THIS JOB OF BEING A CHRISTIAN CAN BE VERY HUMANLY CHALLENGING

I read recently that one of the greatest obstacles to becoming a committed Christian is that Christianity is challenging and that is exactly why I produce what is to follow. 

The task of living a fully God-centered life is no walk in the park, as the lives of the greatest and most fully converted Christians who have ever lived—the saints—will attest. Indeed, Christianity lived to the fullest involves struggle. But is the struggle worth it?

Often the skeptic will see the struggle and be deterred. But of course, even the most hardened skeptic cannot be considered a total write-off. Indeed some skeptics are eventually compelled to change their mind. This is the hopeful realization that drives evangelism.

The rejection of God today, however, is often not caused primarily by philosophical argument. Usually it is a result of indifferentism towards religion—a result of what Bishop Robert Barron has called the “Meh” culture. The question is: Is this popular religious indifference warranted? Are Christians who toil for the cause of Christ wasting their precious time?

If God does not exist, it does not matter how you wager, for there is nothing to win after death and nothing to lose after death. But if God does exist, your only chance of winning eternal happiness is to believe, and your only chance of losing it is to refuse to believe. As Pascal says, ‘I should be much more afraid of being mistaken and then finding out that Christianity is true than of being mistaken in believing it to be true.’

The Christian life demands change, and the toughest kind. It often means turning from the things that come easiest—things that satisfy our natural urges. But the ability to freely choose to say no to our urges and impulses is what makes us distinctly human.  To say no—and yes!—at the right time is what makes humans happy. Ideally, this is true freedom. Christianity is an invitation to actualize the human destiny of everlasting happiness; and through the Church, God has provided the road map to get us there.

Christianity is hard because it aims to soften hearts. One of the tough facts of Christianity is that we must face up to the fact that we are fallen. We are often not what we ought to be. G.K. Chesterton writes: “One of the chief uses of religion is that it makes us remember our coming from darkness, the simple fact that we are created.”

What makes Christianity hard is that it reminds us of our imperfections. We are much too prideful to enjoy such a thing—and this, I fear, is where the skeptic checks out. The skeptic robs himself of the opportunity to encounter the Good News. Chesterton famously remarked: “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.”

This is the great modern tragedy arising out of an age of hedonism and “choose your own way” morality. One might call our times the “Age of Self-Sedation.” Instead of pursuing the supernatural high that explodes interiorly from personal union with God (the highest of highs—just read St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila), the modern man chases sex, drugs, travel, houses, fame, “likes,” retweets, and on goes the list. But it is to no lasting avail.

A Christian who thinks he can be a saint without suffering in this world is mistaken. This begs the question: “Who would choose such an unhappy life?” In "God in the Dock", the former atheist C.S. Lewis responded to this question by remarking: “I didn’t go to religion to make me happy. I always knew a bottle of Port would do that. If you want a religion to make you feel really comfortable, I certainly don’t recommend Christianity.”

It is true that Christianity does not exist to make us happy. But it does exist to make us joyful. Peter Kreeft, who some believe is the “C.S. Lewis of our times,” makes the following distinction: “Joy is more than happiness, just as happiness is more than pleasure. Pleasure is in the body. Happiness is in the mind and feelings. Joy is deep in the heart.” 

The Gospel is an invitation to life everlasting from the Everlasting Man—and with life everlasting comes joy everlasting. Christ promises us that “no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Cor 2:9). Of course, this offer means nothing if God does not exist. It would mean the Christian labors in vain. At best it would be a nice idea worth spreading to make one feel warm and fuzzy, a safety blanket for the naive. Steven Hawking once proposed that heaven is a “fairy story for people afraid of the dark.” Oxford mathematician John Lennox replied by saying, “Atheism is a fairy story for those afraid of the Light.”

God is not a wishful “projection” of the human mind, as Ludwig Feuerbach and friends have contended. There is far too much external evidence for the existence of God. Thus, theoretical physicist Paul Davies, though not a religious man, has concluded upon analysis of the cosmos: “There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all…It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe…The impression of design is overwhelming.”

A different kind of projection that is, however, a real issue is the skeptic’s projection of human qualities onto God. Thus, when the critic of Christianity says, “If God really existed he would (or would not) do this or that,” what he really means is, “If I were God, I would (or would not) do this or that.” This might be called the anthropomorphic problem of the problem of evil. Contrarily, the God of Christianity is eternal, immaterial, all-powerful, all-knowing, all-present—and yes, all-good and loving. He is not like us in all his perfection but rather wholly other. Therefore, we cannot expect to understand God’s ways absolutely. This is where religious belief comes in—when the human intellect meets its threshold and “informed” faith bursts forward. As a wise English convert to Christianity has reflected: “The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens into his head. And it is his head that splits.”

This does not mean, however, that Christian faith and the works that flow from it are based irrationally on a grand metaphysical guess about the unseen. Christianity hinges on the person of Jesus, and virtually all New Testament experts today, including the critics, agree that Jesus certainly existed. To add to the testimony of his existence, ancient texts such as the Babylonian Talmud record Jesus to be a worker of wondrous deeds. We have more reliable historical information about Jesus than almost any other major figure in antiquity. (Unfortunately, it is often overlooked that the New Testament writings are also valuable ancient historical texts.)

Furthermore, the miracle claims of Christianity abound and continue to survive rigorous scientific scrutiny. Recognized by researchers are new developments with the Shroud of Turin; naturally inexplicable events like a dancing sun in Fatima confirmed by secular newspapers and hundreds of eyewitnesses; the “bread” of the Eucharist mysteriously changing to uncorrupting human flesh (like in Lanciano, Italy); the incorrupt bodies of deceased saints (like St. Bernadette); and countless records of miraculous cures and healings, such as those in Lourdes, France. This sheds some light on why Christians are so willing to suffer for their faith: they know with their heart, as well as their head, that Jesus is who he claimed to be. And through miraculous events such as these, God has given believers (and unbelievers) a little help.

It must be noted, however, that in Christianity, the heart has a certain primacy over the head; for God judges hearts, not heads. Faith is largely a matter of the heart—indeed, its surrendering, even breaking. 

But the choice to be Christian is as much a decision to follow one’s head as a decision to follow one’s heart. Faith stands on the shoulder of reason as we “logic things out” in order to approach (and accept) the mysteries of faith. But I feel that religious faith is not opposed to reason. Reason leads to faith. As St. John Paul the Great has confirmed for us: “Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth.”

Sad to say, there are times when my reasoning power is not adequately fulfilling and I lack faith in my ability to meet the challenge I mentioned at the beginning of this piece. Could be that I am not sufficiently saved, and only God can help me now. But then again, why should He when He has 6,928,198,253 other people living in the world to be concerned about? That's just me looking for answers when there are none.

This is all so much hard work for a simple man who is getting slightly tired and somewhat reluctant to call himself a Christian, given what I have just so sanctimoniosly outlined. Personally speaking, there is no joy when in pensive moments I erroneously feel that my beliefs have set me up to fail. I have to remind myself that Jesus died for my sins and I am already saved. I just have to keep acknowleding that fact.

Nevertheless, please heart, don't just yet fail this old sinner who has not always practised what he preached, but meant well!

WHY DOES EVERYTHING HAVE TO BE ABOUT "US AND THEM"?

The more I delve into history and human nature the more I am aware of what an "Us vs. Them" world we live in.

Politics, religion, nationality, ethnicity, race, sports, social standing -- you name it -- we take sides and it is more often than not in the form of an unpleasant rivalry that creates bitter enemies. It was ever thus...and that is not a good thing. Personality clashes, differences of opinion, out-and-out hatred...From where I sit, I am growing weary of it all.

Good reasoning doesn’t come naturally. In fact, humans are instinctively terrible reasoners. Most of the time, the way our brains work isn’t rational at all. Even with exceptional training in analytical thinking, we still have to overcome instincts to think simplistically and nonanalytically.

Just stop and think for a moment about assumptions that can lead to errors of reasoning.

Stereotype: A simplified image of a type or category of people, incorporating assumptions about those people.
Prejudice: A preconceived belief (usually negative) about all people belonging to one type or category.
Partisanship: The tendency to favor those with whom you agree.
Provincialism: The tendency to believe that the issues you feel most strongly about are the most important.
Herd instinct: The tendency to adhere to cultural norms of belief and behavior.
Availability bias: The tendency to assume that memorable or hard-to-ignore events are more common than unmemorable ones.

Good reasoning requires that we withhold judgment until we have all the facts, collect evidence from neutral sources, and make sure that we understand all sides of an issue. Unfortunately, the human brain seems to have a compulsion to simplify. Unless we are vigilant, certain instinctual thought patterns derail our attempts at solid analytical reasoning.

One type of simplification involves putting people into groups, since it’s easier to deal with a few groups than with many individuals. We not only pigeonhole other people — we also put ourselves into groups and then identify strongly with our self-imposed categories. This has some benefits, especially in marketing and politics — it can be much easier to appeal to someone’s group identity than to appeal to the individual. But the assumptions that we make about people based on their categories can impair reasoning.

Depending on our taxonomy, we may be more or less likely to heed people, more or less likely to find their concerns important, more or less likely to contradict them, and more or less likely to think well of them. We may also seek out evidence that supports our assumptions, instead of evidence that is solid and unbiased. I am convinced that many of us fall short in this area and are too stubbornly biased to do anything about it.

Certainly, it is natural to have positive beliefs about a group to which you belong, and to make assumptions (positive or negative) about other groups. Admittedly, sometimes these assumptions are useful. We think of stereotypes as negative, and many are ill-founded or mean, but some assumptions can help us target an audience that enables us to get our message across. For instance, it is a stereotype that high school students are interested in video games. It’s not true of every student, but if you are trying to reach a group of high-school-age kids, you could do worse than to base your approach on that idea.

However, there are several ways in which these assumptions can get in the way of good reasoning.

Prejudice. Even if a stereotype is based in reality — and many are not — it will not be true of every member of a group. Assuming that you know what someone is like because of the groups they belong to is prejudice, and it can keep you from rationally evaluating their motives and choices.

Partisanship. We tend to make positive assumptions about groups to which we belong. Among other assumptions, we believe that people who think like us are more rational and more informed than people with whom we disagree. This hinders reasoning because we accept arguments based on who makes them, not on their content or support.

Provincialism. We tend to think that issues affecting our identity groups are more important or more urgent than issues affecting other groups. This prevents us from accurately evaluating these issues.

Herd instinct. We make assumptions about what’s acceptable and popular in the groups to which we belong, and it’s often hard to go against these norms. When an opinion is unpopular, the herd instinct can make us inclined to ignore evidence so we can maintain beliefs that are in line with the mainstream beliefs.

But today many of these social categories and stereotypes are propagated by society, tradition, and culture. They are not relevant anymore, but we continue to believe them and in many ways they become self-fulfilling beliefs.

We first need to become more aware of our tendency to put people into groups and create an “Us vs. Them” mentality.

As I say, we see it all the time in politics, war, sports and other aspects of our culture, but at the end of the day a lot of this thinking creates unnecessary tension and antagonism between everyone.

Group thinking causes us to act irrationally and uncooperative, because we are more concerned about conforming with our group instead of thinking intelligently for ourselves, or recognizing other people’s interests and values outside of our own social circle.

Instead of seeing people in groups, a better perspective is to see everyone as an individual worthy of respect, equality, and kindness, regardless of what groups they may be categorized in.

We shouldn’t necessarily ignore these common differences between us, but we certainly shouldn’t use them to judge people as “superior” or “inferior” – or see them as a battle between “Us vs. Them.” It is driving a dangerous wedge between people and at the expense of everyone.

If you choose to associate with a group identity, it doesn’t have to be a bad thing. Just be super mindful of it and be cautious if that identity starts to have a negative influence on how you view other people who you don’t identify with.

I personally try to identify with everyone in some way. I believe that at the core of human beings we want to have faith, all the while trying to find happiness and enjoy life -- and in that sense we are all connected as one, so there is no need to divide.

I know...it is all so much easier said than done...But let's try, for the betterment of society going forward!

ABOUT KIDS WHO HAVE LEARNING DISORDERS LIKE ME...

While I have never officially been diagnosed with dyslexia, there is no question that I struggled with school larnin' issues in my formative years and continue to compensate for it to this very day.

You know -- short-term memory lapses, slow deliberate speech, tip-of-the-tongue words suddenly failing me, saying one thing and meaning something entirely the opposite (i.e north and south, left and right), having to read something multiple times in order for it to sink in, difficulty grasping mathematics in general, problems with focusing or concentrating (a day-dreamer), all of which result in low self esteem from an early age. Slow and methodical to this day, always learning from rote.

Sad to say, kids with learning disorders were given a short shift when I was in primary school in the 1940's. Relegated to bottom-of-the-class level as hopeless, hapless dummies, teachers generally gave up on kids like me. We were labelled as lazy and disinterested. Smart kids were the teacher's pet and it was my first exposure to second-class citizenry. We were left to fall further behind with each passing school year and to eventually drop out in an attempt to leave failure and humiliation as far behind as possible.

Accused always of not applying myself, I became disillusioned, fed up and cynical about anything pertaining to school, yet determine to eventually prove them all wrong...somehow. Mature student courses, experimentation and nose-to-the-grindstone dedication to learning while on the job, enabled me to enjoy a degree of career success, in more than one line of endeavour. 

Succinctly, I had to leave school in order to discover and develop what few special skills God had given me. Dear knows how much better balanced and happier I could have been if only I had guidance in applying myself much earlier in life.

I am convinced that children are much more energized when they envision a future that is in line with their own values than when they dutifully do whatever they believe they have to in order to live up to their parents’ or or teachers' expectations. We don’t inspire our kids through fear. We inspire them by helping them to focus on getting better at something, rather than being the best, and by encouraging them to immerse themselves in something they love.

Because this subject has been rather a sore spot for me, I have given it considerable study, leading me to believe that I really did not have a reading problem per se. My issue was more mathematical. I do not think that I ever passed a math test or exam in my entire life.

Proficient reading and mathematics skills, in particular, are an essential tools for learning a large part of the subject matter taught in schools today. With an ever increasing emphasis on education and literacy, more and more children and adults are needing help in learning to read, spell, express their thoughts on paper and acquire adequate use of readin', writin' and 'rithmatic skills.

Formerly called developmental arithmetic disorder, developmental acalculia, or dyscalculia, I am convinced that I was inflicted with a learning disorder in which a person's mathematical ability is substantially below the level normally expected based on age, intelligence, life experiences, educational background, and physical impairments. This disability affects the ability to do calculations as well as the ability to understand word problems and mathematical concepts.

Mathematics disorder was first described as a developmental disorder in 1937. Since then, it has come to encompass a number of distinct types of mathematical deficiencies. These include:
-- difficulty reading and writing numbers
-- difficulty aligning numbers in order to do calculations
-- inability to perform calculations
-- inability to comprehend word problems

The range and number of mathematical difficulties that have been documented suggests that there are several different causes for mathematics disorder. In addition, several known physical conditions cause mathematics disorder. Mathematics disorder is often associated with other learning disorders involving reading and language, although it may also exist independently in children like me whose reading and language skills are average or above average.

The causes of mathematics disorder are not understood. Different manifestations of the disorder may have different causes. Symptoms of the disorder, however, can be grouped into four categories: language symptoms; recognition or perceptual symptoms; mathematical symptoms; and attention symptoms.

The number of children with mathematics disorder is not entirely clear. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, which is the basic manual consulted by mental health professionals in assessing the presence of mental disorders, indicates that about 1% of school age children have mathematics disorder. 

Other studies, however, have found higher rates of arithmetical dysfunction in children. Likewise, some studies find no gender difference in the prevalence of mathematics disorder, while others find that girls are more likely to be affected. Mathematics disorder, like other learning disabilities, however, appears to run in families, suggesting the existence of a genetic component to the disorder.

In defense of all dyslexics and acalculiacs (or dycalculiacs), it has been determined that they have many strengths: oral skills, comprehension, good visual spatial awareness/artistic abilities and creativity. More and more of these children have potential to become talented and gifted students if schools worked not only with their specific areas of difficulty, but also their specific areas of strengths from an early age. To do this we have to let go of outmoded viewpoints that a child with any type of learning disorder must first fail, in order to be identified.

Above all, there must be an understanding from all who teach them, that they may have many talents and skills. Their abilities must not be measured purely on the basis of their difficulties in acquiring literacy skills. All children thrive on challenges and successes in the classroom. At no time should they be made to feel that they are inferior and face the possibility of developing a lasting complex like mine.

Be all that as it may, if only I could have been spared going through life and finding myself in positions where I was required to appear smarter than I really was. It can be damn uncomfortable keeping up perceptions.

"To thine own self be true." -- William Shakespeare.

THE BOOK WE ALL LIVE...

WE ALL HAVE EXCITING LIFE STORIES TO TELL AND THE BEST CHAPTERS MAY BE YET TO COME

I have fun following the curmudgeonly astronomer Jonathan Cainer.  There are times when he makes absolutely no sense at all and there are other times when he is eerily close to the mark. He was talking about people's life stories not too long ago and he struck a chord with me.

Just think about it for a minute.  We all have amazing life stories to tell, if only we were so moved.  Some publishers would no doubt reject many of our life tales because they feel that they are just not believable enough.  Other publishing brain trusts may determine that some of our stories are beyond belief, perhaps better portrayed as fiction.

Of course, certain aspects of our life experiences would require selective self-editing and may not bear repeating publicly.  But that's another story, right?

For some of us, there have been so many uncanny coincidences and inexplicable developments in our life stories.  Even with all the nuances and details accounted for, we still find it hard to explain exactly why and how some things have happened to us.

Once we simplify some of those details, it all starts to seem faintly miraculous, doesn't it...Great stories that most of us will ultimately take untold to the grave with us, and that is a shame.

But you know what, if you are reading this post, your story is not finished yet.  What miraculous next chapter is just around the next corner for each and every one of us?  Exciting thought, isn't it!

If I were a publisher today, I'd love to hear all about your life story friend...So keep your pencil sharp.  You may yet have a best seller on your hands.  Keep living the tale and adding exciting new chapters as you go!

Make your life story a long and good one.

HEY, IT WAS COMMONWEALTH DAY

Yesterday, Monday, March 12, the second Monday in March, was officially Commonwealth Day. Betcha missed it!?

In 1958, what was known as Empire Day was renamed Commonwealth Day, in accordance with the post-colonial relationship between the nations of the former empire.

It was the National Council of the Royal Commonwealth Society of Canada that suggested the idea that Commonwealth Day should be observed on the same day throughout the U.K. and the other 13 countries of the Commonwealth.

In Canada, in 1973, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau was in power and he and, then Commonwealth Secretary-General, Arnold Smith, designed the Commonwealth flag. In 1976, the recommendation and flag were presented at a meeting held in in Canberra, Australia and senior officials from throughout the Commonwealth countries officially declared that the Canadian proposal of the second Monday in March was to be adopted as Commonwealth Day.

In Canada, the Royal Union flag (Union Jack) is flown at most Federal buildings, airports and military bases in recognition of the day.

In England, on Commonwealth Day, Queen Elizabeth delivers her special message and a ‘multi-faith’ service is held at Westminster Abbey, that was initiated at Her insistence.

How soon some of us (me included) forget -- or never knew about it in the first place!

ONCE A DICK...ALWAYS A DICK

I have done quite a bit of research lately into people, names and places. It can be a tricky exercise, especially when it comes to the abbreviation of given names i.e. Francis/Frank, John/Jack, Edward/Ted, Margaret/Peggy -- or as in my case, Richard/Dick.

As best as I can determine, going back to the Middle Ages, there weren't that many first names yet. And so many people were named Richard that everyone needed nicknames to tell one another apart. Richard was shortened to Rick, and then people would rhyme it with something else to become an entirely new name — so Rick became Dick. And then the modern trend of being dirty little pervs meant that everyone today giggles when they hear of a guy named Dick. As a matter of fact, I once worked with a young Filipino woman who refused to call me "Dick" because it was "too embarrassing".

Then there's John = Jack: They have the same number of letters! How does that save any time? There are multiple theories about this nickname, but here's the most likely one: Back in the 11th and 12th centuries, the Normans would have pronounced "John" as "Jen." They also added "-kin" to the ends of names as nicknames. So, Jen turned into Jenkin, which eventually turned into Jakin, and finally into Jack. 

Jack, incidentally, was also the name given to a young boy doing apprentice work in the middle ages, hence the phrase "Jack of all trades". Several jobs children could hold were also referred to as Jacks, for instance if you are a blacksmith and when you use your hand-cranked blower on the forge you have to decide who is the blower jack.... not sure if the name preceded the term or vice versa , or parallel development.

Francis = Frank: Now here's one that can drive you crazy if your are a researcher, because Francis and Frances are often mistakenly used interchangeably. Francis is a male name and Frances is female. While Frank is a given name in its own right, in fact reflecting the Old Frankish form *Frank, the given name in the United States arose again in the 20th century as a short form of Francis (which is itself a shortening of Franciscus, i.e. "the Frenchman", in reference to Saint Francis of Assisi), as popularized by singer Frank Sinatra born Francis Albert Sinatra, 1915–1998).

William = Bill: William was also a popular name in the Middle Ages when so many nicknames were born. It was shortened to Will, which turned into Bill. 
Rhyming nicknames strike again!

Nancy = Ann: Why is the short form of Ann (or Anne) actually longer than the original name? People used to use the affectionate phrase "mine Ann," which eventually turned into "my Nan." Nickname trends of the time also had people adding "-cy" to the ends of name, which is how Ann evolved into Nancy.

Edward = Ted/Ed: As for Ted, just as Richard and William were popular names, Edward was a very common name that required nicknames to be created. With names that start with vowels, people often added an easy-to-pronounce consonant, so Ed became Ted.

Nellie = Helen: Yep, Nellie is similar to Ned and Nancy. Since, depending on your accent, the H in Helen might be silent or difficult to say, it was dropped and "mine Helen" turned into "my Nell" and then into "my Nellie."

Elizabeth = Buffy: Now there's a weird one...There aren't even any F's in "Elizabeth"! Come on! But in this case, it's a nickname based on how a child might pronounce the final syllable — Elizabeth becomes Beth, which becomes Buff, and then becomes Buffy. (So, yes, the full title of the show should have been Elizabeth the Vampire Slayer.)

Hank = Henry: No one is entirely sure how this came to be, but a popular theory is that the name Hendrick is the Dutch version of Henry" Then, Henk became a nickname for Hendrick, so English people borrowed it and eventually it became Hank.

Chuck = Charles: This one's a little simpler: In Middle English, Charles was actually Chukken. (Yes, really.)

So, as I say, this can all prove to be problematic for anyone engaged in research for history and genealogy purposes. Generally, legal documents such as birth and marriage certificates show formal original names while obituaries and press reports often go with abbreviated names more common in everyday use for an individual. No denying this can be a confusing matter and can slow down the research process.

Personally, however, the name Dick feels quite natural and comfortable to me, I have lived with it all my life, but I don't want to go down in history as being a "Dick". Some people would just not understand that Richard was also a Dick.

Wait!...That doesn't sound right either, does it?

WHAT'S SO BAD ABOUT BAMBI, HUCK FINN, TOM SAWYER AND THE BIBLE?

Dresden, ON. photo, circa 1890's, reminding me of a scene from the
Mark Twain novel  "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn".

As a youngster, just out of the nursery rhyme phase, the first four books I ever read were Bambi, Tom Sawyer, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and the Bible -- in that order. Quite honestly, you would think Bambi would be the least controversial of all four books. But not so...

Bambi, The Great Prince and his Mom

The novel traces the life of Bambi, a male roe deer, from his birth through childhood, the loss of his mother, the finding of a mate, the lessons he learns from his father and experience about the dangers posed by human hunters in the forest. Published in North America by Simon & Schuster in 1928, the book has been translated and published in over 30 languages around the world.

Bambi was “hugely popular” after its publication, becoming a “book-of-the-month” selection and selling 650,000 copies in the United States by 1942. For impressionable me it was an interesting and innocent story about a "hero" deer, only to be surpassed later by the story of a dog named Lassie. However, would you believe that Bambi was subsequently banned in Nazi Germany in 1936 as “political allegory on the treatment of Jews in Europe.” Many copies of the novel were burned, making original first editions rare and difficult to find. Adolph Hitler later did his own number on the poor Jews.

Truly incredable! On the surface, a harmless story about wildlife in the forest with a message for children that somehow got twisted in the minds of Germans.

What prompts me to write this piece, however, is the discovery of an old photograph posted on a virtual history site to which I belong. The photo shows a motley collection of mixed-race boys, standing in front of "Roney's Shop" (whatever that may have been) in my hometown of Dresden, ON., some time in the 1880s or '90s. It immediately struck me as a perfect depiction of Huckleberry Finn and sent me scrambling to find my childhood copy of the book by the same name.

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, of course, is a novel by Mark Twain, first published in the United Kingdom in December 1884 and in the United States in February 1885. Commonly named among the Great American Novels, the work is among the first in major American literature to be written throughout in vernacular English, characterized by local color regionalism. It is told in the first person by Huckleberry "Huck" Finn, the narrator of two other Twain novels (Tom Sawyer Abroad and Tom Sawyer, Detective) and a friend of Tom Sawyer. It is a direct sequel.

Perennially popular with readers, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has also been the continued object of study by literary critics since its publication. The book was widely criticized upon release because of its extensive use of coarse language. Throughout the 20th century, and despite arguments that the protagonist and the tenor of the book are anti-racist, criticism of the book continued due to both its perceived use of racial stereotypes and its frequent use of the racial slurs.

The book is noted for its colorful description of people and places along the Mississippi River. Set in a Southern antebellum society that had ceased to exist about 20 years before the work was published, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is an often scathing satire on entrenched attitudes, particularly racism.

Even today I may well be taken to task for using the old hometown photographs as a reminder of the characters that so fascinated me in the Huckleberry Finn story I read some 70 years ago when I was starting to relate to life from first-hand experience in the racially-charged town of my innocence.

To the left, Dresden's version of fabled "Huck" Finn and his chum "Jim" taken from the Dresden Virtual History Group photo seen at the top of this post.

I need not go into a disertation on the history and general acceptance of The Holy Bible, one of the other first books I ever read -- at the insistance of my parents and Sunday School teachers -- and still study extensively to this day, like a good boy!

It's just that nothing is sacred in this day and age, in spite of the push for political correctness which only complicates most matters.

It is a bit unsettling and disillusioning at times, when reading that what I cut my teeth on as a young fellow makes some people uncomfortable and is critically questioned as contributing to stereotypes, even banned, in some parts of the world. For me the old stories still hold significant meaning and I am thankful for having been exposed to them. I am not in the least uncomfortable in talking about them publicly on my blog site, or anywhere else for that matter.

Not only that, it's been fun for the most part. I'm easily amused, seemingly by old photos and the stories they conjure up.

As I said before, I'm kind of funny that way!

FLIP A COIN: REALITY OF EMOTIONAL EXTREMES

I have to admit that the current week has not started out all that well for me, leaving me to ask "Is it just that time of year or are issues and differences simply being magnified?"

There's a familiar refrain from George and Ira Gershwin's Porgy and Bess, "Summertime and the livin' is easy".  Leave it to someone, however, to ask if the living is really that much harder in the middle of the winter?  Personally, I do think that summertime living is a lot easier, because I am not all that fond of winter and all that the season entails, but I do understand the question.

What are these great seasonal extremes if not opposite sides of the same coin?  Much like joy and depression being more closely linked than many people think.  Success and failure have a similarly symbiotic relationship.

When you are down, the only place you can go is up.  And when you are up...Well, let's worry about that when you are up.

Admittedly, it does not take much to set me off. Contrary to a tough exterior, I struggle with over-sensitivity in times of conflict, often wondering if I should apologize for who I am. Victimization can have that kind of affect on you.

I don't know about you, but I am subject to short periods of sadness and melancholy (often self-inflicted, other times imposed by outside sources -- i.e. people) always followed by a burst of happiness and optimism.  I do not know how to attribute either one of those feelings that come over me.  Maybe it is just the way that I am wired, but I have come to accept sad times with the rationalization that "this too shall pass".  Looking at it from a positive standpoint, sadness and disappointment have often resulted in some of my most serious and creative moments.

Health specialists often refer to these opposite sides of the emotional spectrum as a mood disorder, but I think that it amounts to a matter of degree and how we learn to control or balance all of our emotions.  The reality of either a heads or a tails coming up when we flip the coin of life, has to be realized, accepted and dealt with from a rational perspective.

We should grasp the fact that sadness has the unexplained potential to make us very happy. Strange, isn't it?  But we would do well to always remember that.

Without fail, winter turns into summer when the livin' is a lot easier.

I can't wait!