The Marriage Trilogy (Jude the Obscure, Middlemarch, and Anna Karenina)

Warning: this post contains SPOILERS on nineteenth-century novels!!!!!!

Don't mind me if I make a lonelymaxxing type of post. I just really wanted to talk about three nineteenth-century novels that I believe everyone who ponders about marriage should read. These three books constitute what I am going to call The Marriage Trilogy. They contain everything marriage-related you can possibly ponder about. These three books are:

1. Jude the Obscure (1895) by Thomas Hardy -- (Book #1 The Doompill)

2. Middlemarch (1872) by George Eliot -- (Book #2 The Hopepill)

3. Anna Karenina (1878) by Leo Tolstoy -- (Book #3 The Compromisepill) 

This is probably not the last time you're going to have to deal with me marriageposting or divorceposting (I recently read John Milton's pamphlet on divorce!!! So watch out!!!) By the way, Hardy actually quotes Milton in Jude the Obscure!!!!

Jude the Obscure -- The Doompill 

Jude the Obscure is actually my favourite novel of all time. It's also a book that made me cry, scream, and crash out because it's the saddest novel I've ever read. Without giving too much away, the novel is about two people who love each other who can not be with each other. This is because Jude marries a woman who manipulates his sense of honour/chivalry but who he does not actually love, and Sue (who he actually loves) marries someone else who can provide for her out of convenience. But Sue does not love the old schoolmaster she marries either. Jude and Sue have an intellectual connection. Sue basically changes Jude's entire worldview through their intellectual discussions. It's clear that Hardy thinks intellectual companionship is important. They both do Latinmaxxing and Greekmaxxing, but Jude does this to study Christianity while Sue has a deeper appreciation of the classical pagan authors. And this has a huge impact on their worldviews and leads to lively debate and long yaps between them. This book is extremely doompilling because it makes it sound like everyone ends up marrying someone they settle for rather than who they truly love. Even when Sue's husband sees Jude and Sue yapping together, he has to admit that they are lowkey perfect for each other. Jude and Sue technically never get married, but you can argue that they are more married than anyone else in the book is if you use love to define marriage rather than a piece of paper. By the way, what is the Milton quote that Hardy includes as an epigraph in this book? It's this one: 

“Whoso prefers either Matrimony or other Ordinance before the Good of Man and the plain Exigence of Charity, let him profess Papist, or Protestant, or what he will, he is no better than a Pharisee.” — John Milton, quoted by Thomas Hardy

This is a truly based quote. And I don't think anything more based about marriage has been said than this in the entire history of western thought, except for maybe that thing that Nietzche said about marriage being a long conversation. That was pretty based too. However, I have not actually read Nietzche's Human, All Too Human yet so I don't have much context for that. What I can tell you is that Milton and Hardy are based and 100% correct about marriage. If you don't think that whatever Jude and Sue have is a love that is higher than marriage, you are basically a Pharisee (by which Milton means someone who cares more about the law than what is actually right)!!!!!

 

Middlemarch -- The Hopepill 

Middlemarch is the novel that made me end a relationship. I know I said Jude is my favourite novel of all time, but Middlemarch is a close second. I love how this novel basically has two stories going on at once. Dorothea, the protagonist, is in an unhappy marriage with an old scholar named Casaubon. At first, Dorothea thinks Casaubon would be a good match because she wants to be with an intellectual guy who she admires. She thinks she can help him with his scholarly work. However, Dorothea comes to the nasty realization that Casaubon has no admiration for her even though she is an intelligent woman. He has no interest in her inner life, but she remains devoted to him out of a sense of duty. Dorothea has a literary foil, or a character who is in a very similar circumstance as her, named Lydgate. Lydgate is a doctor who is very passionate about his work, but his wife Rosamond doesn't respect his passion. She rejects Lydgate's interest in the medical field, making Lydgate himself feel rejected, unhappy, and resentful. Dorothea and Lydgate both want to be valued for their minds, but their partners do not offer this to them. My relationship reminded me too much of Dorothea and Casaubon's relationship, which is why I ended it. Eventually, Dorothea meets a man named Will Ladislaw who truly loves her soul!!! There's an unforgettable scene where Will Ladislaw and his friend are in an art museum where they see Dorothea. Ladislaw's friend, an artist, says he would paint Dorothea. And Ladislaw says what she really deserves is a poem about her, meaning that he deeply appreciates her non-physical attributes. He is captivated by her voice, soul, and mind. The most romantic scene ever is after Casaubon dies and Dorothea marries Will even though he's poor. 

Anyway, men shouldn't date Rosamonds and women shouldn't date Casaubons. 

While reading Middlemarch, I took pics of passages that had me howling and screaming and posted them on my one-person Discord server. I'll share some with you guys here. This is about how Rosamond was a terrible wife:

Also here is something I saved about some characters who had more minor roles in the story, Fred and Mary. Mary wanted to fix him so badly:

Anyway, Middlemarch is based. It is more hopepilled than Jude because of how Dorothea finds Ladislaw at the end who is basically a perfect man and marries him. 

Also, this is a meme I made. I posted this before. But here's a repost anyway.

Anna Karenina -- The Compromisepill 

Eventually when you're pondering about marriage, you arrive at the compromisepill. However, this is a hard pill to swallow and I lowkey didn't really swallow it yet ngl. 

My cat Mictlan is a Russian Blue, and so I thought it would be cool to take a picture of a Russian creature with a Russian book!! Lowkey Tolstoy should've added more creatures. There were horses though. 

Now, this is 800 pages about a woman cheating on her husband. Interestingly, I actually hated two other classic novels that were about women cheating on their husbands. One was Main Street by Sinclair Lewis and the other was Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert. I think the reason why I didn't like those books is because I thought the women were dumb and hard to sympathize with, even though their husbands were such mediocre men. The husbands in both Main Street and Madame Bovary were doctors who had no time for their wives. They were also lowkey kinda uncultured and didn't read enough poetry. However, their wives were also mediocre and I can't say I liked them much. But Anna is different. I loved Anna, idk. She was cool af and I understand why the young women in the novel like Kitty are captivated by her, and the men too of course. Her husband Karenin is very similar to the hubsands in Main Street and Madame Bovary. That is to say he is extremely mid. Anna wants a passionate love, and so she cheats on him with Count Vronsky, a handsome charming guy who I imagine had a great jawline. However, Vronsky never truly does value her. He sort of treats having her as a status symbol. You also see elements of the classic demand-withdrawal cycle in their relationship. 

Anna Karenina's plot structure is similar to Middlemarch because it sort of has two storylines in one. There's the Anna-Vronsky storyline and the Levin-Kitty storyline. This is kind of like how Middlemarch has Dorothea-Casaubon and Lydgate-Rosamond. I actually wonder if Tolstoy read Eliot. He probably did. I know he liked Dickens. 

Anyway, Vronsky doesn't truly love Anna's soul. There are times when he seems to, like after Anna recovers from a nearly fatal illness, but he mostly just seems like a hotter version of Karenin. Anna realizes that maybe it wasn't worth it. Meanwhile, Levin turns to God instead of turning to other women when he is unhappy in his own marriage.

The novel shows Levin as a noble character while Anna tries to fulfill her own desires instead of turning to spirituality. 

However, the genius of the novel is probably in that even though Levin is endorsed as morally superior, Anna is the more likeable character by far. Her intensity and passion makes her so much easier to sympathize with and relate to than Levin.

So if you fully swallow the Compromisepill, you could end up like Levin. And he is an admirable guy when it comes to morality. 

But Anna is more based, remember that! At what cost will you swallow the Compromisepill?

Here's a pic I took of a page from the book. Anna and Vronsky are quarrelling in this chapter. And I just thought Tolstoy did a 10000 times better job of describing "the demand-withdrawal cycle" than psychologists do. Take that, psychologists. Your field isn't a real science and it can be done better by writers of literary fiction. The demand-withdrawal cycle usually has a woman feeling unappreciated and demanding more from a man who then withdraws because he doesn't like the criticism. It had me howling and screaming when it happened to Anna and Vronsky.

Now, we are almost at the end of this post. I just wanted to end with a poem about the Marriage Trilogy. I chose juvenile rhymes and simple words on purpose to make it sound more like the style of a person who wouldn't read the Marriage Trilogy for some irony. Anyway, here it is:

A Poem I wrote about the Marriage Trilogy 

Long conversations between Jude and Sue

on matters that changed their entire worldview,

Perhaps you'll never know what that's like,

Philosophy taking over the night

Casaubon made Dorothea feel like

he was the sea, and her mind was a pool

until Ladislaw showed her what it was like

to actually be loved for her soul,

But they'll never say you're like him

Maybe you're like Count Vronsky

so handsome he made Anna Karenina

cheat on her husband and ruin her life,

All she wanted was love, 

though Vronsky didn't know how to do that right,

But her husband was not much better 

so she never satisfied her desires

Jude loved Greek and Latin

a poor boy who became a stonemason

just so he could have books 

And Lydgate was a doctor

who truly had a passion

but I'm not sure you know what that's like

any better than his wife did

Maybe that's why you can't love

a person that well either,

Jude and Levin and Ladislaw

could do it better

I don't even think you see

your lover is ensouled,

Ladislaw thought Dorothea's

beauty 

was too much for a portrait,

just right for poetry,

It would capture more of

her mind, her voice,

They say their love is beautiful

and in this one short life

I can't see the point

of being with you if

it doesn't feel like what they have,

So it can't be right

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

that's all, folks! I'll probably try to post something less lonelypilled next time.

announcing my rooner era and a rant about how society hates female desire

Hello frens. For those of you who know about my monthly goals for the month of June, I am proud to announce that I have finished them all. Yes, even my goal of going for a run at least 4 times this month!!!! That means that I am officially a rooner now. I even have Hoka shoes. I will continue rooning in July. 

He's just like me fr <3 

To celebrate getting my monthly goals done, I made eggplant parmesan!!! It was really good !!!! Here's the link to the recipe I used, for anyone interested: https://www.allrecipes.com/recipe/25321/eggplant-parmesan-ii/ 

So I wanted to share some lingering thoughts I have after having a long phone yap sesh with one of my homies who is like 10 years older than me. She's a girlboss and hella based, but I find it funny that our friendship lowkey doesn't pass the Bechdel test sometimes because our conversation topics tend to be about love and relationships. But I consider her to be an expert on these matters, so it is much better to talk to her about this stuff than it would be with some clueless woman in her early 20s. I will share some stuff I pondered about after yapping with her, but first here is a brief intermission to drop my monthly goals for July. Also lmao Canada Day is coming up, and I know it will be more lit this year than perhaps it has ever been before. 

Snekcoatl's July Goals (I'm making them extra spicy and ambitious this month)

1. Languages: 
• Finish the workbook "Our Ojibwe Grammar" by Rick Gresczyk 
• Move on to Lesson 9 of the Kidon Miinawaa Introductory Ojibwe online textbook after reviewing the relevant flashcards in my Anki deck
• 10 hours of practicing reading and writing in Hindi (the Linguin app has short stories and articles and Hindi, so I might practice with that)
2. Rooning and other fitness related stuff:
• Go on at least 4 roons again
• At least 12 gym check-ins
• Get at least 400,000 steps of walking this month 
• Try at least 3 at-home workouts from this youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/@fitbymik/posts?themeRefresh=1
3. Reading
• Finish reading Roger Williams and the Creation of the American Soul: Church, State and the Birth of Civil Liberty by John M. Barry (it's really good so far. I love how the author talks about historical figures as if he knows them personally lmao)
• Finish reading the second book of the Masquerade trilogy, The Monster Baru Cormorant. (IT'S SOOOO GOOOD SO FAR EEEE I LOVE BARU CORMORANT AND ABDUMASI ABD THEY ARE MY FAVOURITE GIRL AND MY FAVOURITE BOY)
• Try to get like at least 1/4th of the way through at least one other book for research purposes 
4. Creative stuff
• edit the short story I finished writing recently 
• write a poem inspired by Saint Francis of Assisi 
• finish at least one lesson of an online asynchronous course on coloured pencil art that I'm taking 
5. Self-care stuff
• do the extended version of my skincare routine lmao
• do hair stuff and nail stuff. basically the girl maintenance stuff that I have been putting off for some time because I generally do not like being reminded that I have a corporeal form. 

Okay, that should be enough to keep me busy. I'm going to revisit these on July 15th to see if they need to be adjusted because they are definitely ambitious but I am also unemployed lmao and I won't be in school again until October when I start my PhD. 

Also, my birthday will be in July!!!!!! I might need to take my birthday off to relax a bit and not work towards these goals that day and maybe have a party with some frens. 

Now it's time to tell you about the stuff I was pondering about. 

Basically, my fren was talking about how concerning it is that some left-wing and liberal feminist dating advice written by women and for women actually sounds a lot like conservative stuff now that feminism was supposed to be fighting against in the first place. She was talking about posts that encourage women to find a m*n who provides for them. Not only a decent life but a luxurious one so she can be soft and feminine. And about finding a m@n who is obsessed with you and makes you his priority in life or something. Bruh? All I want is for him to show emotional intelligence. 

This all seems very concerning and regressive to me and my fren for two reasons that we discussed. One is that the whole point of feminism is for women to not have to depend on men. A good man can be a nice add-on to an already fulfilling life, but that's all he should be. Another issue we have with the advice being given to women right now is that is reinforces rigid notions of gender. For example, it discourages women from being the pursuer or making the first move if they want to and it makes men feel like they should never expect or want the woman to make an effort. It's okay for a man to a babygirl!!!! or a princess!!! or a tradwife!!! It's 2025, after all. And don't even get me started on "a ReLaTiOnsHip ONLy wOrkS iF tHe MaN lOvEs tHe WoMaN mOrE tHaN sHe LoVEs HiM." Y'all are supposed to be mutual simps for each other. That is literally the whole point of being in a relationship. Stop being bitter and doompilled.

This brings me to the thesis of this post which is that I think society hates female desire and wants us to suppress it. Incels tell us to settle for people we are not even attracted to, and terfy radfems tell us to be with some simp who is obsessed with us and has a "provider" kink. Bro why don't you provide some good listening skills and some genuine interest in my hobbies? My point is that women are not trophies to be won. We have our own desires. But somehow it's always "find someone who will spoil you" and never "find someone who you like so much that you actually feel like spoiling them." Normalize women feeling violent carnal desire instead of expecting them to take a passive role in relationships. 

Anyway, that's all for today. Maybe next time I'll tell you guys about the time I used to want to abolish the nuclear family until I became more pro-natalist and pro-family and explain the way my thinking changed over time lol. 

Bye, frens!!

 

I wish bell hooks and Robin Wall Kimmerer did a crossover episode to discuss the Windigo and greed

 What's up y'all? Recently, I had the pleasure of reading "All About Love: New Visions" by bell hooks and "Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants" by Robin Wall Kimmerer. At first glance, the only thing that these books may seem to have in common is that grad students like reading them. But I actually see a lot of similarities in how bell hooks talks about consumerism and how Robin Wall Kimmerer talks about the Windigo. 

The Windigo is a creature that the Anishinaabe speak of that consumes human flesh. In pop culture, you may have seen Windigos appear in horror movies or games. But people who reduce the Windigo to "a sp00ky creature from Native American mythology!!!1!!" are missing the point of Windigo stories. They are cautionary tales. You see, the Windigo was once a human. It was consumed by insatiable greed. No matter what it consumed, it wasn't enough. Humans like this are at risk of "going Windigo." After that, they begin consuming human flesh. If you want to make an artistic rendition of a Windigo but give it contemporary significance, just draw a greedy CEO with a suit and a tie!

One of the essays in Braiding Sweetgrass is called "Windigo footprints." This is where Kimmerer gives the following description of Windigos:

"It is said that the Windigo will never enter the spirit world but will suffer the eternal pain of need, its essence a hunger that will never be sated. The more a Windigo eats, the more ravenous it becomes. It shrieks with its craving, its mind a torture of unmet want. Consumed by consumption, it lays waste to humankind."

This is why I love Robin Wall Kimmerer's writing style. So as you can see, the Windigo is at its core empty. He feels hollow, and there's nothing he can do about it. 

Now lets see what bell hooks writes about consumerism. I am going to share a quote that is in chapter 7 of "all about love," which is called "greed." Keep in mind that Kimmerer's book at its core is about respecting plants as if they are our elders and teachers, which requires a lot of humility to do so. bell hooks speaks of the importance of not giving up on love and using love to not only guide our relationships but political movements as well. She addresses rampant lovelessness in society while Kimmerer confronts the blatant disrespect of nature. And maybe these things are intertwined. 

Many children are brought up in loveless households and continue to be deprived of love as adults. When this happens, they are consumed by greed.

bell hooks writes:

"Intense spiritual and emotional lack in our lives is the perfect breeding ground for material greed and overconsumption. In a world without love the passion to connect can be replaced by the passion to possess. While emotional needs are difficult, and often impossible to satisfy, material desires are easier to fulfill."

This passage really makes me imagine the lovelessness a Windigo must feel. It almost makes you feel compassion or sympathy for the Windigo (while still wanting to stay away from it). 

Now, there are plenty of counterpoints to what bell hooks is saying. Are wealth fantasies always caused by feelings of emptiness or lovelessness? Perhaps not, but they certainly can be. bell hooks also talks about American consumerism in particular, and the same may not apply to other cultures. 

If someone from a Dalit community in India dreamed of owning a fancy car and eventually bought one after becoming wealthier (which is actually possible because caste discrimination and class discrimination are two separate issues in India), any criticism of this action would probably come from a very privileged person. Who are they to judge what a person from a disadvantaged background does to make themselves happier?

That being said, I do think lovelessness and perhaps a lack of passion, hobbies and interests can exacerbate material greed. And I still do think bell hooks is describing how Windigos are made, even if it may not be the only way. 

If you've read either bell hooks or Kimmerer or both or you're simply familiar with Windigo lore, what do you think? What is the contemporary significance of the Windigo in the face of the loneliness epidemic and environmental destruction?

The horseshoe theory of the simp and nonchalanter

 Okay I know the title of this post makes me sound completely bonkers, but hear me out. You know how some people who are politically centrist talk about the horseshoe theory? Basically, according to some centrists, far left and far right extremism are indistinguishable because of how they are both totalitarian. Now despite what many people believe about me, I am not a political person. They just think caring about the environment and Indigenous rights makes me "woke" and left wing when that makes no sense. Like lmao sorry that I don't want to pay the elites to breathe air. But sure it's "woke" to realize that human existence depends on the earth. 

Anyway, this post is not about politics at all. I just wanted to use the term "horseshoe theory" to analyze the modern dating scene, particularly two types of people who I will refer to Simps and Nonchalanters. I am sure these terms are self-explanatory. People who study psychology might use terms from Attachment Theory to understand these people, like anxious attachment and dismissive avoidant or whatever. But as a very wise and enlightened person, I think Attachment Theory is fake and dumb. Also I think psychology is not a real science and that therapists are untrustworthy. Imagine thinking aNxiOus aTtachMent or whatever has any more credibility than astrology. Also, women are always over-labelled with anxious attachment because of sexism. Oh you expect your partner to communicate regularly and clearly with you? you must have anxious attachment I guess!!! At least astrology is cool and aesthetic and so I can tolerate it even though I do not believe it is real. 

So I believe that if you Simp hard enough, it horseshoes into being a Nonchalanter. We view Simps and Nonchalanters as the opposite of each other. But how different are they, really? You see, Simps are prone to love-bombing. Here is what dating looks like for a Simp:

1. They meet a person

2. The person does the bare minimum for them

3. The Simp starts to lose sleep and their dignity as they do everything in their power to try to win over the person and be seen as worthy in their eyes

4. The person thinks the Simp is moving too fast. Has the Simp even really tried to understand them? Why does the Simp want commitment after only knowing them for like a month? The Person might have started liking the Simp if the Simp would just be themselves instead of having 0 personality other than trying to appeal to the object of their desires. 

5. The Simp pushes everyone away by being like this and concludes that they would be better off alone. They become doompilled, and then they turn into their most hated enemy: The Nonchalanter. 

Now, you simps need to understand that the person I have described as the object of your desires is NOT a Nonchalanter. They are just a regular person. They know how to feel love, but it builds up slowly over time for them and only for someone who reciprocates and would be a healthy longterm partner for them. They might yearn sometimes, but in a dainty and sophisticated way. You yearn like a wolverine. 

You are not unworthy. You're underestimating how much your natural looks, intelligence and personality appeal to people. You think they will only like you if you worship the ground they walk on but that is not true. That will actually have the opposite result. But do not take this to the extreme and think that you have to become a Nonchalanter. 

Life is about finding a healthy balance!!!! And you will need to unlearn black and white thinking. 

Here is what dating looks like for a Nonchalanter:

1. They avoid human contact to begin with because they are so scared of being hurt, rejected or abandoned by people. Or they may be very ambitious and hard on themselves to achieve a certain goal, and believe other people will get in the way of their success. 

2. No man is an island, and eventually a Nonchalanter will start chalanting a little when they have a social interaction one time in like a year. 

3. The person they chalanted for softly "rejects" them. They could literally just have been too busy. Or going through something. Or interested in someone else. It's not about YOU. Even the hottest rizziest person you know has like a 75% chance of being rejected because timing/chance/luck just isn't on the side of a lot of people. 

OR

The person actually likes them back and then the Nonchalanter gets scared and ghosts because it was such an unexpected outcome for them. 

4. Either way, the Nonchalanter concludes that Society is Evil 

Nonchalanters and Simps both crave connection, yet push people away. They are more similar to each other than they are to normal people. They are two sides of the same coin!

Anyway, my advice for you to start chalanting without simping, if that is at all possible. However, you should also be patient with yourself. I realized that this post sounds very harsh and critical. Realistically, you won't break out of the vicious Simp-Nonchalanter cycle in one day. It takes years of self-awareness and self-improvement. And try to respect and love yourself the whole way!!

Also, I think short periods of being a Nonchalanter can actually be pretty beneficial. But I warn against making it your whole lifestyle or identity! Same with being a Simp. This is why I'm a huge advocate for No Simp September. That's when you spend a whole month being a Nonchalanter on your sigma grindset to avoid other people's interference in your goals. But it only lasts one month, that's important. 

I did want to give y'all some unrelated life updates before I conclude this post. But they're all Ojibwe-related lmaoo. Indani-gikendaan ji-anishinaabemoyaan (I'm learning the Ojibwe language). I recently acquired a book of Ojibwe legends, a book about the war of 1812 and an Oji-Cree syllabic bible. Updates to follow once I do some studymaxxing with these materials. 

Platonic love is wild

It’s wild how pure and wholesome platonic love is while also having a chaotic and passionate side to it. Like the way you admire your friend is so innocent but the ties of loyalty make you fierce when it comes to defending them. Also, we tend to view our friends as beautiful. They are much more beautiful to us than anyone we have had romantic interest in, but not in a way that makes us physically attracted to them. It just makes us admire them and want to protect them. Also the best part about platonic love is that it doesn’t hurt, it feels secure. Sure there is a chance you may lose the friendship, but you don’t dread losing the friendship every day. You just enjoy it in the present instead of worrying about the future. It doesn’t make you live in fear. Also if the friendship does come to an end, it’s a bit easier to move on than a heartbreak. At least if the reasons were communicated clearly. Also unlike romantic love where the best part about the other person are the thoughts and fantasies you have about them, the best part about platonic love is when you actually spend time with them right in front of you, not in your mind! Also I feel like all love causes pain, not because all love is toxic and unhealthy but because the intensity of the feeling causes pain (like something intensely pleasurable also feels kinda painful just cause of how intense it is you know. Like reading a beautiful poem or seeing a painting so gorgeous it brings you to tears). But with platonic love, the intense painful/pleasurable moments occur when you’re actually with them and they do something cute or wholesome for you or they say something cool and based. Or when you feel a surge of protective feelings for them. With romantic love, the pain is more constant and you just can’t shake it off so it becomes a permanent state of suffering. Well at least this is all true for me, idk about y’all. 

My Grandmother

Today's my grandma's birthday, so I'd like to dedicate this small piece of writing to her :)

I've never met someone as calm and peaceful as my grandmother. I aspire to that level of serenity. She's always in a zen state of mind. It's completely imperturbable. She has the most graceful, beautiful walk. It makes her look like she's gliding when she takes a stroll in my grandfather's garden.  I've known lots of people thinner and smaller than her, yet none of them had the same grace and dignity in their stride. Next to her, even the most lithe, young gymnasts would have a clumsy gait. Her face is regal and composed as a queen's and her long braid runs all the way down her back, swinging as she walks. She hums softly. Nothing can interrupt her then. Who knows what she thinks about when she hums? Her face doesn't register a lot of emotion for she is stoical as an empress. She has always been difficult to read. Her tunes mix with the birdsong in the garden. Although she is a good listener, she doesn't talk much. But she still spends a lot of time humming. She hums when she walks, when she folds long, white sheets, and before she prays. Even though my grandmother does not speak much and her voice is soft and gentle when she does, I have no doubts that she's the wisest woman I've ever met. She doesn't need to be loud when her words are always so profound and true. She doesn't need to use her words to express how much she loves me and the rest of my family, because she already uses her actions. 

Not even in my Dreams

In the morning, the cold is numbing,
I am reminded I don't learn from my mistakes,
my heart is brimming with longing,
to give until I have nothing left to give has always been my fate,
you find me so repulsive that there is nothing for you to say,
you flinch at my touch and at the sound of my pleas you turn away,
it's like this every day,
and so I live my life waiting for the night,
hoping to be rewarded for my devotion in my dreams,
maybe I will hear you laugh,
anything is possible, it seems 
I might trade my life to see you smile,
yet just as deep as my love is my despair,
there is no enmity between us but you just don't care,
no flicker of recognition in your eyes as you pretend I'm not even there,
everyone who I love always leaves,
and you'll never be mine, not even in my dreams

Your Face

I did not believe in otherworldly beauty, 
thought it was silly for poets to compare the sea with eyes and roses with red lips, 
didn't think a human figure could look as graceful as a tree, 
and certainly did not believe that Helen of Troy could have launched a thousand ships 

But all that was before I beheld you, 
far too gorgeous for your surroundings, 
and I was tempted to compare you to the stars and to the moon, 
I finally understood the French expression coup de foudre for I was indeed struck by lightning 

I am now haunted by your beauty every day and every night, 
no one else I've seen could be your rival, 
yet underneath you have a heart of ice,  
your face, it is not worthy of someone who is so evil, 
a lifetime of repentance couldn't make up for your sins, 
your vanity knows no limits, 
there's no kindness under your skin, 
and now I realize that not even the best mask can conceal the horrors that lie beneath it 

Four Months

A lot can happen in just four months,
a time that seems so long to our young hearts,
enough time to make a stranger into a friend,
could it be enough to fall in love?
I daresay I got to know you better in those four months,
than ever I did some people who I knew for four years,
that may be why memories of you linger with me,
so long after those days are over 

Early February was when we first met,
and I thought you seemed larger than your surroundings,
so full of energy yet with a profound sadness in your eyes,
by late March, your secrets weighed heavily upon me,
your mind was artistic and wonderful,
how could I resist you then,
after four months of talking to such a man for four hours a day?

If only the force of my admiration had been enough to make you mine,
for to be deprived of you seemed like the most cruel thing the universe ever did,
would you forgive me now for being so young and so foolish?
I was simply angry that you had been the cause of my enlightenment, 
had elevated me to a different world and abandoned me at its door,
I asked too much of you in my greed,
It was no surprise when in April you started growing distant,
for I had wanted you to fill me like I were a vessel,
I wanted you to be the kindling of my flame

By the end of the month it seemed that I had really gone too far,
I would still catch a glimpse of you ever so often, 
for you were always easy to spot among a crowd,
our paths crossed daily yet in your eyes there was no more flicker of recognition,
we often stood so close to each other,
yet we could not have been further apart,
by May, we were complete strangers