Here is my current plan. Lord willing I’ll get through it.
Does anyone else find little boxes to check-off motivating?
Here is my current plan. Lord willing I’ll get through it.
Does anyone else find little boxes to check-off motivating?
Another random-advice article.
The questions in the forum I visit have been nice writing prompts :) I think I like blogging these because they are sort of attitude-landmarks. They articulate how I feel about a particular issue.
The topic here is the question of whether a happily married gal just out of college should have babies (and stay home with them) or a career first.
Those asking the question seem to be stuck between two scares:
The arguments that I was reacting to included the assertions that the young woman ought to enjoy life before becoming encumbered by children, and that (after working so hard to get her degree) she had a near-moral obligation to do something with it. There was also the question of whether she wanted to risk the happiness of her marriage on children (yet).
~
There are people who will warn you about how a baby will change your relationship, and it will, but it doesn’t have to destroy or even weaken it.
I heard a lot of stories about that while pregnant the first time. They unsettled me, but ended up not applying to us at all.
What helped us, I believe, was Jay’s paternity leave and his heavy involvement while he was home.
We were working actively on the same team and it was a boot-camp bonding experience: both challenging and encouraging to our marriage.
More and more employers (if the women’s mags are right) are seeing the value of the women returning to the work force in their 30s and 40s, and are eager for the “real-life” skills these women bring.
Trust me, you will gain valuable work- and real-world-experience learning to manage a home, live frugally on one income and stimulate/encourage your children in their individual talents.
If you haven’t guessed already I am a SAHM, and it is a full-time job. Not just the always-on-call type of full-time job, but the type I must study for. Reading and researching to stay on top of my game.
It is preparing me for so many future plans that I write them down and squirrel them away. Sometimes I work on them, sometimes I tack a future date on them, but I don’t have to deny them.
And when thinking about age, don’t forget how much (active!) life continues long beyond your fertile years. “Getting your fun in” doesn’t have to happen all in your 20s. Especially if you’ve already found your life-partner.
Just, don’t be afraid of time.
I have the Recorded Books Inc. unabridged production of Lord of the Rings, and frequently listen to it (now on my iPod, so I don’t have to change disks) while I do housework and make meals.
This exchange, begun by Elrond as the fellowship of the ring is about to set out from Rivendell, has frequently come to mind when I hear the “optional-ness” of marriage discussed:
“The further you go, the less easy it will be to withdraw; yet no oath or bond is laid upon you to go further than you will. For you do not yet know the strength of your hearts, and you cannot foresee what each may meet upon the road.”
“Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens,” said Gimli.
“Maybe,” said Elrond, “but let him not vow to walk in the dark, who has not seen the nightfall.”
“Yet sworn word may strengthen quaking heart,” said Gimli.
“Or break it,” said Elrond. “Look not too far ahead.”
As may be expected I definitely fall hard on the side of Gimli’s reasoning. Especially when looking at the adventure of a lifelong partnership.
To Elrond’s rebuttal (were he truly arguing about marriage) I’d respond that as my heart is going to be broken either way, I’ll go with that most likely to shore it up– rather than break it down. That is, every ending is painful. Why not take what care we can to strengthen what we’ve begun?
At least, if his provision for my delight is any indication, He does.
Last week, okay, two weeks ago now, our family was in Anchorage. While there I visited this fabulous new/used bookstore called Title Wave Books. Cool name, yes?
I’ve never been in a bookstore before that shelved new and used side by side, really great for browsing. As might be expected, I limited my purchases to titles that had a used copy, since the cost was less, and, well, there were still loads of neat titles.
My first night there I found (and bought):
The last three (*) have been on my amazon wish list for months, the second (Uses) has been on my story-telling radar, and the folktales book (in addition to being part of a useful series I have two books from already) opened with a very thoughtful essay that included insights about the structural differences between male-centered and female-centered tales that gave me an insight I needed for the novels I’ve been writing.
“I was supposed to buy this book,” I thought to myself over and over again as I read the essay and stories.
“I feel so validated,” I kept telling my husband, cycling from book to book. Kid in a candy store just doesn’t cut it. I would take a bite from one, say “This is so good,” know this was the one I would read while Elisha kept me up tonight, then “taste” the next one. “This is so good,” I’d say again, and experience the delicious pain of this type of indecision.
So many choices and all of them good. (If you can give me the context/title of the work with the opposite quote–So many choices, and all of them bad– I’ll give you great thanks, assuming it’s one I’ve read/seen. The line keeps circling through my head).
I felt validated, as I mentioned earlier, because these were all used books. They none of them had to be there, but God allowed/brought together the circumstances that gave them to me to encourage me. And they did.
We all admire the intelligence of people who think the way we do.
Bruno Bettelheim wrote a book called The Uses of Enchantment designed (as far as I can tell) to defend and promote the use of fairy tales in bringing up children. Naturally it is referenced in a number of storytelling articles I have read. I have only just started the book, and so far it is quite intriguing. Here is a quote that reminds me of the arguments I began articulating earlier.
There is a widespread refusal to let children know that the source of much that goes wrong in life is due to our very own natures– the propensity of all men for acting aggressively, asocially, selfishly, out of anger and anxiety. Instead we want our children to believe that, inherently all men are good. But children know that they are not always good; and often, even when they are, they would prefer not to be. This contradicts what they are told by their parents, and therefore makes the child a monster in his own eyes.
I have often thought about how ridiculous it is that adults continue to assert the inherent goodness of children (as one who has cared for/observed them most of my life), but I had never before considered how it must seem to the honest and thoughtful child who is aware of his or her own shortcomings.
Indeed, if a sensitive child is told that children’s goodness comes naturally, and honestly observes that his own goodness does not– I can see that being rather distressing, even if not completely “mak[ing] the child a monster in his own eyes.”
(Posted simultaneously at Family News.)
I am officially limiting myself.
I “flipped a coin” (it wasn’t a literal coin, I was driving) and– as I’ve noticed in the past– found while it was in the air what it was I really wanted.
Jay and I have always known we wanted to homeschool our children, and Natasha is definitely ready and willing to learn new skills. So this conscious limiting is directly tied to the research and preparations I have begun in order to lay the groundwork for her schooling.
It is not so much the schooling that I see as the challenge, but maintaining a smoothly-running household at the same time. I have come across some very nice resources.
“Where did you get your copies?”
“Out of my head.”
“That head I see now on your shoulders?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Has it other furniture of the same kind within?
“I should think it may have: I should hope–better.”
I think it was the first two books I read about novel-writing that planted the four most impactful ideas.
I wonder now if these statements had the most impact on me because they were in the first books I read, or because they are what I most needed to hear.
One of the authors said his first published novel was the third he wrote, but the first two weren’t wasted because (aside from helping him develop as a writer and learn/perfect his craft) having those manuscripts proved to his publisher that he was serious about writing. Eventually he did rework at least one of them for publication.
My challenge sometimes seems to be remembering that I have enough material to make more books. I like that opening quote (from Jane Eyre) because it reflects my feelings about producing more than one work. I continue to write because it is like moving– I can only be still so long. But more than just having something new to write, I want it to actually be better.Sure, you can “overcome genetics”: dye your hair, exercise and eat right to counter a history of heart disease… but all that is still being driven– underlined– by genetics.
I stopped by my mom’s office on my way off campus this morning. I had just finished my last piano lesson class. As I was leaving I explained to some classmates I might come back next fall, but not this spring– I was going to take a semester off to shift focus to the guitar for a while.
So I walked up to my mom’s place thinking of how many different things I feel torn between, musically (guitar, piano), “professionally” (storytelling, noveling, children’s books) and home life (cleaning, meal planning, and “pre-school” for the girls). One of the first things she said to me was how dad felt pulled in so many directions by his many interests, and I could only laugh.