Tuesday December 16, 2008 Random ramblings
Tuesday December 16, 2008 I'm curious if there's any well-reasoned argument, preferably with data, that shows that constructing a giant conspiracy to get kids to believe that a fat man delivers presents to kids across the world, in one night, in a flying, reindeer-driven sled, is a good idea, does anyone know?
Maybe it's just me, but it confused me greatly that all these adults enjoyed lying to me to make me think men in obviously fake beards knew whether I was good or not.
These same adults who would tell me lying was bad and chastise me if I did so. That I was asked to believe in two different variants of the beardy-with-presents story1 didn't aid its credibility Also, it distressed my poor little sister, who was completely enthralled by the whole thing, terribly when she found out at age 4 or 5 or so that there was no Santa (it might have been me who told her - she hasn't forgiven me to this day). 
Perhap's there's some parental joy to be had in deceiving your child so fully, that I havn't yet had the chance to experience.. Does this Santa conspiracy really serve children, or more the adults?
1. The other one, Sinter Klaas, was a bit less fantastical and more plausible though. He was a bishop and dressed like those funny old men you'd see in church sometimes; he arrived by boat from Spain, with a bunch of Moorish helpers; he'd arrive a week or more in advance; he travelled the country on a white horse traditionally, but would avail of modern transport; he left the presents on your front-door step on the evening of the 6th of December. A sceptical child could still imagine he distributed the presents in advance, with the parents colluding in the final delivery (my uncle always disappeared before the knock on the door, I noticed). Still, I couldn't quite understand why adults so enjoyed us believing in this strange beardy - but it didn't matter as long as I got presents.
( Dec 16 2008, 04:03:57 PM GMT ) Permalink Comments [5]
Trackback URL: http://blogs.sun.com/paulj/entry/is_there_a_case_for
Post a Comment:
It's just to make your mind soft to later accept the even larger conspiration about gods.
Posted by Thommy Malmström on December 16, 2008 at 04:14 PM GMT #
It's a way to get them some sort of present even if they are not deserving of one.
Posted by Brian on December 16, 2008 at 05:29 PM GMT #
A friend of mine tells of a child who spontaneously stood up in class and shouted out that there was no Santa Claus. The next day, he was forced to apologise and say that there was, indeed, a Santa Claus.
While I think the kid should have shut the hell up and not spoiled it for everyone, the adults around him should have shown a bit of intelligence and not then forced him to lie.
Personally I disagree with this whole "god of children" thing. We all know that it's us that buys the things. The kids should be allowed to enjoy the festive season without having the religious baggage that goes along with it.
Thommy is right as well. It's a handy way of making the kids ready to believe the other tripe that the education system is about to dole out. Church/State separation, me arse.
All hail Eru Ilúvatar!
Posted by kae verens on December 16, 2008 at 08:57 PM GMT #
Brian,
But, in my day at least, if you had been bold you would get a lump of coal as a present. In the Sinterklaas variant, naughty children got the 'roe' - a bunch of sticks tied together, for the parents to physically chastise the children with (and that practice still being common when I was young).
So surely it was more an inducement to get children to be good, than a means to still give presents to the bold? The former doesn't require the conspiracy anyway..
Posted by Paul Jakma on December 17, 2008 at 08:31 AM GMT #
I quite like Terry Pratchett's take on this. You need to get children practising the small lies like Santa Claus, so their imagination is stretched to help perpetuate the big ones, like truth and justice.
Posted by Ann on December 17, 2008 at 10:42 AM GMT #