It was a random question: Have you ever been selected for the basketball team? And it got me thinking retrospectively. What if I had been allowed to be part of the school's basketball team when I was 12? It was a pity my parents turned it down as I was due to sit for the PSLE later that year and they thought I should concentrate on studying. That, I didn't really mind because I was actually quite bad at the game.
And some time before that, my parents turned down an invitation from the school's high jump team. And I've always been wondering what would have happened if I were allowed to take up the sport that I loved. Would I subsequently go on to represent Singapore in international high jump competitions? I can always recall the grin on my face whenever I managed a few centimeters more than my peers.
In contrast, I was strangely encouraged to participate in public speaking competitions since I was 8.
The thing is this. Most parents would make decisions they think is best for their children; their children have little, if at all, say. And more often than not, these decisions are laden with pragmatic justifications. It's always either "This is good for your future." or "You shouldn't do that because it will not be helpful to you in the future." But is a pragmatic decision always better?
I couldn't help but wonder: How often has budding talent been obliterated in the name of economic viability or simply, for survival? It is morbidly noteworthy that only some struggling artists made it after their physical existence expired. In this material world of pragmatism versus dreams, how does one strike a balance?
And some time before that, my parents turned down an invitation from the school's high jump team. And I've always been wondering what would have happened if I were allowed to take up the sport that I loved. Would I subsequently go on to represent Singapore in international high jump competitions? I can always recall the grin on my face whenever I managed a few centimeters more than my peers.
In contrast, I was strangely encouraged to participate in public speaking competitions since I was 8.
The thing is this. Most parents would make decisions they think is best for their children; their children have little, if at all, say. And more often than not, these decisions are laden with pragmatic justifications. It's always either "This is good for your future." or "You shouldn't do that because it will not be helpful to you in the future." But is a pragmatic decision always better?
I couldn't help but wonder: How often has budding talent been obliterated in the name of economic viability or simply, for survival? It is morbidly noteworthy that only some struggling artists made it after their physical existence expired. In this material world of pragmatism versus dreams, how does one strike a balance?
1 comment:
pretty tough questions. it's probably of how far we are as a society. function of how much our basic needs have progressed to spiritual needs... - Huibin
Post a Comment