A Day at the Temple

Yesterday was such a blessing. When I heard a week ago that a spontaneous temple trip was developing within my local Relief Society, I felt really impressed that I needed to go. There were so many reasons to not go. For one, my week is so full and busy that Saturday is my only day for any rest whatsoever. In fact, the last few Saturdays I have found that staying in bed for most of the day has been really necessary to give me energy and motivation to get to church and through the next week. Last Saturday in fact, I got up and did some things and in the late morning I sat down on the bed... and fell asleep for almost four hours! I must have needed it. :) Another reason is that Saturday is the only day that I get a lot of time to spend with Bug and get everything done and prepared for the coming week. The idea of not seeing Bug was extremely painful. But the idea took hold and I immediately called and booked myself a seat in one of the cars for the trip. The next week passed pretty much uneventfully with only slight problems with anxiety about it until yesterday morning.

And what a day! I wasn't sure when I started out why I felt prompted to come. And with everything going on in my life a trip to the temple frankly seemed a little foolish. When I left yesterday, I had pretty much decided that I was going to the temple to do something for myself and because I thought I should. But this has turned out to be a day to remember. The five hour drive down to Boston was spent with some other members that I didn't know terribly well and I feel a lot more comfortable with them now. I feel like I know them better now and I feel a little less shy. When I got to the temple, a small group of people asked if we would help with photos and so I enjoyed some talk and banter while taking photos for them. When I went into the temple and presented my recommend, I found that I was lucky enough to be able to join a group from Connecticut who were performing baptisms. (I don't know how it is for some members in larger areas, but to do baptisms in the temple in Boston, you must have a group, several priesthood leaders and an appointment... which usually must be made at least eight months in advance. So I was aware of the real possibility that I might arrive at the temple and spend the full time in the visitor's room or walking around the outer grounds... it has happened before.) But I was whisked into the baptistry and given clothing and joined the tail end of the group. My mind was already a bit full with my thoughts and I found a line from a song constantly playing over and over in my mind as I sat and waited to do confirmations. I tried to focus on the list of women in my hand; what were they like, were they happy I was there, would they accept the work and was I truly worthy to help them when my life feels like it is in tatters. But I found a feeling of comfort and peace as I performed the ordinances and a feeling that suggested that my life is about to begin anew... and I have a fresh start. I felt impressed that this time in my life is my opportunity to take the time to do some things that I have wanted and needed to do and haven't been able to accomplish in my life so far.

I was able to do two sessions with two different groups – one from Lincoln, Maine. I felt so blessed and was treated like a valued guest by the Lincoln group and I didn't feel awkward joining at all. I also attended a spontaneous talk and testimony meeting in the temple set up by my branch president and his wife. I should technically have missed it by attending the second session, but as I walked out to head upstairs I found that a member was just walking into the baptistry to get me to make sure I was able to attend... another blessing of the day. There were so many blessings that I received today. I received a few small promptings and thoughts that I really needed. I found some peace and some moments that I felt simply fine and calm... I didn't feel like I was dealing with the problems that I am or that my trials are so large. For a brief moment of time, I simply felt peaceful and enjoyed the ability and opportunity to provide service for someone else. I can't express how grateful I am that I came today. My cup is very full and I am almost sorry to leave and head back to the life I know I must continue to live and grow in.

One aspect of yesterday that I enjoyed was that I found a few of the names and individuals on my cards stick with me throughout the day. And so I arrived home, tired but well, and ready for bed. But before I tuck in, I thought I would take some time to research and present to you the two women whose names have stayed in my mind and who seemed to reach out to touch me today. I am grateful that I helped many more than these two, but as these women have stayed in my mind, I will take a few moments to try and discover a few pieces of their lives to know for myself and to share with you. I am thankful for the opportunities that they gave me today.

Clara Elizabeth Collins was born on July 23, 1890 in North Carolina. Her parents were Joseph Collins and Ann Rebecca Gupton and she was one of ten children... born in her parents later years. She had six older brothers and one older sister and when she was old enough, she fell in love and married Augustus Adolphus Drake. She lived with him until his death and bore him four children: three girls and a boy. She passed away on April 30th, 1978 in Nashville, North Carolina. She would have come to adulthood around the time of World War I.... lived through the Great Depression and the second World War, and having to deal with and understand the racial divisions that were slowly trying to unravel in the south.

Anne de Fayolle was born in 1532 in Francia. She was born the year of the union of the land of France and Brittany... lands that are still unified today. Born in the aftermath of the Hundred Years War, she would have grown up learning and living in a culture consciously separating itself as a nation and as a people from England. The House of Valois was in power and she would have lived during the reigns of Henry II and Francis II. This time was a period of change and she would not have failed to have noticed and even have been affected by it. The Medieval period of time was ending and people in general were questioning the Catholic church and monarchy in general. During the reign of Henry II, the Protestant religion became an important it minor religion... important enough that as the strength of the monarchy declined the last decades of her life and after would be filled with violence between the Catholic church and other Protestant groups.


I didn't find much, and I truly wish I had found more. I feel like I only got a small taste of what these women might be like, but its time to go to church so I should head off. Happy Sabbath. :)

“La Revolution Devore Ses Enfants” - The Revolution Devours Its Children

Living in the time and space of a revolution is always a dangerous business. There is the difficultly of picking the right side (which tends to be the winning side), surviving through the death, destruction, and mayhem... and of course figuring out all the new rules and changing your lifestyle and mindset to suit. However, some revolutions last over a period of time that allows the combination of anger, fear, desire for change, passion and blame to spiral into a level of violence, death, and fear that is more than the average war, revolt or revolution. I liken it to a small candle, beautiful and glowing in a light wind on a dry night... and then you throw a few gallons of gasoline on it- not a good idea! :) This was the path that the French Revolution took in the desire for 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.' The candle was lit and gasoline was poured on slowly until the inferno was difficult to control. I would like to analyze the process by which the French Revolution became so radical that, as the saying goes, it “devoured its own children.”

If the process of radicalization must be described in two words, it would be 'fear' and 'anger.' And this emotion touches over all aspects of the revolution causing more and more extreme reactions. While some historians have blamed Enlightenment writers (or 'radical critics' of society) for some of the more extreme behavior, modern historians see these works as only a small piece of the puzzle. Another piece of the puzzle is governmental censorship. In France, censorship was a bit more lenient than other countries and so many documents could be written that criticizes the government... as long as nothing was named and it was discussed as metaphor. This got the majority of French readers studying and discussing 'forbidden' topics which also helped radicalize the very thoughts in the heads of the populace. Paris and the country of France were really at the heart of Enlightenment thinking due to some basic differences between France and the other states of Europe- some differences include religious differences (France had more control over the Catholic Church in its borders than other countries which interesting enough caused only the most extreme and radical forms of Protestantism to come to France), class differences (France was more stratified in class than other European states and the stratification was beginning to weaken and crack), censorship, etc...


When the nobles pressed the king to call for the Estates General to assemble, about 1200 deputies arrived in Versailles for the event. Some of the deputies were already radical and were articulate on the wish for a huge transformation of public life. Deputies from the Third Estate were fearful that they would have no say due to the tradition rules of voting so all members of that caucus as well as a few members from the other estates joined together to stop any discussion unless the the voting rules were changed. Fear of the Third Estates actions by the monarchy and the nobles caused King Louis XVI to lock out the rebelling deputies. Anger at the king's response caused the outside deputies to get together and swear to not leave or be sent home until they had helped France get a new constitution. The delay in getting a new constitution and agreement at the National Assembly caused unrest and frustration in the rest of the country. This frustration bubbled up and with some unknown event, riots broke out and within a month or two, the famous 'storming of the Bastille' in Paris... and the revolution had begun! Riots and uprising in other cities forced local officials to follow the wishes of the rioters... not the king. Royal authority, once it began to dissolve, diminished quickly and the National Assembly held a special session to abolish feudalism and do away with all privileges from that institution. They also wrote the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen and set up a constitutional monarchy. Violence would continue as the 'extremes' in the country continued to mistrust the other extremes- Catholics against Protestants, peasants against nobles, etc.... And as violence was 'accepted', it became acceptable. As with all boundaries in life, we as humans push those borders of acceptable behavior... and when a boundary falls, we are more likely to push against the next boundary if we do not acknowledge that a boundary has disappeared. And so, violence not only happened more often, but became more brutal and almost inhuman (the September massacres entered my mind as I thought about this.)

King Louis XVI tried to run with his family to another country to safety, but was unsuccessful. This action broke apart the constitutional monarchy and was the beginning of the end for the National Assembly. Election brought in more of the bourgeois members and fewer nobles and those new members were more likely to want more radical reforms. As more people started to feel that the revolution hadn't actually worked and started pro-royalists groups as well as counterrevolutionary agitation in public, both sides became more and more polarized. The Revolutionaries became fearful of the future of the revolution itself and moved more to the fringes. Unrest in the country stepped up, the National Assembly voted to declare war on Austria, and so any internal descent was now seen as treasonous. Emergency measures were set up, and a new form of government was born called the National Convention. The King was put on trial and the decision to execute him was made- by executing the king, the convention was making a clear statement to the opposition... there was no possibility of compromise. The Montagnards ruled in the Convention, Maximilian ruled the Montagnards and after the development of the Committee of Public Safety... the Reign of Terror had begun. The fear, passion, and anger that the revolutionaries in the National Convention felt towards anyone who might possibly be against the Revolution was focused and turned against the perceived enemies of the state. Anything, any disagreement or difference of opinion could be seen as treasonous... and it is now that the revolution began to 'devour its own children'

In the country, there were many counterrevolutionaries in different cities.... and many people who were tired of the violence, hungry and wanted things to go back to a better space. But at this point, the revolution had lost control. In the National Convention, the Montagnards led by Robespierre and another highly ranking member Georges-Jacques Danton had a difference of opinion. Danton was one of the original revolutionaries and was considered quite the hero, but he was too moderate in the end. He gave a speech in favor of ending the terror and restoring regular legal and civil procedures in January 1794. This disagreement cost Danton his life one month later and gave us the quote mentioned above: the full quote is “the Revolution may soon, like Saturn, devour its own children.” No one was safe once the revolution was out of control and Danton and many of his followers were only the first of the 'children' to be fed to le guillotine. Ironically, Maximilian Robespierre's death on the guillotine was one of the few things that ended the Terror... and help stabilized the revolution and its violence a little bit.

There are quite a few ironies that can be found in the study of the details of this long event. The largest irony is that this movement which was begun in the name of freedom and individual liberty caused so much death and destruction. Another irony is that Maximilian Robespierre, who was an intelligent, passionate advocate of human rights... could have become the main advocate of the Terror (which caused such a large amount of unnecessary bloodshed.) While some things did change for the better, this period of time was a time of fear, anger, terror, passion and bloodshed. Until the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte, it would continue.

Thoughts on Revolution, Potential Causes, and Revolt

I did quite a bit of reading on the causes or potential factors of building a revolution- I am currently studying the French Revolution that started in 1789. There are many different causes that can be pointed to in hindsight for a revolution and during my studies I have certainly found several potential factors- poverty, lack of prosperity or hope for the majority of French constituents, poor economy and lack of jobs, huge governmental debt, perception (or reality) of the government being weak, unable to lead or create positive change, and ignorance or indifference (or at least perceived ignorance or indifference) by the few who had the most ability to create change.  All of these could be considered primary factors in creating an environment that sparks a revolution- I think that the more of these factors you add, the more you can actually bet on the spark being lit by a 'small' act and the revolution is now fully operating, so to speak. During my studies, I tried to think of factors that would make me as a person be willing to join in an overthrow of my country's government. As I thought I decided that all of the answers that I gave above would (at least in my case) really be secondary factors- all of them are bad, but I do think that to actually join or start a revolution, I would have to have one other defining factor. I think I would need to have pretty much all of the above, but I also would need to feel that the safety of my family and community are not only at risk, but the idea of the status quo being just as dangerous and life threatening as a revolution might be would be the primary factor that would get me to be involved. I think I would have to feel passionately that all of us (friends, family, community) might be dead unless I did something.... and most of the above factors would have to be in effect for most of that to happen I suspect. The thought that frightens me the most about this line of thinking is that I think many countries, including our own are in this sort of 'swimming pool'- the factors above are all in place and the pool is full and glistening in front of us... we are simply waiting for the one thing/person that gets us all going off of the diving board. I really think that most people will not join a revolt or cause one that becomes a revolution unless you have many factors that they feel passionately about, no ability to see that they will be fixed in the future and the very real possibility of the problems getting so much worse. If you have been suffering for awhile, even a small suggestion of more suffering could really be a breaking point.

I think that these factors are the same reasons that will continue to push for revolutions now and in the future on our planet. I think that as long as people feel hope that things can become better, they can feel help and that they have a voice for facilitating change... then we can as a people will continue to suffer with the economy, shrinking public safety nets and community services, and other difficulties and will do so looking for the light at the end of the recession, etc... But suffering for long periods of time, feeling 'dull' and hopeless, and finding no ways to move forward and only despair and suffering can and will eventually cause people to strike out in their frustration, anger and desire for something else.  I think that is why revolutions tend to be so bloody- the negative emotions cause people to do things that they might never do in any other circumstances. And that is one reason that I dislike the idea of revolution so much. People kill children and people who do not agree with them to up hold their virtue - whether it is change, human rights, etc.... and their virtue becomes in some senses a demon; harming and killing everyone in its wake until the fire of their passion and virtue is put out, contained or destroyed. Many die who had no part in making the problem, many die who wanted to fix the problem, and many die who may not have even understood what the problem was. I will admit that I don't feel comfortable with revolution – even non violent revolution- simply because of the ferocious pace. I prefer change that comes gradually but sure and brings people happily or confusedly into the group... not by force, or other negative means.

Do you think that America has many of the factors that I described above? What are your thoughts on this issue? What would you need to have to get involved in a revolt/revolution?

The Subjugation of Kievan Rus : The Tartar-Mongol Conquest and its Influences/ Ramifications

The Tartar- Mongol invasion of 1237-1241 marked the collapse of the Kievan Rus state and for more than a century, the Mongolian leaders and armies remained the major power over most of the Rus territories. For almost the next 300 years, the three major influences on this country and its people were the Mongols, the new city of Moscow, and let's not forget the Russian princes and aristocracy that will continue to weave their influence, civil war, and conflicts onto the Russian people and its land mass. This paper will discuss the Tartar -Mongol invasion and the Russian resistance to it and also will discuss the history of the “Golden Gate” of Kiev and its significance to Russian history and the Mongol invasion.

By the time of the beginning of the Mongol invasion in 1237, many things had changed in Kievan Rus. The city of Kiev was no longer the capital of the 'great prince' Andrei Bogolyubsky as he had 'sacked' the city and then moved 'his' capital to the city of Vladimir. As the trade to Greece became less important, so did the city of Kiev and eventually steppe nomads (the Polovtsy) cut the water route to Greece. This waterway 'tie' had connected the two largest areas of Kievan Rus... and they were now divided. Decentralization and migration to avoid the steppe nomads began to occur and ordinary Russians, as they understood the inability or unwillingness of their princes to rule, took to finding their own strength to solve their problems and to try and prosper. This lack of communication and the lack of cooperation by the ruling elite left the Kievan Rus state more vulnerable to outside invading forces. This vulnerability and then the loss of several armies that were sent to help neighboring Polovtsky forces fight the Mongolian forces, helped assure the collapse of the Kievan Rus and the takeover by the Mongols.

Russia was safe for a few years from the Tartar-Mongols as the Mongolian forces retreated to the East in 1227 to deal with internal problems arising from the death of Genghis Khan....however, these were dealt with and so the Mongols returned, invading under a khan named Batu and a general named Subodei. While the Russian elite and its people should have been prepared for the Mongols to return, the Riurikid princes failed to take any extraordinary precautions against attack – even after three of their neighbors were attacked and subdued in 1229 and 1232. Batu and his army attacked in 1237 by crossing the Volga river and systematically taking over the land after his demand for a tribute of 10% of all the assets of Russia was denied- which included people and horses. The first to fall was the city of Riazan which was conquered in a week, destroyed the small town of Moscow in January 1238, 'captured, plundered, and burned' the city of Suzdal, and then reached the city of Vladimir in February- which was defeated and beaten in a battle on the Sit' river on March 4, 1238. The great Tartar-Mongol campaigns in the lands of Russia can be divided into two separate phases over three years (1237-1240).


By 1240, Batu had conquered all but a single part of the Kievan Rus- and Novgorod escaped only by a very lucky circumstance. As new territories were acquired, the Mongols conscripted new members for the military from the conquered populations and adapted their 'clan structure' to the conquered people. The Mongols were also noted by religious communities at the time for being very tolerant of other religions. However, the Mongols were not noted for their abundance of mercy or pity- to themselves or other groups of people. An example of the strict discipline by this group for themselves can be measured the the example given to other soldiers – if one or more soldiers was 'captured' by the enemy, the other members of their military 'group' were executed after the battle's end. Also, in “The Tale of the Destruction of Riazan”, the audience is reminded that the Mongols 'burned this holy city with all its beauty and wealth... And churches of God were destroyed and much blood was spilled on the holy alters. And not one man remained alive in the city. All were dead. All had drunk the same bitter cup to the dregs. And there was not even anyone to mourn the dead.', After the Mongol military campaigns were concluded in the Rus lands, these lands joined the vast empire that was known as the Golden Horde- which at its largest point covered large areas across eastern Europe, Persia, China and Korea.

The land of Kieven Rus and its people were deeply affected by the invasion and subsequent rule by the Mongol rulers. Looking at the land through a large lens, the country itself was mostly cut off from Europe for more than 250 years. This would certainly have had its effect on the economy- as well as the political and cultural structure of the time. After the city of Kiev was burned to the ground in December 1242, the center of political power in the Rus was shuffled from there to the newer city of Moscow. (An interesting chronicle account on the siege and burning of Kiev mentions that so many people tried to get to safety from the Mongol army in the Church of Tithe that the upper floors of the church collapsed due to the weight. The Church of Tithe was also the first church built of stone in the city of Kiev.) At the time of the Mongol destruction, Kiev was considered one of the largest cities in the world, with a population exceeding one hundred thousand. Many parts of the land and its human geography was destroyed as cities were burned, large quantities of people killed, several royal princes killed along with their armies, and a new way of life and new leaders emerged. (There is some argument about how much real damage either than 'deaths' the Mongol conquest actually caused.) The only facts that do not appear to have much dissent surrounding them is that the Tartar-Mongol forces seemed to easily and speedily conquer the Kievan Rus state due to a few circumstances- the Mongol army was much larger and much more efficient due to skill, military tactics etc.... The Russians had no central command, smaller and less efficient armies, no intelligence system and very little communication between the towns and districts.

With the coming of the Khan- ruler or tsar of the Golden Horde, the lives and lifestyles of the remaining populations were to change. The Mongol society was primarily a nomadic one and that was not to change after the takeover of a different group of people. Society was based around clans, which were then divided into tribes and then smaller groups and even when building cities and agricultural communities, the Mongols were known for continuing to be a people who were easily 'transportable'- while building his capital city of Sarai, the leader Batu lived in a tent. One source suggests that by 1253, this capital city was an enormous 'tent city' of about ten miles in size. The economy was affected as tribute needed to be paid to the Mongol oppressors, qualified men were forced or conscripted into new positions in the economy- army, crafted items, other skilled labor, etc... Some chronicles describe the taking of slaves and the systematic conscription of the skilled craftsman and artisans. So internal commerce would have suffered a setback due to the lack of city craftsman to make things to sell, the inability of the towns to make goods to satisfy the villagers, the Mongol policy of 'ignoring' the peasants so that the peasants would be forced to grow food for themselves and the trade routes that had been disrupted and needed to be restored, etc... To be blunt, the Mongols, who were primarily interested in economic gain, had the motivation to get the economy moving again quickly and settle in peaceful relations over the conquered. That said, the motivation was based on what the Mongol leaders wanted the economy to do... and that did not necessarily contain what the economy had already been functioning as before the war.

Politics changed as well. The war with the Mongols had reduced the number of princes that still survived to vie for power and land (mostly the northeastern princes). And each of these princes needed to accept their new rulers, learn how to deal with the new rules/laws and attempt to recover and restore order in their lands- of course, after they had their right to continue to 'rule' confirmed by the Khan. The fact that the Mongols had become the men in charge, however, did not change the continuous power struggles between the Russian princes as well as the near severance of political and cultural ties between the north and south lands. In some areas the only outward sign of the Tatar-Mongol invasion's success was that the Russian princes would travel to the headquarters of the Golden Horde to pay allegiance to the Khan and have their appointments as leaders confirmed... as well as to pay tribute. The invasion also brought the 'census' to Russian lands as the Mongol leaders used the information gathered for military conscription, land division, assessing the amount of tribute due, etc... Politics in general changed more in the southern areas of the old Kievan Rus due to proximity to the headquarters of the Golden Horde- the northern areas were less easily influenced. Diplomatic rituals clearly changed and developed over this time as well. The visits became more formalized and became a 'ritual'... and not a haphazard system.

Other changes that can be attributed to the Mongol invasion were changes in culture. A postal system was developed that helped speed communication and make it more efficient. Interactions between the Church and the Golden Horde became more direct and regular at time went on and by 1261 a bishopric was established at Sarai and the Russian church was afforded special privileges from taxation and military conscription- even though the Mongols were generally Muslim. Individual bishops could serve as diplomatic agents for the khans and were used by the Golden Horde to help improve alliances with the Byzantium as well as act as emissaries to the Russian princes (which could suggest church approval for the Mongols.) As the city of Moscow became more prominent over time, the culture that the city of Kiev had shared diminished and the cultural attributes of Moscow became more widespread. (By 1252, Moscow had become an independent hereditary principality and over the next hundred years it was to grow strong enough to not only annex some of its neighbors in 1302, but to also fight for the title of Grand Princedom in the early 1360's.) Over time, the Golden Horde would put it's trust/confidence in the prince's of Moscow over other political princes.

Like all empires, the Golden Horde was chipped at over time and was eventually vanquished from the Russian lands. In 1380, an alliance led by the princes of Moscow defeated the mongols at the battle of Kulikovo- which was to mark the beginning of the end of the Golden Horde in Russia. The Mongol 'vacuum' as filled as it lifted, but mostly by Russia's traditional enemies (the Poles and the Lithuanians) and not necessarily by the Russian's themselves. As these new groups moved in, intermarriage became more commonplace, helping to blend, people, cultures, and language.

In conclusion, while the Mongol invasion caused changes in the economic, political and cultural structure of Kievan Rus- and certainly contributed or caused the failure/collapse of the state, not all changes can be placed squarely at the feet of the Golden Horde. For some groups economic advantages could be had that were better than before the invasion... and many economic hardships that were suffered by the common man could be shown to be as much the fault of the Russian princes themselves as well as the Mongol leaders. The changes in culture can be placed at the feet of the Mongols... and at the feet of the Russian princes and the Byzantine empire as well. And many political 'changes' didn't cause much change at all- the Russian princes still squabbled like toddlers playing a high stakes game of Risk. Some changes, such as the census and tax gathering methods the princes saw as distinct benefits- and kept using them after the Khan had been vanquished from the Russian lands. Moscow rose to prominence because of the calculation of its princes and their use of the 'political arraignments by the Golden Horde- a calculation that other princes in Russia didn't take advantage of.

An interesting side note to this invasion and physical structure that has managed to survive the years of changes and revolution is the “Golden Gate' of Kiev. Who constructed the gate is up to debate- whether it was Vladimir I or his son Yaroslav the Wise- although Yaroslav appears to be winning in the debate. It was constructed in 1017-1024 and served as a main gala entrance to Kiev. The Golden Gate was originally a 'triplet' and was one of the three main gates into the city of Kiev. The other two have not survived the onslaught of centuries. The city of Vladimir had a set of gates also known as the 'Golden Gates', but those particular gates were destroyed by Batu during the Mongol invasion of the city. The Golden Gate of Kiev, however, was built so well that when Batu tried and successful attacked the city of Kiev, he was unable to get through that particular gate... and only found success through a less well fortified area. These 'gates' have a few significant connections to the past history of the Russian state. In 1048, a french delegation arrived in the city of Kiev to ask King Yaroslav for his daughter's hand in marriage to King Henry I of France. The french diplomats was awed by the beauty of the “Golden Gates” and you can still find royal deeds in France signed with the seal of the Princess Anna Yaroslavna- which has a iris and a gate... which is thought to be the Golden Gates of Kiev. If all the entrances to Kiev had been like the Golden Gate...well, the Mongols might have met their match in the city of Kiev. It is also a unique architectural structure that has been imitated a few times, but is based on the internal decorations found in ancient Ruthenian churches. Currently, the Golden Gates have been restored on the ruins of the original gates, holds a museum inside and are now the property of a different nation- Ukraine.

French, Anyone?

I have decided to make an attempt to learn French. I need to stress that this will be a tiny attempt. In my short past, I have found the attempt to learn a language to be something that is an impossibility to me- like math. No matter how hard I try, I have not been successful. Its almost like I have a mental block that tells me I can't do it... so therefore I live up to that idea and I am truly unable to do it. I feel a little uncomfortable with that idea though; the idea that something that is perfectly possible in impossible for me. I am intelligent, kind, motivated, and determined. There is no rational reason that I can come up with that I cannot learn a language. And I loved my time in Paris and I am interested in moving to Canada... so...

Today I will try! I pledge to give five minutes at least four days a week to this goal. Not so much that I feel pressured, but enough to remind me of my goal and to learn a word and how to use it. And if I am really good... I will try to stick to appropriate words, although that doesn't sound like as much fun! :o)

So, if I want to try and do this without the help of my family because I am hoping it will be a pleasant surprise, does anybody else know of any good resources for learning the language? If you have learned a language before, what helped you the most? And please, what was not helpful to you? What advice would you give me?