I return here to one of my favourite themes – the gap between reality and expectation for children. This is prompted by an excellent article in the online magazine, Aeon, headlined You Can Do It Baby – the implication being that you probably can’t do it, baby. The article explores the myth that, “You can be anything you want to be”. It suggests that this trope isn’t helping most of the young launch careers or find satisfaction in life.

I am drawn towards this subject by two personal factors – my father telling me, as I was growing up, that ambition is a curse. In defiance of this, I became hugely ambitious – thus defying my father’s edict and, at the same time, in a strange way, confirming it. Because although I have achieved way beyond my father’s – and even my own – expectations, it has not brought the happiness I imagined was guaranteed with the package.

In fact, most of the joy I have got out of my life has been through the commonplace activities of home, family and hobbies, rather than being that most sought-after occupation, a novelist, which pushes me constantly to the frontiers of my limited abilities. Yes, I have won a few laurels – but the price I have paid in terms of effort and struggle and disappointment is high.

The article questions the mantra that children should be told they can do whatever they like. The author, Canadian writer Leslie Garrett, quotes a typical line on this, from the actor Will Smith: “Being realistic is the most commonly travelled road to mediocrity.” But “mediocrity” is a loaded term. “By implying that the only options are superstardom or mediocrity, we ignore where most of us ultimately land – that huge middle ground between anything and nothing much at all,” notes Garrett. In other words, most of us, by definition, are going to be mediocre – at least by Smith’s standards.

What’s wrong with this “you can be anything” ethic is what “being anything” usually implies. “We’re equating it with prestige, power, titles, money, certain sectors,” says Garrett. But is it so shameful to want to be a nurse rather than a doctor, a schoolteacher rather than a university lecturer?

A better point to put to our children is not what they want to be, but who they want to be. This observation is made by Roman Krznaric, who teaches on career fulfillment at the School of Life in London. In his classes he says it is striking that, “Someone who’s maybe a taxi driver or a nurse cannot believe there’s a TV producer who seems to be more miserable than they are.”

So what’s the answer? We don’t want to discourage our children from reaching towards the higher branches of life. But realism is also important.

Another commentator quoted in the article, Tracey Cleantis, author of The Next Happy, observes: “There’s a kind of unspoken narrative: if I become this, if I do this, if I achieve this, then I will be loved, I will have self-acceptance.” The idea that your success in work represents your success as a person is useful for capitalism, but it can extract an exacting personal cost.

Given how difficult it is for most of us to achieve our dreams, given the extraordinarily competitive nature of modern society, perhaps it is best for many of us to do what our parents’ generation did – keep our enthusiasms and passions for our hobbies. Unless you display a genuine, prodigious early talent, you should be a little more practical in ambitions for professional life.

Instead of teaching “you’re special, you’re great”, we should emphasise self-control and hard work, which are positively correlated with success. And we should define for our children some alternative life goals to reaching for the stars – because for the overwhelming majority of us, they will always sparkle, coldly, out of reach.

@timlottwriter