Rossetti’s Love Column

Three women sit in a room and idly chat about their love lives. One wears a mini skirt with a low-cut blouse and ruby-red lipstick. She places her heels on top of the table and speaks of the many men she has loved. Another dons golden hair that falls in soft waves against her rosy-pink cheeks and blue eyes. She speaks in a low voice and gushes about how much attention she receives from the opposite sex and her particular affection for one young man. The third wears faded layered garments with unkempt grey locks loosely fitted into a braid. She describes the life of an old woman knitting needles and still waiting for the right man to knock on her door. These three distinct women can all be found in society today. Though they are different in appearance and have divergent avenues of life, they have one quality in common: they are all hopelessly searching for love. In Christina Rossetti’s sonnet “A Triad,” Rossetti offers the audience three types of women who are pursuing love on misguided paths: a harlot, an object of beauty, and a spinster.

Rossetti uses society’s idea of a harlot to describe the disillusion associated with seeking fulfillment of love through promiscuity. Rossetti introduces the promiscuous woman as the “one with lips / Crimson, with cheeks and bosom in a glow, / Flushed to the yellow hair and finger-tips” (1-3). Though red lipstick holds a reigning position in the world of beauty today, during Rossetti’s era, lipstick was typically seen as a perverse method of seduction. However, most cultures today still consider cleavage-bearing shirts to be inappropriate and licentious attire. The meaning of Rossetti’s phrase “flushed to the yellow hair and finger-tips” seems unclear, but the idea of a “loose” woman suggests a person with unrestrained sexual desires, meaning her passion reaches every part of her body, even her hair and finger-tips. Later in the poem, Rossetti states, “One shamed herself in love” (9). This line connects to the promiscuous woman because she garners a negative impression from society and ignores her moral codes by attempting to find love in various outlets. Though the woman may believe love lies in this precarious mode of living, she never finds true love and ends up feeling lost and empty.

Rossetti capitalizes on the appearance of a beautiful woman to address the vain pursuit of beauty in place of love. In the poem, Rossetti writes, “And one there sang who soft and smooth as snow / Bloomed like a tinted hyacinth at a show” (4-5). A graceful singer has always been considered an emblem of beauty to the world. In addition, fairer complexions, similar to the color of snow, characterize delicate and attractive women. Rossetti also uses the brilliant colors of hyacinth flowers to further describe the woman’s alluring nature. Because the woman has such an appealing appearance, she most likely attracts a lot of male attention, so it should not be surprising to readers that out of the three women, the beautiful one seeks love through marriage. Rossetti states, “one temperately / Grew gross in soulless love, a sluggish wife” (9-10). Since the man only married the woman for her beauty, he neglects her when she grows old and unattractive. The woman dwells in soulless love because the man’s love for her was only skin deep and did not involve her heart.

Rossetti depicts the life of a loveless old maid to illustrate the negative effects of a life in sole pursuit of love. Rossetti says, “And one was blue with famine after love, / Who like a harpstring snapped rang harsh and low / The burden of what those were singing of” (6-8). The spinster may have had previous experiences with affection, but she never found true love. The phrase “blue with famine after love” suggests that she dwells in old age, dismal from the shortage of love in her life. Because of the old maid’s lack of love, her demeanor becomes bitter and aggrieved. Rossetti chooses to compare the resentful maid to a broken harpstring since the harpstring makes a “harsh and low” sound when it snaps, similar to the woman’s harsh outlook on love. Rossetti writes, “One famished died for love” (11). The woman famishes during the “famine” she experiences because of love’s absence. The old maid spent her entire life seeking love, wasting her limited days on earth and eventually died in vain before finding fulfillment.

Though Rossetti does not make it clear which one of the women “droned in sweetness like a fattened bee” (13) and which two “Took death for love and won him after strife” (12), the reader can decipher the possible meaning. The harlot could be the bee since she seeks love in many sources, filling herself with the sweet juices of deception dressed as affection like a bee growing fat from collecting pollen and nectar from countless flowers. The beautiful woman might have mistook the man’s love of her appearance for love of her soul and left life an unloved woman when her beauty faded. However, Rossetti does make it evident that the spinster died in hopeless search for love. Though all three women looked for love in different ways, Rossetti states that they were “All on the threshold, yet all short of life” (14). Because all three women tried to find love on misguided paths, they inevitably discovered themselves at death’s door before stumbling upon true love. Rossetti’s poem offers her readers harsh realities and applicable advice about love. Love cannot be discovered in sex or beauty, and a life should not be wasted in sole pursuit of love.

I Caught Happiness in a Net

1. Life seems to be a collection of things. A collection of knowledge. A collection of memories. A collection of coins.
2. I feel transparent. Can they see what I am thinking? I feel transparent. Do they know who I am? I feel transparent. It might be time to move somewhere else.
3. Introverts strive to become extroverts. Extroverts attempt to become introverts. Then there are extroverted introverts and introverted extroverts. If every introvert and extrovert were comfortable in his or her own skin, the world might be able to arrive at a happy medium, but then again, some individuals do not fit either mold.

No matter what boundaries and rules people try to place on the world, there will always be exceptions and gaps in the perimeter. Because of this inconsistency, the law will need to be broadened and adjusted to account for all individuals.

4. What if you could bottle happiness and take it anywhere you desired? Would you choose to take it with you or let it free at a bump in the road?
5. Maybe if the future seems inconceivable, it will not happen. At least, destiny will not happen according to plan. Man struggles to conceive concepts and ideas that only the infinite knowledge of God can comprehend.

Man’s carnal future exists in the world, and God has the world in His hand. Man’s eternal future also derives from God, so why should man worry over the future, which proves ungovernable?

6. Greatness exists in the most mundane things.

A door lock consists of a series of thin metal pins. The metal pins are broken up into two separate sets: an upper set and a lower set. A set of small springs keeps the pins in place. Every lock has a distinct pin length and pattern. When someone inserts the correct key into the lock, the pins lift, opening the door. And who would have thought it was just a lock?

7. People resemble bugs persistently running into glass windows. The bug can see where he wants to be, but he cannot figure out how to make it to the other side. He just keeps running into the same spot over and over again.

In the same manner, people see their end goal, whether that be happiness, love, or success, but the means to reach the goal appear obscured by unforeseen barriers. An individual can achieve a goal by identifying the obstacle and locating the window God has open in the his or her life.

8. People adapt their personalities, attitudes, and moods to accommodate their surroundings. This adaptation seems ordinary, but upon deeper reflection, it casts an unsettling shadow on an individual’s true identity. Who are people really? To a friend, I may be witty and cheerful, but to my professor, I might be perceived as reserved and cordial.

An individual’s authenticity exists within themselves. Even so, another problem arises. How can a person know his or her own identity when it has been warped by habituation for so long? Am I all of the characteristics I pretend to be, or are all of the traits I have developed attributes of my environment? If I do not know who I truly am then other people cannot claim to know my identity either.

9. I am floating upstream. I do not know how, but I am floating upstream.
10. I caught happiness in a net and put it in my butterfly jar. I could hear happiness try to escape as it beat its wings against the lid. I walked around the earth for awhile with happiness in my jar. With every step I took, the beating of happiness’ wings grew louder and stronger. I struggled to contain happiness in the jar against the wings’ power. I wanted to keep happiness there, but the beating became unbearable. I unscrewed the lid, expecting happiness to fly into the wind, but the jar was empty.
11. The human mind so easily falters under the weight of the world. The fragility of the mind does not always hinder the person. Sometimes it provides a gateway for emotion and action that further propels a person to accomplish more in life.
12. When eyes wander upon me, I would hope that they see deeper than skin and farther than trite thoughts. But then again, platitude phrases are not overly displeasing, are they? Terms and expressions have greater depth than surface level, so perhaps pretty and smart are adequate enough for now.
13. To fully comprehend my revelation, the geometric concept of a rectangle being an elongated square must be understood first. With that in mind, college generally takes the shape of a square building filled with square rooms and square desks where students write on square sheets of notebook paper. This square phenomenon extends beyond an arbitrary circumstance; instead, it establishes a methodical pattern.

It almost seems like college encourages students to think inside the box. The same defining boundaries exist in life. A stereotypical house consists of a rectangular structure with square rooms and rectangular rugs. People read rectangular books and sleep on rectangular beds with rectangular pillows.

Creativity exists in the realization that there are other shapes in life. A whole world of opportunities lies outside society’s defined lines. Life, if people allow it, has the potential to be a freethinking environment with architecturally different rooms and contrasting environments where thoughts and ideas bounce off walls and continue flowing through the atmosphere instead of becoming stuck in the corner of conformity. People should take advantage of the triangles, circles, and maybe even octagons life

offers.

Wading into Satirical Waters

        Let me start out by confessing: I love satires. I was first introduced to satires in middle school, where my history teacher thought it wise to expose eighth-graders to the likes of George Orwell in Animal Farm. In my naivety, I proclaimed to have a vast comprehension of the text and everything it embodied. Little did I know, there was more to it than a cute story about animals overthrowing people. It was not until high school when I came across Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal when I truly began to understand and fall in love with satire. I am not sure whether it was the brilliancy of the work or the shocking proposal of eating babies that garnered my attention, but nevertheless, I waded into the satirical waters. Even now, after years of reading satirical works of art, I cannot admit to having fully grasped the complexity of satires. In reading Voltaire’s Candide, I was not aware that it was anything more than an unusual narrative until halfway through the text. I initially blamed my misunderstanding on the stress of the semester, but the truth prevails, Candide certainly demonstrates itself to be a dense satire. In Candide, Voltaire exposes many different societal inconsistencies, specifically those regarding religion, war, and wealth.

        In various instances within the text, Voltaire uses satire to cast a negative light on religion. In one example, Candide runs out of provisions, but he does not worry since the country seems to be full of Christians who will readily adhere to the Bible’s doctrine of charity and provide him with life’s necessities. However, upon addressing a protestant minister, the minister asks Candide if he believes the Pope to be the Anti-Christ. Like any man inflicted by hunger pains, Candide replies, “ ‘whether he be, or whether he be not, I want bread’ ” (12). In response to Candide, the preacher says, “ ‘Thou dost not deserve to eat,’ … ‘Begone, rogue; begone, wretch; do not come near me again’ ” (12). In this particular scene, the protestant orator does not agree with Candide’s religious differences, so disregarding all biblical principles and his previous sermon regarding charity, he casts Candide away on the street to starve. Voltaire seems to be identifying the hypocrisy present among certain religions. He singles out the ongoing feud between Protestants and Catholics by exposing the lengths that each religion takes, even so far as disobeying the principles they are founded on, in order to undercut each other. Voltaire continues to expose more than just religious inconsistencies.

        Voltaire ridicules war by unemotionally relaying its horrors. Candide, drafted to fight by the Bulgarians, describes the war scene as “heroic butchery” (10). The words appear to be an oxymoron, but upon further reflection, the reader begins to see it as an accurate analysis of war. War, though an emblem of patriotism, leads to the unwarranted death of many people. In analyzing the wasteful nature of war, Candide ironically observes, “The cannons first of all laid flat about six thousand men on each side; the muskets swept away from this best of worlds nine or ten thousand ruffians who infested its surface. The bayonet was sufficient reason for the death of several thousands” (10). Voltaire removes men from behind the actions in order to desensitize the brutality; instead, he attributes the executions to the weapons themselves. Through this desensitization mechanism, Voltaire actually increases the reader’s awareness of the needless, destructive nature of war. Voltaire’s full-frontal attack on societal issues extends beyond the scope of religion and warfare.

        Voltaire uses the Utopian land of El Dorado in order to address society’s vain aspirations for wealth. Candide and his traveling companion Cacambo arrive in El Dorado, where they first come across children playing with stones from the land composed of gold, emeralds, and rubies. Candide and Cacambo later discover that the jewels do not hold any worth to the citizens of El Dorado since they come from the “pebbles” and “yellow clay” of the kingdom (66, 73). El Dorado appears to be an ideal place, filled with happiness and riches beyond measure, but Candide and Cacambo still resort to leaving the seemingly perfect land in search of other glories. Through this example, Voltaire attempts to convey to the reader the futility of living life in sole pursuit of wealth by showing how El Dorado thrives in happiness without the vain desire for riches. Voltaire also reveals that even when a person gains the wealth of the world, human desire still remains unquenched. The riches that Candide and Cacambo brought from El Dorado into the outside world also seem to dwindle rather quickly, and it ends up bringing them more trouble rather than helping them along the way. Through this, Voltaire seems to suggest that wealth has a short lifespan and proves ineffective in making life easier.

        Voltaire’s Candide certainly unveils many inconsistencies within society. The topics he brings to light continue to reflect the controversies present in our society today, such as those regarding religion, war, and wealth. Even though Voltaire’s exaggerations within Candide give rise to an unlikely plot, Voltaire manages to capture his audience’s attention and thus bring them to consider these issues from a different perspective. I may not have fully grasped every concept Voltaire put forth, but the text provides me with a unique looking glass to use in viewing the world around me. Candide proves itself to be another satirical piece worthy of adding to my ever-growing satirical book collection. This book has allowed me to move from wading ankle deep in the satirical waters to being fully submerged.

Spoon or Fork?

My friend and I once had a riveting discussion about whether mashed potatoes should be eaten with a fork or a spoon. She firmly believes that mashed potatoes should be eaten with a spoon because reason suggests that soft foods fall through the cracks of a fork. I am convinced that mashed potatoes should rightfully be eaten with a fork because I have complete faith that the solidity of the potatoes will maintain itself on top of the fork. My friend and I have yet to resolve this conflict; we just settled on the conclusion that as long as the potatoes can be consumed, our differences of opinion remain irrelevant. Similar to this argument, the dual philosophers and mathematicians Blaise Pascal and Renè Descartes share a difference of opinion about certain elements of the world. Even though both Pascal’s Human Happiness and Descartes’ Discourse on the Method ultimately land on the same conclusions, their thought processes widely differ.

        In order to understand why Pascal’s and Descartes’ outlooks conflict with one another, we need to first understand how each of their personalities shape their thinking. Pascal’s approach to understanding humans demonstrates itself to be slightly more pessimistic than Descartes’ method. Pascal states that even though man proves to be “nobler than his slayer,” he still remains the “weakest in nature” similar to a “thinking reed” (21, 54). Pascal seems to be saying that just like a reed, humans can be swayed by external circumstances and remain subject to chance. Pascal’s way of thinking directly contrasts with Descartes’ idea that man proves himself superior by being able to discern the truth and being “so secure and certain” in truth “that it could not be shaken by any of the most extravagant suppositions” (28). Descartes believes in the infallible nature of man. Unlike Pascal, Descartes remains convinced that humans prevail over external circumstances and can make rational decisions all on their own.

        Pascal’s and Descartes’ opinions about the relationship of the mind and body also directly contradict each other. Pascal firmly supposes that “The way in which minds are attached to bodies is beyond man’s understanding, and yet this is what man is …” (54). When Pascal states that “yet this is what man is,” he indicates that even though man cannot perceive of the intertwinement of mind and body, mind and body still exist together within man. Descartes takes the opposite approach by positing that the mind “… is not sufficient to be lodged in the human body like a pilot in his ship, except perhaps to move its members …” (48). Descartes not only believes that the mind exists separate from the body, but he asserts that the mind would not even function properly if it was present in the body. Even though Pascal and Descartes have opposing viewpoints about the mind and body, they both still come to the conclusion that whatever the relationship, each entity must fulfill its purpose in man.

        Pascal’s and Descartes’ primary disagreement hinges on the emphasis of human senses versus the emphasis of human reason. Pascal remains a staunch supporter for the power of human senses. He theorizes, “Imagination. It is the dominant faculty in man, master of error and falsehood …” (3). Pascal rejects the popularly preached doctrine that reason holds the position as man’s governing force and suggests that man’s sense of imagination dictates his actions. Pascal rationalizes this theory by stating, “Reason may object in vain, it cannot fix the price of things” (4). Pascal’s statement gives imagination the power to set the worth of anything man encounters, robbing reason of man’s leading faculty. In a discordant manner, Descartes asserts, “ … because our senses sometimes deceive us, I decided to suppose that nothing was such as they led us to imagine it to be” (28). Descartes’ supposition seems to be a full-frontal assault on Pascal’s ideology. Descartes believes that the senses, such as those related to imagination, prove themselves overly fickle, so they do not offer a foundation solid enough for man to rely on when perceiving the world. Instead, Descartes places confidence in reason’s ability to discern truth from falsehood through doubt.

Pascal’s emphasis on human senses and Descartes’ emphasis on human reason lead them to have conflicting views as it relates to theology. Pascal ventures to prove the existence of God through faith rather than reason. Concerning the question of God’s existence, he affirms, “Reason cannot make you choose either, reason cannot prove either wrong” (66). Instead he believes, “We are therefore incapable of knowing either what he is or whether he is. That being so, who would dare to attempt an answer to the question?” (65). Pascal’s basis for believing in God roots itself in man’s incapacity to know through reasoning whether God exists, alternatively stressing faith that God exists without innate knowledge. Descartes attests that man is able to discern whether God exists because “… God has given each of us an inner light to distinguish the true from the false …” (24). In this way, Descartes concludes that we can reason that God exists by following the logic that humans are not wholly perfect, so we must derive from a “truly more perfect” being (30). Pascal and Descartes may have taken different routes, but they both arrive at the conclusion of God’s existence.

It would certainly be accurate to say that Pascal and Descartes have incompatible ideologies. Nevertheless, as science would have it, polar opposites attract and almost always arrive at the same point. I would like to think that Pascal and Descartes would make the best of friends, always arguing about which route to take, but making it there in the end. Just like my friend and me, we settled with the fact that as long as the mashed potatoes can be eaten, the question of spoon or fork does not really matter. Though we agreed to disagree, I will always voice my support for the fork.  

Fact Not Folly

     Think of a person, any person. It could be a close associate or simply a fond acquaintance. Now think of every adjective that could possibly be used to describe that individual. Did the word “perfect” happen to be one of those descriptions? Odds are that it was not. If it was, then a reevaluation might be in order because that analysis contradicts with the self-evident truth found in the person’s humanity, the individual's predisposition to faults. Nonetheless, we tend to overlook the faults in people in order to maintain a happy relationship with them. Erasmus addresses this phenomenon in his work titled Praise of Folly. In this satirical piece, Erasmus utilizes the narrator Folly in order to address societal issues in an ironic fashion. One of the social deceptions Folly speaks of lies within the confines of relationships as it specifically relates to friendship, marriage, and family.
     Folly attributes the success of friendship to the presence of, none other than, folly. She confronts this topic by saying, “Just think: winking at your friend’s faults, passing over them, turning a blind eye, building up illusions, treating obvious faults as virtues which call for love and admiration–isn’t all that related to folly?” (33). Upon first coming into contact with Folly’s statement, it may seem that her analysis has not truth to it at all. However, when a reader actually begins to meditate on what makes a friendship last, Folly’s statement morphs into a plausible explanation. Honestly, how else could a person be able to reconcile another person’s flaws in order to achieve a happy relationship except by being under the illusion of the friend’s perfect state? The subtle realization that the friend has faults may even come to mind, but the illusion remains in order for the relationship to sustain itself. Friendship proves not to be the only relationship where Folly rears her head.
     Folly also declares to her audience that she identifies herself as the ultimate arbitrator in thriving marriages. She begins her tangent on the importance of folly in marriage by stating, “Just tell me, please, what man would be willing to offer his neck to halter matrimony if he applied the usual practice of the wise man and first weighed up its disadvantages as a way of life? (20). This statement by Folly has proven to be every bachelor’s excuse for eluding marriage. But what makes someone want to throw away his or her singular status and marry another despite the other person’s faults? How can someone deal with another’s horrible sense of humor or weird birthmark for the rest of life? Folly takes full responsibility and praise for this baffling occurrence. Folly reasons that the love-smitten individual must be under the influence of folly in order to be able to take another’s peculiarities and turn them into charming characteristics. Although, Folly only accepts praise for her part in happy marriages. A breakdown of a marriage can be attributed to an absence of Folly when the mirage that once masked the loved-one’s blemishes has disappeared. Now, what other relationship remains that Folly can claim as her own?
     Folly reveals that she proves responsible for the unquestionable bond between parent and offspring. Describing an instance where the perplexing relationship between parent and child manifests itself, Folly announces, “… a father talks about the wink in his son’s squinting eye–what’s that, please, but folly pure and simple?” (33). It may seem normal for a father to love his son in spite of the son’s imperfections because love should rightly exist within a family. However, love proves to be an emotion set aside from reason, and “all emotions belong to Folly” (45). Mothers and fathers cannot help but think the best of their children because the parents are swayed by the winds of love emanating from our fellow-friend folly. Every person can agree that the illusion manifested between parent and offspring deserves praise because love within a family proves to be a wonderful sentiment.
     Folly seems to attribute an extensive volume of seemingly-natural occurrences to herself. It may appear illogical to credit Folly with the happiness of all relationships like those of friendship, marriage, and family. Notwithstanding, Erasmus does have a point with his use of Folly in addressing these oddities within the world. It leads the reader to question the cause of these peculiarities, and like everything within the world, the origin of all emotions leads to God himself. In fact, Genesis 1:27 of the Bible says that we are created in God’s own image. Our emotions originate in our Creator, and that proves to be a fact not folly.

Debunking Utopia

Would you like to reside in a country where happiness, peace, equality, and prosperity are available to every individual? Odds are that you would. I know I certainly would. This idea of a perfect society has its roots in the term "Utopia" coined by Sir Thomas More in his work titled Utopia. More's novel tells the story of a character by the name of Raphael who thoroughly describes a seemingly perfect society he encountered on his travels to a far-away island. But why does this type of place seem so fictitious? There seems to be good reason for its mythical appearance. Great-thinkers throughout the ages have attempted to create a perfect society, but human efforts have failed to create a faultless model. This fact has led many to question the plausibility of a perfect society. However, human nature proves itself to be vastly against the reality of a perfect society like the civilization described in Thomas More’s Utopia.

Human nature proves instinctively greedy, and thus a faultless civilization cannot exist in the midst of a covetous people. The fact that More's Utopian society thrives without money does not exclude it from being corrupted by the desire for materialistic gain. An instance within the text where human greed would naturally take over can be found in their communistic policy in which "Any necessary equipment which is not available in the country is got from one's hometown … You simply ask an official for what you want, and he hands it over, without any sort of payment" (51). Any human being in a situation where he or she needs an item and does not have to pay for it will inevitably exploit the system and acquire more. One's reasoning for obtaining more than needed at the moment could either be for the sake of possessing more than another individual and thereby elevating one's socioeconomic status, or simply to prepare for unexpected predicaments. After all, no matter where a person lives, it manifests itself virtually impossible to steer clear of unplanned situations because God rules, not people. Another basis for hoarding excessive materials could be to save another trip to the town official, and that leads us to the next innate human nature that hinders a perfect society.

        It proves evident that individuals are quite lazy, so even the most ideal environment cannot suppress a person's desire to take shortcuts. Even if a person has never tasted the sweet, natural remedy called rest and relaxation, an individual can still recognize a quicker means to an end. Within the “ideal” land of Utopia, a policy exists in which the “authorities announce a shorter work day” because of the notion that they do not “force people to work unnecessarily, for the main purpose of their whole economy is to give each person as much time free from physical drudgery as the needs of the community will allow … ” (59). The fact that the citizens of the Utopian society have the opportunity for reduced work days and actually take advantage of it suggests that the citizens have a motive behind finishing their work. What other motive could that be other than shortening the hours spent in “physical drudgery” which leads to leisure and relaxation? They are certainly not speedily finishing their work in order to hastily begin more unnecessary work. Following that reasoning, how do the people finish their work so quickly? If they are already working their hardest, they cannot work even harder. They must have found a shortcut to aid them in hastening the process. With the instinctive human desire for downtime and time-saving, a perfect place cannot exist. Another unavoidable human characteristic that inhibits an ideal civilization presents itself.

        Humans naturally desire to improve themselves by advancing their lives; with that at the forefront of every person’s mind, an unblemished community cannot exist because every person primarily strives for self-betterment rather than bettering other’s lives. More refutes the idea of innovation for self-improvement by stating, “… there are bound to be dozens of unnecessary trades carried on, which merely supply luxury goods and entertainment” (57). Clearly, innovation remains an important part of economic growth and not an unnecessary factor in an ideal society. But why does an entrepreneur invent? An entrepreneur might say that his chief purpose for innovation lies in the appetite to improve the lives of others, but an inventor would not come up with a product that does not improve his own life as well. Products would have been thrown out if their usefulness did not initially present itself to the inventor. The great entrepreneur Steve Jobs does not have people at the forefront of his mind when he puts a new phone on the market every couple of months with a price-tag of close to a thousand dollars. Yet, he like other inventors prove essential to the prosperity of a country because a land would fall drastically behind others and lose its status as a dominant world power without advancements. Obviously the instinctive human desire for self-improvement cannot be avoided; consequently, a perfect civilization in that sense proves unavoidable as well.

        Ultimately, human nature inhibits the reality of an ideal society similar to the perfect civilization described in Thomas More’s Utopia. Even though we as humans would like to be a flawless individual without imperfect characteristics, a perfect being besides Christ cannot exist. Greed will always lead us to want more out of life. Laziness will always lead us to walk the straightest path between two points, and self-improvement will continue to lead us to dream up larger-than-reality innovations. Nonetheless, we should not fret at the thought of always living in imperfection because if we are saved through Christ, we have the opportunity to experience the perfect reality of Heaven.

The Traveler’s Guide Through Hell

            Who would be your ideal travel companion on a journey to a mystical, remote island? Perhaps it would be a native who has first-hand knowledge of the local hot-spots. Maybe it would be your level-headed mother who keeps you from being swallowed by jungle animals. It might even be your overly-prepared friend who prides herself in reading all of the travel brochures and speaking the regional language. But what if you had a fellow traveler who encompasses every desirable characteristic imaginable? It sounds too magnificent to exist, right? Well, you are correct in theory. This faultless individual cannot be found in the world today. However, this unique specimen of a man named Virgil lies within the confines of Dante’s epic poem Inferno. This literary work of art tells the tale of a character by the name of Dante (not to be confused with the author Dante) who roams the Circles of Hell under the supervision of one groovy tour guide, Virgil. Virgil proves to be the ultimate travel companion through Hell by undertaking the impressive roles of guide, reason, and teacher.

            Virgil’s most coveted title exists in the role of Dante’s tour guide. Upon introducing himself to Dante, Virgil promptly tells Dante to “follow me” and declares that he will be Dante’s “guide” “through an eternal place” (9). If you have ever been on a trip with indecisive companions, you know very well how frustrating it can get. That makes Virgil’s immediate imperative command sound like a sweet blessing. Virgil also discloses that he has already journeyed through Hell due to the commandments of the brutish witch Erichtho (89). Virgil’s statement establishes him as a trustworthy guide, and that proves crucial on a trip to a place as dangerous as Hell. A credible guide also proves vital on vacations to foreign lands, because if you are aware of imminent threats, it becomes less likely that you will fall prey to them. For example, if your guide tells you pickpockets are prevalent in a specific area, you will guard your belongings with extra care, making sure not to leave your possessions within easy access. Virgil possesses more than one characteristic of a perfect travel companion.

            Virgil’s characteristics and actions undeniably echo reason and wisdom. It seems important to note that Virgil proves to be more than the average Uncle Virgil. (Am I the only one with an Uncle Virgil?) He happens to be The Virgil that wrote the masterpiece the Aeneid. It goes without saying that any sane individual would be delighted to have a poet spitting out rhymes as he or she traverses a foreign land. Evidence already suggests from his writings that Virgil encompasses a little more intelligence than the standard Homo sapiens. His wisdom remains steady—if not more powerful—in his afterlife, and that rings true countless times within the Inferno. Virgil’s vast reason comes in handy when the Evil Claws try to pursue Dante and Virgil. Dante panics, but Virgil remains calm, cool, and collected by stating that he has “devised a single plan” to escape the Evil Claws (237). Inevitably, one guy always panics, but it proves a splendid phenomenon when another takes control of the dire situation. Virgil demonstrates himself to be a bona fide Fred Jones, who directs the gang to split up and comes up with all kinds of elaborate schemes. He happens to be a poet, and he personally knows Scooby Doo. What more could you want in a fellow traveler? Well, the creek that manifests itself as Virgil’s exceptional characteristics does not run dry yet.

            Virgil’s astounding intellect lands him the position of Dante’s teacher. In the pilgrimage to the Underworld, Dante faces a double obstacle by personally stating that he has to overcome “the battle through/ the journey, and the pity of my heart” (13). Not only does Dante have to conquer the long road through Hell, but he has to overcome his pity for the condemned souls. Virgil insistently instills in Dante the idea that weeping over the lost souls proves itself to be a worthless act. In one instance, Dante cries for the distorted figure in Hell, but Dante rebukes him, saying, “Here pity lives the best when it is dead” (205). Basically, Virgil’s cheeky reprimand means that Dante needs to stop blubbering over the hopeless shades and move on with his life. It would be quite convenient to have Dante around on a vacation to constantly teach me essential life lessons. For instance, maybe he could teach me to eat less at those vacation buffets. Honestly, you have to possess some serious self-control to be able to keep your hands off the endless shrimp and the ever-flowing chocolate fountain. Virgil, teach me your ways.

            Virgil demonstrates himself to be the epitome of travel companions through his diverse roles of guide, reason, and teacher. Even though Hell vastly differs from the typical person’s exotic vacation, they say that once you have seen Hell, you have seen it all, so a Hawaiian getaway would not prove terribly trivial for Virgil. And hey, maybe he can even teach you how to limbo (or not to Limbo) while you are there. Granted, Virgil remains physically absent on the Earth, but he manifests himself within the pages of his writing. Sometimes books are the best travel companions anyway. Ultimately, books are words that someone wrote. Are we not words that God spoke? 

Consolation of Exercise

I used to run mountain trails filled with adventure and thrill,

but now my stomach aches with donuts and cake,

and my diet is that only an

overweight boxing champion could take,

innumerable calories for a pot-belly pig of a woman.

To the youthful,

Sugar

is the craze, but now that I am heavy and laden,

and it weighs down more than my mind,

I cease to be a fair maiden,

yet still I consume serving after serving.

Relentless.

        My stomach sang these hymns to me through its tantrum-filled rumbles as I contemplated whether I should endure a circuit at the gym or a round of treats at Krispy Kreme. The donuts won out in the end. Here I hibernated on my bed amidst a dozen pastries, when out of my glazed-induced coma appeared a mighty man. His appearance startled me. The man’s biceps were alarmingly similar in size to basketballs, and his calves were even more prominent. Not only that, but the man’s odor was a distinguishable mixture of protein shakes and the sweat of a million Olympic athletes. He carried an apple and a banana in his left hand and a 20-pound dumbbell in his right.

The man’s piercing glare switched incessantly between the box of donuts and me. With a voice like a personal trainer, he roared, “How did these sugary varmints find their way in here? They provide no comfort for the miseries of a lazy woman. If these donuts were infecting an ordinary individual, it would be a different story. This is a five-time cross-country state champion for goodness sakes!” In one swift motion, he cast the pastries into my bedside garbage can.

I was almost put to tears at the thought of losing my precious chocolate-sprinkled desserts. If it was not for the intimidating nature of this man, I would have lashed out in furious rage. Still, I wanted to know who this muscled monster thought he was trashing the one substance that was providing me with the energy I needed to make it through the day.  He approached the television that was resting on my bedside table and pressed the power button with his sausage-like index finger. The television promptly turned on to an unfamiliar program and the motivational poet addressed me exclaiming:

The heaviness of weight

hides the abs.

Those calories you ate,

glazed and sprinkled,

hides it further.

A jelly-bellied woman

encountering a buffet

will stop in her tracks.

In the same manner,

your motivation

has no inclination

to proceed.

Discard your Netflix,

your pizza,

and your covers.

Let go of the donuts

and your body will

Recover.

He remained concentrated on the program, but as soon as the narrator ceased speaking, he flicked the television off and returned his focus to me. The mystery man demanded, “Wipe the sprinkles off your shirt and put on some tennis shoes! We need to whip you into shape!” After that proclamation, I instantly recognized him. It was none other than Sir Exercise himself. He had been with me all the way from little-league soccer to high school cross-country. It was now freshman year of college, and I had not seen his face in months.

I knew better than to ignore his commands, so I reluctantly rolled out of bed and dusted off a pair of ancient Asics running shoes. He pushed me out the door of my dorm out into the blinding sunlight.

I was terrified at the thought of what sort of arduous activity Sir Exercise might compel me to complete. He bellowed, “I know we have been separated for a while, so I am going to start you off with a little something I like to call walking.” I inquiringly pleaded, “Why do I have to walk when I can just drive my car around campus?”

Sir Exercise sighed, “I guess you have drifted farther than I had imagined. Let me tell you a little narrative.”

She who has seen into fitness’ secrets

now lies obese,

her body weighed down

by heavy meals

and no social skills.

With eyes to the screen,

she no longer sees

the grand benefits of walking.

She used to seek daily fitness goals,

and she knew that a ten-minute mile pace

is all that it takes

for wonderful health

and a reason

to feel satisfied about yourself.

        Realizing the astounding similarities this tale had to my life, I uttered, “Alright. Alright. I am now beginning to understand your reasoning. Commence the walking.”

        Sir Exercise and I trudged side-by-side in silence for half an hour. I occasionally eyeballed my stomach to see if it was shrinking yet. To my discouragement, it remained the same hefty size. We made an entire loop around campus, outlining as far as the football field back to Margaret Harris dorm. Boy, was I sweating. When we reached the dorm again, I was exceedingly close to coughing up a lung (or maybe it was a donut). I came to the sudden realization that I needed to start walking more in order to get back into decent physical shape.

        Through deep breaths, I airily announced to Sir Exercise, “Good workout. I now fully comprehend the need for walking.” Before I could turn around to head back to my room to be reunited with my comfy bed and maybe fish those unlucky donuts out of the trash, Sir Exercise said, “Whoa now, it is not time to hang up your shoes yet. We are advancing to light jogging. That was only the warm up…” Everything he said after that was a blurred mist of absolute bewilderment. “The warm up? Jogging? I thought we were finished! Why is there a need for a warm up when the warm up is an exercise in itself?”

        Sir Exercise exhaled, “You seem to have forgotten the key component of exercise. The warm up is crucial to successful physical activity. You are halfway to discovering the beauty of exercise again. But first, let me relay another tale to assist you in your understanding.”

       

On the athletes’ running track,

the coaches instruct the athletes

how to warm up before the physical test.

So one coach commands his player

to make the best of his rest.

Another directs his runner

to warm up his muscles

for the event.

Can you guess

which runner

won first place?

You would be right

if you said

the athlete who warmed up

was the one that came out ahead,

a trophy for one,

and a pulled hammy for the other.

Oh,

What a bummer.

I contemplated this notion along with Sir Exercise’s previous assessments, and every puzzle piece seemed to instantly find its place in the puzzle. I remembered. I remembered the desire I previously possessed to exercise. The runs I would go on every day just to clear my head. The healthy meals I would consume. The slim waist I sported. I recalled it all. Exercise is an important part of who I am. It makes me feel physically and mentally strong, and it is a part of me that will never be forgotten again. So long donuts. Hello exercise.