Do you think the French people did Victor a favor by trying to civilize him? Or do you think he would have been better off remaining free to live in the woods?
I think the older Victor got, the more of a threat he would have been perceived by the local villagers. Since Victor was still small and could be handled by most adults, that's the only reason they gave him a chance.
No two persons ever watch the same movie.share
Victor was still in his critical period (before puberty) of learning and development when he was first caught, but that probably passed quickly as his life with the doctor and nurse began. In that day and age, they may have wanted to catch him either way, but the fact that he was child especially at the time of such developments in philosphy and science sparked great interest. I think Victor would have come a lot further if they had taught him sign language. There's also the question of Victor's mental state before he was wild...as in was he autistic, so that's changes a lot.
I'm not sure what was better for the boy, because there's so much unknown of his situation and what his life was really like. But that's such a good question, and when I come to this story, I think about it a lot as i'm sure others do.
in real life what ended up happening was his funding was dropped and Le Dr Jean Itard didn't care anymore since he was no longer getting anything out of it and dumped the Wild Child with the housekeeper where he lived till about 40 years old.
I bet that you look good on the dancefloor
Dancin to electropop like a robot
from 1984:SPERM-TTW
Yep. That's what happened. I wish there was more about her, the nurse...really, she was his mother. Anyway, more about Victor can be found out at feralchildren.com
Also this site leads to plenty of books and films and documentaries about Victor and other Wild Children.
I strongly recommend the book "Wild Boy" by Jill Dawson...a novel more than a biography, and awesome work at that, really providing insight in this boy's life and those around him.
do you know anything about Genie?
I bet that you look good on the dancefloor
Dancin to electropop like a robot
from 1984:SPERM-TTW
Yea, check out the movie "Mockingbird Don't Sing" There's also a NOVA documentary on her and Victor. If you go to feralchildren.com you can find the documentary as well as info on her and Victor.
share[deleted]
Honestly I think they did the right thing. Most likely Victor wouldn't have survived much longer living in the wilderness. Apparently he lived happily the rest of his life under the caring of Mme. Guérin.
I'd ask you, what would you do if you find a kid wandering naked in the woods? To ignore him. leaving the kid alone in the woods? or would you try to rescue him and to do as much as possible to incorporate him to the civilized world? What would you do?
Remmeber that he wasn't an animal but a human being.
It's very difficult to compare my life in a 2010 San Francisco metropolis suburb to semi-rural southern France around 1800. There are so many differences between life expectations and cultures across time and distance. I definitely wouldn't react the same as Pierre Joseph Bonnaterre/Le Dr Jean Itard or Madame Guérin. This Wikipedia article discusses a little about the mindset of educated people at that time and place.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_of_Aveyron
Around where I live, you'd have to drive over 2 hours to find woods dense enough where a child could possibly live years, undiscovered, without a parent or guardian. The population is so concentrated, it's hard to even imagine a feral child scenario could even exist. Let alone the temperature difference between southern France and northern California.
Personally, I'd bypass a naked child wandering in the woods and try to find an authority figure to deal with him. In American society, there's a lot of hostility against single adults who attempt to interact with children who is not a relative AND one they don't know. It's like both the children and parents are brainwashed with the idea that any adult, of either gender, is constantly calculating about molesting or otherwise hurting any pre-teen.
Actually, I wouldn't even make the assumption that the kid was alone. I'd guess that his caretaker was nearby, probably temporarily out of sight. That's how unlikely it'd be for me to come across a child alone.
What about you, Nekromantiko? What would you do if you found a naked kid wandering in the woods? Try to rescue him and to do as much as possible to incorporate him to the civilized world?
No two persons ever watch the same movie.share
I think this is a non-question really, at least in terms of what would one do. No-one would leave a ten year old child living in the woods (although it has to be said there are plenty of children living rough on the streets of cities in the third world).
As to whether they did the "right" thing, I think a lot of the film, particularly given the period in which it's set, is predicated on Rousseau's idea of the "noble savage", which is really romantic nonsense in a lot of ways. As Hobbes said, life before civilisation was nasty, brutish and short, and Victor would probably have been dead in a few years (40 was probably not a bad innings for the early 19th century).
This is not to be dewy-eyed about "progress", and I think it's probably an issue worth thinking about, but really, man is a social animal and we're not designed to live on our own in the forest. And to live with others you must be able to communicate.
I used to want to change the world. Now I just want to leave the room with a little dignity.
People dump dogs and cats in the wild thinking they will go feral and do okay. They have short, terrible lives, covered in ticks, starved, and diseased. It was probably just a matter of time before Victor was ripped up by a predator and died of his wounds and infection, or couldn't find enough food in the winter and died of starvation.
Personally, I don't believe for a moment he lived on his own for very long. Animals have to learn from others how to hunt effectively. Even the most adept survivalist has trouble living off the land. And then there's the matter of conditions brought on by a lack of nutrients such as scurvy or rickets or kwashiorkor. Scurvy fell explorers who didn't know to chow down on the right plants in a single winter. I think it's far more likely the boy was kept in isolation by monstrously abusive parents and then dumped the same year he was found. A small child lost in the woods in daytime clothes today would be in severe danger of hypothermia by morning in most parts of the country in most of the year. And certainly a small child would be the easiest bait for a predator. Nope, I just don't buy it.