Fragile

In the past five years, I've learned something about windows and balls. I've had two incisive lessons. What I've learned is, it doesn't take a hard baseball to break a window. Even a relatively small ball, say a soft-sided juggling ball or a super-bounce rubber ball, are a smashing success. And I do mean smashing.

My first lesson took place five years ago, in the Family Room, with Professors Kyla and Collin. They deftly demonstrated that a super-bounce rubber ball can, in fact, shatter a window. Since my darling husband is many things, including a procrastinator, the window is still broken. Although both children served punishments for that mishap, the lesson apparently did not stick with Collin. Or else he didn't think it applied to juggling balls.

Collin and Mason were in charge of the second demonstration. They were in the Studio, which is essentially our homeschooling room, the long bonus room over the garage. Even way back on the other side of the house, I heard shattering glass. Moments later, a stricken Collin came in with the confession.

At least he was contrite. Grief-stricken, even.

They are both serving time, living out the summer without the dubious benefit of DSis, Wii, computer or TV. Personally, I wish it was like that all the time, because I have been amazed and impressed with the worthwhile uses they find for their time without electronic distractions.

So, here is my Studio window, custom-designed to match my Family Room window.

P.S. I should mention that philosophically, taking away electronics is not what I normally do to correct poor judgement. I see no connection between the two. DH felt the need to exact some sort of punishment and so he chose this. They do also have to work to pay restitution, but it wasn't realistic to have them work to pay for something so expensive and it wouldn't have been fair to Collin, since he can work much harder than Mason. On the whole, though, we almost never use "grounding" in the traditional sense.

Outliers

I really dig that new picture in my header, but I have no bloomin' clue how to make it smaller than Goliath. Bear with me while I figure that out. I'm not the least bit techy.

The book I read this past week was Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell. I found it fascinating! It certainly inspired me to do well in my homeschooling endeavors, as well as my self-education efforts.

In Outliers, Gladwell examines the factors that shape people, or groups of people, into exceptions in their field. It examines individuals, (Bill Gates, Bill Joy, The Beatles) as well as population segments, such as professional hockey players and the success of Asians in mathematics. The findings are striking and, often, surprising. It's not necessarily amazing talent that defines the successful, and not necessarily pure brain power. Practice, it turns out, really does make perfect, as it has been found again and again that the most successful have put in thousands of hours of practice - right around 10,000 hours, in fact. The 10,000-hour rule was exciting to me. It demonstrates how mastery is achieved by anyone committed to the time and effort to become exceptional.

I also found the findings on longer school hours (mostly in other countries) very interesting. It showed very plainly the set-backs incurred by a long summer break. It validates my belief that my kids should continue with Math, at the very least, throughout the summer.

Two thumbs up for Outliers. It's a fascinating book that demonstrates that success is achievable for anyone with the chutzpah to seek it.

The Mysterious Benedict Society - Book Week 8

I have just finished reading The Mysterious Benedict Society" by Trenton Lee Stewart. As "kid lit" goes, this one is fairly good. I'm not sure if you'd call this Sci-Fi or a mystery, but it's somewhere between those two. The lead character is Raynard Moulden, a gifted orphan, who gets an opportunity to be part of a special mission. He and his orphaned cohorts form The Mysterious Benedict Society and act as spies at their weird special school, The Learning Institute for the Very Enlightened (L.I.V.E., as displayed on their red school flag...or is it EVIL?) Stewart does one fine job of crafting suspense. I didn't have to go far from one spine-tingling "Whatever will they do?" musing to the next. As the climax comes along, the story is moving at break-neck speed. However, the Denouement crashed along much too rapidly. So many threads had been lain down, it was bewildering to have them all explained away and everything tied up much too neatly in the last few pages.

The setting was a little baffling and left me feeling ungrounded far into the book. I'm not sure if Stoneytown Harbor and Nomanson Island are real places (in America?) or purely fictional. Later in the book, Holland is mentioned and so is Zambia, so apparently, it's on our "real" earth. But where? I gotta say that bugged me quite a lot. Maybe I somehow missed this important point, but either way, it never registered.

There was a wonderful plot twist regarding the character named Milligan that was a total delight. However, new information on the character named Constance Contraire was completely preposterous. Gotta love that wonderful name-crafting, though. Constance Contraire! What a perfect name for the character who is constantly contrary!

All-in-all, a clever book and an entertaining read. Kids in the 8-12 age range, especially boys, will most likely enjoy it.

Some Tears are Wiped Away, I Guess, For Some

This is a long-due update to the Valley of Tears outcry I raised in December. Remember the lady I spoke of whose adoption fell through? The update is - it came to fruition after all. She got to adopt a newborn girl. By mid-January, she had her Christmas Miracle. I was speechless. And then never happens.

I struggle because I don't know what these things mean. I don't know if God was merciful or if she just "got lucky". Because - how can we speak of God's mercy when The Right Thing happens amidst so many examples of The Wrong Thing happening?

When a survivor was pulled from the wreckage of Haiti a month after the earthquake, some thank God for that miracle. But what of the hundreds of thousands not shown that mercy? Where does that leave them?

Book a Week - Week Three

I'm sorry I'm all over the map on my blog, folks. I know I'm supposed to be posting about The Love Dare, but I've fallen off the dare wagon. I'm also a few posts behind on my general life stuff that I mean to do. And now, I've gone and added this Book a Week challenge with my buddies from The Well-Trained Mind forums.

*sigh* Anyway...I just finished reading A Simple Christmas by Mike Huckabee. It was an enjoyable read. I felt that I needed something relaxing and not too cerebral. This book met that need.

My complaint about the book is that it's not tightly edited. He takes three pages to say what would fit on one. There were also a few glaring word clashes. Once he said something like, "I can't verify the veracity of..." That almost hurt my ears. Two such similar words clanging together like that. Also, I got tired of every chapter ending with the refrain..."a simple Christmas. I realize he's trying to bring the theme back around each chapter but it got dull. Okay, Mike, it's a simple Christmas. We know.

Still, a very pleasant read. Good stories in there that really make you chuckle when you think of your own eccentric uncles or chain-smoking cousin or whatever oddballs make up your family history. Funny stuff.

So my book for this coming week is "Mansfield Park" by Jane Austen. I have never read that one before. I'm enjoying the language and the character development just as much as all the other Austen novels. Her word-craft rocks the house, people!

Unconditional Love

Today's Dare is about unconditional love. I've pondered it before.

I would say that most happy, lasting marriages are not truly founded in unconditional love. It would not be true to say that I would stay married no matter what, that nothing Kelly could do or become could thwart my love for him. I'm just guessing, but I think it's true from his end, too. Yes, True love is long-suffering and tolerant; it doesn't look for a reason to part company. And yes, there is an element of choosing to stay married. But still. Unconditional love? I don't even think that is healthy, let alone practical.

If my husband smacked me around, drained the bank account to buy a boat, was cruel to the kids, kicked the dog and didn't go to work, would I stay? No. I would not. If I took a job as a stripper, left the kids alone while I partied, stayed mysteriously away from home on occasion, failed to buy food and couldn't explain all those calls on my cell phone, would he stay? No. He would not. I would even hope that he respected himself better than to subject himself and our kids to such a life.

Now, if we want to talk tolerant love, okay, I'm in. You stay with your mate even if they never put their clean clothes away, leave the suitcase in the hall for a month after a trip, bring the car home with the tank on E and forget to take out the recycling. Although that suitcase-in-the-hall thing is really annoying. But, yeah, you stay.

Today's dare still works fine, even if you question unconditional love. This is the Dare:

Do something out of the ordinary today, something that proves to you and to them that your love is based on your choice and nothing else. Wash her car, clean the kitchen, buy his favorite dessert, fold the laundry. Demonstrate love to them for the sheer joy of being their partner in marriage.

What do you think, dear readers? Do you love your spouse unconditionally? Do you think that is the ideal?

Valley of Tears

Okay, I know I said I would blog about the Love Dare, and yes, I am still doing that, but I have to kvetch about something else today. This is open-heart time, so here, watch me spill it.

Some people will surely hate the semantics of this, but I've been trying to be a Christian. I am trying to find a place back to where I can say I trust God and love Him and believe that He loves me. But I do get stuck on what has happened to me in the past. Once bitten, twice shy. Sometimes, I get stuck on what happens to other people, even people I don't actually know. And so this is just what has happened recently.

A person I "know" only in the cyber-sense, whom I will call "Sue", has longed for a daughter for years. She posted last Christmas about her longings for a daughter and how infertility and difficulties with adopting have made this a longing that remains unsatisfied. Just before Christmas this year, however, an opportunity dropped in her lap. It looked like her prayers would be answered with this "Christmas miracle" and she would be able to adopt a baby girl. I hoped along with her. For her dream to come true would vicariously validate my own dreams of having another child. It would be a strong point in God's favor for the ol' "God is Good" column.

So, for a few days, we on the board were hoping along with Sue, waiting to witness a miracle. But when Sue showed up on the board, it was to say how it looked like the adoption was not going to happen. Her pain was palpable.

I completely get how this hurts. Her question is my question. Why does God stir things up, only to disappoint? Why does He seem to start something if it's not going to end well? I ask this all the time. Why do I long for another child? Am I wrong to long for another child, when it would take a miracle for me to have one? Am I wrong to give up hope, on the other hand, and admit that it just isn't in the cards? Is it selfish to want more kids? Or is it faith, the "substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen," in action?

This is why I can't get over the "trust and love" hurdle. Trust and love is natural if the object of your trust and love evidently is trustworthy. When you only get hurt in return, how can trust and love be expected? Honestly, these are times when the Christian walk looks to me like bad advice given to battered women. "Stand by your man! Remember the commitment you made! Deep down, he really loves you!"

I am currently reading The Promise by Father Jonathan Morris. This line jumped right out at me today:

Religious faith is not blind. It is not irrational. It is about trusting and loving someone we have come to know. If you haven't come to know Jesus personally and as a providential God - one who is on our side - it is irrational to put your trust in him.

This is really the crux of the whole thing for me. I did come to know Jesus personally, but it does not look like God is on my side, therefore it is irrational to put my trust in Him. This is not quite how Father Morris meant it, but that is why it is a problem for me. I really, really wanted to see things work out miraculously for Sue on the internet community. It would give me hope.