FLAT: do you find plain ol' euclidean geometry beautifully elegant or familiar to the point of disinterest (or anything in between or beyond)?
So in my math competition days geometry was always my weakest point. It was mostly a self-defeating prophecy, I think-- probably if I would have just played around with it longer I would have built up an instinct for which goofy little lines to draw. It surely didn't help that the way we teach geometry as an introduction to proofs (admirable) involves two-column proofs (anathema as someone who cares about good writing across formats).
But that changed when a friend showed me Euclidea and I fell in love with constructions! Something incredibly beautiful about being able to look at a diagram and say "This is how this was made".
In fact, I have had this conversation with a lot of my mentors in the poetry community:
ME: So I wish there were an equivalent of compass-and-straightedge construction for poems.
POET: Inshallah you will outgrow rigid method-seeking as you mature as a poet.
ME: No no no I'm not looking for like, a magic formula. I want to look at a poem and be able to describe how it was made.
POET: So like authorial intent?
ME: No certainly not that! Like how you can look at a diagram in geometry and say "This was determined by drawing this circle, then this circle." I want to look at a poem and say "This sentence was logically determined by making this choice, then this choice. Kind of like vector graphics, how you can reduce everything there to circle objects and rectangle objects and whatever?"
POET: boss that sounds like a rigid formula to me
Idk! I had an opportunity to take a class on the Elements in college and while I'm glad I took the queer film seminar instead I often wonder what weird strong opinions I'd have if I did that instead.