Water Beats Water

Remember the old game "Rock, Paper, Scissors?" Today is nature's version of this game. To date, we have experienced more snow than the last Ice Age and the mountains that have surrounded my property actually demonstrate clinal variations in vegetation from the base to the apex.

Snow insulates. The theory behind igloos and snow houses. And, the more you have, the slower it will melt. We have had warmish temperatures lately, but the effects of this baking has done little to break down the mighty mounds. Today, that has changed. We are having rain. Real rain - not the freezing variety or a misty dibble-dabble, but good solid rain. Today is the last day in the life of the snow...

Water has beaten water. What the sun could not accomplish, a different form of the same substance has done in a trice. The power of liquid water is profound, of course. Anyone gazing upon the glory of the Grand Canyon is witnessing the power of water in its flowing form. If it can carve rock, it can wreak havoc on snow. But, there is something cannabilistic about the process. Snow and water are both, well, water. There is nothing chemically different about them. Two atoms of hydrogen bonded to an atom of oxygen, forming a bipolar molecule of water. Steam is the same as well. The forms of water represent phases of matter - chemically identical, but with varying physical properties due to differences in energy and molecular motion. Vastly different - steam gives us a nice salmon dinner. Ice provides the sorbet for dessert. Water does the dishes.

But, it is said that every snowflake is different. And, I don't doubt that is true. Given the complexity of the structure, the number of permutations of form are staggering. I also think the same is true, though, for raindrops. No one says much about that. Consider that raindrops are actually accumulations of water molecules. Right away, there is variation in the number of molecules in the drop, the mass of the drop, the volume, surface area, diameter, circumference, shape, etc. Each unique, each discreet. Not as showy as their wintry cousins, but just as provided with independent identities. This will also affect the way in which each reflects and refracts light, so they would look "different" to the eye based on luster, color, radiance, etc.

But we think of water as the plain sister to snow. Snow is applauded for its beauty, portrayed in art and on countless holiday cards. It is embroidered on clothing and shaped in to pencil erasers and notepads. One does not see this attention paid to rain. We speak of its cleansing power and its life-giving properties, but not its beauty. We do not view rain as pretty. It is not cute. But to weigh the quality of beauty against those of life and rebirth demonstrates the value of rain over snow. We overlook rain with the eye, but we see rain with the soul.

I am reminded of John Ruskin's quote:

Remember that the most beautiful things in the world are the most useless; peacocks and lilies, for example.

Besides winter-sports enthusiasts and snowball warriors, few find "use" in snow. But, if asked, most people could ennumerate the uses of rain. But, we do not glorify rain. We don't create art around the drizzle. We acknowledge its importance, its worth. We cry when it is lacking and die when the lack is prolonged. But we do not romance the rain.

What was my point again?