Δαφνη Ευτυχια Αρθουρος

I was thinking that as I was writing it. To be honest, some of this come a little hard for me too -- or at least I have to think about it much harder than the "second quiz". But I am sure that my partner, for example, a brooding, bullied child whose temperament tends to the grudgeful and paranoid, would def. see her lifepath as determined strongly by obstacles and enemies rather than helping hands and trustable mentors. In the end, the "lesson" makes a valid point about the fact that people who are memorable or important are really the people who care about us, but it errs in supposing that what is important is that this care has to be positive. No, to be memorable and important the care has only to be personal.

And even that is not quite right. I am certain my life has been quite affected by people whose names I will never forget even if I have never been their focus. The comparison between the lessons shows that record-breaking achievements or plaudits awarded by objective peers don't make things memorable unless matched by plaudits and pedestals (or hatred and venom) in our subjective hearts. I can't name the last three Nobel laureates in literature, but I recall vividly the names of Ursula K. LeGuin, A.S.Byatt or Ayn Rand -- because they've mattered to me (the first two through love, the last, however, through loathing -- but still just as useful in formulating what matters to me, what people I seek out and whom I avoid); I can't name the victorious generals of the three Punic Wars, but I cannot forget the loser-suicide of the second, Hannibal Barca -- because his biography inspired something in me.