This oil painting entitled,
"Dances with Wolves," was done by David Reeves-Payne, who currently lives and
paints in North Devon, England. I like it, both for itself and for the concepts
it symbolizes. As for the music, what you see and what you hear depends entirely upon who you are .... really are .... really are ....
Whatever will be, will be, will be ....
The future is not ours, to see ....
The future is not ours, to see ....
I
always have considered myself to be a generalist -- which is to say, I never
have wanted to be or thought of myself as a specialist at anything. I have a
"smattering" of knowledge in many areas, but a great deal of knowledge at
nothing. Sort of like the old cliché: "Jack
of all trades, master of none." That is one point.
Incidentally,
the "Jack of all trades" idiom evidently originated in a 1592 booklet in which
the writer, Robert Greene, referred to none other than William Shakespeare in
that manner. Shakespeare was a struggling actor in the process of becoming a
struggling playwright. It is said to be
the first known written mention of the bard.
Back
on track: Another point is that the older I grow, the more I realize the
vastness of my ignorance about the world in which I live and the absolute
impossibility to know the future or even to anticipate it in a logical manner.
Random chance and mentally unbalanced people play too great a role in the
scenarios of life and living.
Drifting
a bit now: A Seventeenth Century Jesuit priest named Athanasius Kircher is
claimed by some as the last man (or, should I say, the last individual) to know
everything in the spheres magic, arcana and dogma. Kircher had the intellectual
capacity and the organizing genius to prospect a route through knowledge and
its accumulation, to its expression and distribution.
There
are, of course, others in competition for the title of "the last" to know
everything. Thomas Young, a British polymath and physician, who was walking the
Earth for a few decades before and after 1800 also is said to be "the last" who
knew everything.
My
vote for the distinction of "the last" to know everything probably would go to Aristotle
-- the "Old Greek" philosopher and scientist; the student of Plato; the teacher
of Alexander the Great; the writer on a myriad of subjects. Think about it for
a while.
By
the way, when I write "the last to know everything," I am not considering he/she/it
to be someone with a computer-like mind and insatiable memory banks which can
record everything ad infinitum. I am thinking of it as an individual not only
with vast knowledge, but as someone like Kircher who has the ability to know where to look for data and, once
found, how to understand it and to explain it.
Once
again, back on track: I always have said that should time travel suddenly be
available, my curiosity would utilize it to go back in time to witness past
events so I would know with absolute certainty what happened at a given moment
at a given location.
Now,
however, I am beginning to believe I have been wrong in that regard and my
thoughts are shifting forward to the future. I am becoming increasingly
frustrated knowing the future will come and go and I will not be here to
witness it beyond a certain point in time.
Learning
the past is an imprecise study; learning the future is an impossible study.