Comment on tutelary figures
I have written about the importance of tutelary figures in several articles. Although it is clear from the context what I have in mind, I have not elaborated in a standalone piece. A tutelary figure is a person who watches over you while teaching you something that is valuable for life. Parents typically perform this function, as do teachers, coaches, and religious leaders, among others.
Every person does something we can learn from, including in the form of an example to avoid. Though those people are not explicitly out there trying to take care of you or, anyhow, contribute to your long-term wellness. They are just minding their own business and you learn by discerning the patterns therein. A tutelary figure is guided by benevolence. They want you to succeed. This means that they can be rough at times, if their position permits as much and the situation calls for it.
A mistake some people make is to think that benevolence is the attitude of accepting all missteps, of not defining boundaries, and of effectively claiming that all numbers win. Sometimes openendedness is the appropriate course of action. At others it does a disservice to those involved because it does not give them the impetus and framework they need to develop their capacities in ways that empower them to succeed.
It can be disastrous to give someone exactly what they ask for, because people do not always know what will cause them irreparable damage. For example, giving too much freedom to a toddler is how that child will harm itself. You do not let a 2-year-old walk to the beach and go for a swim. It is not ready for that. Thus a parent who always answers affirmatively is not being responsible.
Strict control is another case that is characterised by irresponsibility, even if that is less obvious at the outset. Continuing with the example of parenting, the beach-going parent who never allows its child to learn how to swim is not giving enough space for personal growth. The overprotected child may thus turn into an insecure adult and/or entitled prick.
A tutelary figure understands that they are supposed to pass on the baton or, anyhow, that they will only remain relevant in some other capacity beyond what they were there for initially. Your parents will not be babying you for long, though they might be there to help you raise your own kids, and/or to keep you company. Teachers will expect you to leave school and go do some job, including one where you are a teacher yourself. They may still be your friends and chat with you about all sorts of issues. Your coach will give you all the tools you need to be able to do the task on your own. Then the coach can still be there as your peer. The religious leader will allow the members of the community to self-organise and still be present to share their experience, to provide encouragement, and to correct any irregularities.
There are people who do not need a lot of protection and others who benefit from closer control. People are diverse: one size does not fit all. A child, for example, may already have the responsibility of an adult at the age of 10, while another person will develop it in their 30s. The former is not necessarily better, because the 10-year-old still needs experience, which it will only get in a positive way if it is reminded that it still is a child. The latter case is not defective or anyhow wrong. It too makes poignant the need for tutelary figures.
Tutelary figures hold authority. This authority can be organic, as in the case of a family: the child starts out as a fully dependent, symbiotic organism, that gradually learns from the adults around it. Authority may also be ex officio, such as the teacher at school who has the power to punish students with extra homework when they misbehave. Though authority may also come from one’s recognition of excellence in another. If you ask someone for their opinion on some important matter, you are effectively acknowledging that they have the skills, knowledge, and experience to answer in a manner that is helpful. If done with regularity, that person has authority over you in this specific capacity.
Authority is an interpersonal phenomenon. It cannot stand on its own. The teacher has no power other than brute force if the student does not listen and if the institution does not grant them any remedial action. The relationship is thus broken. Consequently, authority and submission go together. One must submit to the other’s guidance, which is another way of saying that they agree to be handheld. Sometimes this happens regardless of one’s will, though it will typically be subject to their acquiescence or express want. For example, the baby has no choice in the matter, but other relationships do involve consent, like one wanting to train under a specific football coach during their free time.
Tutelary figures are involved in every stage of our life. If they are not, then we must be our own best guide and guardian. Otherwise we are lost and are in trouble. In effect, the tutelary figure is there to show us what is a benign option and what would be detrimental to our being. A person who falls into self-destructive habits, for example, essentially does not have someone in their life who can put them on the right path. The situation they are in sets them up for failure. Perhaps they are lonely and/or stressed and/or overworked. There will be a more descriptive explanation than merely “this person is bad”.
Authority and submission is how hierarchies take form. Societies need those to thrive. Individuals benefit from hierarchies at every stage of their life. In the absence of hierarchy one must be stable in their routines and clear in their thinking. Such is a rare case, however. The vast majority of individuals in the vast majority of cases benefits from guidance and control, which they can hopefully find in their social milieu.