A recent debate in the Guardian's letters pages, sparked by a reader's concern that the nonsensical 'six-seven' phrase represents an 'embracement of idiocy' among young people, has prompted a robust defence from educators and commentators. They argue that such playful trends are a normal, healthy part of childhood development and social bonding.
The Educator's Perspective: Connection Over Correction
In a letter published on 29 December, teacher Alexsandro Pinzon from Mitcham, London, offered a respectful but firm rebuttal. Pinzon contends that from a developmental standpoint, behaviours like the repetitive use of 'six-seven' are not only normal but beneficial. He emphasises that children and adolescents often adopt shared phrases or jokes primarily as a tool for group belonging, where the meaning is secondary to the act of participation itself.
"As a teacher, understanding and acknowledging this behaviour helps me connect with pupils' lived realities," Pinzon writes. He believes that when students feel seen and understood rather than dismissed for engaging in harmless trends, it builds crucial trust. This connection, he argues, is foundational to effective learning, as pupils are more likely to engage, take risks, and respond to guidance positively when their world is recognised in the classroom.
A Hallmark of Social Development and Absurdist Tradition
Other correspondents echoed and expanded on this view. Torran Turner from Littleborough, Greater Manchester, expressed sadness at the original critique, drawing parallels to past generational fads like Dick and Dom's 'bogeys' catchphrase. Turner's central plea is simple: "Let people have nice things." He argues that dismissing what children find funny essentially tells them their enjoyment is wrong, unnecessarily stealing a piece of their childhood joy.
Ted Watson from Brighton offered a cultural defence, pointing out that embracing the illogical and nonsensical is a hallmark of surreal and absurd comedy, akin to dadaism. While the children may not invoke the term 'dada', Watson suggests their behaviour channels the same spirit of playful, surreal nonsense found in performance art. He recalled his own childhood in the 1960s, where his whole class would perform similarly inexplicable acts, like spreading fingers on their heads when a teacher entered the room.
The Counterpoint: A Question of Language and Logic
Not all letters were wholly in defence of the trend. Mike Hine from Kingston upon Thames diverted slightly from the main argument to critique what he sees as a related issue: language inflation. He questioned whether the 'promotion of logic and understanding' is served by calling primary schoolchildren 'students', a term he believes should be reserved for those in further or higher education.
The original letter from Marlon Minty, which described the 'six-seven' trend as an embrace of idiocy, argued that doing things without understanding reduces us. However, as noted by columnist Coco Khan and reiterated by Ted Watson, a key point of such crazes is often precisely to playfully annoy adults—a time-honoured juvenile tradition.
In conclusion, the consensus from these respondents is clear: playfulness and shared silliness are essential components of human interaction and growth. Alexsandro Pinzon powerfully summarises the pedagogical stance: "Hope in schools is fostered not only through kindness and honesty, but also through laughter, shared experiences and relationships built on mutual respect." Allowing space for these moments, he insists, strengthens the learning environment rather than undermining it. The key takeaway for educators and parents alike is that harmless humour does not indicate a lack of intelligence, and fostering a classroom where such joy is permitted can be a profound tool for connection and development.
