Soul Food

Like Lo Mien...yum.


SO, as some of you may know I like to find intertwining events, theories, names, really anything, that associates with Harry Potter. For this post I would like to point out the similarities and differences between Daemons and Patronuses.

First, Daemons. They are a manifestation of ones own soul there to guide you through life and help make decisions; they are a life long companion that if hurt/killed affects you in the same manner. They do behave in ways that are independent of their human and are usually the opposite gender. When separated it's as if your soul has been ripped out. When you become an adult or go through a life changing experience, your daemon will settle on an animal form that represents and defines you.



http://tucsoncitizen.com/morgue/files/2007/12/l71381-1.jpg

Now for the Patronuses. When you conjure a patronus it forms into animal or creature that often represents you or your deepest inner feelings. They are unique to their person and represent a part of them. I was very much reminded of patronuses when reading about deamons, but for the similarities I've found, there are also many differences. Patronuses do not have a metaphysical bond to the conjured; if it gets hit or cursed away, nothing will directly happen to the wizard and they could just as easily conjure it again. Patronuses don't neccesarily settle; yes they usually keep the same form, but they can change do to strong feelings or a life changing event (Tonk's patronus changed into a Werewolf form when she was in love with Lupin). This also backs up the fact that the patronus doesn't DEFINE the person, it just portrays certain feelings and characteristics of the person.

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/harry-potter-7.jpg

Two great stories with two great ideas that share some kind-of sort-of similarities.

Lucy is awesome!

I have different reasons for and against three of the Pevensie children as to who should not have been allowed back into Narnia. Really the only person that I cannot come up with anything against her acceptance into Narnia is Lucy. She always believed in Narnia and did all that she could for Narnia.

The first person I thought of that should have been banned from Narnia is Edmund. Right from the beginning he was a traitor. If you were to look at the religious contexts of the Narnia books and were to compare Edmund to Judas then Edmund should have been punished like Judas (and become a vampire if you are familiar with that story!) That is the defense against Edmund, but if you were to look at all the stories you would find that Edmund changed a great deal. After The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe Edmund was always doing everything he could for Narnia. He was always siding with Lucy even if no one else would and always tried to help Narnia.

Peter was always doing everything that he could for Narnia. The only problem with him was his pride and arrogance. He was the “high king” and never let anyone forget it.

No one can believe that Susan was no longer a friend of Narnia, but I have to say I saw something coming (only not as extreme). In Prince Caspian she refused to believe that Aslan was there and could not believe Lucy. She kept saying that Lucy was being a bad girl.

Nothing is something worth doing.

In a world growing and advancing as fast as ours is, it would be disastrous and utterly unwise to do anything that even comes close to reverting to our primitive ways. we are so medically advanced that we are on the edge of cancer rehabilitation breakthroughs. There is no need to reintroduce natural selection when we are advanced enough to avoid it in a healthy manner.
In fact I believe that we are still very much a part of natural selection. you cannot blame the homosapien for utilizing the very thing gift that god has granted him. The gift of advanced intelligence and that of our imagination. it would be insulting to our species and of life itself to not embrace our morals and human emotions and to not want to save and protect every being of our human existence.
Nothing that we build or synthesize on this planet should ever be considered unnatural for we are just as much a part of this planet as any other living or nonliving thing. is the imagination that we have been blessed with, the imagination that allows us to create something as simple as a scalpel or as advanced as a robotic surgeon not as much a part of our natural beings as our very own hearts and lungs (rhetorical question). We have not taken ourselves out of natural selection but are advancing and adapting at a pace that can not be compared to by any other multicellular complex structure of this planet. I feel that it will always be true that we will be second in line to bacteria and viruses but that does not make them a threat to our existence they are merely a goal for our advancement and adaptation.

Who let the Dwarves in? by Sarah McCoy

So with all the discussions on who was and wasn't let in to the final Narnia I went back to consider the Dwarves. Should they have been let in or not? Where should they have gone? Are they like Susan?

Even though the dwarves are just sitting somewhere near the stable door, they still appear to be IN Narnia. I disagree with this because what good are they doing there just sitting around "blind" to their surroundings? I am not saying that they don't have the possibility of being there but since they can't believe in it, they shouldn't have gotten in automatically. I think a better place for the dwarves would be not a "hell" but the in between purgatory like spot so that when they finally decided to believe they got to Narnia and further up and further in.

After reading Joy's post about Susan I have to agree with her that Susan just forgot and lost track of the point of Narnia. So I have to say now that she and the dwarves are not alike because the dwarves don't believe or see anything or care about anything but themselves. Susan did care about Narnia at some point. These dwarves on the other hand had lost hope or belief in Aslan or anything else except being dwarves. Its dissappointing but I guess someone had to be it.

Why Are We Human?

The opening lines of the movie, 'Stardust' say this: Are we human because we gaze at the stars, or do we gaze at them because we are human?

Though on simple level it is quite a ridiculous question, when you really begin to think about it on a philosophical level what truly makes us humans? What makes us the creatures we are today?

Do we lay in the grass in the summer time imagining the clouds to be different shapes, or do we see them as the different shapes because we are human?

What makes us the beings we are? Not the biological answers or the biochemistry answers that say were are carbon based life forms with a brain and a heart and cells. But what makes us tick deeper than the biological make up of our body.

I believe its our curiosity to learn, to imagine, to grow. Without this driving need to rediscover we would still be in the caves cold and without clothing. I believe this inner working in our brain silently drive our civilization to aspire and grow.

I'm sure that someone else out there disagrees with me. But I believe we gaze at them because we are human.

Chalk & Tag Games verse Makeup & Parties

Susan Susan Susan . . . Susan, oh the problem of Susan. Now the question has become “why didn’t Susan get to go to Heaven or the new Narnia like everyone else?” “Would there have been a better person?” well . . . I think NO! haha ok maybe not exactly such an enthusiastic NO! But still no, see I think that Susan was the perfect person to fit the role, now let me explain as to why.

Susan has given up all of her childishness and instead she has become engrossed in makeup and other such things. She has now become an adult with in society. Unfortunately for Susan she doesn’t seem to realize all that she has lost. There is a certain freedom that comes with acting like a kid, a sort of care free fun and often times a more happier out look on life. This Susan has lost because she is trying to fit in so badly and she most likely feels that fitting in to society is all that she needs to do, but she doesn’t realize what exactly she has lost in the process.


Think back, don’t you remember being a little kid and just wishing that you were older so that you could go to parties, drive a car, live on your own, all those fun things that “adults” get to do. Well now that you can, look back and remember all that fun that you used to have as a little kid, playing tag games, riding your bike all summer, having mud fights, creating forts, all those carefree and silly things that “little” kids get to do. Don’t you sometimes wish that you could spend your days with out a worry in the world, no homework, no bills, no nothing? Well I don’t know about you but I sometimes wished that I was still a care free “little kid”. Don’t get me wrong I am not saying that we can’t have fun adults but now there are certain things that are considered to be unacceptable by society and more things that we need to worry about, we have lost that care freeness of our younger days. Also often time’s people are so excited to grow up that when they are adults they completely forget to be the “little kid” and have fun, which I think has happened to Susan. She denies ever being to Narnia, she has cut that part of her life out. You might ask how can she do that when she has been there herself and so have her brothers and sisters. Well minds are a funny thing and we can block things out of our memory consciously or even consciously. We can even imagine things that aren’t even there. Reality is a funny thing. Just look at the main character in “A Beautiful Mind”, his reality was completely twisted and he often had a hard time figuring out what was real and what wasn’t. Honestly for me this is a very scary idea.
Now, to tie back into Susan being the perfect character to not go to Heaven or the new Narnia. Well she did always seem to be the more “practical” one and have the most doubts about Narnia. I think that C.S. Lewis chooses not to let Susan go to Narnia because he wants to remind people that being too serious is not healthy and there is nothing wrong with being a “little kid” sometimes.

Who is building these frames?

I do understand that we have certain frames that we have obtained up until now, and those are the frames we see the world through. I think very rarely in todays world are we shown a frame that truly shatters what we have once known. The concept of everyone having a frame and the fact that each person's frame affects everyone else is a brilliant concept, but my question is who is making these frames? Can you just make your own frame? And is it possible to break free of your frame.

The frame concept reminds me of the matrix for some reason; Neo has a frame that he sees life through, but the frame itself is really a construct created by robots in order to enslave humans. Are our own frames enslaving us? Are robots responsible for building theses frames society so readily adopts?

I believe frames are similar to right and wrong, ethics, morals etc. It all depends on timing and what majority sees as right and wrong. I believe it is he masses it is society that makes these frames; And it is the out cast, the eccentric in this world that simply will not except this. They choose to create their own frame...possible in the shape of a circle instead of a square.

In the end this framing idea drives me crazy I do not like the fact that someone is making frames that I have to see life through, I am choosing to make my frame out of something malleable something ready for change and open to even the strangest of frames. The frames have left me with more questions than answers; the frame concept and I have a love hate relationship, but im sure that's just how i'm viewing this whole thing through my personal frame.