Tidbits of Su's Mind...
12/9/11 The Qur’an vs. the Bible
I just found this really awesome verse as I was reading a little Christmas devotion today. The verse in the devotion led me to read the rest of the chapter—2 Peter 3. Okay, so we talked about how the Qur’an confirms the Bible, BUT it distorts really important little things, like Daniela and Christine said. Also, the Qur’an disregards the Christian belief that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, so that’s kind of a big difference, I guess (sarcasm). Anyways, I was just stunned by how insightful and filled with the Holy Spirit Simon Peter was. Hope this makes sense...
2 Peter 3:16b-18 reads, “His [Paul’s] letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position. But grown in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.” Peter knew that people would distort the gospel. Some of it is hard to understand for people, yes, and instead of seeking people to help them discern it, they read into it their own meaning, which leads to dangerous distortion. Reading into it what you think it means is not what God intended, and you are then reading your word, not God’s, and this is dangerous—“to their own destruction”! Like I said earlier, the Qur’an is shown to do this very thing—distort vital facts of the Bible (specifically the gospel in the New Testament). It just blows me away how God knows everything, and He spoke, through His disciples and in His word, to all those who choose to follow Him, warning us that there will be false prophets in the future. It’s just amazing to me to see these warnings and teachings fulfilled and very real today!
Please understand that this is coming from my personal beliefs and reflections. I do NOT write this to offend anyone, I’m just reflecting and journaling on what I believe is true and what I hold fast to. Also, I'm only pointing out this distortion and the warning against it from the New Testament in direct relation to the "holy text" of Islam. But I couldn’t help but share the awesomeness of my God! J
12/2/11 It’s December!
This was a solid idea for a research paper. I was pretty excited about the topic I chose and thought it might be a fun thing to research (for once). Hopefully others felt the same.
One paper in particular that I edited was laid out really well. Her thoughts were well developed and I noticed a clear path of where she was going in each paragraph. It all fit together into an explanatory timeline of sorts, showing how love and marriage and the attitudes toward them have changed and reverted over the centuries. Her paper really felt like I was reading a research paper, because there was a distinct section that was devoted to informing the reader about her topic from the period of ancient Greece up to the modern day. Directly following, she expounded on the story of Aeneas and Dido in The Aeneid in order to exemplify the effect relationships for the sake of love can have on a love-struck individual. Concluding from this story and going off of a quote by Jens Peter Jacobsen, she made the point that sometimes marriage solely based on love or infatuation can get complicated, messy, and “poison” the affected party. At first, it struck me as odd that she would so boldly state that marriage based solely on love has a good chance of falling apart, but she remedied this by adding a claim that there should be a balance between love and reality (reality being an understanding of money and functionality). It makes sense that a strong marriage should have a good balance of love, yet not being naïve, on the part of both individuals.
Technically, the paper had just a few minor glitches that can be easily corrected. Structurally, it was close to golden! Again, one tiny little glitch, but that was hardly worth mentioning. I enjoyed reading it, and I got the feel that it was a topic chosen in the writer’s interest as well.
11/18/11 Some Neat Art…”How does this make you feel?”
The outside of the museum is very majestic and classic looking and the stone is beautifully carved. I like the mix of white stone and brick used in the architecture, because I think it hints at the mixture of art within. There are ancient artifacts, pre-modern and modern sculptures and paintings, and contemporary art works as well. The structure of the inside of the building is very simple, with spacious, open rooms and methodically laid out works. There seems to be a rhythm in the transitions between rooms and within all the rooms themselves. The sculpture court is an interesting place. A couple of the sculptures are old, representing gods and goddesses, which stand in stark contrast to the monumental abstract painting on the wall above the fork in the staircase. The newer addition, “Be Like Water,” adds a calming effect to the whole area. It hangs from the ceiling peacefully, all one nondescript color, softly refracting light coming in from broad windows. The sculpture court is a gentle way to welcome visitors because it is spacious, simple, and does not contain an overwhelming slew of artwork. Additionally, there are two sculptures of women dancing joyfully, which just add a blissful and positive feeling to the room I think. I feel like the message and aura of each room is very well defined by the works the room contains. It is easy to get lost in the time period during which the paintings were done. The contemporary rooms are bright and sterile, giving off a sort of cold feeling, while the rooms that contain works from the Renaissance and even medieval periods are a little darker and make use of warmer colors, which coincide with the feeling of continuity and soft lines represented in the paintings (more so in the Renaissance). Traveling through the rooms is like easing from one period in history to the next. I’m no art expert, but I think if you spend enough time gazing at all the different art, you can learn a lot about what was happening in history.
One of my favorite pieces is the “Helmet-mask” in the room right off the sculpture court (I forget what that room’s called…) Anyways, I just think it’s really interesting and certainly tribal. The use of all those natural elements—monkey hide, hair, etc.—strongly represents the indigenous people who created it. It’s also pretty terrifying. If I saw a dude running at me wearing that contraption on his head, I’m not quite sure what I would do. So, yea, I like the art museum. There is SO much in there to absorb and observe; I would have to go multiple times to take everything in. It always makes me tired.
11/11/11 WHOA LOOK AT THE DATE!
My group is presenting on death and the underworld, and it would have been super helpful if the Aeneid was part of that segment, at least the part about Aeneas descending in to the underworld. It is so descriptive and really paints a picture of the eeriness and sketchiness of the underworld. That’s one thing I like about Virgil’s story—he pays attention to detail without being overly repetitive, like in the Odyssey… It is imaginative and enjoyable to read.
The part about the underworld being easy to get to but hard to leave reminded me of “Hotel California”—“You can check out any time you want, but you can’t ever leave.” The song also has an ominous or sinister feel to it. Once you are in the underworld, it seems like you are captivated almost by all the people there that you knew and loved and want to spend time with. At the same time, I always get nervous when I read about a mortal (or still living) being descending into the underworld, because, knowing the touchiness of all the gods, I feel like one of those immortals would get all angry that life was tainting their world of death and cast the poor fellow off to Tartarus or something.
So I have some questions—we established in class that Aeneas went to the underworld to talk to his father, right? But I thought his charge was to bring the golden branch to Persephone, the queen of the underworld, and also to give one of his shipmates a proper burial so he wouldn’t have to roam around in limbo forever.
Also, I really liked those pictures on the Wiki of Sybil’s cave. It looks so cool! It’s kind of ominous but beautiful, the way I pictured it as I was reading. It is very mythical. I’m surprised at how intricate and developed it is, with all its carved stone and almost well landscaped surroundings. I vote we take a field trip, any takers? J
11/9/11 Splendid Ideas
SO, I have an idea for my paper, as follows:
I am definitely interested in ancient Greece. Seems like we certainly have gotten our fill of the mythology aspect as pertaining to the heroes and “upper class” people (kings, rulers). What I want to know about now are the slaves, the “low-life” group. I will explore the way the slaves were treated in Greek (and possibly Roman) culture—what they were responsible for, how they were acquired, and the dynamics of their relationships with their masters, etc. I found a book on the guilt of slavery in Greek scripture, so that will play a role in my paper as well. That’s about it for my abstract idea.
11/4/11 Music, tradition, and other such things The way I read that line about ritual and goodness is that Confucius is arguing against ritual as just going through the motions. If you aren't good and you don't perform the ritual in the proper spirit, then there is no point. [MH]
I’m thinking about the [On Ritual and Music] section, book III. In verse 3, Confucius says that a man who is not good can have nothing to do with ritual. I feel like he is saying that ritual defines your goodness, which is so strange to me. So, if you do something just because everyone else has done it for eons, that makes you a good person? It seems like that would make all actions empty and insincere. This seems to reflect what Jesus said in Matthew 23:25, chastising the Pharisees for looking showy and clean outwardly, and putting on the mask, but inwardly they were filled with greed and selfishness. Confucius seems to advocate this—not necessarily as explicitly and in a way that accuses people of being greedy inwardly, but in a way that implies that even if your “heart isn’t in the right place” to do something courteous or kind, do it anyways, because it’s tradition. Look outwardly pretty, regardless of the condition of your heart. As far as music is concerned, I don’t really know what Confucius is alluding to there, unless he is just saying that music is inherently incredible and no one who is not good can have anything to do with such awesomeness ;) but I think that’s probably not where he was going with that. So anyways, I’m not going to pretend I have a good theory about that…
But then, Confucius says, “In ritual at large it is a safe rule always to be too sparing rather than too lavish…” So do whatever you need to do anyways, just don’t make it TOO showy and obvious. Also, if one is too sparing in ritual, that seems to encourage being devoid of emotions while performing whatever acts. When it comes to mourning, however, Confucius says this should be done out of true grief rather than fear. So now it sounds like he’s coming around and saying, “Oh, well, there are some things that you should act upon out of conviction,” (like mourning). This guy, at least in this little blurb, is quite unorthodox. No wonder he’s a famous philosopher and thinker.
10/29/11 Livin’ it up with “The Good Life”
I’ve decided that talking about the “Good Life” is totally subjective and kind of a circular argument. We established that the good life may be defined for some people through material things, some through spiritual wholeness, some through dying happy, some through feeling fulfilled in their accomplishments. But if you die happy but had a really crappy life, then is that really a good life? You all know, because you were there. But anyways, I think the fundamental idea behind the philosophy of the good life is fairly accurate—fulfillment, true satisfaction and joy, and having been content in your possessions. I think that religion plays a huge role in the first bit about satisfaction and fulfillment. Different people will obviously find fulfillment in their own respective religions—Buddhists through meditation, Christians through Jesus, etc. I guess religion doesn’t have everything to do with a sense of “good feeling” though. I’m sitting here listening to some pretty awesome music and realizing that people could very well find a sense of contentment by losing themselves in their favorite music. The spectrum of possibilities is endless, which is kind of what makes this a big circle of a discussion topic. As far as media goes, I think media does feed off of people’s desires and cravings. We, as Americans, are naturally very materialistic because we just have so much! So I think the media appeals to that and inundates society with the “next best product”, which in turn fuels our materialism. Our materialism can lead to discontent in a lot of cases. The more we have, the more we want and the less happy we become. It’s an endless downward spiral spinning further away from living the “good life”. This kind of took a different turn but that’s where my though process goes I suppose!
10/20/11 Mid-term Evaluation
This has definitely been my favorite class this semester. It is the most engaging, interesting, and laid back of all my classes. My perspective has been widened so much, just by hearing other opinions; I’ve thought about things in a way I never would have on my own. I’m not really an “out-of-the-box” thinker, although I’d like to think I am (I’m working on that…) Anyways, this class has pushed me to think outside the box a little. Having group discussions usually gets all my questions answered about certain texts and whatnot. As far as learning goes, I chose the honors college for this very reason. Instead of getting lectured at and painstakingly forced to absorb dry information, this class helps me learn by presenting questions that I have to complete by engaging my own thoughts and opinions and lacing them through other people’s thoughts and the context of the text we are reading. Basically, this class helps me learn more effectively because it incorporates my efforts with those of the professor and my classmates. In all of this, I feel like we as a class still have fun and can make jokes and laugh about things while staying on the topic of our discussion. It’s nice to be able to have fun in a class setting at nine in the morning!
Also, Dr. Hartman doesn’t seem as much like a person with power over students, but like someone who wants to have a stimulating conversation with his students and cares what we have to say enough to add his input and guide our conversations. One issue I was worried about with going to a state school was that I would feel like just a number, not a student. This small honors class certainly does not have that feeling, which is really nice.
Now, there is just one thing I would change about this course, but it is a somewhat meaningless and petty change. I think I would have a lot of takers on the idea of having class in DeHo as opposed to walking (in the lovey temperamental Indiana weather) to Robert Bell. J In all seriousness, however, there isn’t anything I can think of that I would readily like to change about the course. I think Dr. Hartman does an effective and thorough job of leading and instructing our course on ancient literature.
10/14/11 Antigone: Loyal or a Lunatic...?
Antigone sure had a strong sense of family. Either that or a death wish. Or maybe just a lot of pride. At any rate, she’s quite the forceful individual. I find it honorable that she wanted so badly to have a proper burial for her brother (or so it appeared she wished for this). This shows that, no matter what, family is still family. Even if your brother is a traitor to your country and killed your other brother, that does not change the fact that he is still your own flesh and blood. So maybe that sounds a little radical. I am by no means advocating treason and loving the enemy. I am just pointing out the extreme devotion and sense of family blood that this woman had. On the other hand, as the story progresses, Antigone seems to be increasingly more prideful. She even exclaims, “Glory! Give me glory…” (l. 561). It’s like she is just throwing up her hands and saying “For Pete’s sake, man, just recognize that I’m doing something that totally goes against the grain, so I deserve some recognition!” This makes me feel like she is using her brother’s burial to boost her own image, or become this great martyr in her own mind. Which is kind of horrifying and heartless. I realize that this entry went all the way to the North pole then down to the South pole in 200 words, but I guess that’s the way my brain works. Anyways, had her motives been pure, Antigone could be a very admirable lady, but the fact that she was so eager to die for her own glory kind of puts a damper on that nice thought. Additionally, I hardly think it was up to the king to command families to leave their very own dead loved ones out in the street to be mutilated by buzzards and whatnot. That is pretty sadistic, first of all, and secondly, I don’t think a king should have the right to meddle with such personal issues within the family unit. I mean, he might as well be telling them to sell their own dear mother or brother for a pat on the back. I think the king can rule whatever he wants politically and socially, but when it comes to personal family issues and the way family loves each other, no ruler can be sovereign over that. If You’re Going Back HomeBy: August Frisco, based on song“If You’re Going Through Hell” by Rodney Atkins
Well, you know those years
When you feel like there’s a target on your head
Just bright enough for Cyclops’ eye,
And to hurt Helios’ pride?
Things go from bad to Hades
You think you’re so unfortunate
And then…your ship gets blown off course!
You step off the deck of your ship
And you’re in Kalypso’s arms
You try to run away,
But she kind of steals your heart.
Ask directions from Athena
‘Cause you know that she’ll be there
To save the day.
And that’s only the beginning.
Chorus:
If you’re going back home,
Keep on sailing, don’t be dumb;
If you’re cocky don’t show it;
You might get home
Before the suitors steal your wife away!
Well you’ve been deep down into Hades,
And lost a lot of men.
Watched a hundred different monsters
Pick off your crew for lunch.
And you knew that if you didn’t
Open your mouth and trash talk Cyc, they’d be alive, dude…
But the good news
Is Athena’s always somehow on your side,
Whisperin’ in your ear, saving your neck day by day.
You’re lucky she’s a god, because mortals
Would have given up
Twelve years ago.
You know it’s true.
If you’re going back home,
Keep on sailing, don’t be dumb;
If you’re cocky, don’t show it;
You might get home
Before the suitors steal your wife away!
(repeat chorus 2x)
10/6/11 Rama and the Multi-headed Beasties; Heracles
So I don’t know if anyone else has seen A Little Princess, but while reading the Ramayana all I could think about was that movie and the continuing story Sarah told about Prince Rama rescuing his princess from the ten-headed beast Ravana. I see now that the movie told a much more simplified version of the story, but reading the actual story explains the whole business with the monkey in the movie. I never understood that, but it makes sense now that the man from India always has a monkey hanging around with him, because the monkey princes in the story are kind of a big deal. I mean, they did make it possible for Rama to save his darling. So instead of praying to gods or whatever, what better way to be in the “spiritual loop” than have a god itself, a monkey, on your shoulders grasping your head all day? I see the correlation; it’s quite an interesting concept. Now, I’m totally not trying to bash Indian culture and religion at all—what they believe is what they believe and I respect that—but honestly, I can’t help but chuckle a little when reading about…monkey princes. Monkeys. As royalty/deity? It’s a fairly comical thing to picture! I just see these cute little creatures running around in purple robes trimmed in gold, wearing crowns, and building an epic bridge. I also see this one older monkey—wiser than all the rest of course—with deep creases in his face, meditating and intuitively governing his fellow monkeys of the royal court. So maybe I got a little hung up on the Indian concept of divinity, but what can I say? I’m a zoology major, animals are kind of my thing. So Rama defeats this mega-beastie, rescues his lovely lady, and returns a hero, obviously. And he couldn’t have done it without the monkeys!
Now, about this poor Heracles character, I feel a bit sympathetic toward him, because he gets this nice little package of Missions Impossible that he has to complete. So he goes and slays this Hydra, but needs a little help, because the thing happens to be immortal. Oh, but he got help killing the Hydra, so, sorry man, that one doesn’t count on your list of completed Missions Impossible. But he doesn’t give up! He is determined to finish the tasks, and he does just that. Heracles completes all twelve impossibles in spite of the fact that he doesn’t get credit for some of them. This shows humility and determination, which sounds suspiciously like the makings of a good hero.
9/30/11 Hebrew Scriptures Journal
Regarding Job, I think this book can be used to explain one of the reasons bad things happen to good people. It could be God using trials to test the strength of his children’s faith. Those who break down and curse God are the ones whose faith is not as strong as they might think it is. Those who praise God nonetheless, and submit to and trust His ultimate will and realize they are nothing but chaff in the wind in the grander scope of things, those are the people whose faith is a “sweet song” to God, ringing strong, clear and true. Job’s story could also be seen as one of God’s ways to strengthen the faith of His people. This goes back to what Elisabeth said in class about “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.” Satan pushed Job within an inch of his life, but he didn’t kill him. And we see that Job came out stronger in the end. God blessed him with exponentially more than he had to begin with. Job praised God, and I’m willing to bet that His faith in God was just on fire by the end of that ordeal.
Psalms is just so beautiful. Having read through most of them, I see the beauty of David’s love for his heavenly King, God, in David’s lyrical praise and adoration. He realizes that God is his comforter, his stronghold, and his shepherd. God is the one who will see David through everything and take care of him day after day, even if David feels like God is failing him. David complains here and there, sure, but he’s human, and we all do that. In the end, he realizes that he is safe and secure in his God. That’s beautiful to me because I relate to the way David feels. He articulates true worship of the Lord so well.
9/23/11 God vs. Zeus & Co.
Well, I don’t exactly know what to reflect on at the moment, quite honestly, so I’ll just go with my favorite issue brought up in these creation myths: monotheism vs. polytheism. The Genesis account basically sticks out like a sore thumb in regards to this issue. Aside from the “Hymn to Aten”, it is the only creation account that celebrates one sovereign deity. But I think it goes a little bit deeper than that. I love the point that Daniela brought up in class—you can’t put the Hebrew God into a box. The multiple gods in the Greek culture are so like humans; they are quarrelsome, rash, emotional. They are interdependent, especially for knowledge of which god is manipulating which human pawn on which day and whatnot. The one sovereign Hebrew God is one in Himself—no one to reason with, no one to be angered at, no one to direct the question, “What is going on?” at because He already knows everything. He is a God who evokes the respect kind of fear from His children, not the shaking-in-your-boots kind of fear that the Greek gods seem to evoke in their minions.
Ok, so the Hebrew God is more fatherly and loving than the multiple Greek gods. But there still seems to be something that clearly sets Him apart from humans. He is God, we are human, and there is this great divide between the divine and humans, which seems to be so clear in the Genesis account. But what is it that makes that segregation so evident? I believe there is something more than just myth and hear-tell going on here. How do you pinpoint the spiritual difference between omniscient, omnipotent, perfect God and the depraved human race? I suppose the best explanation is the fall of man; the triumph of sin over perfect man in the beginning, when Eve then Adam partook of the fruit from the forbidden tree and ushered sin into the world. Sin and ultimate perfection cannot coexist. Another example of this Hebrew God being loving is when, even after this cosmic screw-up happened courtesy of our own human race, in the face of God, completely disobedient to this all-powerful God, God still provided those same dumb, wishy-washy humans with something to wear to hide their nakedness and shame—“Unto Adam also, and to his wife, did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them,” (p. 91). I mean let’s be real, Zeus would have sent a bolt of lightning through Eve’s heart and conspired with Poseidon to send his freaky Cyclops son to eat Adam for breakfast. So I guess that makes God pretty patient and forgiving too, not to mention level-headed.
9/16/11 Odyssey Journal 3
So, Odysseus’ travels and adventures have finally come to a grand end! (Took long enough, right?) As I was reading the last few books, I did realize how suspenseful the end of the story actually is. It may not be the same kind of suspense that is in books we read today or movies we see, but the elements are definitely there. By that I mean the story takes a long time to play itself out, and we might even tire of it after a while, but if we look at certain events, they clearly build up anticipation. For example, the suitors constantly egg on Odysseus, making him increasingly angry. The weapons are placed in a strategic spot. Telemachus and Odysseus constantly plan out their attack. Most grotesquely, there is the illusion of the suitors’ faces going pallid and blood covering the walls. In Homer’s time, I am willing to bet all of those situations put the audience on the edges of their seats. The difference in language/translation may not do the same for us today, but I can definitely see how it is such a popular and timeless epic. Maybe that’s just me who didn’t feel the suspense. I don’t really know. But I definitely enjoyed this story!
The epic was surprisingly easy to read and comprehend. I am detail oriented, though, so all those little minute details and play-by-play descriptions that would probably drive other people crazy are elements that I appreciate, because I always have to make sure I have all the facts straight. If I don’t, sometimes I miss out on important things in the story, but that definitely was not an issue in The Odyssey.
I think one of my favorite scenes is still the first time Odysseus and Telemachus reunite. It is just such a sweet moment! It is as if Odysseus sheds his “hero cloak” completely and just breaks down and takes in this moment with his son. Odysseus has not gotten to watch his son grow up, become a man, struggle through and overcome tribulation, or enjoy life. What an overwhelming moment it would be to finally see him again, especially when Telemachus never lost faith in Odysseus. Even if the end of the story was a little choppy and just “ended,” at least that moment was one of complete reconciliation. At least that part was something we as readers would expect.
9/10/11 Odyssey Journal 2
In class our group talked about the women of The Odyssey. Jacob made a very good point that Homer must have respected women, because he portrayed them in such a light that exemplified their strength and determination. They did not fit the stereotypical stay-at-home moms or housewives who existed solely for the service and benefit of men. Who would keep the house going when the men were off at war? The households probably had servants, but the women must have had to step up and take charge of things while their husbands were gone. Penelope, for example, spent ten years fending off suitors while her husband was off at war and slowly making his way back home. She did not even know for sure if he would ever come back, yet she stayed strong and never gave up on him. I would probably break after ten years, especially since they were very young when they got married, and he has been gone for so many years. That amount of time could very well have lead to maturity and outgrowing “young love.”
Athena is another example of strength. She is the goddess of wisdom, so of course she is going to pull some really smart moves, but the faith that she has in Odysseus is amazing. She never gave up on him, even when he slipped up and did not follow instructions or when his arrogance almost got him killed (as was the case with the Cyclops). Athena also seemed to be very influential, because she could talk the gods into being just a little more gracious to Odysseus. Those gods must have had some respect for her, because they listened when she proposed an idea and sometimes changed their minds. This, again, shows a little of the respect Homer must have had for women, because he makes a point of Athena being wise and influential. She is almost the “hand of God” in the story, because she is always saving Odysseus or guiding him and telling him exactly what to do.
9/2/11 Odyssey Journal
Odysseus is much more of an honorable hero than Gilgamesh. He is exhibits bravery, valor, strength, intelligence (in ruling a successful kingdom), and is loved by his countrymen. I get the impression that Odysseus is almost god-like in these characteristics, however, his humanity still shows through. As was pointed out in class, this expression of being merely human makes him more of a hero. In my eyes, this is for two reasons—1) he has all these amazing traits, but is also very relatable and just like the average person, and 2) he is still only human but is able to overcome the normal societal standards and fight a ten year battle all the way back home. He just wants to be home again, and anyone can relate to that at one point in their lives or another! This story is a lot easier for me to follow, because the writing style is a bit different in that it is more descriptive in events and gives a play-by-play of every detail.
The multiple gods in this epic pose a bit of confusion for the mortals. If I were a person living during this time, keeping track of all those gods would be confusing enough, but add in the fact that the gods seem to be temperamental and opinionated as well, and that would just scare me more than anything. I would feel like I was walking on pins and needles and holding my breath, trying to be nondescript and not do anything to tip off the gods’ moodiness. Also, though this is a myth, how would those people feel, knowing that these glorified “essences” were the ones more or less controlling their lives/destinies? I get the sense of hopelessness by putting myself in their shoes, because, for example, if something bad was happening in my life, and I did not know the reason, I would not be able to take consolation in the fact that “everything happens for a reason.” The best explanation I might have is that I forgot to sacrifice to the gods on Tuesday, or Poseidon got angry with me for making poor use of my water supply. I could never be sure if what was happening was being administered by the gods with my best interest in mind, or if the gods were just having a bad day and needed to take it out on the mortals. If the gods did not quarrel amongst themselves and show this instability, I could be more assured that everything happened for a reason and to better my destiny. The instability, however, is a factor that would evoke doubt in my faith in them.
8/26/11 Gilgamesh Journal
For most of this epic, Gilgamesh has not really impressed me. He was not the best king. His own people were even crying out to the gods for deliverance from Gilgamesh. He was able to befriend Enkidu, but he still gave me the impression of being very arrogant. He always expects that he will get the best. It was not until Enkidu died that I changed my perception about Gilgamesh. The depth of sorrow and love and caring portrayed by Gilgamesh during that tragic time evoked pity in me as a reader. As someone said in class today, that incident makes him very relatable. His grief was not necessarily a weakness, but more of a sensitive side. I think every hero in every story shows his or her sensitive side eventually, and that is one thing that makes them a hero—the fact that normal people, the readers, can relate to the hero, the one with the super powers or the one who swoops in and saves the day. Heroes cannot just be cold people who do something good or achieve some great feat but have no “soft human” characteristics (sensitivity, caring, feeling). These characteristics make the hero likeable. And that popularity, in turn, is yet another aspect that makes a hero who he is.
On a different note, I honestly cannot figure out the correlation between 1) Gilgamesh’s hunger for increasing power and immortality, 2) his grief over Enkidu, and 3) his desire to live eternally despite having to live it without his companion, when he said that his life was nothing now that Enkidu was gone. Now I’m going to be a bit girly and sensitive here, but what I would like to think is that Gilgamesh wants to live eternally as a symbol of his everlasting brotherly love for his companion. Gilgamesh wants to do this to prove he will always love Enkidu. (Whoever it was that came up with that idea in class today, by the way, kudos to you, I liked that! I would give you credit, but I cannot remember who said it). That idea might be a long shot, but it is at least a possibility, I think. That does, however, leave out the question of why Gilgamesh is still so hungry for power. It seems a little selfish after all this change he has undergone, but maybe that is just what I think.
This is definitely one of the more “unorthodox” and different hero stories than the typical ones, in that…well honestly, I cannot really just look at the story and know what it is that makes Gilgamesh a hero. For example, everyone knows Superman saves the day, Batman fights evil, Beowulf nobly defends his countrymen, but Gilgamesh…what is it that makes him a hero? It is something I have to think about and read more about to figure out.
12/9/11 The Qur’an vs. the Bible
I just found this really awesome verse as I was reading a little Christmas devotion today. The verse in the devotion led me to read the rest of the chapter—2 Peter 3. Okay, so we talked about how the Qur’an confirms the Bible, BUT it distorts really important little things, like Daniela and Christine said. Also, the Qur’an disregards the Christian belief that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, so that’s kind of a big difference, I guess (sarcasm). Anyways, I was just stunned by how insightful and filled with the Holy Spirit Simon Peter was. Hope this makes sense...
2 Peter 3:16b-18 reads, “His [Paul’s] letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position. But grown in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.” Peter knew that people would distort the gospel. Some of it is hard to understand for people, yes, and instead of seeking people to help them discern it, they read into it their own meaning, which leads to dangerous distortion. Reading into it what you think it means is not what God intended, and you are then reading your word, not God’s, and this is dangerous—“to their own destruction”! Like I said earlier, the Qur’an is shown to do this very thing—distort vital facts of the Bible (specifically the gospel in the New Testament). It just blows me away how God knows everything, and He spoke, through His disciples and in His word, to all those who choose to follow Him, warning us that there will be false prophets in the future. It’s just amazing to me to see these warnings and teachings fulfilled and very real today!
Please understand that this is coming from my personal beliefs and reflections. I do NOT write this to offend anyone, I’m just reflecting and journaling on what I believe is true and what I hold fast to. Also, I'm only pointing out this distortion and the warning against it from the New Testament in direct relation to the "holy text" of Islam. But I couldn’t help but share the awesomeness of my God! J
12/2/11 It’s December!
This was a solid idea for a research paper. I was pretty excited about the topic I chose and thought it might be a fun thing to research (for once). Hopefully others felt the same.
One paper in particular that I edited was laid out really well. Her thoughts were well developed and I noticed a clear path of where she was going in each paragraph. It all fit together into an explanatory timeline of sorts, showing how love and marriage and the attitudes toward them have changed and reverted over the centuries. Her paper really felt like I was reading a research paper, because there was a distinct section that was devoted to informing the reader about her topic from the period of ancient Greece up to the modern day. Directly following, she expounded on the story of Aeneas and Dido in The Aeneid in order to exemplify the effect relationships for the sake of love can have on a love-struck individual. Concluding from this story and going off of a quote by Jens Peter Jacobsen, she made the point that sometimes marriage solely based on love or infatuation can get complicated, messy, and “poison” the affected party. At first, it struck me as odd that she would so boldly state that marriage based solely on love has a good chance of falling apart, but she remedied this by adding a claim that there should be a balance between love and reality (reality being an understanding of money and functionality). It makes sense that a strong marriage should have a good balance of love, yet not being naïve, on the part of both individuals.
Technically, the paper had just a few minor glitches that can be easily corrected. Structurally, it was close to golden! Again, one tiny little glitch, but that was hardly worth mentioning. I enjoyed reading it, and I got the feel that it was a topic chosen in the writer’s interest as well.
11/18/11 Some Neat Art…”How does this make you feel?”
The outside of the museum is very majestic and classic looking and the stone is beautifully carved. I like the mix of white stone and brick used in the architecture, because I think it hints at the mixture of art within. There are ancient artifacts, pre-modern and modern sculptures and paintings, and contemporary art works as well. The structure of the inside of the building is very simple, with spacious, open rooms and methodically laid out works. There seems to be a rhythm in the transitions between rooms and within all the rooms themselves. The sculpture court is an interesting place. A couple of the sculptures are old, representing gods and goddesses, which stand in stark contrast to the monumental abstract painting on the wall above the fork in the staircase. The newer addition, “Be Like Water,” adds a calming effect to the whole area. It hangs from the ceiling peacefully, all one nondescript color, softly refracting light coming in from broad windows. The sculpture court is a gentle way to welcome visitors because it is spacious, simple, and does not contain an overwhelming slew of artwork. Additionally, there are two sculptures of women dancing joyfully, which just add a blissful and positive feeling to the room I think. I feel like the message and aura of each room is very well defined by the works the room contains. It is easy to get lost in the time period during which the paintings were done. The contemporary rooms are bright and sterile, giving off a sort of cold feeling, while the rooms that contain works from the Renaissance and even medieval periods are a little darker and make use of warmer colors, which coincide with the feeling of continuity and soft lines represented in the paintings (more so in the Renaissance). Traveling through the rooms is like easing from one period in history to the next. I’m no art expert, but I think if you spend enough time gazing at all the different art, you can learn a lot about what was happening in history.
One of my favorite pieces is the “Helmet-mask” in the room right off the sculpture court (I forget what that room’s called…) Anyways, I just think it’s really interesting and certainly tribal. The use of all those natural elements—monkey hide, hair, etc.—strongly represents the indigenous people who created it. It’s also pretty terrifying. If I saw a dude running at me wearing that contraption on his head, I’m not quite sure what I would do. So, yea, I like the art museum. There is SO much in there to absorb and observe; I would have to go multiple times to take everything in. It always makes me tired.
11/11/11 WHOA LOOK AT THE DATE!
My group is presenting on death and the underworld, and it would have been super helpful if the Aeneid was part of that segment, at least the part about Aeneas descending in to the underworld. It is so descriptive and really paints a picture of the eeriness and sketchiness of the underworld. That’s one thing I like about Virgil’s story—he pays attention to detail without being overly repetitive, like in the Odyssey… It is imaginative and enjoyable to read.
The part about the underworld being easy to get to but hard to leave reminded me of “Hotel California”—“You can check out any time you want, but you can’t ever leave.” The song also has an ominous or sinister feel to it. Once you are in the underworld, it seems like you are captivated almost by all the people there that you knew and loved and want to spend time with. At the same time, I always get nervous when I read about a mortal (or still living) being descending into the underworld, because, knowing the touchiness of all the gods, I feel like one of those immortals would get all angry that life was tainting their world of death and cast the poor fellow off to Tartarus or something.
So I have some questions—we established in class that Aeneas went to the underworld to talk to his father, right? But I thought his charge was to bring the golden branch to Persephone, the queen of the underworld, and also to give one of his shipmates a proper burial so he wouldn’t have to roam around in limbo forever.
Also, I really liked those pictures on the Wiki of Sybil’s cave. It looks so cool! It’s kind of ominous but beautiful, the way I pictured it as I was reading. It is very mythical. I’m surprised at how intricate and developed it is, with all its carved stone and almost well landscaped surroundings. I vote we take a field trip, any takers? J
11/9/11 Splendid Ideas
SO, I have an idea for my paper, as follows:
I am definitely interested in ancient Greece. Seems like we certainly have gotten our fill of the mythology aspect as pertaining to the heroes and “upper class” people (kings, rulers). What I want to know about now are the slaves, the “low-life” group. I will explore the way the slaves were treated in Greek (and possibly Roman) culture—what they were responsible for, how they were acquired, and the dynamics of their relationships with their masters, etc. I found a book on the guilt of slavery in Greek scripture, so that will play a role in my paper as well. That’s about it for my abstract idea.
11/4/11 Music, tradition, and other such thingsThe way I read that line about ritual and goodness is that Confucius is arguing against ritual as just going through the motions. If you aren't good and you don't perform the ritual in the proper spirit, then there is no point. [MH]
I’m thinking about the [On Ritual and Music] section, book III. In verse 3, Confucius says that a man who is not good can have nothing to do with ritual. I feel like he is saying that ritual defines your goodness, which is so strange to me. So, if you do something just because everyone else has done it for eons, that makes you a good person? It seems like that would make all actions empty and insincere. This seems to reflect what Jesus said in Matthew 23:25, chastising the Pharisees for looking showy and clean outwardly, and putting on the mask, but inwardly they were filled with greed and selfishness. Confucius seems to advocate this—not necessarily as explicitly and in a way that accuses people of being greedy inwardly, but in a way that implies that even if your “heart isn’t in the right place” to do something courteous or kind, do it anyways, because it’s tradition. Look outwardly pretty, regardless of the condition of your heart. As far as music is concerned, I don’t really know what Confucius is alluding to there, unless he is just saying that music is inherently incredible and no one who is not good can have anything to do with such awesomeness ;) but I think that’s probably not where he was going with that. So anyways, I’m not going to pretend I have a good theory about that…
But then, Confucius says, “In ritual at large it is a safe rule always to be too sparing rather than too lavish…” So do whatever you need to do anyways, just don’t make it TOO showy and obvious. Also, if one is too sparing in ritual, that seems to encourage being devoid of emotions while performing whatever acts. When it comes to mourning, however, Confucius says this should be done out of true grief rather than fear. So now it sounds like he’s coming around and saying, “Oh, well, there are some things that you should act upon out of conviction,” (like mourning). This guy, at least in this little blurb, is quite unorthodox. No wonder he’s a famous philosopher and thinker.
10/29/11 Livin’ it up with “The Good Life”
I’ve decided that talking about the “Good Life” is totally subjective and kind of a circular argument. We established that the good life may be defined for some people through material things, some through spiritual wholeness, some through dying happy, some through feeling fulfilled in their accomplishments. But if you die happy but had a really crappy life, then is that really a good life? You all know, because you were there. But anyways, I think the fundamental idea behind the philosophy of the good life is fairly accurate—fulfillment, true satisfaction and joy, and having been content in your possessions. I think that religion plays a huge role in the first bit about satisfaction and fulfillment. Different people will obviously find fulfillment in their own respective religions—Buddhists through meditation, Christians through Jesus, etc. I guess religion doesn’t have everything to do with a sense of “good feeling” though. I’m sitting here listening to some pretty awesome music and realizing that people could very well find a sense of contentment by losing themselves in their favorite music. The spectrum of possibilities is endless, which is kind of what makes this a big circle of a discussion topic. As far as media goes, I think media does feed off of people’s desires and cravings. We, as Americans, are naturally very materialistic because we just have so much! So I think the media appeals to that and inundates society with the “next best product”, which in turn fuels our materialism. Our materialism can lead to discontent in a lot of cases. The more we have, the more we want and the less happy we become. It’s an endless downward spiral spinning further away from living the “good life”. This kind of took a different turn but that’s where my though process goes I suppose!
10/20/11 Mid-term Evaluation
This has definitely been my favorite class this semester. It is the most engaging, interesting, and laid back of all my classes. My perspective has been widened so much, just by hearing other opinions; I’ve thought about things in a way I never would have on my own. I’m not really an “out-of-the-box” thinker, although I’d like to think I am (I’m working on that…) Anyways, this class has pushed me to think outside the box a little. Having group discussions usually gets all my questions answered about certain texts and whatnot. As far as learning goes, I chose the honors college for this very reason. Instead of getting lectured at and painstakingly forced to absorb dry information, this class helps me learn by presenting questions that I have to complete by engaging my own thoughts and opinions and lacing them through other people’s thoughts and the context of the text we are reading. Basically, this class helps me learn more effectively because it incorporates my efforts with those of the professor and my classmates. In all of this, I feel like we as a class still have fun and can make jokes and laugh about things while staying on the topic of our discussion. It’s nice to be able to have fun in a class setting at nine in the morning!
Also, Dr. Hartman doesn’t seem as much like a person with power over students, but like someone who wants to have a stimulating conversation with his students and cares what we have to say enough to add his input and guide our conversations. One issue I was worried about with going to a state school was that I would feel like just a number, not a student. This small honors class certainly does not have that feeling, which is really nice.
Now, there is just one thing I would change about this course, but it is a somewhat meaningless and petty change. I think I would have a lot of takers on the idea of having class in DeHo as opposed to walking (in the lovey temperamental Indiana weather) to Robert Bell. J In all seriousness, however, there isn’t anything I can think of that I would readily like to change about the course. I think Dr. Hartman does an effective and thorough job of leading and instructing our course on ancient literature.
10/14/11 Antigone: Loyal or a Lunatic...?
Antigone sure had a strong sense of family. Either that or a death wish. Or maybe just a lot of pride. At any rate, she’s quite the forceful individual. I find it honorable that she wanted so badly to have a proper burial for her brother (or so it appeared she wished for this). This shows that, no matter what, family is still family. Even if your brother is a traitor to your country and killed your other brother, that does not change the fact that he is still your own flesh and blood. So maybe that sounds a little radical. I am by no means advocating treason and loving the enemy. I am just pointing out the extreme devotion and sense of family blood that this woman had. On the other hand, as the story progresses, Antigone seems to be increasingly more prideful. She even exclaims, “Glory! Give me glory…” (l. 561). It’s like she is just throwing up her hands and saying “For Pete’s sake, man, just recognize that I’m doing something that totally goes against the grain, so I deserve some recognition!” This makes me feel like she is using her brother’s burial to boost her own image, or become this great martyr in her own mind. Which is kind of horrifying and heartless. I realize that this entry went all the way to the North pole then down to the South pole in 200 words, but I guess that’s the way my brain works. Anyways, had her motives been pure, Antigone could be a very admirable lady, but the fact that she was so eager to die for her own glory kind of puts a damper on that nice thought. Additionally, I hardly think it was up to the king to command families to leave their very own dead loved ones out in the street to be mutilated by buzzards and whatnot. That is pretty sadistic, first of all, and secondly, I don’t think a king should have the right to meddle with such personal issues within the family unit. I mean, he might as well be telling them to sell their own dear mother or brother for a pat on the back. I think the king can rule whatever he wants politically and socially, but when it comes to personal family issues and the way family loves each other, no ruler can be sovereign over that.
If You’re Going Back HomeBy: August Frisco, based on song“If You’re Going Through Hell” by Rodney Atkins
Well, you know those years
When you feel like there’s a target on your head
Just bright enough for Cyclops’ eye,
And to hurt Helios’ pride?
Things go from bad to Hades
You think you’re so unfortunate
And then…your ship gets blown off course!
You step off the deck of your ship
And you’re in Kalypso’s arms
You try to run away,
But she kind of steals your heart.
Ask directions from Athena
‘Cause you know that she’ll be there
To save the day.
And that’s only the beginning.
Chorus:
If you’re going back home,
Keep on sailing, don’t be dumb;
If you’re cocky don’t show it;
You might get home
Before the suitors steal your wife away!
Well you’ve been deep down into Hades,
And lost a lot of men.
Watched a hundred different monsters
Pick off your crew for lunch.
And you knew that if you didn’t
Open your mouth and trash talk Cyc, they’d be alive, dude…
But the good news
Is Athena’s always somehow on your side,
Whisperin’ in your ear, saving your neck day by day.
You’re lucky she’s a god, because mortals
Would have given up
Twelve years ago.
You know it’s true.
If you’re going back home,
Keep on sailing, don’t be dumb;
If you’re cocky, don’t show it;
You might get home
Before the suitors steal your wife away!
(repeat chorus 2x)
10/6/11 Rama and the Multi-headed Beasties; Heracles
So I don’t know if anyone else has seen A Little Princess, but while reading the Ramayana all I could think about was that movie and the continuing story Sarah told about Prince Rama rescuing his princess from the ten-headed beast Ravana. I see now that the movie told a much more simplified version of the story, but reading the actual story explains the whole business with the monkey in the movie. I never understood that, but it makes sense now that the man from India always has a monkey hanging around with him, because the monkey princes in the story are kind of a big deal. I mean, they did make it possible for Rama to save his darling. So instead of praying to gods or whatever, what better way to be in the “spiritual loop” than have a god itself, a monkey, on your shoulders grasping your head all day? I see the correlation; it’s quite an interesting concept. Now, I’m totally not trying to bash Indian culture and religion at all—what they believe is what they believe and I respect that—but honestly, I can’t help but chuckle a little when reading about…monkey princes. Monkeys. As royalty/deity? It’s a fairly comical thing to picture! I just see these cute little creatures running around in purple robes trimmed in gold, wearing crowns, and building an epic bridge. I also see this one older monkey—wiser than all the rest of course—with deep creases in his face, meditating and intuitively governing his fellow monkeys of the royal court. So maybe I got a little hung up on the Indian concept of divinity, but what can I say? I’m a zoology major, animals are kind of my thing. So Rama defeats this mega-beastie, rescues his lovely lady, and returns a hero, obviously. And he couldn’t have done it without the monkeys!
Now, about this poor Heracles character, I feel a bit sympathetic toward him, because he gets this nice little package of Missions Impossible that he has to complete. So he goes and slays this Hydra, but needs a little help, because the thing happens to be immortal. Oh, but he got help killing the Hydra, so, sorry man, that one doesn’t count on your list of completed Missions Impossible. But he doesn’t give up! He is determined to finish the tasks, and he does just that. Heracles completes all twelve impossibles in spite of the fact that he doesn’t get credit for some of them. This shows humility and determination, which sounds suspiciously like the makings of a good hero.
9/30/11 Hebrew Scriptures Journal
Regarding Job, I think this book can be used to explain one of the reasons bad things happen to good people. It could be God using trials to test the strength of his children’s faith. Those who break down and curse God are the ones whose faith is not as strong as they might think it is. Those who praise God nonetheless, and submit to and trust His ultimate will and realize they are nothing but chaff in the wind in the grander scope of things, those are the people whose faith is a “sweet song” to God, ringing strong, clear and true. Job’s story could also be seen as one of God’s ways to strengthen the faith of His people. This goes back to what Elisabeth said in class about “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.” Satan pushed Job within an inch of his life, but he didn’t kill him. And we see that Job came out stronger in the end. God blessed him with exponentially more than he had to begin with. Job praised God, and I’m willing to bet that His faith in God was just on fire by the end of that ordeal.
Psalms is just so beautiful. Having read through most of them, I see the beauty of David’s love for his heavenly King, God, in David’s lyrical praise and adoration. He realizes that God is his comforter, his stronghold, and his shepherd. God is the one who will see David through everything and take care of him day after day, even if David feels like God is failing him. David complains here and there, sure, but he’s human, and we all do that. In the end, he realizes that he is safe and secure in his God. That’s beautiful to me because I relate to the way David feels. He articulates true worship of the Lord so well.
9/23/11 God vs. Zeus & Co.
Well, I don’t exactly know what to reflect on at the moment, quite honestly, so I’ll just go with my favorite issue brought up in these creation myths: monotheism vs. polytheism. The Genesis account basically sticks out like a sore thumb in regards to this issue. Aside from the “Hymn to Aten”, it is the only creation account that celebrates one sovereign deity. But I think it goes a little bit deeper than that. I love the point that Daniela brought up in class—you can’t put the Hebrew God into a box. The multiple gods in the Greek culture are so like humans; they are quarrelsome, rash, emotional. They are interdependent, especially for knowledge of which god is manipulating which human pawn on which day and whatnot. The one sovereign Hebrew God is one in Himself—no one to reason with, no one to be angered at, no one to direct the question, “What is going on?” at because He already knows everything. He is a God who evokes the respect kind of fear from His children, not the shaking-in-your-boots kind of fear that the Greek gods seem to evoke in their minions.
Ok, so the Hebrew God is more fatherly and loving than the multiple Greek gods. But there still seems to be something that clearly sets Him apart from humans. He is God, we are human, and there is this great divide between the divine and humans, which seems to be so clear in the Genesis account. But what is it that makes that segregation so evident? I believe there is something more than just myth and hear-tell going on here. How do you pinpoint the spiritual difference between omniscient, omnipotent, perfect God and the depraved human race? I suppose the best explanation is the fall of man; the triumph of sin over perfect man in the beginning, when Eve then Adam partook of the fruit from the forbidden tree and ushered sin into the world. Sin and ultimate perfection cannot coexist. Another example of this Hebrew God being loving is when, even after this cosmic screw-up happened courtesy of our own human race, in the face of God, completely disobedient to this all-powerful God, God still provided those same dumb, wishy-washy humans with something to wear to hide their nakedness and shame—“Unto Adam also, and to his wife, did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them,” (p. 91). I mean let’s be real, Zeus would have sent a bolt of lightning through Eve’s heart and conspired with Poseidon to send his freaky Cyclops son to eat Adam for breakfast. So I guess that makes God pretty patient and forgiving too, not to mention level-headed.
9/16/11 Odyssey Journal 3
So, Odysseus’ travels and adventures have finally come to a grand end! (Took long enough, right?) As I was reading the last few books, I did realize how suspenseful the end of the story actually is. It may not be the same kind of suspense that is in books we read today or movies we see, but the elements are definitely there. By that I mean the story takes a long time to play itself out, and we might even tire of it after a while, but if we look at certain events, they clearly build up anticipation. For example, the suitors constantly egg on Odysseus, making him increasingly angry. The weapons are placed in a strategic spot. Telemachus and Odysseus constantly plan out their attack. Most grotesquely, there is the illusion of the suitors’ faces going pallid and blood covering the walls. In Homer’s time, I am willing to bet all of those situations put the audience on the edges of their seats. The difference in language/translation may not do the same for us today, but I can definitely see how it is such a popular and timeless epic. Maybe that’s just me who didn’t feel the suspense. I don’t really know. But I definitely enjoyed this story!
The epic was surprisingly easy to read and comprehend. I am detail oriented, though, so all those little minute details and play-by-play descriptions that would probably drive other people crazy are elements that I appreciate, because I always have to make sure I have all the facts straight. If I don’t, sometimes I miss out on important things in the story, but that definitely was not an issue in The Odyssey.
I think one of my favorite scenes is still the first time Odysseus and Telemachus reunite. It is just such a sweet moment! It is as if Odysseus sheds his “hero cloak” completely and just breaks down and takes in this moment with his son. Odysseus has not gotten to watch his son grow up, become a man, struggle through and overcome tribulation, or enjoy life. What an overwhelming moment it would be to finally see him again, especially when Telemachus never lost faith in Odysseus. Even if the end of the story was a little choppy and just “ended,” at least that moment was one of complete reconciliation. At least that part was something we as readers would expect.
9/10/11 Odyssey Journal 2
In class our group talked about the women of The Odyssey. Jacob made a very good point that Homer must have respected women, because he portrayed them in such a light that exemplified their strength and determination. They did not fit the stereotypical stay-at-home moms or housewives who existed solely for the service and benefit of men. Who would keep the house going when the men were off at war? The households probably had servants, but the women must have had to step up and take charge of things while their husbands were gone. Penelope, for example, spent ten years fending off suitors while her husband was off at war and slowly making his way back home. She did not even know for sure if he would ever come back, yet she stayed strong and never gave up on him. I would probably break after ten years, especially since they were very young when they got married, and he has been gone for so many years. That amount of time could very well have lead to maturity and outgrowing “young love.”
Athena is another example of strength. She is the goddess of wisdom, so of course she is going to pull some really smart moves, but the faith that she has in Odysseus is amazing. She never gave up on him, even when he slipped up and did not follow instructions or when his arrogance almost got him killed (as was the case with the Cyclops). Athena also seemed to be very influential, because she could talk the gods into being just a little more gracious to Odysseus. Those gods must have had some respect for her, because they listened when she proposed an idea and sometimes changed their minds. This, again, shows a little of the respect Homer must have had for women, because he makes a point of Athena being wise and influential. She is almost the “hand of God” in the story, because she is always saving Odysseus or guiding him and telling him exactly what to do.
9/2/11 Odyssey Journal
Odysseus is much more of an honorable hero than Gilgamesh. He is exhibits bravery, valor, strength, intelligence (in ruling a successful kingdom), and is loved by his countrymen. I get the impression that Odysseus is almost god-like in these characteristics, however, his humanity still shows through. As was pointed out in class, this expression of being merely human makes him more of a hero. In my eyes, this is for two reasons—1) he has all these amazing traits, but is also very relatable and just like the average person, and 2) he is still only human but is able to overcome the normal societal standards and fight a ten year battle all the way back home. He just wants to be home again, and anyone can relate to that at one point in their lives or another! This story is a lot easier for me to follow, because the writing style is a bit different in that it is more descriptive in events and gives a play-by-play of every detail.
The multiple gods in this epic pose a bit of confusion for the mortals. If I were a person living during this time, keeping track of all those gods would be confusing enough, but add in the fact that the gods seem to be temperamental and opinionated as well, and that would just scare me more than anything. I would feel like I was walking on pins and needles and holding my breath, trying to be nondescript and not do anything to tip off the gods’ moodiness. Also, though this is a myth, how would those people feel, knowing that these glorified “essences” were the ones more or less controlling their lives/destinies? I get the sense of hopelessness by putting myself in their shoes, because, for example, if something bad was happening in my life, and I did not know the reason, I would not be able to take consolation in the fact that “everything happens for a reason.” The best explanation I might have is that I forgot to sacrifice to the gods on Tuesday, or Poseidon got angry with me for making poor use of my water supply. I could never be sure if what was happening was being administered by the gods with my best interest in mind, or if the gods were just having a bad day and needed to take it out on the mortals. If the gods did not quarrel amongst themselves and show this instability, I could be more assured that everything happened for a reason and to better my destiny. The instability, however, is a factor that would evoke doubt in my faith in them.
8/26/11 Gilgamesh Journal
For most of this epic, Gilgamesh has not really impressed me. He was not the best king. His own people were even crying out to the gods for deliverance from Gilgamesh. He was able to befriend Enkidu, but he still gave me the impression of being very arrogant. He always expects that he will get the best. It was not until Enkidu died that I changed my perception about Gilgamesh. The depth of sorrow and love and caring portrayed by Gilgamesh during that tragic time evoked pity in me as a reader. As someone said in class today, that incident makes him very relatable. His grief was not necessarily a weakness, but more of a sensitive side. I think every hero in every story shows his or her sensitive side eventually, and that is one thing that makes them a hero—the fact that normal people, the readers, can relate to the hero, the one with the super powers or the one who swoops in and saves the day. Heroes cannot just be cold people who do something good or achieve some great feat but have no “soft human” characteristics (sensitivity, caring, feeling). These characteristics make the hero likeable. And that popularity, in turn, is yet another aspect that makes a hero who he is.
On a different note, I honestly cannot figure out the correlation between 1) Gilgamesh’s hunger for increasing power and immortality, 2) his grief over Enkidu, and 3) his desire to live eternally despite having to live it without his companion, when he said that his life was nothing now that Enkidu was gone. Now I’m going to be a bit girly and sensitive here, but what I would like to think is that Gilgamesh wants to live eternally as a symbol of his everlasting brotherly love for his companion. Gilgamesh wants to do this to prove he will always love Enkidu. (Whoever it was that came up with that idea in class today, by the way, kudos to you, I liked that! I would give you credit, but I cannot remember who said it). That idea might be a long shot, but it is at least a possibility, I think. That does, however, leave out the question of why Gilgamesh is still so hungry for power. It seems a little selfish after all this change he has undergone, but maybe that is just what I think.
This is definitely one of the more “unorthodox” and different hero stories than the typical ones, in that…well honestly, I cannot really just look at the story and know what it is that makes Gilgamesh a hero. For example, everyone knows Superman saves the day, Batman fights evil, Beowulf nobly defends his countrymen, but Gilgamesh…what is it that makes him a hero? It is something I have to think about and read more about to figure out.