Quotes from my copywork

Here are some quotes that I've collected from the classics I've read in the past few months, and that I've used for copywork. Some are serious, some are funny, all are from books I enjoyed.


“But then over these convictions there came a third,--equally strong, which told him that the girl loved the younger man and did not love him, and that if he loved the girl it was his duty as a man to prove his love by doing what he could to make her happy. As he walked up and down the walk by the moat.....he schooled himself to feel that that, and that only, could be his duty. What did love mean if not that? What could be the devotion which men so often affect to feel if it did not tend to self-sacrifice on behalf of the beloved one? A man would incur any danger for a woman, would subject himself to any toil,--would even die for her! But if this were done simply with the object of winning her, where was that real love of which sacrifice of self on behalf of another is the truest proof? So, by degrees, he resolved that the thing must be done.” —The thoughts of Roger Carbury, The Way We Live Now

“'Is he a young man, papa?'
'About forty, I believe,' said the archdeacon.
'Oh!' said Griselda. Had her father said eighty, Mr Arabin would not have appeared to her to be very much older.” —Barchester Towers

“'You may go how and when and where you please, so that you leave my house tomorrow. You have disgraced me, sir; you have disgraced yourself, and me, and your sisters.'
'I am glad at least sir, that I have not disgraced my mother,' said Bertie.” —Barchester Towers

"As far as I have had opportunity of judging, it appears to me that the usual style of letter-writing among women is faultless, except in three particulars: A general deficiency of subject, a total inattention to stops, and a very frequent ignorance of grammar." —Henry Tilney, Northanger Abbey

“Madam your wife and I did not hit it off the only time I ever saw her. I won't say she was silly, but I think one of us was silly, and it was not me.” —Squire Hamley, Wives and Daughters

'I can live alone, if self-respect, and circumstances require me so to do. I need not sell my soul to buy bliss. I have an inward treasure born with me, which can keep me alive if all extraneous delights should be withheld, or offered only at a price I cannot afford to give.' —Jane, Jane Eyre

“I distinguish reserve from shyness, because I imagine shyness would please, if it knew how; whereas, reserve is indifferent whether it pleases or not.” —The Life of Charlotte Bronte

Whoops!

Apparently, I accidentally signed in as Purring Piggy, so the last two posts were credited to her. I went back and fixed that, so that they are now credited to the right author. I'm sorry for any mixup that occured!

Brontë and her biography

I finished Elizabeth Gaskell’s The Life of Charlotte Bronte a week ago, and though I really enjoyed it, it made me realize why I like fiction so much. It isn’t that fiction is more interesting (though it can be), it is that it isn’t real. When I grow attached to Mr. Bush or Osborne Hamley, and cry over their death, I always know that it isn’t real, so the pain isn’t real either. But growing attached to Charlotte Brontë through the four hundred page book made the end of her life really tragic.

She was a quiet but deep feeling woman who grew up in the lonely moors of Yorkshire. Her two older sisters and her mother died when she was a child, leaving her the oldest among the remaining four children. Emily was wild and willful, Anne was shy and sensitive, and Branwell was capricious, so it remained to practical yet idealistic Charlotte to keep the house together.

All four siblings were incredibly precocious, but of all of them, Charlotte was the most simple, the most easy to love, despite her reputation for wild and passionate stories (this really belongs to Emily). They told stories to each other about two fantasy worlds they had created, and this creative gift followed them into their young adult life. At first they wrote poetry too, some of which Charlotte sent to the poet Southey to ask his opinion. His response struck me as very kind and thoughtful:

“It is not my advice that you have asked as to the direction of your talents, but my opinion of them, and yet the opinion may be worth little, and the advice much. You evidently possess, and in no inconsiderable degree, what Wordsworth calls the ‘faculty of verse.’ I am not depreciating it when I say that in these times it is not rare. Many volumes of poems are now published every year without attracting public attention, any one of which if it had appeared half a century ago, would have obtained a high reputation for its author. Whoever, therefore, is ambitious of distinction in this way ought to be prepared for disappointment.

“But it is not with a view to distinction that you should cultivate this talent, if you consult your own happiness. I, who have made literature my profession, and devoted my life to it, and have never for a moment repented of the deliberate choice, think myself, nevertheless, bound in duty to caution every young man who applies as an aspirant to me for encouragement and advice, against taking so perilous a course. You will say that a woman has no need of such a caution; there can be no peril in it for her. In a certain sense this is true; but there is a danger of which I would, with all kindness and all earnestness, warn you. The daydreams in which you habitually indulge are likely to induce a distempered state of mind; and in proportion as all the ordinary uses of the world seem to you flat and unprofitable, you will be unfitted for them without becoming fitted for anything else. Literature cannot be the business of a woman’s life, and it ought not to be. The more she is engaged in her proper duties, the less leisure will she have for it, even as an accomplishment and a recreation. To those duties you have not yet been called, and when you are you will be less eager for celebrity. You will not seek in imagination for excitement, of which the vicissitudes of this life, and the anxieties from which you must not hope to be exempted, be your state what it may, will bring with them but too much.

“But do not suppose that I disparage the gift which you possess; nor that I would discourage you from exercising it. I only exhort you so to think of it, and so to use it, as to render it conducive to your own permanent good. Write poetry for its own sake; not in a spirit of emulation, and not with a view to celebrity; the less you aim at that the more likely you will be to deserve and finally to obtain it. So written, it is wholesome both for the heart and soul; it may be made the surest means, next to religion, of soothing the mind and elevating it. You may embody in it your best thoughts and your wisest feelings, and in so doing discipline and strengthen them.

“Farewell, madam. It is not because I have forgotten that I was once young myself, that I write to you in this strain; but because I remember it. You will neither doubt my sincerity nor my good will; and however ill what has here been said may accord with your present views and temper, the longer you live the more reasonable it will appear to you. Though I may be but an ungracious adviser, you will allow me, therefore, to subscribe myself, with the best wishes for your happiness here and hereafter, your true friend,

“ROBERT SOUTHEY.”

She did continue writing, and eventually made her living out of it, giving to the world such wonderful stories as Jane Eyre, Villette, and Shirley. Emily, always a strange and wild child, gave the equally strange and wild Wuthering Heights; and quiet Anne gave the surprisingly strong Agnes Gray and The Tenant of Wildfell Hall.

Despite the fame she got from her writings, Charlotte’s family tragedies threatened to overcome her spirit. Emily, Anne, and Branwell followed their sisters and mother to the grave when they were still very young, leaving Charlotte and her father alone in the country parsonage of Haworth. But Charlotte, though she felt deeply, had the strength of character to carry her through. She continued writing after that, and maintained a few close friendships that she had made. Many years passed. Her father’s curate eventually proposed to her after suffering under a concealed passion for years. He was a good man and she was fond of him, and he had a good position in life, so she married him. It was a good choice, for for about a year they were particularly happy, as she learned to love him greatly. Finally, she had gained the happy marriage that she promised to her heroines. Then just as she was expecting a child, she died.

How awfully tragic! If this had been a fictional story, I could have had a good cry and moved on. But the fact that it was real made it worse. Charlotte Brontë was a real woman, who had many real trials, and the story of her life is not happy. And thus it is that I have felt about histories and biographies: why would I want to read about unhappy real people? If I’m going to feel grief about something, wouldn’t I rather the sadness be only in my imagination?

But while I still prefer fiction, recently biographies have started to hold an attraction for me because they are real. While I may sigh for the fact that Paul Emmanuel exists only in my head, there are some truly wonderful and interesting people that were real, and who people actually knew, and who benefitted the real world. And that at least is worth the reading about the sadness of their lives.

A book meme

I wasn't tagged, but I can't resist these:

1. A book that made you cry - Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell. The legacy of Scarlett O'Hara was that she did so much, but could have been so much more.

2. A book that scared you - And Then There Were None by Agatha Christie. Kept me off murder mysteries for years.

3. A book that made you laugh - Cotillion by Georgette Heyer. One of my absolute favorite love stories and so funny.

4. A book that disgusted you - N/A

5. A book you loved in elementary school - Mr. Popper's Penguins by Richard Atwater.

6. A book you loved in middle school - Little Women by Louisa May Alcott. I'm inclined to think it a wee bit sentimental now, but it was my favorite book then.

7. A book you loved in high school - Barchester Towers (and its prequel, The Warden) by Anthony Trollope. I feel like I could read this book forever. I wished it would never end.

8. A book you loved in college - N/A

9. A book that challenged your identity or faith - The Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien. I've always had my faith, but this challenged so many things that I believed about myself.

10. A series that you love - The Hornblower series by C. S. Forester.

11. Your favorite horror book - N/A

12. Your favorite science fiction book - The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams.

13. Your favorite fantasy book - other than #9, Watership Down by Richard Adams.

14. Your favorite mystery book - A Blunt Instrument by Georgette Heyer.

15. Your favorite biography - John Adams by David McCullough. This and the excellent movie 1776 made John Adams my absolute favorite Founding Father.

16. Your favorite coming-of-age book - Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen. Henry is one of a kind, Catherine is delightful, and it's dreadfully funny to boot.

17. Your favorite book not on this list - Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë or Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen.

Wives and Daughters

We watched Wives and Daughters a couple nights ago, which really should be called Wives and Daughters and Fathers and Sons and Townsfolk and Gentry and How They Live...or maybe just Relationships. I had seen this movie before, as well as read the book, but it had been my first exposure to the author, Elizabeth Gaskell. This time it was a little different, as I am currently enamoured with North and South by the same author.

The plots are very different in place and character, but also in treatment. W&D is considered Gaskell’s masterpiece: it has an elegantly and superbly crafted plot, every one of the vast cast of characters is memorable, and the main character is endearing. N&S had a simple story, though it is more beautiful than W&D IMHO, with few main characters and no surprises. N&S was about how the characters get to the destination; W&D doesn’t let you know the destination until you’re there. In the end, they are vastly different but equally enjoyable stories.

The one thing that binds them together is Gaskell’s treatment of characters. Like Anthony Trollope, she doesn’t allow herself a full villain, but creates very human characters and treats them with sympathy. N&S really had no dislikable characters, and W&D’s Mr. Preston and Hyacinth Kirkpatrick are quite understandable. None of the good characters are infallible also, but it is how they let their mistakes shape their character that separates the good from the bad. A lovely undercurrent of forgiveness and redemption is throughout the stories. In N&S it is limited to one relationship, but W&D is chock full of them and they all need forgiveness.

First there is the relationship of the new Mrs. Gibson and her daughter and stepdaughter; then Mr. Gibson and his daughter and stepdaughter, and then the relationship of the daughter and stepdaughter to each other. In the other family, there is Squire Hamley and his two sons, also Mrs. Hamley and her sons, and then the sons with each other. Then there are the aristocratic Cumnors and how they relate to the “lower” folk, and the ordinary townsfolk who complete the picture. All of these relationships intermingle with each other, and the outcomes are uncertain until the end, but they all revolve around the main character: Molly Gibson.

The people making the movie picked an excellent actress for Molly, who is very quietly pretty and ingenuous looking, and who quite accurately pales in beauty when compared to her beguiling stepsister Cynthia. Like Fanny of Mansfield Park, Molly is the only constant one of the bunch, and her good and quiet influence both soothes everyone else’s relationships and makes them all love her. And though she is put upon by some of them, in the end they do good to her because she was good to them, and it all ends well. This was yet another long BBC drama that was well worth the watching and owning.

Books I've Read

Unlike others in my family who read piles and piles of books for pleasure, I was only able to finish a handful for my own enrichment. I did also get to read several horse books to my horse-loving daughter, and I would say that was as much for my enjoyment as for hers! (Loved Misty, Stormy, Sea Star, but not Misty's Twilight) And I also have read countless piles of picture books to the little ones. But that is also for my pleasure; especially getting to share a loved story with Emma Darcy for the first time.

Nobody's Girl by Hector Malory - I found this book in a warehouse of discarded library books. I didn't recognize the title or author but it looked like it might be a good book. I opened the cover and read that it
had been awarded honors in France so I figured it was worth a try. I loved it from the first chapter. It is the story of a young girl who is orphaned and must find her relatives, who she believes will not accept her. This
girl is brave, resourceful and hardworking. Definitely a keeper.

Nobody's Boy by Hector Malory - After reading Nobody's Girl, I found an inexpensive copy of the first book Malory wrote. Another great story, but since I had read the other one first, I could guess the ending prematurely in the story. If you read these, start with the Boy and then read the Girl.
Another example of exemplary character and old-fashioned determination and hard work. Great read!

Preparing Sons to Provide for a Single Income Family by Steve Maxwell - I have 4 sons and so I was anxious to read this book to glean ideas. Much of it is best applied to fathers (unfortunately for me) but there were some good ideas that helped me see how I could direct my sons. A large chunk of the book deals with building good character and a good work ethic. I was definitely disappointed at the lack of practical examples, though. There are comments made through out the book about his sons buying their own homes, etc. yet we are not told many specifics on how this happened. A lot more stories of real young men earning real money would have been helpful.

Susanna Wesley - This is a biography in the Sower Series. I had heard wonderful things about Mrs. Wesley and so I was hoping this would tell me about her and inspire me. The writing in this book was quite poor. I am
told that most of the series is good, but I have only read 2 books from the series and both were very poorly written. (The other was a George Washington bio) The only reason I kept reading was I was amazed at the turn
of events in her life and wanted to know what else could happen to her. I wasn't very inspired, and it was hard to endure the writing but I would love to read a better bio of her if someone knows of one.

Royal Road to Romance by Richard Halliburton - I was pre-reading this for my son who is a geography fanatic. The geography parts are wonderful but Mr. Halliburton is a young, single man traveling the globe in search of romantic places...well, he meets a few ladies. It was written in the 1930's so nothing very scandalous takes place, but the tone of carefree love and relationships bothered me. What was truly shocking to me was his horrible racial and cultural slurs. Anyone who was different from him was inferior and he spoke of many people disrespectfully. He also broke the law extensively, which allowed him to experience amazing sights, and ultimately to write this book, but still it bothered me as a Christian adult and I certainly wouldn't want a young boy to read it.

Cotillion by Georgette Heyer - My dear daughter asked me to read this one and I totally loved it! Fantastic book. Being somewhat stupid about names in books, I should have written down all the characters in the first chapter so I could keep them straight, but half way through I was doing all right. The humor was SO good, it just screamed to be made into a movie...like "The Importance of Being Earnest." Well, I don't have loads of money to produce a movie, and I doubt someone else will do it, but the book was wonderful nonetheless!

Suspense and Austen: Part 2

Suspense and Austen, Part 2: What’s up with Mansfield Park?

Of all Austen’s books, the ending of Mansfield Park is the least easiest to guess. In Part 1 of this post, I discussed the suspense value of all the books, and why Mansfield Park has so much suspense value: the character of Henry Crawford.

He seems nearly the ideal Austen hero. He complements the temperament of Fanny, is well situated (and she has no fortune), has wit, and has family that might disapprove. However, he is dissolute, flirting with all the girls, and lacking strong principles. Yet, Mansfield Park has all the ingredients for Henry Crawford’s reformation as well. Fanny has strong enough principles and morals to teach him, his bad character is said to be caused by poor moral training rather than an bad temperament, Fanny’s dislike of him is immediate (usually a sign of ill judgment in Austen), and he is willing to learn better under Fanny’s teaching. He is also given as much time and thought as Fanny’s eventual husband, Edmund Bertram.

Edmund, on the other hand, does not seem ideal. He’s prosy and almost priggish, with a tendency to be more older-brotherly than friendly. His admiration for Mary Crawford shows poor judgment, though his appreciation of Fanny is admirable, and he is, like Fanny, too grave and solemn. It is remarkable, then, that Edmund and not Henry should marry Fanny at the end. The setup appears all in Henry’s favor, up to his trying to change and being kind to her family in Portsmouth. To be sure, his announcement of a good deed is not like, say, Brandon or Darcy’s letting their character show by itself, but then, Henry is more open and not fully reformed yet.

But it would be an easy task for Austen, one would think, to have Henry reform completely under Fanny’s influence, enough so that she can love him. Of course, then one has to think of Fanny’s love for Edmund. He cannot marry Mary Crawford unless she reforms, which would be too perfect for Austen, but she could have had Fanny grow to love Henry and become a sister to the heartbroken Edmund. There would be enough unhappiness while enough reasonable happiness to merit Austen, so the question is: why didn’t she do it that way?

While we can imagine that Fanny and Edmund will be happy together, could not Fanny have been just as happy if not happier loving a reformed Henry Crawford? She would make a fine mistress of Everingham with her practicality and talent for household tasks; and Henry, being inclined himself to company and entertaining (and providing that he truly loves Fanny), would make it almost unnecessary for her to be much in company. And as a perfect Austen marriage of two temperaments usually turns out, she would likely become more confident in company, while he would gain more gravity.

Perhaps Austen was planning to do it this way, and then thought the reformed rake plot too clichéd for her taste, and fell back on Edmund. Perhaps she decided that Henry Crawford was too far gone for her to heal in the space that she had left for him. Perhaps she used author’s prerogative and decided that she liked Edmund better. Perhaps all this speculation is just in my imagination.

And yet, Mansfield Park, of all the books, ends unsatisfactorily for me, and I will always wonder why Austen didn’t do more with Henry Crawford.

Suspense and Austen

It is interesting that of all Jane Austen’s books (sans Northanger Abbey) Pride and Prejudice is the most easily guessable—and yet the least guessed by readers.

Darcy and Lizzy are fated to be together by all conventions of the novel form that Austen chose. Mr. Wickham is not well enough drawn, nor given enough screen time, to be a final match for Elizabeth, neither is Colonel Fitzwilliam: Darcy is the only male given enough space for that. Which is strange in her most praised book, for Jane Austen is very good with suspense elsewhere.

In Emma, Mr. Knightley is there from the beginning, but such mystique and charm surrounds Frank Churchill that he might very well be seen as a match for Emma. In Sense and Sensibility, Willoughby is so well portrayed as Marianne’s soul mate, and Colonel Brandon portrayed as the unfortunate tragic suitor, that it seems more likely that Marianne will remain single after Willoughby’s betrayal. In Persuasion, it seems unlikely that Captain Wentworth still cares for Anne, but as there is no other suitor for Anne, there is not as much suspense.

And in Mansfield Park, the suspense element is at its best. Fanny’s two possible mates, Henry Crawford and Edmund Bertram are both inaccessible at the start. Edmund treats her like a sister, and Henry ignores her. Henry grows to love her, but Edmund’s feelings go off in an entirely different direction. Henry seems bad on the outside, but there is a precedent for misunderstandings of people’s character in Austen, so readers are likely to believe in the change that he effects for Fanny. Till almost the end of the book, Henry Crawford seems the most likely choice. Not only is he trying to change for Fanny, but her affections, placed with Edmund, are both unrequited and could almost be termed a girlish crush.

Another thing in Henry’s favor is his character. Austen loves the combination of two people of different temperaments in her matches. Lizzy and Darcy, Emma and Knightley, Catherine and Tilney, Anne and Wentworth, Marianne and Brandon. Even among her minor characters, the best marriages are of different temperaments: Jane and Bingley, Jane Fairfax and Frank, Harriet and Robert Martin, Louisa and Captain Benwick. Of all the marriages, Elinor and Edward Ferrars are the most similar. Henry Crawford has the advantage of being the complement to Fanny’s character: she is solemn, he is light; she is prone to depression; he is too optimistic; she feels deeply and hurts deeply, he get over things more quickly; she is reserved, he is outgoing. It would be a match very much like Henry Tilney and Catherine Morland’s, only that Henry Crawford has character flaws.

So all the way through Mansfield Park, neither Edmund nor Henry takes the most prominent position as Obvious Future Mate, and the suspense is high.

In Pride and Prejudice, though, Lizzy’s choices are to remain single or marry Darcy. Since there is so much mystique about him, and also because the book would be rather pointless if Lizzy did not marry (Fanny could remain single and Mansfield Park would not be a disappointment), Darcy is destined for Lizzy. Pride and Prejudice is close to perfection as far as plots go; the only thing it needs is a stronger rival for Lizzy’s affection.

When thinking again on Fanny and Edmund and Henry of Mansfield Park, I wonder if Henry was Austen’s choice for Fanny’s husband at one time. More on this in Part 2 of this post.

Thornton vs. Darcy

In thinking on the similarities and differences between North and South and Pride and Prejudice, I spent some time on the characters of Mr. Thornton and Mr. Darcy. While in North and South, Margaret is the Darcy figure, Thornton has many similarities to him as well: being the first to fall in love (against his will), having a mother figure who disapproves, proposing and being rejected in much the same manner as Darcy, and doing a service for Margaret much like Darcy rescuing Lydia from disgrace.

But Mr. Thornton seems less noble and worthy than Darcy to many readers, even though we see what he is thinking and know his good intentions, and I wondered why.

When I looked into it, Mr. Thornton does more unselfish things than Darcy, for good reasons, yet readers are just as likely to dislike him as much as Darcy is first disliked. There must be a reason for this, and I think it is
the amount of screen-time. Through much of Pride and Prejudice, Darcy is offstage, and we get only a couple glimpses into his thoughts. However, in North and South, Mr. Thornton is given almost as much time as Margaret herself, and we get all his thoughts. One would think, in Pride and Prejudice, that if we saw Darcy's thoughts, we would like him better, but if Mr. Thornton is anything to go by, apparently we wouldn't.

One of the things that makes Mr. Thornton unlikable is his reaction to Margaret's refusal. He is angry, bitter, and cold to her, especially after he is jealous of a supposed suitor, and for a long time does not accept the justice of her objections to him. He is constantly near to Margaret, as they live in the same town, and though he avoids her as much as possible, the nearness makes it worse. Darcy, however, is out of Elizabeth's presence for four months after the failed proposal, so we do not see how he takes it. And when we do meet up with him again, he has learned his lesson so much so that he seems very humble and likable. Mr. Thornton has no such distance to help him. We see every stage of his disappointment, and at first it's not very pretty. He is, after all, only human, and Darcy never had a rival, imagined or not. (There is a small, but telling, remark of Darcy's, that he wants his letter to Lizzy to be destroyed, because "When I wrote that letter, I believed myself perfectly calm and cool, but I am since convinced that it was written in a dreadful bitterness of spirit." This seems to me a hint that his reaction was much the same as Mr. Thornton's.)

But despite all this, which might make us dislike Thornton, he is overall more "good" than Darcy. Even in his most proud moments, he thinks the best of the Hales and Margaret, and does good to them even when he thinks he despises Margaret. When he rescues her from a situation that could ruin her (like Lydia's debacle in Pride and Prejudice), he does it out of gentlemanly principle, not particular interest in Margaret's well-being. A marked contrast to Darcy's rescuing of Lydia, which is done, he admits, thinking "only of [Elizabeth]" and her love. It is unlikely that Darcy would send fresh fruit to Mrs. Bennet if she was ill, or rescue Lydia from Wickham if he did not care for Elizabeth. And though Mrs. Hale is about as silly as Mrs. Bennet (to Thornton, at least), Thornton never despises her, and is genuinely kind to the family (and makes his mother be polite to them).

With all this evidence in his favor, you would think that people would like Thornton just as much, if not more than, Darcy. But among the people I have talked to who have read the book, very few of them think Thornton as "good" as Darcy, and a pretty large chunk dislike him greatly. It is strange that seeing that one unpleasant stage in his affection should influence readers so, if my surmise is correct. Apparently, part of Darcy's appeal is his mysteriousness.

<>[My dad made a really good comment, so I thought I'd add it to the post:
"I would agree with your point about seeing all of Thornton's thoughts and actions after the refusal. It is even more interesting in that Thornton was under a lot of stress due to a failing business while Darcy was sitting fat and happy without a care in the world save for his unrequited love of Elizabeth. Though gruff on the exterior, Thornton's heart was much bigger and not just for Margaret!"]

Carnival of Homeschooling is up!

http://homeschooling.about.com/b/a/216371.htm

Check out the Father's Day theme in this week's Carnival of Homeschooling!

I was especially touched by the post at Principled Discovery.

Donna

What? We're out of fly swappers?

The Queen has a funny habit of using the wrong words. At the samurai party, her kimono belt was a boby (obi). She constantly says that we're going to the library to "buy" books, and Goldilocks turns into "Lollipops". It's very cute, and sometimes hilarious. Yesterday, The Queen found a fly on the window, and ran to the kitchen shouting "Mom! Mom! Get the fly swapper quick!"

Oh, and apparently, Frank the spider has two brothers now, William and George (who was apparently upgraded from a potato bug to a spider; it's fascinating, insect politics)

Blessing Others with Used Curriculum

Blessing Yourself and Others With Used Curriculum

I hear it all the time in homeschooling circles. "I have so much curriculum
on my shelves that I don't even use." The vast majority of us have WAY more
than we could ever use in our homes, yet we continue to buy new curriculum
that is just too good to pass up! The worst part of this cycle is the guilt
that goes with those piles of wonderful books. This guilt is like a ball
and chain around our ankles, weighing us down and often negatively effecting
our homeschool. Ladies, it is time to let go of the guilt and free
ourselves from this burden! I have some ideas that I'd like to share that I
hope will bless you as well as bless others.

#1 - You need to know that nearly every homeschooler has more curriculum
than they can use.

This is normal because we all love our children and want to give them the
very best education we can. Homeschooling often creates a love of learning
in us as well as our children so we get excited about all the wonderful
curriculum choices! I know ladies who started homeschooling before it was
legal in this state and their choices in curriculum were limited to
workbooks from Safeway! These ladies had little curriculum to work with yet
they created a wonderful learning environment in their homes and their
children grew up and now have successful lives. All without KONOS,
Math-U-See, or Apologia Science! Over the last 15 years I have seen the
homeschooling market explode with choices. It can be overwhelming to anyone
(especially new homeschoolers) as we get caught in this whirlpool of options
and easily get drowned.

#2 - It is impossible to teach your child everything they need to know.

Yes, your child will have gaps in their education; we all do, even those of
us educated by the government schools. The key to a good education is not
the quantity of knowledge but creating the desire to learn and the ability
to find knowledge all throughout your life. When it comes to homeschooling
we want the very best for our child. We think we will teach our children
French, Spanish, Latin, Greek and perhaps American Sign Language, too. Is
that realistic? No, and trying to do it will certainly burn out our child
and ourselves! The love of learning will quickly be squelched if we
discourage our children with too much. Plus our creative energy is stolen
away when we are stressed and overwhelmed and the joy of homeschooling
disappears. The delicate balancing act of how much to do in our homeschool
often takes years to achieve (and then it changes each year, too!) and many
new homeschoolers will quit before they learn the correct balance for their
families. Some advice: Be flexible, adjust each year, adjust for each
child, and don't compare your child, family or homeschool to others. Then
once you find something that works, stick with it and avoid second guessing
yourself when something new comes along. It is better to do less and do it
well.

#3 - You cannot relive the past and it is a waste of energy to try.

Whether a curriculum purchase was good or not is irrelevant now that it is
made. It is time to decide what to do with what you have already purchased.
You will hopefully learn from this experience, but wallowing in the past is
counter-productive. You cannot go back and change the past, but you can
make the future brighter.

#4 - Keeping clutter around your home is an energy drain.

I am sure nearly all homeschoolers have read a book on clutter and home
organization, so I won't belabor this point. You know that a simplified
home is easier to keep clean, easier to get the most out of, easier to live
in. The same is true of your homeschool. Keeping the curriculum essentials
to a minimum makes them easier to find, easier to use, easier to keep track
of, and easier to get the most out of. You will need to collect what you
are actually using, (and what is really working!) evaluate what you will
really use this year (be realistic) and bless your children and yourself by
letting go of the rest. If a curriculum isn't working for your child, admit
it and move on. It doesn't matter how much you spent on it if it's killing
your child's joy and stressing you out. There is another child somewhere
who would love that same program!

#5 - There are many people who could be blessed by you if you would only let
go of your stuff.

Homeschoolers often forget that there is someone out there who is looking
for the very curriculum that you have and aren't using. Many times
homeschoolers are single income families who cannot afford new curriculum
and need to buy used items. New homeschoolers may not know what they want
to use and by buying used curriculum they can test drive something without
the huge outlay of money. Don't you see how you can bless some other family
with your surplus?

#6 - Decide how to easily get rid of your extra curriculum.

If you make it difficult, you may not do it. Check around at your local homeschooling
meeting and perhaps you can find someone to give your curriculum to. Think
how happy they would be! This is the time of year for used curriculum sales
that are already organized by someone else. Sell off your extras or just
give it away. The internet makes it very easy to connect with other
homeschoolers and sell or give away your curriculum. Sometimes you can find a used
curriculum store where you can take your
stuff and get credit to buy what you need for next year! Depending on your
priorities (joy factor, financial, time, practicality, etc.), you can decide
how best to bless others, but don't hold back. Just do it! Once you are
released of that extra weight, you will feel wonderful as you soar into your
next year of homeschooling!

Comfort books

I don't eat for comfort, I read. Sometimes, when you're feeling low, nothing but some fluffy reading will do. It has to be the right fluff: not too intellectual, definitely not deep-thought-provoking, laugh-out-loud funny, and cozy.

My favorite for this is James Thurber. I don't understand what's humorous about some of his stories, but the rest of them hit the right spot. I can feel only happy after reading Thurber. Why he is my first choice is that he comes in small doses, essays and short stories mostly. My favorite of his collections is Lanterns and Lances, which has a lot of lingual essays. But other favorites of mine are the essays "The Macbeth Murder Mystery", "The Topaz Cufflinks Mystery", "Guessing Game", "A Dozen Disciples", "An Outline of Scientists", and "Food Fun for the Menfolk". I could think of more if I tried, I'm sure, but you will find most of these in 92 Stories.

My second choice is Georgette Heyer, but she's second because once I start something of hers, I don't want to put it down. Not all of her books are good, though. Here are the ones I have liked: Cotillion, The Grand Sophy, The Unknown Ajax, A Blunt Instrument, Talisman Ring, A Civil Contract, Powder and Patch, Arabella, Sylvester, and Faro’s Daughter.

My third choice would be Wodehouse. I haven't read much of him, but his Jeeves and Wooster books are perfect fluff. My favorite so far is The Code of the Woosters, but Very Good, Jeeves and Right Ho, Jeeves were great, too.

Douglas Adams wrote a hilarious "trilogy" of humorous science fiction books, the first one (and the best) being The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

Jane Austen and Anthony Trollope are comforting and cozy and often funny, but they also have parts that make you think. For the most comforting and funny, though, try Northanger Abbey and Barchester Towers.

What do others read for comfort?

Where were you, what were you doing...?

I was hoping someone would tag me for this. Thanks Elinor!


Where were you, what were you doing...

20 Years Ago: June 5 1986

1. Um...I was nonexistent. ;-)


15 years ago: June 5 1991

1. I was two years old and had a sibling for the first time.
2. We lived where we do now, except three miles away, in a house with awful carpet.


10 Years Ago: June 5 1996

1. I was seven years old, had three brothers, and longed for a sister.
2. I was being unschooled by my mom...playing in our yard, reading books, and learning a lot without realizing it.


5 Years Ago: June 5 2001

1. I was twelve and had just finished The Lord of the Rings, which was to be my passion for the next four years, and waiting for the movie.
2. I had a sister finally, two years old, and she was adorable!
3. I loved school, and spent all my free time reading
4. I had just discovered the internet.


3 Years Ago: June 5 2003

1. Purring Piggy was nine months pregnant and we were all excited.
2. I was fourteen and loved fantasy excessively.
3. I was doing Olympic-style fencing, and was in love with the Middle Ages.
4. I was doing Ambleside's Year 7.


1 Year Ago: June 5 2005

1. I was 16 years old and immersed in Austen and Bronte.
2. Emma Darcy was two years old and enchanting our house.
3. I was on my second year of gardening and wondering why the beet leaves were turning brown (still don't know why)
4. I had never heard of a blog before.


So Far This Year

1. I've read 103 books, and enjoyed most of them.
2. I've discovered Gaskell, Trollope, and murder mysteries (thus adding to my huge booklist)
3. I've been immersed in the eighteenth century and wondering why I preferred the Middle Ages for so long.
4. I've written 145 posts to this blog, and have been reading about twenty others that have enriched my life.
5. I've made three new internet friends.


Tomorrow

1. I hope to work on Für Elise and Moonlight Sonata.
2. I really need to finish Cranford!


Next Week

1. Purring Piggy and I will go to a homeschool convention.


In the Next Year

1. I will be headed towards Running Start and college.
2. I will hopefully have finished the Year 9 and 10 free reading list.


In the Next Minute

1. I'm going to read more blogs

A Room With a View

Because I'm trying to find short books to read, I picked as my first Forster book A Room With a View, rather than A Passage to India. It was a pretty sort of story, though it felt disjointed at points, but the worldview was quite skewed. From what I understood, the whole point of the book was that love (passion) cannot be helped, cannot be overcome, and is eternal. A lovely idea, I'm sure, but not very realistic. I prefer books like A Civil Contract, which, though perhaps more fluff-like, has almost the opposite (and therefore a more correct) view on love, while being just as lovely a story.

A book-lover's Odyssey

People who think that book-lovers are sedentary folk have obviously never tried being one.

The first step is the getting of the books. You stand in line for an hour or so outside a booksale, and when the time comes, you rush in with heart beating rapidly with excitement. If it is sorted by section, you rush about, frantically trying to find the section you desire, and then bob and weave through the aisles until you arrive, breathless, to the spot. You browse the table, grabbing titles that jump out at you, until you realize that you can’t hold anymore, whereupon you squeeze out of the aisle and run as fast as you can to a corner, where you put the selected books in a box and run back for more. After many more trips, your feet ache, your neck aches, and your excitement is dimmed in such aching reality. You sort through your books, remember that you own a few of them already, and rush off to return them (after noticing that the sale is nearly over and you haven’t bought the books yet). You stop halfway and realize that you took the wrong pile, whereupon you return muttering under your breath, and finish the job properly. Then you carry or push your boxes down the long line to the counter, where you count and pay for them, and then must carry them, box by box, the 1/4 of a mile to your vehicle, which distance feels proportionally longer with each trip, so that by the eighth box you have added an extra 9 psychological miles to the marathon of navigating the sale itself. The quiet drive home may or may not atone for this.

Once reaching your home, you must tote the boxes in the house and catalog them into your database. Very likely, your computer is on the second floor while your library is on the first floor, thereby requiring the carrying of boxes up the outside stairs, and then down the inside stairs once the cataloging is complete. After the boxes are downstairs, you must start unloading them onto the shelves, and realize that you must move at least 5 shelves of books to make room. Since this task involves the carrying of hundreds more books, you are wretchedly tired at the end of the task. The satisfaction of a well-ordered library may or may not atone for this.

While organizing your library, you see four score or so books that you want to read, and make several trips up the stairs afterwards with them (your bedroom is never conveniently near to the library). Upon reaching your bedroom, you see that there is no space for the books you have just brought because of the mini-collection of borrowed books from your local library. You quickly go through and remove the books you have read, placing them in a bag to return to their proper home. This involves carrying more bags up the steps and into the library where you load them into the book chute. Failure to resist the allure of books free for the taking of those with library cards, you carry a large pile of new books to borrow to the counter, where the librarian (who knows you well), automatically goes to the holdshelf and herself removes a large pile of books that are reserved for you. You give a dismayed glance at your already-full bags, and ask to borrow a couple more (resolving secretly never again to put more than four tomes of a thousand pages on hold at once). You drag your hoard to the vehicle, and must carry them upstairs again when you arrive at home.

Deciding that it is time to let your duplicate books have a good home, you post them for sale, and get several buyers. This involves putting your for-sale books in a special spot (which is never on the same floor as the computer) and taking the printed orders to meet them. After carrying a couple orders up the stairs, you realize that in the dimness of light (electricity is hard to pay for while booksales exist) you mistook one of the names of the books, and must drag your complaining feet back down to correct the mistake. Once the order is boxed up, you must carry the heavy boxes to the post office to mail them. The small profit may or may not atone for this.

You return home groaning over the past days, and go to the kitchen to heat up your teapot. Before the pleasant whistle sounds, you retrieve a heating pad for your back, and pick a nice book off of your shelf. The tea brews, the pad soothes, the armchair creaks, the pages crinkle (such lovely old pages!), and you sigh with true enjoyment. Finally...there is rest.

Miscellany

This is shameful. I like directors who don't hold themselves slave to the original, but this is waaaay to far. "Jane Austen most likely made it backstory for a reason."

I never really appreciated mothers who rock fussy babies until yesterday. I was babysitting a ten-month old, who was very clingy, and had decided that I was the least scary of our family. He didn't like it when I sat down, so I found myself walking around for two hours with a baby who was on the verge of tears. There is nothing quite like it, and I have higher respect now for my mother, and others, who rocked us when we were small.

Oh weather? Weather? It is June now, did you know? That means you can stop raining. Rain is good...but not for a whole week.

While at the lunch table two days ago, I learned something new about my siblings:

Adaon: ...Iceman, do you realize how poisonous those are?
MTW: Yeah, you could kill Frank!
MerryK: Who on earth is Frank?
Adaon: He's a spider that we've been feeding bugs to.
MerryK: You named him?
MTW: Yeah, and we fed him George the Potato Bug.
MerryK: (shakes head and sighs)

Books read in May

The Inklings by Humphrey Carpenter (May 2)
I just loved this biography.

The Oxford Guide to Word Games by Tony Augarde (May 3)
This book I picked up because I thought it would be interesting, but once started, I didn't want to put it down. It is rare that a non-fiction book grips me so.

The Black Dudley Murder by Margery Allingham (May 3)
Albert Campion would drive me insane in real life, but in fiction he's rather enjoyable. One of the wonders of literature, I suppose.

More Book Lust by Nancy Pearl (May 4)

Q’s Legacy by Helene Hanff (May 4)

A Landscape With Dragons (reread) by Michael O’Brien (May 5)

A Passion For Books edited by Harold Rabinowitz (May 7)

Great Books of the Christian Tradition by Terry Glaspey (May 7)

Jenna Starborn by Sharon Shinn (May 15)
A science fiction retelling of Jane Eyre. It followed a little too closely to the story to be a good retelling, but it was light and enjoyable and would be a good way to get non-classic-lit people to enjoy the story, I think.

That Hideous Strength by C. S. Lewis (May 17)
I finally finished this book after putting it down three different times. I hoped it would pay off, but I really didn't enjoy it at all.

Excessively Diverted by Juliette Shapiro (May 17)

Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. (May 18)

Whose Body by Dorothy Sayers (May 18)
Lord Peter Wimsey is a wonderful creation...I wonder why Tolkien and Lewis didn't like him. He reminds me rather of Sir Percy Blakeney.

Galileo’s Daughter by Dava Sobel (May 20)
I prefer reading fiction, but if not, then biographies. This one was excellent, though I prefer Longitude.

Northanger Abbey (reread) by Jane Austen (May 23)

Bath Tangle by Georgette Heyer (May 24)

North by Northanger by Carrie Bebris (May 25)
The newest Mr. and Mrs. Darcy Mystery. The mysteries aren't very elaborate, but I love her characterizations. I laughed out loud in several spots for this one, which is my favorite of the three so far.

A Blunt Instrument by Georgette Heyer (May 26)
Neville Fletcher is a bona fide Heyer character, and I love him. I didn't know if I would like her mysteries, but this one tickled me pink.

North and South (reread) by Elizabeth Gaskell (May 29)
Even better the second time. I just watched the excellent BBC adaptation, and when rereading the book, recognized many scenes from the movie that I thought were added, but were not.

Isaac Bickerstaff by Richard Steele (May 30)