Bart asks Garrick how many speedsters there are. The old man gives a mealy answer about not being the first and Bart not being the last. Bart confronts him about not having raced the demon himself to stop to have possibly stopped it, and Garrick denounces their abilities as a curse. Clark offers that curses can be blessings if they don't let their powers control their lives. Garrick likens Clark to Carter Hall and Bart jumps on the moment to call him out for not having stayed in touch with his team. The old man owns up to being proud of how he acted, but it's not good enough for Bart. Riled up, he starts tapping into the Speed Force before Clark manages to stop him.
Offensive coordinator Garrick McGee will now turn to an experienced backfield as he attempts to bring along either of the two remaining signal-callers—George seems to have the edge given he took more snaps last season (and ended with a 40.4 completion rate and five picks to set against four touchdowns) after Crouch missed the spring due to injury. They were close to getting junior college transfer and former Virginia Tech quarterback Dwayne Lawson to step in immediately, but too many loose ends regarding course credits will keep him out of an Illini uniform until January, per . The fact that all signs point to the son of famed overall No. 1 bust Jeff George being Illinois’s best hope is, given what he did last season, not encouraging. I have no clue if the Illini even have rivals (Indiana, maybe?) but they’re definitely happy about this.
What, then, are we to do? We cannot go back to the Middle Ages. Thatis a cry to which we have become accustomed. We cannot go back--or canwe? Distinguo. I should like every term in that proposition defined. Does"go back" mean a retrogression in time, or the revision of anerror? The first is clearly impossible per se; the second is a thing whichwise men do every day. "Cannot"-- does this mean that our behavioris determined irreversibly, or merely that such an action would be verydifficult in view of the opposition it would provoke? Obviously the twentiethcentury is not and cannot be the fourteenth; but if "the Middle Ages"is, in this context, simply a picturesque phrase denoting a particulareducational theory, there seems to be no a priori reason why we shouldnot "go back" to it--with modifications--as we have already "goneback" with modifications, to, let us say, the idea of playing Shakespeare'splays as he wrote them, and not in the "modernized" versionsof Cibber and Garrick, which once seemed to be the latest thing in theatricalprogress.
While we have not been in contact for a few years, our contact concerning the publication in 2012 of an essay I wrote about Yin, Yang and Thinking Styles has meant a lot to me.
An archive of articles on eighteenth century theatre.
"Subjects" of some kind there must be, of course. One cannot learn the theory of grammar without learning an actual language, or learn to argue and orate without speaking about something in particular. The debating subjects of the Middle Ages were drawn largely from theology, or from the ethics and history of antiquity. Often, indeed, they became stereotyped, especially towards the end of the period, and the far-fetched and wire-drawn absurdities of Scholastic argument fretted Milton and provide food for merriment even to this day. Whether they were in themselves any more hackneyed and trivial than the usual subjects set nowadays for "essaywriting" I should not like to say: we may ourselves grow a littleweary of "A Day in My Holidays" and all the rest of it. But mostof the merriment is misplaced, because the aim and object of the debatingthesis has by now been lost sight of.
18th-Century Theatre - Victoria and Albert Museum
It is, of course, quite true that bits and pieces of the mediaeval traditionstill linger, or have been revived, in the ordinary school syllabus oftoday. Some knowledge of grammar is still required when learning a foreignlanguage--perhaps I should say, "is again required," for duringmy own lifetime, we passed through a phase when the teaching of declensionsand conjugations was considered rather reprehensible, and it was consideredbetter to pick these things up as we went along. School debating societiesflourish; essays are written; the necessity for "self- expression"is stressed, and perhaps even over-stressed. But these activities are cultivatedmore or less in detachment, as belonging to the special subjects in whichthey are pigeon-holed rather than as forming one coherent scheme of mentaltraining to which all "subjects"stand in a subordinate relation."Grammar" belongs especially to the "subject" of foreignlanguages, and essay-writing to the "subject" called "English";while Dialectic has become almost entirely divorced from the rest of thecurriculum, and is frequently practiced unsystematically and out of schoolhours as a separate exercise, only very loosely related to the main businessof learning. Taken by and large, the great difference of emphasis betweenthe two conceptions holds good: modern education concentrates on "teachingsubjects," leaving the method of thinking, arguing, and expressingone's conclusions to be picked up by the scholar as he goes along' mediaevaleducation concentrated on first forging and learning to handle the toolsof learning, using whatever subject came handy as a piece of material onwhich to doodle until the use of the tool became second nature.
How We Know | Indians of the Midwest - Newberry
Preface This essay/review is primarily US-centric and my irresistible attraction to digging a little deeper into the lives of the authors, as well as exploring their work.