A fleeting history of happiness: children's perspectives
Professor Cedric Cullingford

Click here for a print version of this article.

Whilst it will not always seem apparent to most of us, the Government has shown a great deal of interest in the well-being of the population. In pilot studies in places like East Tyneside, it has sought to promote happiness as part of local educational priorities. Although not embedding well-being in the National Curriculum, the notion that it should be aimed for, targeted and inspected, will inevitably be part of educational policy in the future. Some might think that happiness is promoted for nefarious reasons; the more content take part in voting and the discontented would not vote for the government. Nevertheless, the notion of well-being is now on the agenda.

This is an interesting subject and one that concerns children. What could be more important to them than well-being? The schooling they undergo makes them very aware of it, even if it is never discussed as part of the curriculum. It matters to them and they have clear views about it.

What is so interesting when we explore pupils' perspectives on happiness is that they come across as wise. There is nothing superficial about their understandings of what it means. The debates about happiness have always been between the instrumental perspectives of hedonism, assuming, like the government, that happiness can be induced, and the philosophical views that see it as a much more complex, and intractable idea. Whilst we live in a society in which much attention is given to pleasure and to the promotion of heightened states of mind through drink or drugs, through musicals and films, children demonstrate understandings far more akin to those of Plato and the philosophers of the past.

Children's awareness of sadness, to which they are too close to ignore, gives them a more complex view of happiness, and the pressures on them. Like adults, they have a strong sense of nostalgia.

"I am not always happy any longer. I was happy when I was younger" (Boy age 10)

This sense of sadness can give them a different perspective.

Many people will have heard of the Englishman in New York who, on being wished a happy day for the 20th time, replied "I have other plans". Happiness is a difficult concept and one that provokes some sour reactions. Constant cheerfulness seems to upset some people. Others only need to tell themselves to be happy and they are at once miserable. As J.S.Mill said, "Ask yourself to be happy and you cease to be so". As an attainable end, the notion of happiness has always been seen as an odd one. Most people hope for something rather less ambitious. Money might not bring happiness, but it makes it possible to be miserable in comfort.

The concept of happiness has always been a subject of philosophical speculation. The question of its existence and what it consists of, whether one should wonder about its purpose and whether it is a moral or purely hedonistic concept has long fuelled debate. More recently it has become a matter of scientific exploration, pursuing the possibilities of manipulation. This is perhaps one of the reasons it falls under so much suspicion. As Shaw wrote in Man and Superman - "A lifetime of happiness: no man alive can bear it. It would be hell on earth".

The notion of happiness, or well-being, or satisfaction or whatever other term people wish to use has now become a type of science and a profession. There are life coaches, there are therapists, there are chemists, there are bar staff, and now the government believes that it can manipulate people into feeling better about themselves, more fulfilled, and certainly more oblivious to misery.

The government's approach appears to rest on the utilitarian notion that there should be, like GNP, some kind of quotient of satisfaction. When Dickens was parodying Bentham's notion of the greatest good to the greatest number he did not do so only in Hard Times, but also in Macawber's simple saying: "Annual income 20 shillings, annual expenditure are 20 shillings and sixpence: result misery. Annual income 20 shillings and annual expenditure 19 and sixpence: result happiness". Such are the simplistic notions of the new science of life coaching therapy, and drugs. Happiness was once a philosophical subject. It is now a cognitive neuroscience. It is taught in schools wealthy enough to afford full-time coaches.

The concept of happiness is at once simple and complex.

"Ah, happiness! Our being's end and aim! Good, pleasure, ease, content! Whate'er thy name. (Pope's Essay on Man).

There are many alternative definitions available from goodness to contentment. What Pope also makes clear is the difference between concepts such as pleasure and good. Is happiness the result of being good or doing good? This has always been the dilemma for philosophers over the ages as well as for children.

"When I've been good. Being a good friend. Being helpful. Good people: they're happy". (Girl age 8)

Happiness, after all, can alternatively be seen as a kind of oblivion. In Huxley's Brave New World people were artificially happy. Yet no one would choose to live in such a condition. When people are offered the possibility of having a machine that would make them instantly happy, they invariably reject it as it seems to take away their will and their self-awareness. This is puzzling given the pleasure taken in drugs and binge-drinking, but the sense of the importance of individual consciousness remains intact.

Of all things that young children most prize, it is the gift of insight that strikes them as most important. This insight is the security of understanding, of not having to guess what is required of them, of not being wrong-footed or humiliated by inadvertently doing the wrong thing. It is both an intellectual self-awareness and an emotional security. The loss of such consciousness would certainly be looked on with alarm. Day-dreams are not a form of escapism but playing with the possibility of ideas.

In the distant past it was not only the Stoics who suggested that happiness was something that can only be attained by the few. It was seen as an outcome of higher purity or learning, a chance by-product for those in a higher condition of life. For most people, if not all, it was unthinkable. "No man can be happy till he dies. He is at best but fortunate" (Herodotus). The Greek philosophers, such as Plato and Aristotle, look with suspicion on notions of happiness, since they see life as a conflict between desires and appetites. Happiness is not simply a matter of fulfilment, but something greater. Aristotle points out that a person does not become real without conflict, so that the notion of simple contentment becomes meaningless.

If philosophers considered happiness as something unobtainable on this earth, then so did religions. Most great religions believe in a life after death that is far more important in terms of fulfilment and happiness than anything temporary. Happiness, for them, is a mixture of self-sacrifice and looking to the future, neglecting the present for the sake of promises of heaven and eschewing any belief in present possibilities. If there is happiness, it is an inadvertent result of doing good, or self-sacrifice.

The first time in which happiness was considered to be a possibility for all was the 18th century. It is only in the Enlightenment that happiness became democratised. Indeed, that was the first time in which it could be one of the aims of government. The American Constitution is the first to enshrine "the pursuit of happiness". It does not promise fulfilment, but at least it supports the notion that happiness is something that deserves to be sought. Even Dr Johnson said, "It is the business of the wise man to be happy.". It was in the 18th-century that people began to talk of the "Great task of happiness" or the "duty" of being happy.

In the evolution of the concept of happiness, there are some ground rules, which have remained true for all the centuries, even if we live, for the first time, with the notion that such things can be measured.

Contentment
The first important notion concerning happiness is that it essentially means contentment. In such a notion, the extremes are to be avoided. Being content with one's lot is both a matter of modesty, self-containment and not having too many ambitions. The sense of security is very important for children. Balancing nostalgia for the past is the hope for certainty in the future.

"I would have a husband and I would have two children. I don't know if that will happen but I would like a boy and a girl. I'd call them Amanda and something else." (Girl 7)

The idea of peace and security has a long history.

"Happy the man whose wish and care
A few paternal acres bound
Content to breathe his native air
In his own ground". (Pope's version of Horace)

This definition of contentment is not only applicable to the agricultural past. In the measures of happiness today, being employed is no guarantee of happiness but the insecurity of unemployment is a definite cause for misery. A sense of security, or a lack of outside demands, absence of threats and bullying, all constitute the conditions for contentment. The assumption is that one should not strive too high or want too much.

"Since this sorrow never comes too late.
And happiness too swiftly flies
Thought would destroy their paradise.
No more. Where ignorance is bliss.
'Tis folly to be wise".
(Gray Ode on a distant prospect of Eton College)

That famous quotation makes it clear that to avoid happiness being temporary one should not seek out to know too much. As Horace said, "no lot is in all respects happy." The sense that the best one can hope for is quite modest is widespread in children. They understand unhappiness too well to assume the possibility of pure bliss. They are aware of the great contrasts between the rich and the poor, between the powerful and the helpless and they see their own position as at best in the middle of two extremes.

"I think I lead a happy life. And an exciting life, quite. Quite an interesting life" (Boy, 8)

"I think you can live more happily because I think you're more content if you've done well" (Boy, 8)

Contentment is an ancient attitude towards fulfilment. At least it is better than living lives of quiet desperation. The idea of contentment, or the eschewing of the great burden of ambition, is closely linked to the second concept that underlies the idea of happiness. This second concept is the avoidance of too much desire.

The avoidance of desire
Just as Plato was suspicious of those who had too strong an appetite, so there has always been a sense that "the more you crave happiness, the less likely it is to happen". This is the Buddhist idea that, given the unmitigated unhappiness of the world, the only true rule solution is not to hope too much. The assumption is that hope, that eternal desire for something more, is the blight of experience. If Buddhism presents a message of overcoming desire and appetites so do the spiritual exercises of the mediaeval church. The consolations of philosophy suggest that desire is the worst infliction in the human condition. To serve God is to give oneself up, and to eliminate bad thoughts.

This subjection of desire is not just a religious notion, but one that has its deep roots in philosophy. As Schopenhauer wrote. "The motors of desire power us only part of the way towards contentment." To him it was important to get rid of cravings. Even Freud, in his book on Civilisation and its Discontents pointed out that "Civilization, by urging us to gratify our workaday needs, only inflames worldly complaints". The sense of discontent affects all children, even if they are minor. The feelings of craving for the acquisitions of possession and the unhappiness they can bring are also well known. Children often look back on those times when they were not afflicted by desire or my expectation.

"I am not always happy any longer. I was happy when I was younger. "(Boy, 10)

"There is not always anything to be happy about" (boy 12)

Whilst there is a constant emphasis by governments on economics, on the well-being that derives from wealth - "you never had it so good"- this type of rhetoric reiterates the notion that well-being is manipulable and can be induced. It contrasts with the perception of children who persist in taking a more philosophical view of life, where discontents are central.

"I'd like to be changed back into a baby again, because….I love the toys they play with" (Girl, 8)

"I don't like being me. I want to be in a different school and I want to be like someone rich" (Boy, 8)

The absence of desire and settling for small contentment is only one aspect of happiness. There remain all those notions of ecstasy and excitement. The third important theme is that of contrasts.

Contrasts
One cannot have happiness without understanding sorrow. It is one that leads to the other. As Keats wrote: "Joy, whose hand is ever at his lips...
Bidding adieu….
Aye, in the very temple of delight
Veiled melancholy has her sovereign shrine
Though felt by none save those who are strenuous tongue
Can burst joys grape against his palate fine."

Contrasts are always at the heart of the most essential experiences of being human. Thus it is sorrow that makes people aware of happiness, and vice versa. "There is no greater sorrow than to recall happiness." (Dante) "For truly, in adverse fortune, the worst sting of misery is to have been happy." (Boethius, in his Consolations of Philosophy). Whilst Dr Johnson talked about the duty to be happy he also, in Rasselas, wrote "I shall long to see the miseries of the world, since the sight of them is necessary to happiness."

Contrasts are, therefore, an essential way of understanding all kinds of things. Happiness, as modern scientists have found out, depends on contrasts with others. This awareness of contrasts permeates the comments of children.

"Sometimes we feel happy. Sometimes we feel sad. I only feel happy when my mum says I'm behaving" (Girl, 8)

The moments of happiness are clearly defined. They are special events, periods of contrast, and excitement rather than a regular or steady state.

"Well, sometimes it's my birthday. Sometimes we go out. Sometimes we go out for a party". (Contrast this with domestic reality) "Getting told off; going out where we don't want to go out" (Girl, 5)

The notion of happiness, as a contrast with sadness, is a philosophical one. One state of mind is a shadow of the other. This ancient notion has been joined with a more modern one. This is that happiness depends not only on personal circumstances but on contrasts to others. Whereas, in the past, only a few were allowed to be happy, the democratisation of the concept has meant that all can be happy, but only if others are less so.

In all the experimental work on people's satisfactions, it is clear that money itself does not bring happiness but relative wealth does. H.L Mencken said: "A wealthy man is one who earns £1000 more than his wife's sister's husband". When people think about their own status they always do so in relation to others. Sometimes, this can be a difficult thing. When Chekhov points out that no good person could be happy, except with awful insensitivity, he was making it clear that an awareness of others should not cause personal satisfaction. The problem is that this is just what happens. Just as a monkey's greatest fear is not being chased by a lion but being yawned at, personal esteem and self-consciousness including the fear of humiliation, go very deep. Envy is corrosive. Just as people define themselves against others, so their sense of worth and status depends on contrast with others.

This notion has been tested on students. If, for instance, students are offered £50,000 per year and are told that the others will get half that amount, that sounds attractive. If, however, they are offered £100,000 a year, and others are offered double that, this is something they all reject. This characteristic of comparing oneself with others can have uncomfortable undertones. As Gore Vidal so bitterly pointed out: "If a friend of mine does well, something in me dies a little". Shakespeare, as always, understood this. Orlando in "As you like it" says "Oh, how bitter a thing it is to look into happiness through another man's eyes".

On the other hand, friendship, the closeness to others, has always been associated with happiness. As Mark Twain said. "The best way to cheer oneself up is to try to cheer someone else up." In Seligman's 'positive psychology' the key to happiness is friendship with other people. The Epicurean notion of happiness also made friendship central. And this, in turn, is related to the concept of "flow", losing yourself in tasks, and friendship, and interests which go beyond yourself. 'Flow' is a Buddhist axiom. At a more mundane level Dr Johnson spoke of Inns as being the greatest invention for happiness. Pope pointed out that "true self love, and social, are the same." (Essay on Man).

Given such pragmatism, one can see that happiness is no longer a philosophical concept, but a manipulative possibility. The notions of whether happiness consists of feeling good, or doing good, are replaced by the possibility of affecting one's own mood.

Personality is seen by children to be significant. Certain people possess a disposition to be happy, a propensity to cheerfulness. The displays of temperament are very clear and those who demonstrate optimistic outlooks are envied.

"I would like to have a personality to make people laugh" (Boy, 7)

"I would like to have a personality that makes a likeable person" (Girl, 8)

"I would like to be the sort of person with lots of friends" (Girl, 7)

The question is, in this pragmatic age, whether it is possible to induce happiness. There are, after all, many professionals involved in doing just this from psychiatrists to Lifestyle coaches to bartenders. The philosophically disconcerting conclusion is that you can.

If, for instance, you ask teachers to make sure they praise their children in a class several times, the standard goes up. If the head teacher is told to praise his staff, they feel much happier. Even if this is done utterly mechanically, it is still successful. If people write down five positive things about themselves every day, they feel better. And this can be measured. Life satisfaction can be induced. Even if it is rather like measuring spirituality, certain simple tricks make a difference. The kind of pragmatism that children express is of a more old-fashioned kind. They link happiness not with life-style techniques but with the more palpable rewards of behaving well.

"I like being good the best because you get more treats and when you're naughty you have to go to bed. The more you are naughty the more you have to go to bed. The more you be good the more treats you get". (Girl, 8)

For some people this pragmatism is a depressing fact. The difference between the past and the present is that we have come not only from a philosophy to a scientific approach but, it sometimes seems, from wisdom to mechanics. There are, however, many findings that show that even if we understand notions of well-being and believe in the gross national product of happiness, the age old contradictions remain.

We know, for example, that performance related pay does not have the effect that is intended, and yet the government persists with the notion. We know that setting targets and blaming people for not meeting them does nothing to raise standards, and yet this policy is pursued. We know that the notion of accountability, which takes away trust and responsibility, does not work. And yet it remains the mantra of the political world. The very government that wants to promote well-being is involved in destroying it.

Such ironies would of course be quite clearly understood by the philosophers of the past. For a small insight into this age old conundrum we only have to understand the experience of children in school. When we hear about what they say about it, one cannot imagine a condition better designed to bring out the worst in them and to give them the greatest sense of unhappiness, fear and unfairness.

And yet they survive this with resilience and they realise that this is something which is happening to them not with deliberate intention, but inadvertently. Their answer is not that they want to be happier, but they want greater understanding. They realise that to attain a sense of well-being is hard work, more like the moral duty that the eighteenth century writers contemplated.

"In the short run it's very hard , but in the long run I'm going to lead a happier life if I work hard for it" (Boy, 8)

Children's reflections of the issue suggest that wisdom is what they really want, since happiness might come from that. In the words of the young, we see the real solution to well-being; it would be a moment of great happiness if we could begin to act on the insight of children.

Back to the top of the page