Response; August 23, 2013 Introduction to Art History. “How can that be art?” That, I believe, will always be a question of interest for many critics, or people in general. While some people believe that literally anything could be considered art, others have their own arguments for what may or may not be considered art by societal norms. Oldest proofs of art include cave paintings that may have been done by Neanderthals, which happen to be less evolved hominids, 40,800 years ago (about). At the pinnacle of older art includes artwork from Africa that dates back to 400,000 BCE. After the Prehistoric era came the Ancient era in art history; this era presented human reasoning to observations and produced the earliest naturalistic images of human beings. In comparison, the Middle Ages opened up a pathway for art relating to religion with a focus on Christianity. Art only has options to grow as times change as it has before, although saying that it is changing would be wrong; art is an unchanging thing, just because times change doesn’t mean that something in the past is no longer considered art. Some might argue that, but for the most part everything that was once considered art keeps that definition to this present day. Everything has the potential to be art, but society as a whole does not accept this idea. In today’s society, art is profitable; many people sell and buy art; some artists only paint, sculpt, draw, etc. to make a profit from it. Does this detract from the definition of art? Most people would argue that art is still being created, but if profit is the only reason it is being created doesn’t that take away a special component away? That feels like an age-old question that everyone has opinions geared towards. Beginner’s Guide to the Medieval Period During these times, visual art prospered with religious themes and commissions made by churches. Europe, though, was split down the middle (not exactly) into Western Europe and the Byzantine Empire. While in Western Europe, religious themes thrived and formed more realistic depictions of secular ideas, persons, and stories. The Byzantine Empire was plagued with iconoclasm; Emperor Leo III was against icons because he felt as though they did not follow the Old Testament’s words. Instead they created images of God or other holy figures which many people were against because they felt as though it was idolatry. So, Christian art moved from naturalistic representation to abstraction; these warped versions of holy figures and meanings were not literally naturalistic images of God. (Even though Emperor Leo III and others argued for iconoclasm, the destruction of images and/or hostility toward visual representations in general, God, in Exodus, does instruct humans on how to make three-dimensional representations of angels. The Iconoclastic Controversy lasted for more than one hundred years, but ended in 787. Thoughts Many Christians doubled as artists and pitting them against themselves (making them pick a side because to be an artist creating an icon of a religious figure was sacrilegious in most of the minds of highly ranked churchmen) is wrong, although as times changed Christians are not persecuted for being artists and creating pieces of artwork that depicts God in a fashion that is not considered demeaning. The mere idea that in the past Christians were not allowed to openly express their beliefs through their art is stifling. Coming from a very atheistic family, I personally find some of this information very new because I tended to avoid studying any material that seemed to contain verses from the Bible or highly religious stories that all my classmates seemed to understand or know while I have little to no interest in having knowledge towards religious stories. They are interesting to study now that I’ve become more comfortable with the idea of a belief of God, but in my childhood, it was hard to wrap my head around something that may or may not exist. So, reading about how civil wars broke out over iconoclasm is interesting, odd, and mind-boggling. People blindly honor, avidly love, and worship an entity that has never presented itself outwardly towards the whole public. It really shows so much about the human race and how so many people just want something to believe in, even if that thing is all-powerful, intangible, and vitally dangerous to the human race.
Response; August 30, 2013
“Adolescence”
St. Augustine seemed to be majorly dramatic in his accounts, or confessions as he properly used and titled his autobiographical work. There was a lack of rawness that the writing was in need of, in heavy doses. Instead, the work seemed to be peppered with vivid stories of times he felt guilt, but there was an underlying emotion that made it seem like he did not feel the guilt that he should have, so in order to subject himself to feeling guilt he retold his life stories, calling attention to how he felt in the moment, and in the moment that he wrote these accounts. Religion might have been the purpose for the autobiography, but once it was started, he seemed to use it as an outlet for emotions that he wish he felt in the moment that he was committing the sinful acts, such as stealing the pear.
“Confessions”
This dramatization of conversion was almost too much for me. Instead of making it a believable account, St. Augustine had a way with making things seem too vivid, as though he were piecing together memories and adding in details that he thought made it better. The pure emotions that he poured out into the autobiography seemed as though he remember them too clearly. Either he had an impressive memory, or an impressive talent for using words.
“The Consolation of Philosophy”
My initial thoughts about this piece of literature involve how beautifully it is pieced together. The transfer from poem to prose is invigoratingly peaceful; it makes the story all the more interesting. The godliness of Philosophy, and the humanizing of her emotions and thoughts showed the depth of Boethius’ mind; he was an impressive philosopher, who believed strongly in Philosophy, but also seemed to hold the muses of poetry close to them, as they comforted him.
“The Qu’ran”
“The Qu’ran” puts emphasis on humankind committing good deeds and offering prayers to Allah regularly.
Response; September 13, 2013
Dante, Inferno (Canto I-V)
Dante introduces the story to the readers by putting us with the character of Dante into “The Dark Wood.” In this wood, there live three beasts that are the embodiment of sin; these creatures impede Dante from climbing the hill that he thought his path lead to. This is where Virgil, someone Dante looks up to, stops him and tells him of his true pathway: through the descent into Hell. Dante’s Hell is a cone-like structure that holds people based off what they could be held accountable for, e.g., sins. Beatrice, Dante’s love from Heaven, was sent by Saint Lucia (who the Virgin Mary asked for) to attend to Dante by means of calling upon Virgil to be his guide in this journey. Dante enters Hell and must go through the first circle: Limbo. Here are where the pagans or unbaptized reside; here, Dante talks with four of the greatest classical poets and puts Virgil and himself into their company making six of the greatest. In Limbo, he is also introduced to scholars and other academics. In Canto V, Dante enters the second circle where the lustful reside; it is a place of total darkness, wherein they must pay for their crimes of not being able to control themselves by being blown around and mixed up. It is here that Dante hears the lamentations of Paolo and Francesca da Rimini and pities them. Then he faints.
Dante, Inferno (Canto VI-XI)
I’ve noticed that in Dante’s work, he uses many popularly known names in Greek mythology, such as Cerberus and Medusa, while also using many Italian names, and names of those from the Bible. In the oddest way, he seems to be combining some aspects of mythology characters into his work. My knowledge of Greek myths helps me to understand the reasons they are located where they are located in Hell, but it is really odd that they seem to be thrown into the Inferno with a variety of others.
September 20, 2013
Dante, Inferno (Canto XIX-XXIX)
These parts of Inferno were increasingly morbid and graphic; the imagery was strong and grotesque as the torments grow worse. Ulysses is burnt alongside Diomedes in a double flame forevermore. The next part of Hell was full of those suffering from some type of disease that made them scratch at themselves until they bled. The “Sowers of Discord and Schism” have one of the most graphic scenes as they are walking about with gashes; as shades, you would think that the punishments inflicted upon them would be less physical, but these punishments seem to be working just as well as anything else.
Dante, Inferno (Canto XXX-XXXIV)
Circle nine being cold and housing not only shades, but souls of those whose bodies still roam the earth with demons placed inside of them is a very morbid thought. Dante, the character, seems to have become frosty in his mood and instead of having pity for any of these shades, he believes that they deserve everything they are receiving down inside of this, the lowest, circle. Those who committed treachery are looked down upon as some of the worst beings. Demons inhabiting bodies seems to be the most interesting concept, aside from Satan’s appearance though. Do these demons cause havoc and mayhem on Earth, or do they simply have an existence because they are given a chance to escape from Hell, if only for a couple years? I would think they would take advantage of their “vacation” and be on good behavior, but do demons understand how to be “good”? The souls that inhabited the bodies that are now being taken over seem to have taken their existence for granted and this is the most fitting punishment for them. For their treachery, they lose their “home,” their shell: the one thing that allowed them to walk Earth freely and commit the sins they are punished for.
Response; September 27, 2013
“The Canterbury Tales”
The Tale of the Wife of Bath (Prologue) sparked interesting conversation in class; the Wife had the courage to challenge the Church Fathers which in itself was a feat. Her own thoughts on virginity, remarriage, marriage in general, and power in relationships were well thought out, if a little personal. From personal experience, she was able to refute the arguments about societal norms during her time. She had been a wife and a widow: having five husbands had given her knowledge and insight to the inner workings of relationships. Her opinion on remarriage was that God never dictated the number of spouses on could have in their lifetime, plus God made people to reproduce. Her argument includes that if everyone was a virgin, then there would be no possibility of the population increasing. Virgins cannot produce virgins, instead, married couples are the ones who produce the virgins that are needed (or thought to be needed).
Her thoughts also include thinking the women are holding the real power in relationships. The Wife believes that the women are capable of being wiser, and stronger than men: with the ability to also lie their way through anything (and lie through anything). She also believes that marriage is necessary; although some of the Church Fathers believe that people should remain single, but she clearly believes that people should get married. God never says it is a sin to marry, and the Wife points this out.
This tale was interesting, but overall, I really did not enjoy it as I have the other pieces of work that I have read in this class. It sounds interesting to read The Canterbury Tales in its entirety to see how each part works together (especially after hearing what was said about the Oxford student telling a story in reply).
Response; October 4, 2013
Sir Thomas More, Utopia
In the “conclusion” of Utopia there is a very interesting concept brought up that I myself have thought of oftentimes: the absence of money. Money seems to be the root of most evil, although many pop lyrics consider “money is the reason we exist; everyone knows it’s a fact.” I agree wholeheartedly with Raphael in the thoughts that without the invention of money, things would have went by much better; cleaner, than with money as our society is going now. Greed, envy, etc, can all stem from the absence or presence of money. Barter and trade could have continued without money; the same inventions would have come about. The only thing that I can say positively towards money is that it does allow the regulation of products, although products could have easily been regulated other ways.
The concept of marriage is another topic from Utopia that I found incredibly interesting. I do not seem to share the same agreements, but someone who believes in “true love” should not believe in it. Well, there is a fine line – the privacy of seeing a naked body, or at least in today’s society, would be wrong. I do not believe that it is right for that to make or break a relationship. BUT the Utopians do discuss STDs and the presence of them being a factor. Since they do not pursue marriage because of “true love,” they should worry about the presence of STIs or STDs because this is the partner they will be stuck with for their whole life, unless adultery is committed. Divorce is looked down highly upon in Utopia and it hardly happens. They also believe wholeheartedly in monogamous relationships when human nature just sometimes does not allow that; polyamorous is an actual state and many people find it difficult and uncomfortable to be a monogamous relationship, or any relationship at all. Utopia seems to pressure the citizens to be perfect, when in fact humans are entirely too imperfect to ever succeed perfection.
Response; October 11, 2013
Essay plans Your first idea is definitely workable. I'm interested in finding out why you think Machiavelli is not relevant today. -MH
I work off the panic-contingent in place of the time-contingent plans because I tend not to care too much for writing essays, although I am considered quite good at tackling essays in unique ways; therefore, I am not sure definitely of my plans for the essay, but am definitely sure that I will know before Wednesday.
Writing a paper in way of creative response intrigues me as a creative writers, and I was thinking of tackling that one first because the subject matter I want to have involved is something we have gone over recently. You know, the more prevalent something is in your mind, the more likely that will be your topic of interest. I was thinking about going the route of creatively arguing how “The Prince” is not relevant in today’s world. I was going to do this by way of short story, although I have not put into much thought aside from some characterization and here and there notes in my Humanities notebook. “The Prince” is a work that I marvel over constantly – we had to read the whole book and go over Machiavellian principle in detail in my high school, so it was refreshing to read something so familiar, but this time the load was lightened. If not a short story, then I would most likely write it as a movie/play script. Either way setting up a fictional scenario featuring dialogue.
I’m ruddy at comparing works, but I was thinking about comparing “The Prince” and “Utopia,” emphasizing their differences, but I am strongly leaning towards the first idea if that is okayed by you. Sorry for the ambiguous wall of text that makes it seem like I have no idea what I am doing, when in fact I have a slight clue of what I might be doing.
Response; October 25, 2013
Newscast
Our readings this week all boiled down to being about native/foreign peoples and their interactions with the already “established” peoples (Spanish, etc.). Of Cannibals was a very interesting piece that actually brought up reasonable ideas, such as the thought they we only think something is barbaric because it is unknown to us; if it isn’t our norm, then we are unsure about the behavior and usually label it as barbaric if it isn’t within the guidelines of what we believe to be correct and just. That’s interesting because normally we don’t think that somewhere else in the world something could be normal to those people and completely wrong to us because of the way it is executed. Maybe they are the ones who think we are barbaric because of some of our actions.
The newscasts were a creative way to discuss these readings and get a better understanding of how our classmates understood and interpreted the readings. It ensured that the groups worked together and each group member put thought into the script and made sure to read the covered material so that they would have a better understanding of what they were speaking about. I felt as though I was exposed to a very unique way of learning that kept me entertained and in the moment. The different positions that all the groups took was very enlightening to me especially given how much freedom was allowed. You allowed us to pick what we side we wanted to be on and how we would present that side, allowing us to satirize it too if that is what we wanted to do. It was a very enjoyable experience that I would definitely partake in again because it got the whole class involved in an activity that was interesting and informative.
Response; November 1, 2013
“An Essay on Man”
This philosophical piece was extraordinarily well-written and drew me in unlike other philosophical pieces that I’ve read in the past that have turned me away from the topic at hand because the idea they were presenting seemed unbelievable (or at least against my beliefs). This work though was focused on an absolute truth: “whatever is, is right;” although I don’t necessarily agree with what he might be trying to convey here, I do draw my own meaning from these passages. “Whatever is, is right” seems to be saying that because life is flowing a certain way, there is no better way for things to be happening because whatever happening is the correct thing: the thing that was meant to happen from the moment of conception. It is like saying that everyone has a destiny that leads them from choice to choice, but whatever happens is what was supposed to happen because this theory also would hold that the destiny of these people would be plotted and planned out. Even the “wrong” decisions would be considered correct because that is what is.
I was impressed with the author’s mode of thinking, however obvious it was that he believed in a higher power: God, he still made it obvious that people are given the illusion of free will. All of “God’s children” are believed to have the ability to make a choice between something simple like what to have for breakfast, but whatever decision they make, it was already known because it was a minor part of their destiny to wake up that Sunday morning and eat eggs instead of cereal and read the paper instead of watch television. People are only given the illusion of free will because the harsh reality of being unable to control anything drives some people absolutely mad. This may just be a theory, but it is a very well thought out theory. “Whatever is, is right” just might be a harsh reality.
Response; November 8, 2013
“Candide”
Having read Candide in my high school honors course, I am already familiar with interpreting Voltaire’s writings and analyzing them. This wasn’t particularly my favorite thing to study, although Voltaire does happen to be one of my favorite authors. The way he satirizes items makes him an entertaining read. In class, we have had interesting discussions on the topic of Candide and the various characters. Although I have been neglecting my reading (not putting it off completely, but not reading through everything avidly), I have been up-to-date with what we have been talking about in class.
Something we only hit on briefly in class was Leibniz and how Voltaire satirizes him; Leibniz is someone who I look up to as a philosopher because he touches on the illusion of free will, but also on the whole issue of metaphysics which has always been an interesting topic for me. Although this isn’t supposed to be a critical account of Leibniz, I found myself looking more and more into his ideas. He is a very brilliant philosopher. The fact that Voltaire satirizes him for one reason or another is almost unsettling, but I have too much respect for both of these deceased men and their talents.
Leibniz had this idea of monads, which are entirely like souls in many ways; people are connected by this network of monads and he goes even further into the functioning of metaphysics which I find incredibly exciting and interesting.
Touching back on Candide, I am excited for the group mini-project that we are going to complete. Especially if it will resemble the news broadcast one.
Response; November 15, 2013
Essay #2
For this proposition, I was thinking about comparing “An Essay on Man” by Alexander Pope with “Candide” by Voltaire. These are both philosophical pieces that have both similarities and differences, but I feel as though it would be more pertinent to point out the similarities in these writings. Voltaire’s writing is very much satirical, which contrasts sharply with Pope’s “An Essay on Man” which may be one of the reasons I feel like comparing them instead of contrasting them; the contrast is already so strong that I feel like similarities should be drawn. These similarities may make “An Essay on Man” seem less credible, especially when compared to a satirical piece of work, but this doesn’t necessarily mean that Pope was exactly wrong in his writings.
I have yet to start writing this, so I hope it will work out in the way I am thinking. For now, I am going through “Candide” and trying to find the parts where I want to draw similarities, or finding points that I want to touch on. Because I have already used my creative prompt, I will be writing this in strictly essay-esque terms.
“An Essay on Man” will be my main focus because it strictly enforces one type of philosophical view, while “Candide” touches on more than one viewpoint. There are many paths I could go with this, but I feel as though I shouldn’t place all the attention onto “Candide.”
Once I begin writing this essay, I will have a clearer view of where exactly I will go with it, but for now I am surely going to try to compare these two pieces of work.
Kayla, these are good texts to compare. I'm interested to find out what similarities you see between them. I can see similarities in the questions they tackle, but the methods of addressing them and the conclusions are very different. -MH
Response; December 6, 2013
Classical Music
This week we have gone over classical music and its components. Mozart, an important classical musician was one of our topics for discussion on several occasions because of his musical prowess and genius. Mozart has the knack for producing a type of melody that is sing-able and catchy. Listening to classical music has given me insight on listening to the differences that baroque and classical have to offer. While baroque seems to be like a grand gesture: very loud, dynamic, and capable of stunning audiences, while seemingly fitting for a ballroom party; classical is uplifting, light, and quite enjoyable for listening outside or while dining.
Mozart had a knack for composing some of the best classical pieces of music; his compositions painted extravagant pictures of different scenes that interested listeners. Clearly, as some of his greatest pieces of music are still played today while people study or dine.
Another interesting thing in the class was that classical music can be likened to pop music because they both almost came out of nowhere, but happened at once and was enjoyed popularly. Everything about the classical era seemed to be enjoyable for many people’s ears. The popularity of the music carried on to today, even though it may not have the same definition, sometimes they have similar sounds or they are able to sound completely different and yet still retain components that make it a classical piece of music.
Introduction to Art History.
“How can that be art?” That, I believe, will always be a question of interest for many critics, or people in general. While some people believe that literally anything could be considered art, others have their own arguments for what may or may not be considered art by societal norms. Oldest proofs of art include cave paintings that may have been done by Neanderthals, which happen to be less evolved hominids, 40,800 years ago (about). At the pinnacle of older art includes artwork from Africa that dates back to 400,000 BCE. After the Prehistoric era came the Ancient era in art history; this era presented human reasoning to observations and produced the earliest naturalistic images of human beings. In comparison, the Middle Ages opened up a pathway for art relating to religion with a focus on Christianity. Art only has options to grow as times change as it has before, although saying that it is changing would be wrong; art is an unchanging thing, just because times change doesn’t mean that something in the past is no longer considered art. Some might argue that, but for the most part everything that was once considered art keeps that definition to this present day. Everything has the potential to be art, but society as a whole does not accept this idea. In today’s society, art is profitable; many people sell and buy art; some artists only paint, sculpt, draw, etc. to make a profit from it. Does this detract from the definition of art? Most people would argue that art is still being created, but if profit is the only reason it is being created doesn’t that take away a special component away? That feels like an age-old question that everyone has opinions geared towards.
Beginner’s Guide to the Medieval Period
During these times, visual art prospered with religious themes and commissions made by churches. Europe, though, was split down the middle (not exactly) into Western Europe and the Byzantine Empire. While in Western Europe, religious themes thrived and formed more realistic depictions of secular ideas, persons, and stories. The Byzantine Empire was plagued with iconoclasm; Emperor Leo III was against icons because he felt as though they did not follow the Old Testament’s words. Instead they created images of God or other holy figures which many people were against because they felt as though it was idolatry. So, Christian art moved from naturalistic representation to abstraction; these warped versions of holy figures and meanings were not literally naturalistic images of God. (Even though Emperor Leo III and others argued for iconoclasm, the destruction of images and/or hostility toward visual representations in general, God, in Exodus, does instruct humans on how to make three-dimensional representations of angels. The Iconoclastic Controversy lasted for more than one hundred years, but ended in 787.
Thoughts
Many Christians doubled as artists and pitting them against themselves (making them pick a side because to be an artist creating an icon of a religious figure was sacrilegious in most of the minds of highly ranked churchmen) is wrong, although as times changed Christians are not persecuted for being artists and creating pieces of artwork that depicts God in a fashion that is not considered demeaning. The mere idea that in the past Christians were not allowed to openly express their beliefs through their art is stifling.
Coming from a very atheistic family, I personally find some of this information very new because I tended to avoid studying any material that seemed to contain verses from the Bible or highly religious stories that all my classmates seemed to understand or know while I have little to no interest in having knowledge towards religious stories. They are interesting to study now that I’ve become more comfortable with the idea of a belief of God, but in my childhood, it was hard to wrap my head around something that may or may not exist. So, reading about how civil wars broke out over iconoclasm is interesting, odd, and mind-boggling. People blindly honor, avidly love, and worship an entity that has never presented itself outwardly towards the whole public. It really shows so much about the human race and how so many people just want something to believe in, even if that thing is all-powerful, intangible, and vitally dangerous to the human race.
Response; August 30, 2013
“Adolescence”
St. Augustine seemed to be majorly dramatic in his accounts, or confessions as he properly used and titled his autobiographical work. There was a lack of rawness that the writing was in need of, in heavy doses. Instead, the work seemed to be peppered with vivid stories of times he felt guilt, but there was an underlying emotion that made it seem like he did not feel the guilt that he should have, so in order to subject himself to feeling guilt he retold his life stories, calling attention to how he felt in the moment, and in the moment that he wrote these accounts. Religion might have been the purpose for the autobiography, but once it was started, he seemed to use it as an outlet for emotions that he wish he felt in the moment that he was committing the sinful acts, such as stealing the pear.
“Confessions”
This dramatization of conversion was almost too much for me. Instead of making it a believable account, St. Augustine had a way with making things seem too vivid, as though he were piecing together memories and adding in details that he thought made it better. The pure emotions that he poured out into the autobiography seemed as though he remember them too clearly. Either he had an impressive memory, or an impressive talent for using words.
“The Consolation of Philosophy”
My initial thoughts about this piece of literature involve how beautifully it is pieced together. The transfer from poem to prose is invigoratingly peaceful; it makes the story all the more interesting. The godliness of Philosophy, and the humanizing of her emotions and thoughts showed the depth of Boethius’ mind; he was an impressive philosopher, who believed strongly in Philosophy, but also seemed to hold the muses of poetry close to them, as they comforted him.
“The Qu’ran”
“The Qu’ran” puts emphasis on humankind committing good deeds and offering prayers to Allah regularly.
Response; September 13, 2013
Dante, Inferno (Canto I-V)
Dante introduces the story to the readers by putting us with the character of Dante into “The Dark Wood.” In this wood, there live three beasts that are the embodiment of sin; these creatures impede Dante from climbing the hill that he thought his path lead to. This is where Virgil, someone Dante looks up to, stops him and tells him of his true pathway: through the descent into Hell. Dante’s Hell is a cone-like structure that holds people based off what they could be held accountable for, e.g., sins. Beatrice, Dante’s love from Heaven, was sent by Saint Lucia (who the Virgin Mary asked for) to attend to Dante by means of calling upon Virgil to be his guide in this journey. Dante enters Hell and must go through the first circle: Limbo. Here are where the pagans or unbaptized reside; here, Dante talks with four of the greatest classical poets and puts Virgil and himself into their company making six of the greatest. In Limbo, he is also introduced to scholars and other academics. In Canto V, Dante enters the second circle where the lustful reside; it is a place of total darkness, wherein they must pay for their crimes of not being able to control themselves by being blown around and mixed up. It is here that Dante hears the lamentations of Paolo and Francesca da Rimini and pities them. Then he faints.
Dante, Inferno (Canto VI-XI)
I’ve noticed that in Dante’s work, he uses many popularly known names in Greek mythology, such as Cerberus and Medusa, while also using many Italian names, and names of those from the Bible. In the oddest way, he seems to be combining some aspects of mythology characters into his work. My knowledge of Greek myths helps me to understand the reasons they are located where they are located in Hell, but it is really odd that they seem to be thrown into the Inferno with a variety of others.
September 20, 2013
Dante, Inferno (Canto XIX-XXIX)
These parts of Inferno were increasingly morbid and graphic; the imagery was strong and grotesque as the torments grow worse. Ulysses is burnt alongside Diomedes in a double flame forevermore. The next part of Hell was full of those suffering from some type of disease that made them scratch at themselves until they bled. The “Sowers of Discord and Schism” have one of the most graphic scenes as they are walking about with gashes; as shades, you would think that the punishments inflicted upon them would be less physical, but these punishments seem to be working just as well as anything else.
Dante, Inferno (Canto XXX-XXXIV)
Circle nine being cold and housing not only shades, but souls of those whose bodies still roam the earth with demons placed inside of them is a very morbid thought. Dante, the character, seems to have become frosty in his mood and instead of having pity for any of these shades, he believes that they deserve everything they are receiving down inside of this, the lowest, circle. Those who committed treachery are looked down upon as some of the worst beings. Demons inhabiting bodies seems to be the most interesting concept, aside from Satan’s appearance though. Do these demons cause havoc and mayhem on Earth, or do they simply have an existence because they are given a chance to escape from Hell, if only for a couple years? I would think they would take advantage of their “vacation” and be on good behavior, but do demons understand how to be “good”? The souls that inhabited the bodies that are now being taken over seem to have taken their existence for granted and this is the most fitting punishment for them. For their treachery, they lose their “home,” their shell: the one thing that allowed them to walk Earth freely and commit the sins they are punished for.
Response; September 27, 2013
“The Canterbury Tales”
The Tale of the Wife of Bath (Prologue) sparked interesting conversation in class; the Wife had the courage to challenge the Church Fathers which in itself was a feat. Her own thoughts on virginity, remarriage, marriage in general, and power in relationships were well thought out, if a little personal. From personal experience, she was able to refute the arguments about societal norms during her time. She had been a wife and a widow: having five husbands had given her knowledge and insight to the inner workings of relationships. Her opinion on remarriage was that God never dictated the number of spouses on could have in their lifetime, plus God made people to reproduce. Her argument includes that if everyone was a virgin, then there would be no possibility of the population increasing. Virgins cannot produce virgins, instead, married couples are the ones who produce the virgins that are needed (or thought to be needed).
Her thoughts also include thinking the women are holding the real power in relationships. The Wife believes that the women are capable of being wiser, and stronger than men: with the ability to also lie their way through anything (and lie through anything). She also believes that marriage is necessary; although some of the Church Fathers believe that people should remain single, but she clearly believes that people should get married. God never says it is a sin to marry, and the Wife points this out.
This tale was interesting, but overall, I really did not enjoy it as I have the other pieces of work that I have read in this class. It sounds interesting to read The Canterbury Tales in its entirety to see how each part works together (especially after hearing what was said about the Oxford student telling a story in reply).
Response; October 4, 2013
Sir Thomas More, Utopia
In the “conclusion” of Utopia there is a very interesting concept brought up that I myself have thought of oftentimes: the absence of money. Money seems to be the root of most evil, although many pop lyrics consider “money is the reason we exist; everyone knows it’s a fact.” I agree wholeheartedly with Raphael in the thoughts that without the invention of money, things would have went by much better; cleaner, than with money as our society is going now. Greed, envy, etc, can all stem from the absence or presence of money. Barter and trade could have continued without money; the same inventions would have come about. The only thing that I can say positively towards money is that it does allow the regulation of products, although products could have easily been regulated other ways.
The concept of marriage is another topic from Utopia that I found incredibly interesting. I do not seem to share the same agreements, but someone who believes in “true love” should not believe in it. Well, there is a fine line – the privacy of seeing a naked body, or at least in today’s society, would be wrong. I do not believe that it is right for that to make or break a relationship. BUT the Utopians do discuss STDs and the presence of them being a factor. Since they do not pursue marriage because of “true love,” they should worry about the presence of STIs or STDs because this is the partner they will be stuck with for their whole life, unless adultery is committed. Divorce is looked down highly upon in Utopia and it hardly happens. They also believe wholeheartedly in monogamous relationships when human nature just sometimes does not allow that; polyamorous is an actual state and many people find it difficult and uncomfortable to be a monogamous relationship, or any relationship at all. Utopia seems to pressure the citizens to be perfect, when in fact humans are entirely too imperfect to ever succeed perfection.
Response; October 11, 2013
Essay plans
Your first idea is definitely workable. I'm interested in finding out why you think Machiavelli is not relevant today. -MH
I work off the panic-contingent in place of the time-contingent plans because I tend not to care too much for writing essays, although I am considered quite good at tackling essays in unique ways; therefore, I am not sure definitely of my plans for the essay, but am definitely sure that I will know before Wednesday.
Writing a paper in way of creative response intrigues me as a creative writers, and I was thinking of tackling that one first because the subject matter I want to have involved is something we have gone over recently. You know, the more prevalent something is in your mind, the more likely that will be your topic of interest. I was thinking about going the route of creatively arguing how “The Prince” is not relevant in today’s world. I was going to do this by way of short story, although I have not put into much thought aside from some characterization and here and there notes in my Humanities notebook. “The Prince” is a work that I marvel over constantly – we had to read the whole book and go over Machiavellian principle in detail in my high school, so it was refreshing to read something so familiar, but this time the load was lightened. If not a short story, then I would most likely write it as a movie/play script. Either way setting up a fictional scenario featuring dialogue.
I’m ruddy at comparing works, but I was thinking about comparing “The Prince” and “Utopia,” emphasizing their differences, but I am strongly leaning towards the first idea if that is okayed by you. Sorry for the ambiguous wall of text that makes it seem like I have no idea what I am doing, when in fact I have a slight clue of what I might be doing.
Response; October 25, 2013
Newscast
Our readings this week all boiled down to being about native/foreign peoples and their interactions with the already “established” peoples (Spanish, etc.). Of Cannibals was a very interesting piece that actually brought up reasonable ideas, such as the thought they we only think something is barbaric because it is unknown to us; if it isn’t our norm, then we are unsure about the behavior and usually label it as barbaric if it isn’t within the guidelines of what we believe to be correct and just. That’s interesting because normally we don’t think that somewhere else in the world something could be normal to those people and completely wrong to us because of the way it is executed. Maybe they are the ones who think we are barbaric because of some of our actions.
The newscasts were a creative way to discuss these readings and get a better understanding of how our classmates understood and interpreted the readings. It ensured that the groups worked together and each group member put thought into the script and made sure to read the covered material so that they would have a better understanding of what they were speaking about. I felt as though I was exposed to a very unique way of learning that kept me entertained and in the moment. The different positions that all the groups took was very enlightening to me especially given how much freedom was allowed. You allowed us to pick what we side we wanted to be on and how we would present that side, allowing us to satirize it too if that is what we wanted to do. It was a very enjoyable experience that I would definitely partake in again because it got the whole class involved in an activity that was interesting and informative.
Response; November 1, 2013
“An Essay on Man”
This philosophical piece was extraordinarily well-written and drew me in unlike other philosophical pieces that I’ve read in the past that have turned me away from the topic at hand because the idea they were presenting seemed unbelievable (or at least against my beliefs). This work though was focused on an absolute truth: “whatever is, is right;” although I don’t necessarily agree with what he might be trying to convey here, I do draw my own meaning from these passages. “Whatever is, is right” seems to be saying that because life is flowing a certain way, there is no better way for things to be happening because whatever happening is the correct thing: the thing that was meant to happen from the moment of conception. It is like saying that everyone has a destiny that leads them from choice to choice, but whatever happens is what was supposed to happen because this theory also would hold that the destiny of these people would be plotted and planned out. Even the “wrong” decisions would be considered correct because that is what is.
I was impressed with the author’s mode of thinking, however obvious it was that he believed in a higher power: God, he still made it obvious that people are given the illusion of free will. All of “God’s children” are believed to have the ability to make a choice between something simple like what to have for breakfast, but whatever decision they make, it was already known because it was a minor part of their destiny to wake up that Sunday morning and eat eggs instead of cereal and read the paper instead of watch television. People are only given the illusion of free will because the harsh reality of being unable to control anything drives some people absolutely mad. This may just be a theory, but it is a very well thought out theory. “Whatever is, is right” just might be a harsh reality.
Response; November 8, 2013
“Candide”
Having read Candide in my high school honors course, I am already familiar with interpreting Voltaire’s writings and analyzing them. This wasn’t particularly my favorite thing to study, although Voltaire does happen to be one of my favorite authors. The way he satirizes items makes him an entertaining read. In class, we have had interesting discussions on the topic of Candide and the various characters. Although I have been neglecting my reading (not putting it off completely, but not reading through everything avidly), I have been up-to-date with what we have been talking about in class.
Something we only hit on briefly in class was Leibniz and how Voltaire satirizes him; Leibniz is someone who I look up to as a philosopher because he touches on the illusion of free will, but also on the whole issue of metaphysics which has always been an interesting topic for me. Although this isn’t supposed to be a critical account of Leibniz, I found myself looking more and more into his ideas. He is a very brilliant philosopher. The fact that Voltaire satirizes him for one reason or another is almost unsettling, but I have too much respect for both of these deceased men and their talents.
Leibniz had this idea of monads, which are entirely like souls in many ways; people are connected by this network of monads and he goes even further into the functioning of metaphysics which I find incredibly exciting and interesting.
Touching back on Candide, I am excited for the group mini-project that we are going to complete. Especially if it will resemble the news broadcast one.
Response; November 15, 2013
Essay #2
For this proposition, I was thinking about comparing “An Essay on Man” by Alexander Pope with “Candide” by Voltaire. These are both philosophical pieces that have both similarities and differences, but I feel as though it would be more pertinent to point out the similarities in these writings. Voltaire’s writing is very much satirical, which contrasts sharply with Pope’s “An Essay on Man” which may be one of the reasons I feel like comparing them instead of contrasting them; the contrast is already so strong that I feel like similarities should be drawn. These similarities may make “An Essay on Man” seem less credible, especially when compared to a satirical piece of work, but this doesn’t necessarily mean that Pope was exactly wrong in his writings.
I have yet to start writing this, so I hope it will work out in the way I am thinking. For now, I am going through “Candide” and trying to find the parts where I want to draw similarities, or finding points that I want to touch on. Because I have already used my creative prompt, I will be writing this in strictly essay-esque terms.
“An Essay on Man” will be my main focus because it strictly enforces one type of philosophical view, while “Candide” touches on more than one viewpoint. There are many paths I could go with this, but I feel as though I shouldn’t place all the attention onto “Candide.”
Once I begin writing this essay, I will have a clearer view of where exactly I will go with it, but for now I am surely going to try to compare these two pieces of work.
Kayla, these are good texts to compare. I'm interested to find out what similarities you see between them. I can see similarities in the questions they tackle, but the methods of addressing them and the conclusions are very different. -MH
Response; December 6, 2013
Classical Music
This week we have gone over classical music and its components. Mozart, an important classical musician was one of our topics for discussion on several occasions because of his musical prowess and genius. Mozart has the knack for producing a type of melody that is sing-able and catchy. Listening to classical music has given me insight on listening to the differences that baroque and classical have to offer. While baroque seems to be like a grand gesture: very loud, dynamic, and capable of stunning audiences, while seemingly fitting for a ballroom party; classical is uplifting, light, and quite enjoyable for listening outside or while dining.
Mozart had a knack for composing some of the best classical pieces of music; his compositions painted extravagant pictures of different scenes that interested listeners. Clearly, as some of his greatest pieces of music are still played today while people study or dine.
Another interesting thing in the class was that classical music can be likened to pop music because they both almost came out of nowhere, but happened at once and was enjoyed popularly. Everything about the classical era seemed to be enjoyable for many people’s ears. The popularity of the music carried on to today, even though it may not have the same definition, sometimes they have similar sounds or they are able to sound completely different and yet still retain components that make it a classical piece of music.