Take a photo of a barcode or cover
aimee70807 's review for:
The Normal One: Life with a Difficult or Damaged Sibling
by Jeanne Safer
The author's thesis is that siblings are an overlooked but integral part of our identity. She argues that having a sibling who is "difficult or damaged" generally makes parents go in one of two directions, both of which damage the "normal" child. Option A is to sink all of your energy into the problem child, with the result that the normal child becomes invisible, generally having to mature quickly to help with the damaged child and becoming an overachiever in life as a way of drawing parental attention. Option B is to write off the problem child and turn the normal child into your golden boy or girl, which in turn makes the normal child see that parental love is conditional and can easily be lost if he or she develops any flaws.
While I find that analysis interesting, the book itself really turned me off. I think part of the problem is simply that I have a knee-jerk negative reaction to the author, who admits that she was complicit in relegating her troubled older brother to second-rate status during their childhood. I found it annoying that she spent over 5% of the book on a literary analysis of the Tempest --- even though she uses Caliban as the symbol for the damaged sibling throughout the book, the analysis seemed excessive.
But the real problem, I think, is that the author can't seem to take a step back from her own problematic childhood to look at the issue in context. Yes, it's tough to be the normal sibling, but short of ditching anyone who's slightly abnormal, I don't see any other option than to take on extra responsibilities if someone in your family is troubled. I don't subscribe to the American belief that our own personal fulfillment should be the absolute top priority in our lives if we're hurting other people to make that happen, but I suspect the author of this book does.
While I find that analysis interesting, the book itself really turned me off. I think part of the problem is simply that I have a knee-jerk negative reaction to the author, who admits that she was complicit in relegating her troubled older brother to second-rate status during their childhood. I found it annoying that she spent over 5% of the book on a literary analysis of the Tempest --- even though she uses Caliban as the symbol for the damaged sibling throughout the book, the analysis seemed excessive.
But the real problem, I think, is that the author can't seem to take a step back from her own problematic childhood to look at the issue in context. Yes, it's tough to be the normal sibling, but short of ditching anyone who's slightly abnormal, I don't see any other option than to take on extra responsibilities if someone in your family is troubled. I don't subscribe to the American belief that our own personal fulfillment should be the absolute top priority in our lives if we're hurting other people to make that happen, but I suspect the author of this book does.