Novak (novak) wrote,

Personal: Christmas; Medievals in Movies; Star Trek; Kristin Lavransdatter; Random

This will be a fairly random entry, in lieu of having made any entries for about a week. No serious theological work has been going on, with no Thoughts in development. I did make a vague complaint to Mom as she was going to bed. We had watched one of my absolute favs -- A Man For All Seasons (which she had last seen when it was released, to my amusement and delight) -- and then the TV had given way to a PBS showing of a mystery starring the medieval monk Cadfael, "A Morbid Taste for Bones." The first few scenes lead me to complain about why it was that film and TV people seem to go out of their way to make medieval people dour (as though they were all disappointed to discover that they had been born in the Middle Ages). The point I was trying to make was that our giant blow-out of Mardi Gras is the least echo of a medieval culture of celebration and feasting that we American's are far too dour and clock-obsessed to seem to be able to keep up with, but all I managed to do was muddle the point and to confuse her, so I let it slide.

Now I'm watching the 1960s Star Trek episode "Obsession," which I've been wanting to catch for years: 40 years since the show premiered and I've never caught this episode. Geeky fun for me! This nicely dovetails with our watching the 1966 Best Picture A Man For All Seasons for Mom's first time since its release, doesn't it?

It's been a slow and easy break so far. Diane Duane's Star Trek novel (it somehow seems diminishing to call it that: she writes a deeply cultural future-history that so transcends most sci-fi published in this area) The Empty Chair (mentioned in the previous entry) was all I had hoped it would be: a wonderful yarn, fulfilling all the potential of the previous novels she had written with these characters. It tied together my reading of her all the way back to late grade school or the beginning of high school. That done, I have moved on to Kristin Lavransdatter, which I wrote about in my entry from the Ethics and Culture conference at Notre Dame. amea and I have found ourselves starting the novel at the same time, and with some discussion and debate about the new translation and the original 1920's one, we have begun reading together, although she's got a bit of a start on me. (Yes, yes, you're very fast: I'm only on chapter 5.)

canonjohn left a thought-provoking post earlier, mostly on the topic of people often feeling a loss of innocence as they go on in years, which provoked the following idea in me, which I thought I would add here for my own sake:
Perhaps it is not so much a matter of "innocence" that is lost as it is "surprise" or newness. With life and experience, there is so often so much less that we experience that is truly new experience, and brings that freshness we associate with our youths. Thus, your description of times that you do experience that freshness -- as in the writing of poetry, which is what suggested this other reading to me -- have less to do with a lost (and unrecoverable?) innocence than with simply a lessened potential to be surprised.

Now, I'm obviously using "innocence" in some kind of more moral sense, or as a term of purity or somesuch. There is a way you can use the word that would mean exactly what I wrote above, and maybe that was your intent the whole time and I just wasn't seeing it so clearly. But I guess I make my point to show that we haven't lost anything in ourselves: the loss, taken in my sense, is only statistical. We simply have the experience of surprise less often, because we have seen and learned a thing or two. But when we do experience it: in a new insight, a flash leading to poetry, a delving into a new friend, we feel that same feeling as robustly as ever. And that, I think -- the fact that our capacity for depth of feeling is undiminished -- is the important thing, and that if that is there, then perhaps things are well, after all.
This piece of silly randomness came from nextdrinksonme -- I can neither confirm nor deny its accuracy, but I think I will avoid Random Brutal Sex Masters:
The Slow Dancer
Deliberate Gentle Love Dreamer (DGLDm)

Steady, reliable, and cradling her tenderly. Take a deep breath, and let it out real are The Slow Dancer.

Your focus is love, not sex, and for your age, you have average experience. But you're a great, thoughtful guy, and your love life improves every year. There's also a powerful elimination process working in your favor: most Playboy types get stuck raising unwanted kids before you even begin settling down. The women left over will be hot and yours. Your ideal woman is someone intimate, intelligent, and very supportive.

Your exact opposite:
The Hornivore

Random Brutal Sex Master
While you're not exactly the life of the party, you do thrive in small groups of smart people. Your circle of friends is extra tight and it's HIGHLY likely they're just like you. You appreciate symmetry in relationships.

ALWAYS AVOID: The Battleaxe

CONSIDER: The Maid of Honor or The Sonnet
Link: The 32-Type Dating Test by OkCupid - Free Online Dating.
Tags: books, cultural, family, friends-marquette era, historical, literary, meme, movies/film/tv, personal, random, sexuality

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.