I just learned about “Yes Virginia, There Is a Santa Claus”. I learned about it from a animated movie
about the story, but have since read up on the original source. And I have to say, I’m a little steamed about
it.
The story, as I understand it, is that a little girl wrote a
letter to the editor expressing skepticism about Santa Claus. Some of her friends say he’s not real. She’s not sure. “Please tell me the truth, is there a Santa
Claus?” she asks.
Here is the full text, for reference.
What really chaps me about this is that I read the honest,
heartfelt pleading of a girl who is confused and yearning for the truth. I admire her so much for her desire to fine the
line between fact and fiction. She’s
clearly confused, and goes to what she feels is the ultimate source for the
truth. So what answer does she get?
“Virginia, your little friends are wrong. They have been
affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age.”
Bull. Shit. Her friends are dead-on right. There is no Santa Claus.
“Not believe in Santa Claus! You might as well not believe
in fairies.”
Yes. You might as
well not believe in fairies. In fact, I
don’t think you should.
“Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is
no Santa Claus.”
And
“Did you ever see
fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that's no proof that they are
not there.”
This is true enough, but that’s not how we go about
determining what is real. We don’t start
with “everything is real until proven otherwise”. You can’t say “Fairies are real until you
prove they are not.” That is a terrible
strategy. Instead, I claim we should
take the opposite approach. “Nothing is
real until it is demonstrated to be real.”
Now, before going too much further, it bears discussing the
terms “real” and “exists”. Do ideas
exist? Are emotions real? That totally depends on your definition of
the words. If you want to say that Santa
Claus exists as an idea - as a representation of the Christmas spirit, then I
agree. The idea of Santa Claus exists (inasmuch
as any idea exists).
I think it’s helpful to remember the context of Virginia’s
question. I think that kids are generally
taught that Santa actually exists as a real, physical entity. You know all the stories. It isn’t until they get older that they begin
to have very real, and very valid questions.
How does he travel to millions of houses? How does he carry so many presents? In short, how is this possible at all?!
Of course, the correct answer is “It’s not possible. It’s a deliberate lie that some people tell
their children to make Christmas more fun. And good for you for using your big brain to
determine that it’s all a fraud!” Our
children should be commended for seeking out the truth, and not only that, but
seeking out the proper strategies for determining truth from fiction.
So it breaks my heart that young Virginia, when asking for the
truth, had it denied to her. Or, at the
very least, twisted and distorted. She
wasn’t asking about the metaphorical Santa (I don’t think). She was asking if he was real in the literal
sense. And the answer she got was misleading.
Now, as an adult, I think I know where the editor was going. And this is probably what you, dear reader,
have been screaming at me the whole time.
He’s saying that Santa exists as the metaphor of the Christmas
Spirit. He exists as emotions of
generosity and love and imagination.
Without “Santa”, we’d have no “childlike faith, no poetry, no romance to
make tolerable this existence.” To a
certain degree, I can get behind this.
There is room in our lives for both fact and fantasy. For love and for art and beauty. But where the editor and I part ways, I
think, is that I don’t think that Faith or Belief is an integral part of those
things. We needn’t trick ourselves into
believing fairy tales, and our lives lose nothing if we strive to cut out
fantasy from reality. There is enough beauty
in reality to last more than a lifetime.
