<h2>LETTERS</h2>
<p>The letter exacted from a child is usually a letter of thanks; somebody
has sent him a box of chocolates. The thanks tend to stiffen a
child’s style; but in any case a letter is the occasion of a sudden
self-consciousness, newer to a child than his elders know. They
speak prose and know it. But a young child possesses his words
by a different tenure; he is not aware of the spelt and written aspect
of the things he says every day; he does not dwell upon the sound of
them. He is so little taken by the kind and character of any word
that he catches the first that comes at random. A little child
to whom a peach was first revealed, whispered to his mother, “I
like that kind of turnip.” Compelled to write a letter,
the child finds the word of daily life suddenly a stranger.</p>
<p>The fresher the mind the duller the sentence; and the younger the
fingers the older, more wrinkled, and more sidling the handwriting.
Dickens, who used his eyes, remarked the contrast. The hand of
a child and his face are full of rounds; but his written O is tottering
and haggard.</p>
<p>His phrases are ceremonious without the dignity of ceremony.
The child chatters because he wants his companion to hear; but there
is no inspiration in the act of writing to a distant aunt about whom
he probably has some grotesque impression because he cannot think of
anyone, however vague and forgotten, without a mental image. As
like as not he pictures all his relatives at a distance with their eyes
shut. No boy wants to write familiar things to a forgotten aunt
with her eyes shut. His thoughtless elders require him not only
to write to her under these discouragements, but to write to her in
an artless and childlike fashion.</p>
<p>The child is unwieldy of thought, besides. He cannot send the
conventional messages but he loses his way among the few pronouns: “I
send them their love,” “They sent me my love,” “I
kissed their hand to me.” If he is stopped and told to get
the words right, he has to make a long effort. His precedent might
be cited to excuse every politician who cannot remember whether he began
his sentence with “people” in the singular or the plural,
and who finishes it otherwise than as he began it. Points of grammar
that are purely points of logic baffle a child completely. He
is as unready in the thought needed for these as he is in the use of
his senses.</p>
<p>It is not true—though it is generally said—that a young
child’s senses are quick. This is one of the unverified
ideas that commend themselves, one knows not why. We have had
experiments to compare the relative quickness of perception proved by
men and women. The same experiments with children would give curious
results, but they can hardly, perhaps, be made, because the children
would be not only slow to perceive but slow to announce the perception;
so the moment would go by, and the game be lost. Not even amateur
conjuring does so baffle the slow turning of a child’s mind as
does a little intricacy of grammar.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />