It's (almost) Friday. Except you think it's Tuesday.

Did you know that the Beatles were largely responsible for the downfall of Communism in Russia?
Or that that the Canterbury tales were written in accentual-syllabic meter (specifically, generally iambic pentameter with occasional breaks of trochaic pentameter or an extra syllable)?
Or that Zachary Levi got his start in musicals at the age of 6?
Neither did I. Now I do, though, which makes me wonder...what's the point? Why do we learn? I enjoy it for sure (well, almost always,) but does it actually help me to know what years the Tudors were in power?
Of course you could make the argument that those years are important for understanding the historical context of British literature from that time period. But if that's true, shouldn't I bet trying to memorize every ruler for the past (*insert length of time since writing began) years in every country where there were significant contributions to literature? Which, of course, begs the question "what is significant literature"?

Here's a stab at an answer - note that although I do not claim to have all or any of the answers, I have recently decided that I am still going to try and find answers.

I think that stories make us who we are, and that the most critical information is "that which edifieth"; information that connects to what we already know and lights up the huge space of the universe a little bit more than it its. In this case, any knowledge can be valuable - if knowing that Zachary Levi started his acting career by singing in musicals connects to something you already know and allows to you start understanding a pattern in human existence, go you. You study that celebrity culture. I think the most important patterns (or lack of patterns) of human existence are all related, so here's my "information wanted" sign:

Seeking enlightenment. Will accept any form of assisting knowledge,
including how grasshoppers harmonize their chirping. Prefers
stories.

(I think stories are more often true than "facts" because they aren't trying to be.)

Happy thinking and Thanksgiving, readers.

Love, Jessie

It's Friiiiidayyy

 (The wife of Bath)
Dear reader,

     Today I am grateful for weekends. What a good idea! Who thought them up? Does anyone know, actually, where the weekend originated? 

      *ahem.* I would like to share a line from "The Wife of Bath" (part of the Canterbury Tales) that made me ponder. Describing her relations with her many husbands, the Wife exclaims that "We wommen han, if that I shal not lye

In this matere a queynte fantasye.

Wayte, what thyng we may nat lightly have,

Thereafter wol we crie al day and crave!

Forvede us thyng, and that desiren we:

Presse on us faste, and thanne wol we fle" (515-20). 

The gist of this passage is that women will always seek after what you deny them, and undervalue what they're given. Although I think this argument could be made about men as well, I'm curious what it is about women (or people) that seeks after the difficult and the unobtainable. What about that difficulty makes the end result more valuable?

Along that line, does it follow that people should make love continually difficult to obtain for their partner? That seems a little counter-productive to me. Perhaps after a certain time period you can stop "playing hard to get." 

Thoughts?

 

Back in Black

To whomever reads this blog:

I am (once again) officially returning to the blogging stage. Although I'll continue to publish my personal projects (photos and writing) on sunbursts21@blogspot.com, this blog is about feel the cleansing fire of a political reformation.

Prepare yourself. : )