Hm.

Last semester's marks:

Logic A: A+
My verdict: totally deserved, I loved that course and I worked reasonably hard. I'm still stoked, though, because while I got 100% for my first 50% test, the second 50% test (which I must have got at least... 35, 40% of) was really bizarrely formatted, so I had no idea what to expect. So, yeah, I'm pleased.

Epistemology and Metaphysics: A
My verdict: Hm, I could have done with another A+, but I guess I can't complain. Can't help wondering if that essay had been a little better... but meh.

Algebra and Cryptography: A-
My verdict: I'm disappointed, actually. I did at least A, often better, in all the tests and assignments, and I didn't find the exam overly difficult. I dunno, I feel like I knew the course material better than that. However, it could be because I missed a lot of my tutorials; I kind of want my exam script back now...

French: B
My verdict: AHAHAHA okay, I'm actually really pleased because considering I hated the course, skipped half my classes and assessments and did an absolutely horrible oral I was seriously expecting to flunk, so, yay!

This semester's courses:

I was originally planning on taking Logic B, Semantics, Children's Literature and a history paper. However...
-I need more maths for my degree
-Children's literature clashes with Logic B
- I went to my semantics lecture today and it looks seriously boring

So my possible remodel looks either like this:
Logic B, MATH221 (groups & systems), semantics, and either nineteenth century environments or seventeenth century writing
OR
Logic B, MATH221, nineteenth century environments AND seventeenth century writing.

If anyone wants to cast a vote on which way they think I should go, please to do so as I am seriously stuck and need to make up my mind ASAP.

Pros for semantics: it's a logic-based course, and I normally adore logic. It's also a linguistics course on the meaning of words, which I also normally find interesting. I have a solid background in both logic and linguistics; I'm good at them both, too, so this has the potential to be an easy pass.
Cons for semantics: The class today was kind of dull. I might keep going for a couple of weeks to see if it improves.

Pros for nineteenth century environments: I went today and it looks really good, the lecturer seems interesting and so does the course material, which is basically about the development of environmentalist poetry, prose and non-fiction in the nineteenth century as a response to things like the industrial revolution. We get to study Frankenstein, Tess of the d'Urbervlles and the Hunting of the Snark, along with Charles Darwin and a whole slew of poets. I'm interested in environmentalism and I don't really know much about the nineteenth century but hey, Darwin!
Cons for nineteenth century environments: it looks like a crapload of reading and a lot of work. But... I think I might enjoy both, so.

Pros for the seventeenth century: king & country: I haven't been to a lecture yet (trying tomorrow) but I had one of the lecturers last year for my Shakespeare course and he was great. I know a fair bit about the (early) seventeenth century and it was a pretty interesting period. I'd quite like to study Milton because I know I'll never read him otherwise. And apparently we do a lot of seventeenth century poetry, which I think would be really satisfying; I love studying poetry (this is also a pro for C19th.)
Cons for the seventeenth century: if I don't take it, I have my Tuesdays off. Um, yeah, I would quite like that. :P It, too, looks like a lot of reading. I'd be doing three 22-pt 200 level papers and one 11-pt 200 level, which I'd be doing anyway, but I have a feeling Semantics might be an easy pass and this one definitely wouldn't be. *sigh*

ETA: also, what, are all the universities releasing their results today or something? crazy, kids. And congratulations to flist who seem to be doing very well indeed. :)