The Child in the Midst / A Comparative Study of Child Welfare in Christian and Non-Christian Lands

CHAPTER III.
THE CHILD AT PLAY AND AT WORK

“Boys and girls playing in the streets thereof.”

What is play?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of play?

At what age would you wish your child to stop playing?

What would be the physical and moral consequences to a child who practically stopped playing at or before the age of ten years?

At what age would you advise that a child begin to work for commercial profit?

If it is good for the children in whom you are interested to have time and opportunity for play, how far would the same rule hold good for other children in America? For children of other countries?

Name the countries in which defective and dependent children may be neglected or overworked without danger to world-welfare.

Reversing the stereotyped text-book arrangement, we place our questions at the beginning rather than at the end of this chapter. Every thoughtful woman is begged to stop and answer these questions,—in writing, if feasible,—as fully and as honestly as possible, and then, after carefully studying the subject, to see if her opinions have altered in any particulars.

Two of the great movements that are sweeping over our land,—the Playground movement and the movement to create and enforce proper laws concerning Child Labor,—are engrossing the attention of some of our greatest and wisest men and women. The abundance of literature on these subjects, the time devoted to them in great conventions and in lesser gatherings, the very opposition encountered in the ranks of those who profit by the exploitation of America’s growing children,—all go to prove that they belong to the living issues of the day. Our grandmothers would doubtless have been shocked beyond words to be told that the subject of their children’s play belonged to the “Child Problems” studied by the country at large through its Juvenile Commission, and had become a matter for legislation and financial appropriation by state and municipality! But so it is, and Hygiene and Psychology and various other learned sciences each claim a voice in the subject of the play and the work of the nation’s children.

A few extracts from earnest writers and thinkers on this subject will illustrate their view point.

All animals play. Play is likewise one of the fundamental instincts of the child. If there are any inherent rights of childhood, the right to play must be considered one of them. It carries with it immeasurable benefits, but the exact results still remain comparatively uncertain. It is unquestionable, however, that play promotes the physical and mental development of the child, and that it is no mean factor in his social and moral elevation.... The ancient attitude toward play was that of toleration of the ebullient spirits of the growing boy.... The utilitarian function of play was undreamed of. The physical weakness of the child and his incapacity for concentrated thought and endeavor saved to him the enjoyment of play until his parents could use his services in some gainful occupation.... Play—the most enjoyable right of childhood—was unduly curtailed, and even at the present day its value is minimized by many who do not recognize its varied functions....

Whatever be the correct theory of play—that it is practice in the line of future methods of conduct, that it is simply the discharge of the surplus energy of the young, or that it is for the purpose of relaxation and recreation only—whatever theory be adopted, the inestimable value of play to the child and to the nation cannot be gainsaid. Play is an irrepressible method of self-expression....

The social and moral influences of play produce indelible effects upon the child mind.... The recognition of mutual rights is one of its initial values. These rights are but little understood by the unthinking child, and when brute force permits, are often entirely overthrown or perverted into a mere toleration of privileges.... On the supervised playground a new regime is put into operation.... The growth of the instinct of co-operation is perhaps the most valuable result of play.... Ability to co-operate spells ability to excel.[28]

Miss Jane Addams of Hull House, Chicago, speaks with no uncertain sound and with undisputed authority on this subject.

This stupid experiment of organizing work and failing to organize play has, of course, brought about a fine revenge. The love of pleasure will not be denied, and, when it has turned into all sorts of malignant and vicious appetites, then we, the middle aged, grow quite distracted, and resort to all sorts of restrictive measures. We even try to dam up the sweet fountain itself because we are affrighted by these neglected streams; but almost worse than the restrictive measures is our apparent belief that the city itself has no obligation in the matter, an assumption upon which the modern city turns over to commercialism practically all the provisions for public recreation.[29]

Singling out one type of the play instinct, the little girl and her doll, Professor St. John of the Hartford School of Religious Pedagogy says:—

Altruistic feeling had its origin in motherhood, and it has reached no greater heights of self-denial and service than in that same relationship. In playing with her doll the child is in thought and feeling making that experience her own. At a very formative period of her life it gives her much the same training that the race has received through the actual experience.... Every impulse toward loving care of the doll should be encouraged. To the child in her play it is a living child, and hence the experience provides the same kind of emotional training that would come from the care of a baby, without the obvious disadvantages to the infant.

Kate Douglas Wiggin says, “Every mother knows the development of tenderness and motherliness that goes on in her little girl through the nursing and petting and teaching and caring for her doll.”[30]

If we agree with an axiom laid down in the first chapter (p. 7) of this book, that one of the inalienable rights of every child is to follow his instinct for healthful play, it is now our privilege and pleasure to watch the little ones of many lands with their tripping feet and merry voices and lithe little bodies. We instinctively turn to Japan, “the paradise of children,” where annually at the “Feast of Dolls” the whole home becomes a big playhouse for the girls of the family, and where the “Feast of Flags” is the day dedicated to the boys of the nation. We certainly must stop long enough to see what is done at these feasts.

And then there is the feast most loved in the whole year, the Feast of Dolls, when on the third day of the third month the great fire-proof store-house gives forth its treasures of dolls,—in an old family, many of them hundreds of years old,—and for three days, with all their belongings of tiny furnishings, in silver, lacquer, and porcelain, they reign supreme, arranged on red-covered shelves in the finest room of the house. Most prominent among the dolls are the effigies of the Emperor and Empress in antique court costume, seated in dignified calm, each on a lacquered dais. Near them are the figures of the five court musicians in their robes of office, each with his instrument. Beside these dolls, which are always present and form the central figures at the feast, numerous others, more plebeian, but more lovable, find places on the lower shelves, and the array of dolls’ furnishings which is brought out on these occasions is something marvelous....

As the Feast of Dolls is to the girls, so is the Feast of Flags to the boys,—their own special day, set apart for them out of the whole year. It comes on the fifth day of the fifth month.... When the great day at last arrives, the feast within the home is conducted in much the same way as the Feast of Dolls. There are the same red-covered shelves, the same offerings of food and drink; but instead of the placid images of the Emperor and Empress and the five court musicians, the household furnishings, and toilet articles, there are effigies of the heroes of history and folk-lore.... Behind each figure stands a flag with the crest of the hero in miniature. The food offered is mochi wrapped in oak leaves, because the oak is among trees what the carp is among fishes, the emblem of strength and endurance. The flower of the day is the iris or flag, because of its sword-shaped leaves,—hence the name, Shobu Matsuri, feast of iris or flag.[31]

It is a matter for heartfelt rejoicing that the Japanese Government has seized upon the idea of the Playground Movement as one of the really essential activities of some of the great Christian nations, and is introducing playgrounds for the benefit of Japanese children, who certainly deserve a suitable place and opportunity to follow their instinct for play. We hope that hammocks and sandpiles for babies will soon eliminate one feature of the play hour which is described by many missionaries and tourists.

“We have such hosts of children here in Tokyo,” writes Mrs. J. K. McCauley. “We go out and see boys on high stilts, with babies on their backs, and we tremble lest they fall and drop the baby; but I have never heard of one who did; and we see girls, jumping the rope with babies on their backs, and playing battledore and shuttlecock, dodging, hopping, stooping, and the wee baby’s head bobbing up and down, laughing, and sometimes crying; but the playing goes on, winter, summer, no matter how cold, unless raining or snowing. The streets swarm with children, with bright colored kimonos, bright eyes, rosy cheeks, and on wooden shoes, making such a clatter; but seldom are they noisy in their play, but fun-loving as any children in the world!”[32]

That other lands than Japan are beginning to be aroused on the subject of Child Play by America’s example is proved by the fact that in April, 1913, letters were received by the Playground and Recreation Association of America from Persia, Russia, China, and Uruguay regarding recreation in those countries. The suggestion is made that perhaps as Rome gave to the world law, and Greece gave art, so America may contribute play as her share towards the world’s progress.

There are some games that seem to be as instinctive to mankind as are the processes of eating and sleeping. Kites, tops, and marbles appear at their proper seasons in Korea, India, and Persia, the rules of “Hop-Scotch,” “tag,” “hide and seek,” “crack the whip” seem to be very similar whether played by the Lao children or European immigrant children on an American pavement. Jack-stones and “Fox and Geese” are popular among the small, bound-footed girls in China. The rhythmic movement and exciting choices of “London Bridge” are recognized in the very heart of Africa in a game so prettily described by Miss Jean McKenzie that we long to join in the fun.

A mother and her children file under the arms of two players. The child caught is drawn aside for the choice between a cake of gourd seed or a peanut porridge, a necklace of beads or a bow and arrow—we all know the phantom bliss of such choices. The children are caught and ranged until there remains none but the mother and one who is now called “the only child.” This remnant of a once numerous family takes to the bush, but the mother sallies forth from time to time and tosses a handful of grass toward the company, who ask her in chorus:

“How big is the only child now?”

“The only child creeps,” says the mother.

“Hay-a-a!” exclaims the astonished chorus after this and all other complacent maternal announcements.

“How old is the only child now?”

“The only child walks.”

“Hay-a-a!”

To this chorus of astonished approval, the only child comes to be a young girl, has a sweetheart, is married, and has a baby!

Having achieved so much success, the only child ceases to figure in this drama, and the grandmother is plied with questions about the child of the only child.

“How old is the child of the only child now?”

“The child of the only child creeps.”

“Hay-a-a!”

He walks, he sets traps, one day he has killed a little antelope, another day he has killed a big antelope, and now he has killed an elephant!

Here surely is a climax. “Hay-a-a!” The chorus disintegrates; one after another comes to beg a piece of elephant meat from the child of the only child, who emerges from hiding. One after another is refused, until that one comes who pleases the child of the only child. He gives her a piece of elephant meat for a sign that she is his sweetheart—and they are obliged, of course, to run away. After them the entire company is, of course, obliged to follow.

Here, you see, is a rehearsal of life as it is to be. Here is the dissension, the gossip, the greed, the romance, and the adventure of life.[33]

“Kidd in his book on ‘Savage Childhood’ describes the Bantu children of Africa as showing great power of imagination in their games. Before the missionary they appear dull and unresponsive, but when no stranger is about they delight in playing missionary, holding a play service, singing hymns, and mimicking the padre’s bad dialect. The insistence of the motor idea is strong in the native; he likes to play games involving motor skill, is fond of acrobatic tricks, of mimicking animals, and delights in dolls and play animals. In fact, the whole picture is that of an intensely human little animal, decidedly attractive, and one feels pity that it should grow up into an unattractive and troublesome Kaffir problem.”[34]

How invariably true is the child’s instinct for imitation, for making his play largely a “rehearsal of life as it is to be.” The little Bedouin boys, each with a pet locust harnessed to a bit of string, enjoy the exciting races of their “fiery steeds,” and prepare eagerly for the great game in which the bigger boys show their budding manhood. A dweller in the region of the Dead Sea thus describes some of the games of the desert:

“The boys of the desert are glad when the first of the month comes. For that day their fathers allow them to have a horse each and ride away from their black tent homes into the open desert, their athletic field. A few of the men, heroes of the tribe, meet there with the boys and act as judges in the horse-racing. They divide the boys in two rows, and then select a boy from each side, and start off this first pair in their race (on horseback) to the distant goal, a pole with a prize on it such as eggs, money, or clothes. The one who arrives first takes the prize off the pole or knocks it down with his staff. The judge keeps the conqueror on one side, the conquered on the other. A new prize is put up, another pair races, and so on till all the victors are on one side, and the poor defeated ones on the other.

“A sham battle takes place, the conquerors shooting the conquered with paper or some harmless shot. Then the beaten soldiers are taken captive and led to their homes, while the proud victors are allowed to go to the meeting place of the men and drink coffee with the heroes of their tribe.”

All too soon the games of childhood merge into the stern realities of life, and, as we watch and listen and smile, we suddenly wonder why the laughter is hushed, why the smiling, girlish lips are covered by a woman’s thick veil, why the little backs stoop beneath loads far too heavy for them. Then from far and near comes the testimony of those who have lived and worked among the children in non-Christian lands. The physical director of a Y. M. C. A. says:—“One of the strongest impressions made on me in China was by the lack of opportunity which the average child has for normal physical development and for the adequate expression of its play instinct.”

Deaconess Phelps of St. Hilda’s School for girls in Hankow says: “When Chinese girls come to our mission schools we find it difficult to teach them how to play, and in the case of elder children we often fail completely, because from time immemorial the idea of learning and scholarship has been entirely inconsistent with fun and good times.”[35]

So great an authority as Dr. Arthur H. Smith says: “The outdoor games of Chinese children are mostly of a tame and uninteresting type. Even in the country Chinese lads do not appear to take kindly to anything which involves much exercise. Their jumping and climbing are of the most elementary sort.”[36]

Mrs. Napier Malcolm after discussing the play life of Persian children adds:

“But when all is said, the games and toys are very few in Persia as compared to those you are accustomed to. No great distinction is made between children and grown-ups, and really there is not so much difference as we find at home. The children are taught to take life very seriously ... and they have no time to grow up into proper men and women. The result is that we find the children too grown-up and the grown-ups too childish.”[37]

“Little old men and women” the missionary called them in her plea that to the children of India might be brought the gift of CHILDHOOD, and so we must not be surprised that our missionaries find the lesson of “HOW TO PLAY” one of the most essential and one of the most difficult to teach in many lands. They have been at it for many years in a quiet, unpretentious way, these pioneers of thought and action. Now that the whole American public is being aroused as never before to the value and need of play for all children, let us see to it that all necessary facilities are in the hands of our missionaries, and that their numbers are sufficiently reinforced so that the “Spirit of Play” may flit from land to land and bring smiles and joy and health and lessons of unselfishness and co-operation to little children who have long since forgotten how to play.

Not only because they are children today, but because they will in a few short years become parents, must we give the little ones this opportunity. If the fathers and mothers of the near future know how to value the development of the play instinct at its true worth, there is great hope for their children. If they can enter into the play spirit with their boys and girls, there will be a revolution in home ideals and companionships. That the lesson is not an easy one to learn or to teach, we are assured by Elizabeth Harrison, who says, “How many parents and teachers are there who can enter into this world of play and not spoil it? In my classes for mothers I have found that one of the most difficult things I have had to teach many of them has been how to play simply and genuinely as a child will play.”

But whether the parents themselves know how to play or not, the quickest and surest way into their hearts is through sympathy with the play instinct of a little child. The missionary who can enter into even that realm of the life of a child has the wondering appreciation of the parent. A little mountain girl lay dangerously ill at the girls’ school in Urumia, Persia. The principal, who was tenderly caring for her in her own room, came to ask if by any chance I knew how to get hold of a dollie for the little child, who had seen such a toy in the possession of a missionary’s child. Yes, a thoughtful friend had tucked a couple of dolls into one of my boxes for just such an emergency, and the one whose head had survived the eight thousand mile journey was found and sent to the little girl. Such rapturous smiles, such motherly hugs and caresses, such appreciation when her schoolmates gave up their recreation hours in order to make proper Persian clothes to replace the queer American garments! And when the little one went to be with Him who “gathers the lambs in His arms,” her weeping parents selected according to custom her chief treasure to lay into the casket,—in this instance, the cheap little American doll that had travelled so far to bring joy to the heart of a dying child. Up into the rugged Kurdish mountains the crude casket was carried on the back of a sure-footed horse, and at every village where there were friends of the family the caravan was halted for a last glimpse of the little face and a wondering look at the fascinating toy. “How they must have loved her!” was the text from which the doll preached many a sermon that day.

In order that the “Spirit of Play” may have full right of way, a great, united, preliminary effort is needed, that the little ones of all lands may come into their rightful heritage. What time, what strength, what zest is there left for play when the children have to work and contribute toward the family support? With shame we confess that the Christian nations are far from guiltless in this matter,—the blood of thousands of their children cries to God from the ground. But, thank God, they are aroused, and changes are taking place with wonderful rapidity, and nations like China and Japan are looking to us as examples. Shall we fail them in their hour of crisis, or shall we lead and help and encourage them and other lands awaking from age-long sleep in this matter of their duty to the children?

Prominent among the rights of the child must be the right to abstain from the task of earning money either for his own support or to increase the family income. Premature child labor is an absolute evil and is wholly without justification.... The enlightened view of today refuses to regard the child as a mere commercial asset of the parent. On the contrary, the relation of the two is exactly reversed. Until children reach a certain age it is absolutely necessary that they be supported by their parents, and society must enforce this obligation.[38]

“How hard the Bedouin girls have to work,” we read in “Topsy-Turvey Land,”[39] “treated like beasts of burden as if they had no souls! They go barefoot carrying heavy loads of wood or skins of water, grind the meal and make fresh bread every morning, or spin the camel’s hair or goat’s hair into one coarse garment.”

One little Bedouin girl said, “I tote my two small brothers on my back all day long, and they kill me a thousand times with their crying.” Another said, “What do I do? Why, nothing but work—that’s what children are for.”[40]

The familiar Chinese proverb,—“A child of six should earn his own salt,” is an indication of public opinion that needs revision.

On the African girl the burden falls early and heavily, while her brother, joining the men in their occupations, finds life much easier and more enjoyable than she does.

“The girl follows her mother to the plantation (distance one-half to one mile from the village), imitating her mother in carrying a basket on her back, its weight supported by a broad strap going around it and over her forehead. Some burden is always put into that basket, often one beyond the child’s strength, as a jug of water. The little one staggers under it, leaning far forward to lessen the direct traction over her forehead. With that daily bending the child would become deformed, were it not counteracted by the carrying at other times of a log of firewood or some lighter burden on her head.”[41]

The little coolie children of Hong Kong toiling up a steep road under the broiling sun with great loads of bricks slung on either end of a bamboo pole; the thousands of Chinese children gathering and carrying home great loads of fuel and manure; the Japanese girls sitting closely on their heels and painting cheap crockery for $1.00 a week; the little children of a Japanese village helping to support themselves by making match boxes for the sum of eight cents a thousand; the mere babies picking tea leaves under the hot sun in Bengal; the seven year old girls working from five in the morning to six at night in the cotton and silk mills in China;—these and countless others seem to be calling to us in the name of the Child of Bethlehem to lighten in some way their heavy load.

And, oh, what heroic efforts your missionaries are making to lessen the great evil, but how powerless they seem in lands where no law, no custom, no religion gives the child any rights. Once more we turn to Mrs. Napier Malcolm for a vivid word picture from Persia.[42]