I think little children are better than being a mother. The reason why it translates to being a mother is that after all, it is an attempt to put mothers and mothers in the position that they are obliged to redeem their children. It can be said that this kind of coercion will eventually lead to a lot of unnatural burdens. Because not many mothers have the epiphany as the few in the film.
Rather than redemption, it is better to speak of preservation, rather than to speak of preservation, it is better to speak of innocence. In the film, the mother role in the highest sense we see should be Ronnie's mother, trying to protect him until he grows old. She carried this obligation firmly on her back, and until the last moment of her life, she still gave him the good, instead of accusing "you burned my whole life, quickly become independent"... without the slightest desire to unload the goods Psychology, I saw the most touching place, but that's it. Although Ronnie has some deficiencies, I think he has deeply received his mother's contribution. Moreover, his mother's contribution seems to be enough for him to contend with this icy world that has been deliberately keeping a distance from him.
Others, as mothers, are particularly weakly portrayed.
In fact, I believe that no one is obliged to redeem themselves. In many cultural backgrounds, there are many mothers who are eager to save. On the one hand, they are impatient and desperate for a result. On the one hand, the redeemed are often not appreciative. Therefore, this kind of asymmetry makes redemption a trap, suffocating both sides, and even makes it easy for the redeemed party to breed malice, "How much do you want to control me"...
At the end of the day, it’s still about empathy or other abilities related to self-awareness. A thousand words, it is better to protect yourself and help others when you have spare energy, whether it is a child, a significant other, or a parent.
View more about Little Children reviews
