I've read people on message boards talking about the weird names used for the people who their spam is supposedly from, but I never really paid attention to mine until today.
Most of my spam does not have a person's name in the from field- I get a lot of companies and descriptions, maybe some web addresses. But in what I did get, I noticed an odd pattern. Almost half of them have girl names for last names. These names: Connie, Rona, Nell, Lauralee, Albertha, Paula, Celeste, Theda, Carole, Kathryn, Tiffani, Liza, Catarina, Carolann, and Ciera.
There were also a couple humorous name combinations: Virginia Mann and Irish Catarina.
Although I suppose Irish Catarina could be some sort of company name. Or Virginia Mann, for that matter, but I'd expect it to be Virginia Man then.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Soul Mates
I have been thinking about soul mates off and on for several months now, and I'm not sure what to think.
Believing in them is not really the cool thing to do. Now, I try not to let how cool an idea is influence me too much as to whether I agree with it. But the idea that there is one right person for everybody and that if you miss them, you're sunk just does not ring true to me. Because someone is sure to make a mistake and end up throwing things off for who knows how many other people.
John Bytheway wrote a book about dating and looking for an eternal companion. And one of the things he said was that sometimes you pray about someone and get a go-ahead answer, but then you mess things up and have to move on. Part of me understands and agrees with this, that people and situations change. But another part of me goes along with something I heard elsewhere, that if something was right before, it's not going to just change. And I believe that no relationship is so far gone that it can't be fixed if you put enough effort into it. Some relationships might not be worth that effort. But if it was a worthwhile relationship before and neither of you have gone off the deep end, I can't see it being anything but worthwhile now. Of course, there is always the possibility that you were told to go for it to teach you something, or because you had to go down that path to see for yourself that it wasn't right.
I mentioned the Spencer W. Kimball quote about how soul mates aren't real and almost any two righteous people can make a happy life together in an earlier post. But there definitely are some people that go better together than others. And if I would be better with Jake than with Jack, and better with Jerry than with Jake, and so on, how many people would be at the top? Could it be that Jordan is the person who I would fit best with, or is he tied with Justin, Josh, and Jed? If I messed things up with Jordan, I know I could find someone else to be happy with. And things will all work out in the eternities.
But off the top of my head, I can think of four different stories where someone was impressed that they would marry a certain person, then later did. One is a young couple in their twenties, one is in my parents' generation, one in my grandparents' generation, and one my great-grandparents. All have been happy so far. And if they got these impressions, then that suggests to me that maybe in some cases, there is a specific person you should be with.
Believing in them is not really the cool thing to do. Now, I try not to let how cool an idea is influence me too much as to whether I agree with it. But the idea that there is one right person for everybody and that if you miss them, you're sunk just does not ring true to me. Because someone is sure to make a mistake and end up throwing things off for who knows how many other people.
John Bytheway wrote a book about dating and looking for an eternal companion. And one of the things he said was that sometimes you pray about someone and get a go-ahead answer, but then you mess things up and have to move on. Part of me understands and agrees with this, that people and situations change. But another part of me goes along with something I heard elsewhere, that if something was right before, it's not going to just change. And I believe that no relationship is so far gone that it can't be fixed if you put enough effort into it. Some relationships might not be worth that effort. But if it was a worthwhile relationship before and neither of you have gone off the deep end, I can't see it being anything but worthwhile now. Of course, there is always the possibility that you were told to go for it to teach you something, or because you had to go down that path to see for yourself that it wasn't right.
I mentioned the Spencer W. Kimball quote about how soul mates aren't real and almost any two righteous people can make a happy life together in an earlier post. But there definitely are some people that go better together than others. And if I would be better with Jake than with Jack, and better with Jerry than with Jake, and so on, how many people would be at the top? Could it be that Jordan is the person who I would fit best with, or is he tied with Justin, Josh, and Jed? If I messed things up with Jordan, I know I could find someone else to be happy with. And things will all work out in the eternities.
But off the top of my head, I can think of four different stories where someone was impressed that they would marry a certain person, then later did. One is a young couple in their twenties, one is in my parents' generation, one in my grandparents' generation, and one my great-grandparents. All have been happy so far. And if they got these impressions, then that suggests to me that maybe in some cases, there is a specific person you should be with.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Keeping Holidays
As I've stated before, I really like Valentine's Day as a day to appreciate everybody you love- friends and family included. And I hate it when anybody calls it Singles Awareness Day.
Now, Singles Awareness Day is not the only complaint I've heard about the holiday. Like most other holidays, sometimes people complain about the commercialization. And I think some guys spend more than they really need to. The point is not the money- the point is to show that you care. And I'll leave it at that for now.
The other objection is that you should be aware of the people you care about always, and that it shouldn't take a special day to show that you care. And that is true. But the same can be said about Christmas and Easter and Thanksgiving and pretty much every other holiday out there. Except Halloween, since it's pretty much meaningless these days to most people I know. And the way I look at it, human nature being what it is, we do tend to forget about these things without occasional reminders. Most of the time, we get some just living our lives. But I don't think it hurts anything to have a special day or season of reminder unless we start to think that we can only acknowledge love on Valentine's Day and our Veterans on Veterans' Day. And I always love an excuse to celebrate. So I say keep the holiday.
Now, Singles Awareness Day is not the only complaint I've heard about the holiday. Like most other holidays, sometimes people complain about the commercialization. And I think some guys spend more than they really need to. The point is not the money- the point is to show that you care. And I'll leave it at that for now.
The other objection is that you should be aware of the people you care about always, and that it shouldn't take a special day to show that you care. And that is true. But the same can be said about Christmas and Easter and Thanksgiving and pretty much every other holiday out there. Except Halloween, since it's pretty much meaningless these days to most people I know. And the way I look at it, human nature being what it is, we do tend to forget about these things without occasional reminders. Most of the time, we get some just living our lives. But I don't think it hurts anything to have a special day or season of reminder unless we start to think that we can only acknowledge love on Valentine's Day and our Veterans on Veterans' Day. And I always love an excuse to celebrate. So I say keep the holiday.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Dating
I have no desire to date.
I know I should date. At least, that's what we've been told many times. Go look for an eternal companion. And do that by dating regularly. Don't just hang out. Make the boys take you on dates. Stop feeding them and being available to them for casual hanging out. And so on.
But really, I would much rather just hang out. It's more fun- at least, in my experience. Of course, this may be because of the high proportion of blind dates I've been on. When I was on those blind dates, I usually managed to have a good time. But it would have been just as fun, or maybe more fun, without him. Of course, when I was with a guy I knew and wanted to be with, who wanted to be with me, I did have a good time.
But in general, hanging out is more enjoyable for me. You get to know each other doing different activities and see each other interacting with other people. And dating piles on more expectation, which leads to more stress.
And with dating, I just don't see the point in going out just to go out. I used to like the idea of going on a date just for fun, but somehow, that is no longer appealing to me. I can have just as much or more fun with a large group of friends, and I can be gratified enough to know that they want to spend time with me.
I recently learned that there are girls around here, including at least one of my friends, who don't necessarily like the boys who are their boyfriends. They just go along with it. And I really don't understand that. It seems unfair to both of you. And I can't understand why they would want to be cuddling and kissing with someone they don't have strong feelings for. The very thought is repugnant to me. For me, the physical and the emotional and the relational are all very much connected.
But back to my original topic. If some boy asked me on a date, I would probably accept. After all, I am supposed to be dating. And I would go through all the motions of figuring out what to wear and how to do my hair and makeup and so on. But I would not be at all excited. And I would try to give him a chance, but I don't know how successful I would be. And with me going in with a poor attitude, chances are good that neither of us would have a great time, so nothing would come of it. And I could have spent that time in some other manner. Maybe productive, maybe not. But even just wandering around on the catwalks for a couple hours sounds more appealing. And it has been that way for several months now.
I know I should date. At least, that's what we've been told many times. Go look for an eternal companion. And do that by dating regularly. Don't just hang out. Make the boys take you on dates. Stop feeding them and being available to them for casual hanging out. And so on.
But really, I would much rather just hang out. It's more fun- at least, in my experience. Of course, this may be because of the high proportion of blind dates I've been on. When I was on those blind dates, I usually managed to have a good time. But it would have been just as fun, or maybe more fun, without him. Of course, when I was with a guy I knew and wanted to be with, who wanted to be with me, I did have a good time.
But in general, hanging out is more enjoyable for me. You get to know each other doing different activities and see each other interacting with other people. And dating piles on more expectation, which leads to more stress.
And with dating, I just don't see the point in going out just to go out. I used to like the idea of going on a date just for fun, but somehow, that is no longer appealing to me. I can have just as much or more fun with a large group of friends, and I can be gratified enough to know that they want to spend time with me.
I recently learned that there are girls around here, including at least one of my friends, who don't necessarily like the boys who are their boyfriends. They just go along with it. And I really don't understand that. It seems unfair to both of you. And I can't understand why they would want to be cuddling and kissing with someone they don't have strong feelings for. The very thought is repugnant to me. For me, the physical and the emotional and the relational are all very much connected.
But back to my original topic. If some boy asked me on a date, I would probably accept. After all, I am supposed to be dating. And I would go through all the motions of figuring out what to wear and how to do my hair and makeup and so on. But I would not be at all excited. And I would try to give him a chance, but I don't know how successful I would be. And with me going in with a poor attitude, chances are good that neither of us would have a great time, so nothing would come of it. And I could have spent that time in some other manner. Maybe productive, maybe not. But even just wandering around on the catwalks for a couple hours sounds more appealing. And it has been that way for several months now.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Dixie
A long time ago I read a book called The Mother Tongue by Bill Bryson. It was an interesting read about the development of the English language.
But at one point, he mentions the Dixie accent in Utah. And he says nobody knows why it is called that. And that causes me to wonder how extensively he researched. Because I would think that if he actually talked to a few people who spoke with that accent, he would be able to learn about Utah's Dixie region. And I would have thought that if he planned to talk about the characteristics of a particular accent, he would want to hear it spoken.
But maybe that's just me.
But at one point, he mentions the Dixie accent in Utah. And he says nobody knows why it is called that. And that causes me to wonder how extensively he researched. Because I would think that if he actually talked to a few people who spoke with that accent, he would be able to learn about Utah's Dixie region. And I would have thought that if he planned to talk about the characteristics of a particular accent, he would want to hear it spoken.
But maybe that's just me.
Labels
I decided to label my posts in case somebody wants to follow my thoughts on some particular topic or something like that. Yeah, my reasons aren't exactly well-defined at the moment. But, anyway, if you see some sort of topic or theme that I haven't labeled and you think I should, or something isn't given a label you think it needs or is labeled in a way that doesn't fit or you think of a cooler name for one of my labels, feel free to tell me.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
A Sad Non-Cycle
I feel like I've been posting a lot of stuff about me, which is not necessarily what I want this blog to be about. I want to examine various subjects, not spend all my time focusing on me. But this is the first thing that I've had any desire to write about for a while.
I've noticed that I draw a lot of my energy and excitement from the people I am with. I am a people person. Yes, I am shy, but I am a people person all the same. I need a lot of human contact. And I have apparently been this way for my whole life- I seem to remember hearing that as soon as I was mobile, I would go to where the people were. And if you put me in a group of people, I rarely get very tired before everybody else has left.
That's all well and good. But I seem to need to feed off of other people's excitement to express any myself. If I walk into a room super excited about something and start to talk about it, I sometimes sound slightly bored about it, even though I'm not. It isn't until someone shows some interest that I really get into the telling of it. And if I try to put some excitement into my voice, it is forced and it sounds that way.
This can be a problem, considering that other people tend to like to listen better and get more involved when the speaker is excited. And since I start off sounding bored, I can't always get someone else to feed my energy so I can show my excitement. So we are both disappointed in the conversation. Which is a rather sad non-cycle to get into.
I've noticed that I draw a lot of my energy and excitement from the people I am with. I am a people person. Yes, I am shy, but I am a people person all the same. I need a lot of human contact. And I have apparently been this way for my whole life- I seem to remember hearing that as soon as I was mobile, I would go to where the people were. And if you put me in a group of people, I rarely get very tired before everybody else has left.
That's all well and good. But I seem to need to feed off of other people's excitement to express any myself. If I walk into a room super excited about something and start to talk about it, I sometimes sound slightly bored about it, even though I'm not. It isn't until someone shows some interest that I really get into the telling of it. And if I try to put some excitement into my voice, it is forced and it sounds that way.
This can be a problem, considering that other people tend to like to listen better and get more involved when the speaker is excited. And since I start off sounding bored, I can't always get someone else to feed my energy so I can show my excitement. So we are both disappointed in the conversation. Which is a rather sad non-cycle to get into.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Rocks and Mountains
One quote from Pride and Prejudice that I have heard many times is "What are men to rocks and mountains?"
Thing is, sometimes to really appreciate those rocks and mountains, you need someone to share it with. And sometimes the proper person is a man.
Thing is, sometimes to really appreciate those rocks and mountains, you need someone to share it with. And sometimes the proper person is a man.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Pilate
As a child, I always thought that people were a little too hard on Pontius Pilate. After all, he tried to get the people to let him go. And when they insisted, he washed his hands of the whole thing. Then when I was a little older, I learned about his earlier troubles with the Jews and the precariousness of his position as governor, and I sympathized more with him.
Of course, I did also understand that his washing his hands didn't really change his responsibility. And I knew about his wife's dream and warning to him.
But I still don't know that he deserves as much blame as some people give him. He could have done more to let an innocent man go free. But I don't know if he really knew who Christ was- if he'd had a witness of the Spirit. And circumstances did make it difficult for him to really go against what the people wanted. He is one historical figure I am perfectly content to leave unjudged.
If Kim is reading this, I'll bet she has a little more insight in the matter than I do.
Of course, I did also understand that his washing his hands didn't really change his responsibility. And I knew about his wife's dream and warning to him.
But I still don't know that he deserves as much blame as some people give him. He could have done more to let an innocent man go free. But I don't know if he really knew who Christ was- if he'd had a witness of the Spirit. And circumstances did make it difficult for him to really go against what the people wanted. He is one historical figure I am perfectly content to leave unjudged.
If Kim is reading this, I'll bet she has a little more insight in the matter than I do.
My Self
In my last post, I joked that maybe I don't have a sense of self. Well, I've been thinking about that lately, and maybe it's true.
Well, not really. The major example of a person with no sense of self I can think of is Julia Roberts' character in Runaway Bride. She really has no clue of who she is and what she likes. Her personality and interests change completely with each new man in her life.
Well, I do stay somewhat consistent. New people introduce me to new interests. But when I find something I like, I keep liking it. And if I dislike something, I know. And my personality stays about the same, with some variations depending on what life is throwing at me. If something just isn't me, I know it. I just can't tell you why. And when I try to think of what my strengths and weaknesses are, and what type of job I'd be happy in, I come up with nothing. I don't know why I do so many of the things I do. I've thought about that a bit lately, and I remembered that when I took my first psychology classes, I was sort of hoping they could help me understand myself better. But they didn't really.
I wonder if studying Erikson a bit more would help me any. According to him, I should be close to resolving my Identity vs. Role Confusion crisis and starting in on Intimacy vs. Isolation. Which has been a definite source of stress in the past little while...
Well, not really. The major example of a person with no sense of self I can think of is Julia Roberts' character in Runaway Bride. She really has no clue of who she is and what she likes. Her personality and interests change completely with each new man in her life.
Well, I do stay somewhat consistent. New people introduce me to new interests. But when I find something I like, I keep liking it. And if I dislike something, I know. And my personality stays about the same, with some variations depending on what life is throwing at me. If something just isn't me, I know it. I just can't tell you why. And when I try to think of what my strengths and weaknesses are, and what type of job I'd be happy in, I come up with nothing. I don't know why I do so many of the things I do. I've thought about that a bit lately, and I remembered that when I took my first psychology classes, I was sort of hoping they could help me understand myself better. But they didn't really.
I wonder if studying Erikson a bit more would help me any. According to him, I should be close to resolving my Identity vs. Role Confusion crisis and starting in on Intimacy vs. Isolation. Which has been a definite source of stress in the past little while...
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Loosely Linked Thoughts on Names and Identity
If you want to know absolutely nothing about what happens to Anne Shirley of Anne of Green Gables before reading it in the novels and have not made it though the third volume then do not read this post.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
If She Would Have Been Faithful
I listened to the lyrics of Chicago's song If She Would Have Been Faithful for the first time today, and I have a couple of issues with it. The part that causes problems for me is "If she would have been faithful... I would never know real love. I would have missed out on you."
I have heard many times Spencer W. Kimball's statement that "Soul mates are fiction and an illusion; and while every young man and young woman will seek with all diligence and prayerfulness to find a mate with whom life can be most compatible and beautiful, yet it is certain that almost any good man and any good woman can have happiness and a successful marriage if both are willing to pay the price." Also, you hear a lot about the success of arranged marriages when proper care is taken and effort put in and how they grow to love each other. Well, if this singer/songwriter/whoever I'm talking about truly thought he was in love, I think he had a good start. And I've heard from a lot of different sources that their love has grown immeasurably during the years/decades they have been married. And with these two having already chosen to be together, they probably have a decent start of regard for each other and with enough time and effort and work, they should be able to grow to real love someday.
Also, he is making assumptions here. I am going in a contradictory direction from some of what I said in the last paragraph now. But if she was cheating on him, there were probably already serious problems with the relationship and even if she had not cheated, the relationship likely would have ended anyway. So who's to say he wouldn't have found the new girl later? You can never say what would have happened if things had gone differently.
I have heard many times Spencer W. Kimball's statement that "Soul mates are fiction and an illusion; and while every young man and young woman will seek with all diligence and prayerfulness to find a mate with whom life can be most compatible and beautiful, yet it is certain that almost any good man and any good woman can have happiness and a successful marriage if both are willing to pay the price." Also, you hear a lot about the success of arranged marriages when proper care is taken and effort put in and how they grow to love each other. Well, if this singer/songwriter/whoever I'm talking about truly thought he was in love, I think he had a good start. And I've heard from a lot of different sources that their love has grown immeasurably during the years/decades they have been married. And with these two having already chosen to be together, they probably have a decent start of regard for each other and with enough time and effort and work, they should be able to grow to real love someday.
Also, he is making assumptions here. I am going in a contradictory direction from some of what I said in the last paragraph now. But if she was cheating on him, there were probably already serious problems with the relationship and even if she had not cheated, the relationship likely would have ended anyway. So who's to say he wouldn't have found the new girl later? You can never say what would have happened if things had gone differently.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Random Thoughts
A couple things I thought about at the bus stop this afternoon:
1. I remembered hearing in the news a few years ago that Kobe Bryant's wife gave him permission to sleep with another woman once a year. I also read in Jerry Lewis' memoirs that his wife was fine with him sleeping around as long as he didn't embarrass her. As I see it, that sort of thing is degrading to everybody involved. The wife is basically saying that she doesn't deserve or expect a man who respects and values her and is devoted to her. She is also saying that she thinks her husband is not capable of controlling himself. And the other women... well, it's just degrading.
2. I've heard that when a bone heals after you break it, that is the strongest part of the bone. Also, when you are weight training, you tear apart the muscles and then they regrow stronger than before. I also remembered that in Must Love Dogs (Which I do not recommend seeing. It's been a while since I watched it, but I remember getting the impression that the amount of crassness outweighed its value.) John Cusack's character has this theory that a broken heart grows back with a greater ability to love. And then I thought of Ether 12:27- And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them.
So I wondered, once again, what it is that the last several months have been trying to teach me and whether and how I have grown. I did contribute a lot to my troubles, but it was a very rough time for me and I think something got broken for a while. So I think that qualifies me to grow back stronger. After all, when you tear down your muscles during weight training, it is something you do to yourself.
1. I remembered hearing in the news a few years ago that Kobe Bryant's wife gave him permission to sleep with another woman once a year. I also read in Jerry Lewis' memoirs that his wife was fine with him sleeping around as long as he didn't embarrass her. As I see it, that sort of thing is degrading to everybody involved. The wife is basically saying that she doesn't deserve or expect a man who respects and values her and is devoted to her. She is also saying that she thinks her husband is not capable of controlling himself. And the other women... well, it's just degrading.
2. I've heard that when a bone heals after you break it, that is the strongest part of the bone. Also, when you are weight training, you tear apart the muscles and then they regrow stronger than before. I also remembered that in Must Love Dogs (Which I do not recommend seeing. It's been a while since I watched it, but I remember getting the impression that the amount of crassness outweighed its value.) John Cusack's character has this theory that a broken heart grows back with a greater ability to love. And then I thought of Ether 12:27- And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them.
So I wondered, once again, what it is that the last several months have been trying to teach me and whether and how I have grown. I did contribute a lot to my troubles, but it was a very rough time for me and I think something got broken for a while. So I think that qualifies me to grow back stronger. After all, when you tear down your muscles during weight training, it is something you do to yourself.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Bus Route 850
When I take bus 850, I usually miss my stop. I've gotten off in the right place maybe 3 or 4 times. And I've gotten off in the wrong place at least two or three times as often. I don't know why- I've never had this problem on any other routes.
It is a real problem when I'm headed for work. But when I'm going home, it isn't a big deal. I just make sure I know where I am and what direction I'm going when I do get off the bus and it's pretty easy to find my way home. And it's actually helped me in getting to know Provo better. I don't like to wander far from home when I'm by myself. But if I have a purpose, I don't mind it. So my troubles with route 850 have caused me to walk around where I've never been before. And if it keeps up, I should get a decent mental map of that area of town.
But it is a really good thing that I don't live in some other area where the streets have names instead of numbers and aren't laid out in a grid.
It is a real problem when I'm headed for work. But when I'm going home, it isn't a big deal. I just make sure I know where I am and what direction I'm going when I do get off the bus and it's pretty easy to find my way home. And it's actually helped me in getting to know Provo better. I don't like to wander far from home when I'm by myself. But if I have a purpose, I don't mind it. So my troubles with route 850 have caused me to walk around where I've never been before. And if it keeps up, I should get a decent mental map of that area of town.
But it is a really good thing that I don't live in some other area where the streets have names instead of numbers and aren't laid out in a grid.
Overcomplimentary?
Sometimes I don't trust compliments.
Two examples from yesterday- I cooked some chicken for a big potluck dinner involving our entire floor, and I gave a talk in church. And a lot of people complimented me on my talk and on my chicken. And almost every time I wondered if they really meant it or were just trying to be nice or polite or something.
People said my talk was good. But I kept thinking, "But I think I got a bit rushed, and I think I repeated myself, and I lost my place and might have skipped over something. And maybe they are just saying that to be nice and reassure me because they could tell that I was nervous."
And the piece of chicken I took seemed a bit dry and overcooked.
So I wonder.
Two examples from yesterday- I cooked some chicken for a big potluck dinner involving our entire floor, and I gave a talk in church. And a lot of people complimented me on my talk and on my chicken. And almost every time I wondered if they really meant it or were just trying to be nice or polite or something.
People said my talk was good. But I kept thinking, "But I think I got a bit rushed, and I think I repeated myself, and I lost my place and might have skipped over something. And maybe they are just saying that to be nice and reassure me because they could tell that I was nervous."
And the piece of chicken I took seemed a bit dry and overcooked.
So I wonder.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The Experiment Ends
I have now started the process of giving out my blog address. Over the course of my little experiment, from October 2007 through April 2009, five people who were not me have visited this blog.
Living Language
When Mom was pregnant, she would get piles of materials- developing baby magazines, information on baby formula, baby name booklets, and so forth. I have no idea what happened to most of that stuff, but the name booklets stuck around forever. And I frequently pored over them, seeing what the names of all my friends and family meant. Then when I was a young teenager, or maybe just 11 or 12, I picked up one of my parents' gospel books- Gospel Symbolism by Joseph Fielding McConkie. One chapter is titled Names: A Story Within the Story. I think reading that chapter first introduced to me the idea that names actually come from words. For some reason I had never realized that's where the name meanings came from.
From these experiences sprouted two significant interests of mine- name meanings, origins, and trends and general etymology. Mostly English, although other languages can be interesting, too.
I see two general trends with regard to the rules of English. On the one side is the view that there are strict English rules, and we should follow them. The other side sees language as organic and developing. The rules are defined by usage, not the other way around. I tend to fall in line with the second side. Language is definitely not static. New words form. Old words become archaic. Some words change meaning. It all changes depending on the needs of the people, which change over time. And the purpose of language is to communicate. If the old rules of our language make communication more difficult or less beautiful, then they need to change. And if the general population starts to use a word in a different way, let them. It is filling a need. Just so long as when they use it, their meaning is clear. It's happened before. It will happen again. And I think it is a beautiful thing, because that means our language is still living.
From these experiences sprouted two significant interests of mine- name meanings, origins, and trends and general etymology. Mostly English, although other languages can be interesting, too.
I see two general trends with regard to the rules of English. On the one side is the view that there are strict English rules, and we should follow them. The other side sees language as organic and developing. The rules are defined by usage, not the other way around. I tend to fall in line with the second side. Language is definitely not static. New words form. Old words become archaic. Some words change meaning. It all changes depending on the needs of the people, which change over time. And the purpose of language is to communicate. If the old rules of our language make communication more difficult or less beautiful, then they need to change. And if the general population starts to use a word in a different way, let them. It is filling a need. Just so long as when they use it, their meaning is clear. It's happened before. It will happen again. And I think it is a beautiful thing, because that means our language is still living.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Confession
I think it would be fun to make my own religion.
Sometimes it is fun to misinterpret things in completely ridiculous ways. The more ridiculous, the better. And I like to play with ideas. So I actually have come up with a couple doctrines that I would like to work into my theology.
First, I have heard the idea that everybody living currently has some number of molecules in their body that were previously part of the body of any given historical figure. So I imagine in the resurrection, with everyone's bodies restored to perfection, some of the molecules being shared. So that we somehow were sharing bodies. I haven't quite got this one worked through, but it could have some interesting applications with the trinity and the idea of being one with Christ.
I also like the idea that the wicked will burn at the end of the world because of global warming, and that the righteous will be saved because of some mutation we all undergo.
Now I just need to work the two together, and my religion will be off to an interesting start. Although I probably won't. Because I don't think that starting a false religion and recruiting people to it really goes very well with "every member a missionary" and bringing souls to Christ. And it just might harm my chances for exaltation.
Sometimes it is fun to misinterpret things in completely ridiculous ways. The more ridiculous, the better. And I like to play with ideas. So I actually have come up with a couple doctrines that I would like to work into my theology.
First, I have heard the idea that everybody living currently has some number of molecules in their body that were previously part of the body of any given historical figure. So I imagine in the resurrection, with everyone's bodies restored to perfection, some of the molecules being shared. So that we somehow were sharing bodies. I haven't quite got this one worked through, but it could have some interesting applications with the trinity and the idea of being one with Christ.
I also like the idea that the wicked will burn at the end of the world because of global warming, and that the righteous will be saved because of some mutation we all undergo.
Now I just need to work the two together, and my religion will be off to an interesting start. Although I probably won't. Because I don't think that starting a false religion and recruiting people to it really goes very well with "every member a missionary" and bringing souls to Christ. And it just might harm my chances for exaltation.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Pretend This Title Is Clever And Relevant
I have been pretty frustrated with myself lately.
For a long time, this blog served well as an outlet for me. I could express myself here and send my thoughts out into cyberspace, not really caring if anybody ever read them. But for a while now, I've been wanting to share more. I want to talk to an actual person who is really listening and trying to understand. But I can't quite do it. There have been so many times when I told myself, "Go release some of the pressure that is building up in that head of yours while building stronger connections with these people you like and care about." And then when I am in a position to start talking, I just can't make myself open my mouth. The more I want to, the less I am able to.
Adding to the trouble, somewhere it got into my head that if someone is interested in my thoughts or opinions or activities, they will ask about it. So I don't say much about them because I don't want to bore some uninterested person. But I figure if someone else wants me to know about their thoughts or opinions or activities, they will tell me without me needing to ask. I know that if I make these assumptions, chances are I will have very little actual communication, but there you are.
I've been doing more writing than usual in an effort to release some of the stuff up in my head pressing to come out. I've written down a lot of various things I think and sort of want to say, but never actually do. And I've been posting more on this blog, and I feel like these posts have been longer and not as tightly structured as my earlier ones. I'm not sure how that relates, but I thought I'd throw it in there.
Also, very recently, my desire for anonymity has completely evaporated. On March 22, I couldn't see a point when I'd want to be open about my identity on here. I had up until that point carefully limited potentially identifying information, even avoiding mentioning names of anybody I knew. Then, on April 4, I used my friend Beth's name in a post without thinking about it. When I realized, I thought about editing to change the post, but decided I really didn't care. And this Wednesday, I used my sisters' real names. I did that one on purpose. And then I decided to use my actual name to sign blog posts. Now, I don't care at all about revealing my identity.
This is Marissa J. Howes. And I really want to be open now. But I think I'll need a little help.
For a long time, this blog served well as an outlet for me. I could express myself here and send my thoughts out into cyberspace, not really caring if anybody ever read them. But for a while now, I've been wanting to share more. I want to talk to an actual person who is really listening and trying to understand. But I can't quite do it. There have been so many times when I told myself, "Go release some of the pressure that is building up in that head of yours while building stronger connections with these people you like and care about." And then when I am in a position to start talking, I just can't make myself open my mouth. The more I want to, the less I am able to.
Adding to the trouble, somewhere it got into my head that if someone is interested in my thoughts or opinions or activities, they will ask about it. So I don't say much about them because I don't want to bore some uninterested person. But I figure if someone else wants me to know about their thoughts or opinions or activities, they will tell me without me needing to ask. I know that if I make these assumptions, chances are I will have very little actual communication, but there you are.
I've been doing more writing than usual in an effort to release some of the stuff up in my head pressing to come out. I've written down a lot of various things I think and sort of want to say, but never actually do. And I've been posting more on this blog, and I feel like these posts have been longer and not as tightly structured as my earlier ones. I'm not sure how that relates, but I thought I'd throw it in there.
Also, very recently, my desire for anonymity has completely evaporated. On March 22, I couldn't see a point when I'd want to be open about my identity on here. I had up until that point carefully limited potentially identifying information, even avoiding mentioning names of anybody I knew. Then, on April 4, I used my friend Beth's name in a post without thinking about it. When I realized, I thought about editing to change the post, but decided I really didn't care. And this Wednesday, I used my sisters' real names. I did that one on purpose. And then I decided to use my actual name to sign blog posts. Now, I don't care at all about revealing my identity.
This is Marissa J. Howes. And I really want to be open now. But I think I'll need a little help.
Friday, April 10, 2009
The Jehovah's Witnesses came by again today. As I've done before, I answered honestly when asked if I read the Bible (yes, but not as much as I should), listened to the brief Bible message (we need to be born again), and took the offered materials.
Then, a little later, I got to thinking. The Jehovah's Witnesses don't have a particularly grim view of what happens to unbelievers. They just cease to exist at death. No burning for eternity. No rebirth in a less desirable life form.
We also have a less than grim picture of the afterlife for those who do not believe as we do. Actually, it's a pretty cheerful picture. Life forever in a place more beautiful than we could imagine. I'm going to have to look up the quote about that. The only downside is the knowledge that they could have done better.
So why is it that the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons are the faiths with a vigorous missionary effort, expecting all members to act as missionaries? Yes, I know that other Christian religions have missionary programs. But they seem to focus on material relief for poor nations. We do that, too, but we also send proselyting missionaries everywhere. And the gospel message is a bigger service than the food and clothes and medicine and such. Yes, all that is important. But the more eternally significant bit is the gospel. I'm sure the other missionary efforts have some preaching involved, but you don't hear about that as much. At least, I don't. Although I guess I did hear a lot about that having gone on in the past- think of the missionaries who came out west during America's early days. Or African missionaries like they talk about in Things Fall Apart.
And you would think that someone who thinks that anybody who does not believe as they do will suffer for eternity would put a lot of effort into getting everybody saved. That is, if they really care about their fellow man. But maybe I am overestimating their belief in Hell. After all, I have seen statistics that many don't even really believe in Satan or the truthfulness of the Bible.
Then, a little later, I got to thinking. The Jehovah's Witnesses don't have a particularly grim view of what happens to unbelievers. They just cease to exist at death. No burning for eternity. No rebirth in a less desirable life form.
We also have a less than grim picture of the afterlife for those who do not believe as we do. Actually, it's a pretty cheerful picture. Life forever in a place more beautiful than we could imagine. I'm going to have to look up the quote about that. The only downside is the knowledge that they could have done better.
So why is it that the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons are the faiths with a vigorous missionary effort, expecting all members to act as missionaries? Yes, I know that other Christian religions have missionary programs. But they seem to focus on material relief for poor nations. We do that, too, but we also send proselyting missionaries everywhere. And the gospel message is a bigger service than the food and clothes and medicine and such. Yes, all that is important. But the more eternally significant bit is the gospel. I'm sure the other missionary efforts have some preaching involved, but you don't hear about that as much. At least, I don't. Although I guess I did hear a lot about that having gone on in the past- think of the missionaries who came out west during America's early days. Or African missionaries like they talk about in Things Fall Apart.
And you would think that someone who thinks that anybody who does not believe as they do will suffer for eternity would put a lot of effort into getting everybody saved. That is, if they really care about their fellow man. But maybe I am overestimating their belief in Hell. After all, I have seen statistics that many don't even really believe in Satan or the truthfulness of the Bible.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Great Literature
I was just at my sister's blog and reread some stories we wrote together with our other sisters last summer. The rules were you write one sentence, fold the paper over so only your sentence is showing, and pass to the next person. The story ends when you get to the bottom of the page. I will repost the stories here, so you can see what great works of literature the world will get to see if I ever actually get published.
On Lydia's blog, she bolded the lines she wrote. I will follow her example and bold my lines.
One day, a little girl found a unicorn in her tree house. She was very excited, for she had always dreamed of meeting one of those magical creatures. Unfortunately, it was not as magical as she had dreamed the meeting would be. She had always imagined unicorns and rainbows when she met him, but was very disappointed when the unicorns were unaccompanied by rainbows. :[ But when the unicorn offered her a ride she got over the absence of rainbows.
"Yea!" she cried, for she had never imagined she would get to ride one! Unfortunately she fell off and fell into a coma. Sobbing, he brought her comatose body to Bart the out of body guy and asked him to communicate with her. Bart went out of body to communicate with her and discovered that she sometimes talked to Jill, or whatever the coma girl Neal's girlfriend's name was. He realized that he could ask her what the coma-girl's name was.
Surprised to be asked such a question, the nurse grabbed the wrong file and incorrectly informed him that her name was John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt. "AAAAAAAAAA" screamed John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, and she wept and wailed and gnashed her teeth.
Bart was out-of-bodying and happened to think of her, turned up, then turned visible and asked her what was going on, how could he help her, and would she like some fries with that?
"Why, of course," she said happily, "but make sure to include fry sauce!" Being from California, he did not know what fry sauce was and gave her a confused look, but she thought it was a dirty look.
"I hate you Bart, you give me dirty looks! And you hate fry sauce!" screamed John Jacob Jingleheimer Schimdt and she threw a bedpan at him.
"Well, at least I don't give you dirty bedpans," Bart said, and left without helping him, irritated at the lack of gratitude and respect.
The person Bart was talking to went out and talked to him, saying, "I'm sorry, I didn't know you would get so mad."
Notes: There were a couple interesting coincidences here. At least, we found them interesting. First, Jeanette had no idea that the story was about a unicorn, but brought one in anyway. And Lydia had no idea that we were talking about Bart (a character from a book we have at home) when she mentioned him being from California- but that really is where Bart is from.
Rudy, a one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eater, decided to go grocery shopping one raining Tuesday evening. Sadly, it was quite the ordeal to get ready because one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eaters are allergic to water; it makes them melt. In order to prevent his melting, they built a pavilion with walkways stretching everywhere he might need to walk, and instructed him to keep an umbrella with him at all times. However, he had somehow forgotten what an umbrella was. To save face, he pretended to know what it was, which only led to embarrassment. His face flushed a dark shade of violet, and he ran away sobbing, wishing he knew what it was. A girl purple people eater saw him, admired the deep shade of violet he now had, and tried to cheer him up by asking him on a date.
"Well," he said slowly, "I do like to be with people so I will go on a date."
"Alas, I am a one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eater and am prone to get hungry and eat you since my grocery shopping has been interrupted- by you," he continued.
So Rudy took a chomp out of their leg, but didn't realize there was an eating people alarm that dumped a bucket of water on him! He started to melt into a pool of liquid sugar, like honey or maple syrup. But actually it was like the treacle in Hagrid's treacle tart. They spit it out, and starving nearly to delirium, Rudy lunged at her. She ran away and threw her shoe at him because it was purple and she though it matched his skin tone. It didn't match, so he threw it back in her general direction and went to the shoe store to find some that would. He found the perfect shoes, then decided to get perfect socks, too. Unfortunately, his idea of perfect was disastrously different than hers. So it wasn't perfect and she ate him.
Notes: It is a slight miracle that this story ended up sticking with the character of Rudy the purple-people-eater the whole time. There were times when somebody wrote not knowing who they were talking about, and then in the next sentence someone either picked up on an unintentional cue that it was a purple-people-eater or else randomly threw him in there.
Once upon a time there was a couple having an intimate moment. They enjoyed the moment so much that they decided to get married. Soon they went home and the female went to the mall to buy a dress. The dress she bought was bright pink with orange polka-spots; she thought it was ravishing, but in reality it was horrendous. He was planning on wearing his daddy's tuxedo which was a little big, with the cuffs hanging around his ankles, with a ravishing/horrendous tie to match her dress. Unfortunately, he had donated that tux to DI last year. He sighed and went to the mall, where he saw the girl. Suddenly, he realized he was madly in love with her. Excitedly, he blurted it out, thus starting the intimate moment. The woman was displeased with his interruption.
"Well," he said, "I needed to get a new set of clothing."
"If you needed a new set of clothing," she retorted huffily, "you could have at least gotten something that matched my new, ravishing pink with orange polka-spots dress!"
Angrily he huffed back, "I did! See this ravishing slash horrendous tie??"
"It is not at all horrendous, and I don't believe you," she said, crossing her arms and jutting out her chin.
He stammered, attempting to explain, when a thief ran into the store. He suddenly realized that he was now madly in love with the robber and hated the girl with all his being. Thus, the intimate moment was over and he declared his newfound passion to the thief.
So the man and the thief got engaged and the woman went off to build a lucrative career. And the thief said, "I am very happy I met you, mister, because I thought I would be forever single."
Then he realized that his previous feelings were just indigestion, told her she would be forever single, turned her in to the police, found the girl, kissed her, apologized, and they eloped and lived happily ever after.
Notes: Jeanette thought we went into an extended flashback and I misread the sentence preceding my third sentence as saying the moment was startled, not started. Also, notice that the thief never actually steals anything or even attempts to steal anything. We just magically know that she is a thief.
Also, don't worry, when I really write a book I will make it a point to know what happened two sentences previously.
On Lydia's blog, she bolded the lines she wrote. I will follow her example and bold my lines.
One day, a little girl found a unicorn in her tree house. She was very excited, for she had always dreamed of meeting one of those magical creatures. Unfortunately, it was not as magical as she had dreamed the meeting would be. She had always imagined unicorns and rainbows when she met him, but was very disappointed when the unicorns were unaccompanied by rainbows. :[ But when the unicorn offered her a ride she got over the absence of rainbows.
"Yea!" she cried, for she had never imagined she would get to ride one! Unfortunately she fell off and fell into a coma. Sobbing, he brought her comatose body to Bart the out of body guy and asked him to communicate with her. Bart went out of body to communicate with her and discovered that she sometimes talked to Jill, or whatever the coma girl Neal's girlfriend's name was. He realized that he could ask her what the coma-girl's name was.
Surprised to be asked such a question, the nurse grabbed the wrong file and incorrectly informed him that her name was John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt. "AAAAAAAAAA" screamed John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, and she wept and wailed and gnashed her teeth.
Bart was out-of-bodying and happened to think of her, turned up, then turned visible and asked her what was going on, how could he help her, and would she like some fries with that?
"Why, of course," she said happily, "but make sure to include fry sauce!" Being from California, he did not know what fry sauce was and gave her a confused look, but she thought it was a dirty look.
"I hate you Bart, you give me dirty looks! And you hate fry sauce!" screamed John Jacob Jingleheimer Schimdt and she threw a bedpan at him.
"Well, at least I don't give you dirty bedpans," Bart said, and left without helping him, irritated at the lack of gratitude and respect.
The person Bart was talking to went out and talked to him, saying, "I'm sorry, I didn't know you would get so mad."
Notes: There were a couple interesting coincidences here. At least, we found them interesting. First, Jeanette had no idea that the story was about a unicorn, but brought one in anyway. And Lydia had no idea that we were talking about Bart (a character from a book we have at home) when she mentioned him being from California- but that really is where Bart is from.
"Well," he said slowly, "I do like to be with people so I will go on a date."
"Alas, I am a one-eyed-one-horned-flying-purple-people-eater and am prone to get hungry and eat you since my grocery shopping has been interrupted- by you," he continued.
So Rudy took a chomp out of their leg, but didn't realize there was an eating people alarm that dumped a bucket of water on him! He started to melt into a pool of liquid sugar, like honey or maple syrup. But actually it was like the treacle in Hagrid's treacle tart. They spit it out, and starving nearly to delirium, Rudy lunged at her. She ran away and threw her shoe at him because it was purple and she though it matched his skin tone. It didn't match, so he threw it back in her general direction and went to the shoe store to find some that would. He found the perfect shoes, then decided to get perfect socks, too. Unfortunately, his idea of perfect was disastrously different than hers. So it wasn't perfect and she ate him.
Notes: It is a slight miracle that this story ended up sticking with the character of Rudy the purple-people-eater the whole time. There were times when somebody wrote not knowing who they were talking about, and then in the next sentence someone either picked up on an unintentional cue that it was a purple-people-eater or else randomly threw him in there.
"Well," he said, "I needed to get a new set of clothing."
"If you needed a new set of clothing," she retorted huffily, "you could have at least gotten something that matched my new, ravishing pink with orange polka-spots dress!"
Angrily he huffed back, "I did! See this ravishing slash horrendous tie??"
"It is not at all horrendous, and I don't believe you," she said, crossing her arms and jutting out her chin.
He stammered, attempting to explain, when a thief ran into the store. He suddenly realized that he was now madly in love with the robber and hated the girl with all his being. Thus, the intimate moment was over and he declared his newfound passion to the thief.
So the man and the thief got engaged and the woman went off to build a lucrative career. And the thief said, "I am very happy I met you, mister, because I thought I would be forever single."
Then he realized that his previous feelings were just indigestion, told her she would be forever single, turned her in to the police, found the girl, kissed her, apologized, and they eloped and lived happily ever after.
Notes: Jeanette thought we went into an extended flashback and I misread the sentence preceding my third sentence as saying the moment was startled, not started. Also, notice that the thief never actually steals anything or even attempts to steal anything. We just magically know that she is a thief.
Also, don't worry, when I really write a book I will make it a point to know what happened two sentences previously.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Living Forever
Speaking of books, last December I read The Declaration by Gemma Malley. It was a decent enough book, but not one I would recommend or consider buying. It did, however, get me thinking a bit.
The concept is that a wonderdrug has been developed that stops aging and death. Most of the world's population takes it. And because the older generation is not dying off, there are not enough resources to support new children. So it is now illegal to reproduce unless you agree as a young adult not to take the drug.
So, after reading this book, I got to thinking- what would you do if you lived forever? One minor character did a lot of traveling. She has now been everywhere countless times. And as I see it, a large part of the fun of traveling is to experience new things. After a very long while, you would run out of things to experience. So, maybe just interacting with your friends. I do enjoy conversations with friends. But how long can you think of new topics? Could you really do that for an eternity without a changing world to bring up new inspiration? I really don't know about that one.
Then I thought, what will we do for eternity after we die? Heavenly Father's work is about his children. But will that work eventually change, or will he need to help us forever, or does he have an infinite number of children to send to earths? The idea of his having an infinite number of children is mind-boggling- but then, so is the idea of eternity. I have been known to attempt to ponder that when I feel the need to confront an idea I can't comprehend in order to create a pleasant brain ache. But the idea that He will later help us help our children as he helps us now is an interesting one that I will ponder further.
The concept is that a wonderdrug has been developed that stops aging and death. Most of the world's population takes it. And because the older generation is not dying off, there are not enough resources to support new children. So it is now illegal to reproduce unless you agree as a young adult not to take the drug.
So, after reading this book, I got to thinking- what would you do if you lived forever? One minor character did a lot of traveling. She has now been everywhere countless times. And as I see it, a large part of the fun of traveling is to experience new things. After a very long while, you would run out of things to experience. So, maybe just interacting with your friends. I do enjoy conversations with friends. But how long can you think of new topics? Could you really do that for an eternity without a changing world to bring up new inspiration? I really don't know about that one.
Then I thought, what will we do for eternity after we die? Heavenly Father's work is about his children. But will that work eventually change, or will he need to help us forever, or does he have an infinite number of children to send to earths? The idea of his having an infinite number of children is mind-boggling- but then, so is the idea of eternity. I have been known to attempt to ponder that when I feel the need to confront an idea I can't comprehend in order to create a pleasant brain ache. But the idea that He will later help us help our children as he helps us now is an interesting one that I will ponder further.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Marginalia
Towards the end of February, I posted in response to a book that I was reading at the time. Now I want to follow up with some other thoughts I had while reading the same section.
I may have mentioned that various people study the books that famous writers and scholars read, trying to understand how they thought. Well, one thing they study is their marginalia- the notes written in margins. Or commonplace books where others wrote their thoughts all together, combining the notes from their different readings in one convenient location. It mentioned the disappointment felt when some figure was found not to have notated their books in any noticeable way.
Well, that got me to thinking about my own habits. I never write in any books besides my scriptures. I have heard that it can help in studying- that the writing helps you retain information and then you are better able to return to significant sections for later study. But I never really took to it.
In high school, I had a few teachers who required me to write as I read. I had one English teacher who had us make notes as we read on post-it notes and stick them in the pages of our books. I mostly wrote them after finishing, and usually did not have as many notes as the other students. A history teacher made us outline the chapters of our textbook and turn them in as a regular assignment. And a different English teacher required us to in our notebooks write down the questions we had while reading on one side of a page and our insights and other non-question thoughts on the other.
Well, after doing these assignments, I found that I only found it all annoying. When I had to write down my thoughts as I read, it slowed me down, and the constant interruption disrupted the flow- of the story or narrative and of my thoughts. And after I finish reading something, I generally do remember the major insights I had. And I can come up with better ones with a better flowing story. And not making notes on a story never hurt my ability to write an essay about it. I could always think of plenty of points to defend my thesis. The only way notes could have made it easier would have been to help me find the relevant passages for quoting- which wasn't a big problem. I rarely use bookmarks, so am perfectly used to trying to find the right part of the book just by remembering what happens when and about how far into it I am. Since I do not find note taking helpful, I don't do it.
Well, that and the fact that I've read books with notations in them before, and they are as distracting as taking the notes myself- I am compelled to stop and read them, which disrupts the flow, and they rarely add to my comprehension or enjoyment. Plus, I have never read a book that I did not plan to let someone else read later on. Books are communal property in my family. Yes, they have an owner in name, but we all read everybody else's libraries, too. So in consideration to others, I leave my books blank.
Sorry, future researchers who desire to peer into my soul. You'll have to find some other way to figure me out. Good luck.
I may have mentioned that various people study the books that famous writers and scholars read, trying to understand how they thought. Well, one thing they study is their marginalia- the notes written in margins. Or commonplace books where others wrote their thoughts all together, combining the notes from their different readings in one convenient location. It mentioned the disappointment felt when some figure was found not to have notated their books in any noticeable way.
Well, that got me to thinking about my own habits. I never write in any books besides my scriptures. I have heard that it can help in studying- that the writing helps you retain information and then you are better able to return to significant sections for later study. But I never really took to it.
In high school, I had a few teachers who required me to write as I read. I had one English teacher who had us make notes as we read on post-it notes and stick them in the pages of our books. I mostly wrote them after finishing, and usually did not have as many notes as the other students. A history teacher made us outline the chapters of our textbook and turn them in as a regular assignment. And a different English teacher required us to in our notebooks write down the questions we had while reading on one side of a page and our insights and other non-question thoughts on the other.
Well, after doing these assignments, I found that I only found it all annoying. When I had to write down my thoughts as I read, it slowed me down, and the constant interruption disrupted the flow- of the story or narrative and of my thoughts. And after I finish reading something, I generally do remember the major insights I had. And I can come up with better ones with a better flowing story. And not making notes on a story never hurt my ability to write an essay about it. I could always think of plenty of points to defend my thesis. The only way notes could have made it easier would have been to help me find the relevant passages for quoting- which wasn't a big problem. I rarely use bookmarks, so am perfectly used to trying to find the right part of the book just by remembering what happens when and about how far into it I am. Since I do not find note taking helpful, I don't do it.
Well, that and the fact that I've read books with notations in them before, and they are as distracting as taking the notes myself- I am compelled to stop and read them, which disrupts the flow, and they rarely add to my comprehension or enjoyment. Plus, I have never read a book that I did not plan to let someone else read later on. Books are communal property in my family. Yes, they have an owner in name, but we all read everybody else's libraries, too. So in consideration to others, I leave my books blank.
Sorry, future researchers who desire to peer into my soul. You'll have to find some other way to figure me out. Good luck.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Reading List
There is a note going around facebook that starts with this claim: "Apparently the BBC reckons most people will have only read 6 of the 100 books here (Guess it doesn't count if you saw the movie or watched the series on PBS!)." Then, as you would expect, it lists the 100 'books' and you mark which ones you have read. I filled it out and posted it, but I do have a couple quibbles.
Included on the list are Harry Potter series (I thought there were 7 books in that), Lord of the Rings (at least three, but I think each book could be divided into smaller books. I don't remember for sure), His Dark Materials (three books), Hamlet, and the complete works of Shakespeare. Now, I figure if the complete works of Shakespeare is to be considered a book, Hamlet should not be listed separately.
And I would like to see included in the introduction a link to the source of this claim about the BBC.
But as I said, I participated. I like to fill these things out and compare with friends. I won't post the list here, because I find it annoying to come across those on blogs when I'm expecting a thoughtful note or life update. It's not such a big thing on facebook because most of the notes are these survey things anyway. But I will tell you that I read 34 or 35 of them. I'm not sure whether I actually read Little Women all the way through or if I've just read the children's illustrated classic version. And there are a couple that I've read most of but never quite finished.
Anyway, I read 34 or 35. And when I counted them up, I felt quite un-well read. My friend Beth has read 32, and she feels much the same. Now, when you compare our results to the 6 that the average person is supposed to have read, we really did pretty well. But going through the list, I mainly saw all the books I haven't read.
Oh, and I also compared my score to Dad's- he has read 61. And I was like, "That's almost twice as many as me. I really need to catch up." Which makes no sense, because he is more than twice as old as I am.
But there are some books on that list that I really have been meaning to read. And I am now going to make it a point to do so soon.
Included on the list are Harry Potter series (I thought there were 7 books in that), Lord of the Rings (at least three, but I think each book could be divided into smaller books. I don't remember for sure), His Dark Materials (three books), Hamlet, and the complete works of Shakespeare. Now, I figure if the complete works of Shakespeare is to be considered a book, Hamlet should not be listed separately.
And I would like to see included in the introduction a link to the source of this claim about the BBC.
But as I said, I participated. I like to fill these things out and compare with friends. I won't post the list here, because I find it annoying to come across those on blogs when I'm expecting a thoughtful note or life update. It's not such a big thing on facebook because most of the notes are these survey things anyway. But I will tell you that I read 34 or 35 of them. I'm not sure whether I actually read Little Women all the way through or if I've just read the children's illustrated classic version. And there are a couple that I've read most of but never quite finished.
Anyway, I read 34 or 35. And when I counted them up, I felt quite un-well read. My friend Beth has read 32, and she feels much the same. Now, when you compare our results to the 6 that the average person is supposed to have read, we really did pretty well. But going through the list, I mainly saw all the books I haven't read.
Oh, and I also compared my score to Dad's- he has read 61. And I was like, "That's almost twice as many as me. I really need to catch up." Which makes no sense, because he is more than twice as old as I am.
But there are some books on that list that I really have been meaning to read. And I am now going to make it a point to do so soon.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Testimony
One or two years ago, I came across a poll in the Bloggernacle with the question, "If you were not Mormon, what would you be?"
There is a slight flaw in the way the question is asked, though. If I had never been a member, I would probably choose some traditional Christian religion- I'm not sure whether I would go Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant. First choice would likely be whatever I was raised in, of course. But if I was raised without a religion, how am I to know what would be most attractive to me? After all, the church has been in the center of my life so far. Raised with a different center, who can say what I'd be?
But if I were asked what I would become after leaving the church, I probably would have answered atheist. My thinking at the time was that if I left the church, it would probably be because I discovered some sort of false doctrine. And if one piece turned out to be false, then why should I believe anything I've been told? Especially since the pieces all fit together.
Now, I'm not so sure that is true. I've been reflecting on my testimony, and I realized that while I have on occasion questioned what would happen if we were wrong about the Book of Mormon or the prophets, I have never questioned what if God did not exist. No matter how hard the trial, I never doubted that He is there and He loves me and He has a plan and through Him, things will work out. The logical side of my brain says that just because I've never had a flicker of doubt before does not mean that it will never come. But I really can't imagine doubting anything I know with such certainty to my center. So atheism no longer looks likely for a discontented me.
I used to think that my testimony started when I was eleven years old. I had finished reading through the Book of Mormon for the first time, and so I knelt down and prayed about it, as I had been told to do. And I got an answer, as I knew I would.
Well, I recently realized that the fact I knew that I would receive an answer says that my testimony was already there. But it was most definitely strengthened that day.
There is a slight flaw in the way the question is asked, though. If I had never been a member, I would probably choose some traditional Christian religion- I'm not sure whether I would go Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant. First choice would likely be whatever I was raised in, of course. But if I was raised without a religion, how am I to know what would be most attractive to me? After all, the church has been in the center of my life so far. Raised with a different center, who can say what I'd be?
But if I were asked what I would become after leaving the church, I probably would have answered atheist. My thinking at the time was that if I left the church, it would probably be because I discovered some sort of false doctrine. And if one piece turned out to be false, then why should I believe anything I've been told? Especially since the pieces all fit together.
Now, I'm not so sure that is true. I've been reflecting on my testimony, and I realized that while I have on occasion questioned what would happen if we were wrong about the Book of Mormon or the prophets, I have never questioned what if God did not exist. No matter how hard the trial, I never doubted that He is there and He loves me and He has a plan and through Him, things will work out. The logical side of my brain says that just because I've never had a flicker of doubt before does not mean that it will never come. But I really can't imagine doubting anything I know with such certainty to my center. So atheism no longer looks likely for a discontented me.
I used to think that my testimony started when I was eleven years old. I had finished reading through the Book of Mormon for the first time, and so I knelt down and prayed about it, as I had been told to do. And I got an answer, as I knew I would.
Well, I recently realized that the fact I knew that I would receive an answer says that my testimony was already there. But it was most definitely strengthened that day.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Making Connections
I recently put some pieces together in a way that I am surprised I haven't before.
People who marry young are more likely to divorce. That is a fact. Part of the difference has to do with associated factors- people who marry young are likely to be poorer and less well educated than those who wait a while longer, both of which are also contributing factors in divorce rates. But even when controlling for all other factors, age at marriage does make a difference.
Some people point to evidence that the brain keeps developing into the twenties as a possible explanation. They say that since you are still developing and changing so long, it only makes sense that you should wait to get married, to make sure you know who you really are before you marry. Well, that never sounded quite right to me. You don't stop loving your family because you are changing. I love my siblings and my cousins, and they love me. And they and I have been changing and developing all along. The way I see it, if you marry young, then your spouse is part of who you are becoming. Sort of like how my birth family is a part of me because they are the ones who influenced me as I grew up. And anyway, it's not as if once your brain is developed, you stop changing. My grandparents have been married for almost 60 years. I doubt they have stayed exactly the same that whole time. But they love each other.
So I thought that the difference must be related in some way to maturity and ability and willingness to put the other person first. Which reminds me of a portion of an article I saw in the Mormon Times a while ago about extended adolescence. I don't really want to go into an extended tangent right now, but I linked to the article and will put the relevant portion at the end of this post.
Anyway, that sounded reasonable to me. After all, we hear all the time about the problems with selfishness in the world. And ideally, people develop more maturity with age. But then, not quite a week ago, I remembered one of John Gottman's seven principles for making marriage work.
John Gottman is a marriage expert who wrote a book I read for one of my classes. He has researched happy marriages more than probably anybody else in the world and can predict with 91% accuracy whether a couple will stay happy together after observing them for five minutes. Beyond that, his marriage counseling is more successful than most. Nine months after therapy, the national relapse rate is 30-50 percent. His rate is only 20 percent. Because of the reliability of his methods, the large amount of data he collected, and the fact that what he says makes sense, I tend to put some value on what he has to say.
Well, one of those things he has to say is that in good marriages, spouses maintain what he calls active love maps. Basically, they keep up to date with what is going on in each other's lives. They know what they are doing day-to-day and who they are interacting with and what they are worrying about and what they are dreaming of and so on and so forth. So, basically, keep knowing your partner. Now, this takes some effort no matter who you are and how long you've known each other. But if you are still developing, you might be changing more quickly. And if you are both still developing and changing quickly, then maybe it is just harder to keep up-to-date. I'm not sure about this, but it sounds reasonable to me now.
___________________________
Nelson said he found in surveys he conducted that "what (LDS students) believe they need to acquire for adulthood looks different" than what those outside of the church think they need to acquire. While both young adults in and out of the church believe financial independence and accepting responsibility for their actions are hallmarks of adulthood, the BYU sample he surveyed also considered being in control of their emotions, developing concern for others and preparing for family relationships to be signs of maturity.
While Nelson's research is ongoing, he said it appears that those surveyed in the BYU sample group "are further along. They tend to be further along in their identity development. They just seem to be further along in the process than their peers to becoming adults."
"You can tell they're hearing both messages loud and clear," Nelson said. "The message of the world that this is the time period to focus on yourself and have fun, but at the same time they were hearing the message on Sunday that 'now you need to be focused on others and you need to prepare for family roles."
People who marry young are more likely to divorce. That is a fact. Part of the difference has to do with associated factors- people who marry young are likely to be poorer and less well educated than those who wait a while longer, both of which are also contributing factors in divorce rates. But even when controlling for all other factors, age at marriage does make a difference.
Some people point to evidence that the brain keeps developing into the twenties as a possible explanation. They say that since you are still developing and changing so long, it only makes sense that you should wait to get married, to make sure you know who you really are before you marry. Well, that never sounded quite right to me. You don't stop loving your family because you are changing. I love my siblings and my cousins, and they love me. And they and I have been changing and developing all along. The way I see it, if you marry young, then your spouse is part of who you are becoming. Sort of like how my birth family is a part of me because they are the ones who influenced me as I grew up. And anyway, it's not as if once your brain is developed, you stop changing. My grandparents have been married for almost 60 years. I doubt they have stayed exactly the same that whole time. But they love each other.
So I thought that the difference must be related in some way to maturity and ability and willingness to put the other person first. Which reminds me of a portion of an article I saw in the Mormon Times a while ago about extended adolescence. I don't really want to go into an extended tangent right now, but I linked to the article and will put the relevant portion at the end of this post.
Anyway, that sounded reasonable to me. After all, we hear all the time about the problems with selfishness in the world. And ideally, people develop more maturity with age. But then, not quite a week ago, I remembered one of John Gottman's seven principles for making marriage work.
John Gottman is a marriage expert who wrote a book I read for one of my classes. He has researched happy marriages more than probably anybody else in the world and can predict with 91% accuracy whether a couple will stay happy together after observing them for five minutes. Beyond that, his marriage counseling is more successful than most. Nine months after therapy, the national relapse rate is 30-50 percent. His rate is only 20 percent. Because of the reliability of his methods, the large amount of data he collected, and the fact that what he says makes sense, I tend to put some value on what he has to say.
Well, one of those things he has to say is that in good marriages, spouses maintain what he calls active love maps. Basically, they keep up to date with what is going on in each other's lives. They know what they are doing day-to-day and who they are interacting with and what they are worrying about and what they are dreaming of and so on and so forth. So, basically, keep knowing your partner. Now, this takes some effort no matter who you are and how long you've known each other. But if you are still developing, you might be changing more quickly. And if you are both still developing and changing quickly, then maybe it is just harder to keep up-to-date. I'm not sure about this, but it sounds reasonable to me now.
___________________________
Nelson said he found in surveys he conducted that "what (LDS students) believe they need to acquire for adulthood looks different" than what those outside of the church think they need to acquire. While both young adults in and out of the church believe financial independence and accepting responsibility for their actions are hallmarks of adulthood, the BYU sample he surveyed also considered being in control of their emotions, developing concern for others and preparing for family relationships to be signs of maturity.
While Nelson's research is ongoing, he said it appears that those surveyed in the BYU sample group "are further along. They tend to be further along in their identity development. They just seem to be further along in the process than their peers to becoming adults."
"You can tell they're hearing both messages loud and clear," Nelson said. "The message of the world that this is the time period to focus on yourself and have fun, but at the same time they were hearing the message on Sunday that 'now you need to be focused on others and you need to prepare for family roles."
The Other Side
A few days ago, I posted a list of things I want to do in my life. Well, I stumbled across another blog with a list of things the author did not want to do. And I thought it was sort of cool. So, here is my list of things not to do in my life.
1. Eat raw fish. Or any raw meat for that matter.
2. Go skydiving
3. Get botox
4. Have plastic surgery
5. Appear in a tabloid
There don't seem to be as many things I'm really opposed to doing. Unless you count the actual immoral stuff. I chose not to list them. And if #4 is needed because of some accident, I'll allow it.
1. Eat raw fish. Or any raw meat for that matter.
2. Go skydiving
3. Get botox
4. Have plastic surgery
5. Appear in a tabloid
There don't seem to be as many things I'm really opposed to doing. Unless you count the actual immoral stuff. I chose not to list them. And if #4 is needed because of some accident, I'll allow it.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Personal Inertia
I believe that people are basically consistent. Not necessarily with what they say, but in their actions. If we truly know somebody and their situation, what they do will make sense. People seem to act in a contradictory manner because we don't completely understand them or what is going on. It's sort of like the Bible. One of the commandments is thou shalt not kill. But the Israelites are later commanded to kill everybody in the lands they invade, including little children. This looks very contradictory. But when you see the principle behind it, it makes sense. The worth of the soul is great. So do not kill, because that person is very valuable. But if killing all these people now will save several generations of souls later, then it is for the best. Because it is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief. Or it is better to kill one generation if it will prevent many future generations from falling into spiritual death.
If we really saw exactly what each person held most valuable, and what was being asked in each situation, it would make sense. Unfortunately, we can't see that. I think we can't even know ourselves completely, let alone everybody else.
Yes, people change. Not always consciously or on purpose. But these changes are usually in response to something. And for the most part, especially over the short term, people follow the law of inertia- they keep on going the way they have been.
If we really saw exactly what each person held most valuable, and what was being asked in each situation, it would make sense. Unfortunately, we can't see that. I think we can't even know ourselves completely, let alone everybody else.
Yes, people change. Not always consciously or on purpose. But these changes are usually in response to something. And for the most part, especially over the short term, people follow the law of inertia- they keep on going the way they have been.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Things To Do Before I Die
So, I talk about my list of things to do before I die, but I don't think I ever actually wrote it down. I guess I still am not writing it down, but I will type it out. This decision is inspired by my little sister's list on her blog.
1. Go on a cruise
2. Sponsor a child
3. Make a perfect pie crust
4.Go to a midnight movie premiere
5. Camp out in line for tickets to something
6. Visit Australia
7. Write a book that gets bought and published
8. Go to a drive-in movie
9.Stay awake for 24 hours straight
10. Sit and watch the sun rise
11. Sit and watch the sun set
12. Go to Marissa, Illinois
13. Stay at a Bed and Breakfast
14. Take a multi-day trip on Amtrak
15. Be at a Seriously Thursday Night broadcast
16. Order and eat from hotel room service
That's all I can think of right now. I may add on in the future.
1. Go on a cruise
2. Sponsor a child
3. Make a perfect pie crust
4.
5. Camp out in line for tickets to something
6. Visit Australia
7. Write a book that gets bought and published
8. Go to a drive-in movie
9.
10. Sit and watch the sun rise
11. Sit and watch the sun set
12. Go to Marissa, Illinois
13. Stay at a Bed and Breakfast
14. Take a multi-day trip on Amtrak
15. Be at a Seriously Thursday Night broadcast
16. Order and eat from hotel room service
That's all I can think of right now. I may add on in the future.
Monday, March 9, 2009
A Current Event
The television show Big Love is planning to show parts of the endowment on TV this coming Sunday. Naturally, a lot of people are upset. Including me. And everyone has a different opinion on the best way to handle it. Some people have already written and called complaints to the folks at HBO. Some people say that the best thing is to ignore it so as to not bring more publicity. I don't know which side I agree with.
The thing is, most of the response I have seen from nonmembers is negative toward any indignation or offense we feel or any action we take to try to prevent this from being shown. And they assume that it's because we are ashamed of what goes on in the temple. No matter how we express that we are really offended because of the light treatment of the very sacred, they do not get it.
I think some people have no conception of the sacred. And that makes me very sad in addition to the hurt and disappointment.
The thing is, most of the response I have seen from nonmembers is negative toward any indignation or offense we feel or any action we take to try to prevent this from being shown. And they assume that it's because we are ashamed of what goes on in the temple. No matter how we express that we are really offended because of the light treatment of the very sacred, they do not get it.
I think some people have no conception of the sacred. And that makes me very sad in addition to the hurt and disappointment.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Are You What You Read?
My brother gave me a book for Christmas. This is not unusual- it is an off year when I don't get a few books. The title of this book is Every Book Its Reader, and it was written by Nicholas A. Basbanes.
The focus of this book is to look at the influence books have on individuals and the world. And while reading it, I keep trying to apply what it says to myself. When you read author interviews, one question that often comes up is "What authors influenced you?" And they usually manage to come up with at least a couple, sometimes citing a long list. But looking at my life and thoughts, the only books I can say for sure have influenced me are the scriptures. I can, of course, name authors that I read a lot and like the work of- David Lubar, Orson Scott Card, Shannon Hale, and Cynthia Voigt come to mind. And there are many others. But how much does what they write influence my thinking or my writing?
At one point in the book, Basbanes mentions the books that one writer cites or alludes to in his work. And I definitely allude to books and movies. Just on this blog, I've mentioned The Giver by Lois Lowry, A Separate Peace by John Knowles, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by J. K. Rowling, and the movies Guys and Dolls, In The Good Old Summertime, and Kiss Me, Kate. And I remember using a quote from Ella Enchanted by Gail Carson Levine in my journal once as a teenager, and I use references in conversation to books and movies that I am reminded of, or that make good examples of what I am trying to express. But when I use a book to illustrate a thought I have, does it mean that I got the thought from that book, or is it something that I would have thought anyway? I think most of the time, I just like the way they expressed the thought I would have had. And I am now reminded of a quote from You've Got Mail. And now I realize that I have quoted the very next line to express why I write this blog. Anyway, the first quote- "So much of what I say reminds me of something I read in a book, when shouldn't it be the other way around?" I wonder about that sometimes. And I think it doesn't really matter. At least when real life reminds you of a book, you know that somebody succeeded in representing reality in some way. And it means that at least I am experiencing life. Plus, having read about it before, I can have a better idea of how to best respond. Sort of like why they say we study history- to learn from other people's experiences. Right?
All that said, I really do believe that the things you read impact who you become. I just don't know how to measure that influence.
And in case you were curious, the other quote from You've Got Mail is, "I don't really want an answer. I just wanna send this cosmic question out into the void. So, goodnight, dear void."
The focus of this book is to look at the influence books have on individuals and the world. And while reading it, I keep trying to apply what it says to myself. When you read author interviews, one question that often comes up is "What authors influenced you?" And they usually manage to come up with at least a couple, sometimes citing a long list. But looking at my life and thoughts, the only books I can say for sure have influenced me are the scriptures. I can, of course, name authors that I read a lot and like the work of- David Lubar, Orson Scott Card, Shannon Hale, and Cynthia Voigt come to mind. And there are many others. But how much does what they write influence my thinking or my writing?
At one point in the book, Basbanes mentions the books that one writer cites or alludes to in his work. And I definitely allude to books and movies. Just on this blog, I've mentioned The Giver by Lois Lowry, A Separate Peace by John Knowles, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by J. K. Rowling, and the movies Guys and Dolls, In The Good Old Summertime, and Kiss Me, Kate. And I remember using a quote from Ella Enchanted by Gail Carson Levine in my journal once as a teenager, and I use references in conversation to books and movies that I am reminded of, or that make good examples of what I am trying to express. But when I use a book to illustrate a thought I have, does it mean that I got the thought from that book, or is it something that I would have thought anyway? I think most of the time, I just like the way they expressed the thought I would have had. And I am now reminded of a quote from You've Got Mail. And now I realize that I have quoted the very next line to express why I write this blog. Anyway, the first quote- "So much of what I say reminds me of something I read in a book, when shouldn't it be the other way around?" I wonder about that sometimes. And I think it doesn't really matter. At least when real life reminds you of a book, you know that somebody succeeded in representing reality in some way. And it means that at least I am experiencing life. Plus, having read about it before, I can have a better idea of how to best respond. Sort of like why they say we study history- to learn from other people's experiences. Right?
All that said, I really do believe that the things you read impact who you become. I just don't know how to measure that influence.
And in case you were curious, the other quote from You've Got Mail is, "I don't really want an answer. I just wanna send this cosmic question out into the void. So, goodnight, dear void."
One Little Word
If you do not want to know about the world in Lois Lowry's The Giver at this point in time you may want to skip this post.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Home Sweet Home
I never want to move in with my parents again. I am an adult, I have experienced life on my own, and I like a certain amount of independence. When I moved back in after a year in the dorms, I hated the feeling of returning to childhood. And I would hate it even more if I did it again.
The fact that there aren't a whole lot of people my age living in my parents' neighborhood doesn't help.
But the thought of never again starting to randomly break into song and dance with my sisters on a random boring afternoon or evening is unpleasant. I guess you do always have to give something up.
The fact that there aren't a whole lot of people my age living in my parents' neighborhood doesn't help.
But the thought of never again starting to randomly break into song and dance with my sisters on a random boring afternoon or evening is unpleasant. I guess you do always have to give something up.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Additional Information
To clarify:
When I said I look forward to the day when some man does something sweet for me, I am not at all talking about spending a lot of money for me. I would like flowers, but don't demand them. Chocolates would also be nice, but I don't usually like a lot of candy. And if he spends too much money, I'll get worried about his spending habits and ability to stick to a budget. What I want is evidence that he has been thinking of me.
And about the opening up thing. I've always been sensitive. I feel things. I hurt. I cry. And I did that a lot when I was younger. But at some point in the past, I decided this was a problem, so I started building up walls to protect my heart. Because I don't like to get hurt.
Yeah, I know, that's just crazy. Who doesn't want to be hurt?
Anyway, I tried to make it harder for me to get hurt, and if I did get hurt, hard for people to tell. Which sort of goes along with the letting people in thing- if I don't let them in, it doesn't hurt as much if they do hurt me. And if I don't give myself away, it's harder for someone to know enough of me to hurt me.
When I said I look forward to the day when some man does something sweet for me, I am not at all talking about spending a lot of money for me. I would like flowers, but don't demand them. Chocolates would also be nice, but I don't usually like a lot of candy. And if he spends too much money, I'll get worried about his spending habits and ability to stick to a budget. What I want is evidence that he has been thinking of me.
And about the opening up thing. I've always been sensitive. I feel things. I hurt. I cry. And I did that a lot when I was younger. But at some point in the past, I decided this was a problem, so I started building up walls to protect my heart. Because I don't like to get hurt.
Yeah, I know, that's just crazy. Who doesn't want to be hurt?
Anyway, I tried to make it harder for me to get hurt, and if I did get hurt, hard for people to tell. Which sort of goes along with the letting people in thing- if I don't let them in, it doesn't hurt as much if they do hurt me. And if I don't give myself away, it's harder for someone to know enough of me to hurt me.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Holiday Blahs
For the first time in my life, I am not looking forward to Valentine's Day.
Valentine's Day has been my favorite holiday for a few years. I think of it as mostly a friendship appreciation day, and it has always bothered me to hear others refer to it as Singles Awareness Day. After all, we celebrated in elementary school by giving cards and decorating cookies and the like, and it had nothing to do with romance. And through high school, my friends and I exchanged cards and cookies with each other. Same with my family- my mom and sisters and I gave out cards and candy to each other as an expression of our love. Even seeing all the boys getting things for their girlfriends never bothered me. If anything, it made me look forward to the day when some man would be doing something sweet for me.
But this year, I just don't care. It's not really bitterness. I still don't like the Singles Awareness Day thing. Although I won't deny the possibility that a tiny amount of regret or disappointment is lurking in there somewhere. I just am not at all excited. The same thing happened for Christmas last year. I never wanted to go shopping for presents, I didn't care about my own, and I did not at any point feel the Christmas spirit. I guess I'm just having an off year for holidays.
Valentine's Day has been my favorite holiday for a few years. I think of it as mostly a friendship appreciation day, and it has always bothered me to hear others refer to it as Singles Awareness Day. After all, we celebrated in elementary school by giving cards and decorating cookies and the like, and it had nothing to do with romance. And through high school, my friends and I exchanged cards and cookies with each other. Same with my family- my mom and sisters and I gave out cards and candy to each other as an expression of our love. Even seeing all the boys getting things for their girlfriends never bothered me. If anything, it made me look forward to the day when some man would be doing something sweet for me.
But this year, I just don't care. It's not really bitterness. I still don't like the Singles Awareness Day thing. Although I won't deny the possibility that a tiny amount of regret or disappointment is lurking in there somewhere. I just am not at all excited. The same thing happened for Christmas last year. I never wanted to go shopping for presents, I didn't care about my own, and I did not at any point feel the Christmas spirit. I guess I'm just having an off year for holidays.
Introspection
This post has potential spoilers of the itty-bitty kind for A Separate Peace and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)