Category Archives: Blog

This man’s name was Emeron, but he was said to be crazy!!

Posted by David Emeron on

Yes…. Yes indeed…. Most definitely crazy….

…could help teach him to defend himself. He soon found out from the locals that there was such a man that could help him. A man of great strength and great power. This man’s name was Emeron, but he was said to be crazy and belligerent. Forced out by the people he was now considered to be an outcast, and had been so for many, many years now. Ocieleoz sought to find him and found a man unfamiliar to him in the woods and followed him back to his house. After a week of watching him daily, and finding out this was indeed Emeron, Ocieleoz approached him only to be shut down by threat of death. Ocieleoz continued to watch and spy on Emeron for a few weeks, learned his habits and routines, until one evening Emeron did not show up to his house. Ocieleoz took this opportunity to sneak into Emeron’s house, but was soon caught in a trap just inside the back door that roped his foot and flung him upside down. Hitting his head on the ground during this knocked him out. He was woken by Emeron later that night. Recognizing Ocieleoz to be the priests son, he fetched Arwén to come retrieve his boy. Ocieleoz was forbidden by his father to never speak to Emeron again….

via New Blood | Learning How To DM.

This latest…

Posted by David Emeron on

…addition to a sequence, comes at rather a late hour, in more ways than one.  I have been preoccupied with a trip I am planning to take at the beginning of April, 2013–the first of such travel in quite a long while for me.  I found myself avoiding everything–including thought.  Still, tonight I had to see if I could push through it.  I am pleased to see that I am able to do so.  I have posted tonight’s entry which is now scheduled to go up on the 28th.  So the “addition” link will not be live until then.  The “sequence” link is good, but will not include the new entry until then.

The newest entry is a Reverse Spenserian with alternating rhyme at the first of the line–alternating similar sounds.  Plus a few internal rhymes as well.  The Reverse Spenserian scheme has a slowly metamorphosing rhyme sound scheme.  So each new rhyme is related to the last in some way.  And each alternative rhyme is related to its former by an addition of an ‘R’ sound added to the final vowel syllable.

Why do the young man and I both love the dark lady?

Posted by David Emeron on

I am, of course referring to Shakespeare’s sonnets. The most obvious element of the 154 sonnets has not been entertained. Perhaps this is because… I will not say it is due to the fact that no analysis of these sonnets has been performed by a poet. No, rather it is more possible that no poet or non poet, for that matter, has ever undertaken (as have I) to write a sequence of poems (and specifically sonnets) to himself.

Anyone who is familiar with me in the least will know that I tend toward long-winded explanations of subjects in which I am interested. However, here you will be disappointed. I will only state the following: Either first undertake the sequence I mentioned. Write yourself a sequence of poems–written from yourself as you are now, to yourself when much younger: a teen or a child perhaps.   It will help if they have the same form and perhaps would help more, for my purposes, if they were sonnets, but certainly, the more consistent structure, the better for this exercise. Write a sufficient number of them. Let us say… perhaps ten at the minimum. If you do this, you will know the answer to the question in the title of this article. You will not help but know the answer. Or if you are not willing to do this, you may read the next paragraph, but the answer will appear like speculation to you unless you have done what I ask.

The answer to the question is simply that these sonnets were all written by Mr. Shakespeare to his younger self. This renders both popular theories, one with merit, and one without, as incorrect. The first theory is obvious enough not to be stated, however it is that Shakespeare is writing to advise all young men, as there is no evidence of a particular young man whom he had befriended at the time the sonnets were written (during the plague, it seems, when he was all but “holed up” in his house and could not by law engage in his profession of staging his plays) the other theory is not worth a mention but marxists find one reason or another to promote it. Therefore I shan’t even justify it. It is without merit, and for more reasons than anyone is willing or able to state. Still… why not a message to all young men or a particular friend? His reference to the dark lady “that they both love” is the answer. But more than that there is no point in relating until you perform the exercise I suggest.

It is the simplest way to make the case (after which you should go back and read all 154 sonnets again.) Honestly. You will see that the ways in which someone speaks to his younger self are unique–are not, cannot be, those he would employ when speaking to anyone else. Try it. It will convince you! But, as I previously stated, all this will seem like supposition until you do as I ask.

Peacocking???

Posted by David Emeron on

Regarding this:  entitled Liar, Liar, Books on Fire! I left the following comment, and once again I felt it too long that it should not be included here as a regular entry.

There is a book or two that, due to my advancing years, I cannot now remember having read–or not.  Still this is an interesting topic.  As a young man of science, I could not have imagined the reason or cause for “peacocking,” if I am using the offered term correctly.(?)

And, as a young man, the nature of the books I read, filled as they were with diagrams, equations and very, very densely specialised text, such fakery would have been inconceivable.  As a much (much, much, much) older man, I do of course understand the nature of a man who might wish to be thought greater than he is.

Still I would not commit this act of bravado.  And, as it happens, I myself have a very solid reason to commit such an act.  I have a standing agreement with a colleague of mine, who has some kind of irrational aversion to the reading of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged,” to wit, that he will read the book in question if and when I complete Dostoevsky’s “The Brothers Karamozov.”

I have tried.  Indeed I have.  I am some few chapters in at my last attempt.  But I believe my friend will win this contest of ours if I play fair.  And I will, I am afraid, even though I believe Miss Rand’s book will, for him, answer some very important questions which he has to me voiced over the many decades.

As for the above list:

I have read Orwell’s ‘1984’ I wish I could claim to have read it During the year itself, but I cannot now remember.  Most likely, I read it a few years before that time.

My sweet wife and I have read the entire “Lord of the Rings” trilogy aloud, taking turns over many successive evenings.  These books read very well in this way, almost as though they were written with such a method in mind.

I attempted, but did not finish “Pride and Prejudice” as a very young man.  I will here state that I enjoyed, to some degree, the 1/5th that I did read, but that its language was a bit too much for my equation-addled brain to parse.  Merely having fallen in love with a “humanities girl” was not then enough to grant me the gift of comprehension of such language.  (This failure is partly what led me to study the poetry of various periods–to my scientific mind, a much more efficient way to survey the language of various eras)  I have not attempted it yet again, but I believe that, were I to do so, it would afford me no trouble at all at this late date.

And, even though it was not so very long ago, my failed attempt to read “Catcher in the Rye” induced a kind of glaze of the eyes, which condition still has not completely abated.

Polyethylene Glycol 3350…

Posted by David Emeron on

…can be taken in a carbonated soft-drink without significantly altering its taste.  What is more amazing than this, is that in so doing, one does not alter the “fizziness” of the beverage in the least.

One must be careful not to mix it in too quickly, because it will foam somewhat; however not nearly as much as when other dissolvable substances are added to such beverages.

I had expected the foaming to take place, but I did not expect enough carbonation to remain afterwards.  Somehow the resultant mixture was little changed–even after all the agitation necessary to dissolve 17 grams of the the stuff.