The result looks very skewed. The asoiaf stuff is pure entertainment, is it? I’m also 3 books behind on my Goodreads challenge as of now. My challenge is 42 this year, and I know I will mark a few books just to inflate the number.
The Salmon of Doubt
神话与魔法：John Hawe 绘画艺术 （图画书，翻翻就看完了）
Shakespeare: The World as Stage
The Wealth of Nations
Why We Sleep
Quinlan Vos – Jedi in Darkness （漫画，连凑数的我也看不完）
Head First Java
A Midsummer Night’s Dream
Heretics and Believers: A History of the English Reformation
无独有偶，最近一个新闻是美国最高法院做了一个重要的判决。六十年代通过的 civil rights act 说要保护被雇佣的权利，不能因为种族、宗教信仰、性别(sex)、原籍来影响就业机会。最近的这个 Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda 裁决说这个法案保护的对象也包括 sexual orientation 和 sexual identity （也保护同性恋和变性人）。我听新闻的时候觉得，很好啊（没想到现在这么保守的最高法院会这么判决）。但是后来听 the Daily 里提到一句判决思路，我忽然 JKR 了。摘录一下维基百科上的：
An employer who fired an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids. Those who adopted the Civil Rights Act might not have anticipated their work would lead to this particular result. But the limits of the drafters’ imagination supply no reason to ignore the law’s demands. Only the written word is the law, and all persons are entitled to its benefit.
我记得我听的 the Daily 的节目里说的是，假如你有一男一女两个员工，工作方面他们是一样的，他们的性对象都是男的，你没有理由开除那个男的。
我是不是太敏感了？为什么这里举例要拿女性做对比呢？为什么 trans 和 gay 要踩着女性获得权利呢？？
不敢在社交媒体上这么说。但这是我真实的感受。而我真的并不是会歧视 trans 和 gay 的人。我最喜欢的作家是 gay。我和 JKR 的区别只是，她这方面 research 得比我多很多。所以大家这么骂她我很不同意。
Lord Seaworth is a man of humble birth, but he reminded me of my duty, when all I could think of was my rights. I had the cart before the horse, Davos said. I was trying to win the throne to save the kingdom, when I should have been trying to save the kingdom to win the throne.
这两天我读了著名的 Wars and Politics of Ice and Fire 博客上的两篇关于 Stannis 的分析。一篇是从军事角度的分析；另一篇是引用别的人物的想法或说法来比较全面阐述人物性格的。前一篇的主要思想我本来就知道，因为该作者上过 Radio Westeros 讲这个内容。而我发现 RW 之后，比较想要仔细听的节目我是希望重读完成后再来听（比如 Jon 和 Arya 的我都没听），当时对 Stannis 无感，就把讲他的那期节目给听了。这个角色在粉丝群体中可能是比较 polerizing 的，而 WaPoIaF 的这两位作者可能是 fandom 里这个阵营里的。看完这两篇文章，我还想说两个我特别喜欢的 Stannis 的优点：
We will be restoring normality just as soon as we are sure what is normal anyway.
然而世界的分裂并不是今年开始的，也不是2016年美国大选开始的，也不是2012年 he who must not be named 上台开始的，也不是 08 年金融危机开始的，肯定也不是我前一阵忽然倾向于认为的 911 事件开始的。挣扎和痛苦是人生存的一部分。我并不是要 justify 现在的可怕状态。但是糟糕状态下，想想这些，不要觉得现在我们经历的是 exceptional，咬咬牙，每一代人都有他们的挣扎。或者想想女性，在大多数人类文明中，自始至终无时无刻不处在挣扎中。除了 endure 和尽力改变能改变的，好像别无选择。
我同事有时候聊起小孩入学问题，小孩课外班的事情，或者聊起出国旅游，买房买车什么的。他们过得这么好，这么兴致勃勃。我只能觉得，任何觉得可以全身心投入这些问题的人，都并不正常。我真的不是嫉妒。罗素说的那句 “One of the symptoms of an approaching nervous breakdown is the belief that one’s work is terribly important.” 可以扩大到任何 worldly 的事情上。
There is an idea that rationality, if allowed free play, will kill all the deeper emotions. This belief appears to me to be due to an entirely erroneous conception of the function of reason in human life. It is not the business of reason to generate emotions, though it may be part of its function to discover ways of preventing such emotions as are an obstacle to well-being. To find ways of minimizing hatred and envy is no doubt part of the function of a rational psychology. But it is a mistake to suppose that in minimizing these passions we shall at the same time diminish the strength of those passions which reason does not condemn. In passionate love, in parental affection, in friendship, in benevolence, in devotion to science and art, there is nothing that reason should wish to diminish. The rational man, when he feels any or all of these emotions, will be glad that he feels them and will do nothing to lessen their strength, for all these emotions are part of the good life, the life, that is, that makes for happiness both in oneself and in others. There is nothing irrational in the passions as such, and many irrational people feel only the most trivial passions. No man need fear that be making himself rational he will make his life dull. On the contrary, since rationality consists in the main of internal harmony, the man who achieves it is freer in his contemplation of the world and in the use of his energies to achieve external purposes than is the man who is perpetually hampered by inward conflicts. Nothing is so dull as to be encased in self, nothing so exhilarating as to have attention and energy directed outwards.