Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in emilykuipers' LiveJournal:

[ << Previous 20 ]

Friday, December 9th, 2005
10:38 pm	My Final Paper!!! Everyone comes into a classroom situation with a variety of prejudices, depending on their personal background with the information being presented. “Biblical and Classical Backgrounds” to literature was obviously no exception. I was reluctant to study religious traditions, especially the Bible, because of my personal bias toward Christianity. Also, I had always considered the Bible to be boring and irrelevant: a collection of myths and stories that mean nothing except to a religious person. I discovered throughout this course, however, the depth and beauty of the writing in the Bible. I now have an immense appreciation for it as a literary work. I began to understand the characters, the complex history of its families, as well as the many nuances within its wisdom and message. My religious background is one of unhappiness. My parents were raised in the Christian Reformed Church, a very strict church that prohibits dancing, movies, certain types of music, and any sort of pleasure or work on Sundays. My parents hated the strict structure of the church, and rebelled against it in any way they could. When they married and moved to Montana, they made a personal decision that they would not raise my sister and me with the same strictness. They joined a Methodist church, and it is in that faith that I was raised. During my childhood, my family was very involved with our church. We were regulars at church functions, but we rarely discussed religion inside our home. As my sister and I grew, we began to learn more about our parent’s upbringing. We realized that our parents felt obligated to take us to church because they came from a religious family. However, the strictness of their childhood religion had caused them to lose their faith and trust in Christianity. They couldn’t reconcile the unhappy and over-structured Christian Reformed religion with the messages of Christianity itself. They believed many of the messages of the Bible, such as “Love your enemy” and the ideas of charity. However, they had seen with their own eyes that these messages are often disregarded and misused within the church itself. Therefore, they could not go along with this sort of organized religion. My sister and I were very influenced by this distrust of religion. As we grew up, we agreed with our parents: we didn’t believe we needed to belong to a church or religious view to be good, moral people. We stopped going to church about the time I began high school. Many church members were angry with us; often times making us feel guilty enough to think about going back. But we realized that we would be going to church for the same reason we had gone when we were little: because it was dictated by the society around us, not because of how we felt about it. Because of this whole experience I have had a large amount of anger and resentment toward the Christian religion. I’ve refused to be involved with it in any way because I have seen the harm and uncertainty I has caused in my family. This extended greatly to the Bible. I knew only the simple stories from Sunday school and hardly considered it worth my time to read. When I walked into English 212, I had resigned myself to the fact that if I wanted to study literature I was going to have to learn the Biblical traditions sometime. I didn’t want to be preached to and definitely didn’t want to have to read the Bible. What did I learn in this class, then? I learned something that has shocked me to the very core of my being. I now have a deep appreciation for the Bible. Don’t get me wrong: I still am not Christian or religious at all, but I greatly appreciate the Bible for its literary quality. I now enjoy reading the Bible, and get excited discussing it. What shocked me the most was how all of the stories and books that had seemed so random when I was a child suddenly began to make sense as a whole. I’m indebted greatly to both Friedman and Frye for pointing out the complexities of their relationships to each other. Having only attended Sunday school, I expected all the Bible stories to be as simple and boring as they were presented to me. For example, the Book of Job was one I remember learning about as a child. I was not aware, however, of the complexity of the discussion of God and suffering. I don’t think I had ever read the “gooey middle of the Oreo cookie” and was amazed to find that Job was questioning his religion and God’s actions. This seemed blasphemous to me: I had always thought that the Bible only contained stories that praised God. The emotions were far more complex than I had thought and I began to trace, through Job’s story, the path that every human takes when they are suffering: from anger, to questioning, to resignation. The Bible is surprisingly adept at expressing real human emotions. Along with this, I had never considered that there might be more complexity to the wisdom in the Bible than the simple proverbs I knew. Although I had heard passages from Ecclesiastes numerous times, I had never set them side by side with proverbs and considered the darker and deeper point of view in Ecclesiastes. I had always considered the Biblical wisdom to be simple and optimistic, because that is what is quoted in church and Sunday school. The depth of emotions I felt while reading Ecclesiastes really riled me up. Only the best literature has been able to make me so deeply reconsider my world view. There is real truth in those words, and not just for Christians. The reason I love to study literature is because of the stories and the characters. It is not just an escape into another life, but a way to help me better understand some of the things in my own life. I had honestly never considered the Bible to be “literature.” When I made myself read it, however, I discovered that I was enjoying it as literature. I felt for many of the characters, and I would imagine these characters living beyond what was in those pages. Once I understood that the Hebrew Bible was an extended commentary on one family, I began to appreciate it even more. Each individual person’s story works into the stories to come. Just as Moses is called to take off his shoes because he is “standing on Holy ground” so is his later descendent, Joshua. The best part is that these connections are not always that overt: they require some thinking. I also began to care deeply for the individual characters because they were not all just “good” or “wicked,” but had a variety of qualities like a real human being. Jacob, who I’d always known as just a kindly father in the Joseph story, turned out to have made his own mistakes in the way he treated his brother. Sibling rivalry is just one of the connections I found in the Hebrew Bible: it extended from Cain and Abel, to Jacob and Esau, and to Joseph and his brothers. I felt the whole Bible coming together into a unified whole. I understood the characters because I could imagine them as real people. Job’s laments reminded me of Jesus’ laments before his crucifixion and I could relate to his feelings of hopelessness. Jesus wasn’t just a God-figure far removed from us: he is one of us, who experienced the same pain and suffering of all mortals. All in all, he is a fascinating and well-developed character torn between two worlds. I believe that at some point we all feel that way. We can’t always reconcile everything in our lives. These intense emotions are probably what have brought the Bible to the status that it is at today: people can see themselves within both the characters and the God figures, and they put their faith in the familiar. I realized that I had avoided the Bible because of my experiences with the modern religious interpretations of it. I was enjoying the stories and finding morals without having to prescribe to any religious view. The Bible revealed to me many things about the ancient world I never would have discovered, for example the humor in it that has been lost on our generation. Learning about the Documentary Hypothesis allowed me to envision each writer and attempt to figure out his main point by the way he tells his story. Just like any other great book I’ve read, I’ve begun perusing outside information and interpretations on it. This discovery of the Bible as well-written, emotional and thought-provoking literature may not seem like much of a breakthrough for most people, especially those well-versed in literature. For me, however, I’ve made a huge step in my understanding of the world. I have moved past my previous prejudices and have found a rich and satisfying world, and I didn’t even have to sacrifice my core beliefs to enjoy it. (Comment on this)
9:31 pm	Day 2 Individual Presentations Here's what areas of information to expect on the final test: -group presentations -individual presentations -Calasso chapter 12 -7 Stages of the Bible according to Northrop Frye 1. Aspen started her presentation by doing a simple math problem: 12 months in a year minus 3 months of winter equal 9 months...which is the time of pregnancy. Aspen used this as the main proof for the equation of woman=nature. She cited the story of Persephone (who ate seeds and therefore decided the fertility of each during the seasons) and the Bible book Song of Solomon, where a woman comes into fertility just as the garden comes into its natural fertility. Aspen explained that this woman=nature equation may be where we get the common idea that women are fickle and overly emotional. 2. The main question of Maggi's presentation was "Where does knowledge stand in the Bible?" Then she simply stated, "Read my paper to find out!" 3. Claire said that she discovered how much she loves reading about women in the Bible. In another class she wrote a paper on Ruth (which is also the name of her grandmother) and showed the class a slide show of pictures and sayings of Ruth from the Bible. 4. Serena explored the negative way men treat women in the Bible and, in order to not offend anyone, did her own version of the show "Match Game" where the class had to fill in the blanks of certain Bible passages concerning the way women are harmed, sacrificed, and just generally mistreated. 5. Acadia talked about parables, especially the definition that they "turn our expectations upside down." Acadia noted that we experience "parable-type moments" in our lives when the exact opposite of what we expect to happen happens. 6. Ruth explained that she had had this "old lady name" for 19 years, but it wasn't until she read the story of Ruth in this class that she began to appreciate it. The main topic of her paper was how different the world would be without the vast influence of the Biblical and Classical traditions. One example she cited was the way our death/mourning ceremonies are influenced by these traditions. 7. Abdul explained that as an exchange student, this was the first time he was really coming into contact with these traditions. He explained that to him the Classical tradition was all about imagination, and that the Biblical tradition is similar to the Koranic tradition of "the revealed word of God." 8. Chrissie did a displacement of the story of Esther, which she considered close to our modern TV show "The Bachelor." Chrissie explained that Esther had great power, but she didn't misuse it...unlike many of the women in the classical tradition. She said the main point of the Esther story was not to get to caught up in food or the material things, because God should be your main sustenance. 9. Evelyn talked really fast, and I caught only a little bit of her "Three main things I learned this semester": 1. live life abundantly 2. read every line from the beginning to the end 3. personal relationships are the key to spirituality 10. Kelly discussed the topic of memory. She was especially interested in the people who memorize the passages in the Bible and the way in which they do this. After researching, she discovered the different techniques used. She said this was an example of "keeping the oral traditions alive." 11. Laura explained that she hadn't realized how many of the classical stories she knew, but had not know they were from the classical tradition because the Christian society we live in had adopted them as their own. She also wondered why we still believe in the Biblical traditions, but not in the Greek traditions. 12. Rachel explained that she had grown up with a liberal mother and a conservative father and that she couldn't wait to see their reactions to the idea of realized eschatology. She also discovered in the class the way fear can cloud judgment when it comes to religion, politics, etc. 13. John asked the question, "Why are women still considered unequal in our society?" He found his answer within the Bible, saying that people literally interpreting the Bible have caused this bias towards women. He quoted 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 which states that woman are not to speak in Church, but must ask their husbands any questions they may have in the privacy of their home. 14. Collin talked about how light and time are metaphors for all our lives, quoting page 243 in Calasso. To the Greeks, light=salvation. 15. Jillian wrote her paper in response to an ejournal discussion she had with Sunny Rae concerning faith. Jillian said that the story she saw as the best example of good faith is that of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (look it up if you don't know it, people!) She realized throughout this class "how much I didn't know about the Bible, how much I should know about the Bible, and how important my faith is." (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Thursday, December 8th, 2005
9:13 pm	And yet, no paper from Emily! I was planning on posting my paper on my ejournal tonight, but I realized that when I typed it in the library I forgot to save it on a disk. So I only have one copy of my paper, and it is currently in the possession MS getting graded. I'm hoping Sexson will bring it to class tomorrow so I can copy it and then retype it onto my ejournal. Sorry about that! (Comment on this)
8:49 pm	"Where were you when they built that ladder to Heaven?" As promised, here are some thoughts on the South Park episode "Ladder to Heaven" alluded to in Clint's speech. The main premise of the episode is that before the boys' friend Kenny died (in the previous season) he had been given a raffle ticket for a free shopping spree at the candy store. The boys had pitched in to buy the ticket, but had given it to Kenny for safe-keeping. A few weeks after Kenny's death, the boys realized they have won the contest, but must have the ticket to collect their prize. They believe, however, that the ticket has been cremated with Kenny's body. Therefore, they decide to build a ladder to Heaven (more of a pile of debris, actually) in order to see Kenny's angel and retrieve the ticket. They tell their parents and the adults in the town that they are building this ladder because they "just have to see our friend Kenny again." The adults think this is the sweetest thing they have ever heard--innocent children attempting to see their dead friend one more time. They don't realize, however, that the kids are only doing this to get free candy. Soon the media becomes involved and the whole nation is "touched" by these "sweet" children. Alan Jackson comes to the town with a new song titled, "Where were you when they built that ladder to Heaven?" which is mocking the real song Jackson wrote after 9/11 that shamelessly capitalized on the pain and suffering of his fellow Americans (that song's main lyrics were "Where were you?" when the twin towers fell). There is actually a line in the South Park episode where Jackson says, "Hey y'all, I'm Alan Jackson. Here to make money once more off a sad and touching story." The adults wonder if they should tell the kids that they can't really get to Heaven by climbing into the sky, but soon the kids discover that the ticket wasn't in Kenny's pocket at all: it was in his dresser drawer all along. The boys immediately halt the building and have a fantastic candy shopping spree. The ladder is destroyed. Clint explained how this was "obviously" the Tower of Babel, and I agree. The boys were trying to reach Heaven because of a materialistic want and expected to be able to just waltz right into Heaven. However, the boys were not struck down by God, but were allowed to get what they wanted. The real losers in this story were the adults, who believed so firmly that the children had innocent intentions that they shamelessly sold the story to the media to promote themselves and their town. Such a commentary on the media...and what people will do to get their 15 minutes of fame! It's also interesting to consider Frye's point that towers are manmade mountains, and that the ladder represents the journey across the axis mundi. The boys use a ladder specifically to cross out of their level of the axis mundi (Earth) to the highest level of the axis mundi. (Comment on this)
Wednesday, December 7th, 2005
10:01 pm	First Day of Individual Presentations (Groups 4,5,6) Once, again...Hey! (I really need to think of a more original greeting...) Anyway, Sexson asked me to be the personal note-taker of the individual presentations. Everyone is required to post a copy of their essay, but Sexson wants me to pull out the "essence" of each presentation and post it here. I will do my best, but if I screw up the "essence" of your paper--let me know! --Two quick announcements: Here is the link to Dylan Paradis' ejournal that has not yet made it onto my journal: http://dylanparadisenglish212.blogspot.com/ Here is the link to the NEW ejournal by Colby Park: http://www.livejournal.com/users/colbypark/ 1. Sunny Rae did a hilarious parody of the Bible: pronouncing in her best Biblical language of proclamation the variety of things she had learned during this class. (I was enthralled and didn't get down too many details!) 2. Rae Ann discussed the tensions between men and women in both the Biblical and classical traditions. She described this as a "power play" and explained that it is this tension that drives the story and keeps bringing us back to these works because we still have this tension today. 3. Adam discussed may things that went way over my head, but I'll do my best. He talked about the general will of a society being driven by the tensions of our own personal will. He acknowledged that in order for there to be tensions, there has to be some similarity. The similarity in the Biblical and Classical traditions is the belief in divine. The central tension is between repentance or submission to God vs. defiance to God. 4. Cassandra had a great start to her paper, claiming "I didn't learn anything in English 212 because I had known it all and just forgot it. Also, since we are all plagiarists, this whole paper is plagiarized" (that was a paraphrase, of course!) After poking fun at some of the truths we learned in class, Cassandra explained that the biggest thing she learned this semester is not to take everything literally, especially the Bible. 5. Colby did a displacement of the Moses story, setting it in the 1800's west. The name Moses means "to lift up" for when he was lifted out of the river, and so Colby reflected this in the name of his main character: Lucky, who was the only survivor after the murder of his family. Lucky is raised by those people who killed his family, but decides when he is older to instead side with the poor people of the town Oasis, who are being oppressed, because he really is one of them. 6. Darcy wrote her paper on the Gospel of Thomas, which was discovered in 1945. She discussed how scholars debate whether this gospel inspired the synoptic gospels or if it was influenced by the synoptic gospels. She also explained that Thomas was just a nickname of sorts for the name Judas, although scholars are not sure which Judas this was. Another interesting fact is that this gospel does not contain a story of Jesus' life, but instead a compellation of sayings attributed to Jesus. 7. Jayne displaced the story of Job by putting into a modern rivalry in the NCAA. I know nothing about this. I suggest if you have no background in college sports (I'm not even 100% sure that football is the sport.....), check out Jayne's ejournal! The main message, however, was to be patient in times of suffering and all will be resolved. 8. Amy discussed how English 212 has given her a different point of view on literature and she is able to appreciate different authors having conversations across their writings. 9. Mick talked about different Biblical and Classical references in the "Matrix" movies and how, after learning about these traditions, he has a whole new appreciation and understanding of the film. Mick says there is even an axis mundi in one of the films! 10. Ryan chose the topic of alcohol and discussed it in each tradition, including the story of Dionysus bringing alcohol to mankind. Ryan discussed how the ultimate message for both traditions is that alcohol is okay to enjoy, just don't overdo it. 11. Spencer made the observation that although the classical and Biblical ways of thinking are different, both have an equal place in everyone's life. He read some lyrics from a rap song that showcased this idea: the singer was torn between wanting to be Santa Claus and give everyone what they need and want (Biblical) and wanting to live his own life to the fullest while he can (Classical). Very cool point...I had never considered the way these two views constantly tug us one way or the other at every moment in our lives! 12. Jennifer considered the idea that everyone's life is shaped by the tradition in which they were raised. She considered a child who had been raised with such stories as Demeter and Persephone and the Trojan War (she claimed a child raised on this story would be inherently violent or immoral). She contrasted this to someone who had been raised in the Biblical tradition, drawing on her personal experience. She explained that the main story of the Bible can be summed up in the story of Martha and Mary: we shouldn't be distracted by those things that don't matter. 13. Brenna discussed the topic of sacred and profane time and argued that there shouldn't be a divide between religions concerning the opportunity to reach a sacred time. 14. Clint talked about how alive these traditions are in our society today, citing Bob Dillon songs and a particular episode of "South Park" called "Ladder to Heaven." And yes...I will discuss the implications of the episode (oh no! I hear you cry!) in my next ejournal post! 15. Sadie explained that, while she was writing a paper on Emerson's essay "The American Scholar," she could see that every piece of literature is building on the ones that came before, and that they are all connected because of their basis in the early traditions. 16. Allison discussed how her study of the Bible has helped her to understand where her Catholic roommates are coming from when they discuss religion. Although they still get upset when she refers to the Bible as "literature," but she is able to have a more civil and knowledgeable discussion. 17. I was up next and had a VERY similar paper to Allison's. I am not at all religious, and am very biased towards the Christian religion. This class, however, has given me a great appreciation for the Bible as a literary text and I enjoy the stories, characters, and themes. I was surprised to see I could enjoy it in a secular way! 18. Dylan took the works of three different literary critics to describe how the Biblical and Classical traditions are like a "world wide web" that connects people of all places and times. 19. Jacob (speaking as fast as he could!) discussed the view on suffering in the two traditions. Concerning the Calasso quote that "we suffer so the bards will sing about us," Jacob describe that we want our suffering to be worth something and for it to be justified by someone either recording it or at least recognizing the pain we are going through. --That's all for the first day. I'll post my paper and some more thoughts tomorrow! (Comment on this)
9:04 pm	Group Presentations 5 and 6 Hey everyone! Sorry it took me so long to post these notes, but I've been busy with final papers and what not. I am part of group 5 and we were given Leviticus 82-85, Deuteronomy 93-97, Daniel 222-227, and Gospel of John 276-277. When we were discussing these verses, we found that the majority of these verses had to do with the laws of the Old Testament (laws of Moses) and people who had broken them. We decided to do a scene at the Pearly Gates with St. Peter. Daniel, who was already judged and allowed into the kingdom of heaven, would be hanging out with St. Peter as he judged each person. At the end, Jesus would come back from his "tour" on Earth and explain that we would have to rejudge everyone who had lived before him, because they had not known of him and his offer of salvation. We chose to have a leper (who couldn't get into Heaven because she was "unclean"), a man who had violated the law of Levirate marriage (a man must concieve children with his brother's widow if she has no children), a hunter who had eaten the blood of unclean animals, and the character of Belshazzar, a king who worshipped false idols and used the Sacred Vessels of Solomon's Temple. God came down in the form of a giant hand (there is just no way to say that without sounding silly!) and wrote on the wall a mysterious sentence. He called upon Daniel to interpret the message, and Daniel interpreted that it forsaw the dividing of Belshazzar's kingdom. He did not tell him, however, that this involved Belshazzar's murder. There is a great page on Wikipedia concerning Belshazzar, including a list of culural/literature/musical references to the story: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belshazzar --It is from the story of Belshazzar that we get the saying "Read the writing on the wall" alluding to a message of doom. I thought that instead of trying to explain the other stories and laws, that I would just post our script. Notice within it the Biblical quotes that explain each law. Enjoy! Scene: At the Pearly Gates. A sign reads, "Welcome to the Pearly Gates! Please Take a Number and Have a Seat!" St. Peter sits behind the podium in front of the gates, doing a crossword puzzle. St. Peter: Now let's see...what's a ten-letter word for "Torah"? Hmm...aha! P-E-N-T-A-T-E-U-C-H. Pentateuch! Alright! Now what's a four letter word for Greek justice? Hmm... (Daniel comes up from behind the Pearly Gates and speaks to the audience) Daniel: Hi everyone. My name is Daniel. I’m on my way to see my good friend St. Peter at the Pearly Gates. Now, I’ve already passed judgment and been allowed through to the kingdom of God, but every once in a while I like to stop by and chew the fat with my old pal St. Peter. You know, he may get made fun of a lot down on earth, but all in all he’s a good guy with an outstanding devotion to God, much like myself. Ah, hello, St. Peter! How goes it? St. Peter: Oh, hey Daniel! I'm very well, thank you. Staying on top of my quota. Thanks for asking. Daniel: Well, it's good to know there's so many faithful and devoted people out there. Wouldn't want your quota to come up short! St. Peter: Ah, yes. However, not everyone is as easy a judgment as you. You, who faced so much. A prisoner under King Nebuchadnezzar, but you chose to remain pure and devoted to God. Of course you were to be delivered into the kingdom of God. I must say, you are quite the heroic model when it comes to being faithful to God. Daniel: What can I say? I have God to thank for so much. All my knowledge and wisdom, not to mention all the insights into visions and dreams. God's been good to me. St. Peter: Here comes another group of sinners. Mind waiting around while I judge these guys? Then we can get some lunch. Daniel: Hey, I'm in no hurry. I've got eternity in Heaven. (The people sit down in the waiting room, preparing to be judged.) St. Peter: Now serving number 345,768,204,483,002. Leper: (to the person sitting next to her) Excuse me. Could you please push my bandages from my eyes a little? I can't read my number. Levirate: Um...ahhhh...oh look, there's my friend over there...uh...sorry...I can't help! (he runs to the other side of the room) Leper: (struggling with her bandages) Jeez, I'm dead and I still can't make any friends. I would have been better to never have been born. St. Peter: Next, please! Come on, people, it's not like we have eternity here. Leper: I'm coming! I'm coming! St. Peter: Hello. Welcome to the Pearly Gates...I'm St. Peter...etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Cause of death please. Leper: Leprosy. I have it really bad. You want to see? (lifts up bandage to show St. Peter) St. Peter: No...really...that's ok...I believe you! Daniel: I think I'm just going to go over here and talk to the angels or something. (whispering to St. Peter) Let me know when she leaves. St. Peter: Okay. Cause of death: leprosy. (writes in his book) According to Leviticus 13: 14-15, " But if raw flesh ever appears on him, he shall be unclean; the priest shall examine the raw flesh and pronounce him unclean. Raw flesh is unclean, for it is a leprous disease.” Were you checked by the priest before death? Leper: Yes, he told me I was unclean so I had to wear tattered clothes and shout “Leper! Leper!" wherever I went. But I thought, if I’m unclean, then I just have to take a shower. Right? So I did, and I went back to the priest. But he still told me I was unclean! Man, I must have taken about one hundred showers, but I just couldn’t seem to get clean. Only then did he tell me that taking a shower wouldn’t make me clean. They really should specify these things don’t’ you think? So, since showering apparently doesn’t help, I haven’t taken one since. And let me tell you, I’m really unclean now! St. Peter: Um, yes, I can smell that. Well, since you were pronounced unclean, I can’t let you into heaven. You are banished to hell! Leper: But… St. Peter: No buts, go now! (she leaves) Hey, Daniel! You can come back, now! Daniel: Wow! Glad that one's gone! What a weirdo! St. Peter: No kidding! Now serving number 345,768,204,483,003. Levirate: Oh! That's me! St. Peter: And what crime against humanity have you perpetrated, old man? Levirate: Well, it's not a crime the way I see it... Daniel: We don't really care the way you see it. St. Peter: Please, continue. And Daniel, shut your trap. Levirate: Well, there was this woman... St. Peter: And? Levirate: And I'm a guy, you dig? And guys got hormones and what not. And I'm a guy...so...I've got to, you know, um... St. Peter: (sighs) Continue... Levirate: Okay, okay...I slept with her. But I thought it was okay, really! I mean, there's that whole law about this sort of thing..."The Law of Levirate Marriage" or somethin' like that. Daniel: Perhaps you don't understand the law... St. Peter: Daniel! Shut up! I can handle this! You, continue, your salvation is at stake...as though I need to remind you of that. Levirate: Well, the law states that I, the loyal Jewish citizen, am duty-bound to take my brother's wife as my own. St. Peter: Yes, it says in Deuteronomy 25:5, "If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her." Daniel: Hey buddy, you're left out some critical information here in your story. I believe that applies only to circumstances where the brother that you have referred to is deceased... Levirate: Right, that's the problem. Turns out this dude wasn't really dead...hmm, and I guess he wasn't really my brother either...come to think of it, can't say that I've ever met the guy. But his wife is...wow... St. Peter: Get out of here! There's no way you're getting into Heaven! (Levirate leaves) Belshazzar: Huh. Looks like you've got quite a story. Nice hat. Who are you? Hunter: Well, I'm a hunter and I survived out of pure stealth and skill. I can kill an animal twenty or even thirty paces with one eye closed. And let me tell you, I don’t waste an ounce of meat. I eat everything, right down to the bones. Belshazzar: So, what do you hunt? Hunter: Oh, anything when I’m hungry, but mainly ox, pig, sheep, goat, deer, gazelle, roebuck, wild goat, ibex, antelope, camel, mountain sheep, hare, and rock badgers. And when the getting gets tough, I can always go down to the river and fish for my dinner. And if I’m not by water, I can usually spot some bird that’ll do. I'm a hell of a cook, too. The best is when you just lightly brown both sides so the meats still raw and dripping blood. I don't like my meat any other way. Belshazzar: Sounds tasty. (sarcastically) What kind of birds you shootin? Hunter: Whatever happens to be perched cuz I may be the best marksman you ever met, but I’ll be damned if I can shoot one in mid-flight. That’s a skill I ain’t ever had. But, when the time is right, you can sneak right up on ‘em. It’s never a bad idea to bait ‘em too. Ya know, throw out a crust of bread or some seeds and jus wait. Those birds are too dumb, they can’t even see my bow comin. Big ones are my favorites, eagles, vultures, osprey, buzzards, ostrich, night hawk, day hawk, brown hawk, heck, any of them hawks an’ owls. Lets see what else…oh yeah storks, herons, hoopoes, and my personal favorite, bats. Thems ya don’t gotta waste yur time pullin feathers all night, ya can jus stick em right in the flame. They get nice and crispy real fast. Ummmmmm. An I suppose when I get real desperate, I roll over stones an such till I find a big juicy winged bug. St. Peter: Now serving number 345,768,204,483,004. Hunter, I'm sorry, but I cannot let you pass. Hunter: Well, why not? I ain’t no sinna. I lived my life doin to others as I’d wannem to do ta me and all that. Daniel: But you have eaten unclean animals. Hunter: UNCLEAN!! Why what the heck does that mean? I’ll show you unclean! Daniel: You have eaten pretty much everything God forbids eating. And you ate the blood! St. Peter: You have indulged past any point I have ever seen. Ewe, its disgusting. Let me lay it out for you, Hunter. “Any animal that divides the hoof and has the hoof cleft in two, and chews the cud, among the animals you may eat.” Daniel: Yeah, pigs don't chew cud. Saint Peter: “Yet of those that chew the cud or have the cleft you shall not eat these: the camel, the hare, and the rock badger, because they chew the cud but do not divide the hoof; they are unclean for you.” “And all winged insects are unclean for you; they shall not be eaten.” “No person among you shall eat blood.” Hunter: Well, I’ll be damned. Who’d a thought. Well what the heck can ya eat? Saint Peter: “These are the animals you may eat; the ox, the sheep, the goat, the deer, the gazelle, the roebuck, the wild goat, the ibex, the antelope, and the mountain sheep.” “You may eat any of the clean birds.” “Whatever has fins and scales you may eat.” Hunter: Alright, well, down I go. Daniel: Wow. No Heaven people yet! Must be a bad day. St. Peter: Alright, who's next? Belshazzar: Yeah, that would be me. My name is Belshazzar. St. Peter: Okay, so let me see here...it looks like you are guilty of worshiping false idols, therefore not exalting the true God as Lord. You also... Belshazzar: Hey! Daniel? Is that you? How have you been? Daniel: Oh, I... Belshazzar: Wait a second! It's your fault I'm even here! St. Peter, man, you have got to listen to me. Before you go about judging me or whatever it is you do, I'd have you know that Daniel should be burning right now, not me. Daniel: What? St. Peter: Really? Well, you've got my attention. So, here's the deal: If you make your case well enough...I'll send Daniel to the Lake of Fire in your stead. Daniel: That's not fair! Belshazzar: Ok...so...first of all, let me clear up this whole "false idols" thing. All I was doing was having a banquet—you know, a good time with all my friends—when we thought that the party was getting pretty dull. Then we realized, hey, nobody's belligerently drunk...bust out the wine! So I told my buddy, "Go fetch some goblets, and make them nice ones!" St. Peter: You stole the sacred golden vessels from the House of God! Belshazzar: Ha! Like I'm supposed to know that! Anyway, we wind up pretty toasted, I mean we were really gone—and one guy says, "Man, I like stone. Praise be to stone." I almost died laughing, and so I was like, "What?! Haha. Yeah, hail to the God of stone!" You know, as a sort of joke. St. Peter: You also praised the gods of wood, iron, brass, gold and silver. I don't think you understand how serious this is. Belshazzar: Look, Pete, I think you need to lighten up a bit. St. Peter: Even so, what on earth does this have to do with my good friend Daniel? Belshazzar: I'm getting there. Yeah, so this big hand suddenly appears out of nowhere freaks out all my friends at the banquet. Seriously, it was freaky. This hand-thing starts writing all over my walls, without even the decency to write it in a language we understand. Like, what was that supposed to accomplish, coming down with all those theatrics and not even having the intelligence enough to be intelligible. I figured it said "Nice Party" or something, but I figured I'd better enlist Daniel's help in deciphering it because, you know, Daniel is good at that sort of stuff. He came over and told me what it said—something about a kingdom divided and an end to a reign—and in gratitude, I gave him purple clothes and a whole lot of bling, and made him third highest ruler of the kingdom. I have never been nicer to anyone. Ever. And what does Daniel do? Of all the things he foretells me, he neglects to say, "Oh yeah, and someone is going to murder you tonight." Danny, how simple would that have been? Daniel: It wasn't in God's will that I should tell you. Belshazzar: Yeah, whatever. St. Peter, this man should be considered an accomplice to a murder: my murder! St. Peter: Indeed, you are correct. Daniel shall be tried as such... Belshazzar: Alright! St. Peter: ...tried as God's accomplice. Belshazzar, you are one depraved, sad little man whose death and dethronement was inevitable. You should have seen this one coming. You could almost say, "You should have seen the writing on the wall!" Daniel: Good one! Belshazzar: Suck up! (Belshazzar leaves. Jesus enters) Jesus: Hey Pete, nice to see you again! St. Peter: Hey, Jesus! Good to have you back up here. Say you look pretty rough... Jesus: Yeah its amazing how much getting lashed, crowned with thorns, crucified, and getting stuck through with a lance will take it out of you. St. Peter: Wow, that definitely sounds like quite the ordeal. But, besides all that, how did the rest of your trip down to earth go? Jesus: Well to be honest, it didn't go as smoothly as I thought it was going to. I thought all I would have to do was walk on water a few times, make the blind see, you know all the normal stuff, and the Jewish people as a whole would recognize me as the fulfillment of the Hebrew scriptures, but the Jewish leaders in Judea weren't having it. St. Peter: But I thought your ol' man made it a point to send those guys an omen, or a fax, or a memo or something like that before you went down there to give them a heads up. Jesus: Well those guys definitely didn't get the Memo. I always knew I was going to die for the sins of mankind, but I assumed it going to be at the hands of Caesar. I don't know what exactly it was, but by the end of it all those priests definitely wanted my hide. They first got all upset with me for breaking the Sabbath after I healed a sick man in Bethzatha and told him afterwards to pick up his sleeping mat and walk around. Then, I was accusing of promoting idolatry. Me, the son of God, accused of idolatry. St. Peter: Yeah, sounds like those cats have got some nerve. Don't worry they'll be dealing will me here shortly. Jesus: Yeah, Well here I stand at your mercy. I have admittedly gone against some of the teachings of old. Any chance I could slip inside so I could say howdy to pops, besides the whole resurrection bit has really got me looking forward to a bath and a hair cut. St. Peter: Like you even need to ask...gesturing for him to go ahead Belshazzar: What a second, how come he gets to go in?! He admitted to not following all the old laws, why can't you make an exception for me too? St. Peter: Well he is the only son of God. Jesus: Well Pete, it has been said, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that who ever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" John 3:16. Belshazzar: Really?! OH I BELIEVE, trust me. Leper: Well, I do, too! Shouldn't my judgment be reconsidered? Levrite: Me, too! Hunter: Me, too! St. Peter: Oh, great! Change the rules on me, Jesus! Now I have to re-judge all those who died before you came down to earth! Thanks a lot! I'm going to have to put in so much overtime... Jesus: My bad! St. Peter: Fine. Well, Daniel, I guess I'm going to have to call off the lunch today. And probably for the rest of the year as well. Daniel: Oh, come on! I'm starving! I really have a yen for some Pickle Barrel! Jesus: That sounds pretty good to me. Mind if I tag along? Daniel: Not at all! Let's get out of here. So about that parable thing...would you ever consider explaining them literally to your good old buddy Daniel? Jesus: Well...(they exit) St. Peter: sighs Now serving number 1. Number 1, please... The End --Since it's not in our script, here is a quote from Daniel 5:1-4 describing Belshazzar's misdeeds: "King Belshazzar gave a great banquet for a thousand of his nobles and drank wine with them. 2 While Belshazzar was drinking his wine, he gave orders to bring in the gold and silver goblets that Nebuchadnezzar his father had taken from the temple in Jerusalem, so that the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines might drink from them. 3 So they brought in the gold goblets that had been taken from the temple of God in Jerusalem, and the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines drank from them. 4 As they drank the wine, they praised the gods of gold and silver, of bronze, iron, wood and stone." --Concerning group 6, they once again had technical difficulties and were unable to present. Hopefully they will give their presentation during the Final Test period. (Comment on this)
Saturday, December 3rd, 2005
9:39 pm	Group Presentations 3 and 4 -Group 3 (Samuel 130-157, Luke 263-269, Proverbs 201-203) did a great "court room drama" on two different stories in the Bible (complete with hand puppet reenactments!). First, David was brought to trial for the death of Goliath. The prosecution argued that David had committed murder: the defense argued he had killed in self defense. The court finally came to the decision that David had indeed committed murder. The grounds for this decision? They were reading the Bible literally! The second case was that of Judah and Jesus. Judah (defending himself) is on trial for the betrayal and slander of Jesus. Judah was drunk throughout the trial and I'm not sure of the Biblical basis for that, but I'm sure someone from Group 3 will post their notes online. -Group 4 (Judges 107-168, Luke 270-274, Jonah 229-231) started with Northrop Frye boringly reading his book...until the class revolted and decorated the classroom in psychedelic colors and objects. They related almost everything within their readings to the band The Rolling Stones, especially the song "Sympathy for the Devil." Here's a link to the lyrics of that song: http://display.lyrics.astraweb.com:2000/display.cgi?rolling_stones..forty_licks..sympathy_for_the_devil The stories covered included the resurrection of Jesus, Samson and Delilah, and Jonah and the Whale. The group discussed that the story of Jonah was the opposite of the story of Jesus. Jonah questioned God and disobeyed him, and as pushishment was eaten by a whale and eventually relased. Jesus, on the other hand, was obviously faithful and good was tortured and killed, despite his good behavior. The main themes of the presentation were love and betrayl. The main lyrics that concerned the contrast between Jesus and Jonah are "Just as every cop is a criminal And all the sinners saints As heads is tails Just call me Lucifer 'Cause I'm in need of some restraint"--Our expectations are turned upside down when the wicked Judah gets to live and good Jesus is killed. I assume that the members of this group will also post some notes concerning these stories (I think Sophie is going to post on Samson and Delilah) because I didn't get down significant notes on this one. MS also discussed the mythology of Robert Johnson in American culture, a figure who was rumored to have met Satan at a crossroads and sold his soul in order to be great (especially in music). Check out this page on Wikipedia about Robert Johnson: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Johnson (Comment on this)
Friday, December 2nd, 2005
3:01 pm	Group Presentations 1 and 2 Here are some notes and musing on the first day of presentations: -Group 1 (who were given the Bible verses Exodus 69-80, Ruth 170-174, Luke 248-252, and Judith 234) did a parody of the Jerri Springer show, showcasing numerous "dysfunctional relationships" within these Bible passages. The first was Miriam and Moses, who were brother and sister. Miriam and her mother had saved Moses as a baby when the Pharaoh in Egypt was killing all the male children of his Hebrew slaves. Later, Moses became a prophet of God: receiving the Ten Commandments, freeing his people from Egypt, and leading them to the land of Milk and Honey (The Promised Land). Miriam, however, came down with leprosy. On the show, these two bickered with each other. Miriam blamed Moses as being the "favorite" of God and also of abandoning her even though she had saved his life when he was a child. --What I thought was interesting about this story, and the way the group portrayed it, is that I had never considered this story from the perspective of Miriam. I would also be very angry if I had broken the law (ie risked my life!) to save my brother's life, and then received nothing back from God except a case of leprosy. So, basically Miriam's only purpose within this story is to save Moses so that Moses will grow up to become the central character of the Hebrew Bible. It seems to me that her job is a pretty important factor in the story and should not just be thrown out of the narrative when she has finished her part. I almost want to write a book called, "Whatever Happened to Baby Miriam?", but then again I felt the same way about the character of Dinah. She was the most interesting character in the story! I guess this is just an example of the Bible's many lacunae. Some characters themselves are simply "plot holes" and not important except to the continuation of the story. -The next story the group addressed was that of Boaz the farmer and Ruth. Ruth came to Boaz's farm and began working the land without permission, but Boaz greatly appreciated her work and accepted her. One night when Boaz was very drunk, Ruth came to lay with Boaz and said, "I am Ruth thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman." When Boaz woke up in the morning, he realized that he had agreed to marry her. It turns out Ruth, who was a widow, was merely following the directions of her mother in law, and this was the main issue brought up in the presentation. Boaz was "fed up" with the fact that Ruth simply followed directions from anyone who would give them. Jerry Springer decided to send them down to Dr. Phil because it was a problem he could not solve. --Ruth turns out to be the great-great-grandmother of King David, who is perceived as a "push-over" and a weakling just like Ruth, but ultimately proves himself a strong and ferocious man. Could this be the redemption of not only his image, but also of Ruth's? Is this a family that is outwardly weak, but inwardly strong (perhaps because God is with them)? It seems that Ruth herself was also very cunning, like David, when she tricked Boaz into agreeing to marry her. Maybe she just doesn't show the person she is inside, but leaves it up to her great-great-grandson to revive the family name. -The third story was that of Joseph, Mary and Jesus. I feel no need to recount that story for it is one as well known as the story of Jack and Rose in "Titanic." The group dealt with Joseph feeling that Jesus wasn't his real son, but instead the son of Dr. Gabriel (very clever, guys!) who Mary visited right before she became pregnant. A paternity test was administered, and, though it showed that God was indeed the father, Joseph decided that because he could get wealthy and famous off of Jesus, he was going to drop the whole issue. --This was the most confusing element of the Bible story for me when I was young. I was always under the impression that Jesus was the son of Joseph and Mary, but God liked him so he named him his "son" (ie. metaphorical son). I used to play house with our manger scene (yes, it's weird, but they were great figurines to make stories with) and Joseph would always end up fighting with God (who was my stuffed Pooh Bear-there's probably something Freud could find in that choice of actor) about who was the real father whenever Jesus needed "disciplining" (he got in a lot of trouble for not playing nice with David the shepard and Gloria the angel--they were the only other figurines we had!). My parents tried to explain that Joseph was his step-father, like my friend Rebecca had a step father. That just made me more confused, because why would God give up his son Jesus to be raised by someone else? Unless God had died, he had obviously willing given up the baby to be raised by another father, and I thought that was just plain un-fatherly. My parents explained that it was Jesus' job to be raised on Earth with the other humans he was going to save. I still didn't get it...and maybe I still don't. I still think "Poor Joseph!" He probably got the line "You're not my real father!" several times. He's like Dinah and Miriam: he did all the hard work, but this "God fellow" gets all the recognition! I wrote a poem when I was young (REALLY YOUNG) called "Today, God is a Daddy" and some sample lyrics are: "Behold the glorious sight tonight! Today God is a daddy, but he's too far away! Today Joseph is a daddy instead!" (Brilliant, isn't it? There is a chorus and illustrations to go with it and I'm proud to say my mom framed it and hung it proundly in the family room)! But I digress... -The last story was that of Judith and Holofernes. When their two people were fighting, Juditith convinced Holofernes that she was willing to turn on her own people and went with him into his tent. There she got him drunk (when will these Bible men EVER LEARN not to get drunk around a woman who might mean them harm!!!!!!) and cut off his head. In the presentation Judith claimed this was her solution to "the problem of men," or at least this particular problem. -Group 2 (Song of Solomon (entire), Luke 253-262, Susanna 223) did three magnificent displacements of the stories of Lot,Oprah and Nayhomely and Ruth, and David and Goliath. I assume they will post those stories on their websites (along with the corresponding slide shows), so I won't attempt to recreate them here! --The only comment I would make about that concerns Jillie's comment about how everyone in the Bible are related: their stories work into one another. MS mentioned that that was Frye's point: that the Bible is not a crazy combination of a bunch of people and stories, but a connected narrative. If the New Testament is an extended commentary on the life of one man (Jesus), then the Hebrew Bible seems to be an extended commentary on the life/events of one family. This calls back to my previous entry concerning Friedman that the people in the Hebrew Bible are like cogs in machine: insignificant except when viewed as moving the story forward to its ultimate goal/lesson/person (Moses?). In that way, the Bible is absolutely brilliant. Despite the harsh times of war and famine, one family manages to overcome their problems and move forward toward the saving of their people. I think it is such a beautiful image of a family that can be viewed two ways without doing disgrace to either. One, you can observe the family as a whole, almost being able to graph the movements of the people from the beginning, with all its ups and downs, wins and loses, happiness and distress. You can also focus in on each of the characters, drawing a lesson or understanding from each of their problems and observing how that connects to the next individual life. The characters themselves are not always well-developed in the Aristotelian "every character must have a background, motive, and logical reactions" sense, but instead are developed toward the goal of the family as a whole. Their character is revealed as needed to motivate the next part of the story. Wow. I just amazed myself, and actually kind of want to sit down and read the whole Bible now that I have found such depth in its story (well, at least the Hebrew Bible!)...who knows, Christmas Break 2005 may mark the time when I can hold my attention span and read the Bible! We can only hope... (Comment on this)
Thursday, November 24th, 2005
9:25 pm	Test Review Hello all--after a ten hour drive yesterday and a hectic (but fun) Thanksgiving Day, I've finally gotten a chance to sit down and write out the notes from Wednesday's test review. Almost everything that we discussed is already detailed in my notes on my ejournal, so if you need elaboration feel free to check out my previous posts. 1. another word for future eschatology is "literal eschatology" 2. Gospel of Thomas: discovered in 1945, considered to have been written earlier than any other gospels, tells that the Kingdom of Heaven is all around us here and now, we just can't see it 3. kairos: the crucial moment of time when God is found within our realm 4. Ejournals with notes on presentations to study from: Maggie-Cave Abdul-Cave Allison-Garden Amy-Mountains Mick 5. Which of the canonized gospels was written first? Mark 6. What is a good adjective to describe the community (pals) of Jesus? Esoteric(inside, private, mysterious, enigmatic) because he spook to the rest of the world in parables, but explained everything to his disciples 7. Why does the Earth have seasons? The story of Persephone and Demeter 8. According to Frye, what are the four levels of the axis mundi? heaven, paradise, earth, hell 9. According to Black Elk, where is the center of the world? Right where you're standing 10. What are the three synoptic gospels? Matthew, Mark, Luke 11. What word does Mark use 42 times? Immediately 12. Who were the Eumenides before? Furies (harpies) 13. Why do we suffer? (MS asked us to make it into a multiple choice question) A. So the bards will sing about us B. Because you didn't go to class yesterday morning C. So we can learn truth D. Because we did something wrong ----Which answer is Homeric? (A) ----Which answer is from the Orestia? (C) ----Which answer is from Job? (D) ----Which answer was originated by the English 212 class? (B) 14. What is the Greek word for justice? Dike 15. If the second best thing is to die, what is the best thing? To never have been born (essence of tragedy) 16. Where is "Remember your creator at the time of your death" from? Ecclesiastes chp. 12 17. Why is John not part of the synoptic gospels? Because he spiritulizes Jesus 18. What two things were the prophets most concerned with? --exclusive worship of YHWH --social justice 19. Why are the gospels not a source for historical facts? They are more concerned with telling the good news in a kerygmatic way 20. Where do the words testament and testimony come from? In the Biblical tradition (particularly the story of Abraham) a witness was called upon to place his hands on the other man's genitals when swearing an oath or promise 21. What is the message of the New Testament? Love your enemy 22. By what title did Jesus call the Old Testament and who did he quote most often? "Law and Prophets" and Isaiah 23. What are the two types of wisdom? --Polonian, conventional --Hamletian, speculative, pessimistic 24. What is the precedent behind every action, according to Calasso? myth 25. What is the Apocalypse? The unveiling of a new order of seeing the world 26. Hubris: arrogance against the gods --Prometheus is the ultimate figure of defiance to the gods --Job is the ultimate figure of submission and repentance to god 27. What were the three parts of the Greek code of hospitality? --Revere the gods --Revere your parents --Revere strangers Well, hope you all have a great weekend.....see you on Monday! (Comment on this)
Wednesday, November 23rd, 2005
10:49 am	"It's the end of the world as we know it...And I feel fine!" All this talk of Revelation and the end of the world has gotten that song permanently stuck in my head!!!! (or was it the "Chicken Little" trailer that plays constantly???) Here are some notes and thoughts from Monday 11/21: 1. Mark Chapter 13 is "The Little Apocalypse" 2. Ultimate message of the New Testament is "Do unto others what you would have them do to you," or "Love your enemy." 3. Frye: The Sermon on the Mount is a commentary on the Ten Commandments (Hebrew Bible laws) in which the negative commands are put into the positive (they become proactive) in order to "celebrate life." 4. Sin: -for Greeks this meant ignorance, or not remembering -for Christians this means a corrupted action or change in our being 5. Apocalypse/Revelation: catastrophic events are not meant to be taken literally, but instead are metaphors for the "unveiling" of the world. According to Paul, we see the world through a "darkened glass" and at the apocalypse light will shine on all the things we cannot see or recognize now. I assume this means we will see the world as God does, not tainted by the human mind. 6. Isaiah and Ezekiel are also apocalyptic books 7. Mark 14.51: There is a small segment where a young boy is running after Jesus dressed in only a loin cloth. The disciples grab him and in the struggle tear away his clothes and he runs away naked. MS suggested that this was an underscoring of early Christianity as a mystery religion because within the initiatory experiences of the mystery religion the new member would wear linen. --My interpretation (although I may just be reading way too much into it) deals with the fact that the boy was wearing a loin cloth. For me this brings up the image of the fig leaves Adam and Eve wore after discovering that they were naked. This boy is then a representation of the state of humanity following the original sin. We cover our bodies (specifically our groins) because we have the knowledge of good and bad. When this boy was touched by the disciples (literally "touched" in the story, but metaphorically "touched" in the interpretation) his loin cloth fell away. This signifies the return to the paradise before original sin when we had no need for clothes. Jesus was put on Earth to die for our sins and offer us a pathway to Heaven, essentially to return us to where we were before the fall. I saw this small incident of the young boy as an illustration of the larger picture of people accepting Jesus into their hearts ("touched" by Jesus) and then being returned to paradise. In this way, the boy is a microcosm for the entirety of humanity. Just some thoughts...take them for what you will... 8. Chapter 16 was the original ending of Mark 9. Assignment: Read the introduction to the Book of Revelation before reading the text 10. Great Catastrophes of the Apocalypse: -plagues -wars -famine -falling of the stars ---Frye: these catastrophes are the destruction of the way of seeing nature's order that is associated with time and history. This hearkens back to the earlier discussion of the end of the world not being at a specific time or place. It also connects to the point about the apocalypse revealing the real world to us, unveiling our previous views/assumptions about it. (Comment on this)
9:28 am	Friday 11/18 Notes and Thoughts 1. Literature itself is an epiphany (brings to light those things we previously couldn't express or define) 2. Epistle: letter to the common people telling the good news 3. New Testament: extended commentary on the life of a single man: Jesus Christ 4. Gospels -tells the essence of Jesus' story, rather than a historical biography (none of the gospel writers were alive during his lifetime) -is kerygmatic (the language of proclamation) -Matthew, Mark, and Luke are synoptic ("see together") because they are very similar -John was written later and spiritulized (or theologized) Jesus 5. Mark -earliest -shortest -uses the word "immediately" 42 times to give a sense of urgency -paratactic -Chapters 13-14: One of the disciple asks when the world will end. By asking "When will this be?" the disciple is assuming that the world is going to end within the historical realm. It isn't a question, however, of time or place, but is a metaphorical time. It has already happened, perhaps, and we have just missed it. This is the difference between realized eschatology (seeing it on a higher level than our realm of time) and future eschatology. 6. Assignment: read the books Mark and Revelation --In my opinion...I've always thought that the world will end whenever I die, because I only have my personal view of the world, so once that is gone it won't matter to me whether the world exists or not. This view is very atheistic(as I am), but I can see how this would also work in the Christian view. In the Bible it states that when we die we are put in the ground, void of our soul (this is commonly misrepresented by the idea that we go to Heaven right after we die). It isn't until Judgment Day that the dead are taken out of the ground, given back their souls, and then judged. If you were good, you go to Heaven at that time. If not, you go to hell. However, Hell is destroyed soon after (thrown in the lake of fire), so you won't have to suffer too long. So, when you die you are gone to the world, and therefore it is gone to you (well, at least until judgment day). (Comment on this)
9:21 am	Wednesday 11/16 with Linda Sexson Here are some notes: 1. Gospel of Thomas -recently discovered -does not tell story of Jesus, is a story collection -considered to be the earliest -usually a person's sayings (ie Jesus' wisdom) are spread faster by word of mouth than his actual life story 2. Tanak: the sections Law, Prophet, Writings of the Hebrew Bible 3. esoteric: designed for or understood by a specific group of people 4. parable: discussing those things that are not named in language (Comment on this)
Tuesday, November 15th, 2005
2:19 pm	"God is just a kid with a magnifying glass. And we're the ants." I'm not sure where that quote is from, but if anyone remembers, let me know (I'm thinking it's from a film or TV show of some kind...). Anyway, all of our class discussion on why we suffer made me think of this quote: quite a pessimistic view on God, however the quote also makes a connection to our discussion on little boys torturing and killing flies. Anywho, here are my notes and random thoughts from Monday 11/14 class: 1. Eschatology: thinking about or pertaining to the end of the world 2. Response to Wisdom A: "How true!" Response to Wisdom B: "How can that be true?" 3. In parables, what we expect to happen doesn't (expectations and conventional wisdom are turned upside down). For example, in the story of the prodigal son, the son who leaves the home and squanders all of his father's money is welcomed home with great love and celebration. The son who has stayed at home all those years working diligently for his father is angered that his brother is rewarded for his reckless actions. The father explains that he has missed his son for so long, and is so excited to have him back, that he feels like rejoicing and celebrating. The other son, however, has been at the home for the whole time and the father never had a chance to miss him. Usually, we would think that because the son did the "right" thing by staying home and taking care of his father, he would be better rewarded than the son who did the "wrong" thing: abandoning his father and living a lavish and reckless life. This expectation is not fulfilled in this as in most parables, instead we receive the exact opposite. Because of this, parables are of the Wisdom B genre: thought-provoking and complex. 4. In the Hebrew Bible, Satan is part of the Heavenly bodies. He serves as the accuser who wanders the Earth looking for sinners he can condemn. This is shown in the Book of Job where Satan meets with the other Heavenly Bodies to discuss the happenings on Earth, and begins the accusation of Job. 5. Book of Job -Frye says that in Job the culmination of the calamities (his children are killed, his house is burned, his livestock is killed, etc) is so great the only response we can have is to laugh -Job is like an Oreo cookie: it has two lids (the beginning and the end of the story) and a gooey middle. The two lids are Wisdom A and come from an old folktale. In these the character of Job is simple. The gooey middle is Wisdom B, delving into topics such as "Why me?" and "I wish I was never born." This sentiment is also echoed in the third play of the Oedipus trilogy in which the chorus states that "The second best thing is to die, the best thing is to never have been born." -Job chapter 3 marks the beginning of the middle portion -Hope is cruel, futile (as MS explained, "The light at the end of the tunnel turns out to be the train racing towards you") -Job's three friends attempt to cheer him up with proverbial, Wisdom A. It doesn't work. -Job 7.11: "I will not restrain my mouth..." Contrary to popular belief, Job is NOT a patient man. Instead, he begs for answers and even death. It is only in the middle section that we discover this complex and human side of the character. -Job 19.9 Job's ultimate desperation: "All my friends bore me, my loved ones turn against me, I survived by the skin of my teeth." -Why would they canonize such pessimism (Ecclesiastes and Job)? Because even though they are pessimistic, they are truly wise and one can learn great things from them. -Job chapter 38: God appears and answers "I'm more powerful than you'll ever know...Can you accomplish all that I have done?" Job then repents, although it can be argued that he repents merely out of fear or need to defuse the situation. Whenever I think of the Book of Job, I always think of "South Park." I believe (and hope someday to put together my argument in some sort of form) that "South Park" is the most brilliant, socially conscious show on television today. I won't go into that here, but there is a lot you can learn from "South Park" if you have the right amount of background information. Numerous times this semester I have understood jokes or nuances in episodes simply because I learned more Biblical and Classical mythology. Also, for those of you who attended MS' speech at Borders on the trickster, you will remember that Eric Cartman (the fat kid from the show) was brought up as a modern day trickster. This is absolutely true: I have a lot of examples to prove it. But what I found most interesting was that most of Cartman's tricks are based on mythology. For example, in the episode "Scott Tennerman Must Die" Cartman kills Scott's parents and feeds them to him in a bowl of chili. Scott is so distracted by something else, that he actually takes a bite before Cartman reveals the deed to him. Sound like Tantalus and Pelops, doesn’t it? Anyway, the episode I want to discuss is "Cartman Land." In this episode, Cartman's grandma dies and leaves him 1 million dollars in her will. Cartman uses the money to buy his own amusement park, because he hates waiting in lines. All goes well, until he catches his friends trying to sneak in. He realizes that he will have to hire a security guard, but to pay his salary he must let two people in the park a day. Then a ride breaks down and he must hire a maintenance worker. This means he must let in two more people. This continues with concession workers, ticket takers, etc until his "private amusement park" is letting in over 800 people a day. There is a whole commentary there on business practices, but I'll skip that for now. It must be stated and understood that Cartman is NOT a nice guy. His friend Kyle, however, always tries to do the right thing, even though it hardly ever works out for him. Kyle is furious that God would allow such a horrible person like Cartman to buy his own theme park. Then, he discovers that he has a hemorrhoid (also Biblical!!!) and is in terrible pain. Kyle is in mental anguish over this: God rewards bad behavior and gives such a good kid like Kyle physical suffering. He finally concludes that there is no God, for no God would ever be that cruel. Kyle (who is Jewish) has lost his religion, and has nothing else to fall back on. He loses the will to live, and his body begins to shut down. In an attempt to save him, his parents read him parts of the Book of Job to try to explain suffering. Kyle replies, "That is your God? Someone who would purposefully torture someone just to prove a point?" Needless to say, Kyle is only further saddened by his parent’s attempt. What I realized on Monday is that Kyle's parents are only reading the lids of the story, the one-dimensional part. It is the middle of the Book of Job that Kyle would have related to. Without looking at the story as a whole, everyone is doing its wisdom and message a great disservice. It is only when Cartman loses all his money and his amusement park (and is very angry and unhappy) that Kyle finally realizes that God "is up there!" and regains his will to live. This reversal of fortune for an evil person is also a very wisdom A or simplistic view on religion and suffering. Kyle assumes that just because Cartman loses his good fortune that God is punishing him for his deeds. Therefore, in both instances the complexity and wholeness of the religious world view is being overlooked. Kyle first refuses to see the entirety of Job's lesson on suffering, and takes another simplistic view that "Bad things happen to bad people, and good things happen to good people." However, it must be remembered that Kyle IS just a child and that simplicity is perhaps the only thing he can truly understand right now. I just thought it was such an interesting commentary of picking and choosing what we read/use out of the Bible and in religion. I'm sorry--I'm a pop culture freak, and also a literature major, so my favorite thing is to make connections between the two. Sorry if it bores you! (Comment on this)
Sunday, November 13th, 2005
8:57 pm	Wednesday 11/08 Class Here are the notes: 1. Read the displacement on Maggi's ejournal! 2. Calasso pages to note: 243, 273, 337, 359, 383, 387 3. Calasso pg. 387: "Myth is a precedent to every action," "Mythology is the story dimension of our lives (actions" 4. Calasso pg. 359: Why do we suffer? We are "woeful so that a bard in the future will sing about us." We suffer so we will have literature, songs 5. Every bad day is a displacement of the worst bad day--tragedy tries to find the worst that could happen, or the worst bad day 6. In real tragedy, there is no answer to the question "Why me?" and there is no hope in the future. In "The Brothers Karamazov" by Dostoevsky, he describes tragedy as unexplained, unresolved suffering. 7. Deus ex Machina: god from the machine 8. Ecclesiastes, chp 224: "There is nothing better than to eat, drink, etc...". The Book of Ecclesiastes turns conventional wisdom upside down--"day of death is better than the day of life" 9. Greeks believed in Carpe Diem, "enjoy the sunlight while you can" 10. Extra Credit assignment: Memorize chapter 12 of Ecclesiastes 11. In the Hebrew Bible (Ten Commandments) the rules of life are expressed in negative terms ("thou shalt not..."), in the New Testament the rules are expressed in a positive way ("Thou shall...") (Comment on this)
Tuesday, November 8th, 2005
9:16 pm	Monday 11/07 notes 1. Check out Colin's ejournal for information on a conversation with Harold Bloom. Bloom says, "We are living in a modern day theocracy," that is, ruled by God. 2. Suggested summer reading from MS: "The Magus" by John Fowles. In this book, we find that not only is literature myth displaced, but life is myth displaced as well. 3. Doctrine of retributive justice: no one suffers who doesn't deserve it 4. Differences in Biblical wisdom (Ecclesiastes, Job, Proverbs): Who does it focus on, man (democracy) or god (theocracy)? Which one is celebrated? 5. Proverbs: Wisdom 1, Wisdom A -based on experience, is an attitude or bearing on life -divides the world into two categories: the righteous and the wicked -simplifies life (but life is not always that simple) -obvious advice 6. Ecclesiastes: Wisdom 2, Wisdom B -speculative -tone is futile, hopeless, pessimistic -"Nothing new under the sun" -In Shakespeare's "Tempest", this is illustrated in the character Miranda and her father. Miranda is young and innocent, and everything is new to her. When she sees a part of the world she has never experienced, she says, "Brave New World." Her father answers, "'Tis new to you." -"Increased knowledge, increased sorrow" -even though it is more pessimistic, this view on life means we can have richer and deeper experiences and learn deeper mysteries -in chapter 1, the word "vanity" should be translated as "fog" or "mist" or "wind" or "breath"--it shows that we can't know anything about life, all our actions are insubstantial ----In my opinion, I agree with the romantic poets' way of looking at the pessimism: "There is no pleasure without pain." For example, we discussed root canals in class. We would not appreciate how our mouth feels on a daily basis if we didn't have occasional moments of pain to contrast it. If we didn't have war, we couldn't appreciate what it is like to have peace. Not that I'm advocating for war or pain, but they will always be here, and we can appreciate what the contrast to them offers to our lives. 7. Story of Tyreseus (did I spell his name right?): Tyreseus was out walking and he saw two snakes copulating. He kicked them apart, and Hera gave him the power to be both a man and a woman for 10 years to see which one had the most sexual pleasure. After 10 years, Tyreseus told Hera that woman by far have more sexual pleasure. Hera was furious, so she blinded him. Zeus, who couldn't undo Hera's actions, gave Tyreseus wisdom to make up for Hera's actions. When Tyreseus appears in Oedipus, his wisdom allows him to see who the murderer was because he can see all of the world's perspectives. (Comment on this)
Sunday, November 6th, 2005
4:56 pm	Fulfilling some ejournal assigments... This post is just to answer some of MS' ejournal assignments! 1. What is the "master plot" Orestes mentions in the Orestia? -I believe the master plot is best summed up in Fagles introduction to the plays. I interpret the master plot to be the cycle of revenge within the house of Atreus. The purpose of all this murder is the ultimate transformation of society into one of justice. Each murder builds to Orestes killing Clytemnestra, which leads to the court battle. This assumes that each of these characters had no control over their actions, but are just cogs in the plan to create justice, or Dike. Fagles describes this transformation as "light after darkness" (14), "a new order has been born" (16), "rite of passage from savagery to civilization" (19), "growth from primitive ritual itself to civilized institution" (20), "evolve from the blood vendetta of the tribe to the social justice of our hopes" (21), and "Dike turns to justice" (22). Orestes also expresses this idea that the master plot took away his families ability to decide on their own: "Look once more on this,/you who gather here to attend out crimes/the master plot that bound my wretched father,/shackled his ankles, manacled his hands" (221). Luckily, after all that pain and suffering, the plot was successful--justice was formed. 2. I'm going attempt to answer Rae Ann's Orestia question. Rae Ann asked why Orestes and Electra weren't upset about the murder of their sister Iphigenia. It seems that throughout this whole trilogy, the normal loyalties within the family are misused or nonexistent. Anger seems to be the dominant emotion felt by each of the characters: anger even takes over love. The family is grouped together and turned against each other. Orestes protects his father, at the expense of his mother. Perhaps the reason this story may be such a tragedy is that it shows a family breaking apart internally, rather than banding together against external threats. Both Orestes and Electra are victims of this and divide their family by deciding who to support and who to betray. More ejournal assignments and notes to come... (Comment on this)
4:36 pm	Friday 11/04 Class Notes Here are the notes from Friday: 1. Assignment: -Read the Book of Ecclesiastes -Read (scan) the Book of Proverbs -Read the Book of Job --Then answer the question: What is the differences in their approach to wisdom? -Ejournal assignment: Collect proverbs we are familiar with. -Proverbs: Polonian wisdom, traditional, practical, advice, concerning everyday life activities -Ecclesiastes: Hamletian wisdom, speculative, thought-provoking, philosophical -Wisdom is usually personified as a woman 2. Pythonian oracle (Apollo's oracle): named after the python snake, which Apollo killed 3. Apollo and the Furies represent the polar opposite of the Greek experience: -Apollo represents the world of the gods, light, harmony, music, excitement -The Furies (the agents of female retribution) represent the underworld, revenge, darkness 4. Red robes in the Orestia: a symbol of transformation of the Greek society as they discover the power of the human mind 5. If we have to suffer into truth, is real truth worth winning? Has truth ever been won without suffering? -In my opinion, life is automatically full of suffering. So, if we are going to suffer anyway, why not use that suffering to discover truth? If the suffering has a purpose or a goal, it may be easier to endure. If the suffering of one family will mean the establishing of justice for all people to come, is that not worth it? 6. Possessed women in Greek mythology: (see my previous post for images) Furies Gorgons Harpies Maenads Bacchae (women who follow Dionysus) 7. Enthusiastic: possessed by a god (comes from the god Theos--"En-Theos") 8. Story of Athens: Hephaestus was obsessed with Athena, but she was a virgin and wouldn't sleep with him. So, Hephaestus ejaculated on her leg. Athena wiped his seed off her leg with a piece of wool and flung it down to Earth where it formed the child Arecteus. His lineage lead to the formation of Athens. -MS mentioned that it was an odd concept to trace a lineage back to a virgin (Athena), but I couldn't help but think about this similarity in the Christian tradition, where humankind's savior was born of the virgin Mary. It seems to be the most magical thing to believe in birth from virginity: both traditions embraced some form of this story. Perhaps this is because it represents defying the rules of nature, a feat that signifies godliness. 9. Pietho: persuasion (this is what replaces blood vengeance at the end of the Orestia) 10. Orestia p. 260: Apollo gives justification for the patriarchal judicial system by arguing that the mother is only a nurse or incubator for the child, while the father is the most important parent. Athena agrees with this because she was born of her father and had no mother. (Comment on this)
3:44 pm	Wednesday 11/02 Class Here are the results of my googling different images from class: NOTE: ANY OF THE IMAGES IN THE LINKS PROVIDED MAY CONTAIN DISTURBING ELEMENTS. PLEASE USE YOUR PERSONAL DISCRETION. Furies-- 1. Orestes and the Furies: http://grenier2clio.free.fr/grec/image/orestes_furies.jpg http://www.uark.edu/campus-resources/achilles/graphics/trag%20Furies%2068.gif http://www.astro.ufl.edu/~carlos/Furies.jpg http://www.mainlesson.com/books/church/tragedians/zpage200.gif 2. Furies: http://www.angelfire.com/yt/lagedor/images/morganfuries.jpg Gorgons-- http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~magerko/images/klimt-3-gorgons.jpg http://www.eaudrey.com/myth/images/medusa2.jpg http://www.eselkunst.com/images/0704/gorgons_grey.jpg http://www.dekh.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/gristlegrim/monstersetoh/Medusa1.gif http://www.filosofem.com/gorgons.jpg http://www.utexas.edu/courses/greeks/lectures2/images2trag/gorgons.jpg http://www.abc.net.au/arts/wingedsandals/storytime/img/story_card_gorgons.gif http://members.tripod.com/gustav_klimt/topic21b.jpg http://mkatz.web.wesleyan.edu/Images/Munich2312a Harpies-- http://www.mythfolklore.net/3043mythfolklore/images/aeneid/aeneas_harpies.jpg http://webhome.idirect.com/~donlong/monsters/IMAGES/harpies.gif http://www.theoi.com/image/P20.1Harpyiai.jpg http://www.utexas.edu/courses/mythmoore/imagefiles15/images15/harpies.jpg http://www.k12.hi.us/~teamb390/creatures/images/harpie.jpg http://thanasis.com/harpie.gif Notes: 1. libation: drink given/raised to the gods 2. in the Orestia, we "suffer into truth." According to Aeschylus, a mature human being must develop a tragic sense of life, knowing that all life includes suffering 3. Dike: justice 4. in Greek tragedy, the violence takes place off-stage (or "obscene") 5. ejournal assignment: What is the "master plot" in the story of the Orestia? 6. Hermes is the god of borders and crossroads (Comment on this)
Tuesday, November 1st, 2005
9:12 pm	Monday 10/31 Notes, and some random thoughts... Here are the 10/31 notes: 1. Check out Mick's website to see fabulous pictures of the class presentations! 2. The underworld is sometimes associated with the "demonic maternal," or the "great mother." In the Greek tradition this is linked to Medea (cunning) a witch of the underworld who learns from Hecate, the ultimate underworld witch. This idea is also represented in the Gorgon sisters (think Medusa, with snakes for hair and eyes that turn anyone who gazes at them into stone). MS discussed how in the Greek view these were very beautiful women, but due to our patriarchal view, we look at them as ugly and gross because they do nasty and mean things. 3. What's more important--the killing of the father or the killing of the mother? (MS suggested--alluding to the result of the court case in the Orestia--that the father will always prevail in the patriarchal society) 4. Orestia Court: -Athena = judge -Apollo = defense attorney -Furies = prosecuting attorneys 5. Orestia p. 61: Connects the story to the agricultural cycle. Clytemnestra has given birth (through her murdering Agamemnon) to the cycle of revenge that will eventually kill her. ---I would have to disagree. I believe that Agamemnon gives birth to this revenge by killing his daughter in the first place, but that is assuming we can look past the patriarchal society! 6. "Faster, Faster, Pussycat, Kill": a 1970's porn based on the Orestia. I thought this was a great bit of trivia: these works are so influential, they invade even the "lowest rung" of the societal ladder! I was looking over the introduction to the Orestia again, and a certain line caught my eye: "He not only conspires with the storm that strikes the fleets, he excels it with the violence of the curse" (p. 26). I instantly thought of "King Lear" and the scene on the heath. Lear's madness is caused by his own doing: his dividing of his kingdom and rejection of daughter Cordelia. This madness is reflected in the violence of the storm on the heath, but more than that Lear seems to think he can control it. He calls the storm down upon "ungrateful men" and accuses it of conspiring with his daughters to take revenge upon him. I see some pretty significant connections between Agamemnon and Lear. Both bring about a wicked storm through their actions (although Agamemnon calls the storm by INTENTIONALLY killing his daughter, where as Lear is blind to the true consequences of his actions). When the storm arrives, it becomes not just an enemy fighting against him (such as Clytemnestra as the storm that awaits Agamemnon at home) but an previously unacknowledged part of himself. For Lear, the storm represents the feelings of human compassion and understanding he had never before considered. The storm is the climax of his fall into ultimate humility, where he can look at the world in an objective way and see the true nature of mankind and himself. For Agamemnon, the storm gives him the opportunity to wage war, but also brings about his fall. Both of these men are faced with a storm that brings both good and bad to their lives: spelling both success and destruction. At times the storm aligns with them ("conspires with the storm"), and at times it turns its violence on its creator. Sometimes the violence caused by the calling of the storm "excels" anything the storm itself could have brought about. I don't know if any of that made any sense to anyone. In fact, these ideas are still a little fuzzy and disorganized to me; I was just noticing a little "literature is myth displaced"! I read through my classmate's ejournals, and found that many of the questions concerning the Orestia were similar to mind and, therefore, I don't feel like I have a significant answer for them. I'll just wait for the rest of you to post your questions, and hope to find one I can illuminate for you! Later, alligator... (Comment on this)
Monday, October 31st, 2005
3:37 pm	Friday 10/28 Class Here are the notes from Friday: 1. Ejournal assignment: Answer someone else's question about the Orestia. 2. Epiphany (or "lightbulb moment"): sudden manifestation of power, energy or insight from another dimension 3. Armageddon: battle field in book of Revelation (light triumphing over darkness) 4. Orestia is about the coming of light to a dark world 5. Electra complex: the opposite of the Oedipus complex--girl loves her father in a sexual way 6. Orestes: is a model hero (no little about his childhood, returns when he is old to avenge wrongs, etc) 7. Orestia concerns a cycle of vengeance (one death leads to another...) 8. Today we have psychologized things that the Greeks personified (ie. the Furies are the "guilt thoughts" of today) 9. Therapist= the rapist 10. When discussing her relationship with Agamemnon, Clytemnestra uses related metaphors: net, yoke, chain, etc...signifying oppression 11. On pg. 140 there is a reference to grapes ("trampling down the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored) 12. Story of Cassandra: Apollo wanted her, but Cassandra would only go with him if he granted her one wish. She wished to be able to see the future. Apollo granted this wish, but soon after Cassandra left him and didn't fulfill her part of the deal. As punishment, Apollo made it so that although she could see the future, no one would ever believe her. 13. Our modern word for "car" comes from the word "chariot" MY QUESTION CONCERNING THE ORESTIA: Does Orestes know about the sacrifice of Iphigenia? Was he too isolated as a child to hear about it? If he does know, why does he not understand Clytemnestra's motives? Is it merely because of the patriarchal society (son must protect father)? Or is it because in his anger he refuses to see the ultimate cause of this violence? Or does he have hidden resentment towards his mother and he would have used any reason to kill her? Also, who would have the audience sympathized with during the time it was written? It seems that today we would feel the pain of Cytemnestra, who lost her daughter. But what would the Greeks think? There's a lot of questions in my "question" about the Orestia, but the idea of revenge in literature always fascinates me: do the characters simply not see the just act that started it all? or do they just refuse to? It seems as if no one cares that Iphigenia was murdered, but only that Clytemnestra murdered Agamemnon. Is this a crime of ignorance or passion? Until later... (1 Comment |Comment on this)