Of studies

If been dying for Jemimah to get around to her paraphrase of Francis Bacon's essay, Of Studies, because it is all about the benefits of reading and learning, and I'm sorta kinda rather fond of both of those.

There are some great quotations in the passage, no more than one long paragraph, really. These are some gems:

Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested.

Reading maketh a full man; conference a ready man; and writing an exact man.

Finally there is this one. I think it is my favourite:

Read not to contradict and confute; nor to believe and take for granted; nor to find talk and discourse; but to weigh and consider.

You can have a read of the whole essay by clicking the link above. Or, you can read Jemimah's very fine paraphrase below. Apparently, paraphrasing Bacon is her very favourite thing of AO8. Whodathunk?

Of StudiesStudies serve to delight, to enhance, and to be useful. They are most delightful when you are alone and at leisure. They enhance by allowing you to display your knowledge in conversation. They are useful because they improve your ability to make good decisions and to run your business more effectively. Clever men can do things and do them well, but learned men can perform daily activities better in general. Spending too much time studying is lazy, using study to show-off is vain, and to decide things just on learning is unwise. Studies perfect man but man’s wisdom affects that knowledge, because natural abilities are like plants that need training by study, and studies can go too far unless they are given limits by experience. Sly men loath study; simple men are impressed by it, and wise men benefit from it. Studies do not teach how to use themselves, but that knowledge comes from outside and is only learned by observation. Don’t read to make arguments, or to believe blindly, or just for something to say, but rather to ponder and provide judgment. Some books are to be tasted, some to be swallowed, and a few are to be chewed and digested; that is, dip into some books, read some for enjoyment, and a few are to be read with concentration. You can read summaries of some books, but only less important books, or books that are not so good, because most summaries don’t do the original book justice, and are just for show. Reading makes you better, discussion prepares you, and writing makes you more precise. If you don’t write things down, you’d better have a great memory. If you don’t ask much, you need to be careful. If you don’t read, you have to be cunning to pretend to know that which you do not know. History makes man wise; poetry makes him witty, mathematics subtle, natural philosophy deep, moral stories make him grave, logic and rhetoric arm him for what will come. Abeunt studia in mores – what you study becomes a habit. Studies improve any intellectual deficit, just like injuries have appropriate rehabilitation exercises. Bowling is good for bladder and kidney, shooting for lungs and chest, gentle walking for the stomach, riding for the brain, and so on. So if a man is getting slow, study maths, because in doing maths, if you are distracted, you must start again. If he is not discerning, let him study the professional scholars, for they are cymene sectores, splitters of hairs and pedantic and the man will become more so. If he doesn’t think about things enough, let him study law. Every defect of the mind has a recipe for cure.

 

Of Regiment of Health

 

I don't know how many of you are interested in reading Jemimah's efforts at paraphrasing Francis Bacon's essays, but I'm just so stinking proud of her efforts that I want to share anyway. I think she does such a good job. This is her rewriting of Bacon's essay Of Regiment of Health. You can read his original here: Yes, it's just one long paragraph.

There is wisdom in this beyond the rules of medicine: knowing what makes you well and unwell is the best way to stay healthy. It is better to say, this doesn’t agree with me so I won’t continue it, than it is to say, this doesn’t make me ill so I will continue it. For the strength of youth is not as sensitive to excesses as an older man will be. Remember that you’re getting older and cannot do the things you used to do, because age will not be tricked. Beware of a great change in your diet, but if you must, change your whole diet to make the change work as effectively as possible. For it is true for both nature and state, that it is better to change the whole rather than one specific part only. Examine your daily habits – diet, sleep, exercise and clothing, and so on; and if you find anything harmful, try to discontinue it bit by bit; but in such a way that if you find the change causes even more trouble, you may reintroduce it. For it is hard to tell apart things that are good and wholesome in general from those that are good for you in particular. One of the best rules for long life is to be cheerful at all times, during eating, sleeping and exercising. As for your passions, avoid jealousy, anxiety, unexpressed anger, awkward interrogations, excessive excitement, and bottled-up sadness. Be hopeful. Laugh. Have a good variety of pleasures, but not too many of them. Wonder and admire new things. Learn from good things like history, fables and nature. If you avoid medicine completely, then it will be too strange for your body when you need it, but if you overuse it, then it won’t do much good when you get ill. I believe that a seasonal diet is better than regular medicine, unless it becomes a habit. For diets change the body more than medicine and hurt it less. Don’t hate change in your body, but look for its cause. When ill, health is most important; when you’re healthy, action is. People who work their bodies when they’re healthy will be able to heal most slight illnesses with care and good food. Celcus could never have said as a doctor, had he not been also a wise man, that one of the main rules for health and long life is to vary one’s habits but not too extremely: Fast or eat a full diet, but prefer the full diet; stay awake or sleep long, but prefer sleep; be sedentary or active, but prefer activity, and so on. In this way we will be looking after our natures, but keeping them in control. Some doctors are so eager to keep the patient happy that they are afraid to cure the actual disease, whereas others are so busy curing the disease that they fail to conform to the patient’s needs. It’s best to find a doctor who is a mixture of both, or if you can’t find one, take one of each, and don’t forget to ask the advice of the one who is the most familiar with your body since he is the best in his area.

Paraphrasing these essays has changed Bacon from a drudgery to one of the highlights of AO8 for my daughter. I encourage you to try it with your kids...or trying it yourself.

In addition to helping us understand the thoughts of one of the greatest minds in history, reading these essays has proved a good opportunity to me to discuss essay writing structure and what makes Bacon's writing different from the writing of later periods. He writes deep, pithy sayings in short, unconnected sentences. Sort of like twitter. (Did I really write that?) He rarely develops his arguments,; each idea is separate from those that follow. There are no signs of the five paragraph essay here - in fact there are no paragraphs at all. Similarly, Bacon pays little attention for grammar and form. All of this makes Bacon hard to read, but despite this - or perhaps because of it, Bacon always makes you think. Perhaps because he fails to develop his arguments, his style encourages you to do it for him. His essays make you think, and allow you to agree or disagree, to form your own opinions and conclusions. Bacon encourages you to meditate on a variety of fascinating topics. And that's possibly the best reason to read his words. Bacon makes you think.

 

Of Innovations

Jemimah's paraphrase of Francis Bacon's Of Innovations.

Of Innovations

New ideas, which are born of time, are like living creatures, and are underdeveloped in the beginning. Despite this, and in the same way that those who first bring honor to their families are mostly more worthy than their children, so the first idea (if it is a good one) is rarely acquired by copying. For evil, according to man’s perverted nature, gathers strength as it grows, whereas good is strongest at the beginning. Every medicine is a new idea, and those that won’t use them must expect new illnesses, for time will bring out new ideas. If time makes things worse, and wisdom and good advice can’t make them better, what will become of us? It is true that settling things by tradition might not be perfect, but at least it is accepted, and those things that have gone together for a long time are at least linked, whereas new things don’t necessarily fit in. So new ideas are useful but they can cause problems. They are like strangers, admired but not approved of. Well, this would be true if time stood still, but it doesn’t. On the contrary, times moves in such a way that continuing with traditions can be as disruptive as the new idea was, and those who live in the past are scorned by men of new ideas. Therefore, it would be good if innovators would follow time’s example. Time certainly brings great ideas, but it does it slowly and quietly so that you hardly notice them. Otherwise, anything new is not wanted. It surely helps some and hinders others, and he that is helped takes it as a blessing and thanks time, whereas he who is hurt takes it as a bad thing and blames the creator. It is good not to try experiments in states unless it is urgent or obviously beneficial. We would do well to remember that reformation comes from the change; wanting change doesn’t bring about the reformation. Finally, remember that a new idea, even though it is not rejected outright, might be held in suspicion, and as Scripture says, we should stand in the old ways and look and find where the straight and right way is, and walk in it.

On studying Plutarch

One of my very favourite Parent's Review Articles is one written by Charlotte Mason herself in 1892/3 entitled The Home School. In the article, Miss Mason compares children educated at home using her correspondence materials, to children enrolled in the Parents' Review School, and I love it, because it is as if she is writing to me, telling me where my fellow homeschooling mums and I are doing well, and where we could do better. Look at this quote. Can't you relate instantly? I can.

(T)he organisation and government of a school is a task requiring special aptitude. Now if this be true of the public (including what is commonly called private) school, how much more is it true of that which is truly private--the family school, whose schoolroom is the morning-room or the study--for it is much easier to work a class of twenty, all doing the same thing, than a school of five children in three different classes.

Notwithstanding this difficulty, home teaching has its peculiar and very marked advantages--into which we will not enter here, except to say to those parents who regret deeply their inability to send their children to school, that our experience in connection with the Parents' Review School tends to show that the average home-taught child may keep well abreast of the average school-taught child. We should even say, may keep well ahead, were it not that the children in the Parents' Review School are in a sense picked--that is, they are the children of parents who take education seriously.

Miss Mason believes that one of the areas that homeschooling mums do best at is teaching Bible, that 'most valuable instrument of education' for its moral, spiritual and intellectual lessons. Charlotte extols scripture, not only for its excellent literary power, but more especially for its ability to teach ethics, and she is pleased to report that the Bible teaching her homeschooled pupils received at home was particularly good. I love that. I think homeschooled mums do a pretty good job of teaching Bible today, too, don't you?

This whole article is worth reading in detail. It is all wonderful, but the bit I want to talk to you about today, is the next part, talking about our good friend, Mr Plutarch. This is what she has to say about him:

Next after the Bible narratives in ethical value ranks history; and because Britain has had no Plutarch amongst its chroniclers, we must give the place of honour to Greek (or Roman) history as told in Plutarch's Lives, "to help the children to realise how personal and intimate is the relation of the individual to the State." The stories from Plutarch are extremely well told, and show that children are able to follow the old-time moralist as he traces conduct to character and character again to conduct.

Here we have an answer from the pen of the great lady, herself, to that oft asked question - Why should we study Plutarch? And what does she say? That after the Bible, history has the greatest ethical value, and that we read the history as told in Plutarch's lives to help children realise the importance of the link between individual and State. Okay, so now we know. We read Plutarch, not as literature, but as a study of ethics - or citizenship, as she calls it in later years.

Miss Mason then goes on to tell us that her homeschooled students are able to follow Plutarch's links from conduct to character and conversely from character to conduct. So that was homeschooled students in 1892. One hundred and twenty three years ago.

What about the students of 2015? Can they follow the old-time moralist too? Judging from questions and comments on the AO Forum, I would say that many mums find the study of Plutarch pretty daunting, and if they do dip a toe in the water and try, they often find him overwhelmingly difficult. Many mums leave him out all together, or try for only a very short time. That's sort of a concern, given what Miss Mason says about Plutarch above, isn't it? She says Plutarch is second to Bible in ethical importance. That makes it pretty pivotal, wouldn't you say? And we leave it out? Really?

Jemimah started studying Plutarch in AO4. I am nothing but compliant, and that's when AO told me to start, so start I did. I felt pretty nervous, and was eager to follow the advice of those who had gone before and begin with the Life of Poplicola, and to make use of the wonderful study guides prepared by Anne White. Oh, my! Those run on sentences! Plutarch, as translated by Mr Dryden in 1683, was hard. Really hard. Still Jemimah and I are not known as quitters, and we soldiered on. We read shorter chunks, sometimes even sentence by sentence. If Jemimah really couldn't get it, sometimes I tried narrating. We struggled through, and finally we got to Lesson 12, and Poplicola was done.

Since then, Jemimah has studied 12 lives, three per year. We are on to Marcus Cato now. And do you want to know something? Plutarch is easy. And one of our favourite subjects. I can't remember when we noticed our work getting easier, although I remember once thinking that...whoever we were reading...was easier than Poplicola. Then we read another and it was easy too. Then, suddenly, they all were. Did you hear that?  Easy.

What we did was not rocket science, but I'd like to share, if I may. It may just help one of you to stay the course, and Plutarch really is worth staying for.

:: First, just make a start. People say Poplicola is easiest, and who am I to argue, so maybe start with him. Alternatively, if you are familiar with any of the characters,  start with them. A reading of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar would pair really well with a study of the Life of Brutus or the Life of Julius Caesar, for example.

:: Second, if Anne hasn't written a Study Guide, find another life. For the first time this year, I feel that I might just be able to attempt a life alone, but it has taken twelve lives to get here, and I haven't tried it yet. For starters, Anne's guides are just so helpful. They define vocabulary, help with context, provide maps, suggest expurgation. They offer narration tips and exam questions. They are just wonderful. Don't try Plutarch without them.

:: Third. You don't need a copy of the book, Plutarch's Lives. If you use Anne's Study Guides, the text is included, or she links to an online version. That's all you need. Miss Mason used the version by North, written in 1579. It is even older than Dryden's version, but I find North easier to follow because his sentences aren't quite so long. He does use thee and thou a bit, though.

If you look at the PNEU Programmes you'll see references to Blackie's Plutarch. Blackie is a publisher, not a translator, and they published the lives in pairs, one pair to each little volume, using North's translation. They are sometimes slightly abridged for school students. This is what they look like:

:: Fourth, just get started. If your child doesn't understand much, don't panic. If you don't understand much, don't panic at that either. Just read!

If you don't understand much, you may find that reading the passage through a couple of times before reading it with your child will be all you need. If you really, really don't understand a big portion, you might choose to read a more recent version, or even an abridged children's version (for you, not for the kids), just to get an idea of what is going on. If you don't understand a sentence or two, but you get the gist, then that is perfectly fine. If you don't understand even that, keep reading. Don't give up!

If your child doesn't understand much, there are a few things you can do. Firstly, Plutarch is best done with mum reading to kids. This subject is much better done together. Make sure you child knows what happened last time by recapping last week's lesson before reading. It is not good to correct a child's narration too much, but you can certainly give the correct version before continuing with the story the following week. Next, don't panic if he doesn't understand every sentence. Provided he knows what is basically going on, then that should be fine. Reading builds muscle. Every week he will understand more and more. You may not notice this in the short term, but believe me, once you've done 13 lives you'll certainly realise that you understand more than you did with life one.  Again, don't give up!

:: Sixth, have your child narrate regularly, but not so regularly that he loses the sense of the story. Jemimah prefers to narrate at the end of each of Plutarch's very long paragraphs, and again at the end, but sometimes when the language is really convoluted, she will narrate each sentence singly, paraphrasing as she goes. Encourage your child to stop you to narrate if he thinks he is losing track of the story.

:: Seventh, remember that you're studying ethics and character, not literature. Look for character, conduct and consequences. Why did he do what he did? Was it in character for him? Would you do things differently, perhaps? Can you see similarities between our hero and another person, either in real life or in a book? Could our leaders learn from this man? Would a Christian agree with his decision here? If your kids don't understand the ins and outs of the battle, but they know that he was brave, or foolish, or proud, or cowardly, and what his men though of him, then they have done great. Really.

:: Finally, we know that Miss Mason considered Plutarch important, so doing anything is better than doing nothing. Keep plugging on. You'll get there, you really will. One day in four or five years or so, you may just wake up and discover that Plutarch is easy and you look forward to the next exciting instalment each week. I know it can happen because that's what has happened with us. It can happen for you too. Promise!

Of Revenge

Jemimah's paraphrase of Francis Bacon's Of Revenge:

Of revenge

Revenge is an uncontrolled form of justice, and the more men try to use it, the more the legal system should try to prevent it. The first offence breaks the law, but by getting revenge, you merely commit a sin yourself, breaking the law again, and preventing the law from helping you. Taking revenge means you get even with your enemy, but by choosing to ignore it, you become a greater man, because it is noble to forgive. Solomon said that it is honourable of a man to ignore an offence. Once it is done, it is done, and there is nothing you can do to change that. Wise men worry about the present and future, and those that agonise over the past, waste their own time. Nobody does wrong for the sake of doing wrong. Rather, they do it to get themselves profit or pleasure or honour. So why blame a man for loving himself more than me? If a man does wrong because he is ill natured, why should anyone be surprised that he is acting in character? It is sort of okay to revenge wrongs that the law can’t prevent, but in that case you must ensure that your revenge is not a crime, or else the enemy still wins, and two crimes have been committed instead of just the original one. When they take revenge, some people want the offender to know where it comes from. This is kinder, because they are not really wanting to cause harm – they just want justice. On the other hand, revenge by stealth is cowardly, like shooting an arrow in the dark. Cosmus, duke of Florence refused to pardon his deceitful and neglectful friends, saying that we are told we must forgive our enemies; we are not told we have to forgive our friends, but I think Job spoke more wisely when he said that we shouldn’t expect good from God if we are not willing to take bad from him as well. In a way, it’s the same with friends. This is for sure – a man who indulges in revenge allows his wounds to fester, instead of letting time heal.
Public revenges are mostly okay, for example, the deaths of Caesar, Pertinax or Henry III of France and so on. Private revenges are different. Vindictive people are like witches. They live a life of wickedness, and pay the price for it.

Of Bacon

You know AO8 is really hard when your pre-teen turns to North's Plutarch or Churchill's The New World for a little light relief.  Oh Boy. In AO8, you move from reading about the Middle Ages into reading the works of the 16th Century written by the authors who lived at that time.  You read morality plays, struggle valiantly through Thomas More's Utopia and then you come across Francis Bacon's Essays.

Seriously, ladies, you know how I keep telling you over and over that you shouldn't skip AO books without a very good reason, and that if something is hard, you should persevere, because reading hard books builds muscle that you'll need to read the books of the coming year?  Remember me saying that? Well, it's all in preparation for AO8.  Forget everything you've ever heard about AO7 being a leap in difficulty; that's just a little tiny step. AO8 is a wall.

We were in shock after the first week.  We wondered if we would ever get there.  And yet, even now, midway through week 5, we're beginning to see our way through.  The readings are clearer without so much concentration.  I'm not having to work as much with Jemimah, and the reading is getting easier.

The first time we read the scheduled Bacon Essay, Of Truth, neither of us understood very much. I guess we were rather droll as we looked at each other, blank faced. We were both determined not to let it beat us, though.  After all, plenty of families have gone before us, and Jemimah's comprehension level is second to none, so I figured if they could do AO8, so could we.

Finally we decided on this plan of attack: Week 1: Read the essay through a couple of times on different days. Weeks 2-4 work on paraphrasing the essay, one paragraph per week to a maximum of half an hour per lesson. I was there for help and encouragement, but Jemimah was to do the actual paraphrasing.

You wanna know something?  Each week, the essay got easier, and today she finished.  I'd like to share her final result.  It may not be perfect, but I think it is pretty fantastic, and I'm really proud of her.  Jemimah's version is much easier to understand than Mr Bacon's, don't you think, and she says pretty much the same thing.

Without further ado, here is Of Truth by Jemimah Age 12.

Of truth

In John 18:38, a joking Pilate asks of Jesus, “What is truth?” but doesn’t wait for his reply. Some people like being foolish, and find making a decision ties them down. They want to be able to do whatever they want, both in their thoughts as well as in their behaviour. The philosophers that thought this way are gone now, but some who are fond of their own voices, speak in the same way, although they are not so passionate about it as the those before them were. But it is not only the struggle people have in discovering the truth, nor the fact that when truth is found it makes us think about it all the time, that makes lies desirable, it seems that they just naturally, though corruptly, love lying for the lie itself. Some of the Greeks examined this, and they couldn’t decide why it was that men would like lies for the lies themselves, not for pleasure, like the poets, nor for benefit, like the merchants. But I don’t know about that. I think that truth is open and obvious like the day, and doesn’t hide the deceit of world half as well as the half-light of lies. Truth is like a pearl that is best by day, but is not as valuable as a lie, which appears good both day and night, like a diamond or a precious garnet. Making up lies is always fun. Do we doubt for one minute that if we removed pride, big headed dreams, lies and imagining what you want, and that sort of thing, that many men’s minds would be left poor shrunken things, full of sadness, lacking motivation, and unpleasing even to themselves?

One of the philosophers aggressively called poetry ‘wine of the devil’ because it fills the imagination; but poetry is only a little lie. It is not the lie that you hear, but the lie that sinks in and remains, that damages, as we mentioned before. But however these lies get into men’s minds and hearts, truth judges itself. Truth itself teaches that loving truth; knowing that it exists, and enjoying it, is the greatest good of mankind. God created the essence of sense first, then logic, and the Holy Spirit continues to enlighten. First he breathed light into chaos, then he breathed light into man, and he continues to inspire light in his chosen people. A certain poet, who made his sect more beautiful than it otherwise was, cleverly said: It is nice to stand safely on the beach and see ships tossed at sea; nice to stand safely in a castle window and see the excitement of battle from afar, but nothing is as nice as standing upon the safety and clarity of the hill of truth, and seeing the confusion of lies far below, so that standing there makes one pity, and not feel proud. It is certainly wonderful to think kind thoughts, know God cares for you, and to live in truth.

Moving from theology and philosophy to the truth of honest business dealings, everyone, even those who don’t practise it, agrees that transparent dealing is honourable. A mix of lies and truth is like impurities in coins made of gold and silver. It may make the metal stronger, but it makes it worth less. These are the serpent’s crooked paths, as it crawls on its belly not on feet. There is nothing that shames a man more than to be found a liar; and Montaigne wondered why that was so, that telling a lie should be so disgraceful, and such a foul accusation. He said, to be honest, that to say that a man lies is like saying he is bravely defying God but being cowardly in face of man, for God knows a lie, but it hides from man. Surely the wickedness of lies and the destruction of trust can’t be disliked more harshly. It shall be the last warning, calling the judgement of God on men. We’ve been told that when Christ comes, he shall not find faith on earth.

Here is a quote from an earlier draft that she didn't end up using, but I thought was profound enough to go into my commonplace:

The manufacture of the lie is satisfactory to the mind and pleasing to the soul.

I'm hoping she doesn't believe that, but the words sure do sound good together, don't they?

Next week's essay is On Revenge.  She may just take revenge on me if I make her do too much of this.

Have your kids done AO8?  Did they read Bacon?  How did they manage?  I'd love to hear.  If you want a reason for reading Bacon in the first place, this is how Wendi explained it to her 13 year old.

Dear Mother

...or Jemimah has a Wicked Sense of Humour.

Before you get all up in arms and hoity-toity, I know this is not correct Latin. It is, in fact, about as poor as Google Translate even. That's okay, because this wasn't supposed to be Latin. It's a Plutarch written narration. Well, part of one, anyhow.

This week in our Plutarch study of the life of Timoleon, Anne White's Study Guide suggested having the child write a letter in the person of Hicetes of Leontini. This year we're getting more adventurous with our written narrations, as well as practicing writing about books read earlier in the week. This exercise seemed perfect!

Jemimah decided to have Hicetes write to his mother, and she figured that as an educated man he would probably write in Latin. Here, on lovely stationery, written with a quill pen, complete with ink blots, and in pseudo Latin font, is his letter home.

In case you wonder, she did wrote a translation in English in her narration book as well because she knew I'd be cranky if she didn't.

I thought it was fabulously clever and creative, and a whole lot of fun. Just like my beautiful girl herself. What do you think?

 

Poor Ned Kelly

Precisely those who plead that Kelly was the creature of circumstances, and that we are all moulded by our surroundings, ought to understand that society is bound to put the brand of failure upon crime. Other men as ignorant and as weak as Kelly must learn from him that it is wise to refrain from bloodshed; that the State is stronger than any one citizen; and that no fictitious romance, no maudlin sympathy will avail against the common sense of the governing majority.

Editorial Opinion, The Age, November 13, 1880

New Kelly was a bushranger. He was an outlaw and a convicted police killer. He was a murderer and a cattle duffer. He took innocent hostages. My grandmother, whose family lived in Yackandandah in the middle of Kelly Country, grew up strongly believing that he was a villain who got his just deserts.

Yet despite that, Ned Kelly continues to be considered by some as a romanticised Aussie Robin Hood, stealing only from the rich to support his poor and struggling relations. He's fondly thought of as loyal and brave and daring and a bit of an Aussie larrikin.

Certainly Ned was a victim of circumstance. That his family situation, the bad influence of his Uncle Jimmy Quinn, and the incessant harrassment by the police influenced his later choices is without dispute. The fact remains though, that many of those decisions were wrong. Ned Kelly was at war with society. He was at war with authority. He was at war with the law.



I suppose it is the ease with which we can see both sides of the Ned Kelly character that makes him such an enduring enigma. There have been books, films, plays, folksongs - even a ballet. His story has been stretched and distorted so much that nowadays it is difficult to distinguish the real man from the even bigger myth. And yet even at the time of his execution by hanging he had his supporters - 32,000 people signed his petition for clemency.

This week as we cover his period in Australian History, Jemimah and I have been doing a bit of a character study of Ned Kelly. We've been reading from Frank Clune's Ned Kelly,a book that clearly develops the unfortunate circumstances that lead to Ned's life of crime, but which also lays the blame for that ultimate decision on Ned's own shoulders.

Ned Kelly was a desperado, with a chip on his shoulder. From the moment he was released, Ned was at war with the community that had spoilt his life.

There could be no real excuse for Ned's choosing wholesale horse-stealing for his profession... This was the taking of a wrong turning for him, and he had nobody to blame but himself. An honest career was open to him...Instead Ned challenged the Law - a fight he was bound to lose.

Many times we've stopped reading for a long discussion about who is to blame for a particular outcome. Could things have been done differently? What should Ned have done? What would you have done?

Charlotte Mason taught that 'an ordered presentation of the possibilities and powers that lie in human nature and of the risks that attend these, can hardly fail to have an enlightening and stimulating effect on young children'. Certainly Clune's book has provided us with some marvellous opportunities for a discussion into Citizenship over the past few days.

I look forward with interest to a continuation 0f the discussion after we read from this book again next week.

Of course Ned Kelly is OOP - aren't they all? Abe has it here. You're looking for the children's adaptation - the one illustrated by Walter Stackpool.

What do you think of Ned Kelly? Is he hero or villain in your eyes?

In unlikely ways and from unlikely sources do children gather that little code of principles which shall guide their lives.

Charlotte Mason Towards a Philosophy of Education p 189

What to avoid and how to avoid it, is knowledge as important to the citizen whether of the City of God or of his own immediate city, as to know what is good and how to perform the same. Children recognise with incipient weariness the doctored tale as soon as it is begun to be told, but the human story with its evil and its good never flags in interest.

ibid. p186-7

Poplicola - an exam narration

We're doing exams this week in the lead up to Easter and the holidays. I love exam week, but I am really looking forward to these holidays, to be honest. It has been a long and difficult term.

Our first subject, this morning, was Citizenship, where we have been studying Plutarch's Life of Poplicola. This is Jemimah's first term of this challenging book, and here is her uncorrected narration. I am really pleased with it...even though some of the facts are a little dodgy...it was Marcus, Poplicola's brother, who was honoured with the outward opening front door!!

Solon describes “the virtue and gallant disposition of the Romans”, of which Poplicola could be taken as a prime example. What are some synonyms for ‘gallant’? How do ‘gallant’ and ‘magnanimous’ fit the picture Plutarch has given us of Poplicola?

Poplicola wasn’t selfish. He shared. When his brother took away his consulship for a short time he actually helped him instead of trying to get it back.

When he was making alliances with different people, to be sure that he was going to do it, he sent some of the people’s children to be slaves to the other country. Among them he sent his daughter, which I think means that, “If my people have to do it, I have to”. When his daughter came back, he sent her straight back again.

The people showed him how much they liked him because normal people’s doors opened inward, so that passers-by would not get hit in the face! But Poplicola’s house had opening out doors.

Gallant means brave. Whenever Poplicola had to fight in an army he would not pass the job onto someone else. He went willingly, even though he could have died. He was willing to give up his life because other men had to do so too.

Magnanimous means not being sad when you give small things to someone else; willing to share; and glad to help. Poplicola was very much these characters. He was glad to help in any way. Most rich men and nobles were scornful of the idea of being with poor people. But not Poplicola. He was happy to share his home with others, and his home was always open to the poor and needy. He would always listen to the peoples’ needs, and patiently try to fix their problems. In one of the stories, Poplicola was told by a servant that he was being sabotaged and was going to be murdered. Poplicola instead of sending him out to get more information, kept him safe by not letting him out of his house (or castle) until he had sorted things out.

Poplicola was very fancy and rich, but as soon as someone needed help he would generously give them of his wealth.

Poplicola didn’t get jealous. On one occasions, he was at war when his brother was selected to take his place. Poplicola helped him but he could have been very angry if he chose to. Another time, Poplicola was at war and his men were building a temple. They had finished it before he got back, and Horatio was chosen to open it and to be coin holder. Then Marcus, Poplicola’s brother, shouted at him from the door, “O Horatio, your son lies dead in the camp.” Then Horatio said, “Mourn for him if you will. I am no mourner!” And he carried out the ceremony. But no-one knows exactly whether he saw through the trick or decided that he would not be sad in the ceremony.

Poplicola’s character was brave, kind, peaceful, and enduring. If he had been a Christian, he would have gone down in history for his bravery and kindness. He was very honourable. No wonder everyone would want to be him.