“The right to ‘lock away’ is at the heart of human adoption.” This resonates. I think about this as the “warranty.” That is, my adoptive parents paid a sum of money and, in exchange, they were promised their “own” child. And I do mean “own” in all its definitions. If, at any point in their lives, the adoptee does not perform as warranted, it is a breach in the eyes of our adopters. A failure to perform as promised. Breach of lifetime warranty.
Yes. Your comment speaks to the true nature of family as it evolved historically from industrialisation as comprising property relationships, usually, you may find, between men. Funny that!
When I was a child I did not know I was adopted and I was obsessed with the Rapunzel story. I was obsessed with her beautiful hair. I never thought Gothel came out of the story looking good in any way. She seemed selfish, scary and mean.
Beautifully put. I wonder what it must be like to have grown up without the gaslighting and resultant fog. So much more is known about child development and the trauma caused by separation and yet there still seems to be industries based around separating children from mothers. It is cruel.
Brilliant deconstruction. Just SO sad. Again. Still. Still requiring some man to save her? Save whoch one? Oh, not the mother. She is mere. So this is how we get the kiddies, is it? Convince them too be princesses? Delude them until they are discarded? Grimm indeed.
You asked whether Rapunzel was the first pro-adoption story I read without realizing it was gaslighting. No, but as a child I hated the Rumplestiltskin story. As an adult I feel it was an extraordinary premonition of the birth and loss of my son through forced adoption in 1968.
Oh yes, I agree. So many of those stories were forms of conditioning (not just about adoption), and yes, Rumplestiltskin is exactly that story. For my thesis, I did in-depth interviews with mothers of loss. All were coerced, all were abused, all were given the choice or no choice. I will shortly write about a 1984 masters thesis in New Zealand, a survey of 830 mothers. The majority were forced.
So profound, Barbara - and elegantly expressed, as is all your writing. The metaphor is aptly made - and once you see it, you can't 'unsee' it. I found the Rapunzel parallel to be reminiscent of the writings of Clarissa Pinkola Estes ('Women who run with the wolves') who draws on archetypal stories/fairy tales/cultural myths to unfold, deconstruct, and examine the deeper psychological meanings underpinning them that propel us (for adoptees, The Ugly Duckling' archetype. This was sheer bloody brilliance. THANK YOU for the gifts of your wisdom and writing.
“The right to ‘lock away’ is at the heart of human adoption.” This resonates. I think about this as the “warranty.” That is, my adoptive parents paid a sum of money and, in exchange, they were promised their “own” child. And I do mean “own” in all its definitions. If, at any point in their lives, the adoptee does not perform as warranted, it is a breach in the eyes of our adopters. A failure to perform as promised. Breach of lifetime warranty.
Yes. Your comment speaks to the true nature of family as it evolved historically from industrialisation as comprising property relationships, usually, you may find, between men. Funny that!
When I was a child I did not know I was adopted and I was obsessed with the Rapunzel story. I was obsessed with her beautiful hair. I never thought Gothel came out of the story looking good in any way. She seemed selfish, scary and mean.
Amazing how we know, even when we do not know. Those lies at the heart of stranger adoption are the cracks where the fog gets in.
Beautifully put. I wonder what it must be like to have grown up without the gaslighting and resultant fog. So much more is known about child development and the trauma caused by separation and yet there still seems to be industries based around separating children from mothers. It is cruel.
Brilliant deconstruction. Just SO sad. Again. Still. Still requiring some man to save her? Save whoch one? Oh, not the mother. She is mere. So this is how we get the kiddies, is it? Convince them too be princesses? Delude them until they are discarded? Grimm indeed.
You asked whether Rapunzel was the first pro-adoption story I read without realizing it was gaslighting. No, but as a child I hated the Rumplestiltskin story. As an adult I feel it was an extraordinary premonition of the birth and loss of my son through forced adoption in 1968.
Oh yes, I agree. So many of those stories were forms of conditioning (not just about adoption), and yes, Rumplestiltskin is exactly that story. For my thesis, I did in-depth interviews with mothers of loss. All were coerced, all were abused, all were given the choice or no choice. I will shortly write about a 1984 masters thesis in New Zealand, a survey of 830 mothers. The majority were forced.
So profound, Barbara - and elegantly expressed, as is all your writing. The metaphor is aptly made - and once you see it, you can't 'unsee' it. I found the Rapunzel parallel to be reminiscent of the writings of Clarissa Pinkola Estes ('Women who run with the wolves') who draws on archetypal stories/fairy tales/cultural myths to unfold, deconstruct, and examine the deeper psychological meanings underpinning them that propel us (for adoptees, The Ugly Duckling' archetype. This was sheer bloody brilliance. THANK YOU for the gifts of your wisdom and writing.