Because some things are worth fighting for — The War of the Bucket
During the 11th and 12th centuries the Italian states and the German kingdoms were often at war due to a series of conflicts called the Investiture Controversy. The Investiture Controversy was a politically motivated war fought over who would be the supreme power of Europe, the theocratic government of the Roman Catholic Church, or the secular government of the Holy Roman Empire. The Controversy officially came to an end in 1176 when the forces of Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa were defeated at the Battle of Legnano.
While the Investiture Controversy ended in 1176, conflict over the issue still remained in Italy between the many kingdoms and city states, which were divided into two factions, the Ghibellines who supported the Holy Roman Emperor, and the Guelfs who supported the Pope. The town of Modena was an ardent Ghibelline city, while Bologna was a staunch Guelf city. Thus for many centuries the two cities were fierce rivals.
One night in 1325 a small group of Modenese commandos snuck into the city and stole the ceremonial civic bucket from the town well. Before they left, they filled it with is much looted treasure as could fit. Enraged by the theft of their sacred bucket, the Bolognese mustered an army of 30,000 men to crush Modena. The two armies met at the town of Zappolino. The Modenese only had an army of 7,000, however the Bolognese were disorganized and poorly armed while the Modenese were well equipped, well trained, and disciplined. As a result, the Battle of Zappolino lasted on 2 hours before the Modenese broke Bolognese ranks, killing 2,000 in the process. The Modenese chased the defeated army all the way to Bologna itself, however they did not have the numbers to lay siege to the city. Rather, they paraded around the city walls, displaying the captured bucket for all to see while shouting insults, wisecracks about Bolognese mothers, and made obscene gestures. Today, the bucket is still in the possession of Modena.
I think I figured something out this week, which is that most people don’t arrange their lives so as to substantially minimize motor planning demands?
So, for instance, we have this cutting board, and my roommate puts it away, like all the way away, in a cabinet with the pots and pans, after virtually every single time she uses it.
I just leave it out as long as it’s reasonably clean, because I’m going to use it again within a single digit number of hours. I rinse it or wash it if it gets messy, but basically I just leave it out, because I am always using it. Same with a bread knife and my tea kettle.
She does dishes after every single meal, even if she didn’t really cook anything. I do them once a day, either in the morning or right before I go to bed, because why am I going to add four extra activity transitions into my day for literally nothing? To wash a dish that I’m going to wash again anyway in 8 hours?
Or I had a one-woman show a couple of years ago, and we mostly rehearsed at her own house, because she had ample free space and most of the furniture we needed. And every day after we finished, she wanted the room we were rehearsing in returned to its original arrangement, and then reset for rehearsal again the next morning. Which is fine, it’s her house. But my instinct is to leave things the way that you’re going to need them to be again day after day for a foreseeable number of days.
And people have always seemed to think I’m lazy or careless for stuff like this, but I’ve always felt like “obviously I’m not going to just add superfluous steps that are nothing but a burden to my ability to do things that I need to do all the time?”
But I guess, if most other people didn’t have some kind of major motivation to absolutely minimize the number of motor transitions they have to make in a day, it would all make sense…
Honestly, it took my partner and i years to come to a balance over this.
He is of the “Everything has its place” school of thought. I am a “I use this all the time why would i make it hard to get to?!” school of thought.
Its particularly interesting to discuss the reasons for this. For me, if i’m trying to get something done, it really frustrates me and adds stress if there are what i see as unnecessary steps. For him, it creates stress if a space is too “busy” (read, chaotic and messy) and he cant create the space in which to focus on one thing.
We’ve learned to compromise. I keep the majority of my stuff away unless i really need it, and will put stuff away if we are using a space – for example, our office. We have desk spaces on one long bench desk, 2 PCs – but i also work from home quite a lot, and have a laptop. I tend to sprawl. But if we are both playing video games or something, even if i’m working at home the next day, i pack all my work kit into my work bag. I mean, not always, but i try to notice when its bad. In return, he brought me a desk riser that has a spot for my PC keyboard to slide out of the way, a stand for my phone, and he hasn’t yet got to the point of drawing a line down the middle of the desk 😀
It’s funny, because I actually am an “everything has its place” person who is also stressed out if a space is way too visually busy or cluttered.
It’s just that to me, the “place” of things that I use all the time is “where I can get to them easily.”
That is basically my approach, too.
Another factor for me is that I do much better leaving things I need to use where I can readily see them, as a prompt. To help work around some rather extreme “out of sight, out of mind” issues.
It’s not just more convenient to leave an item out if I’m going to need to use it again soon, that also makes me way more likely to remember that the thing exists and does need to be used.
That approach does carry the complication of leading to overwhelming visual clutter sometimes, but it still works better for me. Glad to be living with someone who understands that and is actually kind of the same way, since really different preferred organizational styles there can make things hard on everyone involved
imo a pretty significant problem with sj/leftist/radical/whatever-you-want-to-call-it politics in a lot of popular circles is that they’re based on opinions rather than being based on values. having “good politics” is understood as collecting and displaying a whole bunch of correct opinions using the correct language (which is, of course, determined by the leading order of the day and subject to change), rather than having a good set of values and strategies for gaining information from which you can arrive at your own conclusions.
someone having “good politics” to me doesn’t mean that they have a list of positions that I agree with, but rather that they base their politics off of compassion, respect, a desire for a nuanced understanding of the world around them + how they relate to other people, etc. etc. And it’s very likely that we’ll agree on a lot of things and disagree on a few but ultimately I can understand where they’re coming from and we can have a discussion about our disagreements that’s productive and hopefully leads to both of us having a better understanding.
a dog: makes a dog sound
me: i know, i know. i understand. me too
Youth is overrated. No, you’re not at your best in your 20s or younger. Getting old isn’t sad, at all. No, youth isn’t some mystic sublime experience like they say in books and movies. And aging is just a wonderful chance you have, that many don’t. To learn, to grow, to become a better person, to meet new people, fall in love, to, if you want to, have children, buy your own house, maybe, to travel, to learn new languages, to write, to read, to do so many things. No, young people aren’t inherently better than old ones and i’m sick of society treating older people like they are less, like they are a burden. Nothing has age limit. Don’t be afraid of getting old.
Urocyon's Jaunts 2.0 
You must be logged in to post a comment.