1. Remember from The Birth-mark, where Aylmer, the husband, expresses his "shock" at the mark on his wife's cheek, calling it "t
he visible mark of earthly imperfection." Is it possible to love what shocks you? 2. How is human imperfection "the raw material of good" ?
3. O'Connor writes that a tenderness for human suffering, when lacking in insight about human suffering, leads logically to terror. This is because, lacking insight, it is "wrapped in theory." What does she mean? In what theory or theories might it be wrapped? How might that theory -- or "theory" in general -- lead to terror?
4. Would the world be a better place if there were no deformed children? If we could prevent their being born?
5. What is your perception of Christina’s World? Is this painting sinister or soothing? Comfortable or uncomfortable? Or somewhere in between? What about the painting gives you that impression (consider colors, composition, brushstrokes, etc.)? In light of your analysis, do you think Andrew Wyeth was capitalizing on Christina’s infirmity or championing her resiliency?
The history of this mausoleum lends a soul to its magnificence: a soul filled with love, loss and remorse.
If it had not been for love, the world would have been deprived of this magnificent building. An example of how deeply a man loved his wife, that even after she remained present only in the form of memory, he was sure that he would never leave him.
The man was the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan, and his love was the Persian Princess Mumtaz Mahal.
He was 14 when he met Mumtaz and fell in love with her. Five years later, in 1612, they married.
