Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, and other thoughts.

So I am back. I just have a few things to write nothing too important just some thoughts on Sir Gawain, and a few other things.

I finished Sir Gawain and the Green Knight yesterday. Overall, I found the poem very interesting. I feel like at points it was pretty predictable, which would make sense because it is an old story and has been honored by mimicry often I am sure. That is the essence of most great works I would guess and I have no doubt that this story in some way or form was framed from others. Intriguing plot, If you that read this have not read the poem, I will give you a basic synopsis but I encourage you to read the story. It took me only a few hours to get through it (the non-middle english version). The basis of the story is that a mysterious knight dressed in green challenges King Arthur's Court to a challenge/game. Arthur kind of wussed out and thus caused oodles of awkward silence. Sir Gawain being noble and knightly said he would take the challenge in Arthur's stead. The challenge is that he gets one swing with an axe and if at the end the Green Knight was still alive then in one year he would get one swing at Sir Gawain. Gawain fails.. sort of.. and is given a year before he has to take his final blow. The story continues with his journey to meet his destiny and the trials and temptations that he faces. Overall good story. Read it, it's fun and doesn't take long.

On to other thoughts. I worked on a few riddles this week thanks to tyger. They were very interesting. Surprisingly I am sure to him, I actually got them right. I am looking forward to a few books I am about to start reading. Catch-22 by Heller, and The Once and Future King by T. H. White. Looking forward to those. I have also been working on learning more about Etymology and just general Vocabulary. Been a very good way to keep things interesting. Fatuous is a pretty good one. I will leave you with my favorite for of the last few days, Scrumtrulescent. Enjoy it.

More to come later.

-Colin

Thoughts on Kierkegaard

Kierkegaard talks about how despair can be over oneself instead of over others. He gives examples that are basically stating that we have dreams that are unreachable which we try to define ourselves around, but when those dreams do not work out we fall into despair. He states that a man wants to become Caesar or nothing. When he does not become Caesar he falls into despair about his situation, not because he is jealous of not being able to achieve what Caesar achieved but because he is not what he had hoped to be and because he feels hopeless about himself. I think at this point Kierkegaard basically states that people move on past the despair. I think that in Today's society it is not this way always. I feel like in today's Society this despair is very detrimental. Often once someone feels that they can not achieve what they initially wanted they lose all hope. Society tells them that it is ok though; and what is important is that we dont worry about what we have not achieved, we should be happy with whatever happens. Not to continue to fight for what our true potential is but to underachieve and accept that we just can not achieve what our real potential is. Maybe this is because most people are stuck in the "Aesthetic phase" but I guess i just dont see how what Kierkegaard is saying can be completely true. I feel as though ideally he might have a good point, but society as it is today does not function ideally, it functions in a politically correct way that tells us to do whatever is easy and does not tax us much.