Regressing to childhood... Reading Children's Books

Reading Frances Hodgson Burnett's The Little Princess and The Secret Garden not so long ago alongside Rudyard Kipling's Just So Stories was great! Prompted by OF's blog on authors I feel comfortable with I thought about Burnett's books, which, having just read, was on my mind.

It was comforting and reminded me of being a child. I also re-read Harry Potter recently as I blogged about... sadly that was not really in my childhood; more my teenage years. However, the point I am trying very inarticulately to get to is: DIG OUT OLD CHILDHOOD FAVOURITES and give them a re-read! It is the most comforting thing in the world...

It has all the basics of a good plot, needs little thought and great characters = mega enjoyment and full relaxation!

Remember- Christina Rossetti

Remember me when I am gone away,
Gone far away into the silent land;
When you can no more hold me by the hand,
Nor I half turn to go yet turning stay.
Remember me when no more day by day
You tell me of our future that you planned:
Only remember me; you understand
It will be late to counsel then or pray.
Yet if you should forget me for a while
And afterwards remember, do not grieve:
For if the darkness and corruption leave
A vestige of the thoughts that once I had,
Better by far you should forget and smile
Than that you should remember and be sad.

This is what I've always wanted said at my funeral by the way, you know in case I shuffle off this mortal coil in the near future. It is beautiful and so apt about rememberance, grief and needing to get on with daily life. I think i was a little harsh on her in the last blog so I am repenting. This is probably more powerful than Dickinson's poem I typed up in the previous blog... and the sonnet layout works v. effectively... sorry Christina :S

Perhaps I was a little harsh

After Death

Christina Rossetti (1830-1894), contemporaneous with Emily Dickinson, was very similar to her in many ways. Like Emily, Christina never married but she did have her own social circle. However Rossetti did not recede from society like Emily Dickinson did, but Christina did have mental problems following from the nervous breakdown she had when she was 14. Both poets were very religious in their own ways; Emily a Calvinist and Christina was part of the Anglo-Catholic movement. But most importantly they both feared their death towards the end of their lives and reflected this in their poems...

The curtains were half drawn, the floor was swept

And strewn with rushes, rosemary and may

Lay thick upon the bed on which I lay,

Where though the lattice ivy-shawdows crept.

He leaned above me, thinking that I slept

And could not hear him; but I heard him say:

"Poor child, poor child:" as he turned away

Came a deep silence, and I knew he wept.

He did not touch the shroud, or raise the fold

That hid my face, or take my ahnd in his,

Or ruffle the smooth pillows for my head:

He did not love me living; but once dead

He pitied me; and very sweet it is

To know he still is warm though I am cold.

I heard a Fly buzz- when I died-

The Stillness in the Room

Was like the Stillness in the Air-

Between the Heaves of Storm-

The Eyes around- had wrung them dry-

And Breathes were gathering firm

For that last Onset- when the king

Be witnessed-in the Room-

I willed away my Keepsakes- Signed away

What portion of me be

Assignable- and then it was

There interposed a Fly-

With Blue- uncertain stumbling Buzz-

Between the light- and me-

And then the Window failed- and then
I could not see to see-

(See here for one of Emily's other poems about her death)

I prefer Emily Dickinson's style of poetry better than Christina's formal sonnet layout. Traditional and over used perhaps... but Emily's use of the dash works a lot better. Her fear of not being able to see into the world of death: "could not see to see" unnerves us because we can't see either because Emily doesn't. the dash leaves us hanging. There is no definite ending. Christina's poem ends on a full stop, which shown next to Emily's dash really puts a definite end to life. It is effective. There is no room for discussion. But I think it would not be as effective if it was not shown side by side next to Emily's poem. Anyways, that is what i think...

Does God Exist?

Don't worry... well, that much. It is not a long rambling debate on whether God exists. I am going to type out an essay I wrote when I was 17 and having to jump through the hoops of a course I had to do in the sixth form at my Catholic grammar school. I was just battling with my mam about me becoming more atheist and cynical at the time. Most kids at school did not even bother to finish off the course and write this essay. i was a geek and did. But I think it had more to do with teenage angst. I am still waiting for my certificate from the Archbishop for completing the course...

The arrogance combined with an acknowledgement of having to jump through the correct hoops to pass amused me on digging it out the other day when I was rummaging through my old school work and deciding what to throw out and what to keep.

"Through time human beings have existed, we have been 'obsessed' almost with the question of the existence of God. it is necessary, some argue, that God exists and there is in fact a great design for our lives. In this essay, I intend to answer the unanwswerable question: 'Does God Exist?'

"The ontological argument is a much debated argument for the existence of God. Ontologism is a theory that we have some natural and immediate intuition of God's existence. However, the main flaw of this argument is that we cannot prove the existence of God enough to satisfy the speculative reason. The classical argument was created by St. Anselm of Canterbury, who defined God as 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived'. The idea that one needs a definition of God if only to dismiss God's existence. It is now easy to come to the conclusion that God exists in the mind and because of Anselm's idea of 'that than which nothing greater can be conceived', he has to exist in reality because he is 'greater' than us and he need something in which to compare to. However, with the argument concerning reality, it brings up a whole new philosophical question: What is reality? (If you believe the film the Matrix: "What is real? How do you define real? If you're talking about what you can hear, what you can smell, taste and feel then real is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain.")

"In addition, the idea of God's existence is necessary to give reason to why we are here. However, Bertrand Russell said that Anselm used the word 'exist' incorrectly. He says that existence cannot predicate and does not exist. So in conclusion to the ontological argument, it seems somewhat unstable and therefore unsuccessful, as definitions are limited and it is difficult to establish a definition for God, especially seeing as we are not altogether sure that He/She exists, let alone what He/She is.

"The idea of 'MOTION', i.e. the passing of power to act as it takes place, implies a first unmoved Mover, who is God, otherwise we should postulate an infinite series of movers, which is absurd. For the same causes, we see them operating in this world imply the existence of a First Cause that is uncaused i.e. that possesses in itself the sufficient reason for its existenceand this is God. Also the fact that contigent beings exist (beings whose non-existence is recognised as possible) implies that the existence of a necessary being... or God. Also the chance of us just appearing with no cause is extremely unlikely (1/1x10133).

"Humans have a concept of 'perfection', so we will need something to compare it to- an absolute standard that is also actual and infinitely perfect, which we associate with God. there is also evidence of intelligent design, which the Universe and our world shows. it implies the existence of a supreme designer- God. The ethical argument is an idea of an internal witness of conscience to the supremacy of the moral law and therefore to the existence of a supreme lawgiver. The aesthetical argument also proves the existence and perception of beauty. This beauty has to come from somewhere and we must have some comparison as we polarise such things as beauty and ugliness.

"The cosmological argument assumes the validity of the principle of sufficient reason amounts to: that it is impossible according to the laws of human thoughtto give any rational explanation of the phenomena of outside experience and of internal conscience. Whatever exists or happens must have a reason for its existence or occurance. If it is used by a scientist and is valid to explain a phenomenom of physics, it has to be equally valid when used for the explanation of the Universe as a whole. Also the theory that certain things are effects and depend on another cause, and these causes can depend on another cause. One must also realise that our species had its origins late in the history of the universe, and from commonly accepted theories, the actual organisation of the universe has a definite beginning. If time had a definite beginning, then we had a beginning, then how did time and we originate? This happening by chance again is 1/1x10133, so extrememly unlikely then!!

"The telelogical argumentis absed on the existence of design in the universe and proves the existence of a supermundane mind of great intelligence and therefore the existence of God. The idea that we exist because of blind chance is absurd. The argument, however, is not weakened by our inability to explain somethings because we have limited knowledge of the entire design.

"The existence of evil could weaken all arguments promoted for the existence of God. Some believe that god balances evil and vice versa. God is all knowing and all powerful and benevolent, but does that make evil the opposite- not all knowing or powerful? It all seems a little hazy and seems like there is no definite answer. Why would God let evil and suffering exist if He/She is all benevolent? However, one could believe that we need to know evil and suffering to know good and happiness, and appreciate it.

"To conclude, there have been many arguments put forward for the existence of God, but there are flaws in everyone of them. I think in the end it is all to do with faith, if you believe or not. I suppose for the majority, we shall have to wait until death, either to tell us the 'truth' or confirm already stated beliefs."

What a cop out conclusion!! haha... jokes....

Taking a leaf out of OF's blog, I am going to continue his game.

Here are is his instructions: "Here’s a game I've been playing. Take no more than ten minutes. Write down two lists, one of ten authors whose books you feel at home with and the other of ten authors you don’t. Write the names down as they hit you, without too much reflection. Be honest – don’t include authors you think you ought to like/dislike."

Authors I Feel Comfortable With:

Elizabeth Gaskell
Daphne Du Maurier
Erica James
Jane Austen
Anne Bronte
J K Rowling
Dan Brown
Mauve Binchey
Margaret Atwood
Frances Hodgson Burnett
(wish the list could go on!!)

Authors I Feel Uncomfortable With:
Ian McEwan
Charles Dickens
J R R Tolkien
Daniel Defoe
Emily Bronte
Sebastian Faulks
John Steinbeck
George Orwell
Stephen King
Wilbur Smith

The reason feel uncomfortable with those I have mentioned is not to say they aren't any good, but I did not enjoy them in the sense that I would willingly pick them up again and re-read them for COMFORT. George Orwell was a genius, but his ideas can be overwhelming and make you feel naff as a human being for our inherent flaws. Faulks... his writing style just made me cringe (see my other blog here), etc, etc.

For the ones I feel comfortable with, you will see them sitting in pride of place on my bookshelf well thumbed on my shelves.

Children, The World's Little Angels and Natural Comedians!

Now I haven't been working at the Castle for all that long, but as far as I can tell, you are always guaranteed a laugh from one of the kids that comes through your room. Now here are a few things I have noticed about children at Windsor Castle that is really endearing, even if naughty...

1) Rope Fun! No matter what the room or exhibit is, the ropes are always the most interesting aspect. They have to run their hands up and down the rope for the entire room or the game is lost. They have to swing at least one rope really hard and look to see if Mummy/Daddy/Warden is paying attention.

2) Grumps and Charmers. You tend to get two types of children. The Grumps and the Charmers. The Grumps are just hilarious as they pout, grumble and stick their little tongues out in defiance. They give you one withering scowl and move on to scowl at someone else too. The Charmers will give you the biggest grin, giggle, gurgle and gasp at you giving them attention and really make your day. Those really will be the heartbreakers when they are older, as cliched as it may sound. However, as a tendency, the Grumps, barring the occasional floor rolling tantrum (see below), are better behaved because they know they haven't charmed you off your feet so will not hasten to sit on a the two hundred year old throne or the three hundred year old chair or rock the unstable old table with a priceless vase on top, as invariably the toddling wee Charmers do! I couldn't but laugh on seeing a little boy cheekily sitting on the chair after sneaking under the ropes whilst I was telling off one of his relatives for using their mobile phone!!

3)The Tantrums. Deary me. We do see a lot of them. And the parents are just as funny. Seeing little children throw themselves on the soft carpets and roll around while incoherently exclaiming some vast wrong been committed by their parents to them. Some will be placated by the soft carpet and the fun of rolling around. Others will have great fun at causing the most noise and attract the most attention as possible whilst their red-faced parents (from both anger and embarrassment) drag said child out of the room.

4) Pushchairs. Now, I never knew that children invested so much emotional value in their pushchairs. This little girl earnestly told me I was to look after her pushchair with particular care. On collecting it with her mother she marched around it making sure everything was as it should be before placing her bottom primly in the seat and giving her mother a solemn nod of OK. Kids have wailed at having their pushchair being put in storage, even if they hadn't even been seated in it!

5) Nudes. Again no matter what else is in the room, excluding of course the ropes as previously mentioned, kids will immediately find the portrait of the lady with her breasts exposed and the cherub on the ceiling with a small willy, resulting in the parents or teachers (internally giggling) red-faced trying to explain that it is artistic/that was how they dressed/they are naughty/because they didn't have clothes, etc.

6) Audio Guides. Audio Guides are both swords, swinging fun and telephones. Kids will have duels with these things jabbing their best friend in the eye, stomach or back with it, smacking their sister in the mouth, their dads in the legs and whacking themselves in the privates. Others talk back to the audio guide asking questions like "Well, where is it then?" Or they comment like "you're lying, I can't see it". Or "Hey, I see it. That's cool, isn't it? What is it? yeah..." The best comment I ever heard is, "The small person in the mobile, Mummy, says we need to press number 12 now." Cute!

7) If there is a puddle, it must be jumped in, even if it splashing rain water up an American man's trouser leg.

8) If you let a three year old child push their own pushchair, it will be pushed down the hill and out of sight with the new china plates you have just bought out of the shop.

9)If there is a most inconvenient place to squat and take a look around the room, it will be right in the middle of where everyone is walking.

10) And finally, if there is something that can be touched, it will be.

Without kids, even the mischievous ones, my day would be long and dull. May I be able to have kids and lots of them when I too am all growed up! :D hee hee... The World's Natural Comedians!

A solemn thing- it was- I said-

A solemn thing- it was- I said-
A woman- white- to be-
And wear- if God should count me fit-
Her blameless mystery-

A hallowed thing- to drop a life-
Into the purple well-
Too plummetless- that it return-
Eternity- until-

I pondered how the bliss would look-
And would it feel as big-
When I could take it in my hand-
As hovering-seen through fog-

And then- the size of this "small" life-
The Sages- call it small-
Swelled- like Horizons- in my vest-
And I sneered- softly- "small"!

This peom, like many of Emily Dickinson's, is not to be read on one level. Is it to do with marriage? Highly likely. Religion? Most probably. Death? Again, yes. Each line can be read to prove each theme and this makes Emily Dickinson special. You can read a poem and it mean one thing one time, but the other time it would mean the other thing to you- it is a poem for different moods and since I seem to be on a religious rant at the moment follow this poem along the theme of religion.

By the way I think death is probably the primary interpretation, but argue with me on that as you will. I do! "If God should count me fit" is a definite link to Emily's issue with Calvinism. It was very much at the forefront of her religious insecurity. Calvinist believe that one is predetermined to go to heaven before they are born and no matter what they do on earth can really make much difference. We are inherently good/bad from birth. Emily is very insecure about her own death and whether she would get into heaven. Another link to Emily's thoughts and how this poem represents her life and feelings is that "a woman- white- to be-" refers to Emily being dressed in white all the time when she withdrew from society and become a recluse.

"Hallowed" and "Eternity" all hint at a religious connotation. "Purple" is an ecclesiastical and royal colour. "Plummetless" and "Eternity" make death seem a scary, long drawn out thing. "I pondered how bliss would look" shows that Emily is wondering what heaven looks like. "Seen-through fog-" refers to St. Peter's belief of the 'mist of life' (or something- my bible studies are rusty). "It" to me (in the last stanza) is her life. To her, life is not small. It is everything. The Sages- possibly the saints, angels, God, etc- it is just a small life, but from a personal point of view it is everything.

So, am I right or wrong? I don't know. Perhaps when I meet Emily "in the fair schoolroom of the sky" I will ask what she meant!

(I shall know why- when Time is over-
And I have ceased to wonder why-
Christ will explain each separate anguish
In the fair schoolroom of the sky-

He will tell me what "peter" promised-
And I- for wonder at his woe-
I shall forget the drop of Anguish
That scalds me now- that scalds me now!)

For other poetry on women in marriage and also marriage blurred with religious service as a nun (possibly) see here.

For the Young

I keep asking
"For the things I desire,
You tell me I'm selfish
And "playing with fire"-
It is hard to believe
I am selfish and vain,
My desires seem so real
And my needs seem so sane,
And yet You are wiser..."

This poem attracted me. My penultimate blog is an exact example of this... I am indeed selfish, but thankfully as it is a blog I shan't take it so seriously. However, just something to remind me that my woes and wishes, and desires and dreads are relatively minor. This is a prayer/poem. Insert where I wrote "I keep asking"- "Dear God, I keep praying..." How funny that it struck almost as if someone had punched me on the nose. It made me feel bad. Then I remembered i didn't necessarily believe in this and settled into an awkward feeling somewhat placated by a defensive mechanism that blocks religious turmoil within.

Again another belated teenage angst issue on the question of God that has beleaguered the philosophers for decades, generations and centuries, and by no means do I believe that I can find the answer to which many others have tried... did they fail or succeed I suspect should be left to another blog! I am certainly in no mood to philosophise today!

Poem entitled "A Prayer for the Young and Lovely" by Helen Steiner Rice, "Heart Gifts". At least she thinks our selfishness is "lovely" :D

It is the only road...

Believe not those who say
The upward path is smooth.
Lest thou shouldst stumble in the way.
And faint before the truth.

It is the only road
Unto the realms of joy:
But her who seeks that blest abode
Must all his pwers employ.

Anne Bronte

I found this poem on a bookmark within the pages of one of the books I recently dug out of the shed after we packed a lot of our possessions away when our extension was being built. It was in a book of poems owned once by my nanna, and now by my mum. They can be very religious in tone, but these poems are little gems that make me wish I had a deeper conviction that something wider out there exists than what an agnostic-cum-atheist believes. This poem does not exude a high-toned, preaching voice that tells us we are condemned to hell, but to get to heaven is not easy and we must strive with all our efforts to enter this "blest abode". The conviction of what must be done, the true belief expressed in this lone, short poem shows me how faith really did exist. It did for my nanna, it does in some manner for my mother and today? The next generation? Who knows...

Christmas Item #1

I could really do with inventing more time within a day!! I have so many books to read, dvds to watch and people to meet, so much stuff to do, so many places to be but how the hell do I fit it all in.... i need a diary...

Christmas list item #1: DIARY!