Neil Hughes and Symon Basterfield Characters - Essay Example

Comparison of Neil Hughes and Symon Basterfield characters in 42Up “Up” Tv series is the most realistic anthropological study found in literature (Schneider, 2008). Characters in the study represent a wide social arena and a diverse cross section of Britain during 1960s. “Up” series provides vast opportunities and scope for social science researchers on topics of human behaviors and child cognitive development. Nevertheless these characters were born in 1950s. Therefore some of the implications of this study such as single mother parenting may not be valid in modern society. “Up” series can be used to study the impacts of wealth, parenting and race on development of different aspects of human life such as profession and marriage. In analyzing characters of Neil Hughes and Symon Basterfield in “Up” series cognitive development theories introduced by Vygotsky et. al., 1962 and Piaget, 1975 are useful. Although theory focuses on learning behavior of children, similar characteristics as indicated in Piaget’s (1975) theory could be identified in 42Up Neil Hughes and Symon Basterfield characters. According to Vygotsky et. al., 1962 child’s cognitive process begins in social arena where parents are an important influence. Child first learns by listening, observing and imitating her parents. After knowledge had been internalized child becomes competent and the language is perceived as her thoughts. Piaget, 1975, described child cognitive development as a process of adaptation and organization alternatively. When a child is presented with unfamiliar situations assimilation and accommodation take place. These two processes jointly results in adaptation to the changes. Organization is the natural process occurring in human mind, creating structures of related and interconnected information. Neil Hughes and Symon Basterfield experience explicitly different forms of parenting and socioeconomic provisions during their childhoods. Neil Hughes can be the most interesting subject in this social experiment (Newbury, 2008). In 1964 he appeared in “Seven Up”, the first episode of the series, representing the middle class of Liverpool. Seven years old Neil looked ambitious, healthy, and cheerful. He wanted to become an astronaut, a glorious ambition. Symon Basterfield is another distinguished character in the series (Schneider, 2008). He was considered as an illegitimate child whose unknown father was black. Symon was bought up in a children home. Later in 1964 he was living with his mother suffering from depression, which related to Symon being adopted by a children home. Little Symon is a resemblance of troubled childhood. He is a victim of unhealthy parenting and poverty. While young Neil dreamed of exploring the space, latter’s thoughts restricted to London example, “trip to Madame Tussaud’s Wax Museum” (Schneider, 2008). In the experiment Neil is ranked in the middle class while Symon in poor class. The gap between two children’s socioeconomic provisions is reflected in their childhood fantasies as well (Newbury, 2008). Neil who was sufficiently provided with food, cloths, shelter and parental caring probably had a wider exposure to the society as well. He was aware of the wonders in the world as a child. It can be inferred that poor Symon’s exposure to the society had been restricted to the places in London. Childhood inspirations which mean the people, places and things adored and venerated by children influence their growth and development. In accordance with 1962 theory by Vygotsky et al., child cognitive development, young Neil’s personality was positively confident and outgoing while Symon’s personality was characterized by negative, timidity and taciturn. General readers might also expect high performance from adult Neil while weak to mediocre performances from Symon in the future. But this was not the case. Sciologists commonly advocate the importance of sufficiently providing psychological and physical needs of children while parents believe providing nutritious foods, comfortable cloths and good influence can produce a successful adult. Notions such as building confidence and sense of security in child’s mind have been deeply rooted in our society (Bichler, 1976). However evidence of adult Neil and Symon characters in infamous 42Up questions such widely belies. By the time of 42Up in July 1998, Symon was the most enthusiastic of the eleven participants in the show despite weakly provided background for child cognitive development as indicated by 1962 theory by Vygotsky et. al.,. The obstacles to success are evident in his marriage life. He had divorced from the first wife, mother of Symon’s five children. In 35Up he voted to remove from the show up again in 42Up with cheerful new wife, Vionetta (Smith G, 2011). Difficulties in Symon’s marriage life remarkably resemble his childhood exposure to similar situations. Young Symon’s mother was not married. She clearly showed the signs of possessiveness towards Symon while getting depression when he was at child home. Probably Symon grew up listening to her enormous complaining about the society creating a dearth of emotional security in young Symon’s life. As a child he had not exposed to the life of successfully married people. Symon had to learn how to succeed in matrimony by experimenting, which tallies with assimilation, accommodation and organization stages in cognitive development theory suggested by Piaget, 1975. While Symon was struggling with matrimony Neil struggled with financial instability. Neil is considered the least successful among the “Up” characters by the age of fourteen. He was previously noted for having glorious deems in life, wanting to become an astronaut but failed dropping out from Aberdeen University after one term. In most episodes of the show Neil was seen struggling homeless, jobless, single and even with signs of poor mental health and agitation. Grownup Neil showed poor performance in both social relationships and professional aspects of life despite good socioeconomic background during early childhood development. Neil also showed a progressing success by the age of 42 in which he became a Liberal Democrat councilor in Hackney. Young Neil was ambitious and showed inclination to a glorious profession (Newbury, 2008). He partially succeeded in achieving professional goals. By age 35 he directed theater and by age 42 he became a party politician. In analyzing these two characters the unpredictability of human life is explicitly evident. All the human beings are subjected to sorrows, joys, disgrace, fame, lose, profit, success and failures at least one stage in life. What are the real determinants of human development? Clearly general norms and theories of psychology fail to explain the complexity of this phenomenon. The objective of any science is to upgrade the wellbeing of the society. Anthropologists and psychologists attempt to fit human development in theoretical models expecting to positively influence human life (Erickson, 1965). Underlying assumption of modeling human development is that “nature of human lives” can be controlled. Analysis of charters of “Up” experiment shows that development of human life cannot be sufficiently predicted by using socioeconomic parameters and current theories of psychology. A successful life cannot be bought for money, imposed by parents or race. Cognitive behaviors can be partially linked with children’s parents and biological processes but not completely. The choices humans will make given the circumstance we might never predict. By daily experiences we know children of wealthy families have the equal chance of making wrong choices in life Further, Leonardo Da Vinci and Jesus Christ were born in poor families. They did not have nutritious synthetic foods and systematic cognitive support given to modern day children at schools. Nevertheless it took 300 to 400 centuries to interpret Da Vinci’s theories by the common scholars. Analysis of Neil Hughes and Symon Basterfield characters in “Up” series also showed the limitations in common assumptions regarding cognitive development. About 3000 years ago Lord Buddha, the enlightened one, claimed he knows everything about humans, all living beings and universe. According to Buddhism human development is determined by “karma”. Individual’s previous karma affect good and bad in current lives including cognitive capabilities. If people committed sins previously, parents, teachers, siblings, friends or even you cannot avoid the resulting perils. In other words we along are responsible for the successes and failures in our lives. According to Christianity and many other religions God determines the ultimate success of human lives. While living in contemporary Information Technology era it is easy ignore the religions. Some people live as if would never die. But the truth is humans have only a little control of anything that belongs to the arms of nature. 42Up analysis provided ample evidences to support this. References Bichler, RP (1976). Child Development an Introduction. USA: Houghton Mifflin Co. Boston Erickson, E. H. (1965). Childhood and society. New York: Penguin. Eshleman, J. R. (1981). An introduction to sociology. Massachusetts: Ally & Bacon. Newbury, B. (2008). The Neil Hughes Interview. Available: http://www.documentaryfilms.net/index.php/the-neil-hughes-interview/. Last accessed 27th Sep 2012. Piaget, J. (1975). The childs conception of the world. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams. (Originally published 1932). Schneider, D. (2008). The Up Series directed by Michael Apted. Available: http://www.hackwriters.com/Upseries.htm. Last accessed 27th Sep 2012. Smith, G. (2011). symon Basterfield. Available: http://georgina-smith-7upseries.blogspot.com/2011/07/symon.html. Last accessed 27th Sep 2012. Vygotsky, Lev Hanfmann, Eugenia (Ed); Vakar, Gertrude (Ed), (1962). Thought and language.Studies in communication., (pp. 82-118). Cambridge, MA, US: MIT Press, xxi, 168 pp. Read More