Harlequins, Part 6
August 1st, 2008

Harlequins, Part 6

Have you ever had a plan fall apart completely, only to discover something so much better you had missed in all your narrow planning?

This is the sixth and final element in a series of six installments beginning here: http://secretvespers.com/2008/07/21/pieces-part-1/. Each one uses a harlequin pattern and adds a couplet to the story. The hidden text of each one begins with “the romance of”.

Transcriptorial: every possibility / flew open when our plan burst apart

RSS feed | Trackback URI

4 Comments »

Comment by orinoco womble
2008-08-02 02:00:55

They do work extremely well! I have really enjoyed them. Thought-provoking indeed.

And yes, sometimes it is really an improvement when the plans you thought you made change on you completely. I am always suspicious of those who plan their lives out to the nth degree–and make it work that way. How do they manage to control every contingency, unless what they’re actually doing is closing out every possible variable?

My life is nothing like what I had planned so hopefully in my youth. Nor indeed in the beginning of my married life. But it’s good in ways I couldn’t have imagined.

 
Comment by Natasha
2008-08-02 16:01:45

I love it when that happens!

Comment by Somerled
2008-08-11 20:26:20

Me too.

 
 
Comment by MalikTous
2008-08-03 16:03:51

Pasteur and his mouldy petri dish, Becquerel and his leg burn from a pocketful of radium, the first sod to roll a heavy object over a log by accident vice dragging it all the way home… Unplanned and accidental events are commonplace progress.

‘Insufficiency is the mother of invention… Mankind’s first tool was a crutch, and it wasn’t invented by a healthy man. Euryma (a synthetic goddess of invention) is a babbling idiot, and her mother is blind and walks backwards…’

 
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.