(8/23/2013)
Throughout Junior High and High School, many of us became used to history classes that throw names, dates, and dry facts at you. All of this information is given to the student for the sole purpose of regurgitation. The history class that asks the student what he or she thinks about the material is rare. The discussion-based lecture in this course is unique in that we are not only required to think for ourselves, but we get to hear what others in the class are thinking. This results in a more enriching and diverse classroom experience.
Looking at how artwork evolves in form, subject matter, and content throughout the ages is interesting. How an artist chooses to depict his or her subject matter is indicative of the social attitudes and worldviews of people in that time period. Why did Renaissance artists choose to put more emphasis on individuals in their paintings and gravitate more towards everyday life than religious themes? Why do paintings of the Crucifixion and its aftermath seem to vary greatly in tone based on what time period they come from? These are the questions that we answered as a class.
To highlight the stark contrast between art from different periods, we looked at two works showing the nativity. One was from medieval times, the other from the Renaissance. The dominant impression of the medieval work was solemn. No single figure tends to stick out to the viewer as unique. This suggests that the subject was far more important than the people. They are simply props. The work from the Renaissance seems to radiate warmth when placed side by side with the other painting. It is populated by individuals rather than clones. This is a perfect example of the Renaissance artist's concern with humanity and realism.
Being told how people from a certain time period lived and thought is pointless and likely to leave a fleeting impression of the era at best. Seeing what was important to them through artwork is a much better way to construct a lasting mental picture. I look forward to exploring history in this manner for the rest of the semester.
(8/30/2013)
This week, we started out discussing St. Augustine’s Confessions. What I found most interesting about the reading was that this work is considered to be the first autobiographical piece in Western culture. It is not surprising that it is very religious in nature, considering the period in which it was written. The Christian Church had much influence in the Roman Empire at this time. Augustine spends a lot of time admonishing himself for the sins he committed in the past, especially in his youth. It is important to note that he did not have as much of a problem with the nature of his alleged crimes as he did with his motivation to commit them. Augustine clearly had an obsession with analyzing his state of mind during his days of delinquency, otherwise he would not ramble on for pages and pages about several basketfuls of stolen pears. “My feasting was only on the wickedness which I took pleasure in enjoying,” he says. “The theft itself was a nothing,” he claims, highlighting the “foulness” and “carnal corruptions” that motivated the theft.
Despite the fact that Augustine’s Confessions is about the redeeming power of God, and he spends much time pointing out his flaws, he shifts the blame for his behavior quite a bit. At one point he mentions the fact that he would not have stolen the pears had it not been for his friends. He also manages to blame his promiscuity on his parents. His father, he says, would turn a blind eye when he engage in sexual activity because he wanted to have grandchildren. It seems odd to me that Augustine would be so eager to have others to blame in his own grand confession. Is St. Augustine’s Confessions really as genuine as one might think?
Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophy, like St. Augustine’s Confessions, is largely religious. The key difference between the two is the emphasis that Boethius puts on philosophy. There is a balance between philosophical elements and religious influence, whereas St. Augustine is more concerned with God. Boethius converses with “Lady Philosophy” about good VS. evil, happiness, fate, and fortune.
In our third reading, we were assigned to study a segment of the Qur’an. I found it very eye opening because I was not expecting to see so many similarities between Islam and sects of the Judeo-Christian faith. I would have to disagree with many of the statements made in class about how radically different Islam is from Christianity. I grew up in a very religious household. The Bible was a very big part of my childhood. Within the Qur’an I found many things that seem to mirror Christian beliefs. In the introduction, it was mentioned that wealthy Meccan merchants were threatened by Muhammad’s preaching of generosity. It is reminiscent of Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees and Sadducees, and the turning of the tables in the temple. The detailed rules regarding property ownership, the role of women in the home and society, inheritance, and sexuality seemed to come off as strange to many people during class discussion. The Bible, however, contains very similar rules in the books of Leviticus and Numbers. Theses passages are mostly ignored by mainstream Christianity because they are no longer culturally relevant. The passage discussing the believers being on God’s right hand and the nonbelievers on his left is very similar to the sorting of the saved and unsaved in the Book of Revelation. To me, the most striking aspect of the text was the one regarding righteousness. “Righteousness does not consist in entering your dwellings from the back. The righteous man is he that fears God.” This is similar to the Christian concept of Salvation. John 3:16 states that “whoever believes in [the Son of God] shall not perish, but have everlasting life.” These two statements are very similar. Tradition and ritual means much less than simple belief.
(9/13/13)
This week, our readings were on Dante’s Inferno. As we read about the different circles of hell, there was a lot of emphasis placed on how different sins are ranked. For example, fraud and treachery are considered worse than acts of violence such as murder. This is because fraud and treachery are uniquely human in that they require premeditation, cold-heartedness, and a lack of regard for others. Animals can commit acts of violence, but the intent is what sets men apart. Things like lust, gluttony, greed, and anger are closer to the top because they are more common and closer to basic human nature than more extreme crimes such as blasphemy or thievery.
What really stuck out to me was the first circle of “Limbo”. The idea that the unbaptized and those born before Christ are punished, albeit less harshly than those in lower circles, seems unjust to me. It seems to go against the contemporary definition of Christianity that I am familiar with. It would seem that a recurring theme in today’s religious doctrine would be grace and forgiveness. Condemning someone for something out of their control seems backwards.
Looking at the afterlife through the lens of the Inferno is an interesting way to see how people used to view heaven and hell. Today, we have more of a concrete, black and white concept of heaven and hell. It is more a matter of saved and unsaved rather than ranking based on the severity of the sins one has committed.
Another thing that stood out to me was the fact that Dante placed himself alongside the other great poets, Virgil, Homer, Horace, Ovid, and Lucan. He places himself on the same pedestal that they stand on. I found it to be very bold. In my opinion, the interjections of the great poets seemed to detract from the rest of the narrative rather than enhance it. It is most likely because I was unfamiliar with many of the references they made. Perhaps if I had more context I would have enjoyed the text more.
(9/20/13)
Wrapping up Dante's Inferno turned out to be sort of a wild ride. As Dante ventured deeper into the depths of his rendition of Hell, the punishments for the sinners of each circle in the lower rings became progressively more bizarre. Interpreting punishments became more and more difficult.
One thing that puzzled me was how Dante chose Brutus and Cassius as two of the three greatest sinners to be eternally trapped in one of Satan's three mouths. Judas' selection makes sense, however Brutus and Cassius seem to be quite random. In class, we came to the conclusion that Dante's Italian influence most likely made him choose those two historical figures.
I thought Dante's transformation throughout the narrative from empathetic to cold was significant. Earlier in the text, Dante expressed sorrow for the people suffering punishments, even going as far as listening to their stories. Virgil had to caution him on showing sympathy for people who have motivation to lie. In the end, Dante was completely indifferent to the plight of everyone he encountered. Dante goes from being naive to recognizing that everyone is eager to deceive him. When he reached the ninth circle, he kicked one of the heads of a sinner frozen in hell's floor. Is this just or callous? I lean more towards the latter. Dante shows several negative personality traits through his writing. First, he seems narcissistic because he places himself in the company of the other great poets, Virgil, Homer, Horace, Ovid, and Luncan. Second, his writing seems vindictive in that he targets political figures he dislikes and even people from his personal life in Hell. For example, Brunetto Latini, the man who acted as Dante's guardian and teacher after his father died, appears in the seventh circle. The fact that Dante would exploit someone who had such an impact on him makes him seem petty. To me, these traits compromise Dante's credibility and make him an unreliable narrator.
(9/26/13)
This week, we took a look at Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, which chronicles the journey of 29 pilgrims to the shrine of Saint Thomas Becket. The pilgrims were used to represent different kinds of people and also satirized members of the clergy and nobility. Chaucer painted many different portraits in his Prologue. They illustrated qualities that were seen as positive (chivalry, modesty, erudition, charity, chastity, piety, etc) and also pointed out problems with society, such as corruption within the clergy (the Friar accepted bribes and the Pardoner committed fraud and sold indulgences with the intention of hoarding the profits). What I found more interesting, however, were the depictions of gender roles.
At the time that Chaucer wrote his Canterbury Tales, men were divided into three main classes: the clergy, nobility, and peasantry. Merchants and scholars were also newer additions to the hierarchy. Men were classified based on what they did. Women, on the other hand, gained their identities based solely on their relationships with men. Women were either virgins, wives, or widows. Their place in society was restricted to their sexual roles.
This narrow view of women is reflected in Chaucer’s character descriptions. The male pilgrims are depicted as diverse and multi-layered. For example, the Knight is described as a chivalrous, brave ideal of nobility who has fought and won many battles. The nun and the wife of bath, however, are depicted as one-dimensional. The defining characteristics of the nun are limited to her charitable activities, politeness, and chastity. The wife of bath is defined by her relationships. Her marital history dominates Chaucer’s depiction. The reader is left with the impression that she is promiscuous and enjoys dominating men. There is very little else to be said about her personality or life history. Some of the men in Chaucer’s tale are also promiscuous (the Summoner enjoys the company of younger women, for example), however it is not their single defining characteristic.
(10/3/13)
In studying More’s Utopia and Machiavelli’s The Prince, we gain an insight into the thought on how society should work in light of the social changes of the Renaissance. The Humanist mindset is evident in both of these works. More speaks of morality and social obligation from a more secular point of view, despite his fierce dedication to Catholic ideals. Machiavelli draws from the classics, such as Aristotle’s Politics and Greco-Roman history, to demonstrate his beliefs on the hierarchy of political power, the use of military force and capital punishment in controlling the general populace, and the psychology of ingratiating oneself with his subjects.
In my opinion, the ideas put forth in More’s Utopia seem naïve and misguided in light of historically recent attempts to create communist states. The idea that resources can be distributed evenly, that people in positions of power will not abuse their roles, and people will be productive without coercion eliminates the crime of theft because no one owns property and resources are taken and distributed as needed. It is human nature to seek ownership of the things around oneself. Indeed, even More seems to contradict his own philosophy of the absence of ownership when describing the Utopians’ imperialistic ventures. When the Utopians set out to colonize areas on the American mainland, they use force to claim the land of those who resist for Utopia. Even though the Utopians use the land and its resources to create a society where nothing is owned, the society of Utopia acts as the owner of the land itself.
In The Prince, Machiavelli uses language that makes it difficult to associate his world with the modern one (he speaks of monarchies with unlimited power and great military leaders such as Hannibal of Carthage). Despite this, there are several parallels that can be drawn between Machiavelli’s world and our own Western one. Machiavelli speaks of the attributes of a good leader that are valued by the general public (faith, honesty, religion, etc) only in terms of having them when they are most convenient. This is similar to the way that people campaign for office in the United States. Speeches by Presidential candidates often contain language pertaining to prayer, God, and fidelity to the American people that is not as frequent after the election is over. Politicians are notorious for glossing over or completely ignoring promises they made on the campaign trail. This practice is reflected in Chapter 18 of The Prince. “The princes who have done great things are the ones who have taken little account of their promises and who have known how to addle the brains of men with craft.” The theme of The Prince, which is the manipulation of the people by authority figures, seems to go hand in hand with the modern political process.
(10/11/13) Peter, this is a really good idea, especially if you set it up as a response to reactions to Utopia as irrelevant or unrealistic. You might think of what a counterargument might be to your claim and how you could address it. -MH
In my essay I would like to argue for the relevancy of More’s Utopia in modern society. Though the ideas in Utopia may seem unrealistic, they are similar to concepts used in government and many other institutions in western culture.
The distribution of resources in Utopian society has nothing to do with socioeconomic status. Also, all labor necessary to keep things running is distributed between all able persons. Welfare and social security are not foreign concepts in western culture. The idea of setting up a system where fairness, not power and status, determines where resources are allocated would be bizarre to people living in the 16th century, when Utopia was published.
Prisons, for many centuries, were despicable places. Justice systems were arbitrary and doled out inhumane punishments for even minor infractions. The Utopians have criminals perform the “dirty” work as punishment. The idea of slavery seems out of place in a society based on fairness, however the practice as described by More was more progressive than the system in place at the time. In western culture, the justice system is based on the idea of rehabilitation. Instead of employing barbaric punishments, the Utopians chose an approach that balanced punishment and humanitarianism.
More describes the hospitals in Utopia as spacious, well-equipped, and staffed with competent physicians. In More’s time, quality of care was limited by income, as the skilled physicians were expensive. People without money were at the mercy of churches and other charitable organizations for medical help of any kind. The idea of medical care available for everyone, as a basic human right is very much a modern idea. The passage in Utopia that discusses it is especially relevant in light of the current healthcare debate in the United States.
So far, these are the ideas I have for drawing parallels between Utopia and today’s society. I plan on adding at least two more main ideas before I construct my first draft.
(10/24/13)
The accounts of Cortés and Benardino de Sahagun are the most fascinating texts I have read on the subject of the New World and European exploration. History textbooks paint a picture of the conquistadors that is somewhat muddled. It is hard to discern what is part of “Black Legend”, or the exaggeration of Spanish treatment of the natives, and reality. The discrepancies between both versions are very telling.
It is mentioned in the introduction that Cortés’ account may be biased or blatantly inaccurate. When Montezuma says, in Cortés’ version of events, that the prophecy says that the Aztecs would be conquered and taken as vassals, this may be embellishment. There is such a prophecy, however it does not specify that the Aztecs will be subjugated. Cortés further justifies his actions by elaborating on all of Montezuma’s alleged war crimes. Also, after Cortés destroys relics and idols in the great temple, he tells Moctezuma that he should give up his god(s) for the Christian God. According to Cortés, Montezuma and his advisors agree. Sahagun’s account refutes this. Montezuma was imprisoned by the Spaniards and was forced to make any decisions or declarations under threat of death.
In both versions, Aztec envoys greet the Spaniards with gifts and furnish them with all of the provisions they need. Cortés fails to document the harassment of the envoys at the hands of his men.
The most glaring omission from Cortés’ account is in relation to the violence and destruction inflicted upon the Aztecs. The fact that the Spaniards massacred Aztecs while celebrating the fiesta of Huitzilopchtli, looted their temple, and all but destroyed the city of Tenochtitlan is not included at all.
The justification of this treatment was attributed to the European view that the natives were “savages” with “inferior natures”. The discovery of cannibalistic tribes in the new world only fueled such arguments. Montaigne, in his essay Of Cannibals, addresses this ethnocentric view.
“I am not sorry that we notice the barbarous horror of such acts, but I am heartily sorry that, judging their faults rightly, we should be so blind to our own. I think there is more barbarity In eating a man alive than in eating him dead; and in tearing by tortures and the rack a body still full of feeling, in roasting a man bit by bit, in having him bitten and mangled by dogs and swine (as we have not only read but seen within fresh memory, not among ancient enemies, but among neighbors and fellow citizens, and what is worse, on the pretext of piety and religion), than in eating him after he is dead.”
Montaigne makes the point that violence of any kind is not acceptable and is barbaric in and of itself. European nations warring over religion is just as primitive and uncivilized as the violent act of cannibalism. He also mentions that the particular tribe of Native Americans he was discussing fought over rivalry rather than selfish ambition (such as trying to gain more land).
(10/31/13)
This week when we had a class debate on who was the worst villain in Moliere’s Tartuffe, I was surprised by how few people chose Orgon over Tartuffe. Tartuffe seems to be the most obvious choice because of his treacherous ways. He is a hypocrite who practices false piety and covets Orgon’s wife, Elmire, going as far as attempting to have an adulterous encounter with her on the same day he was set to marry her daughter, Mariane. After he is revealed as an imposter, he gives up his ruse completely and uses his position as sole heir to Orgon’s estate to evict Orgon and his family. While there is no defending Tartuffe’s actions, the fact remains that he would not have been able to wreak as much havoc as he did without Orgon’s help. Orgon, through his reckless trust and devotion, enabled Tartuffe.
In addition to being foolish, Orgon displays an attitude towards his family that is indifferent at best. He can be cold, unforgiving, and outright malicious. On page 57, Dorine informs Orgon that Elmire, his wife, has been violently ill while he was gone. He is dismissive of her concerns and repeatedly asks about Tartuffe throughout the entire exchange. The scene that spans pages 88-90 reveals just how heartless Orgon is. When Damis, his son, reveals what he knows about Tartuffe and his lecherous actions, Orgon believes Tartuffe over Damis, easily deceived by Tartuffe’s mental gymnastics of reverse psychology. Orgon then throws his own son out of the house and disowns him in one fell swoop. Convinced that his family is plotting against Tartuffe, Orgon decides to wed Mariane against her will to Tartuffe in order to spite his family. A line on page 59 cleanly sums up Orgon’s attitude throughout the entire play. “My mother, children, brother, and wife could die, and I’d not feel a single moment’s pain.”
It takes Orgon overhearing a personal insult about himself to finally realize that Tartuffe is bad news. His entire family was almost ruined before he came to that conclusion. Who is worse, a deceptive criminal attempting to hide his past, or a man who would take everything away from his family and give it to a criminal?
(11/8/13)
Throughout Candide, Voltaire seems to satirize religion. In the introduction to Candide, it is mentioned that "Voltaire is ridiculing any simplistic explanation for the complexities of experience, any universal principle that is applied unquestioningly to every situation". I think that Voltaire's satirical commentary on religion reflected his disdain for the misuse of religious authority.
After an earthquake destroys Lisbon, a public ceremony carrying out the judgment of the Inquisition takes place. "The faculty of the University of Coimbra had concluded that the spectacle of roasting several persons over a slow fire in a ceremonious fashion is an infallible secret for preventing the earth from quaking". The intent of this ceremony is to prevent future disasters. As if this is not ridiculous enough, Voltaire states that the men who were put to death were arrested for "spiritual incest" and for removing bacon seasoning from chicken (indicating the men in question were Jewish).
When the Grand Inquisitor and Don Issachar, a Jew, argue over who gets Cunegonde, they come up with a plan to split up the week to determine who has the pleasure of her company on which days. Their only point of contention is the Sabbath. "They have never been able to decide if the night between Saturday and Sunday belongs to the old Sabbath or the new." I think that here, Voltaire is criticizing the trivial differences between religious views. In this case, it is between Christianity and Judaism.
(11/15/13)
For my comparison essay I would like to take a closer look at St. Augustine's Confessions and Dante's Inferno in relation to one another.
Both Dante and Augustine discuss sin, guilt, and God's punishment. Both works attempt to analyze human nature and make sense of the moral implications of our actions. Emphasis on conversion is key. Augustine reflects on his moral revelations and Dante is transformed by his experience in the levels of hell.
Both Dante and Augustine are writing from a Christian viewpoint, however they both have different cultural and personal perspectives.
Even though Dante discussed things that were very real to him, his journey was not meant to be taken literally. Augustine, on the other hand, speaks from personal experience. His testimony is very literal.
In my paper I would like to go into detail about the time periods these works were written in and how that affects the authors' choices about formatting and literary devices.
Peter, this would make for an excellent comparison. It sounds like you are planning to do some research (if you are going to learn about the time periods the works were written in). Is that the case? -MH
(12/6/13)
This week, we took a look at classical music. What makes classical music classical? Who were the influential composers in the classical era? How does the historical progression of music from chiefly religious compositions to secular modes of expression and enjoyment reflect the enlightenment? These were the questions we answered to wrap up our study of the Middle Ages, Renaissance, and Enlightenment.
On Friday we examined the first movement of Mozart’s Symphony No. 40 in G minor. We compared it to modern secular music (“Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer” and “And I Love Her” by the Beetles) to find the patterns of exposition, development, recapitulation, and coda.
Seeing the patterns in this piece was interesting because I had it in my study playlist, but never recognized the structures we discussed in class.
Lucas and Megan’s presentation was very thought provoking. It goes without saying that Mozart is a musical genius, however the fact that he incorporated the Golden Rule into his music takes it to a whole new level of complexity.
Throughout Junior High and High School, many of us became used to history classes that throw names, dates, and dry facts at you. All of this information is given to the student for the sole purpose of regurgitation. The history class that asks the student what he or she thinks about the material is rare. The discussion-based lecture in this course is unique in that we are not only required to think for ourselves, but we get to hear what others in the class are thinking. This results in a more enriching and diverse classroom experience.
Looking at how artwork evolves in form, subject matter, and content throughout the ages is interesting. How an artist chooses to depict his or her subject matter is indicative of the social attitudes and worldviews of people in that time period. Why did Renaissance artists choose to put more emphasis on individuals in their paintings and gravitate more towards everyday life than religious themes? Why do paintings of the Crucifixion and its aftermath seem to vary greatly in tone based on what time period they come from? These are the questions that we answered as a class.
To highlight the stark contrast between art from different periods, we looked at two works showing the nativity. One was from medieval times, the other from the Renaissance. The dominant impression of the medieval work was solemn. No single figure tends to stick out to the viewer as unique. This suggests that the subject was far more important than the people. They are simply props. The work from the Renaissance seems to radiate warmth when placed side by side with the other painting. It is populated by individuals rather than clones. This is a perfect example of the Renaissance artist's concern with humanity and realism.
Being told how people from a certain time period lived and thought is pointless and likely to leave a fleeting impression of the era at best. Seeing what was important to them through artwork is a much better way to construct a lasting mental picture. I look forward to exploring history in this manner for the rest of the semester.
(8/30/2013)
This week, we started out discussing St. Augustine’s Confessions. What I found most interesting about the reading was that this work is considered to be the first autobiographical piece in Western culture. It is not surprising that it is very religious in nature, considering the period in which it was written. The Christian Church had much influence in the Roman Empire at this time. Augustine spends a lot of time admonishing himself for the sins he committed in the past, especially in his youth. It is important to note that he did not have as much of a problem with the nature of his alleged crimes as he did with his motivation to commit them. Augustine clearly had an obsession with analyzing his state of mind during his days of delinquency, otherwise he would not ramble on for pages and pages about several basketfuls of stolen pears. “My feasting was only on the wickedness which I took pleasure in enjoying,” he says. “The theft itself was a nothing,” he claims, highlighting the “foulness” and “carnal corruptions” that motivated the theft.
Despite the fact that Augustine’s Confessions is about the redeeming power of God, and he spends much time pointing out his flaws, he shifts the blame for his behavior quite a bit. At one point he mentions the fact that he would not have stolen the pears had it not been for his friends. He also manages to blame his promiscuity on his parents. His father, he says, would turn a blind eye when he engage in sexual activity because he wanted to have grandchildren. It seems odd to me that Augustine would be so eager to have others to blame in his own grand confession. Is St. Augustine’s Confessions really as genuine as one might think?
Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophy, like St. Augustine’s Confessions, is largely religious. The key difference between the two is the emphasis that Boethius puts on philosophy. There is a balance between philosophical elements and religious influence, whereas St. Augustine is more concerned with God. Boethius converses with “Lady Philosophy” about good VS. evil, happiness, fate, and fortune.
In our third reading, we were assigned to study a segment of the Qur’an. I found it very eye opening because I was not expecting to see so many similarities between Islam and sects of the Judeo-Christian faith. I would have to disagree with many of the statements made in class about how radically different Islam is from Christianity. I grew up in a very religious household. The Bible was a very big part of my childhood. Within the Qur’an I found many things that seem to mirror Christian beliefs. In the introduction, it was mentioned that wealthy Meccan merchants were threatened by Muhammad’s preaching of generosity. It is reminiscent of Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees and Sadducees, and the turning of the tables in the temple. The detailed rules regarding property ownership, the role of women in the home and society, inheritance, and sexuality seemed to come off as strange to many people during class discussion. The Bible, however, contains very similar rules in the books of Leviticus and Numbers. Theses passages are mostly ignored by mainstream Christianity because they are no longer culturally relevant. The passage discussing the believers being on God’s right hand and the nonbelievers on his left is very similar to the sorting of the saved and unsaved in the Book of Revelation. To me, the most striking aspect of the text was the one regarding righteousness. “Righteousness does not consist in entering your dwellings from the back. The righteous man is he that fears God.” This is similar to the Christian concept of Salvation. John 3:16 states that “whoever believes in [the Son of God] shall not perish, but have everlasting life.” These two statements are very similar. Tradition and ritual means much less than simple belief.
(9/13/13)
This week, our readings were on Dante’s Inferno. As we read about the different circles of hell, there was a lot of emphasis placed on how different sins are ranked. For example, fraud and treachery are considered worse than acts of violence such as murder. This is because fraud and treachery are uniquely human in that they require premeditation, cold-heartedness, and a lack of regard for others. Animals can commit acts of violence, but the intent is what sets men apart. Things like lust, gluttony, greed, and anger are closer to the top because they are more common and closer to basic human nature than more extreme crimes such as blasphemy or thievery.
What really stuck out to me was the first circle of “Limbo”. The idea that the unbaptized and those born before Christ are punished, albeit less harshly than those in lower circles, seems unjust to me. It seems to go against the contemporary definition of Christianity that I am familiar with. It would seem that a recurring theme in today’s religious doctrine would be grace and forgiveness. Condemning someone for something out of their control seems backwards.
Looking at the afterlife through the lens of the Inferno is an interesting way to see how people used to view heaven and hell. Today, we have more of a concrete, black and white concept of heaven and hell. It is more a matter of saved and unsaved rather than ranking based on the severity of the sins one has committed.
Another thing that stood out to me was the fact that Dante placed himself alongside the other great poets, Virgil, Homer, Horace, Ovid, and Lucan. He places himself on the same pedestal that they stand on. I found it to be very bold. In my opinion, the interjections of the great poets seemed to detract from the rest of the narrative rather than enhance it. It is most likely because I was unfamiliar with many of the references they made. Perhaps if I had more context I would have enjoyed the text more.
(9/20/13)
Wrapping up Dante's Inferno turned out to be sort of a wild ride. As Dante ventured deeper into the depths of his rendition of Hell, the punishments for the sinners of each circle in the lower rings became progressively more bizarre. Interpreting punishments became more and more difficult.
One thing that puzzled me was how Dante chose Brutus and Cassius as two of the three greatest sinners to be eternally trapped in one of Satan's three mouths. Judas' selection makes sense, however Brutus and Cassius seem to be quite random. In class, we came to the conclusion that Dante's Italian influence most likely made him choose those two historical figures.
I thought Dante's transformation throughout the narrative from empathetic to cold was significant. Earlier in the text, Dante expressed sorrow for the people suffering punishments, even going as far as listening to their stories. Virgil had to caution him on showing sympathy for people who have motivation to lie. In the end, Dante was completely indifferent to the plight of everyone he encountered. Dante goes from being naive to recognizing that everyone is eager to deceive him. When he reached the ninth circle, he kicked one of the heads of a sinner frozen in hell's floor. Is this just or callous? I lean more towards the latter. Dante shows several negative personality traits through his writing. First, he seems narcissistic because he places himself in the company of the other great poets, Virgil, Homer, Horace, Ovid, and Luncan. Second, his writing seems vindictive in that he targets political figures he dislikes and even people from his personal life in Hell. For example, Brunetto Latini, the man who acted as Dante's guardian and teacher after his father died, appears in the seventh circle. The fact that Dante would exploit someone who had such an impact on him makes him seem petty. To me, these traits compromise Dante's credibility and make him an unreliable narrator.
(9/26/13)
This week, we took a look at Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, which chronicles the journey of 29 pilgrims to the shrine of Saint Thomas Becket. The pilgrims were used to represent different kinds of people and also satirized members of the clergy and nobility. Chaucer painted many different portraits in his Prologue. They illustrated qualities that were seen as positive (chivalry, modesty, erudition, charity, chastity, piety, etc) and also pointed out problems with society, such as corruption within the clergy (the Friar accepted bribes and the Pardoner committed fraud and sold indulgences with the intention of hoarding the profits). What I found more interesting, however, were the depictions of gender roles.
At the time that Chaucer wrote his Canterbury Tales, men were divided into three main classes: the clergy, nobility, and peasantry. Merchants and scholars were also newer additions to the hierarchy. Men were classified based on what they did. Women, on the other hand, gained their identities based solely on their relationships with men. Women were either virgins, wives, or widows. Their place in society was restricted to their sexual roles.
This narrow view of women is reflected in Chaucer’s character descriptions. The male pilgrims are depicted as diverse and multi-layered. For example, the Knight is described as a chivalrous, brave ideal of nobility who has fought and won many battles. The nun and the wife of bath, however, are depicted as one-dimensional. The defining characteristics of the nun are limited to her charitable activities, politeness, and chastity. The wife of bath is defined by her relationships. Her marital history dominates Chaucer’s depiction. The reader is left with the impression that she is promiscuous and enjoys dominating men. There is very little else to be said about her personality or life history. Some of the men in Chaucer’s tale are also promiscuous (the Summoner enjoys the company of younger women, for example), however it is not their single defining characteristic.
(10/3/13)
In studying More’s Utopia and Machiavelli’s The Prince, we gain an insight into the thought on how society should work in light of the social changes of the Renaissance. The Humanist mindset is evident in both of these works. More speaks of morality and social obligation from a more secular point of view, despite his fierce dedication to Catholic ideals. Machiavelli draws from the classics, such as Aristotle’s Politics and Greco-Roman history, to demonstrate his beliefs on the hierarchy of political power, the use of military force and capital punishment in controlling the general populace, and the psychology of ingratiating oneself with his subjects.
In my opinion, the ideas put forth in More’s Utopia seem naïve and misguided in light of historically recent attempts to create communist states. The idea that resources can be distributed evenly, that people in positions of power will not abuse their roles, and people will be productive without coercion eliminates the crime of theft because no one owns property and resources are taken and distributed as needed. It is human nature to seek ownership of the things around oneself. Indeed, even More seems to contradict his own philosophy of the absence of ownership when describing the Utopians’ imperialistic ventures. When the Utopians set out to colonize areas on the American mainland, they use force to claim the land of those who resist for Utopia. Even though the Utopians use the land and its resources to create a society where nothing is owned, the society of Utopia acts as the owner of the land itself.
In The Prince, Machiavelli uses language that makes it difficult to associate his world with the modern one (he speaks of monarchies with unlimited power and great military leaders such as Hannibal of Carthage). Despite this, there are several parallels that can be drawn between Machiavelli’s world and our own Western one. Machiavelli speaks of the attributes of a good leader that are valued by the general public (faith, honesty, religion, etc) only in terms of having them when they are most convenient. This is similar to the way that people campaign for office in the United States. Speeches by Presidential candidates often contain language pertaining to prayer, God, and fidelity to the American people that is not as frequent after the election is over. Politicians are notorious for glossing over or completely ignoring promises they made on the campaign trail. This practice is reflected in Chapter 18 of The Prince. “The princes who have done great things are the ones who have taken little account of their promises and who have known how to addle the brains of men with craft.” The theme of The Prince, which is the manipulation of the people by authority figures, seems to go hand in hand with the modern political process.
(10/11/13)
Peter, this is a really good idea, especially if you set it up as a response to reactions to Utopia as irrelevant or unrealistic. You might think of what a counterargument might be to your claim and how you could address it. -MH
In my essay I would like to argue for the relevancy of More’s Utopia in modern society. Though the ideas in Utopia may seem unrealistic, they are similar to concepts used in government and many other institutions in western culture.
The distribution of resources in Utopian society has nothing to do with socioeconomic status. Also, all labor necessary to keep things running is distributed between all able persons. Welfare and social security are not foreign concepts in western culture. The idea of setting up a system where fairness, not power and status, determines where resources are allocated would be bizarre to people living in the 16th century, when Utopia was published.
Prisons, for many centuries, were despicable places. Justice systems were arbitrary and doled out inhumane punishments for even minor infractions. The Utopians have criminals perform the “dirty” work as punishment. The idea of slavery seems out of place in a society based on fairness, however the practice as described by More was more progressive than the system in place at the time. In western culture, the justice system is based on the idea of rehabilitation. Instead of employing barbaric punishments, the Utopians chose an approach that balanced punishment and humanitarianism.
More describes the hospitals in Utopia as spacious, well-equipped, and staffed with competent physicians. In More’s time, quality of care was limited by income, as the skilled physicians were expensive. People without money were at the mercy of churches and other charitable organizations for medical help of any kind. The idea of medical care available for everyone, as a basic human right is very much a modern idea. The passage in Utopia that discusses it is especially relevant in light of the current healthcare debate in the United States.
So far, these are the ideas I have for drawing parallels between Utopia and today’s society. I plan on adding at least two more main ideas before I construct my first draft.
(10/24/13)
The accounts of Cortés and Benardino de Sahagun are the most fascinating texts I have read on the subject of the New World and European exploration. History textbooks paint a picture of the conquistadors that is somewhat muddled. It is hard to discern what is part of “Black Legend”, or the exaggeration of Spanish treatment of the natives, and reality. The discrepancies between both versions are very telling.
It is mentioned in the introduction that Cortés’ account may be biased or blatantly inaccurate. When Montezuma says, in Cortés’ version of events, that the prophecy says that the Aztecs would be conquered and taken as vassals, this may be embellishment. There is such a prophecy, however it does not specify that the Aztecs will be subjugated. Cortés further justifies his actions by elaborating on all of Montezuma’s alleged war crimes. Also, after Cortés destroys relics and idols in the great temple, he tells Moctezuma that he should give up his god(s) for the Christian God. According to Cortés, Montezuma and his advisors agree. Sahagun’s account refutes this. Montezuma was imprisoned by the Spaniards and was forced to make any decisions or declarations under threat of death.
In both versions, Aztec envoys greet the Spaniards with gifts and furnish them with all of the provisions they need. Cortés fails to document the harassment of the envoys at the hands of his men.
The most glaring omission from Cortés’ account is in relation to the violence and destruction inflicted upon the Aztecs. The fact that the Spaniards massacred Aztecs while celebrating the fiesta of Huitzilopchtli, looted their temple, and all but destroyed the city of Tenochtitlan is not included at all.
The justification of this treatment was attributed to the European view that the natives were “savages” with “inferior natures”. The discovery of cannibalistic tribes in the new world only fueled such arguments. Montaigne, in his essay Of Cannibals, addresses this ethnocentric view.
“I am not sorry that we notice the barbarous horror of such acts, but I am heartily sorry that, judging their faults rightly, we should be so blind to our own. I think there is more barbarity In eating a man alive than in eating him dead; and in tearing by tortures and the rack a body still full of feeling, in roasting a man bit by bit, in having him bitten and mangled by dogs and swine (as we have not only read but seen within fresh memory, not among ancient enemies, but among neighbors and fellow citizens, and what is worse, on the pretext of piety and religion), than in eating him after he is dead.”
Montaigne makes the point that violence of any kind is not acceptable and is barbaric in and of itself. European nations warring over religion is just as primitive and uncivilized as the violent act of cannibalism. He also mentions that the particular tribe of Native Americans he was discussing fought over rivalry rather than selfish ambition (such as trying to gain more land).
(10/31/13)
This week when we had a class debate on who was the worst villain in Moliere’s Tartuffe, I was surprised by how few people chose Orgon over Tartuffe. Tartuffe seems to be the most obvious choice because of his treacherous ways. He is a hypocrite who practices false piety and covets Orgon’s wife, Elmire, going as far as attempting to have an adulterous encounter with her on the same day he was set to marry her daughter, Mariane. After he is revealed as an imposter, he gives up his ruse completely and uses his position as sole heir to Orgon’s estate to evict Orgon and his family. While there is no defending Tartuffe’s actions, the fact remains that he would not have been able to wreak as much havoc as he did without Orgon’s help. Orgon, through his reckless trust and devotion, enabled Tartuffe.
In addition to being foolish, Orgon displays an attitude towards his family that is indifferent at best. He can be cold, unforgiving, and outright malicious. On page 57, Dorine informs Orgon that Elmire, his wife, has been violently ill while he was gone. He is dismissive of her concerns and repeatedly asks about Tartuffe throughout the entire exchange. The scene that spans pages 88-90 reveals just how heartless Orgon is. When Damis, his son, reveals what he knows about Tartuffe and his lecherous actions, Orgon believes Tartuffe over Damis, easily deceived by Tartuffe’s mental gymnastics of reverse psychology. Orgon then throws his own son out of the house and disowns him in one fell swoop. Convinced that his family is plotting against Tartuffe, Orgon decides to wed Mariane against her will to Tartuffe in order to spite his family. A line on page 59 cleanly sums up Orgon’s attitude throughout the entire play. “My mother, children, brother, and wife could die, and I’d not feel a single moment’s pain.”
It takes Orgon overhearing a personal insult about himself to finally realize that Tartuffe is bad news. His entire family was almost ruined before he came to that conclusion. Who is worse, a deceptive criminal attempting to hide his past, or a man who would take everything away from his family and give it to a criminal?
(11/8/13)
Throughout Candide, Voltaire seems to satirize religion. In the introduction to Candide, it is mentioned that "Voltaire is ridiculing any simplistic explanation for the complexities of experience, any universal principle that is applied unquestioningly to every situation". I think that Voltaire's satirical commentary on religion reflected his disdain for the misuse of religious authority.
After an earthquake destroys Lisbon, a public ceremony carrying out the judgment of the Inquisition takes place. "The faculty of the University of Coimbra had concluded that the spectacle of roasting several persons over a slow fire in a ceremonious fashion is an infallible secret for preventing the earth from quaking". The intent of this ceremony is to prevent future disasters. As if this is not ridiculous enough, Voltaire states that the men who were put to death were arrested for "spiritual incest" and for removing bacon seasoning from chicken (indicating the men in question were Jewish).
When the Grand Inquisitor and Don Issachar, a Jew, argue over who gets Cunegonde, they come up with a plan to split up the week to determine who has the pleasure of her company on which days. Their only point of contention is the Sabbath. "They have never been able to decide if the night between Saturday and Sunday belongs to the old Sabbath or the new." I think that here, Voltaire is criticizing the trivial differences between religious views. In this case, it is between Christianity and Judaism.
(11/15/13)
For my comparison essay I would like to take a closer look at St. Augustine's Confessions and Dante's Inferno in relation to one another.
Both Dante and Augustine discuss sin, guilt, and God's punishment. Both works attempt to analyze human nature and make sense of the moral implications of our actions. Emphasis on conversion is key. Augustine reflects on his moral revelations and Dante is transformed by his experience in the levels of hell.
Both Dante and Augustine are writing from a Christian viewpoint, however they both have different cultural and personal perspectives.
Even though Dante discussed things that were very real to him, his journey was not meant to be taken literally. Augustine, on the other hand, speaks from personal experience. His testimony is very literal.
In my paper I would like to go into detail about the time periods these works were written in and how that affects the authors' choices about formatting and literary devices.
Peter, this would make for an excellent comparison. It sounds like you are planning to do some research (if you are going to learn about the time periods the works were written in). Is that the case? -MH
(12/6/13)
This week, we took a look at classical music. What makes classical music classical? Who were the influential composers in the classical era? How does the historical progression of music from chiefly religious compositions to secular modes of expression and enjoyment reflect the enlightenment? These were the questions we answered to wrap up our study of the Middle Ages, Renaissance, and Enlightenment.
On Friday we examined the first movement of Mozart’s Symphony No. 40 in G minor. We compared it to modern secular music (“Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer” and “And I Love Her” by the Beetles) to find the patterns of exposition, development, recapitulation, and coda.
Seeing the patterns in this piece was interesting because I had it in my study playlist, but never recognized the structures we discussed in class.
Lucas and Megan’s presentation was very thought provoking. It goes without saying that Mozart is a musical genius, however the fact that he incorporated the Golden Rule into his music takes it to a whole new level of complexity.