Learning To Walk

From Menletter February 2008

By Tim Baehr

Walking Is for Suckers

For ages a family I know had a Jules Feiffer cartoon on the back hall bulletin board. The image is a bit hazy in my mind, but there was a baby just learning to walk. He gets up, takes a step, falls down. Gets up, takes a step, falls down. Gets up, takes a step, falls down. Upon which he declares, "Walking is for suckers."

One Halloween the family's 15-month-old took his first independent steps. He had done the usual progression from creeping to crawling to cruising, but hadn't really attempted (like the tot in the cartoon) to walk on his own. Then the doorbell rang, with the first of the trick-or-treaters. "I'll get it," declared the young lad, and he stood up and walked over to the door. Much merriment ensued after Mom and Dad picked up their jaws from the floor.

Flash forward six years or so. Another young son is learning to walk. He performs just like the Feiffer cartoon kid. Up. Step. Down. Up. Step. Down. Up. Step. Down. Up. Step. Down. His brother, the now-seven-year-old with the one-trial success at walking, stares in disbelief: "Doesn't he know he can't walk?"

Critical Period

Eric Lenneberg (1929-1975) was a linguist who posited the "critical period" hypothesis of language learning and other developmental tasks. In one experiment (I don't recall if it was his), pigeon babies were inserted into tubes that prevented them from practicing flying motions with their wings. Yet at the time wild pigeons were supposed to be old enough to fly, these experimental pigeons had no trouble flying at all. This raises an interesting question: Can "practice" take place mentally, without overt action? Were the genes in the pigeons allowing them to go through their developmental tasks for flying in the absence of wing movement? Did older son "practice" walking while waiting (unconsciously, but who really knows?) until he was assured of success? Did younger son feel a need for some kind of kinetic feedback as he got his legs and balance organized? And was the falling down simply a part of the process? Is it all a matter of learning style?

I've seen other examples. Some writers outline a piece carefully and then follow the outline in creating the first draft. Others just start writing, unconcerned about initial quality, expecting to clean things up later. And still others sit and think for a long time and then hammer out a draft that needs little, if any, further work. I've mostly been the third kind, though sometimes I will go back and do a major overhaul.

This has followed me all my life in many arenas. I tend to work things out for a long time before attempting action. This looks maddeningly like procrastination to the people around me, but when I act things usually fall rapidly into place. O.K., there is also an element of procrastination based on laziness or fear of failure. But I've come to accept, and sometimes appreciate, the monstrous captor of the long pause until my personal "critical period" knight lurches around the corner and says "Let's go."

Sooner of Later

What about you? Are you a "wait-to-get-it-right-the-first-time" kind of guy, or a "get-started-now-and-clean-it-up-later" kind of guy? Have you been criticized for not being the other kind? Have you beaten up on yourself for your tendency to wait or plunge? It might be time to check which kind you tend to be, accept the situation, and (if needed) manage other people's expectations about you.

On the other hand, situations change, and life may invite us to try the other way of dealing with action from time to time. Or we may want to try consciously tailoring our approach to each situation. The plungers of the world may benefit every now and then from at least a slight pause for introspection and planning. And surely we waiters can sometimes benefit from getting off our asses and just moving forward.