When I was younger, I had an interest in handwriting analysis. It’s just a bit of fun, but I used to find it helpful to see different personality traits. So I was googling handwriting analysis to check what it means to write above the line or below.
Anyway, this search brought up some different results about colouring books, which led to a memory of my early school days, and being given the task to colour in various images inside the line.
The reward for learning to colour inside the line would be to receive your own colouring book with your name and a gold star instead of colouring in on loose sheets of paper and not being an achiever.
I changed schools aged 6 or 7 from an unstructured quite progressive 1970s school where the classroom was more like a playroom and free expression was very much encouraged, and moved to a starched, uniform-wearing very orderly environment where we were moulded to be disciplined and well-behaved. In the new school I struggled to colour in neatly and although I did manage to do it eventually, I remember having to confine myself to the boundary, being the first stressful experience in my academic life.
I have always thought this was a bad thing and a significantly poor milestone attainment, but apparently my reluctance to be confined to the line now signifies individuality, thinking outside the box and being a bit of a rebel. I just thought I was a bit stupid and I’ve always been so envious of those who are neat and patient enough to take the time to ensure perfection.
So did you colour inside or outside the line? I still think inside the line is much better and yet I am still an outside the line type of person. It’s amazing how such a small task can mean so much.
What an interesting piece of information @AnnieS. I’m an inside the line person I think - I like everything to conform to my view of what I think to be correct. My schooldays were in the 50s and early 60s and were at a very rigid, strict uniform and even stricter rules school. However, my career was as an English teacher in secondary education - a subject that, although conforming to grammatical structures, is less rigid when it comes to the analysis of literary texts. So a bit of a mixed bag there!
I always coloured inside the line. It was a childhood activity but it can be therapeutic for adults as well. Plenty of colouring books on Amazon for this purpose. I posted a while about an art by numbers program I use and showed the results. I found it absorbing once I got started. It looks like I never quite got over colouring.
It’s interesting what you say about English literature. I’ve always been an avid reader, used to excel at writing poetry at school and went on to study English Lit at A level, but found it very confining and went into a career in financial management where I can finally create complex systems that give a neat result without having to pick up a pen!
Perhaps English lit at university level provides far more scope to explore alternative viewpoints and interpretations.
Mart I too have tried the colouring books in the past but my mind is too restless and I start thinking of other tasks that I need to do! (or just turn on Netflix!). Perhaps I was just traumatised and have a negative association
I’ve never thought of the study of Literature as confining @AnnieS how interesting that you did when you studied it - so I suppose then that I really am inside the line even in a subject that to my mind isn’t … I had always considered Maths based subjects too rigid, or maybe that is because I was always hopeless at Maths, although I did manage a B at was what was then GCE
One thing about the digital colouring. It colours according to the program. No decisions to make on inside/outside the line. I originally bought it for when our son visits. He has learning difficulties and it means he can use the computer like everyone else. The digital colouring by numbers keeps him happy and quiet for hours. Having got the program, I found it does the same for me.
It’s intersting that you say that you were always hopeless at Maths, when you achieved a B grade. That used to be an excellent grade when O levels were the standard.
For a long time I considered myself hopeless too after a particularly bad experience with a poor teacher at secondary school. Following a robust performance at Middle school, I was placed in the top class for maths, sat at the back with the naughty kids and had a teacher that went from A to Z in her explanations, missing all the steps in between. To compound it all I have a much older brother whose favourite A level subjects were maths, physics and pure maths, who was tasked by parents with coaching me (impatiently) to catch up following my teen rebellion lapse. Many sibling arguments and tantrums later, I did pass my O’level but I convinced myself I was bad at the subject, then realised later I really enjoy it!
For years though I had imposter syndrome in my career. So much of who we are later in life is shaped by those early experiences and setbacks.
