Small Talk: PTA Meetings

[Meredith Quill]

The Small Talk topic is for:

 

• Introductions
• Off-topic chatter
• Having virtual tea with forum buddies

 

This is NOT a topic for actual show discussion. When you want to talk about the show:

 

1. Figure out the nature of the topic you want to talk about
2. Look for an existing topic that matches or fits
3. If there is NOT an existing topic that fits, CREATE ONE!

 

Examples of topics that populate show forums include (but by no means are limited to):

 

• Character topics
• Episode topics
• Season topics
• Spoiler topics
• Speculation topics
• In the Media topics
• Favourite X topics
• ...you get the idea

 

Happy trails beyond Small Talk!

[Eyes High]

1 hour ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I don't see Renata obsessing about her daughter's exquisitely refined specialness.  I see a mother with unlimited resources who's afraid she's not doing enough for a daughter who's claiming to be bullied.

Then you missed Renata wringing her hands about her daughter being so particularly wounded by her experiences because of her supposedly extremely "intuitive and sensitive" nature, as if only intuitive and sensitive kids get upset by their friends skipping their birthday parties or by being bullied and as if that isn't a reaction any ordinary child would have.

Quote

As a gifted person with a gifted child and working in education and having read a lot on giftedness, I don't see gifted kids as 'spectacular little shits', etc.

As someone who grew up surrounded by kids in gifted programs, several of whom bullied me and their teachers with equal vigour, that may be your perception, but it's certainly not my experience. I get that parents of gifted children, as Renata does, might see their little darlings as incredibly sensitive and intuitive little angels whose rarefied thoughts are ever turned to a higher plane, but I have to tell you: endowing a little human with heightened intellectual abilities to perceive adult bullshit while withholding from them any power except the power to make others miserable, while simultaneously telling them that they are special and unique and better than their peers, is not a recipe for angelic, gentle, thoughtful children. In fact, the more intelligent the kids were at my school, the bigger terrors they were. 

Quote

They come in all personalities.  A very common one is the quiet, sensitive, thoughtful type, kind of like Amabella.

Nope, not in my experience. Spectacular little shits, one and all. One congregated gifted class at my school decided they didn't like the substitute teacher--because she was fat, I think--and detected a weakness in her absent from their usual teacher (who ruled them with an iron fist). They decided to try to reduce her to tears just to put her in her place. This was totally typical, in my experience. (They succeeded, by the way.) It turns out that when you tell a bunch of bratty children that they're smarter than their peers that they become even more arrogant and abusive. Who knew?

Fortunately, some of them grow out of their awfulness. A lot of them don't. A lot of them also suffer later in life. It turns out being labeled super special early in life and then realizing that that label is of no assistance navigating life or, even worse, that you were never particularly special to begin with, can fuck you up. Who knew?

If Amabella is not truly gifted, as I suspect she is not, she'll likely fare better in the long run. Most highly intelligent people I know--even the "successful on paper" ones--are extremely fucked up. Gifted programs seem to make it much worse, for the reasons I've said.

I have a deep suspicion of anyone overly attached to the label of "gifted," either those who claim it for their children or for themselves, and not just because of my own experiences with "giftedness" being the purview of superlatively shitty children or of wealthy parents seeking to obtain a special, desirable label for their kids by any means necessary. ("Giftedness" is of course perfect for attention-seeking, uniqueness-obsessed parents, since it sets their child apart as supposedly having "special needs"...but in a good way!)

This attachment to the idea of "giftedness," which cannot be divorced from socioeconomic status bullshit as I have said, fucks up kids and parents, the former by giving them a complex about their supposed specialness that will bite them in the ass later on when life doesn't give a shit about their specialness, and the latter by encouraging them to view their child's intellectual status as a status symbol signaling "uniqueness" (and giving parents unrealistic expectations about their children's prospects for success). Renata/Amabella is a very good fictional representation of this issue. Obsession with "giftedness" is all about ego, as Renata shows. I think the best thing you can do for a truly brilliant child--or any child, really--is to keep them far, far away from anyone who even breathes the word "gifted." That shit is poison to both children and parents alike.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Eyes High

[Cardie]

2 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

As a gifted person with a gifted child and working in education and having read a lot on giftedness, I don't see gifted kids as 'spectacular little shits', etc.

I was a gifted child back in the 1950s and all my parents did was minimize the specialness of it and make sure I didn't lord it over any peers. And the few times I told off teachers for being stupid--man, was I read the riot act about respect. Of course, this was way before helicopter parenting and I was just a middle-class kid at a middle-class public school.

[NutMeg]

[not sure what this thread will be used for :), if it becomes active]

Edited March 7, 2017 by NutMeg

[Ina123]

10 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

As a gifted person with a gifted child and working in education and having read a lot on giftedness, I don't see gifted kids as 'spectacular little shits', etc.  They come in all personalities.  A very common one is the quiet, sensitive, thoughtful type, kind of like Amabella.  I'm sorry you've had such negative experiences.  

My great-nephew, now 17, has been in gifted classes all of his school life. In elementary school he hated it because he was taken out of his regular class twice a week to go to "special classes". It separated him from friends and made him stand out. Beginning in middle school, his classes were advanced placement and just another part of his schedule and there were lots of kids in them. He didn't stand out. It made all the difference in the world. Same with high school. He's never been a "'spectacular little shits". On the contrary, he has tried to play it down.

[Eyes High]

Quote

They tested me and put me in the gifted class, but my school district and the parents never made me feel like I was special. It was just another test I took. The gifted classes weren't exclusively for gifted students so we were always with other kids. The only way we got singled out was sometimes we were given extra assignments so of course my reaction was, "More work? Nooooooo!"

A girl at my school--congregated gifted classes didn't kick in until the fifth grade or so--was identified as gifted in first grade or so along with a handful of other students, and so the school brought in a special education teacher to pull them out of regular class every week for "enrichment" activities, like going to museums and working on special projects. This did not endear said girl to her classmates, for obvious reasons, and she was swiftly and mercilessly singled out for bullying. I don't think the programming was ever described as "gifted" programming per se, but kids are in general very intuitive; they know when someone else is getting special treatment and they're not, just as they know that the "enrichment" class is a class for smarter kids, no matter whether you call it "honours," "special needs," "special learning," or what have you. The educators, to their credit, always tried to be sensitive about it, but when you're putting kids in a special class because they've tested in, or when you're mysteriously pulling a student out of class once a week to do special supplementary activities, kids will know what's up and they will act accordingly.

Quote

Just because you haven't dealt with any gifted children with pleasant personalities doesn't mean they don't exist. The kids in my school's gifted program were mostly well-behaved, quiet and sweet. I wouldn't be surprised if there are certain gifted programs that encourage bratty behavior - but I don't think those are the norm.

It wasn't encouraged, it was a natural consequence of hiving kids off in a protective bubble slash echo chamber sheltering them from having to negotiate relationships with regular children (setting them up for failure later on when they're stripped of the protective gifted program bubble), implicitly letting them believe them that they're better than their peers, and allowing them to feed off each other's energy and egg each other on. It's some Lord of the Flies bullshit.

Quote

At this point, I don't think we've seen nearly enough of Amabella to have any idea whether she's actually gifted or not.

There's absolutely nothing to indicate Amabella's giftedness at this point other than Renata's claim, which warrants a healthy degree of skepticism. What we've seen so far of her sweet, placid disposition points away from giftedness for me.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Eyes High

[Blakeston]

58 minutes ago, Eyes High said:

A girl at my school--congregated gifted classes didn't kick in until the fifth grade or so--was identified as gifted in first grade or so along with a handful of other students, and so the school brought in a special education teacher to pull them out of regular class every week for "enrichment" activities, like going to museums and working on special projects. This did not endear said girl to her classmates, for obvious reasons, and she was swiftly and mercilessly singled out for bullying. I don't think the programming was ever described as "gifted" programming per se, but kids are in general very intuitive; they know when someone else is getting special treatment and they're not, just as they know that the "enrichment" class is a class for smarter kids, no matter whether you call it "honours," "special needs," "special learning," or what have you. The educators, to their credit, always tried to be sensitive about it, but when you're putting kids in a special class because they've tested in, or when you're mysteriously pulling a student out of class once a week to do special supplementary activities, kids will know what's up and they will act accordingly.

It wasn't encouraged, it was a natural consequence of hiving kids off in a protective bubble slash echo chamber sheltering them from having to negotiate relationships with regular children (setting them up for failure later on when they're stripped of the protective gifted program bubble), implicitly letting them believe them that they're better than their peers, and allowing them to feed off each other's energy and egg each other on. It's some Lord of the Flies bullshit.

But just because you've observed something doesn't mean it's universal. I've known plenty of gifted kids without big egos. Children in "gifted and talented" programs come in a wide range of personalities - some are arrogant, some are self-conscious about being different, and others are insecure because they aren't <i>the</i> smartest. And some think nothing of it.

[Lemons]

2 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

Clown therapists-- so weird. 

At my daughter's elementary school, the special programs started in 3rd grade, I think.  I don't think the other kids were typically jealous.  It was more like the gifted kids got more work to do and missed what was done in class while they were pulled out, but they were expected to remain on top of everything.   

I was in a small elementary school where I, along with about 3 other kids were pulled out of class to take French lessons and other different classes.  I still remember sitting in some back office because there weren't any extra classrooms It wasn't called a gifted class and I was far from gifted. I can see how some parents might glob on to something like that and call it a "gifted" program. But it wasn't,. We were just hand picked with no testing. And I  never had my IQ tested, but if I had it sure wouldn't be part of some top 2%.

i think there are too many kids in these programs to give them that much weight.  And the thought that the top IQs go along with the top paying jobs is ridiculous.  

[ProudMary]

12 hours ago, NutMeg said:

[not sure what this thread will be used for :), if it becomes active]

This would be the perfect thread for the conversation about gifted children that's derailing the episode thread(s).  
Also for general discussion of domestic violence, not specifically pertaining to series' episodes.  

[riverheightsnancy]

Not every school district uses the WISC or the WPPSI or the WAIS (intelligence tests-longstanding, normed and standardized), for inclusion into the G&T program. That would be too expensive. It seems many people do not understand the how or why these tests are administered. It has to be done 1-1 by a licensed psychologist (usually child or school specialist). It is expensive and time consuming with multiple subsets of assessment. The vast majority of kids in G&T programs are there because their scores on achievement tests (testing what you have learned or should have learned) which are routinely administered on a yearly basis by public schools that receive federal funds for education (private schools may do none of these things btw). It is a requirement that the children illustrate basic levels of knowledge for their age group so that the school continues to receive federal funds. The tests are more about proving teacher/school competence (hence the pressure for good scores by the teacher and to ensure those), than they are assessments of the children (as a primary reason for doing them). And they are NOT assessing intelligence although the lay-public always thinks so.  However, many schools use THOSE scores as cutoffs (because they keep the records for year-to-year for each kid and compare them) for inclusion into G&T and possibly AP and Honors classes (for older kids). I remember my 5th grade daughter was mere points from being in the gifted program in math one year and I am glad that she didn't make the cut-off (they had changed it that very year-the prior year she would have been in). Sure it is flattering, but all they did was skip those kids a grade in math. It really wasn't all that special and then she had the stereotypical female adolescent math drop-off and started to struggle with it in high school. So, it was better that she did not advance. Being in a G&T program (based on achievement) and actually having an above average IQ are 2 different things, but people think that they are the same. They are not necessarily mutually exclusive. 

As another aside regarding the "gifted" label, back in the 70s my brother was in 1st grade and the teacher had problems with him. He wouldn't pay attention and do the work. He was put in the corner a lot (back when they did that) and punished. He was labeled a "problem" child. They thought that he was delayed. They brought in the psychologist and did intelligence testing on him to determine his deficits. Well, it turns out that he had a 140+ IQ in 1st grade and was now labeled a "genius". The teacher was told that he was "bored" and needed more. This was before official G&T programs. Well, they sure changed their tune and now his behavior was viewed totally differently. Instead of punishment when he wouldn't do something, it was now perceived as being bored and needing more engaging things to do. I mention this because the power of a "label" is a strong basis for perception and guides the way people act.  The rich people in Monterey are acutely aware of perceptions. It is ALL about perception in the show. If Amabelle is "perceived" as gifted, she will be treated as such, therefore making her "gifted" and treated specially. She fulfills the prophecy and the perception. This show is all about the perceptions people have of others and how that drives the interactions. 

[Blissfool]

On 3/7/2017 at 11:10 AM, Winston9-DT3 said:

Now it's just AP and honors classes, which have their own issues (including being mostly the rich kids), but also the benefit of not having a lot of the students with behavioral issues in those classes.  So disruptions are less common.  

This is the main difference between AP/honors classes and regular classes, according to my son. He's in AP for the core subjects, but of course, he's in regular classes for electives such as Computer Tech or Health. The behavioral issues in those regular classes is astonishing to him.

[Cranky One]

I didn't want to go into the book thread for fear of being spoiled, but I noticed that the author of Big Little Lies has written some other books. Are they worth reading as well? TIA!

[jah1986]

13 hours ago, Cranky One said:

I didn't want to go into the book thread for fear of being spoiled, but I noticed that the author of Big Little Lies has written some other books. Are they worth reading as well? TIA!

I'm a fan of her work. I especially like What Alice Forgot, although I think I'm in the minority there, and The Husband's Secret which I think was one of her biggest sellers. Not all of her books are great but I don't think there are any real duds in the bunch.

[Atlanta]

I liked What Alice Forgot. I'd recommend it. BLL and WAF are the only LM books I've read so far.

[ProudMary]

I enjoyed What Alice Forgot very much.   It was the first LM book I'd read and it's still my favorite (along with BLL.)  I also liked The Hypnotist's Love Story.  I was somewhat disappointed with The Husband's Secret.  Several of my friends were reading it at the same time and were raving about it though.  I just didn't happen to agree.  It's not awful by any means, I just don't think it was as strong as her other books.   
I also went back and read her first two books, Three Wishes and The Last Anniversary.  While I wouldn't run out to get them, they're fun reads if you're stuck looking for something to read.  I think TLA was better than TW.
Then there's her latest:  Truly Madly Guilty.  I started reading the book, got a couple of chapters in and stopped.  I felt as if she was going back to the well (of her past novels) too often.  I may give it another try at some point down the line but right now there are other books I'd prefer to read.
She's a good author overall though.

Speaking of which, for those here who enjoy Liane Moriarty's books, what other authors do you enjoy?
Since I asked the question, I'll start:
Mary Kay Andrews
Emily Giffin
Catherine McKenzie
Colleen Hoover

[Cranky One]

Thank you Atlanta, jah1986 and ProudMary! I will definitely check out your suggestions!

Edited March 22, 2017 by Cranky One

[chocolatine]

2 hours ago, ProudMary said:

Speaking of which, for those here who enjoy Liane Moriarty's books, what other authors do you enjoy?
Since I asked the question, I'll start:
Mary Kay Andrews
Emily Giffin
Catherine McKenzie
Colleen Hoover

Marian Keyes!!! She's like the Irish version of Moriarty, a bit more funny and less dark, but still writing about heavy subjects such as marriage breakup (Watermelon), alcoholism (Rachel's Holiday), and yes, domestic violence (This Charming Man).

I also really loved Jennifer Weiner's early books, Good In Bed and In Her Shoes.

I'll check out your recs when I'm in need of new reading material.

[ProudMary]

12 hours ago, chocolatine said:

Marian Keyes!!! She's like the Irish version of Moriarty, a bit more funny and less dark, but still writing about heavy subjects such as marriage breakup (Watermelon), alcoholism (Rachel's Holiday), and yes, domestic violence (This Charming Man).

I also really loved Jennifer Weiner's early books, Good In Bed and In Her Shoes.

I'll check out your recs when I'm in need of new reading material.

I know I've looked at Marian Keyes' books at B&N and the library but I don't think I've read any of them.  I'll definitely give her a try.  A quick Amazon search indicates that she has a LOT of books to choose from!

I like Jennifer Weiner's books too; I've read several of them.  I was going to put her on my list but I didn't want to hog all the good authors.  Give someone else a chance!  I'm glad you listed her. 

[Atlanta]

On a different topic, does this show make you want to take a yoga class? Been trying to incorporate more yoga and Pilates in my regular workouts.

[topanga]

On 3/23/2017 at 10:23 AM, Atlanta said:

On a different topic, does this show make you want to take a yoga class? Been trying to incorporate more yoga and Pilates in my regular workouts.

Anything that would get me abs like Zoe Kravitz. 

[walnutqueen]

I have little desire to relive my somewhat sordid past, but if it helps even one person from suffering abuse, I guess I should finally come clean.

Once, I was in a low place, and moved in with a wonderful man who showered me with attention, gifts, flowers & cards - and all that happy horseshit.  He was stable & many years sober.  That didn't last, and before I knew it (but too late to save me from buying my dream home and allowing him to share it), he began showing signs of an altogether too familiar emotional abuser (thanks, stepdad), with definite murderous tendencies.  I was proactive, because I was in serious danger for the first time of my life.  He had "issues", and I needed help that the cops I worked with every day and my own emotionally abusive yet recently reconnected stepdad could not provide (cops said "he has to hurt you, and pointing a shotgun at your face isn't enough"; stepdad said "I've never seen you afraid in your whole life").  A therapist I barely even tolerated (what emotions are you really feeling?) actually got with the program, profiled the ever livin' shit out of his ass, as told by me, and quickly concluded she'd be bringing me flowers - either to the hospital with my jaw wired shut or to my grave.  We devised a plan - which took a looong time to execute, and she gave me coping strategies to live with him without triggering the danger.  I made leaving me to move across the country HIS idea, and borrowed enough money to make all his perceived grievances fly away.  It was over a year and a half of eggshells and tightrope walking, and left me devastated, destitute, but alive.  But that therapist saved my life.  And if I'd ignored any of the warning signs, I wouldn't be here today to tell this story.  Abusers have sad, sad stories, too - and they know how to use them, and instinctively hone in on any of your weaknesses.  Beware, and be aware.

[OldButHappy]

1 hour ago, walnutqueen said:

It was over a year and a half of eggshells and tightrope walking, and left me devastated, destitute, but alive.  But that therapist saved my life.

Congrats on your escape!  That is no small achievement.

The problem with dealing with dangerous people is that good people have a really hard time believing that pathological people exist; it's hard to find anyone who even believes you, let alone anyone who can give you good advice on safely disengaging from them.  

Having grown up around narcissists, it took me a long time to sort out the impact that their abusive behaviors and obsessive secrecy had on me and the people that I drew into my life.  

And the good therapists are annoying, almost by definition, if you've been raised to view pathological behaviors as normal.  That's one of the reasons that Celeste's therapy sessions rang so true to me - for a therapist to begin to dismantle the defense mechanisms that she constructed to normalize her abusive situation would feel very threatening.  So, of coarse, Celeste became angry when the truth of her situation began to be revealed.

I learned that any therapy appointment that I really, really wanted to avoid/skip/cancel was a therapy session that I really, really needed to attend!  ;)

[molshoop]

10 hours ago, walnutqueen said:

I have little desire to relive my somewhat sordid past

I'm responding to something you said in the episode post.  I also had an Oma and Opa, so I was wondering if you were Slavic.

On the topic of abuse: I had an abusive father.  When I was 15 I left home to live with friends in another town to escape him.  I realize

I was very lucky to have someplace to go.  Even when women and girls realize they need to get out the resources aren't there for most

of them.

I should also mention that I threatened my father with a large wrench ( that was the first time I had stood up to him), so he was happy to see

me go.  I'm now 70 and I still can't say for sure if I would have used it, but it sure was gratifying to see him looking scared.

[walnutqueen]

1 hour ago, molshoop said:

I'm responding to something you said in the episode post.  I also had an Oma and Opa, so I was wondering if you were Slavic.

My people were Germans living in Poland before coming to Canada.   :-)

[NutMeg]

The amazing Tom and Lorenzo, which I've been reading about for such a long time and only got to check now, have excellent analysis of clothes for each character in the show. They stress that their analysis very much refer to the characters in the story and are not to be taken as ballpark statements. Which makes total sense. They also don't expect people to claim they are a Maddie, or a Renata, as they would have said they were a Charlotte or a Miranda. And while I get that, I was very much amazed to realize that Renata's wardrobe is mine on a good day: I'm very much dressed in black most of the time, or charcoal grey when I want to change it up a bit, and color mostly for sweaters or scarves, or the occasional stripes or floral print, and with the latter most of the time I go any shade of purple, red and orange. And I fully assume that that might make me look like a witch!! Besides, aren't witches in movies getting more and more stylish :) I'm calling it, in terms of look, Princess is out, Witch is in - long term trend (borrowing on the 80s and - early?- 90s vibe: Cruella and Grunge do not a pretty princess make!!!)

Sorry for verging off topic

[mojoween]

Is anyone else reading Nine Perfect Strangers?

I’m about halfway through and I'm already in love with it and especially with Frances. 

Now I'm nervous to see what they're going to do with it onscreen, because Nicole already bought the rights to it, and I’m not even done with it yet!

[chocolatine]

5 minutes ago, mojoween said:

Is anyone else reading Nine Perfect Strangers?

I’m about halfway through and I'm already in love with it and especially with Frances. 

Now I'm nervous to see what they're going to do with it onscreen, because Nicole already bought the rights to it, and I’m not even done with it yet!

I'm almost done reading it. I liked the first half, but for me it deteriorates rapidly in the second half. But I have a few chapters left to go, so maybe the ending will redeem some of the weaker plot/characterization.

To be honest though, I don't expect Liane Moriarty to repeat the success of Big Little Lies. Even the most successful writers usually have one or two really good/great novels, and the rest are just OK.

[mojoween]

I don’t know if she really said this or it’s urban legend that Harper Lee said the best way to beat a sophomore slump was to never write a second novel.

(And how sad for her that the lawyers ruined that for her.)

I know BLL wasn’t Liane’s first or even second novel but it really is the best.  It is immensely re-readable.

A relatively new novelist who I fear has fallen into a severe sophomore slump is B.A. Paris.  “Behind Closed Doors,” her first book, was emotionally terrifying.  It kept me in such suspense that I started looking askance at my husband, as if he were the creepy antagonist.  But her next two books have been rather disappointing IMO.  The second was especially formulaic.

[chocolatine]

I finished Nine Perfect Strangers last night. It was a mess almost to the end, and then everything was tied up formulaically without the least bit of originality. If this had been a manuscript by a first-time writer, I doubt any reputable publisher would have touched it; Moriarty is just coasting on her popularity at this point. Good thing that Amazon gives full refunds on Kindle books within the first week of purchase.

[QuinnM]

Has anyone 'read' the book on Audible?  I'm thinking this is a good story for my daily hike.

[jeansheridan]

Moriarty has had at least two big hits--What Alice Forgot (which would suit Reese as a solo project) and this one and I never thought Big Little Lies was all that great of a book. It has a weird tone problem. Slapstick at first and then it gets heavy. And I didn't like the Husband's Secret either. She is very readable and I love the Australian setting a lot. And her sisters write too which is neat. Very Bronte. 

I had a weird idea for the show. Would you watch one episode primarily from the kids' POV? Because they are all going through big changes and stresses as well. And I think the kid actors could manage it. The older actors would still be in scenes but we'd hear overheard conversations. And see Chloe holding court with all her gossip. And find out if both twins really are cool about Ziggy (I don't they both like him). 

[chocolatine]

12 hours ago, jeansheridan said:

What Alice Forgot (which would suit Reese as a solo project)

I remember reading a few years ago that Jennifer was "in talks" to star in the movie adaptation of What Alice Forgot. Apparently that never came to fruition, so it would be great if Reese could buy the rights for it.

12 hours ago, jeansheridan said:

I never thought Big Little Lies was all that great of a book

Moriarty is not that great of a writer. She knows how to create suspense, but her work is certainly not literary and probably won't be remembered past a few generations.

[Chaos Theory]

Not sure where else to post it but just had to post is somewhere .  Keith Urban is now following me on Twitter.   

He has always been a big supporter of his wife and you can see a photo of him wearing a BLL T-shirt.   

Edited July 22, 2019 by Chaos Theory