Appearance
Excerpt
Excerpt from Treatise on Parents and Children, by Bernard Shaw
The Abuse of Docility
Docility may survive as a lazy habit long after it has ceased to be a
beneficial instinct. If you catch a child when it is young enough to be
instinctively docile, and keep it in a condition of unremitted tutelage
under the nurserymaid, the governess, the preparatory school, the
secondary school, and the university, until it is an adult, you will
produce, not a self-reliant, free, fully matured human being, but a
grown-up schoolboy or schoolgirl, capable of nothing in the way of
original or independent action except outbursts of naughtiness in the
women and blackguardism in the men. That is exactly what we get at
present in our rich and consequently governing classes: they pass from
juvenility to senility without ever touching maturity except in body.
The classes which cannot afford this sustained tutelage are notably more
self-reliant and grown-up: an office boy of fifteen is often more of a
man than a university student of twenty. Unfortunately this precocity
is disabled by poverty, ignorance, narrowness, and a hideous power of
living without art or love or beauty and being rather proud of it. The
poor never escape from servitude: their docility is preserved by their
slavery. And so all become the prey of the greedy, the selfish, the
domineering, the unscrupulous, the predatory. If here and there an
individual refuses to be docile, ten docile persons will beat him or
lock him up or shoot him or hang him at the bidding of his oppressors
and their own. The crux of the whole difficulty about parents,
schoolmasters, priests, absolute monarchs, and despots of every sort,
is the tendency to abuse natural docility. A nation should always be
healthily rebellious; but the king or prime minister has yet to be found
who will make trouble by cultivating that side of the national spirit. A
child should begin to assert itself early, and shift for itself more
and more not only in washing and dressing itself, but in opinions and
conduct; yet as nothing is so exasperating and so unlovable as an uppish
child, it is useless to expect parents and schoolmasters to inculcate
this uppishness. Such unamiable precepts as Always contradict an
authoritative statement, Always return a blow, Never lose a chance of a
good fight, When you are scolded for a mistake ask the person who scolds
you whether he or she supposes you did it on purpose, and follow the
question with a blow or an insult or some other unmistakable expression
of resentment, Remember that the progress of the world depends on your
knowing better than your elders, are just as important as those of The
Sermon on the Mount; but no one has yet seen them written up in letters
of gold in a schoolroom or nursery. The child is taught to be kind, to
be respectful, to be quiet, not to answer back, to be truthful when its
elders want to find out anything from it, to lie when the truth would
shock or hurt its elders, to be above all things obedient, and to be
seen and not heard. Here we have two sets of precepts, each warranted
to spoil a child hopelessly if the other be omitted. Unfortunately we
do not allow fair play between them. The rebellious, intractable,
aggressive, selfish set provoke a corrective resistance, and do not
pretend to high moral or religious sanctions; and they are never urged
by grown-up people on young people. They are therefore more in danger
of neglect or suppression than the other set, which have all the adults,
all the laws, all the religions on their side. How is the child to be
secured its due share of both bodies of doctrine?
The Schoolboy and the Homeboy
Explanation
Detailed Explanation of Bernard Shaw’s Treatise on Parents and Children (Excerpt: The Abuse of Docility)
George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950), the Irish playwright, critic, and socialist, was a fierce advocate for social reform, individualism, and rational education. His Treatise on Parents and Children (1910) critiques traditional upbringing, arguing that conventional parenting and education stifle independence, creativity, and moral courage. The excerpt The Abuse of Docility dissects how excessive obedience (docility) cripples personal and societal progress, while also acknowledging the dangers of unchecked rebellion.
1. Context & Shaw’s Philosophical Stance
Shaw wrote during the late Victorian and Edwardian eras, a time when rigid class structures, authoritarian parenting, and rote-based education dominated. His works often attacked hypocrisy in institutions (religion, government, education) and championed self-reliance. This excerpt aligns with his broader critiques in plays like Major Barbara (1905) and Pygmalion (1912), where he explores class, morality, and the failures of conventional wisdom.
Key influences on Shaw’s thought:
- Socialism: He was a Fabian Society member, advocating gradual reform over revolution.
- Nietzschean Individualism: He admired Nietzsche’s idea of the Übermensch (overman)—a self-created individual who transcends societal constraints.
- Anti-Sentimentalism: Shaw rejected romanticized notions of childhood innocence, arguing that blind obedience breeds weakness.
2. Themes in the Excerpt
A. The Perils of Docility
Shaw argues that docility—the natural tendency of children to obey—is abused by authority figures (parents, teachers, rulers) to maintain control. While docility is useful in early childhood, its prolonged enforcement produces:
- Stunted Maturity: The wealthy, educated classes remain "grown-up schoolboys" (e.g., aristocrats or university students who never learn practical self-reliance).
- False Precocity in the Poor: Working-class children (e.g., an "office boy of fifteen") may seem more mature due to early responsibility, but their potential is crushed by poverty and lack of cultural refinement ("hideous power of living without art or love or beauty").
- Systemic Oppression: Docility makes people easy prey for "the greedy, the selfish, the domineering"—a critique of capitalism and authoritarianism.
Shaw’s claim that the poor "never escape from servitude" reflects his socialist view that economic systems perpetuate cycles of obedience and exploitation.
B. The Necessity of Rebellion
Shaw contrasts docility with healthy rebellion, which he sees as essential for progress. He laments that society suppresses rebellious instincts:
- Authorities punish defiance: "Ten docile persons will beat [a rebel] or lock him up" at the bidding of oppressors.
- Rebellion is demonized: Traits like "uppishness" (defiance) are seen as unlovable, though Shaw argues they are vital for intellectual and moral growth.
His provocative "precepts" (e.g., "Always contradict an authoritative statement," "Never lose a chance of a good fight") are deliberately extreme to highlight how society values blind obedience over critical thinking. These mirror Nietzsche’s call to "question everything" and Shaw’s own contrarian style.
C. The Hypocrisy of Moral Education
Shaw exposes the duality of moral instruction:
- Passive Virtues: Children are taught to be "kind, respectful, quiet, obedient"—traits that reinforce docility.
- Active Virtues: Traits like assertiveness, skepticism, and self-defense (which Shaw argues are equally vital) are suppressed because they challenge authority.
He notes that the first set of precepts is "written up in letters of gold" (e.g., in schools, churches), while the second is ignored, creating an imbalance that stifles individuality.
3. Literary Devices & Rhetorical Strategies
| Device | Example | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Paradox | "They pass from juvenility to senility without ever touching maturity." | Highlights the absurdity of a system that keeps adults childlike. |
| Hyperbole | "Never lose a chance of a good fight" | Emphasizes the need for confrontation to provoke thought. |
| Irony | Praising "uppishness" while acknowledging it’s "unlovable." | Critiques societal double standards. |
| Juxtaposition | Wealthy "grown-up schoolboys" vs. poor "office boy of fifteen" | Contrasts false maturity with premature responsibility. |
| Rhetorical Questions | "How is the child to be secured its due share of both bodies of doctrine?" | Challenges the reader to consider solutions. |
| Sarcasm | "No one has yet seen [rebellious precepts] written up in letters of gold." | Mocks the sanctimony of traditional moral education. |
Shaw’s tone is satirical and polemical—he uses exaggeration and wit to expose flaws in conventional wisdom, a hallmark of his style (e.g., The Devil’s Disciple).
4. The Schoolboy and the Homeboy (Brief Note)
Though not fully excerpted here, Shaw’s distinction between the "schoolboy" (sheltered, obedient, unprepared for life) and the "homeboy" (street-smart but culturally deprived) underscores his argument that both systems fail:
- The schoolboy is over-protected; the homeboy is under-supported.
- Neither is given the tools for true independence—a balance of discipline and critical thinking.
5. Significance & Modern Relevance
Shaw’s critique remains pertinent today:
- Education Systems: Debates over standardized testing vs. critical thinking echo Shaw’s concern about rote obedience.
- Parenting Styles: "Helicopter parenting" vs. "free-range parenting" reflect his warning about stifling or neglecting independence.
- Authoritarianism: His fear of docility enabling oppression resonates in discussions about propaganda, conformity, and resistance (e.g., dystopian literature like 1984).
- Class Divides: The contrast between privileged ineptitude and working-class resilience is still visible in modern inequality.
Shaw’s solution—cultivating "healthy rebellion"—aligns with progressive education models (e.g., Montessori, democratic schools) that prioritize autonomy. However, his extreme precepts (e.g., advocating violence) are intentionally provocative, meant to jolt readers out of complacency.
6. Key Takeaways from the Text Itself
- Docility is a tool of control: Authority figures (parents, teachers, rulers) exploit natural obedience to maintain power.
- Rebellion is necessary for growth: Society suppresses defiance, yet progress depends on challenging norms.
- Moral education is hypocritical: Passive virtues (obedience) are prized over active ones (skepticism, self-defense).
- Class shapes compliance: The rich are infantilized; the poor are hardened but still enslaved.
- Balance is lacking: Children need both discipline and independence, but society offers only the former.
Conclusion
Shaw’s excerpt is a scathing indictment of authoritarian upbringing, arguing that blind obedience cripples individuals and societies. His provocative style—mixing satire, paradox, and radical proposals—forces readers to question ingrained assumptions about morality, education, and power. While his solutions may seem extreme, his core message—that true maturity requires both discipline and defiance—remains a powerful challenge to conventional wisdom.
Would you like a deeper dive into any specific aspect, such as Shaw’s socialist influences or comparisons to modern educational theories?