Wollstonecraft

Question: Remember how, as we were making modern connections with Wollstonecraft, and how she described that, in being educated, women of the eighteenth century (and their subsequent generations, I assume) would become more productive members of society?

Well, I ironically wrote about basically-the-same-thing for my Chinese final paper. I chose "Chinese women's education," and the research I found asserted that exact thing: that, with compulsory higher education for Chinese women (who have lived through quite an oppressive history), they would be able to lead fuller and more productive lives as participating members of society. Ma Wanhua, for example, is a professor at Peking University, and has written at length on the topic of higher education in China. It's funny how Wollstonecraft's thoughts are so relevant, not just in the West, even, but in the East today too.

The only qualm I have would be to ask exactly how women (eighteenth century, Chinese, or what have you) are going to contribute more to society. In other words, what does the phrase "contribute to society" actually mean for these women? And then, what if other things continue to stand in their way? I guess I might say that education for women, at any point in time, is one step towards a higher goal.

Olaudah Equiano and the Middle Passage

I think it would be super interesting to do some research on the middle passage. After seeing that small picture of it in the Equiano book in which there is the diagram of the layout of the ship and it shows how the people taken for slavery were "packed" in there, quite like sardines, it has really captured my interest as an interesting aspect of Equiano's life. It's interesting to think about because the total disregard for their physical (and by extension, possibly mental) comfort on the journey through the middle passage therefore also blatantly ignores their basic human rights. The fact that more would-be slaves died en-route also speaks to the irony of those basic human rights, too - besides not being able to help becoming seriously ill due to the conditions on the ships, some slaves attempted to throw themselves overboard. It's shocking to consider that they would have rather died in that way than remain alive and enslaved. I would love to do more research on this! An interesting topic, but still chilling nonetheless.

Golden Is Thy Fame

Yes, I went there with the title. It totally fits! Inspired by the rad cover of the Oxford edition of Letters of a Peruvian Woman and by our discussion of such gilded things (what up Hoop) I thought I would do a little research and see what I could enlighten myself with about golden Incan art.

I think we can safely assume that the golden objects present everywhere in Peru (as observed by Zilia) are a symbol of Incan civilization. There's a twist, though: the Incans do not seem to realize the value of the gold, in stark contrast to their overly greedy captors. It's everywhere you look: pounded into furniture, adorning the Temple of the Sun, and probably draping from more than a few human appendages (at least maybe some special people). Heck, it's über pretty and why not use it as a tool to represent the most sacred part of their culture and religion: the sun? A fair part of their lives seems to have been centered around sun worship. Indeed, Zilia assumes this new European land she has been brought to must be hallowed ground as well, for if the sun - assuming its fatherly figure, of course - allows its rays to reach here, then things must be alright somewhere.

The Incas probably would have retained an extensive knowledge of this precious metal. I bet they were great metallurgists (would goldsmiths be a better word? Did they work much with other metals?)

Here are some really cool artifacts similar to the mask-looking item from the cover. I found them on an online photo gallery called Odyssey, in case you wanted to look them up yourself (click on Odyssey). There are a ton of beautiful pictures of other Incan treasures, too.

1. Feline Idols (maybe to adorn the walls of a temple or home?)2. Nose-ring - HB, I suppose maybe you could consider this? Just kidding. Where would this even go? 3. Mask. I really like this one. Maybe it's the photo but it's such a brilliant color!

4. Earrings. I REALLY REALLY MUST HAVE A PAIR!

5. Crown. Notice how elaborate it is!

6. Goblets. (for drinking mais, or "corn beer"!)

Oroonoko

Remember how I was saying in class that, in compiling my bibliography for my preliminary topics, I was finding a lot of sources on both Othello and Oroonoko (together) about interracial relationships? The term for it is actually miscegenation, and if you look on JSTOR or any other database there's lots of information on the subject. For my topic it had a

I wanted to bring this article from Associated Content to the table because it has some interesting things to say about racism in Aphra Behn's story. If you have a look, you'll notice how critical it is of Behn's racist writings. It says that the many episodes of racism prove to "dilute the power of the story itself," stipulating that this "drag on the theme" was not intended. It goes on to cite a couple of remarks that reveal a "racist mind at work." The logic there is quite interesting.

The next page talks a bit about what we were saying in class, about Oroonoko being "Europeanized" by Behn, and confirms an interesting new take on the hero image we wrestled with. It's like Behn wanted to make him European in order to be a hero. The article then says that "Behn may decry racism loudly, but it didn't stop her from incorporating it into her writing."

However, the article takes an unexpected turn when the author suggests that Behn's "most dangerous form of racism is reserved for members of her own race," mentioning the various ways the white people in the story are portrayed in such negative lights. Still, the book is fairly heavily criticized, with the author implying that the story could have been written much better and its goals could have been achieved without the racist elements.

Did anyone else find Oroonoko to be particularly racist?

Tartuffe

I think it's amazing that a play that was originally written in French was able to be translated while preserving the rhyme. Truly amazing.

Loving the play. It's actually hilarious ("Tartuffified;" "Miss Smarty Pants").

Also a theme I am wondering about in the play: practical/rational vs. absurdity/irrationality. It keeps coming up... so does honor...

This post will be edited later.

--

Okay, I'm back. To continue my thought on rationality and irrationality, I think it's a major part of the play. The characters seem to be divided into these two groups: people like Cléante and Dorine are always there to be logical and rational, and constantly pointing out the inconsistencies and irrationality of people like Madam Pernelle and, especially, Orgon. Even Orgon admits that his emotions got the best of him, indicating that was why he was so irrational: "Emotions got the best of me, it's true" (V, iii, 75.) The "irrational" people are made so by their contradictions, exaggerations, and absurd ideas, such as when Tartuffe claims that "Because our reputations are our wealth." (III, iv, 133). There are really tons of different points in the play when the practical people are pointing out the failed logic of the impractical ones.

Speaking of Tartuffe, however, he is an interesting character throughout the play because I think it's hard to fit him in either the rational or the irrational category. I guess on the outside he would seem insane (to the logical types like Dorine and Cléante, at least). But on the inside, if he knows he is fooling people like Orgon, I wonder if that makes him clever. I think that Tartuffe manages to escape rationalism via hypocrisy and irony, as seen for example in Act IV, Scene 1. I laughed when Tartuffe says (IV, i, 23-24),

"Heaven's best interests will have been served,

When wrongdoers have got what they deserved."

Ironic, right? It's like he won't even admit to being crazily irrational. SOMEONE'S in denial! I still have to point out my favorite "Tartuffe is irrational" part (IV, v, 119-122):

"There'll be no sins for which we must atone,

'Cause evil exists only when it's known.

Adam and eve were public in their fall.

To sin in private is not to sin at all."

SERIOUSLY, Tartuffe?! If you're so pious, you would know that God is all-knowing and all-powerful. Do you even hear the words that are coming out of your mouth? Do YOU even believe what you say, or are you just trying to fool Elmire, along with everyone else? What a loser.

In the end, I enjoyed how the tables turned for Orgon too when he saw for himself what Tartuffe was really like, and thus became exasperated when trying to explain that to his mother (Madam Pernelle).

My favorite "logical" scene, as I like to think of it, came at the end of Act V, Scene 5 (lines 9-12). This is just after Madam Pernelle realizes everything about Tartuffe, and Dorine has something to say about the material wealth Orgon and his family has. She says,

"Because men are corrupted by their wealth.

Out of concern for your spiritual health,

He's taking, with a pure motivation,

Everything that keeps you from salvation."

LOVE IT! Even though, yet again, Orgon asks her if she has tired of him saying "Quiet!" to her, Dorine has presented us with the best logic ever. HA! LOGIC WINS AGAIN! How does THAT feel, Tartuffe?! Great play!

Paraíso Perdido

Wood engraving: Gustave Doré, 1866.

Satan's Descent. Isn't this an eerie picture?

We have been talking a lot in class about the concepts of light and dark, but there was one thing I did not have a chance to bring up on Thursday. I thought I would draw everyone's attention to the concept of the Tree of Knowledge. In Book IV, lines 510-520, we are told how Satan sees Adam and Eve walking and becomes very jealous of them (I like Milton's portrayal of Satan's complexity, by the way). I must be honest when I say I am not sure who is talking at that point, because at first I thought it was Satan, miserably watching as Adam and Eve are "imparadised in one another's arms," but the lines I wanted to discuss are these:

"...all is not theirs it seems:

One fatal tree there stands of knowledge called,

Forbidden them to taste: Knowledge forbidd'n?

Suspicious, reasonless. Why should their Lord

Envy them that? Can it be sin to know,

Can it be death?..."

I highlighted those as I was reading, because I think something remains to be said for the phrase "knowledge forbidd'n," and the possible consequences for Adam and Eve having gained it (sin, or possibly death). What kind of knowledge is this? Does the Knowledge (capital K) differ for Adam and for Eve? What about Knowledge of the truth of God (or, maybe like we discussed, "light?") Therefore, I wonder if Knowledge would then be equated with "shame," "perversion," or "sin." Although I cannot offer a definitive answer in this blog, maybe we could talk about this kind of apparently forbidden Knowledge more in class. What do you think that Knowledge could mean in any of these cases?

Anne Bradstreet

Well, I have to agree with the other girls in the class in saying that Anne Bradstreet was a great read. I loved exploring her life and learning not only about her experience (as a young woman, a colonist, an Elizabethan, a poet, the first American poet, etc.) but also a bit about Puritanism ideology and beliefs. I studied American History my junior year of high school, but we barely touched upon Puritanism, so I thought the book made a great examination of it.

However, you have to take a look at this article I found. It discusses a recent study that found that New England has surpassed the West Coast as the least religious region in America. It even mentions such "obvious suspects" as the "pedophilia scandal in the Catholic Church." It's a super interesting article, especially given everything we just read about the God-fearing religious fervor of the Puritans and the fact that they came to America to pursue their Utopia.

I was discussing this with some of the other girls, and we were thinking a lot about why exactly the Puritans came to the New World in the first place. Rather than promoting the idea of religious freedom, I feel like they came here to form that utopian society where they (as the dissenters) could flourish in their own Puritan mindset. There was no religious freedom here, as evidenced by the fear they had of other religious ideas, but rather they wanted to be exclusive in who they would accept into their community. I guess the end of the article put it best when it said that "religions are like denominations... They tend to shift." Have a look at it and tell me what you think!

"We have more curiosity than understanding. We grasp at everything, but catch nothing except wind."

Michel de Montaigne himself.

Love that quote! Seems especially fitting at times for the things we discuss in HUST (or perhaps me in Physics class). It comes from the very top of page 106 in the reading from Montaigne, "On Friendship" and "On Cannibalism" (2 hilariously different topics, in my opinion). It makes me wonder how much we really know for sure. I don't know, I don't really have a definitive response to this quote, but I thought I would bring it to your attention in case you hadn't already noticed it. It's kind of like the way he opens it, by stating that he wants to appear simple and natural, and that it is himself that he is going to portray. I like that: he is writing about what he knows best.

I enjoyed the Friendship reading too, but thought it a bit eerie the level of emotional investment this guy had in his friendships. I could see being extremely devoted to a lover or something like that, but on page 97 he discusses "some inexplicable power of destiny that brought about our union. We were looking for each other before we met..." That sounds awesome, but I'm not sure how much I believe in that. Don't get me wrong, friendships are great! No one likes friendships more than me! I am lacking in comments so if you see this and comment on it I'll send you my life story in a minute or less. But the friends I have, I met by chance - I doubt I would have my HUSTies if I never became a major, for example. I wonder why Montaigne seemed to be so invested in his friendships.

One final thing I thought I would bring up here is the matter of what Montaigne has to say about women, as seen in both the Friendship and Cannibalism books. In the former, he doubts that females have the capacities to undertake the relationships he talks about having with his friends. He states that "their souls do not seem firm enough to bear the strain of so hard and lasting a tie." Why? I disagree. On the other hand, in the Cannibalism book, he says of women that "some of their women employ themselves in the meantime with the warming of their drink, which is their principal duty." Why is that the women's principal duty? Did you notice any other comments about women in this article too?

Thinking about Cultural Geography

A shot of the ginormous Bodhisattva in the Yungang Grottoes - Bodhisattva means "enlightened being,"

so I thought it was appropriate for here, and for this class overall.

Click on it for a much larger view!

My topic for tomorrow's mini-presentation is from the "Cultural Geography" chapter in the Othello book. What a great edition - it comes with so many resources and helpful additions to the text that really helped enhance my understanding of the play itself, even from the one chapter I read.

Speaking of my chapter, I enjoyed thinking about new aspects of geography that I hadn't really considered previously. Although I will detail more in class (I have not organized all my ideas as this time yet), I wanted to point out here how much geography really can have to do with the way a play works - i.e., characters' attitudes, setting of the play, and even the way the audience perceives the play (depending on who you are).

Or, the author mentions how mapmaking became like an art or a science, and that collectors "attempted to write the world by compiling and classifying accounts of European travelers from across the globe." Immediately I thought of Mandeville, so it came as no surprise to me that Mandeville was brought up later on. I think it really adds a lot to a story to have a traveler be a part of it. I can experience whatever they are experiencing from the comfort of my dorm room (which is kind of like a small nation in itself). On the other hand, much of what Mandeville reported was heavily (and hilariously!) embellished, or perhaps downright mythical. I guess this just shows how those travel writers were so heavily influenced by legends and stories.

In either case, no matter how people viewed foreigners, I think that imaginations were still wont to run wild with curiosity about unexplored lands. I think this can even hold true today. Clearly the travel bug bit me, and so there always remains the option of visiting a new land and, besides learning something about that new culture, I might learn something about myself too. Sounds cheesy, and it might be really insignificant, but sometimes travelers can be a curious bunch.

Othello

I found this picture when I google-searched images of "Othello," it was my favorite one that I found.

I actually really enjoyed Othello. I am not always one for Shakespeare, but I did find this to be a good read. I was loathing Iago more and more as the play went along, and I couldn't help but think "what an a**" as the story progressed. As with my frustrations with teenage passions in Romeo and Juliet, I was also frustrated with Othello's unwavering trust in Iago, and his immediate jumping to conclusions without any substantial evidence whatsoever. I was surprised that, given Othello's normally very mature and slow-to-anger disposition as lieutenant, he was so quick to suspect Desdemona of infidelity. If it hadn't been for Iago fooling everyone like the puppets they were in his plan, no one would have ever had to be murdered in the first place. I guess one mark of a good writer is making the reader react in a way like this.

I wanted also to point out one interesting line from Desdemona (who sometimes has been referred to as "Desdemon"... does that mean anything or is it just a shorter way of saying her name? It's not really making it that much shorter). After Othello has smothered Desdemona in her bed on their wedding sheets (which I thought was weird), Emilia arrives and opens the bedcurtains to catch her mistress' dying breath. After Desdemona truthfully states that she has "died a guiltless death," Emilia asks her, "Oh, who hath done this deed?" Desdemona's response intrigues me: "Nobody; I myself. Farewell." Why does she say "I myself?" Is this because she is truly that good of a person that she will not even blame Othello for this after he killed her? Or, does she physically mean that no one killed her, but that she has murdered herself? I guess that when she says "I myself" then that could be taken both physically and metaphorically.

• What do you think Desdemona means when she says, "I myself"?

• Were you as frustrated with the way Othello took Iago so seriously without any real evidence too?

• Did you wonder also why Desdemona had Emilia make up their bed with their wedding sheets?

El Fin del Semestre

Well, my friends, it has been one hell of a semester. We have sure been through a lot, I think! Don't worry, this post isn't going to be heavy on the cheese... I'm just saying I am relieved and I just was thinking about what I've learned this year/semester, both academically and personally. (I can hear a certain someone groaning). [:

In fact, I should almost like to either update this blog, or possibly create a new one for my trip to China this summer. I have examined the itinerary and it sounds truly incredible, and there are some things on there that I never dreamed I would be doing. After all of the talking we have done about travel narratives and the like in class (I know everyone found Mandeville a little less than enthralling but as usual I thought it was totally cool), I think it would be neat to apply my HUST experiences and the very nature of the major to my own doings. That raises the questions I have seen discussed on other blogs of my fellow husties and in class about the level of personal things shared through various portals like the written sonnet from a book or the technological status on the Twitter of the Interwebz. Maybe no one cares? Maybe you all care deeply? Who knows. I hope everything turns out alright in the end.

Don't forget that we still need to order those sweatshirts! 

Thanks for the laughs! See you in August.

"Ideally"

"Ideally... theoretically... hopefully..."

Why do we use all of these words when we talk about things "as they should be?" If we want to regard things as being perfect we always use these words to preface what we want. But then, if we even have to use those words, then are we not just implying that what we are about to say is not quite possible? There are always flaws in us as humans that will prevent More's idea of "Utopia" from happening. I guess he did not really consider free will and the like when he imagined it! It's a good idea in theory, though... see, there I used it again!

When I was in class and we were talking about what came to mind when we thought of the word "Utopia," I mentioned something I saw in a magazine a while ago about different types of "places of paradise" as it pertains to different cultures. I should like to point out some of them for you here!

The first I mentioned was Valhalla. This is from Norse mythology (Icelandic sagas, anyone?), and it is a huge and majestic hall ruled over by the god Odin. Those who have heroically died in combat go there, and outside of it there is big golden tree, and the roof is lined with golden shields. It is supposed to be a hall of the "chosen dead," or the most heroic people. Neat, right?

 

I imagine "Clair de Lune" playing in the background.

The next one I thought of is called Shangri-la. Surely you have heard of this one! This mythical place was described by James Hilton in his novel Lost Horizon, and it is supposed to be a permanently happy land because it is isolated from the outside world. Ha! Interesting! The inhabitants of Shangri-la are supposed to be immortal. Did More consider immortality? No me acuerdo. It reminds me of a "Garden of Eden" sort-of place. Since I am going to China soon I think this a cool thing to talk about since it is like an exotic oriental ideal. 

Pretty picture, isn't it? Looks lovely!

Now, similar to Shangri-la, there is Shambhala, the place upon which Shangri-la is based. Shambhala is supposed to be a mythical kingdom in Tibet, (from Buddhism) and it has been mentioned in several ancient texts! It is a very spiritual place, but interestingly it seems to be hidden, which is an interesting concept because some places like this are either only attainable if you find them yourself, or if you have performed good deeds throughout your life, or what have you. So I suppose there are different ways of getting to these ideal places, because the issue in whether or not you have the ability to get there lies within yourself, within the "gods," or within society itself. Confusing!

I discovered this directly on the Shambhala website - it exists! It is the "Primordial Rigden Thangka." Taken directly from the website, it "portrays the basic enlightened nature of all human beings, their basic goodness."

If none of these things are the "ideal" place, then I don't know what is! But I thought it would be interesting to have a look at just a few of the different Utopias as imagined by several different cultures (and from several distinct time periods as well!)

Also, in case you wanted to click around a bit more and learn about Shambhala (I sort of find myself following in Gail's footsteps and experiencing an interest in Asian cultures) and it's really very fascinating. Go here!

What does your Utopia look like?

A Question For You

What do you suppose a heretic like Luther would have been treated like TODAY? I was sitting here getting annoyed with Google because I was looking for our Luther, not MLK Jr., and this question popped into my head. Would someone be able to create their own religion like that today? Would it be taken very seriously as a real threat to the Roman Catholic Church and the center of it all at the Vatican in Rome? Curious. I wonder. 

Incidentally, in case we all wanted to condense Lutero's 95 Theses into one convenient little bundle, here is a "word cloud," as it is called, which I created about the Theses [Brigette is right: it's also called a wordle]. What happens in a word cloud is that you provide a text and from that is generated the following neat little image that gives greater prominence to words that appear the most frequently in your text. 

I just thought this was rather droll so I supposed my fellow Husties might get a kick out of it. "Pardons..." "Pope..." "Indulgences..."

Go here to make your own wordle!

H i l a r i o u s !

What Methinks of Luther

[Everytime I see the name "Luther" I read it to myself as Lutero. Because that's how you say it in Spanish. Martín Lutero. Jajaja.]

Well I sure have been horrible about updating this. I apologize... I have had a lot going on in my life lately and I get really overwhelmed with school (understatement of the century). But better a bit late than never right?

I sense a post filled with such uncertainty coming - which is ironically a big part of this class, a big part of Luther, a big part of theology around the world? WEIRD!

Well, my biggest thing with Luther (that some of you might remember I have raised in class before) is... okay, I lied. TWO things.

1. The fact that he is searching for certainty and wants to rely not on good works but on faith alone. But... isn't faith precisely that? Uncertainty? 

2. The fact that he has the balls to break away from the Church and form his own religion. How is that possible? 

On one hand, sure, why shouldn't he be allowed to question his system of beliefs, because I suppose that many people go through that at some point in their lifetimes. I understand that. And I understand his frustration. Definitely. 

But on the other hand, "here, let me rewrite the Bible for you? The Gospel of Anyone NOT John? Unimportant! *dismissive wave of hand*" How does he assume he has the right to go ahead and do that? I wrote the word "authority" first there, instead of right, but then I refrained because I thought about how he said that we are all supposed to be equal as Christians. So I suppose that's the second issue I wanted to raise about Lutero and where he gets off creating his own religion like that.

Maybe I want to create my own religion. And not some sort of Scientology or Kabbalah bullshit because although money is a handy thing to have I am not out to scam people. No, in Meghanism everyone would treat everyone with respect and be hilarious while doing so. Humor is a wonderful thing and everyone should bubble over with happiness and they should laugh so hard they cry. I do that everyday! Now that makes me wonder how often Lutero laughed... curious.

Zee Poifect Gentlemahn

Hmmm...

Obviously since I have presented on Castiglione and his The Book of the Courtier, I thought I was able to give a lot of valid points in class (hopefully, right, at least I hope it was somewhat coherent). Even though, good lord, I am freaking out because I went way over the time limit. I promise it was not intentional! Believe me, I hate giving presentations and I am surprised I was able to talk for that long. Castiglione sure does have a lot to say about what exactly constitutes the perfect gentleman! One question, though: when one man suggests something and another man shoots it down, does that mean that, by default, Castiglione himself also hates that characteristic that he had his character shoot down? I do not know. Because remember, he is a courtier himself and he is constantly reflected in his work.

I think I went over enough themes in class as far as both the life of Castiglione and some humanism/Renaissance main points (I have posted my PowerPoint on the class wiki), so now I'd like to have some fun.

-cue Also Sprach Zarathustra-

First, there was chivalry.

Then, there was a courtier.

Now, there is a perfect gentleman!*

Castiglione can have his requirements for the ideal man? Well, here are MY thoughts for MY perfect man! [Note: Only some of my thoughts are included. I am an incredibly intricate woman and my brain is a swirling with complexities; so this is what I can think of for now. Teehee! Also, I suppose not all of these have to apply to simply dateable men, but rather any sort of man, friend, whatever. Get your mind out of the gutter.]

• Respect. Enough said.
• Humor. Also enough said.
• Courtesy. Kind of like respect, but a little different.
• Supportive. Duh!
• Sensitive. But not wimpy.
• Goal-oriented.
• Responsible. (I'm almost 21... you'd think this shouldn't be a problem. WRONG.)
• Fun. Entertain me!
• Honest. Don't lie to me. I will find out. And I will hunt you down.

See something I missed, ladies? Comment your little hearts out and add to this list!

These are the major ones I can think of for now. 

* I tried so very hard to think of something clever that could be alliterative and match the c-sound at the beginning of both chivalry and courtier but alas, the only thing that even remotely made sense was companion. But that wasn't exactly the right word I was looking for... I also briefly entertained the idea of "classic" or "classical" companion, or something, but that didn't really make as much sense as I had hoped. Sad.

Cereta, ugh

Here is a supposed image of Cereta, even though no portraits of her apparently survive.

WELP. When I ordered Cereta over Christmas Break, I remember thinking, "The Collected Letters of a Renaissance Feminist. Awesome." Now I hope you don't think I am being ridiculous or close-minded, because I did assume that the concept of feminism is a bit different now from what it was in the late 15th century or early 16th century. I just was somewhat wary about reading a book from that sort of topic. I did not know what to expect (like I said I assumed that the voice of feminism would be different then), because other than Christine de Pisan and some other female writers we encountered last semester, I have never really encountered or studied feminism. So, maybe like I have seen some of the other girls suggest, I do not understand that much about it. But just because I do not happen to agree with all feminist ideas does not mean I cannot have an open mind and a discussion about it. 

To be honest with you, I had trouble getting through the readings. There were some interesting parts, yes, but (and this might sound immature) but it was really long and quite dull to me, at least most of the time. A lot of times I was getting annoyed with the book ("I'm will not go into detail about blank but blah blah blah here it is anyway"). I also wasn't sure if, when indicating her anger with women "for their complicity in their own oppression," she was inadvertently lumping all women into that oppressed category or perhaps only some of the women that she observed in her day. I figure she is supposed to represent women as a whole? Much of the time it was hard to distinguish between whether or not she was talking about herself, and in what light I wanted to categorize those thoughts in: Humanism? Renaissance? Christian? I do not know. I guess it just really frustrated me, especially with the whole tension thing: there are some things that Cereta seems to be innately drawn to but that she also tries to shy away from because she thinks they are wrong. AUGH! How do I distinguish? 

There were some good and valid (and interesting!) points too. I really enjoyed the idea of Time (notice the capital T) as being a commodity, or a necklace. How fascinating, I had never considered it like that before. In that sense she also critiques fashion sometimes, so it is like... wait, where are you coming from again? Another thing I loved (because I totally enjoy weird metaphors) was the pen-needle/masculine-feminine thing. That was really interesting! Of course we also had to see the Fortune idea come up again, like we seem to see in so many readings... she is apparently obsessed with death and the afterlife. Of course I felt bad for her when her husband died, though...

I guess that is enough of my ramblings for now!

Considering Mandeville

I am sorry for being a little late on the blog. There just are not enough hours in the day.

Where to begin? I feel like I have SO much to say about this text! There are a lot of potential areas for discussion.

There are a couple of areas I would like to address...

Some of the girls mentioned their frustrations in class, which I can definitely sympathize with. There were a couple instances where I just wanted to put the book down because I was getting too caught up in all the minutiae. I thought we were supposed to be getting to the Holy Land at some point? At times I also questioned Mandeville's (that is, if he was even a real person) intentions besides that of telling us how to find the Holy Land. I suppose that, for pleasure, he also wants to discuss diversity (or at least appear that way?) And, well, he certainly accomplished that! There were so many places he told us about that I thought my head was going to explode among the thousands of elephants, women who cut off their, erm... yeah, snakes with feet, and cannibals.

BUT. As a travel writer recording all of these things, a central theme to remember here would be the pilgrimages concept. Do not get too annoyed with me because I keep bringing up studying abroad, but I am so enthralled with all kinds of pilgrimages, both local and international. Some of you might already be familiar with this, but I constantly remember the Camino de Santiago, the Chemin de St-Jacques, or the Way of Saint James, which is the pilgrimage to the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela in Galicia, Spain. The only actual remains of one of Jesus' apostle Saint James are supposed to rest there. Mandeville even mentions Saint James on page 125. How cool is that? (I did not actually make it to the exact Cathedral, but just being near part of the pilgrimage was AWESOME). I find that fascinating beyond belief, and I love to remember that I have been to a number of "stops" on the pilgrimage route, due to the fact that my uncle lives very conveniently located to it. In fact, when I visited him after leaving Spain, I saw a lot of pilgrims on the road by his house, backpacks and walking sticks and all. Very cool!

A shot I took of the arch in Montesquiou, a teeny weeny little town where my uncle busily chatted up some pilgrims we found. I, speaking zero French, amused myself by wandering around taking pictures and watching a sleeping kitty I saw sitting on a windowsill.

What does all this have to do with Mandeville? Well, it kind of brings me to my next point: the traveller's perspective. Okay, now I have a lot of ideas in my head so I hope I can get them out with at least some remaining shred of coherence. Like I said, I studied abroad, right? So, I could have kept a travel blog myself, like this blog I have now, but rather I think I would make it a daily account of the people, places, things, ideas, sights, sounds, scents, tastes, and everything I saw while I was travelling. I did not, actually, but I did take several thousand pictures (yes, thousands), some of which are on my Picasa. My dad got me an incredible new camera and so that is how I went about documenting everything. Travel writing can be done for personal, economic, and devotional reasons. But then, I wonder why exactly Mandeville did this, which ties into those two reasons I gave in the beginning, about the purpose of his book. Similarly, the perspective of the author is very important, because we have to consider things such as who he was writing this book for, and if he had any other motivations behind it besides those two we discussed previously.

That brings me to my next point, as far as author's perspective (and, due to this concept's universal nature, I think think it can be applied to a lot of different situations): I thought I would mention something fascinating I discovered in Social Psychology a week or two ago. This might be stretching it, but I really hope it's not too terribly irrelevant because trust me, this stuff is über fascinating and I think it has a lot to do with how Mandeville decided to present his information. There is this concept about self-presentation and social perception.

• There is a certain way we want to present ourselves - what I want you to think.
• We, as humans, think and/or worry about how we present ourselves to others.
• We perceive ourselves in a certain way to begin with, and if we think that others around us perceive us in some different way (maybe not necessarily negative, but oftentimes is), then that in turn would affect us negatively.
• Therefore, my self esteem is equal to how I think you evaluated me reflected back on myself.
  

In case you were still a little confused on this idea of social perception, follow this link to access a Wikipedia page where social perception in the field of social psychology is explained a little more in-depth.

Does that make sense to you? I hope so, because I think that this social-psychological study has a lot to do with the mindset we have discovered while learning about the Renaissance, with all of that "who am I" sort of feelings. I think travel writing really banks on that, and once again, I cannot help but wonder what went through Mandeville's head and how he was actually thinking about his readers (if he was, even). Would he care about his social perception or his self-presentation? I would assume that he would care about how well his book was received, but if some people were angry about it, did he perhaps not care? So many questions!

All in all, the book was pretty good. I signed up for it knowing nothing about it besides a title with the word "Travels" in it (and because I think I "live under the moon," which I find hilarious). Yes, it was pretty boring most of the time, and yes, I got sick of his repetitive strange worldviews and cultural encounters with an almost disrespect for the reader at times. But I also think that I should take it with a grain of salt because I do not presume to know his motives for certain within this new strain of travel writing.

[:

Poetry in Two Parts. Part II: My Sonnet

I thought I might write about my old passion, a passion which I hope may be resurrected at some point in my life. If you consider the exact words I chose, I remember how hard it was for me to get up the courage to do it sometimes; If you know me well you know I have little to no self-confidence.

If I may here is a video of Für Elise, the very first Beethoven piece I ever learned to play. I remember tearing up because I wondered how such a beautiful melody could ever have come from my own hands. Do not laugh at me! I was a little kid!

---
Overwhelmingly it gleams before me
As I set my hands upon the famed keys
The hidden melodies desire appease
What part do I meet with difficulty?

Supposedly everything seems ideal
With no one at home and I there alone
This stranger, I think, should become my own
Suddenly my courage becomes crucial


Convoluted notes become less cryptic
Wrists fly and fingers delicately dance
This sensation, it is quite euphoric


This wooden giant I came across by chance
Upon which melodies flow, as magic
Any mind, should this not serve to entrance?
---


Well, there you have it. It's not very good and it was hard to write, but honestly it really took me back. Maybe I will be inspired to take it up again, hopefully sometime soon...

PS - A Petrarchan sonnet, it follows this rhyme scheme:

ABBA

ABBA

CDC
DCD

Petrarch invented this sonnet sequence, which is why we refer to it as a "petrarchan sonnet." A sonnet is basically like a little song, in which there are usually 14 lines that follow a strict rhyme scheme (like the one listed above) and a certain structure. Oftentimes they employ the use of iambic pentameter, meaning that each line has a meter with every other syllable stressed, so 5 of the 10 syllables of that line (this is very hard to accomplish!). Shakespeare used the iambic pentameter as well. We also encounter that nagging translation problem again when attempting to take Petrarch's sonnets and translate them from the vernacular Italian into English. The lines may not always match up, but they must still maintain the theme (and the meter and the rhyme).

This link will take you to a cool website I found that includes a couple of examples of Petrarchan sonnets. I particularly like the second one, because as the website states, it is a memorial poem to that woman, Laura, that Petrarch loved (and, honestly, obsessed over) from afar. That is the cool thing about sonnets: they really allow a great range of freedom to express the writer's emotions; in Petrarch's case, I imagine ecstasy, joy, sadness, soul love (NOT courtly love), etc. He expresses a great knowledge of self in his writings. He seems to explore his "self" (vs. the medieval investment in).

Like Dante, he was exiled from Florence, and also like Dante, he is interested in the ideal. However, when Dante writes, the split between the pilgrim and the poet is very hard to see, whereas with Petrarch, it is much more explicit, as seen in his My Secret and his various sonnets. I find that Petrarch is very sincere and at times, is also very hard on himself (hmm... sounds familiar).

Poetry in Two Parts. Part I: ANGST

Alright internet.

You present a challenging case. A sonnet you say? But I am not much for poetry! I don't like it, I don't understand it, and I certainly can't write it. LIE. I wrote my very first poem ever in the fourth grade. It was four delicate little lines of pure, unadulterated, adorable childhood thought processes. LIE. It's not that adorable.

Here we are: you know, it just occurred to me that this little gem never got a title. Sad!

Ahem.

I added in this picture because I think it is really pretty and I thought it might be a nice complement to the spirit of my little poem. I took it in Howth, Ireland, on a particularly sunny day, while we were walking along the cliffs by the Irish Sea. I am not kidding when I tell you that these flowers smelled like warm cinnamon and vanilla. I wondered where that delicious scent was coming from and sure enough, it was from the millions of flowers growing wildly and naturally along the cliffs. Amazing, right? How lucky am I?

~

"Oh, the beautiful sunshine,

melts through the trees,

and pours on to flowers,

not disturbing the bees."

~

Do you enjoy the clever color coding? It also occurred to me that this might be a run-on sentence. But that shouldn't matter, because poetry shouldn't be constrained to the conventional rules of daily speaking and writing. So there. Poetry.

Now that I am older (and possibly wiser, although fourth grade me was a real trip), we shall see what sort of sonnet I can come up with. More to come soon (as in a couple of hours, depending on how brilliant I become), so stay tuned.

My first post.

Hello Internet!

This marks the moment of where I begin my very first blog post... ever! I mean, I have a Facebook, but I've never managed my own blog before. There is a good chance I may become addicted. I love personalizing things and making something look really cool (and I've dabbled in HTML editing before, teehee) so this could be a good thing for me. Because I'm sure that if this weren't for class that EVERYONE would otherwise really want to know what I think. [:

As for Petrarch, whom we refer to as the "father of Humanism," I wonder whether or not he would have had a blog had his generation been blessed (cursed?) with the existence of computers and the world wide web. Plumb mentioned his love of travelling. I cannot recall exactly where I read it but sometimes we could consider him the first tourist. How cool is that?! Seems like my kinda guy.

Having spent a year in Spain I was very fortunate to do a lot of travelling... almost every weekend was filled with exploring some exotic new locale. I sure love to travel! Don't you enjoy hearing a new language fill your ears? Sampling new foods? Seeing incredible architecture that you just can't find in South Bend? I bet that if Petrarch could have he would have kept such a travel blog, like the idea I mentioned about it in class. (I also bet that the elusive Laura would have been number one on his list of followers).

I didn't have one personally (although I did have a Picasa, the link for which you might see at the right column there, under "Clickables"), but lots of other kids did, and it was really fun to read them! I never realized how creative and personal you can get with a blog! You can post pictures, videos, links, music, you name it!

I would have LOVED to read Petrarch's travel blog. Now that would have been a good read, amid all the imaginative dialogues with Saint Augustine. I think, perhaps, that he might have had more than one, for each different persona that he seems to adopt. At one point he is obsessing over his Laura; at another he is writing My Secret, somewhat full of melancholy and depression, obsessing over death, expressing an understanding of the self, others, and the Divine, but also remaining very self-critical (because it takes a lot to realize one's own flaws). If he begins with a conflict of these 2 selves, I wonder if he joins them together in the end.

Petrarch is temperamental and he seems to have some extreme personalities (all of which contribute to his glorification of the individual, part of being a Renaissance man), but I don't think he goes overboard with the Renaissance cliches. There is a certain delicacy in invoking these characteristics, don't you think? He sort of mixes a new Renaissance humanism (he is, after all, the "Father of Humanism") with some old values.

I hope that fares well as my first blog post! Enjoy! (and don't forget to check back weekly for more of my clever clever musings.*)

*note the sarcasm.