:: without devolving into gratuitous whump or sappiness ::
I think you succeeded. There are a number of tropes that I hate around recovered memories of trauma (because I think they are fundamentally dishonest), and I think you did a nice job sidestepping them.
:: judging by his treatment of, say, Andy, ::
I disagree that Andy is a relevant example. Andy is an adult, and in his role as a Sheriff's Deputy, he has been charged with, and has accepted, an adult's responsibilities. Similarly in his role as an expectant parent.
Anyhow, I'm one of those people who don't think that it's "innocence" that makes children worthy of extra protection and consideration, but their vulnerability. Also the fact that they don't have adult capacity for full moral judgment yet: it's not that they're well-meaning, but that they often can't do much better than they do. (Children can be frightfully cruel and vicious, and completely lacking in good intent: they still get leniency, however, because we're still teaching them that no, that is not an acceptable away to behave in the world. Or, in the case of very young children, waiting for their empathy circuitry to turn on.)
So, What Would Albert Do? (WWAD? Hee!)
I think when he looks back at himself, he does not see a true six-year-old, he sees a miniature thirty-something Albert, and thus retroactively applies all the standards that he would apply to his current self. It's a common error, and one that I think Albert would be especially prone to making.
If he met an actual six-year-old, though, one who had been traumatized by another child's abuse... Well, I think it depends on whether he sees a miniature Albert. After this story, he might recognize the child's story as similar to his own, and (falsely) apply the same standards he was retroactively applying to himself. (He might have done it before the story, too, depending on how his repression worked and whether he subconsciously identified with the child.) Furthermore, I think that any son of his would be in for a rough childhood, because again, I think Albert would tend to see a miniature Albert, or at least an Albert-in-the-making.
(I adore Albert, and he has many sterling qualities, but empathy and gentleness are not first among them.)
But an actual terrified six-year-old, one that wasn't triggering "miniature Albert" thoughts? I'm not sure that he'd be all cuddles and hugs and teddy bears toward the child (although maybe he would), but I do think that he wouldn't be passing moral judgment on the kid for being too terrified of the adult to report it. A six-year-old has excellent reason to be terrified of an abuser, as well as to question the efficacy of other adults in comprehending the threat and protecting him from it. I do see Albert knowing and understanding that, and seeing the bystander child as being as much a victim as the directly-abused child.
:: the main reason why I'm so sloooow in producing output, because I polish and re-polish everything and still feel uncertain about it when I'm done. :) ::
What, it isn't effortless? You don't just sit down and have exactly the right descriptive detail pour from your fingertips? You have to work at it?
And, as a corollary, I might have to work at it?? Pfft! What is this nonsense of which you speak??
no subject
I think you succeeded. There are a number of tropes that I hate around recovered memories of trauma (because I think they are fundamentally dishonest), and I think you did a nice job sidestepping them.
:: judging by his treatment of, say, Andy, ::
I disagree that Andy is a relevant example. Andy is an adult, and in his role as a Sheriff's Deputy, he has been charged with, and has accepted, an adult's responsibilities. Similarly in his role as an expectant parent.
Anyhow, I'm one of those people who don't think that it's "innocence" that makes children worthy of extra protection and consideration, but their vulnerability. Also the fact that they don't have adult capacity for full moral judgment yet: it's not that they're well-meaning, but that they often can't do much better than they do. (Children can be frightfully cruel and vicious, and completely lacking in good intent: they still get leniency, however, because we're still teaching them that no, that is not an acceptable away to behave in the world. Or, in the case of very young children, waiting for their empathy circuitry to turn on.)
So, What Would Albert Do? (WWAD? Hee!)
I think when he looks back at himself, he does not see a true six-year-old, he sees a miniature thirty-something Albert, and thus retroactively applies all the standards that he would apply to his current self. It's a common error, and one that I think Albert would be especially prone to making.
If he met an actual six-year-old, though, one who had been traumatized by another child's abuse... Well, I think it depends on whether he sees a miniature Albert. After this story, he might recognize the child's story as similar to his own, and (falsely) apply the same standards he was retroactively applying to himself. (He might have done it before the story, too, depending on how his repression worked and whether he subconsciously identified with the child.) Furthermore, I think that any son of his would be in for a rough childhood, because again, I think Albert would tend to see a miniature Albert, or at least an Albert-in-the-making.
(I adore Albert, and he has many sterling qualities, but empathy and gentleness are not first among them.)
But an actual terrified six-year-old, one that wasn't triggering "miniature Albert" thoughts? I'm not sure that he'd be all cuddles and hugs and teddy bears toward the child (although maybe he would), but I do think that he wouldn't be passing moral judgment on the kid for being too terrified of the adult to report it. A six-year-old has excellent reason to be terrified of an abuser, as well as to question the efficacy of other adults in comprehending the threat and protecting him from it. I do see Albert knowing and understanding that, and seeing the bystander child as being as much a victim as the directly-abused child.
:: the main reason why I'm so sloooow in producing output, because I polish and re-polish everything and still feel uncertain about it when I'm done. :) ::
What, it isn't effortless? You don't just sit down and have exactly the right descriptive detail pour from your fingertips? You have to work at it?
And, as a corollary, I might have to work at it?? Pfft! What is this nonsense of which you speak??