- Usher here discusses Shakespeare's response, specifically through his plays, to the changing astronomical system. He suggests that Shakespeare employed a telescopic device developed by Thomas Digges that allowed him to build a greater understanding of the universe, which he then makes references to in his plays, most particularly Hamlet. Although I'm not so sure about the conspiracy-theory-esque-ness of this article, it provides many examples of how the various systems would have been referenced in literature. It also suggests that Shakespeare may have been a person who tried to understand the universe, and then portray it in a more palatable form.
- And it includes the following excellent quote from Richard Stone: "Universally, human beings will resort to narrative to come to grips with a shattered reality."
I had many great opportunities this weekend to discuss my plans for my field study with friends. I've found that I've significantly improved my ability to explain my project concisely and in a way that people understand, although admittedly it sounds rather aloof because using the clearest, concisest words results in a string of longer words used in pretty quick succession. But it's been fun, and people have responded so positively! It feels good to be able to give a small explanation of what I'm interested in, and have people say, "Wow! That sounds really cool!" and then to have some people press for more information about this thing that I'm devoting three months of my life to studying.
I've been reflecting a lot on how cross-disciplinary my project sometimes feels. It's part science, part literature, part history, part theology, part art. This has been, at times, a bit troubling to me because it seems like I'm spreading myself too thin, trying to incorporate too many topics, and not knowing enough about most of them to be able to develop anything valuable. Similarly (and I swear, this is related) I've experienced a bit of frustration here and there with various class discussions, feeling as though they don't apply to me as much as they do to students who are going to Ghana or India or Mexico, or who are doing projects that are more living-people-centric than mine. (Stay with me ... these are going to come together!)
But what I'm coming to realize, both in terms of my project and in terms of life in general, is that life is not compartmentalized. It isn't organized into little boxes, and you can't just say, "I'm going to look at this box now, and this box only." My dad used to say something to us every time something in our house broke while I or one of my siblings would play with it: "Were you using it for something it wasn't meant to be used for?" The answer was usually, "Yes," and although that's the wrong answer when you're using the dining room chairs to build a climbing tower, it is absolutely the right answer in many other settings. That is, we're allowed to use—and should use—the things we know outside of their "compartment." Mostly because those compartments we imagine don't really exist, but also because it improves our learning. I like to imagine that someone's going to ask me, "Were you using that thing you learned in Christian history class for something that wasn't a Christian history assignment?" or "Were you using that interviewing principle for a personal conversation?" I like to imagine that I will always be saying, "Yes."
I'll be saying "Yes" because that's the best way to learn, and the best way to discover—to bring everything you know to the table so you can answer the questions you have and then ask better ones. So what if my project can incorporate information from many disciplines? Right on! That's how it's supposed to be. So what if I don't use the things I'm learning in exactly the same way that they're being taught to me? Awesome! There are a billion ways to use those principles—can't possibly expect them to be used exactly the same way every single time!
I guess what I'm saying is that this whole field study thing, this whole education thing, this whole life thing ... well, it's actually pretty amorphous, pretty flexible, pretty prone to flowing around rather than being solid and definable.
And this whole everything? I'm pretty okay with it. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment