I still disagree that sonnets are all about love./
But that’s some connotation of 14 lines and a rhyming scheme: My classmates say./
So, okay. Then I’ll be aware that if I ever rhyme in 14 lines, I’m saying something/ additional to them./
But if you wrote a sonnet to someone who didn’t know baba from aaa/ (like me, how about, much to the horror of my literature classmates)/
then what ought it mean?/
Because, if you knew the other did not know what a sonnet was, maybe 14 lines happened to be right, and you rhymed because that’s what the other thinks poetry to be./
(AHA a run-on line. Now, if you use that then what purpose does it serve?)/
Who says any poet knows all the time all the devices they use,/ amateurs like this human bean/ included/
Everything happens because of something they choose,/ just take it as it is then./
And still, incomplete, anyway, because this is not where the answer lies.
That’s not really the point though. But yesterday was the last day of formal school, and it is also true that nothing much has changed. I’m relieved but sad to have finished my H3. It’s been a long time in progress and I’m happy with it, but I’m also sad to see it go?
I haven’t written something like that, that I’ve wanted to write, since secondary school narrative essays. GP essays catch you in your own factual loop, Literature makes you justify your feelings, Economics just wants their terms in order and History is now all just arguments and picking things to fit your thesis.
Which of these is the best? Well, at least H1 Chinese let me continue writing stories. Math doesn’t lie and is both harsh and fair.
Ah, but even my own judgements are not fair.
GP is expository essay writing, my unpreferred type, but not much different from before, and these lessons are among the most relevant in life sometimes. But we get misinformation during GP sometimes too, and I am unsure if these are a test.
Literature is built on saying how you felt, and becoming aware of why you felt in a certain way. But sometimes the happiest poems fill you with deep aching sorrow – it’s like history source base in the before; differentiating between the message of the source, and what you interpret it as evidence of when you have your own CK. Does Literature here then ask for more, or less audience involvement?
Economics then is a study of the capitalist system that has brought about wealth in the past few (?) centuries, a study of how people ought to function, how firms which comprise of people exploit the rest, and how semi-controlling governments intervene to prevent the collapse of the system. It’s fascinating to see greed institutionalised, yes, but nothing quite beats History in terms of the horror.
History, not a be-all-end-all, is a story of human suffering. Hatred + Ignorance + STORY. And therefore its purpose to tell that story to correct our state of ignorance. But if you learn the wrong things, bent for the wrong purposes, then history repeats itself, constantly. Kuwait for Saudi Arabia is Poland for Poland. Iraq was funded by multiple world powers for the sake of oil, let us not kid ourselves. Then, let us reapply, everything.
Economics says, intervention in Kuwait makes sense for if Saddam Hussein were to control 65% of the oil in the Middle East that would be bad. But where was Economics when the Great Powers decided to go to Poland’s defence?
Literature says, “How can you say that? Do you have no sense of humanity?”
The answer is, then “Is it not unfair that Czechoslovakia was not defended then?”
But these are built on wrong facts and wrong evidence, for History intercedes, laughing.
“Do you really think that Britain and France defended Poland?”
It’s all balderdash, in the end.
But you see, of these all, GP would use this as evidence of a Western Betrayal.
And Math? x=years of war y=dead. Plot y on x in a scatter diagram, and see if a linear equation would be suitable for estimating the dead by the year 1942.
At the base though, no one knows those numbers to be true. They’re all estimates. – the horror.