The chance of learning what you need to know when you need to know it

"A maid you had broken a porcelain cup, remark[ed], that what cannot be repaired is not to be regretted. This was obvious; and Rasselas reproached himself that he had not discovered it, having not known, or considered, how many useful hints are obtained by chance, and how often the mind, hurried by her own ardour to distant views, neglects the truths that lie open before her" (Johnson 9).

Indirect relevance to literature

I am increasingly amazed at the correlating ideas between Cultures of the World class and Legacy of Success class. In Cultures I'm reading an article about language. The claim is that "Language is essentially a code that people use both to think and to communicate" ("Conformity and Conflict," Hany, Spradley, McCurdy). The quote that specifically stood out as relating to the honors class was: "Richness of linguistic resource undoubtedly helps people to cope with subtle gradations in the things they deal with every day." This reminded me of something Professor Obenauf told me on the subject of, "what is the point of knowledge?" I may have already mentioned it, but basically he said knowledge gives people more choices, and that in itself can increase happiness. That is the indirect relevance to literature in this: such as the way language with more variations of specificity can offer its speakers more choices and therefore clearer ways to communicate and express their inner contemplations to the outer realm of speech, literature increases our experience vicariously (paraphrase D.H. Finn), which, as Prof. O. said, can increase the range of choices available to us. Do you see the connection? (I don't blame you if you don't- I'm terribly confusing tonight. Perhaps you can help me out, because I do not have time to elaborate or try, ironically, to express my inner contemplation to the outer realm of speech.

Imagination

In the context of political and social improvement:

Samuel Johnson in "History of Rasselass" argues that imagination is unproductive, foolish, and essentially wasteful because it diverts from reality. In Sir Philip Sidney's "Defense of Poesy," however, he urges that through imagination poets become the prophets and, in fact, creators of the future. They do this by proposing a BETTER reality and communicating a method clearly through the ageless mode of storytelling. So: is it futile to be an "idealistic dreamer"? Or, by the adjoining of what we imagine and how we live, could we actually become the poets who speak the words of fancy into the fabric of actuality?