无论是大人还是孩子，都不喜欢“无聊”。记得小时候，我惹事生非的时候，大多数都是无聊的时候，尤其是放假在家里没有任何事情做的时候。公司同事说他孩子闹的时候，大多都是无聊的时候。所以，我们给孩子安排了一个又一个活动，买了一个又一个玩具，希望她们繁忙(occupied)，免的惹事生非。实在不行，还有电视，电脑和游戏机。这些电子产品向来都是最有效的 baby sitter。

用SCOTT ADAMS 的话说，“今天我们终于战胜了无聊! 如果你口袋里有一个iPhone，家里有一个游戏机，书包里有一个读书器，你一分钟也不会无所事事。耶!”We've won the war on boredom! If you have a smartphone in your pocket, a game console in the living room, a Kindle in your backpack and an iPad in the kitchen, you never need to suffer a minute without stimulation. Yay! 看了SCOTT ADAMS在华尔街日报上的文章(小石头推荐)，还不禁让人思考 - “无聊”也许是一件很有意义的事情。

我们家地方小，所以把电视给扔掉了，原来放电视的地方变成吃饭的地方，饭厅变成了孩子的游戏活动区。孩子没电视可看，大人也没时间看电视。我们也没有wii和iPad。孩子活动区分门别类摆放了各种工作需要的工具 - 橡皮泥，各种拼图和积木，画笔和湿水彩，娃娃和毛绒玩具，儿童厨房设备和餐具等等。客厅里摆放了小书架和小朋友的椅子。所有的东西摆放都很显眼，乐乐可以自己随便拿取。这样设计的目的就是希望乐乐自己想干嘛就干嘛，自己选择，爸妈可以腾出手来做其它的工作。

可是想得美，哪那么容易? 乐乐一看见周围没人了，就大喊，“爸爸，快过来。妈妈，快过来。” 我的脑海里想像的所谓的“工作”，她很少从事。

每天6点到9点半，是我们铁打不动的陪两个孩子时间 - 在吃饭，吃零食，洗澡，刷牙，上厕所，和收拾收拾的过程中，时间飞快的溜走了，最后讲几个故事，唱两首歌，这一天就草草收场，还把我们累得要死。今天一个美国同事说他家3岁多的孩子每天早7点半到晚6点在托儿所，每天晚上6点到9点雇了保姆，专门陪他孩子。我又直了一次，问，“那你干什么呀?”

我的问题是 - 孩子如何会在无聊的时候可以自己寻找工作，并且专注地工作一段时间呢? 是爸妈的引导不够，榜样的力量不足，创造的环境不够，还是???   这是一个很值得思考的问题。孩子自己寻找工作的这种能力，是一辈子都受用的一种能力。我有一个想法 - 是不是父母经常剥夺孩子无聊的权力，所以孩子也就很难在无聊的时候可以自己寻找工作。我们看不得孩子无所事事，所以自主给孩子安排各种事情。我们受不了无聊的时候唧唧歪歪的孩子，就赶紧找点事情娱乐她们。

最近一段时间，乐乐的主线话题就是，“今天什么活动呀?” 我就想，是不是活动安排过度了，以至于乐乐以为每天在外面跑来跑去才算是活动。我想对孩子来说，ideal的周末活动是这样的 - 和小朋友在一起疯玩；在动物园的大猩猩馆待一两个小时，仔仔细细地看我们的猩猩朋友 (有一次一只猩猩生了小宝宝，我们看了一上午，了解了很多事情)；在please touch museum的艺术室待两个小时，随心所欲地做点手工，坐在靠垫上看两本书；去森林里一个地方野餐，放风筝，扔沙包；在海边玩沙子，看海，睡觉。想得挺美的，呵呵。

还有一个问题 - 每天和孩子相处的时间有限，如何更加有质量呢?  我发现有机会和一个孩子独处是件挺有意义的事情。姥姥姥爷没来之前，我和乐乐每个周六去华德福学校玩，经常在草坪上野餐，还参加了一次五月节聚会 - 那一段日子，每个周六，我们都很开心，都有收获。

我的朋友每天给她3岁多的儿子认字学知识，已经学完一本书了，挺让人佩服的。中国的父母，奉献精神，吃苦耐劳是绝对没得说的。姥姥姥爷总说，你们应该教孩子点东西了。爷爷也小心地试探 - 有没有教乐乐认字呢?  这件事呵，还真是有待商榷。

**********************
SCOTT ADAMS 是卡通人物Dilbert的创造者。文章来自华尔街日报，是公开的。http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903454504576486412642177904.html

The Heady Thrill of Having Nothing to Do

By SCOTT ADAMS

We've won the war on boredom! If you have a smartphone in your pocket, a game console in the living room, a Kindle in your backpack and an iPad in the kitchen, you never need to suffer a minute without stimulation. Yay!

But wait—we might be in dangerous territory. Experts say our brains need boredom so we can process thoughts and be creative. I think they're right. I've noticed that my best ideas always bubble up when the outside world fails in its primary job of frightening, wounding or entertaining me.

I make my living being creative and have always assumed that my potential was inherited from my parents. But for allowing my creativity to flourish, I have to credit the soul-crushing boredom of my childhood.

I grew up in the tiny mountain town of Windham, N.Y., and graduated with the same 40 kids I met in kindergarten. When we picked teams during gym class, there was no mystery about which team would win. The fourth-grader with a mustache would hit four home runs, and the kid with a limp would get thrown out at first. I lived a surprise-free childhood.

The rabbit ears on our television only pulled in one channel well, and we grew accustomed to the picture rolling for the entire evening. Our radio wasn't much better, but if I kept my hand on the antennae I could hear a rhythmic noise that I later learned to call music.

We didn't have many toys by modern standards. But I discovered that if you have a blob of clay and some Lincoln Logs, you can make your own toy rifle. You can use those same materials to create a FrankenBarbie doll with body-image issues and a G.I. Joe that looks like an angry starfish with snow shoes. I'd take turns shooting at both of them, sometimes using the Lincoln Log rifle and sometimes the handgun that I whittled out of a block of wood. I blame society for all of that.

When I wasn't making something inappropriate out of nothing, I would stare out the window into the frosty tundra and watch birds freeze to death in midflight. In the summers I rode my bike for hours every day, imagining fantastic worlds in which ice cream was free and farm dogs didn't attack kids on bicycles just because biting is fun.

My period of greatest creative output was during my corporate years, when every meeting felt like a play date with coma patients. I would sit in long meetings, pretending to pay attention while writing computer code in my mind and imagining the anatomically inspired nicknames I would assign to my boss after I won the lottery.

Years later, when "Dilbert" was in thousands of newspapers, people often asked me if I ever imagined being so lucky. I usually said no, because that's the answer people expected. The truth is that I imagined every bit of good fortune that has come my way. But in my imagination I also invented a belt that would allow me to fly and had special permission from Congress to urinate like a bird wherever I wanted. I wake up every morning disappointed that I have to wear pants and walk. Imagination has a way of breeding disappointment.

Lately I've started worrying that I'm not getting enough boredom in my life. If I'm watching TV, I can fast-forward through commercials. If I'm standing in line at the store, I can check email or play "Angry Birds." When I run on the treadmill, I listen to my iPod while reading the closed captions on the TV. I've eliminated boredom from my life.

Now let's suppose that the people who are leaders and innovators around the world are experiencing a similar lack of boredom. I think it's fair to say they are. What change would you expect to see in a world that has declining levels of boredom and therefore declining creativity? Allow me to describe that world. See if you recognize it.

For starters, you might see people acting more dogmatic than usual. If you don't have the option of thinking creatively, the easiest path is to adopt the default position of your political party, religion or culture. Yup, we see that.

You might see more movies that seem derivative or are sequels. Check.

You might see more reality shows and fewer scripted shows. Right.

You might see the best-seller lists dominated by fiction "factories" in which ghostwriters churn out familiar-feeling work under the brands of famous authors. Got it.

You might see the economy flat-line for lack of industry-changing innovation. Uh-oh.

You might see the headlines start to repeat, like the movie "Groundhog Day," with nothing but the names changed. We're there.

You might find that bloggers are spending most of their energy writing about other bloggers. OK, maybe I do that. Shut up.

You might find that people seem almost incapable of even understanding new ideas. Yes.

To be fair, economics is to blame for some of the decrease in creativity. A movie studio can make more money with a sequel than a gamble on something creative. A similar dynamic is at work in every industry. And, to be fair, sometimes things seem to be getting worse when, in fact, you're only noticing it more. It seems as if folks are more dogmatic than ever, but maybe the pundits are creating that illusion.

Still, it's worth keeping an eye on the link between our vanishing boredom and our lack of innovation. It's the sort of trend that could literally destroy the world without anyone realizing what the root problem is. A lack of creativity always looks like some other problem. If no one invents the next great thing, it will seem as if the problem is tax rates or government red tape or whatever we're blaming this week.

All I'm saying is that if you someday find yourself in a movie titled "The Hangover Part III," that's a good time to sell all of your stocks and invest in gold.

—Mr. Adams is the creator of "Dilbert."