English 212 blog

Closing Statements

2005-12-12T22:43:00.000-08:00

Well, it is once again that time in the semester when we must all say goodbye. I swear that they are getting perpetually faster, which is nice in some respects, but quite frightening in others. Once again, it has been an absolute pleasure listening to Dr. Sexson share some of his knowledge with us. This is my second class with you, Dr. Sexson, and I must say that the knowledge that you and your wife have is astonishing and intimidating, and I am grateful to have had the opportunity to listen. Thank you for a very interesting class and a worthwhile academic experience.
-Kelby

Individual Presentation

2005-12-12T22:14:00.000-08:00

It has been quite interesting to hear what everybody chose to write their final papers on. The range of topics seems quite impressive, and I only hope that mine can stack up. I was not able to present on Friday, so I thought that I would give a general synopsis of my paper here.
My essay is entitled "House of Pain," and in it I delve into the motives and implications behind the implementation of pain and suffering in the two traditions. From the biblical tradition, I drew from the Book of Job and the Gospel of Luke. The parallel that I was able to draw between these two readings, and specifically from the examples of Job repenting and the example of the lost sheep, was that suffering is administered as a means to bring the wandering strays back into the Lord. In essence, it is a form of purification. From the classical tradition I used the stories of Prometheus and Sisyphus. The interesting thing that I found while examining these two examples was the fact that behind the punishments bestowed upon the unlucky recipients were very humanistic motives, in these cases extraction and pure punishment, respectively. I found this to be an interesting dichotomy from the biblical tradition, in that these examples seemingly presented pagan divinities as exhibiting many human-like characteristics.
All in all, I can say with confidence that I hardly scratched the surface of this extremely broad subject, and the implications that I brought into question were quite obvious. I suppose that this is inherent with an essay of this length, but what are you going to do?

And another thing

2005-11-27T15:21:00.000-08:00

I'm still reviewing for the exam, and I came across yet another point of interest for me. A week ago, Dr. Sexson brought up a Harper's article which addressed the possibility that we are living in a modern-day theodicy. How intriguing, and how very correct. The government of the United States is currently under the complete control (although signs of wear are showing!) of the conservative right. Part in parcel to this groups governmental doctrine is a supposedly deep tie to the Evangelical sect of Christianity. As a result, nearly every political issue is now tainted with a WWJD light. This is all fine and dandy, except for the fact that this is the "Land of the Free," not the "Land of the Christ." Thus, we have human incarnations of Satan (aka Dick Cheney) and his following of minions telling free women in the freest country on earth that they cannot have medical procedures performed, the Air Force Academy facing lawsuits over harassment of non-Christian students and a mass raping of the earth's resources because of the fact that god literally made us "shepherds of the earth, to do with it as we please." We most certainly do live in a modern day theodicy, and if current situations across the globe are at all indicative of what happens when one is in place, then please count me out!

Why pessimism

2005-11-27T14:34:00.000-08:00

In reviewing for test number two, I came across the biblical books of Ecclesiastes and Job again, the books of pessimism. I was then struck with a question: if the bible is a source of meaning and “light” for the Christian religion, then why are these supposedly pessimistic readings included?
After some thought, I was able to come up with two possible conclusions. First, I deemed the bible a source of hope and meaning for the Christian religion. This is no doubt a true statement; after all, many Christian rights follow the bible as if it is a how-to manual for life. WWJD comes to mind here. But then it occurred to me that this how-to manual is goal oriented, as if there is a prize at the end. This prize, at least to the Christian religion, is a place in the Kingdom of God, or Heaven. So perhaps it can be said that the bible is a how-to manual to live life out here on earth, while in mortal form. Looking through this perspective, it might be deduced that many parts in the bible are a description of life on earth, which is certainly a pessimistic one, to say the least. If this is the case, then one could almost make the argument that there aren’t enough books like Job and Ecclesiastes in the bible.
Option number two. This choice is much more simplistic than the first one, for it is simply the assumption that life is hard, and thus there must inherently be moments of pessimism associated with it. After all, the readings of Job and Ecclesiastes don’t do much to boost enthusiasm in the Christian faith. Humans are presented as “mere gad flies,” insignificant playthings for divinities to play with. In the case of Job, for example, God puts Job and his family through unimaginable hardships all for a mere bet. When Job has finally worn his patience to the breaking point and asks God why he has punished him, God’s answer is that his power is incomprehensibly great, and thus who is Job to even question his ways. That’s enough to make me want to go join the choir.
Regardless, I think that the implementations of pessimism that are contained in the books of Job and Ecclesiastes are necessary if the bible is to have any validity at all. I consider myself a bit of a realist, and I think that the stories of troubled times add a degree of realism and believability to the bible as a whole. Anyway, I must continue with my studies. Good luck to everyone!

Ecclesiastes; clearly not written by a contemporary American

2005-11-13T13:11:00.000-08:00

The wisdom in Ecclesiastes is of a very neutral variety. Throughout the reading, the Teacher offers metaphors which consist of contrasting polar opposites, and then places his point somewhere in the middle. There is a time to love, and a time to hate, etc. Above all, the Teacher stresses that humans should eat, drink and be merry, and live their lives in some sort of moderation. This attitude is clearly not applicable to contemporary American society. In the United States today, you're either black or white, for the war or against it, republican or democrat. With these polarized views as our only choices, there is little room left for moderation or the elusive "gray" area. I thought that it was quite funny that although presented as a literal barrage of opposites, Ecclesiastes' main message is one of "gray." Maybe some of the politicians in this country ought to catch up on their biblical reading!

The Oresteia

2005-11-01T19:58:00.000-08:00

I have finally finished reading all three plays, which was quite time consuming, to say the least. I was happy to find, however, that the play proved to be very interesting in that it was a literal showcase of timeless characteristics. I believe that it is this quality of timelessness that makes a work great, and The Oresteia is certainly that. Needless to say, I was surprised to see the many parallels between the story in the plays and stories in contemporary American society-let the displacement brainstorming begin!

A Hellish Experience

2005-10-27T10:10:00.000-07:00

Of the many unpleasant experiences that I have been through, I would only deem the ones which were steeped in agony as being truly "Hellish." I have only experienced a few instances of this sort, but strangely enough, they were all memorable. I have torn my rotator cuff, which has resulted in two surgeries, have snapped my meniscus, which I am reminded of every six months when I get an entirely too-large needle of cortisone injected into the back of my knee, and most memorably, have cut my face up like there is no tomorrow. I say that these-yes, there are two-are the most memorable because they hurt more than the others. The funny thing was that the accidents themselves were not really the painful parts. Rather, it was the medical procedures whose memory still makes me cringe. I will never forget what it feels like to have a deep cut on my face physically spread open, only to have five or six shots of novocaine delivered into the gaping orifice. There have only been two occasions in my life when I have involuntarily cried-a bodily reaction to the extreme pain-and both involved getting my faced sewn back together.

Presentation

2005-10-20T08:44:00.000-07:00

I just hope that everyone out there found our (group three) presentation to be both entertaining and informative. With that said, I just want to say that I was thoroughly impressed with all of the groups that went yesterday-it was way more than what I had expected. I'm already looking forward to all of the other groups tomorrow.

Calasso

2005-10-18T16:58:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading chapter six of Calasso, and I must say that this book certainly contains some dense material. There were a few stories that were told in this chapter, and one of the main ones was the genealogy of Tantalus all the way down through the curse of Atreus. Suffice to say that Calasso went into a little bit more detail than we did in class, but that just helped to make the story interesting.
I found it interesting that the history of Pelops, post getting hacked up by his father, was divided into two major parts; the story of his descendents and the stories of the various talismans. Callasso went into a lot of detail about the story of Pelops' descendents, Atreus and Thyestes. Right off the bat, I was struck by a comment that Callasso made, and I had a "light bulb" moment. This comment stated that "Every story of two is always a story of three: two pairs of hands grab the same thing at the same time and tug in opposite directions." This is undoubtedly true, for if there was no third thing, then the original two would never have had anything to quarrel over. Callasso then took this point a bit further when he asserted that the third object, the golden lamb, was not a gift from the gods which was inserted into the body, but rather a mere object that was to be grabbed and fought over. I found this intriguing because for me, this sense of the physical seems to lesson the value of whatever is being fought over. In other words, because Atreus and Thyestes were not fighting over some divine relic as their father possessed, it would appear that their struggle was somewhat trite and unimportant.
Another interesting point that Calasso brought up in relation to Atreus and Thyestes was his notion of "weighing wrongs." I think that it is a fairly safe assumption to think that most people would consider Thyestes the victim in the story, especially considering how Atreus' "revenge" was really just an attempt to rub victory in his brother's face. Callasso corrects us, though, with his diagramming of each of the brother's sins. It was both brothers, we are reminded, who helped their mother kill their bastard brother and both had been afflicted with the curse that Zeus himself put on the house of Tantalus a couple of generations before. With this information realized, it becomes apparent that neither brother is all that innocent, but rather that they both have blood on their hands. And hence, the killing of Thyestes children loses some significance as a horrible atrocity and instead becomes just another event in some very dramatic lives.

Some more on Frye

2005-10-17T19:44:00.000-07:00

Okay, so it has been awhile since my last post, but I can assure everyone that this is because I have been busy with the copious amounts of school work that I'm faced with everyday. With that said, I would like to continue with Frye's book a little more.
In reading the section entitled "The Furnace," which, incidentally, is my group, I was astonished at the "deepness" of some of the concepts that Frye presented to his readers. And of all of these concepts, the one that jumped out at me the most was the idea of "nothing," or "Nothing," however you look at it. Frye makes the delineation between the two, stating that nothing, with a lower case letter n, is in fact that, nothing. This usage of the word, or rather concept, refers to the fact that there is no thing present. Nothing with a capital N, on the other hand, by the very nature of the English language, refers to something, even though that something is Nothing. Frye adds a bit of clarity to his point by referencing a quote by Bergson which states that, "Existence is a conquest over Nothing," meaning essentially that the fact that we, or anything, exists is proof of the fact that Nothingness, which has been conquered by some existence, is in fact something. To help better understand this idea, which is quite broad, put the lower case n in the upper case's place; this arrangement now states that existence is a conquering of literally nothing at all-it's essentially worthless. It is easy to see why I was so taken aback by this claim; I think it is safe to assume that most people on a sub-Frye level of intellect have probably never contrasted the different forms of the word, even though it quickly becomes clear that the implications of each are radically different from the other.
Frye then continues with this concept by applying it to an archetypal Christian belief which says that God created his eternal self from nothing, the lower case one, and hence replaced it with the upper case one (because he now existed to be compared with). This is dense, to say the least. I can comprehend what Frye is arguing here, but I'm not sure that I am able to fully grasp it. This particular point of his is challenging, and what's more it serves as a line of delineation, so to speak, for Christian believers and non-believers. To profess that God created himself out of an actual non-existent nothing, is to profess a belief in something higher than logic permits; magic, for lack of a better word. Frighteningly enough, this chapter was full of points like this one, but my brain is still working to absorb them. Until next time!

Repetitive parallelism

2005-09-11T15:13:00.000-07:00

This was sort of a tough blog, but as near as I can tell, repetitive parallelism was the style of poetry common to oral storytellers several thousand years ago. The method involves repeating information, often in small couplets. This makes sense for an oral storytelling culture because it is through repetition (its a good thing!) that stories are remembered.

Some notes

2005-09-11T14:58:00.000-07:00

Here are a few of the notes from class thus far.

9-29

Repetition-It's a good thing.
Originary-"it" was there first, and therefore it serves as the model for everything else to follow.
Myth-From Greek word Mythos which means "stories."
-From now on do not use the term "Old Testament"; instead use "Hebrew Bible"

8-31

There are two types of reading:
1. Centripetal-a reader attempts to understand a text by examining it.
2. Centrifugal-a reader brings in outside sources to help understand a text.

9-2

Perfunctory-doing only what is necessary
Theodicy-the actions of God that man cannot explain.
Theocentric- "God"-centered
-Judeo-Christian view
-anthropomorphic

9-7

The four levels of Frye's discourse:
4.Speculative, romantic, mythological, kerygmatic, imagination, metaphorical
3.Ideological/rhetorical
2.conceptual
1.descriptive

-According to Frye, everyone is a plagiarist-to the Bible that is.

Documentary hypothesis

2005-09-11T14:48:00.000-07:00

I found this concept to be quite interesting seeing as how I had never heard about the idea prior to last week. Sadly, I must admit that my experience as a biblical scholar is limited at best, so all of these radical ideas are most intriguing for me-come to think of it, all this "hidden message" and theory about the Bible and its authors is a great point of interest for me; I should look into it more. Anyway, this explanation of who wrote the Bible and when is a radical idea for me. I realized that the Bible was a compilation work written over a period of time, but I never really thought that the identities of potential authors had been hypothesized. I hope that we get to talk about this theory more in future classes.

The Grapes

2005-09-11T14:40:00.000-07:00

Due to the incredibly busy nature of the first couple weeks of school, I haven't had the chance to post any blogs recently, and for this I want everyone to know that I am deeply sorry. Anyway, I googled Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, only to find a whole bunch of sparknotes. Not wanting to spend an afternoon on the internet sorting through crap, I thought I would say a few words about the information that Dr. Sexson passed on to us in class. His knowledge, never ceasing to amaze me, showed itself again on this one. I was astounded to learn of the chain-linked nature of the origin of the famous novel's name. I had no idea about the title's relation to the Battle hymn of the Republic. I was not surprised, however, to find that these words went back a step further to where else but the Bible. Seeing how this is a Bible lit. class, it only made sense. Interesting stuff.

Frye cont.

2005-09-01T20:24:00.000-07:00

I was looking around for some more information on Frye and found an official web site about him.

www.northropfrye.com/aboutfrye.htm

Frye

2005-09-01T19:58:00.000-07:00

I can say that I have had some experience reading Northrop Frye, though that experience lies more in the reading of his views on literary criticism. In Frye's never-failing characteristic style, Words with Power offers the mind about as complex of a puzzle as it can handle. I find myself having to go back and read passages two or three times to really begin to get a grasp on what it is that is trying to be said. Thus far, I have had a particular liking for the section dealing with perception in the reading of a text. To quote, "arrangement means selecting for emphasis, and selecting for emphasis can never be definately right or wrong." Suffice to say that this statement alone could be immidiately and with little thought dumped into the bin of literature labled "heavy." It would seem that Frye is making the argument here that all text, that is words arranged by an author in an effort to gain meaning, are open to as many interpritations as there are readers. Thus said, the supposedly concrete writings of the bible are called into question because like any text, it is merely a bunch of words arranged by a writer(s) in an attempt to develop meaning within a reader. Interesting stuff to say the least; I'll have to read more to see where Frye takes this argument.

Initial Impressions

2005-08-31T14:41:00.000-07:00

So it's the first week of class, and nothing short of hectic would describe it. The process of using my brain in an intellectual manner will no doubt take some time to get used to once again.
Anyway, Doctor Sexson's chosen readings sound quite interesting, beginning with the madman himself, Northrop Frye. I have had Dr. Sexson before, and I look forward to seeing how he puts his unique spin on the material that we read. Northrop Frye calls!