What do you think?
Rate this book
Escape from Childhood
The case for treating children like real people, not pets and slaves, and for making available to them all the adult rights and responsibilities as outlined in the US Bill of Rights. This book will challenge not only your ideas about what constitutes "childhood" in today's society, but your ideas about society as a whole.
Paperback
First published January 1, 1974
24 people are currently reading
768 people want to read
About the author
John C. Holt
23 books342 followersAfter teaching in private schools for many years John Caldwell Holt wrote his first two books, How Children Fail, and How Children Learn. He became a vocal advocate for school reforms, and wrote several more books about education theory and practice, including alternative forms and many social issues relating to the education system. Eventually he decided school reform was impossible, and changed his focus to homeschooling. He started America's first magazine dedicated to the subject, Growing Without Schooling, in 1977.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
February 7, 2013
Rating as a 1 since I can't rate it zero.
Coming from a family where Holt was considered practically a god, I can speak to the ideals in his books. Holt says he learned about the sexual needs of children by spending large amounts of time babysitting his friends' infants and small children. He claims small children have sexual needs and should not be denied sexual pleasure. (Walks like a pedo, talks like a pedo... you get my drift.)
Look at pedophile apologist boards and Holt's work comes up everywhere. His insistence on children's "right" to sex and his battle against the age of consent should set up warning flags all over the place. The book is routinely used by pro-pedophile groups to bolster their argument that pedophilia is "just another natural expression of love".
I and eight siblings were "unshcooled" according to the principles he set forth in his so-called "homeschooling" book, and my "bio'rents" (TM)also held to his beliefs in this book as well - I'll let you draw your own conclusions as to what growing up in that household was like.
Coming from a family where Holt was considered practically a god, I can speak to the ideals in his books. Holt says he learned about the sexual needs of children by spending large amounts of time babysitting his friends' infants and small children. He claims small children have sexual needs and should not be denied sexual pleasure. (Walks like a pedo, talks like a pedo... you get my drift.)
Look at pedophile apologist boards and Holt's work comes up everywhere. His insistence on children's "right" to sex and his battle against the age of consent should set up warning flags all over the place. The book is routinely used by pro-pedophile groups to bolster their argument that pedophilia is "just another natural expression of love".
I and eight siblings were "unshcooled" according to the principles he set forth in his so-called "homeschooling" book, and my "bio'rents" (TM)also held to his beliefs in this book as well - I'll let you draw your own conclusions as to what growing up in that household was like.
April 2, 2012
This review is from my blog post, which can be found here: http://www.naturalattachment.com/word...
As promised in my last post, I am going to review John Holt’s book, Escape From Childhood: The Needs and Rights of Children. I don’t really have the time nor the space to philosophize about each point in this book or to cover all the rights Holt would like to see children given…I’ll leave that to someone else. However, I will focus on a few points in the book that speak loudly to me on how we view children in general and how many of us have no real issues with how disrespectful we are towards children.
Just to give the basics on the book and the list of all the rights Holt advocated for, read the short bit here ( http://www.youthrights.net/index.php?... ).
I bought this book back in 2000 when I was on an extended substituting job for a senior English and creative writing teacher (when you fill in for the same teacher for a long period of time, like for their postpartum leave or such). I bought the book at a book sale the school had…they were cleaning out the old and ‘outdated’ books from their library. Being only 18 at the time, I was still trying desperately to escape from my own childhood, which I don’t think I actually did until I was a few years into a marriage, a mother and 1200 miles away from all family — isn’t that the same story for so many? I skimmed through the book at the time and read a chapter here and there; agreeing with everything that I was reading, even day dreamed about discussing a few points I came across in the book with my class, but I never actually read the book cover to cover until about a month ago.
First, while there might only be a couple bits in this entire book that I disagree with (and those might only be because of wording and not intent behind the wording), I have to say that I really wish the book was twice or thrice as long and quoted more studies and examples of ‘real life’ children and families who are living/have lived in such mindful and consensual ways. Being a radical myself, I ‘get’ the book and share the truths in the book, but I also know that there are many people who could benefit (I’m talking about a large population of mainstream parents and those ‘on the fence’ of parenting/life-style philosophies) from the book or another like it, if it was more capable of bridging cultural meme gaps and incorporated more ‘tools’ (though I hate that term) for parents that help them change their perspectives. Being ‘on the fence’ and leaning more towards treating children as people and not property or ‘pets’ is a step and these people might be pushed over the fence by reading Escape From Childhood, but there are so many more out there who could make that leap of faith if there was just a little bit more ‘something’ to push them.
To push home the thought that I just shared, here is an excerpt from chapter one.
“It is never easy to change old ideas and customs. Someone wrote of her grandmother that whenever she heard a new idea she responded in one of two ways: (1) it is crazy, or (2) I’ve always known it. The things we know and believe are a part of us. We feel we have always known them. Almost anything else, anything that doesn’t fit into our structure of knowledge, our mental model of reality is likely to seem strange, wild, fearful, dangerous, and impossible. People defend what they are used to even when it is hurting them.” (page 4) Emphasis mine.
It’s true.
The first part of the book talks about the institution of childhood, what it means to be a child AND what it means to have a family with children. Of course, Holt points out how difficult it is to raise children now because of the nuclear family — difficult on BOTH the child and parent. We don’t have the support of a community, tribe or extended family like we have had throughout the history of man. Often times, this lack of support is even more burdensome on families where the mother (or father) is pretty much the sole parent, guardian, nurse, playmate and so on for her child(ren). It IS more difficult in many ways now to raise a child, but I also find that it is easier now to question just how children can and should be raised, whereas in times past, there was very little room to question what might be best for children or for children to voice what they might prefer.
I hear plenty of people talk of how much better off children are, because they are protected now from being ‘forced’ into adulthood too early. What I am understanding and what Holt speaks of when he mentions the “walled-garden” of childhood in the book is that much of this ‘protection’ from adulthood is due to or because of a lack of respect for children. In a world where children were respected as capable human beings, there would not be a need for much if any of this ‘protection’ from adulthood. If children were viewed as worthy of the same rights and responsibilities as adults, we wouldn’t need numerous laws prohibiting the exploitation of children…children are only exploited, because they are so cut off from the main-line of reality and are seen as almost like another species — a species to be owned, shaped and ‘loved’. Kind of like the beloved puppy of your childhood memories.
Holt has some heavy, yet truthful words to say about why many people even have children — especially those who find children to be rather inconvenient to their lives.
“…almost all adults, men and women, use children as what we might call love objects. We think we have a right, or even a duty, to bestow on them “love”, visible and tangible signs of affection, whenever we want, however we want, and whether they like it or not. In this we exploit them, use them for our purposes. This, more than anything else, is what we use children and childhood for — to provide us with love objects. This is why we adults find children worth owning and the institution of childhood worth preserving, in spite of their great trouble and expense.” (page 72)
Holt goes on to talk about forced affection from elders and how so many seem content on coercing their children to submit to physical affection from certain strangers and elders. This is one that boggles me to this day…with all the talk we give children about not letting anyone touch them or touch them in ways they don’t feel right about, yet we force them to give grandma a hug and grandpa a kiss. Holt points out just how easily the needs or desires of children are cast away because of age.
“Many…have written about…disgusting feelings of being embraced or kissed by an adult they did not like…. To such talk a friend of mine once said that perhaps the older person needed to kiss the small child and so it was right to compel the child to let him do it. This is a perfect example of that I mean about an adult using a child. If the needs of a four-year-old and a sixty-year-old come into conflict, why must the child always give way? …because he is smaller and weaker? …any adult who is so insensitive to the feelings of a child that he would embrace him in spite of the child’s revulsion, and indeed not notice the child’s feelings at all, is not embracing a real child but only the idea of a child, a child-object…. He embraces this particular one…[because] he is permitted to embrace it.” (page 73)
Holt goes on to say that if a person did this to a strange child that he would not get away with it and not be permitted to embrace a strange child. It is only because of familial relations or ties that this kind of forced affection is permitted. He even shares a little later on how he falls victim to this line of thought when he affectionately pats a young girl on the head who is sitting in his lap reading with him and she turns to look at him with surprise and wonder at why he would be so bold when they are sitting there reading.
On the surface it can appear understandable why so many people do not believe that children are capable of doing ‘adult’ things. One reason is that we force children to act and think in infantile ways well beyond their days of infancy. We find children to be ‘cute’ and cute in this context Holt and I both mean that we find children to exude qualities that appeal to us. Holt lists these qualities as: healthy, energetic, quick, vital, vivacious, enthusiastic, resourceful, intelligent, intense, passionate, hopeful, trustful, forgiving and though children can get very angry, unlike adults, they rarely hold grudges. Holt argues that these are not “childish” qualities, but “human” qualities. Unfortunately, when we connect with children we are often condescending in nature. Our idea of ‘cute’ is based on how ‘innocent’ children can seem in their weakness, naivety, helplessness, small stature and how sentimental we can make ourselves about a child’s presumed good nature, happiness and innocence. Children are no different than adults in that both have good days, bad days, stress, fears & desires. Yet, when most adults do encounter rather intelligent and capable children (typically those children who have been treated & repected as equals by their parents), they are astonished, often feeling threatened and they certainly do NOT think of the child as ‘cute’. It is very hard to have a real meaningful relationship with a person when you can only think of them in the abstract, as ‘cute’, because they then become an idea or symbol and do not represent a unique individual with whom you can respect, trust and learn from. Later in life, children learn how to exploit ‘cuteness’ to gain approval & attention. An example of how condescending we are towards children when we think of them as ‘cute’ is when a toddler is learning to walk.
“Any adult who found it as hard to walk as a small child, and who did it so badly, would be called severely handicapped. We certainly would not smile, chuckle, and laugh at his efforts — and congratulate ourselves for doing so…I reminded myself, as I often do when I see a very small child intent and absorbed in what he is doing and I am tempted to think of him as cute, “That child isn’t trying to be cute; he doesn’t see himself as cute; and he doesn’t want to be seen as cute. He is as serious about what he is doing now as any human being can be, and he wants to be taken seriously.”
“I try to respond to the child’s determination, courage, and pleasure, not his littleness, feeblenss, and incompetence. To whatever voice in me says, “Oh, wouldn’t it be nice to pick up that dear little child and give him a big hug and kiss,” I reply, “No, no, NO, that child doesn’t want to be picked up…he wants to walk…He is not walking for the approval or happiness of me or even for his parents beside him, but for himself. It is his show. Don’t try to turn him into an actor in your show. Leave him alone to get on with his work.” (page 84)
Crazy. I know. You are thinking about how you would see yourself as a ‘bad parent’ if you didn’t encourage, smile and chuckle at your baby’s efforts to walk. But, when you think of your toddler as only a human being desparartly trying to teach himself how to get from point A to point B more efficiently like the other humans in his life, you can begin to see how what almost all parents and bystanders do when watching a beginning walker as condescending and only explained by our thinking the child as ‘cute’. While I think it is quite alright to help a child or to even encourage or give positive feedback, but to carry on like most parents is enough to make me nausiated and I am sure most toddlers would pipe up about it if they were verbal enough or hadn’t already been convinced by their parents’ reactions that they weren’t capable of such feats like walking without being gushed over. “Leave him alone to get on with his work”.
“Children do not like being incompetent any more than they like being ignorant. They want to learn how to do, and do well, the things they see being done by bigger people around them. This is why they soon find school such a disappointment; they so seldom get a chance to learn anything important or do anything real. But many defenders of childhood, in or out of school, seem to have this vested interest in the children’s incompetence, which they often call “letting the child be a child.” (page 86)
The entire chapter entitled, How Children Exploit Cuteness is a must read. Holt goes into great detail about how we view children in abstract ways…as ‘cute’ and a member of Childhood and not a child. We deal with Childhood and not real live unique children…we assume all children are the same, even though we tell each other and ourselves how different they all are. Holt talks about how we label children based on abstract thinking and relating to them and then map out their entire futures based on those labels. It’s then these labels that we use to judge them and decide if they are ‘on track’ or not. We are constantly making decisions for them and against them (their wills) that will drive them in the direction that *we think* they *should* go and not where *they think* they *should* go. When we romanticize about our children’s future, we run the risk of disappointment every time they are doing or saying something counter to our fantasy and then we dwell on that instead of helping them become the person they are meant to be and NOT the person we might want them to be.
This book is yet another brilliant piece of literature, not only from Holt, but from the library of literature fighting and advocating for the rights and liberation of the youth. While I know that I haven’t discussed any of the actual rights that Holt mentions in his book, I don’t think I need to. I can’t begin to cover here, even in synopsis, the thoughts behind many of Holt’s ideas regarding children’s rights. The main point is that if we lived in a world where children where NOT used as “love objects” or thought of as “cute” or in other abstract ways, were treated with their rightfully due respect and those around them stopped trying to squash their authenticity and autonomy, we wouldn’t need a blog post or great works of literature to convince people that, yes, a 6 year old should be allowed to vote as a citizen of this nation and that same 6 year old should be able to drink a beer, divorce his parents, have complete say over his educational endeavors and the list continues. Escape From Childhood is a book that I’d add to the required-to-read-before-parenthood-or-working-with-children-list.
I sum the book up in short terms by saying that it is another book discussing how much we squash children because of our own wants/needs/desires/baggage and not because we “know best”. If the majority of the world thought about children like Holt, myself and most Unschoolers, then there would be no need for this book, because the majority would “get it” and not need to be convinced of anything.
Yeah, I know; so much for that ‘reviewing’ part of this!
As promised in my last post, I am going to review John Holt’s book, Escape From Childhood: The Needs and Rights of Children. I don’t really have the time nor the space to philosophize about each point in this book or to cover all the rights Holt would like to see children given…I’ll leave that to someone else. However, I will focus on a few points in the book that speak loudly to me on how we view children in general and how many of us have no real issues with how disrespectful we are towards children.
Just to give the basics on the book and the list of all the rights Holt advocated for, read the short bit here ( http://www.youthrights.net/index.php?... ).
I bought this book back in 2000 when I was on an extended substituting job for a senior English and creative writing teacher (when you fill in for the same teacher for a long period of time, like for their postpartum leave or such). I bought the book at a book sale the school had…they were cleaning out the old and ‘outdated’ books from their library. Being only 18 at the time, I was still trying desperately to escape from my own childhood, which I don’t think I actually did until I was a few years into a marriage, a mother and 1200 miles away from all family — isn’t that the same story for so many? I skimmed through the book at the time and read a chapter here and there; agreeing with everything that I was reading, even day dreamed about discussing a few points I came across in the book with my class, but I never actually read the book cover to cover until about a month ago.
First, while there might only be a couple bits in this entire book that I disagree with (and those might only be because of wording and not intent behind the wording), I have to say that I really wish the book was twice or thrice as long and quoted more studies and examples of ‘real life’ children and families who are living/have lived in such mindful and consensual ways. Being a radical myself, I ‘get’ the book and share the truths in the book, but I also know that there are many people who could benefit (I’m talking about a large population of mainstream parents and those ‘on the fence’ of parenting/life-style philosophies) from the book or another like it, if it was more capable of bridging cultural meme gaps and incorporated more ‘tools’ (though I hate that term) for parents that help them change their perspectives. Being ‘on the fence’ and leaning more towards treating children as people and not property or ‘pets’ is a step and these people might be pushed over the fence by reading Escape From Childhood, but there are so many more out there who could make that leap of faith if there was just a little bit more ‘something’ to push them.
To push home the thought that I just shared, here is an excerpt from chapter one.
“It is never easy to change old ideas and customs. Someone wrote of her grandmother that whenever she heard a new idea she responded in one of two ways: (1) it is crazy, or (2) I’ve always known it. The things we know and believe are a part of us. We feel we have always known them. Almost anything else, anything that doesn’t fit into our structure of knowledge, our mental model of reality is likely to seem strange, wild, fearful, dangerous, and impossible. People defend what they are used to even when it is hurting them.” (page 4) Emphasis mine.
It’s true.
The first part of the book talks about the institution of childhood, what it means to be a child AND what it means to have a family with children. Of course, Holt points out how difficult it is to raise children now because of the nuclear family — difficult on BOTH the child and parent. We don’t have the support of a community, tribe or extended family like we have had throughout the history of man. Often times, this lack of support is even more burdensome on families where the mother (or father) is pretty much the sole parent, guardian, nurse, playmate and so on for her child(ren). It IS more difficult in many ways now to raise a child, but I also find that it is easier now to question just how children can and should be raised, whereas in times past, there was very little room to question what might be best for children or for children to voice what they might prefer.
I hear plenty of people talk of how much better off children are, because they are protected now from being ‘forced’ into adulthood too early. What I am understanding and what Holt speaks of when he mentions the “walled-garden” of childhood in the book is that much of this ‘protection’ from adulthood is due to or because of a lack of respect for children. In a world where children were respected as capable human beings, there would not be a need for much if any of this ‘protection’ from adulthood. If children were viewed as worthy of the same rights and responsibilities as adults, we wouldn’t need numerous laws prohibiting the exploitation of children…children are only exploited, because they are so cut off from the main-line of reality and are seen as almost like another species — a species to be owned, shaped and ‘loved’. Kind of like the beloved puppy of your childhood memories.
Holt has some heavy, yet truthful words to say about why many people even have children — especially those who find children to be rather inconvenient to their lives.
“…almost all adults, men and women, use children as what we might call love objects. We think we have a right, or even a duty, to bestow on them “love”, visible and tangible signs of affection, whenever we want, however we want, and whether they like it or not. In this we exploit them, use them for our purposes. This, more than anything else, is what we use children and childhood for — to provide us with love objects. This is why we adults find children worth owning and the institution of childhood worth preserving, in spite of their great trouble and expense.” (page 72)
Holt goes on to talk about forced affection from elders and how so many seem content on coercing their children to submit to physical affection from certain strangers and elders. This is one that boggles me to this day…with all the talk we give children about not letting anyone touch them or touch them in ways they don’t feel right about, yet we force them to give grandma a hug and grandpa a kiss. Holt points out just how easily the needs or desires of children are cast away because of age.
“Many…have written about…disgusting feelings of being embraced or kissed by an adult they did not like…. To such talk a friend of mine once said that perhaps the older person needed to kiss the small child and so it was right to compel the child to let him do it. This is a perfect example of that I mean about an adult using a child. If the needs of a four-year-old and a sixty-year-old come into conflict, why must the child always give way? …because he is smaller and weaker? …any adult who is so insensitive to the feelings of a child that he would embrace him in spite of the child’s revulsion, and indeed not notice the child’s feelings at all, is not embracing a real child but only the idea of a child, a child-object…. He embraces this particular one…[because] he is permitted to embrace it.” (page 73)
Holt goes on to say that if a person did this to a strange child that he would not get away with it and not be permitted to embrace a strange child. It is only because of familial relations or ties that this kind of forced affection is permitted. He even shares a little later on how he falls victim to this line of thought when he affectionately pats a young girl on the head who is sitting in his lap reading with him and she turns to look at him with surprise and wonder at why he would be so bold when they are sitting there reading.
On the surface it can appear understandable why so many people do not believe that children are capable of doing ‘adult’ things. One reason is that we force children to act and think in infantile ways well beyond their days of infancy. We find children to be ‘cute’ and cute in this context Holt and I both mean that we find children to exude qualities that appeal to us. Holt lists these qualities as: healthy, energetic, quick, vital, vivacious, enthusiastic, resourceful, intelligent, intense, passionate, hopeful, trustful, forgiving and though children can get very angry, unlike adults, they rarely hold grudges. Holt argues that these are not “childish” qualities, but “human” qualities. Unfortunately, when we connect with children we are often condescending in nature. Our idea of ‘cute’ is based on how ‘innocent’ children can seem in their weakness, naivety, helplessness, small stature and how sentimental we can make ourselves about a child’s presumed good nature, happiness and innocence. Children are no different than adults in that both have good days, bad days, stress, fears & desires. Yet, when most adults do encounter rather intelligent and capable children (typically those children who have been treated & repected as equals by their parents), they are astonished, often feeling threatened and they certainly do NOT think of the child as ‘cute’. It is very hard to have a real meaningful relationship with a person when you can only think of them in the abstract, as ‘cute’, because they then become an idea or symbol and do not represent a unique individual with whom you can respect, trust and learn from. Later in life, children learn how to exploit ‘cuteness’ to gain approval & attention. An example of how condescending we are towards children when we think of them as ‘cute’ is when a toddler is learning to walk.
“Any adult who found it as hard to walk as a small child, and who did it so badly, would be called severely handicapped. We certainly would not smile, chuckle, and laugh at his efforts — and congratulate ourselves for doing so…I reminded myself, as I often do when I see a very small child intent and absorbed in what he is doing and I am tempted to think of him as cute, “That child isn’t trying to be cute; he doesn’t see himself as cute; and he doesn’t want to be seen as cute. He is as serious about what he is doing now as any human being can be, and he wants to be taken seriously.”
“I try to respond to the child’s determination, courage, and pleasure, not his littleness, feeblenss, and incompetence. To whatever voice in me says, “Oh, wouldn’t it be nice to pick up that dear little child and give him a big hug and kiss,” I reply, “No, no, NO, that child doesn’t want to be picked up…he wants to walk…He is not walking for the approval or happiness of me or even for his parents beside him, but for himself. It is his show. Don’t try to turn him into an actor in your show. Leave him alone to get on with his work.” (page 84)
Crazy. I know. You are thinking about how you would see yourself as a ‘bad parent’ if you didn’t encourage, smile and chuckle at your baby’s efforts to walk. But, when you think of your toddler as only a human being desparartly trying to teach himself how to get from point A to point B more efficiently like the other humans in his life, you can begin to see how what almost all parents and bystanders do when watching a beginning walker as condescending and only explained by our thinking the child as ‘cute’. While I think it is quite alright to help a child or to even encourage or give positive feedback, but to carry on like most parents is enough to make me nausiated and I am sure most toddlers would pipe up about it if they were verbal enough or hadn’t already been convinced by their parents’ reactions that they weren’t capable of such feats like walking without being gushed over. “Leave him alone to get on with his work”.
“Children do not like being incompetent any more than they like being ignorant. They want to learn how to do, and do well, the things they see being done by bigger people around them. This is why they soon find school such a disappointment; they so seldom get a chance to learn anything important or do anything real. But many defenders of childhood, in or out of school, seem to have this vested interest in the children’s incompetence, which they often call “letting the child be a child.” (page 86)
The entire chapter entitled, How Children Exploit Cuteness is a must read. Holt goes into great detail about how we view children in abstract ways…as ‘cute’ and a member of Childhood and not a child. We deal with Childhood and not real live unique children…we assume all children are the same, even though we tell each other and ourselves how different they all are. Holt talks about how we label children based on abstract thinking and relating to them and then map out their entire futures based on those labels. It’s then these labels that we use to judge them and decide if they are ‘on track’ or not. We are constantly making decisions for them and against them (their wills) that will drive them in the direction that *we think* they *should* go and not where *they think* they *should* go. When we romanticize about our children’s future, we run the risk of disappointment every time they are doing or saying something counter to our fantasy and then we dwell on that instead of helping them become the person they are meant to be and NOT the person we might want them to be.
This book is yet another brilliant piece of literature, not only from Holt, but from the library of literature fighting and advocating for the rights and liberation of the youth. While I know that I haven’t discussed any of the actual rights that Holt mentions in his book, I don’t think I need to. I can’t begin to cover here, even in synopsis, the thoughts behind many of Holt’s ideas regarding children’s rights. The main point is that if we lived in a world where children where NOT used as “love objects” or thought of as “cute” or in other abstract ways, were treated with their rightfully due respect and those around them stopped trying to squash their authenticity and autonomy, we wouldn’t need a blog post or great works of literature to convince people that, yes, a 6 year old should be allowed to vote as a citizen of this nation and that same 6 year old should be able to drink a beer, divorce his parents, have complete say over his educational endeavors and the list continues. Escape From Childhood is a book that I’d add to the required-to-read-before-parenthood-or-working-with-children-list.
I sum the book up in short terms by saying that it is another book discussing how much we squash children because of our own wants/needs/desires/baggage and not because we “know best”. If the majority of the world thought about children like Holt, myself and most Unschoolers, then there would be no need for this book, because the majority would “get it” and not need to be convinced of anything.
Yeah, I know; so much for that ‘reviewing’ part of this!
May 10, 2009
The author claims that children ought to be allowed to do all number of things, including driving, traveling alone, and having sex (with other children as well as with adults). To back up these arguments, he refers to sightings of children in parks, airports and schools where he has made brief visits.
It's all so preposterous! My husband thinks that John Caldwell Holt may have been the pen name of a twelve-year-old boy, but I suspect that this book can be better explained by one of the later chapters, "The Right to Use Drugs," wherein the author states that everyone (children and adults) should be free to consume as many drugs as they wish.
It's all so preposterous! My husband thinks that John Caldwell Holt may have been the pen name of a twelve-year-old boy, but I suspect that this book can be better explained by one of the later chapters, "The Right to Use Drugs," wherein the author states that everyone (children and adults) should be free to consume as many drugs as they wish.
June 30, 2013
This is one of the books everyone in radical youth rights circles seems to have read and for good reason. Those who exhort Holt's commitment to unschooling without taking stock of the broader arguments for youth liberation represented in this work do a fundamental disservice to his legacy, much like those who erase MLK's radical critiques of capitalism and anti-racism from his legacy.
July 30, 2017
A must read for every human, not only parents.
We could try to treat children as human beings for a change.
We could try to treat children as human beings for a change.
August 27, 2019
Very thought-provoking book even though I disagree with many of the author's points. This book is extremely libertarian, perhaps anarchist, in it's approach to children, parents, and society. While I do not fully agree with Holt's philosophy as described in this book, it did help me reevaluate some things as I do believe that children should have far more ownership of their lives than is common in today's society.
February 1, 2021
This book is a wild, radical proposal about how growing up could be achieved. Sometimes practical and stinging critique, sometimes socialist utopia, and definitely interesting.
November 9, 2017
I don't remember when was the last time I was reading a book and blatantly disagreeing with the author, only to be completely persuaded by his arguments at the end of the book.
As a teacher, child's rights and a homeschooling enthusiast, I completely loved this book.
I felt like I already knew what's inherently wrong with the way of how we treat children in our current society, but the book helped me spotlight the wrongdoings.
The book is filled with an example by example of situations where you can clearly see the damage being done to children by adults, and then the author explains what exactly is wrong, and he explains it so elegantly that you feel like you knew this stuff all along.
Not only it's a fantastic read, it's a must-read for literally everyone who's alive.
As a teacher, child's rights and a homeschooling enthusiast, I completely loved this book.
I felt like I already knew what's inherently wrong with the way of how we treat children in our current society, but the book helped me spotlight the wrongdoings.
The book is filled with an example by example of situations where you can clearly see the damage being done to children by adults, and then the author explains what exactly is wrong, and he explains it so elegantly that you feel like you knew this stuff all along.
Not only it's a fantastic read, it's a must-read for literally everyone who's alive.
April 1, 2024
I read this book years ago and would have given it 5 stars then. After living many years with the ideas and principles in this book, I not only strongly disagree with most of his ideas but I deeply regret allowing them to influence the way that I raised my children. My children would agree and rightly believe that I didn’t protect or prepare them the way that I should have because I was so influenced by John Holt’s works.
While I wholeheartedly believe that children deserve to be treated with the same respect as an adult, they are not adults. They need to be nurtured and protected and failing to do so is failing in our most important role as parents. Sometimes we do need to make decisions for our children because it is the best and most loving thing we can do for them.
Similar to another review, I’ve also always had a nagging suspicion that John Holt was a pedophile. The more I’ve learned about pedophiles over the years, I’m now even more convinced. Pedophiles will do anything to gain access to children and what better way to gain access to children than to write books, “study” them and to convince their parents that they are miniature adults. He had an incredibly irresponsible amount of unsupervised alone time with children that, by his own admission, he viewed as capable of making sexual decisions.
While I wholeheartedly believe that children deserve to be treated with the same respect as an adult, they are not adults. They need to be nurtured and protected and failing to do so is failing in our most important role as parents. Sometimes we do need to make decisions for our children because it is the best and most loving thing we can do for them.
Similar to another review, I’ve also always had a nagging suspicion that John Holt was a pedophile. The more I’ve learned about pedophiles over the years, I’m now even more convinced. Pedophiles will do anything to gain access to children and what better way to gain access to children than to write books, “study” them and to convince their parents that they are miniature adults. He had an incredibly irresponsible amount of unsupervised alone time with children that, by his own admission, he viewed as capable of making sexual decisions.
December 31, 2017
a great book for any one who wants to know what all the child needs .. how we can give them truly everything's..
gets boring sometimes though..
gets boring sometimes though..
December 17, 2021
A timeless classic.
Despite this, the concept of "natural authority" remains problematic.
Despite this, the concept of "natural authority" remains problematic.
March 19, 2023
It's meh and so informative for no reason tbh
November 29, 2013
In this era of hypersensitivity to civil rights, it's astonishing that few stop to consider the civil rights of children. It seems like the same blind spot we've had for different races and sexual preferences until recently. We seem to have no problem denying even fundamental human rights to children, to treat them like objects for the benefit of adults, to control and visit abuses upon them that no adult would stand for.
This book challenges these assumptions. He makes the case the "children" is a class of society that adults have created, and that maybe some of them stuck in that role might want out. Why shouldn't they have the right to do so? Why can't those younger than 18 handle all the rights and responsibilities for full citizenship, which adults enjoy? Hell, many adults can't even handle them. Kids should have the right to "escape" from this class of society called "childhood."
This means the rights to drive cars, hold jobs, travel, vote, leave school, and even have sex and do drugs. At this point, most people would laugh him out of town, but he tries to make a case for it nonetheless, and he's mildly persuasive. My favorite is his argument for allowing kids to choose the extent and source of their schooling, which he thinks is the most important. He argues that this is literally the right to control their own minds, a point I hadn't considered before.
While John Holt is considered a pioneer of this little-known political movement, this book feels a bit ranty and lacking substance. It's pure speculation, which is just not sufficient to make a case for such a radical concept. It's also a bit dated by now. Although it lacks "classic" status, I would recommend The Case Against Adolescence instead. It's the same thing, but its arguments are more persuasive and realistic.
This book challenges these assumptions. He makes the case the "children" is a class of society that adults have created, and that maybe some of them stuck in that role might want out. Why shouldn't they have the right to do so? Why can't those younger than 18 handle all the rights and responsibilities for full citizenship, which adults enjoy? Hell, many adults can't even handle them. Kids should have the right to "escape" from this class of society called "childhood."
This means the rights to drive cars, hold jobs, travel, vote, leave school, and even have sex and do drugs. At this point, most people would laugh him out of town, but he tries to make a case for it nonetheless, and he's mildly persuasive. My favorite is his argument for allowing kids to choose the extent and source of their schooling, which he thinks is the most important. He argues that this is literally the right to control their own minds, a point I hadn't considered before.
While John Holt is considered a pioneer of this little-known political movement, this book feels a bit ranty and lacking substance. It's pure speculation, which is just not sufficient to make a case for such a radical concept. It's also a bit dated by now. Although it lacks "classic" status, I would recommend The Case Against Adolescence instead. It's the same thing, but its arguments are more persuasive and realistic.
October 24, 2013
This is one of the most thought-provoking books I've ever read. Wrong in many, many ways but it forces you to re-evaluate your assumptions about age, maturity and the 'innocence' of childhood. Arguing from the position that children should have all the same rights as adults, Holt challenges us to find a genuine argument for why children should not be allowed to drive, vote, own property and choose with whom they live.
It's easy to dismiss these ideas out of hand, but Holt makes a persuasive case. His argument essentially is that rights and responsibilities should be based on what we choose to have, not imposed from above based on arbitrary cut-off points. So instead of there being an age of adulthood, an individual should be able to decide when they are ready and willing to take it on - with both the positive and the negative consequences.
There are obviously counterarguments and ultimately I think Holt goes further than most people would be willing to countenance, but I would still highly recommend this book to anyone looking to challenge their preconceived ideas.
It's easy to dismiss these ideas out of hand, but Holt makes a persuasive case. His argument essentially is that rights and responsibilities should be based on what we choose to have, not imposed from above based on arbitrary cut-off points. So instead of there being an age of adulthood, an individual should be able to decide when they are ready and willing to take it on - with both the positive and the negative consequences.
There are obviously counterarguments and ultimately I think Holt goes further than most people would be willing to countenance, but I would still highly recommend this book to anyone looking to challenge their preconceived ideas.
January 2, 2018
This is a very rare book, and indeed a very rare thought. Escape from childhood will actually show you a different side of childhood, the side which children see. It is rare, it is controversial and it is provocative. I would say that John Holt is a daring writer, surprisingly this book was first published in 1974. Presenting these thoughts at that time must be a bold act, and here we are still making childhood special for our children. The thoughts he has showcased in the book hits my mind hard, and why not after all he is talking about giving rights of using drugs, drive, travel, and choosing their own guardians. But it is not an easy walk for children. All these rights come with duties, he not only talk about rights but duties too. The thoughts are definitely not easily chewable and I won’t say that you will agree to all what he says in the book. But his thoughts will force to you think of the institution of childhood.
May 19, 2013
Books written by such well-educated, well-spoken and intellectual people just make me feel warm and fuzzy. I loved this book. Even if I didn't agree with Holt, this book is FASCINATING. But I do agree with him (except for his ideas on giving everyone money). I have been saying most of these things for years now, but in different ways.I haven't really thought about giving children freedom within our institution of mass coercion since I don't support any of it even for adults so some of Holt's ideas are "not applicable" to me but who cares when the ideas themselves are so interesting and well thought about. This book made me like the human race and made me feel more confident than ever and more excited than ever about how I am living and raising my son.
December 20, 2009
My least preferred John Holt book. Ideas similar to those in the book "The Case against Adoloescence" by Robert Epstein. They are both arguing that children should be treated with the same respect afforded to adults, and should have some of the same rights. I think I preferred Epstein's book because it pushed the ideas further. Maybe he got the inspiration from John Holt.
Also, I am confused by some of the points made by Holt in this book, as they seem to contradict some of his ideas in other books - e.g. in other books, he promotes homeschooling, but in this one, he argues that children are kept too close to their family.
Also, I am confused by some of the points made by Holt in this book, as they seem to contradict some of his ideas in other books - e.g. in other books, he promotes homeschooling, but in this one, he argues that children are kept too close to their family.
January 9, 2016
The Good:
-Makes valid points about having common respect and courtesy towards youth
-Gives enlightening and insightful methods of raising and "handling" children.
-Amazing theories for education reform
The Bad:
-Socialistic politics
-Avocation of abortion
-Lost interest around the last few chapters...
I agree with Holt's policy of respecting children and treating them as humans. However, I severely disagree with many of his political views.
-Makes valid points about having common respect and courtesy towards youth
-Gives enlightening and insightful methods of raising and "handling" children.
-Amazing theories for education reform
The Bad:
-Socialistic politics
-Avocation of abortion
-Lost interest around the last few chapters...
I agree with Holt's policy of respecting children and treating them as humans. However, I severely disagree with many of his political views.
May 12, 2013
A passionate argument for the rights of children. Some of the ideas are a little too revolutionary, gives amazing insights about "respecting the individual", be it child or adult. A must read for any of us who have ever said to a child.."These are the best years of your life...enjoy them!" Are we presenting to them the a sad and desolate picture of the "grown-up world"?
May 5, 2016
A really interesting book; I find Holt's reasoning very sound, despite it being quite hard to imagine the implementation of some of his ideas. It all deserves a lot of thought.
This book confirms my dodgy hypothesis that one very often has to go back in time to read something truly radical. Recommended.
This book confirms my dodgy hypothesis that one very often has to go back in time to read something truly radical. Recommended.
October 27, 2007
funny. though i didnt really like this book, its come up several times this week.
August 21, 2010
Challenging and provoking.
June 21, 2013
basically all stuff I agreed with; well-articulated and argued. Relied too much on concept of minimum guaranteed income. Interesting to see what has happened and what hasn't in the past 40 years.
November 14, 2013
a manifesto arguing that children should have more of the same rights as adults (including the right to work, vote, travel, etc.)
August 11, 2016
grumpier and not so emotionally sympathetic as his anti-school books. I was surprised by that.
April 9, 2015
From reading this and other books I think we sell children short and don't give them what they need to continue being amazing later in life.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews