Frog-Talk: Βρεκεκεκὲξ κοὰξ κοάξ

Apropos of nothing, I made a note of this in October 2017: Brekekekèx-koàx-koáx / Βρεκεκεκὲξ κοὰξ κοάξ

The Beech-Grove

After Sam and Frodo are rescued from Mordor, they awaken in a beech-grove in Ithilien.  We enter the scene with Sam's return to consciousness:

(LotR VI.4 at 951).*  After some discussion and their morning ablutions, Frodo and Sam follow Gandalf "out of the beech-grove in which they had lain" even further into a world of bliss and beauty and abundance (id. at 952).

* * *

So here we see peace and safety associated with a bed outdoors in a beech-grove.  We say "safe as houses," but the description here really emphasizes the lack of roof.  With no roof and no walls, the hobbits would necessarily be exposed to the elements, wouldn't they?  No doubt the clement weather, too, is a sign of grace. 

FN* Sam quickly realizes where he is (that smell!) and verifies that Frodo is sleeping peacefully.  Over the next five paragraphs he has a bit of conversation with Gandalf and springs out of bed, before we (along with Sam) learn that Frodo first woke up hours before ("I was awake early this morning, and now it must be nearly noon.").  

Lewis Carroll's Games and Puzzles

I used to have a paperback book devoted to various brain teasers by Lewis Carroll, which I foolishly jettisoned when it started disintegrating and have never been able to find again after many online searches.  I associate it with the place we lived in 1986-1991, so it was probably published no later than that (quite possibly much earlier) and seem to recall it was edited by Martin Gardiner.  It may have been published by Penguin.  And yes, I have used some and all of those search elements and more (including quotes from specific rhymes and puzzles I remember from inside the book) to no avail.

One of the games this book introduced me to is a thing where you are to change one word into another in a certain number of steps, changing one letter at a time - and of course, each step must be a word. 

For example, the challenge might be to change DROP into PAIL, which can be done in 6 steps as follows:
DROP
DRIP
GRIP
GRIN
GAIN
PAIN
PAIL

(It may be possible to do it in fewer than six steps, that's just what it took me!)  This is a game I've played sometimes on the subway for fun, setting myself the odd semi-random challenge; ideally there is some connection between the words.

Other examples I generated, as a possible exercise for the reader: 

• change HAND into FOOT (5 steps or fewer)
• change NOSE into EARS (5 steps or fewer)
• change BALD into HAIR (4 steps or fewer)
• change NOSE into TOES (4 steps or fewer)
• change COOL into WARM (5 steps or fewer)
• change SHOE into SOCK (this took me 10 steps - surely it can be improved upon!)
• change MIND into MUSH (5 steps or fewer)

Elvis Is Everywhere and Other Pre-Pandemic Miscellany (2019)

• The song could so easily have been "Elves Is Everywhere" – Sam Gamgee's theme song – and it could have had the refrain "Elves needs boats, Elves needs boats" (thus explaining the Bermuda Triangle in the process).  We will not speak of the Lórien bots, although that has its own charm.
• The calls to legalize marijuana now always provoke this thought in me: "...because there isn't nearly enough carelessness, incompetence, and sloppy thinking."
• Doesn't the Ursula K Le Guin book (on which a friend's cat is sleeping) look like the The Tombs of Tuan? I like to think of Túan as the undead offspring of Tevildo and Húan.  And that might explain why the cat isn't helping...
• Thinking of S, who died far too soon:
• She loved wearing overalls, for pretty much the same reason her beloved hated them (they are unflatteringly unisex and juvenile)
• Overall, she had a sort of modesty or humility that seemed to reflect a lack of confidence, or even a discomfort with her own gifts (which were many).  
• When she was in grad school, there was a guy in her program who kept telling her "I'm in love!"  She would keep asking him who with, and he would keep replying "With life!"  It was obvious to me and everyone else that he had a crush on her, but she seemed to take his statement at face value and found it very inspirational.  (She was very surprised and chagrined when he finally confessed that she was the object of his affection.) 
• When we were in high school or early college, I remember my dad mentioning once that she'd sent him her resume; he told me he was willing to speak with her, but she'd have to reach out to him.  Why didn't I tell her that?  (She never did reach out to him.)  
• She was given to almost naive enthusiasms, perhaps even self-consciously reveling in her own unabashedness, while she could be quite scornful of enthusiasms she didn't share.
• She had no patience with posers/wannabes.
• I remember several quirks about her beloved, including that he deleted the Minesweeper game on her computer because he couldn't resist playing it.  But they were devoted to each other, and I believe were quite happy together.

Perelandra & Theological Debate

I have in my notes a response to some superficial/snarky characterization of the fact that Ransom ultimately takes his "debate" with the Un-man to the physical plane in Perelandra.   (As best I can reconstruct it, the claim must have been that Lewis seems to suggest that Christianity cannot be defended by logic and reason, but only by physical violence.)   I've adapted my thoughts here for sharing.

===

Preliminarily, I would acknowledge that few believers of any faith are capable of winning philosophical debates with outsiders in real life. 

That said, Ransom is never really engaged in a philosophical debate with the Un-man; both of them are addressing their arguments to the Lady, and the purpose is to create or prevent a Fall on her planet.  Critically, they are not discussing or debating Christianity, which has absolutely no relevance to unfallen Perelandra.  Indeed, Ransom believes that a Fall on Perelandra would prompt divine grace in some terrifyingly different, unimaginable form.†

Rather, the Un-man is looking to tempt the Lady to rebel against Maleldil, and it is not limiting itself to logic and reason.  Appeals to emotion and self-image are entirely fair game.  For example, at one point, the Un-man starts telling seemingly interminable stories which Ransom eventually realizes are designed to play on the Lady's altruism and nobility of spirit to trigger dangerous pride or vanity.  The Un-man seeks to manipulate the Lady by any means available.

Ransom is playing defense.  He is trying to expose and guard against the Un-man's temptations and thus prevent a new Fall.  But he simply cannot win the contest for persuasion of the Lady, because he's human.  He, unlike the diabolical agent animating the Un-man, needs food and sleep, and has only a few decades' experience to draw on.

I would also note that the Un-man literally can't be bothered to debate Ransom.  It doesn't need to persuade him of anything, so it's perfectly content to torment him by repeating his name incessantly at intervals for no reason.*  This passage from chapter 10 explains the peculiar relationship between the Un-man and rationality itself:  

[The Un-man] showed plenty of subtlety and intelligence when talking to the Lady; but Ransom soon perceived that it regarded intelligence simply and solely as a weapon, which it had no more wish to employ in its off-duty hours than a soldier has to do bayonet practice when he is on leave.  Thought was for it a device necessary to certain ends, but thought in itself did not interest it.  It assumed reason as externally and inorganically as it had assumed Weston's body.  The moment the Lady was out of sight it seemed to relapse. 

===

FN† From chapter 11: 

If [Ransom] now failed, this world also would hereafter be redeemed.  If he were not the ransom, Another would be.  Yet nothing was ever repeated.  Not a second crucifixion: perhaps--who knows--not even a second Incarnation . . . some act of even more appalling love, some glory of yet deeper humility.  For he had seen already how the pattern grows and how from each world it sprouts into the next through some other dimension.  The small external evil which Satan had done in Malacandra was only as a line: the deeper evil he had done in Earth was as a square: if Venus fell, her evil would be a cube – her Redemption beyond conceiving.  Yet redeemed she would be. 

FN* Luckily for readers, Lewis explains the concept in a few pages rather than reporting the entire monologue journalistically.

Back to Cold Spring!

It was a cool, breezy day, perfect for hiking.  For the stem of the lollipop (about 1 hour), I walked from the station to the trailhead, then took a left at the initial fork for the gentle slope of Cornish (blue) to Brook (red).  The loop portion took me about 2.5 hours: right on Undercliff (yellow), left on Washburn (white) to go up and over the top of Bull Hill, then left on Notch (blue) back to the junction with Undercliff.  From there, I retraced my steps.  

Not much to report in terms of flora or fauna, but it was nice to get back to the old stomping grounds.  

Nosiness

At the AskAManager site: 

1. How do I explain why I’m not donating blood?

My medium-sized company is hosting a blood drive on site in a few weeks and HR has really been pushing for people to sign up. I would love to donate blood but because I am a sexually active gay man, I am not allowed. Because I live in a small, conservative town, I am in mostly in the closet (totally at work). My employer is basically the only game in town and I need to keep my job. From past conversations and experiences, I have no doubt that things would not go well if I came out (that includes HR and my boss).

While I hate that this is how it is, I have come to terms with it. The issue is, I don’t know what to say to people when they ask why I haven’t signed up. I can’t say the truth so I think a small white lie is the way to go. I was going to say that I donated recently already but as this is a small town, we don’t have many drives so worry about follow-up questions. Any other suggestions? 

Since I apparently missed the commenting window, here's my $0.02:

I'd try to pick a vague reason or even a non-reason and repeat it over and over, no matter what.  Unless the busybodies have a subpoena, you don't have to give them a real answer of any kind - no matter how hard they push.  

And if they start speculating about specific reasons why you might be unable to give blood, whether correctly or incorrectly, I'd move to "You are not entitled to that information."  Or "Wow, that's presumptuous."  Or just stare at them in amazement at their rudeness and walk away.    

I suppose the bottom line, for me, is that it is, in fact, the busybodies who are being rude if they persist after a polite non-answer or a polite deflection.  The longer they persist, the ruder they are being.  You owe them nothing.

And now that I think about it, the letter writer doesn't even need to reveal the fact that he cannot give blood.  If he's got the courage to face down social disapproval and is willing to ignore or deflect attempts to persuade him that he's being selfish or insufficiently public-spirited, "I don't want to" is a more than sufficient reason - and it should shut down inquiry into his reasons.