There are, as has been pointed out upstream, different levels of stocking ponds/streams with fish.
I know that here in Missouri a farmer can (or could ten years ago) dig himself out a pond, fill it, and the conservation dept would stock it with fish. It's not really for the purpose of fishing, but the farmer I knew who told me this (while I was fishing in one of his ponds) occasionally does use them for fishing. Still, in a situation like this, the fish has an even chance, as long as you aren't using, say, dynamite.
Same for some stocking that's done for the purpose of fishing--if it's not overstocked, say, or if the fish have an avenue of escape. Once again, in Missouri there are "trout parks" that work this way. The trout are not overstocked, and if they're smart enough to swim back the way they came, they're safe for good (fish sanctuary!). If they go downstream far enough, they're out of the park, and the density of fishers drops precipitously. So the fish has a fighting chance. Fishing places like that is a bit easier than fishing just anywhere, but I can tell you from personal experience that it's not shooting fish in a barrel.
Now, I have relatives by marriage who go to a lake stocked with trout. You pay by the pound for whatever fish you pull out, no throwing back. And no escape route. They stock the thing so thick you can practically walk across the water on trout backs, and the trout are huge, to keep the price up. Now that's fish in a barrel. What's more, these relatives don't really like fish very much, just fishing, and so they end up with a freezer full of giant fish that just sits there.
I've stopped associating with those particular relatives by marriage. Sure, fish aren't fuzzy, but....ugh.
Obligatory attempt to one-up previous links to other examples with one dated even earlier.
There are various continuations,
This should read "there are various continuations by other people." Sorry about that.
What was this plate supposed to be, anyway? (I mean in de Troyes' version.) The plate Jesus ate from at the LS?
Your guess is as good as anyone else's. Chretien died before he finished the story, and never explained it. There are various continuations, but nobody really knows what Chretien intended it to be.
Ann, does one have to be a geek to turn pale at the realization that one has mistaken the color of Gawain's shield?
I certainly hope not! Though I fear it's likely the case. :)
I do really like the essay. I have an almost-nine-year-old who's been through The Hobbit, several of the Oz books, and as much as currently exists of the Lemony Snicket Books. And other assorted. I've been contemplating (read "waffling over") buying New Magics for the house in the hopes she might enjoy some of it, and this essay is definitely an inducement.
Oh, and I meant to also say, it's not the scarf that saves his life, and if he'd turned it over he'd not even have gotten the nick he did get.
The Green Knight punishes him for dallying, but if he hadn't, would he have got the green scarf that seems to save his life?
Gawain isn't punished for dallying--he's punished for not keeping his promise, that is, to turn over whatever he got that day, which would have included the scarf.
The essay is very nice, though I read through the first description of the knight thinking "It seems like Gawain, but Gawain's shield was red with a gold star, not green..."
De-lurking for a moment to agree with dislike for "levitican" and "pharisee" and to suggest "Streetcorner Christian." As in Matthew 6:5.
And back to lurking...
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2009 | 1 |
| 2006 | 2 |
| 2005 | 5 |
| 2004 | 1 |
Total: 9 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Ann:
Show all comments by Ann.