When In Touch reported that Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes bought 5-year-old daughter Suri a $100,000 tree house, the initial reaction from most people was likely one of shock, disgust, revulsion, etc. How anyone could think a mini-estate for a kiddo "complete with running water, electricity, as well as shag carpeting" is a great way to spend $100K seems kind of mind-boggling at first. But after considering it for a moment or two, it doesn't seem that crazy. Hear me out.
First of all, in relation to the mansion TomKat must live in and the moolah they have to their names, spending $100K on a mini-house for their daughter probably makes sense. And in defense of spending like this on a tree house at all, let me tell you -- it was one thing I would have been over-the-moon for when I was Suri's age.
Actually, there were a few homey things I coveted as a kid: A window seat, where I could look out at our front or backyard while reading my Babysitter's Club and Sweet Valley High books (I was obsessed), a canopy bed (I was also obsessed with this, and heartbroken when my mom told me it was "bad Feng Shui"), and a tree house.
I actually don't know if I ever expressed my desire to have a tree house. I just know I loved hanging out in the "fort" my guy friends had built in one of their backyards, and when I saw what the girls in Now & Then had, I was super-jealous.
Why? A tree house is a place to get away from the grown-ups when you're a kid and to really own any kind of make-believe game. PLUS, I would think as a parent, depending on the child's age, it's probably nice to know they're having fun with friends or, in Suri's case, a nanny or two or three.
If used properly, Suri's tree house will probably afford her a lot of awesome good-time memories and bolster her imagination. That, to me, seems worth what her uber-rich Hollywood parents spent on her mini-mansion in the sky.
Are you pro- or anti-tree house?