The guest speaker today I thought was a refreshing change of pace, I liked the fact that while we did drift around to several parts of the Bible, we maintained one theme throughout. The specificity of the class topic I think allowed us to drive a bit deeper into the content and context of how women are depicted in the Bible. I thought the distinction between the Feminine and Women rolls to be an accurate one. Because the implications of each one are symbol and social respectively. This is important to consider because the Bible is to be looked at as stories and characters in stories. And sometimes they are to be taken at face value and sometimes not. Either way both of these types of women teach us something, a moral.
One idea that really stuck with me even after I left the classroom, was the notion that gender is about roles. The simplicity of this statement is in fact so complex. What confuses me first about this is that if gender is concerned our roles doesn't that make it about our places in society and not what distinguishes us as individuals? I'm not really sure where I'm going with this. Perhaps I'll blog again later.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Fryen' On Emerald Lake
Yesterday around eleven o'clock would find me sitting on the bank of Emerald Lake with my dog Bo by my side and Words With Power in my hands. I started reading the chapter entitled Identity and Metaphor and I was intrigued by his notions in regards to writing and reading. As far as I understand it Frye was looking at the relationships that exist between the reader and the text. Arguing that the writer unlike a painter, "must use the same words that everyone else does" it can complicated to, through poetry, get at the meaning you want all to experience. He writes, "The inference is that there may be something potentially unlimited of infinite in the response to poetry" He goes on to make this idea even more complex arguing, "What we 'see' when we try to comprehend the totality of a literary structure is a large number of juxtaposed images." In regards to the Bible I think these two ideas are inherent throughout given that we all try to get different meanings from the same words. And even when we do get a similar idea we have numerous different ideas we can relate it to. So what is a writer to say, is nothing concrete and static, does is world of literature a never ending cross reference? Probably
Monday, September 27, 2010
Nature/Self/Bible
I really look forward to getting my copy of Frye's book after reading Emily's latest post about the self and how nature is the content of art's form. This notion reminded me of some of the themes we are talking about in the capstone class with Dr. Morgan. As some of you may know the class's theme is Dark Romanticism and it deals with these ideas in regards to how we as people and artists are to feel about and sequentially describe nature in our lives and our art.
I am one to argue that, yes, most of what art is and means comes from the inside of us, obviouly the inside of us is influenced my numerous and diverse sets of stimuli. However, this notion of the self should not be diminished especially with a text as significant as the Bible. Again I think we all come to this text with, to say the least, different points of view, but we can all talk about it in a somewhat objective basis. This can be done it we wade through the overwhelming allusions we make when reading the Bible and get down to how each part of it is a story with a non-detachable moral. Here I think is the key to reading and enjoying the Bible in regards to nature. We must look at how the Bible speaks to us in the way that it is a story, and then we can take this point of view and apply it to our world which is the most worthy context.
I am one to argue that, yes, most of what art is and means comes from the inside of us, obviouly the inside of us is influenced my numerous and diverse sets of stimuli. However, this notion of the self should not be diminished especially with a text as significant as the Bible. Again I think we all come to this text with, to say the least, different points of view, but we can all talk about it in a somewhat objective basis. This can be done it we wade through the overwhelming allusions we make when reading the Bible and get down to how each part of it is a story with a non-detachable moral. Here I think is the key to reading and enjoying the Bible in regards to nature. We must look at how the Bible speaks to us in the way that it is a story, and then we can take this point of view and apply it to our world which is the most worthy context.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Blog Reflection
After reading Trish's blog about the movie the Ten Commandments and her mention of The Prince of Egypt, I'm reminded of a notion I first encountered in high school. An English teacher I had for the first two years of my literary studies at the time, he is probably the reason I'm an English major, used to talk about the "Disneyfication" of Greek myths. He boasted that when Disney makes a movie about these topics, they dumb it down and do it a real injustice. In particular he mentioned the film Hercules in which his quest to do good through out the land was a journey to find his parents. However, the "real" story involves a journey educed by Hercules murdering of his family. Crazy right? I used to watch that movie all the time without knowing its real basis of reference.
In regards to how we approach the Bible I think a similar element is in play, this idea that we can't talk about certain parts in certain contexts, or we talk about these parts so they play to our liking. All the raping, murdering, and warfare chapters were left undiscussed in my confirmation classes. And in doing so we were presented with the "good" version of the Bible. Is this the right way to go about it? Maybe. I think that a lot of what makes the Bible, and literature in general, great is its subjective nature, the way we discover it for ourselves.
In regards to how we approach the Bible I think a similar element is in play, this idea that we can't talk about certain parts in certain contexts, or we talk about these parts so they play to our liking. All the raping, murdering, and warfare chapters were left undiscussed in my confirmation classes. And in doing so we were presented with the "good" version of the Bible. Is this the right way to go about it? Maybe. I think that a lot of what makes the Bible, and literature in general, great is its subjective nature, the way we discover it for ourselves.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Frye 'n' Frazer
It's official I, within 4-14 business days, will have copies of Frye's and Frazer's books to help me read the Bible. I was able to find the cheap, used, paper back copies, totaling less than eight dollars from Amazon's online store.
After class the other day, and reading Alexa's blog I'm hopeful that these works will aid in making sense of the Bible as I read it this semester. I like the notion Alexa advocated in her recent post saying that collectively the Bible seems a mess of words with little coherent meaning. But by focusing on one book even one line it seems to become clear. This in a sense gives it a literal meaning one, again, I hope will come through via Frye and Frazer. Because after all that's the idea of this class to read the Bible like just another book.
After class the other day, and reading Alexa's blog I'm hopeful that these works will aid in making sense of the Bible as I read it this semester. I like the notion Alexa advocated in her recent post saying that collectively the Bible seems a mess of words with little coherent meaning. But by focusing on one book even one line it seems to become clear. This in a sense gives it a literal meaning one, again, I hope will come through via Frye and Frazer. Because after all that's the idea of this class to read the Bible like just another book.
Ready for Judgement
My plan thus far this semester has been to read complete chapters of the Bible in a seemingly random order. First I read most of Genesis, then all of Revelation, and last night I committed myself to the books of Judges and Ruth. I find that by reading the Bible in this manner I'm able to focus more clearly and really get a lot out of the individual books than if I were to keep reading chronologically. Plus After reading Plotz's chapter on Leviticus I thought it best to skip that one, for now.
Judges contains much warfare and seizing of land, and taking control of slaves. I thought about Plotz's comment that God is like a real-estate king, and it showed in this book. As there were several occasions in which God either rewarded or took land from people. One thing I noticed consistently through out were the lists and the repeated lines. "And the children of Isreal again did evil in the sight of the Lord" and "In those days there was no king in Isreal" start of many books in
Judges. I found a certain rhythm to it almost as if this was the chorus and all the other actions were verses.
Although I'm still very fuzzy about who is in command of what, and who killed who to get it, and the reasons for it all, I did find several little, "Oh shit" instances of literary excitement. Book 3 around verse 20 goes, "And he arose out of his seat. and Ehud put forth his left hand, and took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly. And the haft also went in after the blade; and the fat closed upon the blade, so that eh could not draw the dagger out of his belly; and the dirt came out" It reminded me of something you might see while watching an action film, but certainly not the Bible. The other thing that surprised me was the quickness to anger of God, he seemed more like an irritated mother trying to get the kids to behave more than a deity. The story of Samson and Delilah was one of the more interesting parts of this book. Again I found it a little hard to follow but I think that Samson was getting tricked and Delilah was bait, to get a hold of his land, maybe. Anyway I found this line particularly enticing, "And it came to pass, when she pressed him daily with her words, and urged him, so that his soul was vexed unto death." She sounds like an earful. I'm puzzled by the end of this book, considering all the vengeance for wrong doings previously discussed it seems odd that, "In those days there was no king in Isreal: every man did that which was right in his own eyes" should be that line. The word "right" what context does that have after all this death and betrayal?
Judges contains much warfare and seizing of land, and taking control of slaves. I thought about Plotz's comment that God is like a real-estate king, and it showed in this book. As there were several occasions in which God either rewarded or took land from people. One thing I noticed consistently through out were the lists and the repeated lines. "And the children of Isreal again did evil in the sight of the Lord" and "In those days there was no king in Isreal" start of many books in
Judges. I found a certain rhythm to it almost as if this was the chorus and all the other actions were verses.
Although I'm still very fuzzy about who is in command of what, and who killed who to get it, and the reasons for it all, I did find several little, "Oh shit" instances of literary excitement. Book 3 around verse 20 goes, "And he arose out of his seat. and Ehud put forth his left hand, and took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly. And the haft also went in after the blade; and the fat closed upon the blade, so that eh could not draw the dagger out of his belly; and the dirt came out" It reminded me of something you might see while watching an action film, but certainly not the Bible. The other thing that surprised me was the quickness to anger of God, he seemed more like an irritated mother trying to get the kids to behave more than a deity. The story of Samson and Delilah was one of the more interesting parts of this book. Again I found it a little hard to follow but I think that Samson was getting tricked and Delilah was bait, to get a hold of his land, maybe. Anyway I found this line particularly enticing, "And it came to pass, when she pressed him daily with her words, and urged him, so that his soul was vexed unto death." She sounds like an earful. I'm puzzled by the end of this book, considering all the vengeance for wrong doings previously discussed it seems odd that, "In those days there was no king in Isreal: every man did that which was right in his own eyes" should be that line. The word "right" what context does that have after all this death and betrayal?
Thursday, September 16, 2010
The Laws Of Leviticus
I rather like the notion of Plotz being an additional classmate to this endeavor of reading the bible. I see him as that kid who does all the reading and you can just read his notes for a general idea of any particular chapter. I'm very glad I read his notes on Leviticus, because I doubt I could have made it through on my own without some basic sense of what was happening. Throughout this reading I was constantly reminded of an episode of "The Simpsons" in which Marge asks Rev. Lovejoy if she should get a divorce from Homer. To which he responds with a simple, "Get a Divorce" a nervous Marge inquires, isn't that against the Bible. The Reverend then pick up his own copy asking, "Have you ever read this thing, technically we're not even allowed to go to the bathroom." This I think is the same attitude with which Plotz approaches his reading of the Bible. In this respect are we to have a bowl of salt next to us as we read this thing. Or should we take it literally, because it sound like it might be impossible to do, especially with all these contradictions.
One quote from Plotz's chapter three really spoke to me it goes, "We talk about the Bible as if there is only one. But if there's anything I've learned from these months with the Good Book, it's that we all have our own Bible. We linger on the passages we love and blot out, or argue, or skim the verses that repel us." You think of the extremeists who insist the Bible hates gays. You think of the exteremists who disragard the whole thing and live by thier own codes. Which is right, is there a right? Probably not, but maybe, who are we to decide. I think if anything is right, it has to be right in our own heads first, and then see if it fits into the world, cause we are all in this together. I'll leave you with a quote from a Steppenwolf song called "Rock Me"
"I don't know where we come from
Don't know where we're goin' to
But if all this should have a reason
We would be the last to know
So let's just hope there is a promised land
Hang on 'til then
As best as you can"
I know I will, will you?
One quote from Plotz's chapter three really spoke to me it goes, "We talk about the Bible as if there is only one. But if there's anything I've learned from these months with the Good Book, it's that we all have our own Bible. We linger on the passages we love and blot out, or argue, or skim the verses that repel us." You think of the extremeists who insist the Bible hates gays. You think of the exteremists who disragard the whole thing and live by thier own codes. Which is right, is there a right? Probably not, but maybe, who are we to decide. I think if anything is right, it has to be right in our own heads first, and then see if it fits into the world, cause we are all in this together. I'll leave you with a quote from a Steppenwolf song called "Rock Me"
"I don't know where we come from
Don't know where we're goin' to
But if all this should have a reason
We would be the last to know
So let's just hope there is a promised land
Hang on 'til then
As best as you can"
I know I will, will you?
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Holy Shit, Revelation
So far the Book of Revelation is my favorite book of the Bible, I can't even believe I'm writing this but it's true. The language and the word choice of these biblical events had me entranced underlining passages and rereading some as I went. Verses 10 through 16 were awe inspiring. I could not help but visualize this man and I can only imagine the sound his voice made. "and his voice as the sound of many waters." reminds me of a passage from the Quartets "I don't know much about gods; but I think that the river / Is a strong brown god-sullen, untamed and intractable" Much like the Clark Fork river that runs through Missoula, and very unlike the Bozeman Creek that runs through this town. Regardless this man was not untamed or intractable, he was everything.
The whole notion that this was a written account of John's experiences reminds me again of Blake's Heaven and Hell, he writes, I can't find the passage now, but it's something along the lines of a 'prophecy is only a prophecy to the first one who sees it', and I think that this is people's main problem with the Bible, because it is said to be divine however it is only truly divine to the first person to the rest it's just hearsay.
Throughout the book there were dozens of references to the number seven and to the Lamb of God, which, as I understood it to be, was the creature of salvation the greatest spirit of them all. Another thing that entered my mind as I read this book was several references to music. The "Bottomless Pit" reminded me of Bob's "Redemption Song" were he sings that he was taken from this pit before he gets sold to the merchant ships. In book six the men of the earth, could clearly hear Jimi Hendrix saying "Fall mountains just don't fall on me" when the men ask for the mountains to fall so they will be hid from the face of the thrown. There were numerous other allusions I made while reading this book but the overall feeling I get about the Bible is captured in Verse 12 of the last book asking John to let people be for they will be judged in time, and that's what I should be about I think. It's a to each his own kind of world. Coexist. Can't we all just get abong.
The whole notion that this was a written account of John's experiences reminds me again of Blake's Heaven and Hell, he writes, I can't find the passage now, but it's something along the lines of a 'prophecy is only a prophecy to the first one who sees it', and I think that this is people's main problem with the Bible, because it is said to be divine however it is only truly divine to the first person to the rest it's just hearsay.
Throughout the book there were dozens of references to the number seven and to the Lamb of God, which, as I understood it to be, was the creature of salvation the greatest spirit of them all. Another thing that entered my mind as I read this book was several references to music. The "Bottomless Pit" reminded me of Bob's "Redemption Song" were he sings that he was taken from this pit before he gets sold to the merchant ships. In book six the men of the earth, could clearly hear Jimi Hendrix saying "Fall mountains just don't fall on me" when the men ask for the mountains to fall so they will be hid from the face of the thrown. There were numerous other allusions I made while reading this book but the overall feeling I get about the Bible is captured in Verse 12 of the last book asking John to let people be for they will be judged in time, and that's what I should be about I think. It's a to each his own kind of world. Coexist. Can't we all just get abong.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Reflections on "The Good Book"
After having just read most of the first chapter of the book and the introduction, I found Plotz's viewpoint to be quite refreshing. Several times I laughed out loud at his satirical commentary on the book of Genesis, and the Bible in general. I remember last semester in Emergent Lit, the Bible was mentioned to be the most popular book in the world, but on the flip side, it's one very few people actually finished or understood. My experience with the Bible, as I found to be similar to Plotz's, is one of general hearsay if you will. I compare it to my knowledge of the book my Herman Melville's Moby Dick. In that I knew the book existed and I knew its basic premise but never actually sat down and read it. Until last semester when I actually did sit down and read the whole thing. I found it to be a kind of second reading, due to my knowledge of it prior to this occasion. As I read the Bible for this class I find it also to have this kind of impact on me but with a more profound sense of interest. Not only will I read about the classes reading experience, but also Plotz's, and my own as well and this will all relate to me prior knowledge of this epic book. I find that Plotz's way of describing his thoughts and reflections on the Bible to be a way lowering it from the pedestal I knew it to reside on. The way he relates it to his life, television, shows, and society in general to be a refreshing look. With this in mind I feel I'll be able to better understand this daunting text, and furthermore relate it the my life and this beautiful world around me, because that's what books are supposed to do right?
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Good Genesis
Having just finished reading the first seventeen books of Genesis, I had several surprises. My first reaction was how compelled I felt to read this thing, I mean actually sit down and read it. I have been exposed to bibles due to my Christian heritage, and even received a copy on my confirmation, a book that remains unopened. Sitting on my porch with a pencil in hand I began to read the words of the lord. Reading through this beginning section I found myself eagerly looking for the verse that the Boondock Saints recite before some glorious action, or Jules's favorite passage to say before killing the next target.
In any case I didn't find it to be boring at all, maybe a bit dry at parts, but most of all I looked at the names. Cain, Abel, Enoch, Hagar, and most notably Shem. Finnagain, eh. I'm finding the writing style easy to keep up with I enjoy the constantly moving plot of the book, a refreshing change of pace. Genesis 2 verse 7 And the Lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. This reminded me of a concept discussed in Blake's Heaven and Hell the notion that God is at fault for making man body and his soul one entity. And I agree with Blake, to a degree. Because we need a body so the soul can take form, yet the soul cannot do all it is capable of because of the restrictive nature of a body. I'm reminded of a line from Blind Melon's song Hell that goes, "Cause I'll designate over time if I expect my body to try and keep up with my mind"
In any case I didn't find it to be boring at all, maybe a bit dry at parts, but most of all I looked at the names. Cain, Abel, Enoch, Hagar, and most notably Shem. Finnagain, eh. I'm finding the writing style easy to keep up with I enjoy the constantly moving plot of the book, a refreshing change of pace. Genesis 2 verse 7 And the Lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. This reminded me of a concept discussed in Blake's Heaven and Hell the notion that God is at fault for making man body and his soul one entity. And I agree with Blake, to a degree. Because we need a body so the soul can take form, yet the soul cannot do all it is capable of because of the restrictive nature of a body. I'm reminded of a line from Blind Melon's song Hell that goes, "Cause I'll designate over time if I expect my body to try and keep up with my mind"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)