(1.) That the greater range of literature with which one is familiar, the greater the desire to read widely, and one may be tempted, while reading anything, to wish that she had undertaken something else, and it will be a good discipline of the will, having begun a course, to carry it through, since there is nothing in the course that can be pronounced “trash,” or be considered useless.
(2.) The aim of the C. L. S. C. is not merely to give pleasant or classic reading, although the style or character of the reading should be worthy of commendation by the most cultivated taste. The object of the C. L. S. C. is to give the “college student’s outlook”—to present in a series of brief readings the whole world of history, literature, science and art. This is for the benefit of college graduates, who in college spent so much time with the languages and mathematics, for purposes of mental discipline, that they failed to enjoy the charms of the literature itself. It is also for the benefit of others, who, having studied the physical sciences years before, desire now to review, seeing that so many changes are continually taking place in the hypotheses and settled conclusions of the scientists. The course is also designed for people who have never enjoyed college training, that they may have the benefit of the outlook which is to be enjoyed by their children later on.
(3.) A course so wide-reaching will embrace many topics about which certain people care nothing; but one of the greatest advantages of reading is the training of one to read because he ought to know rather than because he has a particular aptitude or delight in that direction.
I hope that my genial, candid, “enthusiastic” Chautauquan of the class of 1887, from beyond the Mississippi, will continue in the ranks of the C. L. S. C.
“Has any plan been devised by which graduates may go on with the regular classes as long as they wish, reading new and re-reading old subjects?” Answer: We give a seal for the re-reading of former years, and also a special seal for those who continue year after year to read.
Our excellent Canadian friend, Mr. James L. Hughes, writes: In answer to your query respecting the origin of the name “Canada,” I have the honor to state that the best authorities agree in deriving it from an Indian word “Kan-na-ta,” meaning a village. It is certain that Stadacona (Quebec) was spoken of as “Kan-na-ta,” and Champlain found it to be a common name applied to Indian villages. This is the received origin of the name. Some attribute its origin to the Spaniards, who first visited the country in search of mines, but finding none frequently exclaimed, “Aca Node,” “here is nothing.” This is not now accepted as reliable. Several others have been given, only one of which may be mentioned to show its absurdity. Some one claimed that the French supplied their workmen in the colony with canned food, and that each man was allowed a can a day! Hence the name.
A question.—“Some of our class reject the pronunciation of Goethe’s name as given by Prof. Wilkinson in the Latin Course. Please confirm—in the next number of The Chautauquan—the Professor, or give us the correct pronunciation according to the highest standard.”