Soft thunder
Jane Eyre inspired (Victorian style Era)
Dear Jane,
Did you ever see the evidence of winter start with soft thunder and the sun blooming through the gray, listless clouds? I find the snow eerie. The ice crystals that settle down inside the once lush landscape of green refresh me yet again, I feel a tormenting sensation of nostalgia for something that never existed.
I am unaware if you would even accept this letter in the post, but even as I feel the departure from each other was upsettingly inevitable, I still feel you will receive it with steady hands. Soft thunder from the scattered winds and snowfall reminded me of you. Your intensity drew me in like honey to a flower to a bee. You knew as a young, aspiring poet, I would be smitten by your enthusiasm and love for my work.
You overflowed my cup of complimentary words and your confidence in my craft. I immersed myself in your world. I immediately felt like you knew me. You published a poem in the local papers about a balm that healed, and without names or words between us, I knew it was about me. You confirmed it, yet I still stayed away as I respected your sovereignty.
Young poets these days are ostracized by their peers. The world does not care for romantic poetry. They only want greed, more power and more influence. I was born in a naive grave that led me to believe that love was the ultimate gift. Most scholarly colleagues of mine basically shoot down literature of fictitious value and love poetry as buttering the bacon, pardon the expression. It’s certainly not as prevalent as one might hope.
Did you know that I was in turmoil? That I was seething with anger, grief and a sadness that only your soft thunder of a heart could break? Oh, how wretched it is to wrestle with affection that bears no weight to the world, only to the heart! You cannot weigh yourself in blood loss when your heart feels heavy, broken and very tired.
How cruel doth a woman be when a man confesses his love but a woman cuts him off, to say it was never to be? When she herself told him she cared? When she once had confessed of feeling such compassion, such devotion? But, alas, it was not to be.
I had penned this letter many times in my own head, scratching out every single word and leaving unkempt notes that felt wrong, false and inaccurate. I know that having a broken heart for so long can make a man feel angry at the world. I find the tortured nature of this feeling is in that you said I was alone in this. That you never felt this kind of maddening pull, at least, not with me.
And yet, as I opened up my very private, very personal and intimate world to you slowly, you reminded me that hatred and fear was not apart of love. That the abuse I suffered from my mad wife was unacceptable. Did you know that I was tormented by this abuse? Did you see that in my poetry there wore a mask of tragedy and comedy that represented pure grief?
Even if you did not know it, you must’ve felt it. You might’ve thought, “Oh, he’s got the morbs,” but this feeling was never meant to be a passing melancholy. I have felt this so-called passing sadness all my life. It’s a shame, shall I say, as I have always known I was a faithful person, companion and steadfast partner. It was a complete loss of my self-control and my confidence to let myself fall into another’s pitfall of messy feelings. To immerse myself so deeply into their very pain, their fear, joy, the place they had hidden themselves away in a deep, gentle rage that was only assuaged by providence and prayer.
Now that is has been some time since we have parted, I feel that soft thunder is the only way to perfectly capture your essence. Sweet humming sounds of your voice cocooned my hardened soul with ideas on how life can be, love should be, and how our deepening sense of purpose and companionship with one another would be.
You made me feel you deserved all my extra time and attention, I always wanted you to know I would be here to support you through any ailments or troubles. You did the same for me. Our road to friendship was wrought with a great many obstacles. Healing from abuse on your side and mine was something I felt caused disharmony and discord in our communication.
We had dropped into one another’s lives——I believed it was in your arms but it was merely side-by-side. It had broken my heart when I had to initially deny my equaled expression when you confessed your feelings, that spoony sort of thing that we all understand as a crush.
I remember being beside my horse, writing to you by my carriage how platonic love was just as strong. However, at that moment, I wanted so badly to let you know I felt the same.
Merely, you tried to rectify this earlier discussion of your feelings by saying it was only a love for my poetry, not me, which felt so wrong. I have our earlier discourse of letters that were in fact, of an amorous, persistent tone. I had related your words to my mad wife at the time, to my own potential detriment and danger.
Why would anyone want to put themselves in the position of being dishonest about something so important? I don’t play politics with women’s hearts.
Why did you deny this interaction between us? I am not mad; I am of healthy constitution and my mind is not a conspiracy of delusion. Nor am I angry. I merely wish to relay facts. As of now, it is clear that your stance of not wanting to be part of my life is based on your episode of morose silence and of unbending will. This tormented me, and I have to admit privately to you I sobbed frantically when I realized you were unreachable to my pleas.
You must believe, even now, that my heart is full of unconditional gratitude to you for allowing me to be open in a manner that is honest with myself and others. This was something I never expected I could do. I believe that through it all, we found something real in the mist of our troubled past, grieving hearts and the pain of losing our trust through the darkness and abuse of others.
Now, I am here with my mad wife after our friendship of stressful discourse that ended what I thought was a very important relationship with you. She has made great strides and progress in her healing and understanding of the pain she caused others. Though, she must continue to heal and help herself to strive to be better, I feel her and my relationship has reached a new level of normality and trust. Love is there, I feel that it is becoming stronger. All of us, through prayer and providence and real change, can make our lives a whole different experience of peace and love and joy.
This might be my last letter to you, Jane.
Why does the soft thunder ripple through my heart beat like a fever-dream? Through the most inconvenient moments of my day, I find the feeling of soft thunder running down my spine. Rushing through my chest like a spirit of Fire and Water. Clouded by the sun-swept current of mysterious, mixed dying stars and gods and monsters and all manner of strange things. I feel my heart has dropped in my chest as a stone in a river and during my private moments, I feel it crippling my voice, muscles, limbs and bones.
If you ever see me, just know I’ll be the poet who is wearing Agony in Red, trying to look afternoonified but honestly, I’ll simply just be—-me. I want the same for you, unclouded and full of the pure aura of your presence:
Soft thunder that brings beauty into the earth, a roar that makes you look twice, and an unmistakable feeling of warmth, cool and fire.
Unmistakably, inexorably, and very impetuously,
Edward
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Melissa Ingoldsby and writers in History and other communities.
Remember when you first kissed me?
Dearest Barbara, It's summer in the dreary 2004. Why aren't you here with me? I get the feeling you'd knock me out for wanting death so much. But I remember the most terrible things mixing up inside of me when I realized that you were actually gone. When you left that night, I had the chance to run after you but you were so affected by something that you demanded I stay behind.
By Melissa Ingoldsby11 months ago in History
Nobel Peace Prize
The Nobel Peace Prize has stood as one of the world’s most recognized honors. Awarded annually in Oslo, it is meant to celebrate individuals or organizations that have made significant contributions toward peace, diplomacy, and humanitarian progress. While its mission appears straightforward, the Nobel Peace Prize has never been free from debate. In recent years, conversations surrounding global politics—particularly discussions about the Trump Nobel Peace Prize—have brought renewed attention to how peace is defined, measured, and rewarded in the modern era. The Origins and Meaning of the Nobel Peace Prize The Nobel Peace Prize was established by Alfred Nobel, the Swedish inventor best known for creating dynamite. In his final will, Nobel directed that a portion of his wealth be used to recognize efforts that foster peace among nations, reduce standing armies, or promote diplomacy and cooperation. Since its first award in 1901, the prize has honored activists, diplomats, organizations, and world leaders whose actions shaped international dialogue. Unlike other Nobel categories, the peace prize is awarded by a Norwegian committee rather than a Swedish institution. This distinction reflects Nobel’s desire to separate the prize from national interests and focus instead on global responsibility. Over time, the definition of “peace” has expanded. Early recipients were often disarmament advocates or mediators. More recent laureates have included human rights defenders, climate activists, and international organizations working in conflict zones. Politics and the Nobel Peace Prize Despite its humanitarian ideals, the Nobel Peace Prize has always intersected with politics. Recognizing peace efforts often means evaluating political leadership, international negotiations, and long-term consequences—none of which are easy to measure in real time. Some awards have been widely celebrated, while others sparked controversy. Critics often argue that certain laureates were honored prematurely, before the lasting results of their actions became clear. Supporters counter that the prize is meant to encourage peace efforts, not merely reward completed achievements. This tension has made the Nobel Peace Prize a reflection of global priorities at any given moment, rather than a simple historical judgment. Donald Trump and Nobel Peace Prize Discussions Few modern political figures have generated as much debate in connection with the Nobel Peace Prize as Donald Trump. During and after his presidency, conversations about a potential Trump Nobel Prize emerged repeatedly, particularly among supporters who pointed to his role in diplomatic initiatives. The phrase Trump Nobel Peace Prize gained traction following agreements and negotiations in regions long marked by conflict. Advocates argued that these diplomatic efforts aligned with Alfred Nobel’s vision of reducing international tension through dialogue rather than force. At the same time, critics questioned whether these actions met the broader ethical and humanitarian standards traditionally associated with the award. They pointed to domestic divisions, foreign policy controversies, and unresolved global conflicts as reasons for skepticism. This divide highlights a core challenge of the Nobel Peace Prize: peace is rarely absolute, and political leadership is often complex and contradictory. Trump Nobel Peace Prize 2026: Speculation and Context As global politics continue to evolve, speculation around a Trump Nobel Peace Prize 2026 has appeared in media discussions and public commentary. It is important to note that nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize are confidential for decades, and speculation does not confirm consideration or selection. However, the mere discussion of Trump Nobel Peace Prize 2026 reflects how the award has become part of broader cultural and political conversations. Supporters view such recognition as validation of diplomatic achievements, while critics see the speculation as politicizing an institution meant to rise above partisan debate. This dynamic is not unique to Trump. Many past leaders, from various ideological backgrounds, were debated heavily before or after receiving the prize. The Nobel Peace Prize often mirrors global disagreements rather than resolving them. How the Nobel Committee Makes Its Decision Each year, hundreds of nominations are submitted by qualified individuals, including academics, lawmakers, and previous laureates. The Nobel Committee evaluates these nominations through research, expert consultation, and internal debate. The process considers intent, impact, and long-term significance. However, because peace efforts often unfold over years or decades, the committee must make decisions without full historical clarity. This reality explains why some awards age gracefully while others remain controversial. The committee rarely responds directly to public pressure or online campaigns. Media attention, including discussions around a Trump Nobel, does not guarantee influence over the final decision. The Broader Impact of the Nobel Peace Prize Beyond individual recipients, the Nobel Peace Prize plays a symbolic role. It brings global attention to issues that might otherwise be ignored, from humanitarian crises to fragile peace processes. Even controversial nominations can spark meaningful debate about what peace truly means in the modern world. The prize also raises questions about accountability. When leaders are considered for such recognition, the public is encouraged to examine policies, outcomes, and moral responsibility more closely. In this sense, discussions surrounding the Trump Nobel Peace Prize are not just about one individual. They reflect deeper conversations about diplomacy, leadership, and the evolving standards by which peace is judged. Conclusion: A Prize That Reflects the World The Nobel Peace Prize remains one of the most influential and debated honors in global society. Its power lies not only in recognizing peace efforts but also in challenging the world to think critically about conflict, cooperation, and responsibility. Whether discussions involve historic activists or modern political figures like those associated with Trump Nobel Peace Prize 2026 speculation, the award continues to reflect the complexities of international relations. Peace is rarely simple, and neither is the process of honoring it. Ultimately, the Nobel Peace Prize serves as a reminder that striving for peace is an ongoing journey—one shaped by ideals, actions, and the difficult choices that define human history.
By Saboor Brohi about 22 hours ago in History
Kyrsten Sinema
Kyrsten Sinema has become one of the most recognizable and debated figures in modern American politics. Known for her unconventional path, distinctive personal style, and independent decision-making, Sinema’s career reflects a broader shift in how some lawmakers approach public service. Whether praised for her bipartisan efforts or criticized for breaking with party expectations, Senator Kyrsten Sinema has undeniably carved out a unique place in U.S. political history. Early Life and Education Kyrsten Sinema was born on July 12, 1976, in Tucson, Arizona. Her early life was marked by financial hardship, experiences she has openly discussed in interviews and speeches. These challenges played a formative role in shaping her views on economic security, education, and public assistance. Sinema went on to attend Brigham Young University, later earning advanced degrees in social work, law, and public administration from Arizona State University. Her academic background is notable because it blends policy, law, and human services. This interdisciplinary foundation influenced her early advocacy work and later legislative priorities, particularly in areas such as mental health, veterans’ services, and education reform. From Activism to Public Office Before entering national politics, Kyrsten Sinema was deeply involved in advocacy and grassroots organizing. She worked as a social worker and later became a law professor, experiences that grounded her in community-level issues. Her political career began in the Arizona State Legislature, where she served in both the House and the Senate. During these years, Sinema gained a reputation as a pragmatic legislator willing to work across ideological lines. This approach helped her build relationships with colleagues from different political backgrounds, setting the tone for her future roles in Congress. Rise to the U.S. Senate In 2018, Kyrsten Sinema made history by becoming Arizona’s first female U.S. senator. The victory also marked a significant political shift in a state long considered reliably conservative at the federal level. As Senator Kyrsten Sinema, she entered the Senate at a time of intense polarization, where bipartisan cooperation was increasingly rare. Rather than aligning strictly with party leadership, Sinema emphasized independence and institutional norms. Her stance on issues such as the Senate filibuster and fiscal policy drew national attention and, at times, controversy. Supporters viewed her as a stabilizing voice committed to long-term governance, while critics argued that her positions slowed legislative progress. Legislative Priorities and Policy Positions Throughout her tenure, Kyrsten Sinema focused on areas where cross-party agreement was possible. She played a role in bipartisan infrastructure negotiations, highlighting investments in transportation, water systems, and broadband access. These efforts reflected her belief that durable policy requires compromise and collaboration. Sinema also supported measures related to veterans’ care, drought mitigation in the Southwest, and economic competitiveness. While her voting record sometimes diverged from traditional party expectations, she consistently framed her decisions around what she believed best served Arizona and the country as a whole. Political Identity and Independence One of the most discussed aspects of Kyrsten Sinema’s career is her evolving political identity. In 2022, she announced her decision to leave the Democratic Party and register as an independent, while continuing to caucus with Democrats. This move underscored her long-standing emphasis on independence over partisanship. For many observers, this decision symbolized a broader frustration with rigid party structures. Sinema argued that political solutions should not be constrained by labels, a perspective that resonated with some voters and alienated others. Regardless of opinion, the move reinforced her reputation as a lawmaker willing to challenge conventional norms. Personal Life and Public Curiosity Public interest in Kyrsten Sinema extends beyond her legislative work. Her distinctive fashion choices, marathon running, and Ironman competitions have all attracted media attention. Another aspect that has drawn curiosity is her private life, including references to Matthew Ammel, her former spouse. Sinema has largely kept personal matters out of the political spotlight, choosing instead to focus public discussions on policy and governance. Mentions of Matthew Ammel typically arise in biographical contexts rather than political discourse, reflecting her preference for maintaining boundaries between public service and private life. Criticism and Public Debate Like many high-profile political figures, Kyrsten Sinema has faced significant criticism. Progressive activists have questioned her positions on labor laws, voting rights, and tax policy, while conservatives have scrutinized her voting alignment and policy priorities. Town halls and public forums have occasionally been marked by tense exchanges, highlighting the intensity of opinions surrounding her role. Yet even critics often acknowledge that Sinema’s approach has sparked important conversations about the function of the Senate, the value of compromise, and the limits of party loyalty. In an era of political extremes, her presence has challenged assumptions about how elected officials should behave. Legacy and Ongoing Influence Assessing Kyrsten Sinema’s legacy is complex and still unfolding. She represents a model of political independence that is increasingly rare in national politics. Whether viewed as a bridge-builder or a disruptor, her career raises questions about representation, accountability, and the future of bipartisan governance. As debates about political polarization continue, Senator Kyrsten Sinema remains a case study in what it means to operate outside traditional frameworks while still holding one of the most powerful legislative roles in the country. Conclusion Kyrsten Sinema’s journey from grassroots activism to the U.S. Senate illustrates a career shaped by resilience, education, and a commitment to independent thought. Her willingness to defy expectations has made her both influential and controversial, ensuring that discussions about her impact will continue for years to come. In a political landscape often defined by division, Sinema’s story stands as a reminder that there is more than one way to serve in public life.
By Saboor Brohi a day ago in History
Comments (5)
This was heartbreaking, love unfulfilled and unreturned. Written with the eloquence, intelligence and beauty that Ms Bronte would have been proud of. This is such a first-rate entry, Melissa! Well done!
Poor Edward, how cruel it is to know such heartbreak & lack of requite. Poor Jan, how cruel it is to know that you have caused another such pain but cannot do anything to assuage it without betraying yourself.
Oh my heart broke so much for Edward. I can't believe he is back with his abusive wife. Loved your letter!
The wife burns down the house, he goes blind and Jane hears hers the call from another city. Now there is love for you. I do believe he egained some sight and saw his children. Beautifully sad story.
wow. that's all I can say. I loved the flow and intelligence of this - I loved these lines: Soft thunder that brings beauty into the earth, a roar that makes you look twice, and an unmistakable feeling of warmth, cool and fire.