i stole this off my cousin's facebook - it's too good to keep to myself:
http://little-people.blogspot.com/
oh yeah, and check this new song. gosh i adore that little pixie.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Sunday, February 24, 2008
apparently i have asian roots...
so, i was reading eben's blog about the root of harmony's name and decided to look up my own name. i was surprised to find that kerria is not only a flowering japanese bush (kerria japonica) but also a resin-secreting insect (kerria lacca, also known as kerria lacca lacca, or lakshadia indica). its secretion, 'lac', is used to create a scarlet (like my hair!) pigment and the end product of shellac for varnish. it is also used as an anti-obesity drug. this insect is native to India, China and South East Asia.
According to the ever-reliable wikipedia, "[lac] has a mention in the ancient Vedic book called the Manusmrti, or the 'Laws of Manu'. This book is the source of all the laws regarding caste in India. It lays down who can eat with whom, who can marry whom, who can touch whom; and it also lays down how those who infringe those laws should be punished. Thus, for example, it is decreed: "XII. 4. If the shudra [a member of the labouring caste, or an Untouchable] intentionally listens for committing to memory the Veda, then his ears should be filled with molten lead and lac; if he utters the Veda, then his tongue should be cut off; if he has mastered the Veda his body should be cut to pieces."
hmmmm...
i also spent some time a couple of months ago searching for other kerrias on facebook, and found that it seems to be popular in the states as a middle name or in an altered state: sha'kerria, for example.
maybe i should change my name to sha'kerria.
According to the ever-reliable wikipedia, "[lac] has a mention in the ancient Vedic book called the Manusmrti, or the 'Laws of Manu'. This book is the source of all the laws regarding caste in India. It lays down who can eat with whom, who can marry whom, who can touch whom; and it also lays down how those who infringe those laws should be punished. Thus, for example, it is decreed: "XII. 4. If the shudra [a member of the labouring caste, or an Untouchable] intentionally listens for committing to memory the Veda, then his ears should be filled with molten lead and lac; if he utters the Veda, then his tongue should be cut off; if he has mastered the Veda his body should be cut to pieces."
hmmmm...
i also spent some time a couple of months ago searching for other kerrias on facebook, and found that it seems to be popular in the states as a middle name or in an altered state: sha'kerria, for example.
maybe i should change my name to sha'kerria.
Friday, February 08, 2008
sow your seeds, little ones...
school at once inspires and repulses me. i love some things, i hate others. i hate the meaningless discussions of structure and theory, when it doesn't come hand in hand with some sort of reality to ground it in. what is the use of discussing a theory without asking how it fits into the world?
maybe this is why i love my environment classes. some of it is observational - earth crusts and wave motion and the movement of sediment from one side of a continent to the other and how the ocean revolves around us and gives us life(amazing!). some of it is how to take the theories and thoughts and ideas of hundreds of years and use it for something positive. funny how unique this seems in university. i don't seem to recall any other realm that ever said "ok, let's discuss compassion and how to make this world more compassionate and gentle", rather than merely "let's discuss theories of ethics, development, poverty, health...". perhaps it is a given that you will use this knowledge to change the world around you. but should this be a given? should we be able to gnaw our ways through four years of university classes without once being told - "this is not for naught! take this and sow it, use it to make the world a more beautiful place!"
perhaps that would not be a good thing either. in fact it sounds downright evangelical. and of course i realize that 'good' is subjective and has been twisted for nefarious purposes. but perhaps compassion and generosity are better words. perhaps this is what is lacking: i rarely heard anyone discuss those words in university, nor their importance - not in a classroom setting, anyway. i just remember a book my mom and dad used to read me called 'the lupine lady', in which the main character is taught as a little girl by her grandfather that in order to live a full life she must leave the world a more beautiful place than before. and she spends many years doing exciting things and traveling the world and living a happy life, but never feels that she has left a more beautiful earth behind her. so finally she decides to plant lupines everywhere and leave the hillsides blue-purple-pink.
i guess what i mean by all this is that university seems to teach us, for the most part, how to make our own lives better. it gives us 'tools' (as they say) for the 'real world' (as they say). it gives us a zingy resume, the ability to think quickly and sharply and sometimes critically so that we are wonderfully 'hireable'. it gives us the ability to regurgitate a million times over the thoughts of others, but for the most part our own thoughts and creativity are not seen to be part of the process. and simplicity is never rewarded. nobody ever says that it is admirable to be without ambition, that planting flowers and trees and food is a noble pursuit, or that gentleness and kindness and a compassionate ethic is more important than personal success.
and i guess that a book i read when i was five left me a more generous person than unviersity ever did, and this seems sad. something so simple can make the world more lovely for others, but i feel like all we ever think about (myself included) is how to make the world better for ourselves. so yeah, i'm stoked that i'm taking classes that discuss how to bring compassion and empathy back into a world where the dominant and applauded ideology is individual gain. and the people in my class are all so excited, so involved, so young and wide-eyed and kind. we are being asked in a 200 level class to examine our desires and needs, to examine how we treat the world around us and finally to use this knowledge to build a noble life. i feel inspired by this.
i can't wait to be a farmer.
maybe this is why i love my environment classes. some of it is observational - earth crusts and wave motion and the movement of sediment from one side of a continent to the other and how the ocean revolves around us and gives us life(amazing!). some of it is how to take the theories and thoughts and ideas of hundreds of years and use it for something positive. funny how unique this seems in university. i don't seem to recall any other realm that ever said "ok, let's discuss compassion and how to make this world more compassionate and gentle", rather than merely "let's discuss theories of ethics, development, poverty, health...". perhaps it is a given that you will use this knowledge to change the world around you. but should this be a given? should we be able to gnaw our ways through four years of university classes without once being told - "this is not for naught! take this and sow it, use it to make the world a more beautiful place!"
perhaps that would not be a good thing either. in fact it sounds downright evangelical. and of course i realize that 'good' is subjective and has been twisted for nefarious purposes. but perhaps compassion and generosity are better words. perhaps this is what is lacking: i rarely heard anyone discuss those words in university, nor their importance - not in a classroom setting, anyway. i just remember a book my mom and dad used to read me called 'the lupine lady', in which the main character is taught as a little girl by her grandfather that in order to live a full life she must leave the world a more beautiful place than before. and she spends many years doing exciting things and traveling the world and living a happy life, but never feels that she has left a more beautiful earth behind her. so finally she decides to plant lupines everywhere and leave the hillsides blue-purple-pink.
i guess what i mean by all this is that university seems to teach us, for the most part, how to make our own lives better. it gives us 'tools' (as they say) for the 'real world' (as they say). it gives us a zingy resume, the ability to think quickly and sharply and sometimes critically so that we are wonderfully 'hireable'. it gives us the ability to regurgitate a million times over the thoughts of others, but for the most part our own thoughts and creativity are not seen to be part of the process. and simplicity is never rewarded. nobody ever says that it is admirable to be without ambition, that planting flowers and trees and food is a noble pursuit, or that gentleness and kindness and a compassionate ethic is more important than personal success.
and i guess that a book i read when i was five left me a more generous person than unviersity ever did, and this seems sad. something so simple can make the world more lovely for others, but i feel like all we ever think about (myself included) is how to make the world better for ourselves. so yeah, i'm stoked that i'm taking classes that discuss how to bring compassion and empathy back into a world where the dominant and applauded ideology is individual gain. and the people in my class are all so excited, so involved, so young and wide-eyed and kind. we are being asked in a 200 level class to examine our desires and needs, to examine how we treat the world around us and finally to use this knowledge to build a noble life. i feel inspired by this.
i can't wait to be a farmer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)