I remember how, as a kid, my parents told me all about how the message of the book was the joy of sharing and how the rainbow fish with the sparkly scales brought happiness to the other fish by giving freely instead of being selfish. Now however, as I look back on my childhood and so many of the ideas my bios worked so hard to ingrain in me, I can't help but grimace as I think about that book. The author presents the character of the rainbow fish as a haughty but lonely figure who received guidance from an old octopus to give away all his sparkly scales in order to find true happiness. I can relate. As a child, I was rarely allowed even a few birthday gifts and was expected to give away anything special or perceived as excessive to the more needy around me. This mentality was also foundational in bigger ideologies, like how a missionary should "sell all they own and give the proceeds to the poor", even above providing basic care of their family first, and how one couldn't truly have any sort of "positive testimony" without adhering to such a lifestyle. I remember my bios also often using these ideas as excuses to get out of things they didn't want to deal with, where I was concerned, which for me included everything from simple hobbies to pretty major medical care. To make matters worse, while I was expected to give freely of everything I had to the children around me regardless of my own wants or needs, I was actively discouraged from connecting with my peers, as they were often seen as bad influences. This left me even more confused and frustrated as a young person wondering what the point was of having to release anything of any value to me simply in order to support my parents in their attempts to connect with those around them enough to try to impress change and sway them to their particular way of thinking and ideologies. Since I left home, my bios have also significantly changed their lifestyle in a way so as to provide more for their personal whims and indulgences (and those of my younger sisters) first and as they feel like it, something that leaves me feeling even further singled out and put down. I was also taught some really bad habits of self care from this type of message, that I should give to others not just my excess, but even to my detriment, like why invest in basic medical or mental health care if you can use that same resource to essentially manipulate another into coming around to your point of view? Granted my bios saw it as engaging people with a vital message that would bring about their eternal salvation, not manipulation, but I can no longer see it that way myself.
I wonder now, Why did the rainbow fish have to let go of his special, unique characteristic in order to be happy? What does it say about a friendship if one has to give away or let go of their prized possessions simply to connect? Why couldn't the story have been about interpersonal relationships and communication instead of that kind of "selfless sacrifice"? Can't we find a better middle ground between haughty arrogance and selfishness and complete forfeit? Is such an utter sacrifice really even useful, much less healthy? Isn't there a way we can share what's unique and special about ourselves (and each other) without having to give it up?
Earlier today I happened across a Facebook post on a group for librarians from around the country about how an author is rewriting a "cringy" children's book in order to address some of the more concerning elements in the story. I was blown away when I read in the comments that the book Rainbow Fish was also being revisited and taken back to the drawing board. It broke my heart when a fellow librarian shared how, after reading the book to a group, as requested by one child, a very shy little boy approached her and asked how he could give away something of great value to him in order to make friends like the rainbow fish did in that story. It broke my heart because I get it.
No comments:
Post a Comment