Like many, I feel that for such an excellent and powerful book, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has a muddled ending.
Far be it for me to rewrite Twain, but I might’ve done some chopping.
I must say the “actually” in this prompt feels a bit accusatory and judgmental — as though, as a matter of practice, the answerer is generally unreliable. It also sounds like a question for someone with Dissociative Identity Disorder — otherwise who is making promises to whom? I am either one being or I contain multitudes, there being two seems at once too crowded and too lonely.
I’d lean flawed but interesting — e.g. Sun Wu Kong, Artful Dodger, or Juliette (of the same-named Sade novel [not the Shakespearean one,]) but it is risky. The Monkey King might bash me, Artful Dodger might rob me, and who knows what Juliette might do. So maybe the Candide from the end of the book.
I can’t claim I’ve ever done as well as Peter Minuit (buying Manhattan for $24) or Thomas Jefferson (picking up the Louisiana Territory at $0.04 / acre,) or the USG (acquiring Alaska for $0.02 / acre.)
I once bought a nice stick (which still have,) but it was not a tremendous bargain.
Kindle Reader. Do people engage in habitual activities that they feel bad about? I understand the occasional excessive pile of ice cream or hedonistic cheeseburger, but continually doing something one feels bad about seems self-rectifying.
I would say it’s much more common for travel to inspire me to read a particular book than the other way about. I can’t think of a case in which reading a book was the prime mover in a decision to travel to a given place. But I do try to read some literature from every country or literarily active city that I visit.
I’ll preface my comment by saying this kind of thinking is fraught with peril. The law of unintended consequences makes knowing whether one’s counterfactual would produce the intended results impossible.
For example, in the US (and some other countries of the developed world,) there has been a proclivity to run up massive debt — both budget and trade. In the US, servicing debt has passed defense spending and (given current trends) will surpass entitlements to become the largest component of the Federal deficit. I am among those who think this will probably end catastrophically, given the complete lack of effort to correct the situation. (Jaw-jacking and firing civil servants whose salaries make up a pittance in comparison to interest payments — while building yet more debt-inducing budgets — has [unsurprisingly] not proved useful.)
So, this is definitely a trend I wish didn’t exist, but almost certainly the American and world economies would not be as well off to date as they are had this trend been kept in check, and it’s possible something might be figured out that allows a softer landing than I presently expect. The old man lost his horse. Good news? Bad news? Who’s to say?
We’d be better off if the bleeding edge of weapon technology were the pointy stick — not just because of atrocities averted. Also, we’d all have to be more capable in such a world — there is no imposter syndrome among people who have to kill a deer or fish with a spear they hewed themselves. Also, if you are cheesed off with one or more people (or the world,) it is entirely different (and more calming) decision space if one has to go out spearing them individually than if one can spray them with automatic fire from 50 feet away. You’d still have the option, but you’d have to want it more and to accept the inevitability of consequence more fully. Finally, it is quite hard to run an authoritarian dictatorship if your army has weapons of similar capability to any random person.
I don’t know for sure whether “an armed society is a polite society,” but I suspect it is if the pointy stick is the pinnacle of armaments.
I know this makes it sound like I was around in the pre-Bronze era. I was not.
“I was tossed by a bison.”
