A Quote by Edmund Wallace Hildick

A child can identify with adult characters- but only if they are sympathetically drawn and simple enough. — © Edmund Wallace Hildick
A child can identify with adult characters- but only if they are sympathetically drawn and simple enough.
Good children's literature appeals not only to the child in the adult, but to the adult in the child.
The clash between child and adult is never as stubborn as when the child within us confronts the adult in our child.
As a child and young adult, I delighted in being able to identify almost any wild plant or animal.
Adults had the notion that juveniles needed to suffer. Only when they had suffered enough to wipe out most of their naturally joyous spirits and innocence were they staid enough to be considered mature. An adult was essentially a broken-down child.
In certain circumstances where he experiments in new types of conduct by cooperating with his equals, the child is already an adult. There is an adult in every child and a child in every adult. ... There exist in the child certain attitudes and beliefs which intellectual development will more and more tend to eliminate: there are others which will acquire more and more importance. The later are not derived from the former but are partly antagonistic to them.
It is the child that sees the primordial secret in Nature and it is the child of ourselves we return to. The child within us is simple and daring enough to live the Secret.
I'm drawn to female characters, not all of them are strong characters. I think I'm drawn to female characters partly because they don't have as easy or as obvious a relationship to power in society, and so they suffer under social constraints or have to maneuver within them in ways men sometimes don't, or are unconscious about, or have certain liberties that are invisible to them.
When a child hits a child, we call it aggression. When a child hits an adult, we call it hostility. When an adult hits an adult, we call it assault. When an adult hits a child, we call it discipline.
I could not identify with harming my child or giving up my child. But I could identify with giving up my child if it were going to be ultimately in his best interest.
I've learned... That simple walks with my father around the block on summer nights when I was a child did wonders for me as an adult.
I know it's horrible to have to admit that, but I'm not adult enough to take care of a child.
I'm drawn to punk. I'm drawn to samba a bit. I don't think there's a type of music I'm not drawn to. Lykke Li I really like. Holy Sons I still can't get enough of.
If you just got enough expertise and enough special techniques and read up enough, then you could shape a child into the kind of adult you wanted. There's almost this kind of competitive enterprise. That picture is the picture I think people often imply when they use the word "parenting".
If the point of the inner-child movement is to cure adult problems, it doesn't work. Reliving childhood traumas gives you a nice afterglow, but it lasts only for hours or days. There is no evidence it changes adult problems.
A child is an eager observer and is particularly attracted by the actions of the adults and wants to imitate them. In this regard an adult can have a kind of mission. He can be an inspiration for the child's actions, a kind of open book wherein a child can learn how to direct his own movements. But an adult, if he is to afford proper guidance, must always be calm and act slowly so that the child who is watching him can clearly see his actions in all their particulars.
I enjoyed being in movies when I was a boy. As a child you're not acting - you believe. Ah, if an adult could only act as a child does with that insane, playing-at-toy- soldiers concentration!
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!