#Should I use Atom or sublime?

[mariacallous]

As he witnessed the first detonation of a nuclear weapon on July 16, 1945, a piece of Hindu scripture ran through the mind of J. Robert Oppenheimer: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.” It is, perhaps, the most well-known line from the Bhagavad Gita, but also the most misunderstood.

Oppenheimer, the subject of a new film from director Christopher Nolan, died at the age of 62 in Princeton, New Jersey, on February 18, 1967. As wartime head of the Los Alamos Laboratory, the birthplace of the Manhattan Project, he is rightly seen as the “father” of the atomic bomb. “We knew the world would not be the same,” he later recalled. “A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent.”

Oppenheimer, watching the fireball of the Trinity nuclear test, turned to Hinduism. While he never became a Hindu in the devotional sense, Oppenheimer found it a useful philosophy to structure his life around. “He was obviously very attracted to this philosophy,” says Stephen Thompson, who has spent more than 30 years studying and teaching Sanskrit. Oppenheimer’s interest in Hinduism was about more than a sound bite, Thompson argues. It was a way of making sense of his actions.

The Bhagavad Gita is 700-verse Hindu scripture, written in Sanskrit, that centers on a dialog between a great warrior prince named Arjuna and his charioteer Lord Krishna, an incarnation of Vishnu. Facing an opposing army containing his friends and relatives, Arjuna is torn. But Krishna teaches him about a higher philosophy that will enable him to carry out his duties as a warrior irrespective of his personal concerns. This is known as the dharma, or holy duty. It is one of the four key lessons of the Bhagavad Gita, on desire or lust; wealth; the desire for righteousness, or dharma; and the final state of total liberation, moksha.

Seeking his counsel, Arjuna asks Krishna to reveal his universal form. Krishna obliges, and in verse 12 of the Gita he manifests as a sublime, terrifying being of many mouths and eyes. It is this moment that entered Oppenheimer’s mind in July 1945. “If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the mighty one,” was Oppenheimer’s translation of that moment in the desert of New Mexico.

In Hinduism, which has a non-linear concept of time, the great god is involved in not only the creation, but also the dissolution. In verse 32, Krishna says the famous line. In it “death” literally translates as “world-destroying time,” says Thompson, adding that Oppenheimer’s Sanskrit teacher chose to translate “world-destroying time” as “death,” a common interpretation. Its meaning is simple: Irrespective of what Arjuna does, everything is in the hands of the divine.

“Arjuna is a soldier, he has a duty to fight. Krishna, not Arjuna, will determine who lives and who dies and Arjuna should neither mourn nor rejoice over what fate has in store, but should be sublimely unattached to such results,” says Thompson. “And ultimately the most important thing is he should be devoted to Krishna. His faith will save Arjuna’s soul." But Oppenheimer, seemingly, was never able to achieve this peace. “In some sort of crude sense which no vulgarity, no humor, no overstatements can quite extinguish,” he said, two years after the Trinity explosion, “the physicists have known sin; and this is a knowledge which they cannot lose.”

“He doesn’t seem to believe that the soul is eternal, whereas Arjuna does,” says Thompson. “The fourth argument in the Gita is really that death is an illusion, that we’re not born and we don’t die. That’s the philosophy, really. That there’s only one consciousness and that the whole of creation is a wonderful play.” Oppenheimer, perhaps, never believed that the people killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki would not suffer. While he carried out his work dutifully, he could never accept that this could liberate him from the cycle of life and death. In stark contrast, Arjuna realizes his error and decides to join the battle.

“Krishna is saying you have to simply do your duty as a warrior,” says Thompson. “If you were a priest you wouldn’t have to do this, but you are a warrior and you have to perform it. In the larger scheme of things, presumably, the bomb represented the path of the battle against the forces of evil, which were epitomized by the forces of fascism.”

For Arjuna, it may have been comparatively easy to be indifferent to war because he believed the souls of his opponents would live on regardless. But Oppenheimer felt the consequences of the atomic bomb acutely. “He hadn’t got that confidence that the destruction, ultimately, was an illusion,” says Thompson. Oppenheimer’s apparent inability to accept the idea of an immortal soul would always weigh heavy on his mind.

[savagesneversleepnyc]

THE MAIDENHEAD

EYES SPY A CEILING ABOVE

AND A MEANING WE PUT ON

OUR FACES THAT TAKES US INTO

SPACES WE PLAY AND TOIL HOPING

ONLY TO FIND REST AND WARM GRUEL

IN A GULAG OF OTHER COGS WINDING

DOWN INTO A POINT OF REST

EACH RISING AND FALLING IS THE SOUNDING OF THE MIGHTY BELL

CAST TO LAST FOR ALL TIME YET

CRACKED UPON THE

FIRST HAMMER

KISS

RING THE

OLD TIME STEP INTO

BOOTS AND PARKAS THAT ARE

DIPPED IN A RESINOUS FATTY MEMBRANE

AS THE ECHO OF THE BROKEN BELL’S

REPORTS CLAPS OFF EARS RINGING

IN FEARS AND HUMBLING THE ODD FOLK

TO DROP A HOE AND STRIP NAKED

ONLY TO PLUNGE IN THE TORRENTS

AND WHITEWATER UPSTREAM

POUNDING AGAINST A CURRENT

THAT CARVES FACES INTO GULLIES

AND UNSULLIED SALVATION OF BUTTERFLY STROKES TO MATCH

THE COHO IN A DEATH RACE TO SPAWN

AND TRANSFORM WHAT FLESH THEY HAD

LEFT TO PROTON AND ATOMS ON A PLACID

RIVER BEADS DOWN THE GULCH FROM

MAIDENHEAD

3:26am HOD YARDIE OGE 314

maidenhead

in American English

(ˈmeɪdənˌhɛd)

noun

1. Archaic

maidenhood; virginity

2. the hymen

The repurposing of old world words and expressions is an archaic revival of syntax. The reclamation of antiquated lingo is a device of transformation into assertions we have moved away from in the modern era. The rebirth of old words allows us to be PURE, VIRGIN and UNSULLIED. To remove the brutal and ARCIAC context that is sewn around the collective assumption of this old world expression.

The use also is an attack on those who would RAPE and violate a persons barrier of purity in HUBRIS. Such behavior is a severe and savage thing to take from a person and to then hold. This exchange is permanent and shall bare the highest level of consequence. Not all acts are flat or round but to take in haste and hate is beyond the blindness of kindness I am permitted to levy.

To forgive is sublime, but to turn a blind eye and lie in acts that TAKE a thing that cannot ever be returned, are acts that will be repeated should incursion, termination or expulsion be presented. To shake from the weight of act in consequence is the true MARK OF GUILT. All are allowed salvation, but to knock TWICE and still spill LIES is the PROOF required to rule over acts beyond comprehension. Those who act without consequence shall face the same acts upon themselves in no half measure.

3:48am ON MAIDEN HEAD, PURITY, CONSEQUENCE

[straycatboogie]

2023/08/01 English

BGM: Ryuichi Sakamoto - War & Peace (Cornelius Remix)

I'm still thinking about the troubles about the movies "Barbie" and "Oppenheimer". Indeed, I need to do so with trying to seek for the truth to learn again like a journalist. Therefore I should accept that I am saying my "incomplete" and "rare" opinion at this moment. But I have to say that I have found some opinions as "We Japanese should say that 'We can't allow any atomic bombs' clearly". In this situation, I feel a kind of Devil start whispering as "Really?" or "Is that true?" in me. I think that some Japanese would say that "That atomic bombs were what we needed" or "We should have done that decision to finish that war". Is this a kind of terrible "relativism" or "cynicism"? You would say that "Then, how do YOU think?". I want to say that "No more HIROSHIMAS". It's from the same reason that I can't allow any terrorism or massacre which can kill a lot of innocent people. But, that Devil's whisper comes me as some uncool, but critical replies as "Then, How could we finish that war sooner? Could you suggest any alternative solution?" and "How do you think not to increase victims?". TBH, I am always fighting this kind of whispers every day.

I guess that at that war time their "common sense" or "ethics" had not been updated as now. Indeed, I am just saying from my imagination so I need your alternative opinion, but I guess the concept "peace" couldn't be sublime as now at that time. The era that "war" could be a way of solution for the problems, therefore not be a prohibited thing… But I have to say that this is just a silly speculation. In other words, I am stepping into a silly conspiracy. Now, we know how terrible Auschwitz was. Or Dachau, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki… we can also read "Man's Search For Meaning" (in Japan, we can read "Wildfire"). From them, I can learn that wars must be irrational "physically". But at that time, they couldn't see that the wars must kill weak people meaninglessly as bugs. Could the weak people be "visible"?

But, I also don't want to say that "We Japanese must allow them because they must do that decision to finish the war. Atomic bombs must be needed". Yes, I am really wishy-washy. I am moved so easily by wind's currency. But, even though I try to understand that limit at that time, I think that to criticize that period's primitive common sense from the current time, by the current common sense. To look at that past with keen and critical eyes would mean to look at our footsteps to the current place. How have we walked our way to here (it means the "history"). Accepting "they reached their limit" and "They couldn't choose alternative, better way" with realistic attitude, but returning to the principle of "But, we have to save the dignities of victims. Be human". I believe that is possible. So I don't want to deny the revisionist's old good logic as "Fascists had done good works" or "Hitler had helped some people". Of course, I won't allow the holocaust and also Eugenic thought (I am autistic therefore this thought would hurt me/us). I want to make my logic for the revisionists or cynical people. How can I be real/actual to make my opinion? That's what I am thinking.

Today I worked early. This afternoon, I wrote my poem as usual. This evening, I had time so I read Hisaki Matsuura's essays. I started thinking my proses (in particular, I want to write "essays" or "columns") about the poetry. But I have been writing a journal at every morning and also a poem at every afternoon. This means I have been doing too much output everyday therefore I have to face the lack of inputting. To stop this journal could be a solution… Reading Hisaki Matsuura, I started thinking if I would read his novels and proses more. Write as you think, as you want… Hisaki taught me that truth (by quoting his favorite critic, Roland Barthes). This year, I want to read Proust's "In Search of Lost Time" (Indeed, I would never be able to read it completely). I am also interested in Louis Carroll's poetry… If I have a certain free time, I want to watch great movies about Hiroshima or The Pacific War itself.

Departure at Dusk

A sunset time I enjoyed Lloyd Cole's "No Blue Skies" I remembered the days I had read the novel "High Rise" At that time I had already had two drunken eyes People said what they should, but I believed I must be wise

In Japanese, we write dusk as "the time he can't be seen" The time a owl start flying… Yes, it's what Hegel would mean I had adored to be a writer a long time ago, since I was 14 Troubles happened… but I tried to keep on saving my eyes keen Since this summer of 48, I started this creation series with Muse I am single with no kids, therefore I have nothing to lose Like this creating process, I've enjoyed a private, spiritual cruise

A pen, a notebook, and a smartphone. These are what I need I just keep on living this life passionately, and keep this slow speed I'm now at the dusk time of my life… But I just try to keep my creed

[soulofgita]

'Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds'. The story of Oppenheimer's infamous quote

The line, from the Hindu sacred text the Bhagavad-Gita, has come to define Robert Oppenheimer, but its meaning is more complex than many realise

Article by James Temperton

As he witnessed the first detonation of a nuclear weapon on July 16, 1945, a piece of Hindu scripture ran through the mind of Robert Oppenheimer: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”. It is, perhaps, the most well-known line from the Bhagavad-Gita, but also the most misunderstood.

Oppenheimer died at the age of sixty-two in Princeton, New Jersey on February 18, 1967. As wartime head of the Los Alamos Laboratory, the birthplace of the Manhattan Project, he is rightly seen as the “father” of the atomic bomb. “We knew the world would not be the same,” he later recalled. “A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent.” Oppenheimer, watching the fireball of the Trinity nuclear test, turned to Hinduism. While he never became a Hindu in the devotional sense, Oppenheimer found it a useful philosophy to structure his life around. "He was obviously very attracted to this philosophy,” says Rev Dr Stephen Thompson, who holds a PhD in Sanskrit grammar and is currently reading a DPhil at Oxford University on other aspects of the language and Hindu faith. Oppenheimer’s interest in Hinduism was about more than a soundbite, it was a way of making sense of his actions.

The Bhagavad-Gita is 700-verse Hindu scripture, written in Sanskrit, that centres on a dialogue between a great warrior prince called Arjuna and his charioteer Lord Krishna, an incarnation of Vishnu. Facing an opposing army containing his friends and relatives, Arjuna is torn. But Krishna teaches him about a higher philosophy that will enable him to carry out his duties as a warrior irrespective of his personal concerns. This is known as the dharma, or holy duty. It is one of the four key lessons of the Bhagavad-Gita: desire or lust; wealth; the desire for righteousness or dharma; and the final state of total liberation, or moksha.

Seeking his counsel, Arjuna asks Krishna to reveal his universal form. Krishna obliges, and in verse twelve of the Gita he manifests as a sublime, terrifying being of many mouths and eyes. It is this moment that entered Oppenheimer’s mind in July 1945. “If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendour of the mighty one,” was Oppenheimer’s translation of that moment in the desert of New Mexico.

In Hinduism, which has a non-linear concept of time, the great god is not only involved in the creation, but also the dissolution. In verse thirty-two, Krishna speaks the line brought to global attention by Oppenheimer. "The quotation 'Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds', is literally the world-destroying time,” explains Thompson, adding that Oppenheimer’s Sanskrit teacher chose to translate “world-destroying time” as “death”, a common interpretation. Its meaning is simple: irrespective of what Arjuna does, everything is in the hands of the divine.

"Arjuna is a soldier, he has a duty to fight. Krishna not Arjuna will determine who lives and who dies and Arjuna should neither mourn nor rejoice over what fate has in store, but should be sublimely unattached to such results,” says Thompson. “And ultimately the most important thing is he should be devoted to Krishna. His faith will save Arjuna's soul." But Oppenheimer, seemingly, was never able to achieve this peace. "In some sort of crude sense which no vulgarity, no humour, no overstatements can quite extinguish," he said two years after the Trinity explosion, "the physicists have known sin; and this is a knowledge which they cannot lose.”

“He doesn't seem to believe that the soul is eternal, whereas Arjuna does,” says Thompson. “The fourth argument in the Gita is really that death is an illusion, that we're not born and we don't die. That's the philosophy really: that there's only one consciousness and that the whole of creation is a wonderful play.” Oppenheimer, it can be inferred, never believed that the people killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki would not suffer. While he carried out his work dutifully, he could never accept that this could liberate him from the cycle of life and death. In stark contrast, Arjuna realises his error and decides to join the battle.

“Krishna is saying you have to simply do your duty as a warrior,” says Thompson. “If you were a priest you wouldn't have to do this, but you are a warrior and you have to perform it. In the larger scheme of things, presumably The Bomb represented the path of the battle against the forces of evil, which were epitomised by the forces of fascism.”

For Arjuna, it may have been comparatively easy to be indifferent to war because he believed the souls of his opponents would live on regardless. But Oppenheimer felt the consequences of the atomic bomb acutely. “He hadn't got that confidence that the destruction, ultimately, was an illusion,” says Thompson. Oppenheimer’s apparent inability to accept the idea of an immortal soul would always weigh heavy on his mind.

[skybirdplate]

Do born haber cycle problems

The Born – Haber cycle is based on the Hess' law and its application of ionic solid. Hess's Law: The overall change in energy determined by breaking the process into steps and adding changes in each step. It can be either positive or negative based on the atoms involved and their interaction. The heat of Formation: It is the change in energy when a particular compound is formed from elements.

It is again an input of energy and is always positive. Sublimation Energy: Known as the energy of atomization, it is required to turn the compound from solid to gas while passing through the liquid phase. The magnitude of it is dependent on the electronegativity of the atoms involved in the compound. Dissociation is an endothermic process that requires an input of energy. The electron affinity is known for increasing from left to right and decreasing from top to bottom in a periodic table.ĭissociation Energy: The energy needed to break a compound apart. When used to calculate the lattice energy, one has to subtract the electron affinity and not add it because of the positive value. The energy released is known to have a negative value, but due to the definition of affinity, it is denoted as a positive value. However, there are some exceptions due to the unpredictable stability of completely filled/half-filled orbitals.Įlectron Affinity: The energy released when an electron is added to a neutral ion/atom. Ionization energy is noted to be increasing across the periodic table from left to right, and decreasing from top to bottom. In order to do this, there should be an input of energy, which is why it is always positive. Ionization Energy: The energy required to take off an electron from the neutral ion/atom. There are several other concepts that one has to understand before getting to the Born – Haber cycle and applying it to determine the lattice energy of an ionic solid. A Born-Haber cycle applies Hess’ law to calculate the lattice energy by comparing the standard enthalpy change in the formation of the ionic solid from the elements to the enthalpy that is required to form the gaseous ions from the elements.Įxplain Born - Haber Cycle - Born – Haber Cycle Definition The lattice energy is the enthalpy change involved in the formation of ionic solids from gaseous ions or the energy involved in breaking the ionic solids into gaseous ions. The cycle is mostly concerned with the formation of an ionic solid from the metals (Group I or Group II) when reacted with a halogen or a non-metallic element like oxygen.īorn-Haber cycles are primarily used in calculating the lattice energy which cannot be measured otherwise. The Born-Haber cycle is a classic approach to measure the reaction energies. In order to understand the idea of lattice energy and calculate it, a Born-Haber cycle is used. This is where the Born-Haber cycle allows us to determine and understand the lattice energies of the ionic solids. The lattice energy present cannot be measured. These compounds also have additional stability because of the lattice energy present in its solid structure. The enthalpies required for the formation of the ionic molecules do not account for stability alone.

[mainscompany]

Datagrip sql

Datagrip sql driver#

Datagrip sql full#

Datagrip sql software#

Datagrip sql trial#

Datagrip sql full#

The SQL syntax is standard Spark SQL so we are free to use the full capabilities of the language. This style of working makes it really easy to explore our data as we're building our pipelines. Click on a table to view the records from that component.The DataGrip catalog should be filled in, with each Dataflow should be present as a different schema with each component mapped as a table.

Datagrip sql trial#

DOWNLOAD A 30-DAY TRIAL FOR DATAGRIP One of the most important activities for anyone working with databases is writing SQL. It supports PostgreSQL, MySQL, SQL Server, Oracle, and many other databases. It even analyzes your existing databases and helps you write. DataGrip is a universal tool for dealing with databases. It has auto completion support for SQL language. Although this article will go through the setup. DataGrip is a SQL database IDE from JetBrains. Click the database connection, select “ All schemas”, then hit the "Refresh" icon. Using Ascends JDBC / ODBC Connection, developers can query Ascend directly from SQL tools like DataGrip.

By default DataGrip does not include any schemas.

Switch to the Options tab to enable the connection as "Read-only".

Test the connection to ensure the setup is correct.

Enter the Username and Password from an API Token linked to a Service Account.

Fill in the host with your Ascend domain in the format.

If you encounter difficult connecting, you will likely need to download the Hive Standalone JAR for 2.3.7 from Maven Central and use that JAR instead of the one embedded in DataGrip.

Datagrip sql driver#

The Apache Hive Driver that ships with DataGrip is version 3 and Spark is only compatible up to version 2.3.7. For the data source type, prefer Apache Spark if present, otherwise use Apache Hive. "You get what you pay for" - The paid tools are worth the cost if you can use it to full extent. You can get a connection to SQLite going very easily though, and unlike other databases it doesn't require a server per se (or to be more correct the server is self contained in the driver). To create an instance, run SqlLocalDB create 'DEVELOPMENT' 14.0 -s. A cross-platform IDE that is aimed at DBAs and developers working with SQL databases. You will see a list of available LocalDB instances on the server. What is DataGrip A database IDE for professional SQL developers. Locate SqllocalDB.exe and run the SqllocalDB.exe i command in a terminal. And as a first step, check if your LocalDB instance is ready for a connection. dBeaver - SSMS, Azure Data Studio, Oracle development studio - Snowflake UI, GBQ Builtin UI DataGrip is still a great tool for learning SQL, but there's generally some additional setup involved in getting a server running that they simply don't cover. You can easily connect to your LocalDB instance with DataGrip. The tools native to the system are more than enough. Select the Databricks driver that you added in the preceding step. On the Data Sources tab, click the + ( Add) button. VSCode - Pycharm + DataGripįree tools should not be ignored as they get the job done well. Use DataGrip to connect to the cluster or SQL warehouse that you want to use to access the databases in your Databricks workspace. This means, the development environment should cater to general needs and/or scripting. I'll summarize some of the response:įor general DE needs, a scripted approach seems to be consensus.

Datagrip sql software#

MY RECOMMENDED READING LIST FOR SOFTWARE DEVEL. Toad, data grip, dbeaver etc.Īny recommendations / opinions on IDE & why?Įdit: Thanks for the feedback. Wondering if you should buy Jetbrains DataGrip Learn if its worth the price tag in this super quick review. I have been using sublime and atom as text editors with syntax highlighting but I have been looking into full fledged IDEs e.g. Just curious about the IDE's that other people use.

[lascltrades]

What is the best free code editor for mac

#What is the best free code editor for mac upgrade#

#What is the best free code editor for mac code#

#What is the best free code editor for mac download#

There are many text editors out there why should you spend your time learning about and using Atom?Įditors like Sublime and TextMate offer convenience but only limited extensibility. Keyboard shortcuts make everything smoother.Goto Anything (lightning-fast search/shortcuts).Once you get used to Sublime’s and sublime keyboard shortcuts, you can never leave without them. If you feel confident enough in their product that you’ll like it enough, then you can pay them to support continued development.

#What is the best free code editor for mac upgrade#

You have to deal with upgrade prompts as you open the editor occasionally, but you can use it as long as you wish to evaluate it. The sublime purchase price is $80, but they offer an indefinite, never-ending trial. One of the most significant features users flaunts the ridiculously intuitive keyboard shortcut system. This is because of features like distraction-free writing mode, quick shortcuts/search, split editing, and much more. The UX is probably the tightest of every entry on the list. Maybe the biggest draw is that it puts a premium on user experience.

#What is the best free code editor for mac code#

Sublime Text is a beautiful, feature-rich code editor. Being designed for code, markup, and prose is a big plus. Sublime Text is pretty close to the industry standard for text editors.

Linux (Ubuntu, Fedora, SUSE, Red Hat, and Debian in particular)īefore the release of the Visual Studio Code, I used to work with Sublime Text.

IntelliSense highlighting and autocomplete works like a dream.

It has specific Linux distros for Ubuntu, Fedora, SUSE, Red Hat, and Debian.

It is very lightweight in comparison to other, similarly robust editors.

It is compatible with nearly every programming language.

They have an extensive library of extensions and plugins.

It’s built-in Git (including merge conflicts, diff checking, and modified file tracking from within the editor).

You don’t have to fiddle with them to get them configured well. It works well from the moment you first run it, and the integrated Git and debugger work.

#What is the best free code editor for mac download#

VS Code works great on every platform we’ve tried it on, and there hasn’t been a noticeable difference in performance between the three, either.Įven though VS Code does have a ton of packages you can download to customize the code editor to whatever you want it to be, you don’t have to. If you are a Javascript or TypeScript developer, then VS Code is truly an exception editor. Their support is tremendous, and every month, they are releasing new features to keep up with the latest workflow. Written in Node.js and Electron, you can be sure the code will become outdated or lag behind any time soon. With the VS Code being open-source, that community works exceptionally hard to keep VS Code competitive with the rest of the field. The community support for the VS Code is incredibly passionate, and that works to everyone’s benefit. Not quite an IDE (that’s a separate product altogether), VS Code can take on most of the tasks of the IDE with the right configuration and plugin library. That means that developers on MacOS, Windows, and Linux can use this potent tool. Like most Microsoft products these days, VS Code is available on all the major platforms.

[shoppertonki]

Jupyterlab extension

#Jupyterlab extension install

#Jupyterlab extension free

#Jupyterlab extension install

Is there a specific version of jupyterlab I should be installing? Or maybe the problem is something else altogether? Note that I can successfully install the extension on jupyterlab=1.0.0rc0, however this creates new conflicts between jupyter-server, jupyterlab and tornado. With a few clicks, you can perform any CRUD operation. Mito is a missing pandas extension that we were waiting for years When you start Mito, it shows a spreadsheet view of a pandas Dataframe.

#Jupyterlab extension free

ValueError: The extension "jupyterlab-prodigy" does not yet support the current version of JupyterLab.Īs a third attempt I tried jupyterlab=2.3.0: $ jupyter labextension install jupyterlab-prodigyīuilding jupyterlab assets (build:prod:minimize) Mito is a free JupyterLab extension that enables exploring and transforming datasets with the ease of Excel. Consider upgrading JupyterLab.īut with jupyterlab=3: $ jupyter labextension install jupyterlab-prodigy This means that nodejs or CLI installation activities to use an extension is no longer needed. Installing an extension with JupyterLab is since version 3 possible using the web interface only. However, it seems to support a new version of JupyterLab. JupyterLab extensions Some issues you might face using JupyterLab are excellent solved by an extension. ValueError: No version of jupyterlab-prodigy could be found that is compatible with the current version of JupyterLab. First I installed jupyterlab=2.0.0, then when trying to install the labextension on jupyterlab version 2: $ jupyter labextension install jupyterlab-prodigy Inspired by Gnome Shell Top Bar indicators. Similar to the status bar, the top bar can be used to place a few indicators and optimize the overall space. Jupyter Lab does provide this feature.I'm trying to get the jupyterlab prodigy extension installed but am having some trouble finding the correct version of jupyterlab to use. JupyterLab Top Bar¶ Monorepo to experiment with the top bar space in JupyterLab. However, if you are a user of VS Code, Sublime or Atom, you might also want to directly search what you want to install in a “manager”. In this example, We are plotting a JSON like data with Geometry right in. No Need to read the data or Visualise it with Other desktop software. The GeoSJON extension enables you to plot Geosjon data on the fly inside Jupyter lab quickly. jupyter labextension install using the command line is also my favourite. These are specific tools for rendering maps or geospatial data inside JupyterLab. Most of the online resource will tell you to run the command like the following to install a Jupyter Lab extension. In this article, I’ll introduce 10 Jupyter Lab extensions that I found are very useful to dramatically improve the productivity of a typical data scientist or data engineer. JupyterLab allows the use of extensions, such as notebook table of contents and rendering of custom data formats such as FASTA. Now, even the Jupyter Lab development team is excited to have such a robust and thrive third-party extension community. As the “next-generation” web-based application for Jupyter Notebook, Jupyter Lab provides much more convenient features than its old bother. Note: A clean reinstall of the JupyterLab extension can be done by first running the jupyter lab clean command which will remove the staging and static directories from the lab directory To streamline third-party development of extensions, this library provides a build script for generating third party extension JavaScript bundles I’ll post that talk. If none of these work for you, then refer to the JupyterLab documentation on extensions here and the Git extensions documentation. Install Extensions into JupyterLab Teradata Vantage Modules for Jupyter - 3.3 - Installing the Extensions into JupyterLab from Source - Teradata Vantage. Requirements JupyterLab > 3.0 ( older version available for 2.x) Git (version >2. There are two main ways to install it one might be easier on some computers than others. A JupyterLab extension for version control using Git To see the extension in action, open the example notebook included in the Binder demo. If you are a Data Scientist or a Data Engineer using Python as your primary programming language, I believe you must use Jupyter Notebook. Git for JupyterLab is an official Jupyter Lab extension. Customise Jupyter Lab, an IDE tool, for yourself

[literary-illuminati]

favourite books, or favourite books from this year?

This is too difficult to narrow down to one or two, so here's a top five? (As of the start of September, because this has been sitting in my drafts for a WHILE)

In no particular order

Circe, by Madeline Miller - in terms of prose, Miller might literally be my favorite author writing today. She needs to have written more, please. Just perfectly beautiful and tragic and properly mythic and altogether sublime. Lodged in my head as the canonical telling of the myth of Circe to compare others to.

Downbelow Station, by C. J. Cherryh - I've rambled on about this at length already, but this is the rare piece of SFF that really feels plausible to me? Like, not in the sense of technology, but that there's no main character, that chance and contingency and weight of history matter more than the grand destiny of any individual or family, that the world is fundamentally amoral without being fundamentally malevolent, and just, it reads like it could be the history of the future. That's a really rare accomplishment. Also for what a cultural wasteland the 80s are supposed to have been it really didn't feel dated at all. (I've got two other Cherryh books that have been sitting on my dresser for six months I should really get to)

The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer, by Siddhartha Mukherjee - The acknowledgements for this book mention it was inspired by The Making of the Atomic Bomb, and you can tell (in the best possible way). One of the rare pop-sci books that really feels like it expands you understanding of the world and lifts some small few of the scales from your eyes. Also oddly hopeful and inspiring, for all the horrors (the very, very well-described horrors. I went form barely knowing what leukemia was to having nightmares about it).

Radiance, by Catherynne Valente - I do adore Valente's writing, but this is probably the first full length work of hers I've read that lives up to the novellas and short stories. It coasts by almost entirely on style and aesthetic and how perfectly aimed the character and arc of the protagonist is at me in particular, but my god the style and aesthetic are worth the price of admission. The whole thing should really fall apart under the weight of its pretension, and I really love it for the fact that it doesn't.

India in the Persianate Age, by Richard M. Eaton - A rather dry history text, really, and not one I'd really recommend to someone who just asked me for a book to read. But I've got at least a vague view-from-ten-thousand-feet idea of the shape of history from the medieval era on, and India was (and to a lesser extent is) one of the main remaining gaps. So I'm deeply appreciative for providing an organizing narrative of the region's development to use. And just generally, one of those books that really feels like its filling in little blank spots on the map? Sure it's dry, but just incredibly interesting subject matter and well-argued thesis.

(Honorable Mentions: The Chosen and the Beautiful by Nghi Vo, The Causal Angel by Hannu Rajaniemi, The Jasmine Throne by Tasha Suri)

[blackswaneuroparedux]

We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried. Most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita; Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty, and to impress him, takes on his multi-armed form and says, 'Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.' I suppose we all thought that, one way or another.

- J. Robert Oppenheimer 

As he witnessed the first detonation of a nuclear weapon on July 16, 1945, a piece of Hindu scripture ran through the mind of Robert Oppenheimer: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”. It is, perhaps, the most well-known line from the Bhagavad-Gita, but also the most misunderstood.

Oppenheimer died at the age of sixty-two in Princeton, New Jersey on February 18, 1967. As wartime head of the Los Alamos Laboratory, the birthplace of the Manhattan Project, he is rightly seen as the “father” of the atomic bomb. “We knew the world would not be the same,” he later recalled. “A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent.”

Oppenheimer, watching the fireball of the Trinity nuclear test, turned to Hinduism. While he never became a Hindu in the devotional sense, Oppenheimer found it a useful philosophy to structure his life around. He was obviously very attracted to this ancient philosophy. Oppenheimer’s interest in Hinduism was about more than a soundbite, it was a way of making sense of his actions.

The Bhagavad-Gita is 700-verse Hindu scripture, written in Sanskrit, that centres on a dialogue between a great warrior prince called Arjuna and his charioteer Lord Krishna, an incarnation of Vishnu. Facing an opposing army containing his friends and relatives, Arjuna is torn. But Krishna teaches him about a higher philosophy that will enable him to carry out his duties as a warrior irrespective of his personal concerns. This is known as the dharma, or holy duty. It is one of the four key lessons of the Bhagavad-Gita: desire or lust; wealth; the desire for righteousness or dharma; and the final state of total liberation, or moksha.

Seeking his counsel, Arjuna asks Krishna to reveal his universal form. Krishna obliges, and in verse twelve of the Gita he manifests as a sublime, terrifying being of many mouths and eyes. It is this moment that entered Oppenheimer’s mind in July 1945. “If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendour of the mighty one,” was Oppenheimer’s translation of that moment in the desert of New Mexico.

In Hinduism, which has a non-linear concept of time, the great god is not only involved in the creation, but also the dissolution. In verse thirty-two, Krishna speaks the line brought to global attention by Oppenheimer. "The quotation 'Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds', is literally the world-destroying time. Oppenheimer’s Sanskrit teacher chose to translate “world-destroying time” as “death”, a common interpretation. Its meaning is simple: irrespective of what Arjuna does, everything is in the hands of the divine.

Arjuna is a soldier, he has a duty to fight. Krishna not Arjuna will determine who lives and who dies and Arjuna should neither mourn nor rejoice over what fate has in store, but should be sublimely unattached to such results. And ultimately the most important thing is he should be devoted to Krishna. His faith will save Arjuna's soul.

But Oppenheimer, seemingly, was never able to achieve this peace. “In some sort of crude sense which no vulgarity, no humour, no overstatements can quite extinguish," he said two years after the Trinity explosion, "the physicists have known sin; and this is a knowledge which they cannot lose.”

[balioc]

Responding to this post, in a format that doesn't stick an enormous text wall on everyone's dashboard.

OK. To start with, this is super important:

“This is what we hold to be important because it’s tradition” is not, and has never been, the traditional outlook. It is, as we say, the traditionalist outlook. Or, if you prefer, the LARPer [derogatory] outlook. It is a bastardized, incoherent justification employed only by alienated midwit theorists who are desperately trying to hold onto something that they've already lost and never properly understood. And if you pretend that it is the animating spirit of conservatism, you will fail to understand actual conservatives, very badly -- both in the sense that you're not engaging with their good theorists who have meaningful things to say, and (even more importantly) in the sense that you won't understand the inchoate forces that are driving the rank and file.

The pious man does not pray to God because it is the way of his ancestors. He prays to God because God is good, because he wishes to be saved, because he is overcome with humility and gratitude in the face of his Maker.

The macho man does not hew to his traditional gender roles because they are traditional, and he values tradition so very much. He hews to his traditional gender roles because he wants to be a real man (and not a faggot), and he has a pretty clear picture in his mind of what that means.

When you say "people should do what is good for them," the conservative replies with: Yes, very true, people should do what is good for them. It is good for people to pray to God. It is good for men to be men and for women to be women. That is what goodness is, and if your measurements say otherwise, then your measuring stick is wrong. And he will probably add: But even if we use your warped atomized liberal measure, and just check whether people are happy and "fulfilled" -- which is, again, not actually the same as goodness -- the results of that measurement will still favor my program. It turns out that chasing after every whim doesn't actually make you happier, not in the long run, and being able to rely on the people around you living up to their proper social roles does make you happier. Your principles have created a world where it's normal for women to be mentally ill and normal for children to want to kill themselves; at what point do you admit failure?

And then you get into an argument over what "goodness" means and how you measure it, and soon enough you find that you have incompatible axioms, hooray.

-------------------------------

If you give people the freedom to choose --

-- well, the results will depend a lot on where they started. No one exists in a vacuum, and there is no possible choice that is unfettered by the soul-defining pressures of society.

If you give Amish teenagers the freedom to choose their lifestyle, for example, they will overwhelmingly choose an Amish [extremely conservative] lifestyle rather than anything more modern or more liberal. That's exactly what rumspringa is. This is, in part, because rumspringa is kind of a cruel trick; if you take someone from a smotheringly-communitarian milieu and throw him into atomized modernity with no preparation, then surprise! it's likely to go very badly. But it's also because human beings spend their childhood, in large part, learning what they value -- what things like "goodness" and "beauty" and "admirable conduct" mean. If everything you're raised to value is exemplified by an Amish community, then the "English" world isn't going to measure up very well.

[SIDEBAR: Part of the reason that conservatism failed so badly on a cultural front, in the modern Westernized world, is that the mid-20th-century model of self-righteous capitalized conservatism was so corrupt and so hypocritical that it failed to provide good value even by its own standards. If you teach your kids to value being rich, they're going to leave your conservative community behind to pursue economic opportunity. If you teach your kids to care deeply about what the neighbors think, then when the neighbors start to disagree with you, your kids will too. Etc. In fairness to conservative intellectuals, most of them have realized by now how badly their immediate predecessors shit the bed on this front.]

If you start your people off in a liberalized milieu -- which is to say, with enormous freedom of choice, and very little guidance (or pressure) regarding what they should value --

-- then, yes, it's true, conservatism is going to fail super hard in the marketplace of ideas and lifestyles, virtually no one is going to buy what the trads are selling.

But in the long run, even in the medium run, whatever you value is going to fail just as hard.

Because the completely liberalized marketplace-of-ideas-and-lifestyle is an untended garden, an environment that optimizes ruthlessly for the most competitive memes, and nothing else. In the end it will give you heroin and porn and Cookie Clicker and Twitter dogpiles, and nothing else. Heroin and porn and Cookie Clicker and Twitter dogpiles are the things designed to scratch that basal human urge of [gimme stimulus], and nothing grand or glorious or sublime can match them on that front. All the things that lie beyond that, all the "interconnection and new knowledge and new experiences," all the cathedrals and palaces, all the wonders of science, all the works of art and literature that I would consider worth a damn, require

(a) having your values molded past the baseline of the greedy infant -- by community elders, by wise and clever teachers, by some weird book on which you imprinted, by something; and

(b) cultivating the art of letting those molded values override your basal click-the-cookie instincts.

At which point we start talking about how to do this, and also about which values are best, now that we're in the business of trying to shape people's values to begin with. And this is (at the most abstract level) the conversation with which conservatives can, plausibly, engage in a productive fashion.

-------------------------------

On the object level, I don't think I actually disagree with you, particularly. One of the major problems with conservative ideologies is that their premises make them inflexible; whatever your program is, some portion of the population is going to end up saying "this is really really bad for me," and there are some legitimating myths and moral structures that allow you to work with those people, but "God said so" (etc.) just makes them into implacable enemies. And on an even object-ier level than that, I do in fact care deeply about individual flourishing, and I do think of the individual human mind as the measure of all things, and not having any safety valves for oddballs and deviants is super terrible.

But if you're going to wrestle with powers and principalities, they should be real ones, not shadow puppets.

[script-a-world]

hi, any advice on timeline and era etc stuff? I have dyscalculia so numbers and measurements are meaningless to me and it’s really difficult to figure out how much time should lapse (on a large scale; time periods, millennia, eras, etc, not stuff like in one persons lifespan) between eras and events, especially in regards to political n social n technological etc changes

Feral: That depends. There isn’t one answer. You’re asking for longer time periods than a generation or a lifetime, but for scale, take what’s happening now. How many calamities, major political events, social trends, and changes in technology (and how we interact with it) have happened in the year 2020? Since the year 2016? Since 2008? Since 2001? How are they grouped together or spaced apart? And these are all working on each other. In the USA where I live, the 9/11 attacks absolutely have a direct causal effect with the politics that led to the 2016 election (actually before that a Supreme Court decision in the 2000 election also had an impact on that result), and the results of the 2016 election impacted how COVID has been handled this year. That’s 20 years, so when we’re looking at longer timeframes, we scale up. We see gaps and groupings and there just isn’t a specific “oh every decade/score/century, these types of events happen.”

To quote a particularly relevant introduction on Wikipedia:

This results in descriptive abstractions that provide convenient terms for periods of time with relatively stable characteristics. However, determining the precise beginning and ending to any ‘period’ is often arbitrary, since it has changed over time over the course of history.

To the extent that history is continuous and not generalized, all systems of periodization are more or less arbitrary. Yet without named periods, however clumsy or imprecise, past time would be nothing more than scattered events without a framework to help us understand them.

Eras, of the non-geological or -cosmological sort, or time periods are culturally determined, completely variable in length, and often overlap. For example, the beginning of the Victorian Era, 64 years, (defined by Victoria’s rule of England) of the Anglo-influenced world overlapped with the Antebellum Era, 78 years, (defined by political and social tensions in the lead up to the American Civil War) of the United States, which is also part of the Anglo-influenced world, and then following the end of the Antebellum Era, was the American Civil War, 4 years, and then the Reconstruction Era, 14 years (the first 2 of which are within the Civil War), which are both fully contained within the Victorian Era. Typically, when you are trying to think about eras, think about political rulership, wars, and large scale trends like artistic styles. It may also be helpful to familiarize yourself with the Three-Age System, which can be applied individually on cultures, rather describing trends for the whole world.

What it really comes down to when we think of eras and time periods is almost like a type of pareidolia. People see groupings of like things happening and put this grouping into a bubble of time, which kinda doesn’t actually exist in objective reality and is more or less a group hallucination on a massive scale. It calls to mind what Zeno’s arrow might have actually been trying to describe - not to say that this paradox is infallible, but it’s an interesting thought exercise, especially once you get into the quantum Zeno effect.

Now that I have fully diverged from the question at hand, we’ll get back to it. Let’s look at one technology type and how much time elapses between developments as well as some tie-in technological, social, and political forces that may be acting on the developments or that the developments might be acting on. I’ll also note how this technology traverses the eras of history as I find that looking at one discrete set over time is easier than just trying to look at the big picture. Let’s look at the history of printing.

(With hopes that it will be easier for you to conceptualize, I will use simplified (aka rounded up/down) timeframes written numerically rather than spelled out or via terms like decade or century so at the very least you can compare length of numbers. I’m also going to link as many Wikipedia articles as I can - I like Wikipedia for this because of its incredible cross-indexing and how it strings relevant articles together into a series, often chronologically. If the numbers are still challenging for you, I will summarize without at the end.)

5,520 years ago, the very first form of printing we know about is done with cylinders rolled over wet clay in Sumer in 3500 BCE, the beginning of the Early Bronze Age.

3,700 years later, woodblock printing is developed in China somewhere around 200 CE/AD, just after the end of the Pax Romana in Europe.

700 years later, the next development of printing is movable type, which is developed in China in 1040. 26 years later, on the other side of the world, in 1066 is the Battle of Hastings and the establishment of the Norman Era of rulership in England, in another 20 years, in 1086, the Domesday Book is hand written in 2 volumes: 1 is 764 8”x15” pages, the other 900 8”x11” pages.

400 years later gives us the Gutenburg printing press that is developed in Germany (at the time in the Holy Roman Empire) in 1440. This is during the Renaissance Era; it’s also the Era of Humanism, and often called the Early Modern Period. Martin Luther will write the 95 Theses less than 80 years later and start the Protestant Reformation, largely thanks to the ability for the theses to be easily copied by the printing press and spread quickly.

75 years later we have etching in 1515. 90 years later, the first weekly “true” newspaper, the Relation, begins printing in 1604.

130 years later we have mezzotint in 1642, which is the start of the First English Civil War, which will last for 4 years. Depending on your preference, the Age of Enlightenment either began 5 years before or 40 years later (unless you’re French).

130 years later we have aquatint in 1772. That is right at the beginning of the American Revolution: 2 years after the Boston Massacre; 1 year before the Boston Tea Party; 2 years before the Intolerable Acts and the First Continental Congress; 3 years before Patrick Henry’s “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” Speech (which is printed and shared across the colonies), Paul Revere’s Ride, and the Battle of Lexington & Concord; and finally 4 years before Thomas Paine’s Common Sense is published, the signing of the Declaration of Independence (which is printed and shared across the colonies), Nathan Hale’s execution for treason against the Crown, and Washington’s Crossing of the Delaware.

25 years later lithography is developed in 1796; the year prior Napoleon overthrows le Directoire.

40 years later we have chromolithography in 1837, the year Victoria ascends and the first electric/battery powered locomotive is invented.

5 years later is the rotary press in 1843. The First Industrial Revolution is over.

15 years later is the hectograph in 1860. 1 year later, the American Civil War begins.

15 years later is offset printing in 1875. 1 year before, the first commercial typewriter becomes available. 1 year later is Bell and Watson’s first phone call in 1876.

10 years later is hotmetal typing in 1884.

1 year later is the mimeograph in 1885. 2 years later is Black Monday. 5-10 years later the radio is invented.

20 years later is the photostat and rectigraph in 1907.

4 years later is screen printing in 1911. 3 years later WWI begins in 1914.

10 years later is the spirit duplicator in 1923. The Roaring Twenties.

2 years later is dot matrix printing in 1925. 4 years later is the Great Crash.

10 years later is xerography in 1938, the same year as the first digital computer. 1 year later WWII begins in 1939.

2 years later is spark printing in 1940. 1 year later is the Attack on Pearl Harbor.

9 years later is phototypesetting in 1949. The USSR detonates their first atomic bomb.

1 year later is inkjet printing in 1950. Truman orders the development of the hydrogen bomb. Apartheid becomes law in South Africa.

7 years later is dye-sublimation in 1957. 6 years later, Martin Luther King, Jr. gives his “I Have a Dream” Speech.

12 years later is laser printing in 1969, the summer of which is known for very Very.

3 years later is thermal printing in 1972. The break-in at the Watergate Office Building is this same year and 2 years later Nixon resigns.

14 years later is 3D printing in 1986, the year Pixar Animation is founded and the year after the beginning of the Iran-Contra Affair.

1 year later is solid ink printing in 1987. 2 years later is the invention of the World Wide Web, and the internet as we know it.

4 years later is digital printing in 1991, the same year the USSR dissolved. 2 years before, the Berlin Wall fell.

There have been no significant developments in the history of printing since 1991.

So, let’s look at some averages to help us consume this data. Printing has a history of 5,520 years. It took 3,700 years for another development to occur, and then another 700 years after that - in other words, in the first 4,400 years of printing, there were 3 developments, equalling to an average of 1 every 1,470 years. In the 400 years between 1440 and 1843,  there were 7 developments (average of 1 every 57 years). In the next 100 years between 1860 and 1957, there were 14 developments (average of 1 every 7 years but with 1 year having 2 developments simultaneously). In the next 22 years between 1969 and 1991, there were 5 developments (average of 1 every 4 years).

While the general trend is that the more a technology develops, the faster it develops, a trend is not the whole picture. Consider: in the 90 years of 1796-1885, there were 6 developments, making the average 1 every 15 years. In the 85 years of 1907-1991, there were 15 developments, making the average 1 every 6 years. There has not been a development in the past 30 years! There hasn’t been this large of a gap since 1837, 180 years ago.

In general, without numbers, what I think we can see here is that sometimes a certain development, like the printing press, can usher in a new era, and sometimes reactions to what else is happening in the world can pressure someone into developing something new, but often times, most times, when you look at just one thing under microscope over time, why that thing is produced in this era but not that era has nothing to do with the eras in question. When we create time periods, we’re generally doing it after the fact. No one living under the rule of the Roman Empire in 100 CE was thinking to themselves, “ah yes, the Pax Romana, when we have peace for 200 years!”

So applying all of this to worldbuilding, I see two methods that you can use together, to create a timeline that makes sense and is useful to your storytelling.

Method the first, arbitrarily create time bubbles of various lengths - I recommend the use of index cards for this. Index card A is 7 years; card B is 150 years; card C is 47 years and so on. Then take big ideas and put those onto your cards; use inspiration from real history. “I want the War of the Roses but condensed into 7 years.” “A Mongolian Empire type expansion happens over 150 years.” “There’s a 47 year Renaissance of fascination with Ancient History.” Then take those cards, lay them out into roughly the order in which you want them to occur, maybe overlap them a little, especially if they are happening in different parts of your world. Remember that time is not actually linear and things do not happen in a linear, narrative manner in the real world, so there can be wild leaps; there can be regressions; and you don’t have to follow real world history here - though you may want to the first time as a helpful exercise. It’s also very unlikely that you will ever have to know exactly how many years are between the eras or what the interstitial eras are.

Method the second, list all the major historical events, inventions, etc that you want/need to have happened. Start with what directly impacts your main characters and plot. “MC’s great-grandfather is humiliatingly defeated in battle, casting a pall of embarrassment across the generations following and ultimately putting the MC in the position that she starts in.” “The first great wizard codifies the 10 Laws of the Important Magical Order that the MC is trying to earn her place in.” Put these in an order that makes sense to you, keeping in mind that it’s not going to be a perfect progression. Again, you don’t need to know how many years there are between each event, but if great-grandpa was the last in a very long line of family members allowed to be in the Important Magical Order, then that IMO had to be founded first, and there would probably be some events between these two.

Then, when you have your two timelines, one of era/time periods and one of events, graft them together. You may have to shift some things to make it work, but consider the “feeling” or theme of the eras and what events make sense in relation to those feelings. Additionally would this event be more suited to happening when the era is new and is finding itself or when the era is solidly on course or is it an event that would completely shatter the illusion of the era and usher in a new one? Does it make sense for your great wizard to be codifying her laws in the expansion of an empire, or during a period of relative peace and prosperity in an established empire, or before empires were a thing in this world and few traveled far from home?

Tex: I’ve found that historically important events are caused for roughly two reasons - one, an invention that others capitalize on for an exponential growth into other inventions/social uses, and two, someone got sick of someone else’s crap and did something about it. Natural disasters will happen with enough frequency to be noted (see: the Little Ice Age, the Black Death, and the 1883 eruption of Krakatoa), although there’s little prediction for them because of the lack of observable build up in activity.

To pull from Feral’s timeline of examples, writing is popularly attributed to being invented in Sumer, 5,520 years ago - it’s our oldest found example, at any rate, though I’ve learned to never say never on archaeological discoveries.

What prompted this invention? Things rarely occur out of the blue, and rarely without interaction from other domains - where could writing have come from? Maybe art? What about from the creation of a tool, a reuse of certain skill sets? Something else we haven’t thought of yet?

So that’s one half of the question. But what about the other half - what did people around the inventor (multiple inventors?) think of this new thing? Deliberately associating a particular sound with a particular object - even a 2D object like pressing shapes into a piece of clay - and then standardizing it, is no mean feat. How did this agreement even happen? Were there arguments about how to do these graphemes, how best to shape them? What about which phoneme to each?

I doubt Sumerian cuneiform was created in a day, and likewise I doubt that language popped into existence on a whim. To keep pulling from this example, language composition has a strong effect on how we interact with our environment (University of Missouri-St Louis Libraries), but it conversely is also deeply affected by the environment its users create (Nature).

Because of this, I think it’s easier to work from a different angle - figure out what your major events are, and what eras you’re covering. If these major events also define an era, that’s even better! Working out how long everything each thing takes is ultimately a bunch of minor details, so it’s up to you how much your plot actively needs them, rather than decoration to your story meant to amuse you more than your audience.

[oliverwvvd]

the devil in me, part ii

Back to writing these two, inevitably, at long last. This is for the lovely anon who dropped by and mentioned this one, despite it having been years since the last post. This is slightly trigger heavy, so sorry if the triggers contain spoilers, but people's mental health comes first so they can choose whether or not to engage with the content.

This is part of a series. You can find part one here.

pairing: Marcus Flint x Oliver Wood

premise: When Marcus wakes again in the endless white of St Mungo's, Oliver is still there, and his wand is still gone. Marcus thinks it's about debts owed, or at least, that's what he's trying to tell himself. Whatever other reasons might keep Oliver Wood at his bedside aren't remotely within a framework he's equipped to handle. [possible triggers: severe PTSD, hospitals, battle situations, Legilimency, implied invasion of the mind, implied intention not to survive]

When he wakes, one needle is back in his arm and Marcus’ first inclination is to be pissed off about it. Of course it is. Being angry is the best alternative, sublimation for all of the other emotions he should be feeling and isn’t. He doesn’t need any St Mungo’s trained therapist to tell him about that, mainly because it’s deliberate on his part.

“For fuck’s sake,” he mutters. “I don’t want painkiller withdrawal on top of everything else. The dosage has to be sky-high for me not to be feeling anything.”

“So you’d rather have the searing amount of pain that makes you pass out within minutes instead? You’re right; being a masochist is a much better idea.”

He closes his eyes. “Why are you still here, again?”

“Waiting for you to take your head out of your arse, though it seems I’ll be in for a long wait.” The tart rejoinder in a lovely, rolling Scottish brogue that he instinctively wants to wrap himself in doesn’t help his temper. Neither does the fact that Oliver is still too earnest despite the familiar barb in the words, as though he thinks he owes Marcus something. The stubborn set to his jaw is familiar too, viewed more than once when facing him on a Quidditch pitch.

It makes Marcus want to push him away for his own safety, because don’t you know what I am? Instead, his gaze is sulky, as though he’s a teenager again in a way he hasn’t been in years, and it’s solely fixed on Oliver. “I don’t like you, and I don’t want you here,” he says, and if that’s not the biggest lie he’s told in the past couple of years, he’s not entirely sure what is.

Oliver shrugs. “That’s too bad, Flint, because I’m not going anywhere.” He’s wearing a poloneck jumper, just like he used to at school when it got to winter weekends out of uniform, and Marcus has the fleeting, horrifying thought that maybe it covers bruises or worse. A second thought just as horrifying resurfaces: he still doesn’t have his wand.

That thought makes him abruptly change the subject. “Alright, Wood, since you’re here, be a good boy and tell me why I don’t have my wand.” It’s not a question. He doesn’t phrase it as one. To punctuate it and make it clear he’s not asking, Marcus opts to verbally twist the knife for good measure. “You owe me. That’s why you’re here, right? To settle the debt. So start talking.” That’s not a question either, because why else Oliver might be there is more than he can possibly handle getting into.

Oliver’s (Wood’s, damn it) expression darkens momentarily, as though he’s about to pick a fight. Marcus wants him to, because at least that would be normal, but he sees it the moment that Oliver registers he’s in a hospital bed all over again, sees the way his gaze turns pained and then the shutters draw closed again so he’s at a loss for what the other is thinking. He doesn’t like it. Oliver was always an open book, no filter, no love lost on his side of the equation. He doesn’t know what this new thing is.

He clears his throat brusquely. “Well?”

Oliver sighs. “They’re concerned about your mental state as well. That’s why you don’t have your wand. They thought you might try something you’d regret.”

Fury is, of course, the quickest and most reliable reaction. “So they thought they’d improve things by taking away the only piece of autonomy I had available to me for months? That’s genius thinking, that is. Who do I need to see to recommend them for promotion?”

Oliver’s lips twitch briefly then, clearly catching the sarcasm, but at the same time seemingly unable to smile at it. That’s fine, because it’s not funny at all.

Marcus exhales a sharp sigh, one that’s less exasperated by this point than unimpressed. “I suppose they thought I’d curse the whole place down, eh?” This time, it is a question, and the smile that goes with it isn’t genuine, it’s mean and sharp-edged. It’s an echo of all the ugly things that have stained his hands and his mind, and it occurs to him that throughout that, Oliver has been the only good thing, a pure thing he’d constructed for himself, a secret he kept that was sometimes the only reason he didn’t give in altogether. Now that’s done and it’s back to reality.

To his consternation, Oliver shakes his head, as though he can sense what Marcus is thinking. “No one believes that after the battle. You threw yourself in the way of someone that would have been dead if you hadn’t, without knowing whether you’d survive.” The words seemed hard for Oliver to speak, as though it was like a demon lived in his throat for as long as they sat there. “They didn’t know if you were going to pull through, the first couple of days.”

An eye-roll is Marcus’ first response to that, and he averts his gaze from Oliver then. “That was sort of the bloody point, Wood.” The words fall heavily in the room between them, but this time it’s not out of malice, it’s from defeat, an admission that he should have kept to himself. The anger hasn’t emptied its well yet, but for the time being, it’s quiet, a savage thing made somnolent again by the fact that he can feel the needle in his arm start to pour more potion into him. Presumably, it’s going to knock him out eventually.

Oliver’s own exhale is shaken, as though Marcus has punched him square in the solar plexus and it hurts, badly. After all these months of silence, it’s as though the casually cruel words aiming to drive him away are doing more damage than even the war has managed to. “Flint, you can’t just…”

Marcus wants to sit up again but the potion, damn it, feels like it’s got him pinned in place. That makes him edgy, makes him feel the cold sweat of panic beginning to prick, and he absolutely will not have a panic attack of any kind in front of an audience. He swallows hard, and Oliver seems unable to finish the sentence. It hangs there between them, unfinished.

That’s the moment that the door creaks open and the healer walks in, oblivious to the conversation that had been happening beforehand. Oliver leans back in the chair beside Marcus’ bed.

Marcus’ lip curls just slightly. “Come to check I’m still breathing?” he asks snidely. “Sorry to disappoint. You can go now, your duty is done.”

The healer does no such thing. “I’d hoped you’d be asleep by now,” he says with a tsk tsk sound that reminds Marcus of the teachers from school whenever he didn’t do his homework correctly. It does nothing to endear the man to him at all. “Evidently we need to increase your dosage. You shouldn’t have ripped those needles out of your arm as soon as you did, but Mr Wood tells me you have a remarkably high tolerance for pain.”

That causes Marcus’ gaze to narrow in Oliver’s direction, and it’s as accusing as it gets.

Oliver, to his credit (the little of it that Marcus is currently willing to give) doesn’t look away. “I’ve been in the Hospital Wing with you multiple times,” is the reminder that unexpectedly arrives, softer than he’s ever deserved. “You never took your painkillers. You always cast Evanesco.”

On the one hand, Marcus’ glare only intensifies, because Oliver’s just ratted him out to the healer. On the other, what does it even mean that Oliver remembers; how there seems to be something dark and sad behind his gaze ever since a few minutes ago. It doesn’t correlate with his real life knowledge of Wood, only the fantasy version he constructed in his head to have a reason to go on, and Marcus is fully aware of how incredibly unhealthy that was and is.

It’s only the healer’s voice that interrupts their charged stare, clearly ready to go for another lecture. “Well, there will be no hiding painkillers here. What were you thinking, taking those out? Did you just not realise the degree of damage you took?” It isn’t an indignant pair of questions, instead asked with the tone of someone who wants to understand the subject they are studying. It presses all of the wrong buttons for Marcus, and he endures it in silence until he can’t.

This is the moment he snaps. But it isn’t like every other time he’s lost his temper. No, this is different; his voice is surprisingly quiet and unsteady when he speaks. “Why does everyone want to know what I’m thinking suddenly? I’ve just spent the last two years having my mind pulled apart at a moment’s notice. All that I want is for everyone to stop trying to get into my head because I don’t want anyone in there ever again. Got it? It’s none of your business what I’m thinking.”

Dimly, he registers that Oliver has gone pale as he starts to understand what Marcus means. The healer looks appalled, because evidently, this was something undetectable while he was unconscious, and he’s beyond lashing out, because this has hit places he doesn’t want to go.

“Get out.” The words are quieter still, and there’s a flat, dulled down, deadly note to them.

Even half-conscious on a bed, drugged by the potion, it leaves to question what Marcus is capable of, the one thing no one has dared to think about so far. It’s a weak threat, but his voice carries all of it, like it’s every atom of a star at the moment of destruction.

The healer leaves. Oliver doesn’t, because Oliver hasn’t learned to be afraid of him, even though he should have.

When Marcus looks at him again, he thinks that he sees Oliver flinch, just a little around the eyes, and he knows he’s going to say something unforgivable if he isn’t left alone. “I meant you as well.” The words are empty. You need to go before I do any more things that I regret, and I can’t live with any more.

Oliver doesn’t listen. Instead, he does something that Marcus can handle even less. He climbs onto the bed and rests there next to him, close enough for Marcus to feel him breathe. “You’re really not a good listener, Flint. I already told you. I’m not leaving.”

Marcus’ hands suddenly feel too heavy, utterly ineffectual when he tries to raise them to push Wood right off the bed. Land on his arse. That’ll show him. Instead, his head starts to nod forward, and Oliver, the scheming bastard, must have known that the potion would take effect soon, had kept him talking until he had no choice but to go back to sleep again.

He’s so angry. He’s exhausted. He’s repeating the same cycle, inescapable, stuck on a loop of his own making. There’s wool against his face, something warm against his back. Oliver’s voice is there, he can feel it rumble in his chest, but the words don’t even register. It’s a warm sound, like copper and firelight, and it’s the last thing in his dwindling awareness before the world is lost altogether.

The frightening part is that he’s starting to want to wake up again. 

That wasn’t how it was supposed to go.

[your-disobedient-servant]

Voltaire’s Paméla Letters Translated: Intro and Letter #1

The letters that Voltaire rewrote in the vein of Richardson’s Paméla after his falling out with Frederick the Great have intrigued me ever since I first heard of them in November or December. Only discovered to have been a rewrite and not originals in the late 20th century, it’s hard to say how much of it is authentic and how much exaggerated or made up, but for me, the fact that they have been altered only adds to the fascination.

Six months into learning French, I’m still not sure I’m quite ready to use this as translation exercises, but I’m impatient, I found the book for very cheap, and besides, I feel that to translate Voltaire you must channel some of the hubris, so bring it on. Poetry (to my surprise, it turns out I actually enjoy translating poetry in some masochistic way) and all. In the end, I am proud of the result.

This is not a very juicy letter, but I’m sure one will come along soon enough. I’m not sure how many will I be able to complete because there’s about fifty of them altogether, but I hope I manage at least a few.

Big thanks to everyone who helped me out with the draft. The rest under the cut for brevity, English followed by original French.

FIRST LETTER

In Clèves, July 1750

It is to you, please, niece of mine, to you, woman of a wit superb, philosopher of the selfsame kind, to you who, like me, of Permesse, knows the many paths diverse; it is to you I now address this disarray of prose and verse, recount my long odyssey's story; recount unlike I back then did when, in my splendid age's glory, I still kept to Apollo's writ; when I dared, perhaps courting disaster, for counsel strike for Paris forth, notwithstanding our minds' worth, the god of Taste, my foremost master!

This journey is only too true, and puts too much distance between you and me. Do not imagine that I want to rival Chapelle, who has made, I do not know how, such a reputation for himself for having been from Paris to Monpellier and to papal land, and for having reported to a gourmand.

It was not, perhaps, difficult when one wished to mock monsieur d'Assoucy. We need another style, we need another pen, to portray this Plato, this Solon, this Achilles who writes his verses at Sans-Souci. I could tell you of that charming retreat, portray this hero philosopher and warrior, so terrible to Austria, so trivial for me; however, that could bore you.

Besides, I am not yet at his court and you should not anticipate anything: I want order even in my letters. Therefore know that I left Compiègne on July 25th, taking my road to Flanders, and as a good historiographer and a good citizen, I went to see the fields of Fontenoy, of Rocoux and of Lawfeld on my way. There was no trace of it left: all of it was covered with the finest wheat in the world. The Flemish men and women were dancing, as if nothing had happened.

Go on, innocent eyes of this bad-mannered populace; reign, lovely Ceres, where Bellona once flourished; countryside fertilised with blood of our warriors, I like better your harvests than all of the laurels: provided by chance and by vanity nourished Oh! that grand projects were prevented by doom! Oh! fruitless victories! Oh! the blood spilled in vain! French, English, German so tranquil today did we have to slit throats for friendship to bloom!

I went to Clèves hoping to find there the stage stations that all the bailiwicks provide, at the order of the king of Prussia, to those who to go to philosophise to Sans-Souci with the Solomon of the North and on whom the king bestows the favour of travelling at his expense: but the order of the king of Prussia had stayed in Wesel in the hands of a man who received it as the Spanish receive the papal bulls, with the deepest respect, and without putting them to any use. So I spent a few days in the castle of this princess that madame de La Fayette made so famous.

But this heroine and the duc of Nemours, we ignore in these places the gallant adventure; for  it is not here, I vow, the land of novels, nor the one of love.

It is a shame, for the country seems made for the princesses of Clèves: it is the most beautiful place of nature and art has further added to its position. It is a view superior to that of Meudon; it is a land covered in vegetation like the Champs-Élysées and the forests of Boulogne; it is a hill covered in gently sloping avenues of trees: a large pool collects  the waters of this hill; in the middle of the pool stands a statue of Minerva. The water of this first pool is received by a second, which returns it to the third; and at the foot of the hill ends in a waterfall pouring into a vast, semi-circular grotto. The waterfall lets the waters spill into a canal, which goes on to water a vast meadow and joins a branch of the Rhine. Mademoiselle de Scudéri and La Calprenède would have filled a volume of their novels with this description; but I, historiographer, I will only tell you that a certain prince Maurice de Nassau, the governor, during his lifetime, of this lovely solitude devised nearly all of these wonders there. He lies buried in the middle of the forest, in a great devil of an iron tomb, surrounded by all the ugliest bas-reliefs of the time of the Roman empire's decadence, and some gothic monuments that are worse still. But all of it would be something very respectable for those deep minds who fall into ecstasy at the sight of poorly cut stone, as long as it is two thousand years old.

Another ancient monument, the remains of a great stone road, built by the Romans, which led to Frankfurt, to Vienna, and to Constantinople. The Holy Empire devolved into Germany has fallen a little bit from its magnificence. One gets stuck in the mud in the summer nowadays, in the august Germania. Of all the modern nations, France and the little country of Belgium are the only ones who have roads worthy of Antiquity. We could above all boast of surpassing the ancient Romans in cabaret; and there are still certain points on which we equal them: but in the end, when it comes to durable, useful, magnificent monuments, which people can come close to them? which monarch does in his kingdom what a procosul did in Nîmes and in Arles?

Perfect in the trivial, in trifles sublime great inventors of nothing, envy we excite. Let our minds to the supreme heights strive of the children of Romulus so proud: they did a hundred times more for the vanquished crowd than we solely for ourselves contrive.

In the end, notwithstanding the beauty of the location of Clèves, notwithstanding the Roman road, in spite of a tower believed to have been built by Julius Caesar, or at least by Germanicus; in spite of the inscriptions of the twenty-sixth legion that quartered here for the winter; in spite of the lovely tree-lined roads planted by prince Maurice, and his grand iron tomb; in spite of, lastly, the mineral waters recently discovered here, there are hardly any crowds in Clèves. The waters there are, however, just as good as those of Spa or of Forges; and one cannot swallow the little atoms of iron in a more beautiful place. But it does not suffice, as you know, to have merits to be fashionable: usefulness and pleasantness are here; but this delicious retreat is frequented only by a few Dutchmen, who are attracted by the proximity and the low prices of living and houses there, and who come to admire and to drink.

I found there, to my great satisfaction, a well-known Dutch poet, who gave us the honour of elegantly, and even verse for verse, translating our tragedies, good or bad, to Dutch. Perhaps one day we will be reduced to translating the tragedies of Amsterdam: every nation gets their turn.

The Roman ladies, who leered at their lovers at the theatre of Pompeii, did not suspect that one day, in the middle of Gaul, in a little town called Lutèce, we would produce better plays than Rome.

The order of the king regarding the stage stations has finally reached me; so my delight at the princess of Clèves' place is over, and I am leaving for Berlin.

***

LETTRE PREMIÈRE

À Clèves, juillet 1750

C'est à vous, s'il vous plaît, ma nièce, vous, femme d'esprit sans travers, philosophe de mon espèce, vous qui, comme moi, du Permesse connaisez les sentiers divers ; c'est à vous qu'en courant j'adresse ce fatras de prose et de vers, ce récit de mon long voyage ; non tel que j'en fis autrefois quand, dans la fleur de mon bel âge, d'Apollon je suivais les lois ; quand j'osai, trop hardi peut-être, aller consulter à Paris, en dépit de nos beaux esprits, le dieu du Goût mon premier maître !

Ce voyage-ci n'est que trop vrai, et ne m'éloigne que trop du vous. N'allez pas vous imaginer que je veulle égaler Chapelle, qui s'est fait, je ne sais comment, tant de réputation, pour avoir été de Paris à Montpellier et en terre papale, et en avoir rendu compte à un gourmand.

Ce n'était pas peut-être un emploi difficile de railler monsieur d'Assoucy. Il faut une autre plume, il faut une autre style, pour peindre ce Platon, ce Solon, cet Achille qui fait des vers à Sans-Souci. Je pourrais vous parler de ce charmant asile, vous peindre ce héros philosophe et guerrier, si terrible à l'Autriche, et pour moi si facile ; mais je pourrais vous ennuyer.

D'ailleurs je ne suis pas encore à sa cour, et il ne faut rien anticiper : je veux de l'ordre jusque dans mes lettres. Sachez donc que je partis de Compiègne le 25 de juillet, prenant ma route par la Flandre, et qu'en bon historiographe et en bon citoyen, j'allai voir en passant les champs de Fontenoy, de Rocoux et de Lawfeld. Il n'y paraissait pas : tout cela était couvert des plus beaux blés du monde. Les Flamands et les Flamandes dansaient, comme si de rien n'eût été.

Durez, yeux innocents de ces peuples grossiers ; régnez, belle Cérès, où triompha Bellone ; campagnes qu'engraissa le sang de nos guerriers, j'aime mieux vos moissons que celles des lauriers : la vanité les cueille et le hasard les donne. Ô que de grands projets par le sort démentis ! Ô victoires sans fruits ! Ô meurtres inutiles ! Français, Anglais, Germains, aujourd'hui si tranquilles fallait-il s'égorger pour être bons amis !

J'ai été à Clèves comptant y trouver des relais que tous les bailliages fournissent, moyennant un ordre du roi de Prusse, à ceux qui vont philosopher à Sans-Souci auprès du Salomon du Nord et à qui le roi accorde la faveur de voyager à ses dépens : mais l'ordre du roi de Prusse était resté à Vesel entre les mains d'un homme qui l'a reçu comme les Espagnols reçoivent les bulles des papes, avec le plus profond respect, et sans en faire aucun usage. Je me suis donc quelques jours dans le château de cette princesse que madame de La Fayette a rendu si fameux.

Mais de cette heroïne, et du duc de Nemours, on ignore en ces lieux la galante aventure : ce n'est pas ici, je vous jure, le pays des romans, ni celui des amours.

C'est dommage, car le pays semble fait pour des princesses de Clèves : c'est le plus beau lieu de nature et l'art a encore ajouté à sa situation. C'est une vue supérieure à celle de Meudon ; c'est un terrain planté comme les Champs-Élysées et le bois de Boulogne ; c'est une colline couverte d'allées d'arbres en pente douce : un grand bassin reçoit les eaux de cette colline ; au milieu du bassin s'élève une statue de Minerve. L'eau de ce premier bassin est reçue dans un second, qui la renvoie à un troisième ; et le bas de la colline est terminé par une cascade ménagée dans une vaste grotte en demi-cercle. La cascade laisse tomber les eaux dans un canal qui va arroser une vaste prairie et se joindre à un bras du Rhin. Mademoiselle de Scudéri et La Calprenède auraient rempli de cette description un tome de leurs romans ; mais moi, historiographe, je vous dirai seulement qu'un certain prince Maurice de Nassau, gouverneur, de son vivant, de cette belle solitude, y fit presque toutes ces merveilles. Il s'est fait enterrer au milieu des bois, dans un grand diable de tombeau de fer, environné de tous les plus vilains bas-reliefs du temps de la décadence de l'empire romain, et de quelques monuments gothiques plus grossiers encore. Mais le tout serait quelque chose de fort respectable pour ces esprits profonds qui tombent en extase à la vue d'une pierre mal taillée, pour peu qu'elle ait deux mille ans d'antiquité.

Un autre monument antique, c'est le reste d'un grand chemin pavé, construit par les Romains, qui allait à Francfort, à Vienne et à Constantinople. Le Saint-Empire dévolu à l'Allemagne est un peu déchu de sa magnificence. On s'embourbe aujourd'hui en été, dans l'auguste Germanie. De toutes les nations modernes, la France et la petit pays des Belges sont les seules qui aient des chemins dignes de l'Antiquité. Nous pouvons surtout nous vanter de passer les anciens Romains en cabarets ; et il y a encore certains points sur lesquels nous les valons bien : mais enfin, pour les monuments durables, utiles, magnifiques, quel peuple approche d'eux ? quel monarque fait dans son royaume ce qu'un proconsul faisait dans Nîmes et dans Arles ?

Parfait dans le petit, sublimes en bijoux, grands inventeurs de riens, nous faisons des jaloux. Elevons nos esprits à la hauteur suprême des fiers enfants de Romulus : ils faisaient plus cent fois pour des peuples vaincus que nous ne faisons pour nous-mêmes.

Enfin, malgré la beauté de la situation de Clèves, malgré le chemin des Romains, en dépit d'une tour qu'on croit bâtie par Jules César, ou au moins par Germanicus ; en dépit des inscriptions d'une vingt-sixième légion qui était ici en quartier d'hiver ; en dépit des belles allées plantées par le prince Maurice, et de son grand tombeau de fer ; en dépit enfin des eaux minérales découvertes ici depuis peu, il n'y a guère d'affluence à Clèves. Les eaux y sont cependant aussi bonnes que celles de Spa et de Forges ; et on ne peut avaler de petits atomes de fer dans un plus beau lieu. Mais il ne suffit pas, comme vous savez, d'avoir du mérite pour avoir la vogue : l'utile et l'agréable sont ici ; mais ce séjour délicieux n'est fréquenté que par quelques Hollandais que le voisinage et le bas prix des vivres et de maisons y attirent, et qui viennent admirer et boire.

J'y ai retrouvé, avec une très grande satisfaction, un célèbre poète hollandais, qui nous a fait l'honneur de traduire élégamment en batave, et même vers pour vers, nos tragédies bonnes ou mauvaises. Peut-être un jour viendra que nous serons réduits à traduire les tragédies d'Amsterdam : chaque peuple a son tour.

Les dames romaines, qui allaient lorgner leurs amants au théâtre de Pompée, ne se doutaient pas qu'un jour au milieu des Gaules, dans un petit bourg nommé Lutèce, on ferait de meilleurs pièces de théâtre qu'à Rome.

L'ordre du roi pour les relais vient enfin de me parvenir ; voilà mon enchantement chez la princesse de Clèves fini, et je pars pour Berlin.

[michaelbogild]

Quotes by Lord Byron

Adversity is the first path to truth.

All farewells should be sudden, when forever.

All who would win joy, must share it; happiness was born a twin.

Always laugh when you can, it is cheap medicine.

And dreams in their development have breath, And tears, and tortures, and the touch of joy; They leave a weight upon our waking thoughts, They take a weight from off our waking toils, They do divide our being.

And gave no outward signs of inward strife

And mind and dust- and passions and pure thoughts

And when we think we lead, we are most led

As long as I retain my feeling and my passion for Nature, I can partly soften or subdue my other passions and resist or endure those of others.

Be thou the rainbow in the storms of life. The evening beam that smiles the clouds away, and tints tomorrow with prophetic ray.

Being of no party, I shall offend all parties

Between two worlds life hovers like a star, twixt night and morn, upon the horizon's verge.

But what is Hope? Nothing but the paint on the face of Existence; the least touch of truth rubs it off, and then we see what a hollow-cheeked harlot we have got hold of.

But what is Hope? Nothing but the paint on the face of Existence; the least touch of truth rubs it off, and then we see what a hollow-cheeked harlot we have got hold of.

But who, alas! can love, and then be wise?

But words are things, and a small drop of ink, Falling, like dew, upon a thought produces That which makes thousands, perhaps millions think

Come, lay thy head upon my breast and I'll kiss thee unto rest.

Dark-heaving; boundless, endless, and sublime, The image of Eternity, -- the throne Of the Invisible! even from out thy slime The monsters of the deep are made; each zone Obeys thee; thou goest forth, dread, fathomless, alone

Death, so called, is a thing which makes men weep, And yet a third of life is passed in sleep.

Eat, drink and love...the rest is not worth a nickel

Eternity forbids thee to forget.

Even innocence itself has many a wile, And will not dare to trust itself with truth, And love is taught hypocrisy from youth

For Earth is but a tombstone

For the sword outwears its sheath, And the soul wears out the breast, And the heart must pause to breathe, And love itself have rest.

For there was soft remembrance, and sweet trust In one fond breast, to which his own would melt, And in its tenderer hour on that his bosom dwelt.

For truth is always strange; stranger than fiction.

Friendship may, and often does, grow into love, but love never subsides into friendship.

Had they been wisely mingled; as it is

Hath all the energy which would have made

he knew how to make madness beautiful

I am ashes where once I was fire...

I am so changeable, being everything by turns and nothing long - such a strange melange of good and evil.

I can never get people to understand that poetry is the expression of excited passion.

I do not believe in any religion, I will have nothing to do with immortality. We are miserable enough in this life without speculating upon another.

I feel my immortality over sweep all pains, all tears, all time, all fears, – and peal, like the eternal thunders of the deep, into my ears, this truth, – thou livest forever!

I had a dream, which was not at all a dream.

I have a great mind to believe in Christianity for the mere pleasure of fancying I may be damned.

I know that two and two make four - and should be glad to prove it too if I could - though I must say if by any sort of process I could convert 2 and 2 into five it would give me much greater pleasure.

I linger yet with Nature, for the night Hath been to me a more familiar face Than that of man; and in her starry shade Of dim and solitary loveliness, I learned the language of another world.

I only go out to get me a fresh appetite for being alone.

I slept and dreamt that life was beauty; I woke and found that life was duty.

I suppose I had some meaning when I wrote it; I believe I understood it then.

In secret we met - In silence I grieve, That thy heart could forget, Thy spirit deceive. If I should meet thee After long years, How should I greet thee? - With silence and tears

In solitude, where we are least alone

In vain!—As fall the dews on quenchless sands, Blood only serves to wash Ambition's hands!

It is an awful chaos-light and darkness-

Life's enchanted cup sparkles near the brim

Love will find a way through paths where wolves fear to prey.

Mix'd, and contending without end or order

My pang shall find a voice.

Oh too convincing - dangerously dear - In woman's eye the unanswerable tear

On with the dance! Let joy be undefined!

One certainly has a soul; but how it came to allow itself to be enclosed in a body is more than I can imagine. I only know if once mine gets out, I’ll have a bit of a tussle before I let it get in again to that of any other

Opinions are made to be changed – or how is truth to be got at?

Prometheus-like from heaven she stole The fire that through those silken lashes In darkest glances seems to roll, From eyes that cannot hide their flashes: And as along her bosom steal In lengthened flow her raven tresses, You'd swear each clustering lock could feel, And curled to give her neck caresses.

Roll on, thou deep and dark blue Ocean - roll! Ten thousand fleets sweep over thee in vain; Man marks the earth with ruin - his control Stops with the shore

She walks in beauty, like the night Of cloudless climes and starry skies; And all that's best of dark and bright Meet in her aspect and her eyes

Sigh to the stars, as wolves howl to the moon...

Sleep hath its own world, A boundary between the things misnamed Death and existence: Sleep hath its own world, And a wide realm of wild reality, And dreams in their development have breath, And tears and tortures, and the touch of joy.

So, we'll go no more a-roving So late into the night, Though the heart still be as loving, And the moon still be as bright.

Sorrow is knowledge, those that know the most must mourn the deepest, the tree of knowledge is not the tree of life.

Start not—nor deem my spirit fled: In me behold the only skull From which, unlike a living head, Whatever flows is never dull.

The best of prophets of the future is the past.

The bright sun was extinguish'd, and the stars Did wander darkling in the eternal space.

The dew of compassion is a tear

The drying up a single tear has more of honest fame than shedding seas of gore.

The great art of life is sensation, to feel that we exist, even in pain

The great object of life is sensation—to feel that we exist, even though in pain. It is this ‘craving void’ which drives us to gaming—to battle—to travel—to intemperate but keenly felt pursuits of every description, whose principal attraction is the agitation inseparable from their accomplishment..

The heart will break, but broken live on.

The morn is up again, the dewy morn, With breath all incense, and with cheek all bloom, Laughing the clouds away with playful scorn, And living as if earth contained no tomb,— And glowing into day.

The power of thought is the magic of the mind.

The thorns which I have reap'd are of the tree I planted; they have torn me, and I bleed. I should have known what fruit would spring from such a seed.

There are four questions of value in life... What is sacred? Of what is the spirit made? What is worth living for, and what is worth dying for? The answer to each is same. Only love

There is a pleasure in the pathless woods, There is a rapture on the lonely shore, There is society, where none intrudes, By the deep sea, and music in its roar: I love not man the less, but Nature more

There is music in all things, if men had ears.

There is no instinct like that of the heart

There is the moral of all human tales: ’Tis but the same rehearsal of the past, First Freedom, and then Glory - when that fails, Wealth, vice, corruption - barbarism at last. And History, with all her volumes vast, Hath but one page

There's music in the sighing of a reed; There's music in the gushing of a rill; There's music in all things, if men had ears; The earth is but the music of the spheres.

Think you, if Laura had been Petrarch's wife, he would have written sonnets all his life?

This should have been a noble creature: he

Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves.

Though the night was made for loving, And the day returns too soon, Yet we'll go no more a-roving By the light of the moon.

Tis sweet to know there is an eye will mark our coming, and look brighter when we come

To have joy, one must share it.

To him the magic of their mysteries; To him the book of Night was opened wide, And voices from the deep abyss revealed A marvel and a secret.

Truth is a gem that is found at a great depth; whilst on the surface of the world all things are weighed by the false scale of custom.

We of the craft are all crazy. Some are affected by gaiety, others by melancholy, but all are more or less touched.

Who knows whether, when a comet shall approach this globe to destroy it, as it often has been and will be destroyed, men will not tear rocks from their foundations by means of steam, and hurl mountains, as the giants are said to have done, against the flaming mass? - and then we shall have traditions of Titans again, and of wars with Heaven...

Why I came here, I know not; where I shall go it is useless to inquire - in the midst of myriads of the living and the dead worlds, stars, systems, infinity, why should I be anxious about an atom?

With just enough of learning to misquote.

Yet he was jealous, though he did not show it, For jealousy dislikes the world to know it

You don't love a woman because she is beautiful, but she is beautiful because you love her. Never underestimate the power of love. The way to love anything is to realize it may be lost. The heart has its reasons that reason does not know at all. Music is love in search of a word. There is pleasure in the pathless woods; there is a rapture on the lonely shore; There is society, where none intrudes, by the deep sea, and music in its roar.

[wisdomrays]

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS: What is the Primordial Covenant?: Part 1

This matter is directly mentioned in the Qur'an:

And whenever your Sustainer brings forth their offspring from the loins of the children of Adam, He (thus) calls upon them to bear witness about themselves: "Am I not your Lord?"—to which they answer: "Yes, indeed, we do bear witness thereto." [Of this we remind you] lest you say on the Day of Resurrection: "Verily, we were unaware of this." (7:172)

According to this verse, every soul was required, at some point, to bear witness to its recognition of the Divine Existence and Unity. Qur'anic commentators continue to debate when this covenant was made. Therefore, we will look at a few considerations as to when and how and to whom this question was put.

• When we were as yet nothing and received the command Be!, we gave an affirmative existential response to God's creative act, which is represented or dramatized as a question–answer or a covenant.

• When were still in the form of atoms or even particles not yet formed as atoms, the Lord of the Worlds, Who cherishes and leads everything to perfection, made these particles feel the desire and joy of being human. He therefore took the promise and covenant from them, which is considered a "Yes" from all atoms to God's creative call, though it was far beyond their own power to even imagine such an affirmation.

Such question–answer or offer–acceptance is not in words or statements. For this reason, the event has been interpreted allegorically by some, as if the question were put, answered, and had a particular legal value and effect, although it is not an actual verbal or written contract. In fact, without taking into account God's power and innumerable ways of communicating with His creatures, considering this covenant to be an ordinary contract can lead only to difficulty and error.

This acknowledgement and declaration, this covenant bearing witness against ourselves as regards our recognition of the Divine Existence and Unity, is the ground of our knowing and feeling ourselves, of comprehending that we are nothing other than ourselves. In other words, this covenant is the ground of self-knowledge. It means that we start to look into the mirror of knowledge (ma'rifa), witness the realization of diverse truths reflected in our consciousness, and acknowledge and declare that witnessing. However, the offer–acceptance, the perceiving–making perceived, the covenant, is not overt or amenable to direct perception. Perhaps it becomes perceived after many warnings and orders, and thus the significance of moral and religious guidance, counselling, and enlightenment.

The ego or self (nafs) is created and entrusted to us so that we may know and declare the Creator's Existence and Unity. Therefore, we prove God's Existence with our own existence, and show God's Attributes with our own attributes. For example, our deficiencies and imperfection show God's all-sufficiency and perfection; our privations show God's wealth and abundance; and our inability, weakness, and poverty show God's power, favor, and benevolence. The covenanted self is God's first favor and bestowal upon humanity. Our proper response is to know and declare God's Existence throughout creation and to perceive His Light in all lights. This is how the primordial covenant is fulfilled. The covenant is like a command that is accepted through understanding the meaning of the magnificent Book of Creation written by the Divine Power and Will, of our comprehending the secrets of the lines of events.

The question–answer of the covenant should not be thought of in a material or corporeal sense. God commands beings according to their particular individual nature, and listens to their needs and speech and whatever issues from them. Thus, He understands all and fulfils their needs. In the scholastic theologians' terminology, the Almighty understands all languages and dialects; issues commands and communicates truths in them; explains and expounds humanity and the universe; and takes promises and makes covenant with them in the form of words, for which the technical term is kalam-i lafzi. There is also a Divine Speech specific to animals as inspiration, and to angels as divine discourse. Although their precise natures are unknown to us, obviously it is non-verbal and consists of different manifestations of the so-called kalam-i nafsi.

Divine Speech is so diverse and extensive—from the inspiration coming to the human heart to the discourse addressed to the angels—and the forms of communication between the Creator and His creation are so different and occur in such different realms that those who inhabit one realm cannot hear or detect the communications belonging to another realm.

It is a serious mistake to suppose that we can hear everything. It is generally accepted that the range of our hearing, like our sight, is quite limited. What we see and hear is almost nothing when compared to that which we cannot see or hear. For this reason, God's communicating with the atoms or systems within this creation, His composing, decomposing or re-composing them, occur in such sublime ways that our limited perceptive powers cannot detect or understand them.

We cannot know exactly when God made this covenant with us, for such knowledge is beyond the ability of our limited senses and faculties. In fact, He might have made it not with our whole being, but with a specific part, such as our soul, conscience, or one of the soul's sub-faculties.

There is general agreement that the human soul is an entity independent of the body. Since the soul came into existence before the physical body, and in a sense has a particular individual nature outside of time, and since the questioning and acceptance in the covenant was with the soul, our limited powers cannot comprehend or report it fully. The soul hears and speaks without words and voice, as it does in dreams, and communicates extrasensorily and without the medium of sound waves, as in telepathy. This special form of communication is registered and recorded in its own specific way. When its time is due, it will assume its specific form and, using that language, speak and bring to the mind all original associations. At that time, we will see that the covenant has remained imprinted upon the human soul. In addition, it will be adduced as an argument against its possessor on the Day of Judgment.

The souls of all human beings were gathered in a realm that was not veiled by an intervening realm, and so saw everything clearly. After this, they gave God an oath of allegiance. When He asked them to witness against themselves: "Am I not your Lord?" they replied: "Yes, we witness that You are our Lord and our God." However, as is common today, some people have never turned to that section of their soul (their conscience). Thus, they have not come across that profoundly inherent covenant in themselves, for they have no interest in it and have not tried to see beyond the corporeal world that intervenes between them and reality.

If their minds were not clouded by the conditioning biases under which they live, they would see and hear the answer to the covenant in their conscience. This is the main purpose of inward and outward, as well as subjective and objective contemplation and search. Engaging in such activities saves the mind from self-obsession and frees ideals. With an open mind and a genuinely free will, people can try to read the delicate writings in their consciences. Some people who have habituated themselves to looking into the depths of their hearts cannot discover in books the thoughts and inspiration they acquire through such inward observation and contemplation. Even the allegorical meanings and allusive signs in the Divine Books can become manifest in their true profundity if studied in such a manner. But people cannot attain such a profound level of inward observation and contemplation, or understand what they might discover there, if they cannot overcome their own selves.

Let's look at the when of this covenant. It is really difficult to derive anything definite from the Qur'an and Hadith on this matter. Some commentators argue that the covenant is taken in the realm of atoms, when the person is in a state of uncomposed, separate atoms, and with the atoms and the soul of which the person will be composed. Others say that the covenant is taken while the sperm is travelling toward the egg, when the individual begins to form in the mother's womb, when it becomes a foetus, when spirit is breathed into the foetus, when the child reaches puberty, or when the person is religiously responsible for his or her actions.

While each claim has its own supporting arguments, it is difficult to show a serious reason for preferring one to another.

In fact, this event could happen in the realm of spirits, in a different realm where the soul relates to or gets in touch with its own atoms, in any embryonic stage, or in any stages till the individual reaches puberty. God Almighty, Who realtes to both past and present simultaneously, Who sees and hears past and present together at the same instant, could take the covenant at all of the stages mentioned. As believers, we hear such a communication from the depth of our consciences and know that our hearts have borne witness to such a covenant.

As a stomach expresses its emptiness in its own language, as a body tells its aches and pains in its own words, so the conscience informs us of this event in its own language and words. It suffers pain, distress, and affliction. Moaning with pangs of regret, it becomes restless to keep the promise made, and always hopes for the good and the best. When it draws attention by its sighs and moans, it feels relieved, fortunate and happy, just as children do when they draw their parents' attention. When it cannot express its need or find anyone to understand it, it writhes in pain and distress.