Children (and maybe even adults) have a curious ability to believe conflicting notions at the same time. Case in point: When I was 5 or 6, I knew that FIREBALL XL5 was a puppet programme (I could see the strings) and didn't feature 'real' actors in the starring roles (apart from the voices, of course). However, when I saw the headline on front cover of the very first TV CENTURY 21 asking whether STEVE ZODIAC was dead - and VENUS confirming it inside - it seems to me, recalling the event nearly 50 years later, that I 'believed' it in some way.
Was it because it was presented as 'fact' in a 'newspaper' format that it managed to confuse my 'fantasy detector'? You know, present something as if it's true and it will seem like the truth - no matter how fantastic the premise? For whatever reason, I wondered whether there would be no more Fireball on the telly because Steve Zodiac was dead. (Not realizing that, barring repeats, the programme was already history because STINGRAY was the then-current GERRY ANDERSON baby - with THUNDERBIRDS waiting in the wings.)
Having been sent to Sunday School as a youngster, I was familiar with the concept of the universe supposedly being the handiwork of a Supreme Being. I was also aware of the organic evolutionary idea as it was mentioned in LOOK & LEARN and various other sources. Had you then asked me how things had come into existence, depending on which track my brain-train was running along on any given day, I could've just as easily replied with either one explanation or the other - and not seen the dichotomy.
I remember, as an 8 or 9 year old, sitting in class one day and suddenly realizing that these two schools of thought represented a divergence of opinion on the subject and that they couldn't both be true. Why did it take so long for both these carriages to pull up to the platform at the same time, thus revealing them as rivals as opposed to station-mates? Who knows - maybe I was just a thicko.
However, I don't really think so (and MENSA agrees with me). It just seems to be a fact that the human brain can entertain all sorts of weird and wonderful ideas, some of which are mutually exclusive - and not always be aware of that fact until, somewhere, in a chamber of the mind, a light suddenly flickers on and casts its illumination into the shadows.
Anyone have any similar experiences or observations they'd care to relate? The comments section awaits!
There is probably a tendency to believe what we want to believe, and to ignore evidence to the contrary. If the contradicting evidence won't go away, we then try to reconcile it with our assumptions. One of my teachers in middle school believed in both evolution and the Biblical account of Creation, and insisted that there was no contradiction. Ambrose Bierce said that in religion, we believe only what we don't understand, except when an intelligible doctrine contradicts an incomprehensible one. Then we believe the former as part of the latter. Astrology is similar. ("You don't believe in horoscopes? It figures. You Capricorns are always skeptical.") Re: the "news" of Steve Zodiac's death, the newspaper format probably did give it verisimilitude, especially to a child. TV infomercials are based on the same idea, making a sales pitch look like an objective news report. BTW, when a series character is killed off (Col. Blake on M*A*S*H, Lt. Yar on Star Trek: The Next Generation, Prue on Charmed), the death is "real" to the audience in the sense that the character will no longer appear in the series.
ReplyDeleteP.S.- Some people get upset when a character gets killed off in a movie or TV series. With very young children, it may be understandable, as they don't know fantasy from reality. With adults, one has to wonder. There was controversy over Spock's apparent death in "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan," and Marlena's (again, apparent) murder on "Days of Our Lives." David Gerrold, commenting on the Spock protests, said that if the fans could not accept the death of a fictional character, how would they cope with a death in their families in real life? But then, a lot of people seem to spend more time with their soap operas or comics than with their real friends and families. -TC
ReplyDeleteSome people, of course, believe that organic evolution is the means by which God created things, and in that sense the two concepts can, to some degree, be reconciled. However, if the Genesis account of creation is presented as being a factual, literal account - as it was to me as a child (or, at the very least, I was never told it could be regarded as figurative), then it is somewhat at odds with the evolutionary concept.
ReplyDeleteOf course, as regards the death of Steve, issue #2 revealed that such was not the case. Consternation over.
Thanks for the interesting comment.
PS. Perhaps it's because people lose their loved ones in 'real life' that they object to their fantasy characters also 'dying'. After all, the worlds of fantasy are regarded as a safe haven from the harsh realities of life.
Interesting question, I like the way you juxtapose the example from childhood. I think that's a good illustration because we see the fantasy and the profundity of a child's conception and how shapes their reality in a concrete way. In a lot ways children make more capable thinkers than adults, obviously because they haven't accrued a mass of preconception. So they're able to reconcile explanations or theory that seem in conflict because they recognise they apply to different domains and so are able to call on either version depending upon the context. The assurance adults acquire diminishes as they become older and most of us, I think, start to become self conscious of the cockyness we had as young adults and wince a bit when we see younger folk making the same mistake.
ReplyDeleteWhat you say may well be true, DSE, but with me, I don't think it was so much a case of reconciling conflicting concepts as simply storing them in separate compartments - not realising the inherent contradictions until I took both of them out of their boxes at the same time. Of course, as I said, perhaps I was merely an incredibly obtuse child, although I obviously don't like to think so.
ReplyDeleteWhen i bought the first issue of 2000AD, I did not consider that it was not that far in the distance and I would probably be alive in that year.
ReplyDeleteImagine that,the year 2000.
Yup, it was only 23 years in the future, but seemed an eternity away in 1977.
ReplyDelete"...maybe even adults) have a curious ability to believe conflicting notions at the same time."
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of problems with puppets, several years back a friend surprised me by saying that she'd never seen a single Gerry Anderson-related TV show. I offered to amend this problem by switching on a videotape featuring the first episode of Thunderbirds (you may recall that's the one where The Hood plants a bomb inside Fireflash) - the thing had been going not longer than five minutes when she saw the Fireflash co-pilot and burst out laughing....the problem? He (or it) was wearing sunglasses; the idea of a puppet wearing sunglasses struck her as being so ludicrous that she couldn't take any of the rest of it seriously.
Now, she was in her mid-20s...I'd seen Thunderbirds since I was a youngster and had no problem perceiving the puppets as characters...in fact I still don't; yet she couldn't see them as anything but puppets and models. Has anyone else encountered this difference in perceiving things?
cheers
B Smith
That's a strange one. I don't see why someone would look at a puppet who's wearing clothes, supposedly flying an aircraft and doing all sorts of other 'real-person' things (apart from being able to walk properly in a straight line), and find only a pair of sunglasses ludicrous.
ReplyDeleteAnyone else got any thoughts?
I always saw Kermit the Frog and the rest of the Muppets as "puppets", obviously, until one evening when Kermit was "interviewed" by Chris Evans on TFI Friday. That threw me a bit.
ReplyDeleteYeah, THB, it's like one side of your brain knows they're only puppets, but the other side buys into them as being real. Talk about being schizophrenic?! (No, I'm not - and neither am I.)
ReplyDeleteI cant remember there being a time when i was not aware of the lights cameras and actors.
ReplyDeleteNot only could I see the strings being pulled I looked for them.
Its never really spoiled my enjoyment though.
Oops! How'd I miss this one, Baab? Anyway, 7 years later, thanks for commenting.
ReplyDelete