I don’t recall my parents ever encouraging a belief in Santa. I think I still picked it up from the general culture, but not very strongly- Christmas was “here’s $100, pick out a gift for yourself” and so there wasn’t really the mystery that accompanies it normally. If anything, I think I thought “Santa” was the codeword for the commercial part of Christmas rather than an actual entity.
Regardless of the pros and cons of the Santa deception, that sounds to me like an impoverished way to experience the occasion. Even if you don’t end up enjoying everything you received very much, a lot of the fun comes from the expectation of being pleasantly surprised.
Yes. This is what makes present-buying a bloody nightmare. I realise magic is possible, therefore I am obliged to make it happen. (As an attitude, this can and has led to disastrous overreaching. It was almost a revelation when I realised I could give someone a birthday card that was just pretty good and that would be fine.)
that sounds to me like an impoverished way to experience the occasion.
Perhaps. I will note that I did receive other gifts, typically from grandparents who went with relatively safe choices in clothing, which were infrequently a recipe for being pleasantly surprised.
I do not experience much anticipation or suspense with regard to Christmas, and that may be a real loss. But I find the tradeoff strongly preferable- I do not seem to experience a need for novelty in my material possessions. The people I know well that have such a need seem much worse off because of it.
I also think the calculation that the value of surprise is greater than the lost value in inefficient gifts is mistaken (and the guilt and social hardships that can result), or at least only has a positive result for some subset of the population. I think a view of gift-giving as costly signalling is more accurate and less optimistic.
The non-Grinch part of my message is: there are better places to find pleasant surprise than gift-giving rituals. Indeed, detaching gift-giving from ritual occasions seems to increase the surprise.
The non-Grinch part of my message is: there are better places to find pleasant surprise than gift-giving rituals. Indeed, detaching gift-giving from ritual occasions seems to increase the surprise.
I’m sure it would increase the surprise, but it also decreases the anticipation, which is part of it.
Personally, the gifts that I got the most enjoyment out of were usually video games; I’ll revisit a good video game many times, even after the system has become outdated. Whereas I’ve bought most of my favorite books myself, most of my favorite games were given to me. However, given the choice, I would not have asked to receive only video games for Christmas, first because receiving several games rather than one or two would probably have resulted in a decrease in their average quality, and second, because it would prevent anyone who had a really good gift idea that wasn’t a video game from giving it to me.
On average, I would have probably received a greater total enjoyment from my gifts, but I would have lost much of the mystery and anticipation. The experience of knowing you might get something special and unexpected has utility in itself.
Regardless of the pros and cons of the Santa deception, that sounds to me like an impoverished way to experience the occasion. Even if you don’t end up enjoying everything you received very much, a lot of the fun comes from the expectation of being pleasantly surprised.
Yes. This is what makes present-buying a bloody nightmare. I realise magic is possible, therefore I am obliged to make it happen. (As an attitude, this can and has led to disastrous overreaching. It was almost a revelation when I realised I could give someone a birthday card that was just pretty good and that would be fine.)
Perhaps. I will note that I did receive other gifts, typically from grandparents who went with relatively safe choices in clothing, which were infrequently a recipe for being pleasantly surprised.
I do not experience much anticipation or suspense with regard to Christmas, and that may be a real loss. But I find the tradeoff strongly preferable- I do not seem to experience a need for novelty in my material possessions. The people I know well that have such a need seem much worse off because of it.
I also think the calculation that the value of surprise is greater than the lost value in inefficient gifts is mistaken (and the guilt and social hardships that can result), or at least only has a positive result for some subset of the population. I think a view of gift-giving as costly signalling is more accurate and less optimistic.
The non-Grinch part of my message is: there are better places to find pleasant surprise than gift-giving rituals. Indeed, detaching gift-giving from ritual occasions seems to increase the surprise.
I’m sure it would increase the surprise, but it also decreases the anticipation, which is part of it.
Personally, the gifts that I got the most enjoyment out of were usually video games; I’ll revisit a good video game many times, even after the system has become outdated. Whereas I’ve bought most of my favorite books myself, most of my favorite games were given to me. However, given the choice, I would not have asked to receive only video games for Christmas, first because receiving several games rather than one or two would probably have resulted in a decrease in their average quality, and second, because it would prevent anyone who had a really good gift idea that wasn’t a video game from giving it to me.
On average, I would have probably received a greater total enjoyment from my gifts, but I would have lost much of the mystery and anticipation. The experience of knowing you might get something special and unexpected has utility in itself.