I wish I still believed that people were fundamentally good. I've had a lot of my perceptions of the world shattered over the past couple years, and somewhere along the way I lost faith in people. I always thought that others would abide by the concept of 'treat others as you would be treated', but it seems that's only rarely the case... considering this, why even bother being nice if someone will only take advantage of you?
-sigh-
On a related note, I'm sorry to the friends I've snapped at over the past week - I've been really short-tempered as of late. It's not you guys, it's midterms and this place in general getting to me... I need a break already. And I need to decide whether a biology degree from here is worth taking another 7-8 shitty molecular biology courses (111, 113, 150...). Whether it's worth my happiness for the next 5 terms. I've had two completely different opinions on this so far, from Nate Austin saying "You'll still be able to point to a really strong biology and scientific background if you need to - most history majors won't have that" and Yussanne saying "Don't close doors! It's absolutely worth it! If you ever decide you want to go back into science, you'll have to have it... you don't want to regret dropping the biology major later down the road."
Bugger scientific research - we've already established that I'm just not cut out for it. The question is, will those bio courses prevent me from taking courses that I feel are important, or cause me to do badly in the history and an courses I really care about? I'm worried about this - I'd much, much rather be taking an anthropology course as opposed to another fricking biochem course, but taking both will bring me to an overload next term. Perhaps I'll just put off the bi/ch 111 course till senior year and take a breather from bio next term... that would leave me with bi 123 (12), an --- (9), l 130b (10), h 97a (9), orchestra (3), core (3), pe (3) = 49 units. It's so much more appealing... but that means I'll be taking *another* bio class senior year, when I'd planned to take things pretty easy. -sigh- I should've gone to a liberal arts school...
Ah well, I'll probably be remedying that by going to UT Austin or somewhere similar for grad school in history or a related subfield. Just so long as I never have to deal with physics or math ever again.
On a lighter note:
 | Eowyn If I were a character in The Lord of the Rings, I would be Eowyn, Woman of Rohan, niece of King Theoden and sister of Eomer. In the movie, I am played by Miranda Otto. Who would you be? |
or
 | Legolas Greenleaf If I were a character in The Lord of the Rings, I would be Legolas, Elf, a son of the King of Mirkwood. In the movie, I am played by Orlando Bloom. Who would you be? |
A hair's breadth between them -it just depends on whether or not I prefer a sword at the time. Both are excellent characters, so I'm not complaining :) I know a lot of women identify with Arwen, but I don't think Tolkien's Arwen would quite fit me... perhaps the movie-version of her will. Eowyn at least has strength, courage, and steadfastness in the books; Arwen appears only as Aragorn's demure love interest. I certainly hope I can think beyond being the stereotypical 'damsel in distress needing to be rescued' - I always thought Leia from Star Wars was one of the neatest heroines, because she took matters into her own hands, and sometimes was more successful than her would-be rescuers. I'd certainly like to think I would be Eowyn. Same goes for Legolas, of course (maybe even more so, since he actually went a ways on the quest with the ring-bearer, and gets more time on the battlefield) - they seem to embody quite a few of the same qualities.
Ah, to live in such a world... any one but this one would be nice at the moment. Work? What? I'm on a quest to save the world from evil! ;)
Plus I'd get to wear a cloak and boots, camp out, fight orcs with bow and sword... not to mention ride a good deal of the time, which is always, always a plus. :)
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home