The ingredients of health and long life, are great temperance, open-air, easy labour, and little care."
— Philip Sidney (1554-1586)
The ingredients of health and long life, are great temperance, open-air, easy labour, and little care."
— Philip Sidney (1554-1586)
The titled responsion romanticizes a Good life, one ideal among many. What is your vision of the Good life?
Working the fields, tilling the soil, and planting the future of your survival change the very definition of yield. The resonance is sustainable and comes in the form of ATP — fuel for the body. What you produce is the theme of the pastoral romantic. Imagine a future where the traffic signs that represent merging lanes and stop signs are spaghetti junctions of the past. This return to or homecoming that could emerge is a possibility. Don't get too comfortable with the Amazon deliveries and on-demand grocery supply.
Romantic Apocryphal Thoughts
It was one of those March days when the sun shines hot and the wind blows cold: when it is summer in the light, and winter in the shade."
— Charles Dickens (1812-1870)
The titled responsion is partially predictive reminiscent of the only past participant you can remember.
There are plenty of meditations of apocryphal thoughts, mediated and negotiated through the playfully interpreted mind of fellow co-creators. I am referring to the other members on planksip.
So what do we all have to be romantic about? For me, the romantic tendency centers around the literature of the past, and oddly enough, access to the Google Oracle. When I write, I am continuously looking up words, works and supporting "evidence" for the ideas that I am birthing.
Is it possible to birth ideas on your own? For sure. Working with others is something that I recommend. Charles, for instance, represents a perversion of sorts with, and through, the following aphorism;
Dickens is a euphemism for the word devil, possibly via devilkins. A devilkin is a diabolical imp - a king of mini-devil. Euphemisms that avoid mention of either God or the devil are known as minced-oaths and 'what the dickens' is an archetypal example of that form.
The pastoral romantics of times past depends on the weather, or more specifically the climate. The Dickens we know emerged from the industrialization of London, the dirty coal of yesteryear. So why is it making a comeback? We should know better!
Past or El Romantic
There is no happiness in love, except at the end of an English novel."
— Anthony Trollope (1815-1882)
The titled responsion is novel for sure, and yet the prescription from Tony sounds like he is staking a claim on identity. What was I thinking when I added "el" to romantic?
El, holds special significance when it comes to a train of thought in Chicago. Why Chicago you may ask. Chicago represents an economic school of thought in direct opposition to the Frankfurt school.
Oddly enough, the Frankfurt perversion is also a romantic imagining of something utopian. If you ask a Marxist, which I am not BTW, the function of criticism is "designed" to dismantle wealth. Prosperity, on the other hand, is novel and achievable through natural means, not the deliberate oppression of others.
Biblical I am sure, the romanticism of El is a blatant assumption of King and Country and Deity. Coupled to the past hardly resembles a choice, yet the thematic reembraces asks, Why Iota ask Why?
Strength lies not in defense but in attack."
— Adolf Hitler (1889-1945)
The titled responsion is debatable, especially considering the origin of the quote. The danger lies in the realization of what outcomes of global domination actually transpire. A tick from the times of the Roman Empire, the fall is in common and thankfully so.
The reference to romantics is Roman in origin. Considering the origin of this quote, history contextualizes his actions of terror without forgiveness.
We must know how to contextualize historical acts of terror without forgiveness. History, as the poet said, is "ancient history" and that does not mean that all history is just. There are those who would argue that this is a simplistic argument and that all historical events are true. But I am sure that you have heard that argument before and found it to be rather hollow.
The problem is that all of us are not so sure about whether or not we can truly believe in the truth of what those who do historical deeds say. As the saying goes, "if you are not convinced that something is true, then it is not true."
If one were to try to contextualize those who do these deeds, we might well think that there was a sense of justice at work here. If we were to truly believe that, somehow, this kind of behaviour somehow deserved some sort of retribution, then it would make sense to forgive these acts because there was a justice involved in the punishment that was meted out.
But there seems to be something a little different about justice in the past than there is today. That something is the fact that many people in the past were not so much punished but killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
One of the problems with such acts of terror is the fact that they are sometimes carried out by those who have power and wealth. Those who have power and money often do not even know that they are carrying out these acts. They may feel as though their actions are somehow justified. This is not really justice.
It is certainly a good idea to seek forgiveness when one has committed a crime. It is not always the best idea, however, to simply allow that guilt to carry over to a crime that one committed years ago when no one ever realized that one did so. It is better to learn from the past and to try to become a better person.
It may be easier to forgive a crime that you committed when it has happened several times than it would be to forgive the one that occurred only once, although it would be just as hard to forgive a crime that has occurred many times. because if it happens many times, one tends to be more hardened.
I know that it can be difficult to forgive a crime that has been committed many times. and there are times when I am glad that I can forget about it because I think that it makes me a better person. and that is something that many people would agree with. However, one should never forget about an act of terror.
History is written by the victors. In the case of the past, the victors were those who committed violence, murder, and terrorism against their victims. But history is also written by the losers, those who suffered violence, murder, and terrorism at the hands of their enemies. And history is written by those who have survived those acts.
The truth of the matter is that all such events are terrible, even if they happen over the past century or two. but if it was possible to avoid them, then that is what you would have done. History contextualizes actions of terror without forgiveness.
You cannot allow history to contextualize such acts of terror. Because if you allow that history to write about such acts, then you have allowed it to absolve you of your guilt. This is not something that is good.
History contextualizes such acts without forgiveness because, no matter how many times you get away with a crime, the justice and punishment involved with it is not done. In such a way it changes you, and you are no longer the same individual you were when you committed such acts and you become a different person who has been scarred for life.
Pastor Past Times and the Memorabilia to Proof It
Every passion borders on the chaotic, but the collector's passion borders on the chaos of memories."
— Walter Benjamin (1892-1940)
The titled responsion may sound a little preachy and let the proof lies in the memories.
Chaos is the marker that indicates the market of passion. Collecting chaos is a futile exercise worthy of remembering, despite the contradiction. Emergence is something that is created. Living in the past, so to speak, is (I think) what Benjamin is warning of.
If you have nik-naks and memorabilia to summon memories of the past, the utility of holding on to better times is the wellspring of hope. I am not saying that hope is ideal, it may be a survival reflex and endemic to our virality as a species.
Everything has been figured out, except how to live."
— Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980)
The titled responsion is pessimistic yet oddly accepting of everyone's way of life with the Existential feeling of anxiety throughout.
Living a life worth living was the advice of the Ancient Greeks. Acting as if there is a time limit or some shade of shame for not producing a satisfactory answer to this question lies at the heart of this double entendre from our French philosopher; Jean-Paul Sartre.
Romantic pessimism refers to an emotion that can be identified in the literature of romantic love and romance. Although romantic pessimists have been around for many years and have been used for many different purposes, romantic pessimists seem to be especially common in the literature on romantic love. Romantic pessimists tend to be very negative and pessimistic about a romantic relationship. In some cases, romantic pessimists are even negative about love in general.
The personality of the romantic pessimist seems to be a total rejection of everything that is romantic about love. The nature of the romantic pessimists' pessimism seems to be a total coldness, a refusal to admit or believe that there is anything at all romantic about love. It's no longer human emotion, it's no longer the illness of love, but instead human cruelty and dishonesty. Romantic pessimists seem to be willing to abandon everything that's romantic about love. The romantic pessimist appears as someone who will not only abandon himself and love to protect himself from suffering but will also abandon the idea that he is romantic.
A romantic defeatist can be described as someone who feels that he or she has no true romantic feelings for another person. They may think that their feelings for another person are superficial or based on nothing more than human vanity. Romantic pessimists believe that love is entirely something that they experience, and they will therefore reject love if they think that they can't experience it. Romantic pessimists don't feel that their feelings for another person have depth or meaning, and they do not accept the fact that they could love a person and still be sad if the person they loved got hurt. Romantic pessimists often feel very guilty when they fail to protect love and are not there to help those around them through difficult times. Romantic pessimists often feel as though they are responsible for the pain and suffering of those around them.
It often makes romantic relationships seem very sad and heartbreaking. If you are reading a romance, then you should pay close attention to the way that the story is told and the feelings that the characters express to one another. If there is romance in the story, then this could mean that the romance is romantic for one character and not for another.
Romantic pessimists often fail to realize that they are making a huge mistake if they believe that they can "save" love by ignoring their own needs. Romantic pessimists often think that love is impossible because their own needs are unmet. Romantic pessimists often believe that the reason they feel so bad about themselves because they have no feelings towards love is that they refuse to take care of themselves and let go of their own personal emotions.
Pessimists will usually feel that love is something that they need to give up because they do not feel any emotional connection with another person. Romantic pessimists may believe that their romantic relationships will last forever and that they can never leave this relationship because it is something that they have to give up on because it would be too painful. Romantic pessimists often have no romantic attachment to their partners because they feel that if they did, then they wouldn't be sad and would love again.
Interestingly, they tend to focus on the negative aspects of romantic love and romantic relationships instead of focusing on the positives. Romantic pessimists often spend a great deal of time talking about how the negative aspects of a relationship affect a romantic relationship. However, romantic pessimists often fail to realize that their romantic relationships could be very strong. Romantic pessimists often focus on the negative aspects of a relationship and forget about the positive aspects of the relationship.
These often find themselves focusing on the negative aspects of romance and not thinking of the positives in romantic relationships. They don't realize that they can use their negative emotions in a constructive way and help to make their romantic relationships work. Romantic pessimists often fail to realize that they have the ability to give love to another person and to help to make their romantic relationship work.
The planksip writers' cooperative is sponsoring a re-writing of this article (3,000 words) with $3,000 CAD in prize money for the best article as voted by your peers in the planksip writer's cooperative. Judged by your peers, your chance to join a community of creative thinkers and win over $750,000 CAD in prize money is your entry point into becoming a planksip journalist.
We want to change the way people engage. The planksip organic platform is dedicated to supporting your voice as a writer and a thought leader. Join today, membership matters!