The school year was coming to an end and summer was right around the corner. Our school, like schools all across America, was planning a rally to commemorate the year and to see our 12th graders off. The day came around and me and my advisory dutifully marched out to the football field where it was to be held. Since we were upperclassmen we got to sit in the bleachers instead of on the field like we did back in our freshman and sophomore year. There was music playing and it seemed to rotate between English and Spanish songs. After everyone was settled this guy came out wearing a Hawaiian shirt with a pair of cheap dollar store sunglasses propped up on his forehead. He got everyone’s attention and gave some typical opening statements, during all this he’d momentarily stop to hand the microphone over to the girl standing right to him and she’d convey what he said into Spanish.

We need to establish what we mean by immortality. The concept itself can be seen from two different lenses, that is both divine and worldly. Divine being the experience after death. This is much more literal. We can get an idea of the religious beliefs of the cultures from all four of these works. Worldly is fame among men. Which means that in asking the question we are asking what did these cultures value. Evidently enough what ideals people hold and those who embody them are going to be the most esteemed. While the Epic of Gilgamesh, Iliad, Aeneid, and Divine Comedy were written by individuals and don’t necessarily represent the entirety of the civilizations in which they originate from, along with them being fiction, we do not conclude they can teach us nothing. All four are both famous and highly praised works, read widely throughout their respective countries even in their own time. We are still reading them even up to today. I think a general statement we can make is that each conception of a hero is more subtle than the last. Societies developed new technology and as a result their ideas about the world changed. Gilgamesh had a desire to transcend life in a quest for eternal life. Achilles opted for an enduring legacy on the battlefield. Aeneas set the groundwork for an immortal lineage. Dante perhaps being the most complex, opting for spiritual salvation rather than worldly. As such, I think it would be fitting to explore both divine and worldly immortality, discussing all four of our protagonists in turn.

The largest difficulty for me which I encounter is simply finding a reason to write. Writing is no longer the single form of stored communication. Namely video/audio recordings and online websites. Probably the single largest disadvantage of writing is the audience. For propaganda purposes videos are a much better form. It’s easier to passively consume a video than it is to passively consume a book. One requires more effort. Putting it succinctly—if you want to get a message out a 10 minute video with shiny graphics is much superior than boring text. Most people, even among those who enjoy reading, will spend more time on YouTube than they do in a book. Some will sneer at this and say you can’t replace books with videos, but is that really true? What makes books an inherently superior means of communication? Does this have historical precedent? And I think the answer is simply no. I think philosophers (good ones) are generally considered smart people. Plato communicated in dialogues. I don’t believe Plotinus ever wrote a thing. Most modern philosophers are employed in an academic setting and give lectures. This is commonly accepted and always has been. I think much of the nostalgia around books is driven by kind of a yearning for books themselves, and not actually the information which is contained inside. Then it may be different from person to person, but I find I retain more when the information has been given to me in video form.

Frankly, this seems like a movie for older Chinese women. Unless you fit in that demographic or enjoy Chinese family drama for some reason, can’t say I really recommend this one. I mean it isn’t bad, it just never really captivated me. The artsy Japanese guy was amusing. I’m almost convinced the actor wasn’t actually Japanese, something felt a bit off about him. Ting-Ting was an interesting character. Starting to get a little sick of these movies though, they all feel the same. Then it never gives you the narrative straight, you always got to piece it together for yourself. Meh.

There was a pretty big security vulnerability. If you have a server, make sure you’re not affected.

https://arstechnica.com/security/2024/03/backdoor-found-in-widely-used-linux-utility-breaks-encrypted-ssh-connections/

YouTube keeps recommending me this awful girl. There’s a word for this, it’s called an ‘art h**’. I just loathe everything she is and represents. Her ‘artsy’ nature. The pretentiousness. The assumption she seems to have of herself that she has something deep and meaningful to say. Then everything she says is so predictable. I don’t even need to watch the video to know what she will say. It’s all the most basic opinions mascaraing as if it’s ‘counter-culture’. It’s repulsive. And the length! Who’d want to listen to her for even a few minutes. The video essay trend on YouTube is awful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uspD-d0DxGc&t=212s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMCRF7g5ptM&t=238s

These sorts of documentaries are why I believe the only people who should really be creating historical content are those who are either from the group itself (be it Country, state, county, community, etc.) or are sympathetic to it. Shouldn’t even really be called reconstruction because it just mostly talked about what the federal and state governments did with the former slaves and white/black relations in this period. Never talked about the lives of common, white Southern farmers and never talked about how white women adapted after the Civil War. If you’re going to give the documentary title “Reconstruction”, you should cover information in proportion to the population. Talk about emancipated slaves in the wider context of Southern society, don’t make the entire documentary about them. The title is deceiving and wrong. It’s making a false claim about the information that is actually presented in the documentary. Though I get the impression the purpose of this documentary wasn’t exactly for historical interest.

https://www.americanyawp.com/text/10-religion-and-reform/

https://www.americanyawp.com/text/11-the-cotton-revolution/

I think three important themes in chapters 10 and 11 were the changing landscape of religion, the establishment of cotton as being fundamental to the Southern economy, and slavery shaping Southern society and culture. Different denominations were rising and falling in popularity. The marked shift of more impassioned worship. Methodist, Baptist, and Presbyterian all grew in numbers. There was less emphasis on knowing theology inside and out. The Methodists were the best example of this. By 1850, Methodism was the most popular American denomination. At the end of the 18th century they had fewer than 1,000 members, yet by the mid-19th century they constituted 34% of people going to church.

In chapter 9 Paul began with a defense of himself and all his liberties that he could potentially partake of. He said that while he could potentially partake, it does not edify. In chapter 10 he states that the reason for the Jew’s stumbling in the wilderness is to serve as an admonition for us. They murmured, the tempted Christ, they were idolaters, and subsequently many got destroyed.

Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils. (1 Cor. 10:21)

Had to watch this documentary about slavery. Mostly it was information I already knew, but there were a couple interesting parts. It’s definitely decently made and the content is fine enough. The low resolution doesn’t help though.

This YouTube channel as well appears to be a good source of history documentary playlists.