A Child Prodigy

Sylvia’s talent was rooted in some solid intellect and education.

_ _ _

Her background, of which I knew nothing then, belied her housewifely air: she had been a child prodigy - her first poem was published when she was eight - and then a brilliant student, winning every prize to be had, first at Wellesley High School, then at Smith College: scholarships all the way, straight A’s, Phi Beta Kappa, president of this and that college society, and prizes for everything. A New York glossy magazine, Mademoiselle, had picked her as an outstanding possibility and wined her, dined her and photographed her all over Manhattan. Then, almost inevitably, she had won a Fulbright to Cambridge, where she met Ted Hughes.

-- “The Savage God” by A. Alvarez

_ _ _

For the record, she came from an academic family, a schoolteacher mother and professor father, with both parents of German stock and German-speaking. She wasn't simply an eccentric who tried to compose verse to make her life meaningful. She was on a decided career path.

A Child Prodigy

Sylvia’s talent was rooted in some solid intellect and education.

_ _ _

Her background, of which I knew nothing then, belied her housewifely air: she had been a child prodigy - her first poem was published when she was eight - and then a brilliant student, winning every prize to be had, first at Wellesley High School, then at Smith College: scholarships all the way, straight A’s, Phi Beta Kappa, president of this and that college society, and prizes for everything. A New York glossy magazine, Mademoiselle, had picked her as an outstanding possibility and wined her, dined her and photographed her all over Manhattan. Then, almost inevitably, she had won a Fulbright to Cambridge, where she met Ted Hughes.

-- “The Savage God” by A. Alvarez

_ _ _

For the record, she came from an academic family, a schoolteacher mother and professor father, with both parents of German stock and German-speaking. She wasn't simply an eccentric who tried to compose verse to make her life meaningful. She was on a decided career path.

Of Adam and Eve

One thing that always bothered me: If Adam and Eve were the first humans in existence, why are they always portrayed as having belly buttons?

It's questions like these that got me kicked out of Sunday School.

-- Sully reader

As if the evolution debate were not dispiriting enough, we now have a little stir in the media over the Adam and Eve question: whether they are an historical couple or not?

That surprised me. But apparently our narrow-reading fundamentalists are holding to the literal truth of this story as well. I wonder if they also insist on the talking snake.

The reason why this issue has flared up is that the scientific work on the genome apprently rules out a literal reading of Adam and Eve as a matter of fact now.

In spite of their appreciable political power, these past few hundred years have been a tough time for our fundamentalists in terms of science and philosophy, and one can appreciate the corner they are in, which I feel is captured well in this exchange:

"This stuff is unavoidable," says Dan Harlow at Calvin College. "Evangelicals have to either face up to it or they have to stick their head in the sand. And if they do that, they will lose whatever intellectual currency or respectability they have."

"If so, that's simply the price we'll have to pay," says Southern Baptist seminary's Albert Mohler. "The moment you say 'We have to abandon this theology in order to have the respect of the world,' you end up with neither biblical orthodoxy nor the respect of the world."

And, of course, the thing about these narrow fundamentalists is that they rather thrive psychologically in the disrespect of the world, as it further validates their worth in God's eyes, so they think.

Our problem, in America at least, is that we have so many of these literalists. Forty percent of Americans beleive in a literal Adam and Eve. It throws a wrench into democratic politics. It's all the worse when our rich folks are able to play them like a violin, enlisting their number to their nefarious plutocratic cause, because apparently Jesus hated taxes and regulations.

.........

"Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve" by Barbara Bradley Hagerty at NPR

"The Bible Is a Library, Not a Book" by Karl Giberson, Ph.D at Huffington Post

Of Adam and Eve

One thing that always bothered me: If Adam and Eve were the first humans in existence, why are they always portrayed as having belly buttons?

It's questions like these that got me kicked out of Sunday School.

-- Sully reader

As if the evolution debate were not dispiriting enough, we now have a little stir in the media over the Adam and Eve question: whether they are an historical couple or not?

That surprised me. But apparently our narrow-reading fundamentalists are holding to the literal truth of this story as well. I wonder if they also insist on the talking snake.

The reason why this issue has flared up is that the scientific work on the genome apprently rules out a literal reading of Adam and Eve as a matter of fact now.

In spite of their appreciable political power, these past few hundred years have been a tough time for our fundamentalists in terms of science and philosophy, and one can appreciate the corner they are in, which I feel is captured well in this exchange:

"This stuff is unavoidable," says Dan Harlow at Calvin College. "Evangelicals have to either face up to it or they have to stick their head in the sand. And if they do that, they will lose whatever intellectual currency or respectability they have."

"If so, that's simply the price we'll have to pay," says Southern Baptist seminary's Albert Mohler. "The moment you say 'We have to abandon this theology in order to have the respect of the world,' you end up with neither biblical orthodoxy nor the respect of the world."

And, of course, the thing about these narrow fundamentalists is that they rather thrive psychologically in the disrespect of the world, as it further validates their worth in God's eyes, so they think.

Our problem, in America at least, is that we have so many of these literalists. Forty percent of Americans beleive in a literal Adam and Eve. It throws a wrench into democratic politics. It's all the worse when our rich folks are able to play them like a violin, enlisting their number to their nefarious plutocratic cause, because apparently Jesus hated taxes and regulations.

.........

"Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve" by Barbara Bradley Hagerty at NPR

"The Bible Is a Library, Not a Book" by Karl Giberson, Ph.D at Huffington Post

Okay, who sent me this?

I'm flattered, but I'm not that kind of guy.

Okay, who sent me this?

I'm flattered, but I'm not that kind of guy.

LiLo as our Marilyn Monroe?

Lindsay Lohan is comparing herself to Marilyn Monroe. If she was just talking about her new blonde hair, then she could have a point. Both actresses got their blonde locks out of a bottle. Sadly, that isn't what Lindsay meant. She's been trying to become like Marilyn for years, but there can only truly be one.

-- ONTD

There is more in the article to suggest that Lindsay has a real Marilyn Monroe fixation. I find it interesting that her generation can have that much history in mind, even if Marilyn is iconic in somewhat the way Elvis is. However, I wonder if it suggests a weakness in Lindsay. Shouldn't she be cutting her own path, her own distinct identify? Regardless, she has yet to get back up after her recent legal troubles, and the problem with drugs and drinking, and I don't know if this hard living is helping her keep her good looks. She seems to be in some trouble of becoming famous just for being famous, known more for her fast living than her art.

LiLo as our Marilyn Monroe?

Lindsay Lohan is comparing herself to Marilyn Monroe. If she was just talking about her new blonde hair, then she could have a point. Both actresses got their blonde locks out of a bottle. Sadly, that isn't what Lindsay meant. She's been trying to become like Marilyn for years, but there can only truly be one.

-- ONTD

There is more in the article to suggest that Lindsay has a real Marilyn Monroe fixation. I find it interesting that her generation can have that much history in mind, even if Marilyn is iconic in somewhat the way Elvis is. However, I wonder if it suggests a weakness in Lindsay. Shouldn't she be cutting her own path, her own distinct identify? Regardless, she has yet to get back up after her recent legal troubles, and the problem with drugs and drinking, and I don't know if this hard living is helping her keep her good looks. She seems to be in some trouble of becoming famous just for being famous, known more for her fast living than her art.