So, I finally sat down and made my list of 100 great books, referencing the lists in my last post (as well as the one so kindly provided by Rikki). At least I can say I accomplished something over Thanksgiving break — other than eating and lounging at my parents' house. I'm already feeling a bit overwhelmed about reading all of these, but I'm also excited.
Anyway, to the list itself. Some obvious books are not included because I've read them fairly recently or the thought of reading them again makes me want to vomit. I feel that way about a few of the books on my list, but hopefully those won't be as much of a chore as I expect. I've read some of the books before, but I included them on the list because I'd like to reread them. I didn't allow any author to appear more than twice (12 do). I intentionally avoided poetry and drama (though a few are included), and at first I avoided philosophy and fantasy but eventually caved near the end.
In no particular order, Jenny's 100 Great Books:
1. THE GREAT GATSBY by F. Scott Fitzgerald
2. LOLITA by Vladimir Nabokov
3. BELOVED by Toni Morrison
4. THE GOLDEN ASS by Apuleius
5. PRIDE AND PREJUDICE by Jane Austen
6. THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV by Fyodor Dostoevsky
7. THE AWAKENING by Kate Chopin
8. ATLAS SHRUGGED by Ayn Rand
9. THE DIVINE COMEDY by Dante Alighieri
10. DON QUIXOTE by Miguel de Cervantes
11. THE SOUND AND THE FURY by William Faulkner
12. ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SOLITUDE by Gabriel Garcia Marquez
13. ULYSSES by James Joyce
14. THE GRAPES OF WRATH by John Steinbeck
15. 1984 by George Orwell
16. SLAUGHTERHOUSE FIVE by Kurt Vonnegut
17. TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD by Harper Lee
18. A FAREWELL TO ARMS by Ernest Hemingway
19. THEIR EYES WERE WATCHING GOD by Zora Neale Hurston
20. NATIVE SON by Richard Wright
21. ON THE ROAD by Jack Kerouac
22. THE JUNGLE by Upton Sinclair
23. SOPHIE'S CHOICE by William Styron
24. ETHAN FROME by Edith Wharton
25. TO THE LIGHTHOUSE by Virginia Woolf
26. THINGS FALL APART by Chinua Achebe
27. WOMEN IN LOVE by D.H. Lawrence
28. WIDE SARAGASSO SEA by Jean Rhys
29. RABBIT, RUN by John Updike
30. MIDNIGHT'S CHILDREN by Salman Rushdie
31. WAR AND PEACE by Leo Tolstoy
32. THE NAKED AND THE DEAD by Norman Mailer
33. POINT COUNTER POINT by Aldous Huxley
34. A CLOCKWORK ORANGE by Anthony Burgess
35. UNDER THE VOLCANO by Malcolm Lowry
36. THE HANDMAID'S TALE by Margaret Atwood
37. ZEN AND THE ART OF MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE by Robert Pirsig
38. FAHRENHEIT 451 by Ray Bradbury
39. MY ANTONIA by Willa Cather
40. THE CANTERBURY TALES by Geoffrey Chaucer
41. GULLIVER'S TRAVELS by Jonathan Swift
42. MIDDLEMARCH by George Eliot
43. GONE WITH THE WIND by Margaret Mitchell
44. CATCH-22 by Joseph Heller
45. CONFESSIONS by St. Augustine
46. PARADISE LOST by John Milton
47. LEAVES OF GRASS by Walt Whitman
48. KIM by Rudyard Kipling
49. FRANKENSTEIN by Mary Shelley
50. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST by Ken Kesey
51. THE HEART IS A LONELY HUNTER by Carson McCullers
52. HEART OF DARKNESS by Joseph Conrad
53. NIGHT by Elie Wiesel
54. THE WIND IN THE WILLOWS by Kenneth Grahame
55. THE COLOR PURPLE by Alice Walker
56. THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO by Karl Marx
57. A TALE OF TWO CITIES by Charles Dickens
58. BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S by Truman Capote
59. THE PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY by Oscar Wilde
60. THE TURN OF THE SCREW by Henry James
61. THE OUTSIDER by Albert Camus
62. LES MISERABLES by Victor Hugo
63. THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE by Philip K. Dick
64. THE SCARLET LETTER by Nathaniel Hawthorne
65. THE NAME OF THE ROSE by Umberto Eco
66. THE COURAGE TO BE by Paul Tillich
67. MAN'S SEARCH FOR MEANING by Viktor Frankl
68. THE SOCIAL CONTRACT by Jean-Jacques Rousseau
69. THE PRINCE by Niccolo Machiavelli
70. THE LEVIATHAN by Thomas Hobbes
71. THE SOULS OF BLACK FOLK by W.E.B. DuBois
72. A DEATH IN THE FAMILY by James Agee
73. JANE EYRE by Charlotte Bronte
74. WUTHERING HEIGHTS by Emily Bronte
75. BABBITT by Sinclair Lewis
76. THE CRUCIBLE by Arthur Miller
77. UNCLE TOM'S CABIN by Harriet Beecher Stowe
78. ALICE IN WONDERLAND by Lewis Carroll
79. A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE by Tennessee Williams
80. THE WAY OF ALL FLESH by Samuel Butler
81. THE DARK TOWER series by Stephen King
82. HIS DARK MATERIALS by Philip Pulman
83. THE LORD OF THE RINGS by J.R.R. Tolkein
84. INVISIBLE MAN by Ralph Ellison
85. PORTNOY'S COMPLAINT by Philip Roth
86. STATE OF FEAR by Michael Crichton
87. HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY by Douglas Adams
88. SELECTED POETRY OF ADRIENNE RICH
89. FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS by Ernest Hemingway
90. ANNA KARENINA by Leo Tolstoy
91. AS I LAY DYING by William Faulkner
92. SONG OF SOLOMON by Toni Morrison
93. CRIME AND PUNISHMENT by Fyodor Dostoevsky
94. OF MICE AND MEN by John Steinbeck
95. THIS SIDE OF PARADISE by F. Scott Fitzgerald
96. A PORTRAIT OF THE ARTIST AS A YOUNG MAN by James Joyce
97. ORLANDO by Virginia Woolf
98. LILA by Robert Pirsig
99. THE STAND by Stephen King
100. CAT'S CRADLE by Kurt Vonnegut
Oh, and I've decided against the Kindle. Instead, I'm going to buy all these books at the cheapest used price I can find to build my paper library even more. :) (And I already own 21 of them, so I'm over one-fifth of the way there.)
I'll come back and italicize as I complete books.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
100 Classic Books
So, I've decided to set out to accomplish a rather daunting task: read 100 classic books. I'm requesting a Kindle for Christmas, so hopefully its portability and convenience will aid in the achievement of this goal.
As I've browsed around the internet, I've found quite a few different lists. I'm having a hard time choosing between them. I would love to receive suggestions on which one I should follow. Here are a few I've found, but there are many more out there.
• Penguin Classics
• Newsweek
• Modern Library
• Radcliffe Publishing Course
As I've browsed around the internet, I've found quite a few different lists. I'm having a hard time choosing between them. I would love to receive suggestions on which one I should follow. Here are a few I've found, but there are many more out there.
• Penguin Classics
• Newsweek
• Modern Library
• Radcliffe Publishing Course
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Compromises limit abortion accessibility
Originally published in the Nov. 9 issue of the Daily Beacon, this column I wrote discusses the potential limited accessibility to abortions caused by the House's Nov. 7 passage of the health care reform bill:
I feel sick about the concessions abortion-rights Democrats made in order to pass the health care bill through the House Saturday night.
Forced to choose between a public option and readily available abortions, pending passage through the Senate, this bill may successfully limit women’s access to affordable abortions.
It’s shameful that there was little to no coverage of this abortion amendment, which passed 240-194, prior to the passage of the bill as a whole. Most articles available as of Sunday morning touted the passage of this bill as a great success and relegated the issue and implications of the abortion amendment to the last few lines of a larger story about the bill’s “historic” passage. (The New York Times did create a nice graphic and map showing the geographical spread of support and dissent for the amendment, which shows us Tennesseans that only one of our representatives voted against the abortion amendment: Steven Cohen, Democratic representative from Tennessee’s ninth district.)
Luckily, in perusing the Internet Saturday night, I came across Meredith Simons’ Nov. 7 doubleX.com blog entry entitled “A Critique of the Stupak Amendment: Choose Between Health Care and Abortion.” Published at 10:07 p.m., just before the bill itself was passed, Simons warned, “Remember those conservatives who don’t want the government interfering in health care plans? Right, well, it turns out what they meant was they don’t want the government interfering in health care plans, except when it comes to abortion. At that point, the government can interfere to its heart’s content.”
This is obviously a controversial topic, and I can understand anti-abortion supporters’ conviction that the government should not fund a procedure they deem morally reprehensible, to the point of considering it murder. Such a concern is, of course, a justifiable reason for the addition of the amendment.
The language of the bill (H.R. 3962) is fairly neutral, promising “no preemption of state laws regarding abortion,” “no effect on federal laws regarding abortion” and “no effect on federal civil rights laws” in section 258. Section 259 demands that any “federal agency or program and any state or local government that receives federal financial assistance under this act” cannot discriminate against any “health care entity (who) does not provide, pay for, provide coverage of or refer for abortions.”
This seems harmless enough, right? Wrong.
“To say that this amendment is a wolf in sheep’s clothing would be an understatement of a lifetime,” said Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) during floor debate. It “will be the greatest restriction of a women’s right to choose” passed by Congress “in our career,” according to a Nov. 7 Bloomberg.com article.
The bill will theoretically allow women to purchase a “rider” for their government-sponsored health insurance that would provide them with coverage for abortion procedures. We all know who this kind of provision favors — those who can afford to buy private health insurance anyway, not the poor and underprivileged, those who desperately need access to affordable abortions.
Such a plan will actually limit the coverage of “low- and middle-income women who qualify for government subsidies, along with the legions of women who will buy insurance on the exchange because they are either self-employed or employed by small businesses.” They “won’t be able to get plans that automatically include abortion coverage,” Simons writes.
Even worse, a Sept. 30 New York Times editorial claims this “rider” option is actually a charade, “an unworkable approach given that almost no one expects to need an abortion, few women would buy the rider and, therefore, few insurance companies would even offer it.”
Simons reiterates this point: “Businesses don’t like to sell products that don’t have a market, and the market for something like an abortion rider — essentially a plan for an unplanned pregnancy — is notoriously slim.”
By allowing this concession and effectively restricting the availability of abortions to those who can afford to pay for the procedure out of pocket, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has successfully limited the rights of women, pending the passage of a similar bill through the Senate.
According to a Nov. 8 New York Times article entitled “Abortion Was at Heart of Wrangling,” “Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) said the bill’s original language barring the use of federal dollars to pay for abortions should have been sufficient for the opponents. ‘Abortion is a matter of conscience on both sides of the debate,’ DeLauro said. ‘This amendment takes away that same freedom of conscience from America’s women. It prohibits them from access to an abortion even if they pay for it with their own money. It invades women’s personal decisions.’”
I feel sick about the concessions abortion-rights Democrats made in order to pass the health care bill through the House Saturday night.
Forced to choose between a public option and readily available abortions, pending passage through the Senate, this bill may successfully limit women’s access to affordable abortions.
It’s shameful that there was little to no coverage of this abortion amendment, which passed 240-194, prior to the passage of the bill as a whole. Most articles available as of Sunday morning touted the passage of this bill as a great success and relegated the issue and implications of the abortion amendment to the last few lines of a larger story about the bill’s “historic” passage. (The New York Times did create a nice graphic and map showing the geographical spread of support and dissent for the amendment, which shows us Tennesseans that only one of our representatives voted against the abortion amendment: Steven Cohen, Democratic representative from Tennessee’s ninth district.)
Luckily, in perusing the Internet Saturday night, I came across Meredith Simons’ Nov. 7 doubleX.com blog entry entitled “A Critique of the Stupak Amendment: Choose Between Health Care and Abortion.” Published at 10:07 p.m., just before the bill itself was passed, Simons warned, “Remember those conservatives who don’t want the government interfering in health care plans? Right, well, it turns out what they meant was they don’t want the government interfering in health care plans, except when it comes to abortion. At that point, the government can interfere to its heart’s content.”
This is obviously a controversial topic, and I can understand anti-abortion supporters’ conviction that the government should not fund a procedure they deem morally reprehensible, to the point of considering it murder. Such a concern is, of course, a justifiable reason for the addition of the amendment.
The language of the bill (H.R. 3962) is fairly neutral, promising “no preemption of state laws regarding abortion,” “no effect on federal laws regarding abortion” and “no effect on federal civil rights laws” in section 258. Section 259 demands that any “federal agency or program and any state or local government that receives federal financial assistance under this act” cannot discriminate against any “health care entity (who) does not provide, pay for, provide coverage of or refer for abortions.”
This seems harmless enough, right? Wrong.
“To say that this amendment is a wolf in sheep’s clothing would be an understatement of a lifetime,” said Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) during floor debate. It “will be the greatest restriction of a women’s right to choose” passed by Congress “in our career,” according to a Nov. 7 Bloomberg.com article.
The bill will theoretically allow women to purchase a “rider” for their government-sponsored health insurance that would provide them with coverage for abortion procedures. We all know who this kind of provision favors — those who can afford to buy private health insurance anyway, not the poor and underprivileged, those who desperately need access to affordable abortions.
Such a plan will actually limit the coverage of “low- and middle-income women who qualify for government subsidies, along with the legions of women who will buy insurance on the exchange because they are either self-employed or employed by small businesses.” They “won’t be able to get plans that automatically include abortion coverage,” Simons writes.
Even worse, a Sept. 30 New York Times editorial claims this “rider” option is actually a charade, “an unworkable approach given that almost no one expects to need an abortion, few women would buy the rider and, therefore, few insurance companies would even offer it.”
Simons reiterates this point: “Businesses don’t like to sell products that don’t have a market, and the market for something like an abortion rider — essentially a plan for an unplanned pregnancy — is notoriously slim.”
By allowing this concession and effectively restricting the availability of abortions to those who can afford to pay for the procedure out of pocket, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has successfully limited the rights of women, pending the passage of a similar bill through the Senate.
According to a Nov. 8 New York Times article entitled “Abortion Was at Heart of Wrangling,” “Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) said the bill’s original language barring the use of federal dollars to pay for abortions should have been sufficient for the opponents. ‘Abortion is a matter of conscience on both sides of the debate,’ DeLauro said. ‘This amendment takes away that same freedom of conscience from America’s women. It prohibits them from access to an abortion even if they pay for it with their own money. It invades women’s personal decisions.’”
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Halloween's Tangled Religious Roots
Check out my Daily Beacon feature story on the religious origins of Halloween.
Here are the first few lines:
Marked primarily by costumes and candy in our culture, Halloween, seemingly in contrast to the way it is practiced now, has its roots in religious festivals, first from a pagan feast and later an infusion of pagan and Christian traditions.
Some of today’s practices carry over from the holiday’s ancient roots. Halloween’s religious overtones have evolved throughout the years, in some cases as a result of the dominant religion of the time and later in reaction to the seeming contradiction of celebrating a holiday with pagan roots within the context of Christianity.
Read the rest here.
Here are the first few lines:
Marked primarily by costumes and candy in our culture, Halloween, seemingly in contrast to the way it is practiced now, has its roots in religious festivals, first from a pagan feast and later an infusion of pagan and Christian traditions.
Some of today’s practices carry over from the holiday’s ancient roots. Halloween’s religious overtones have evolved throughout the years, in some cases as a result of the dominant religion of the time and later in reaction to the seeming contradiction of celebrating a holiday with pagan roots within the context of Christianity.
Read the rest here.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
The Veiling of Women in Early Christianity
My New Testament professor discussed this article in class today. It explains a possible reason for why women were required to wear veils in the Corinthian church established by Paul. Apparently the same word means both "veil" and "testicle."
Veil as Testicle in Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians
Veil as Testicle in Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Three of the Seven Plays (in Seven Days)
I'm traveling to NYC in December with a group of UT students and a professor, and we'll be seeing seven plays in seven days. I'm excited to see these on- and off-Broadway plays, as well as to visit lots of museums and see NYC around Christmastime.
Here are the three plays that I already know we'll be seeing:
1. Superior Donuts
2. In The Next Room
3. Next to Normal
Here are the three plays that I already know we'll be seeing:
1. Superior Donuts
2. In The Next Room
3. Next to Normal
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Saints' Lives ♥
"Of all the genres that survive from the Middle Ages, only the lives of the saints, arguably the richest in terms of extant records, are still treated by literary historians as documents for source studies (Quellenkritik) and little else. The genre has until recently fallen through the net of scholarly research, avoided by the historians because it lacks 'documentary' evidential status and by the literary historians because saints' lives are rarely works of art.
We live, moreover, in a pluralist age ruled by a post-Marxian secular materialism, in an age when fear of the avenging angel of the Lord has been replaced by fear of microorganisms. We have replaced the awe-full reverence for the Almighty with a minute examination of the specific. Microbes have replaced devils. Our literary language has followed this transference of belief. The leading theorists of the last twenty years, in both literary criticism and historiography, share two important methodological premises inherited from the logical-positivists: a skepticism of metaphysical inquiry and a disbelief in the ontological status of language. From this methodological vantage point, they argue that narrative is unable to reflect any reality other than its own. Their major premise which decisively veers from the mainstream of Western philosophical argument is that language—which they define as a rule-based system of mutually intelligible signs—cannot represent reality, for reality is itself a random series of unrelated discontinuities (i.e., is not rule-based). Language is a closed encoding system, and if it reveals anything about a 'reality' outside itself, that 'reality' is a fictive one. It is some considerable distance from this position to that wherein language is a vehicle for representing not only the 'things' of the material world but also the numinous presence (e.g., the scriptural λόγος). Augustine, Gregory, Bokenham or—even the proverbial medieval man on the street—all would affirm the ability of language and narrative to represent not only this world but the divine as well."
—Thomas Heffernan, Sacred Biography (1988)
We live, moreover, in a pluralist age ruled by a post-Marxian secular materialism, in an age when fear of the avenging angel of the Lord has been replaced by fear of microorganisms. We have replaced the awe-full reverence for the Almighty with a minute examination of the specific. Microbes have replaced devils. Our literary language has followed this transference of belief. The leading theorists of the last twenty years, in both literary criticism and historiography, share two important methodological premises inherited from the logical-positivists: a skepticism of metaphysical inquiry and a disbelief in the ontological status of language. From this methodological vantage point, they argue that narrative is unable to reflect any reality other than its own. Their major premise which decisively veers from the mainstream of Western philosophical argument is that language—which they define as a rule-based system of mutually intelligible signs—cannot represent reality, for reality is itself a random series of unrelated discontinuities (i.e., is not rule-based). Language is a closed encoding system, and if it reveals anything about a 'reality' outside itself, that 'reality' is a fictive one. It is some considerable distance from this position to that wherein language is a vehicle for representing not only the 'things' of the material world but also the numinous presence (e.g., the scriptural λόγος). Augustine, Gregory, Bokenham or—even the proverbial medieval man on the street—all would affirm the ability of language and narrative to represent not only this world but the divine as well."
—Thomas Heffernan, Sacred Biography (1988)
Pete Yorn & Scarlett Johansson's album
Pete Yorn & Scarlett Johansson recently released a collaborative album, Break Up.
Listen to my favorite song from the album, Shampoo..
Listen to my favorite song from the album, Shampoo..
The Coen brothers' new film
This. looks. amazing. Cathleen Falsani has written a book (The Dude Abides, The Gospel According to the Coen Brothers) analyzing the spiritual themes of each of the Coen brothers' movies. I learned of this awesome new book from an article in the Salt Lake Tribune.
The release of Falsani's book also coincides with the Coens' new movie, A Serious Man, which is loosely based on the Biblical story of Job. I am sooo looking forward to seeing the movie. Unfortunately, the Oct. 2 U.S. release date is limited, and I have been unable to find any information about when the film will arrive in Tennessee — depressing.
According to the review I read, the film should live up to the high standards set by their other films, of which Fargo is my favorite. (My boyfriend's favorite is Burn After Reading, which is also excellent.)
For a glimpse of the new movie, check out the trailer.
The release of Falsani's book also coincides with the Coens' new movie, A Serious Man, which is loosely based on the Biblical story of Job. I am sooo looking forward to seeing the movie. Unfortunately, the Oct. 2 U.S. release date is limited, and I have been unable to find any information about when the film will arrive in Tennessee — depressing.
According to the review I read, the film should live up to the high standards set by their other films, of which Fargo is my favorite. (My boyfriend's favorite is Burn After Reading, which is also excellent.)
For a glimpse of the new movie, check out the trailer.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Halloween costumes
Zooey's Halloween costume was purchased from Build-a-Bear. Unfortunately, as they were designed for a stuffed bear, the arm holes restrain his little legs. Thus, the costume will be returned, but it made for a good photo shoot.
I myself am thinking of being a female modernist poet of ambiguous sexuality (i.e. H.D.). What could be better than combining literature and '40s fashion? I'm not sure about the rest of the outfit; I'm really only in it for the birdcage veil, though I'm not sure that H.D. would have worn one.
I myself am thinking of being a female modernist poet of ambiguous sexuality (i.e. H.D.). What could be better than combining literature and '40s fashion? I'm not sure about the rest of the outfit; I'm really only in it for the birdcage veil, though I'm not sure that H.D. would have worn one.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Lord, I was born a rambling (wo)man
With a non-existent social life, confronted daily with the decision between food and homework, and with almost no time for relaxation of any sort, something has got to give. Several columns I've edited in the past week and a half have spoken to me more personally than usual. With admonitions to make time for activities other than professionally-related ones and advice from a graduate that all the stress and worry of college are baseless, I've definitely begun to reconsider my priorities. Basically everyone with whom I've discussed my insanely-packed life has told me something along the lines of "I don't know how you do it," and "Yeah, you should probably cut back on something next semester." A professor instructed me to consider which of my activities is really important to my future and to what I hope to gain from my college experience. I know I don't want to come out of college with a chronically sore back and that lasting look of exhaustion that friends seem to notice even when I feel more rested than usual. As painful as it is, I know that sometimes I have to let go of something, no matter how worthy a pursuit it might be, in order to improve my skills in another area and, hell, to actually allow myself a little free time. Just to clarify, time cannot be completely free unless it is completely separated from all thoughts of work left undone. That's something I've got to learn.
Also, while I feel that journalism serves an important service for the community, it doesn't seem to have nearly as positive an impact as actual volunteer community service. That's something I haven't really done in years, and I feel self-centered and self-serving for neglecting something as worthwhile as helping others. I'm afraid I've become too cynical. In thinking about community service and "mission" trips taken by church groups, I've often thought what good does one day or one week of picking up trash or cleaning someone's house really do? With mission work, people often go in with the mindset of what they, as the volunteer, will gain from the experience. That's not what it's about at all. It's about connecting with others and simply sharing in a common humanity. Next semester I plan to do some volunteer work. I want to quell this cynicism and see again the goodness of humanity in a simple act of kindness.
Look at me, adding yet another item to the to do list. I need to learn balance in my life, and to think about things in terms of the experience and not in terms of results. In that spirit, today I decided to take a Drama in New York class this December. I, along with 19 other students and a professor, will travel to NYC, attend seven plays, and keep a journal along the way. I'll also have free time to see the sights when we're not attending the theatre. AND the class doesn't count toward my major. I'm doing it because it should prove to be an exciting, enjoyable experience. Improvement, right?
Also, while I feel that journalism serves an important service for the community, it doesn't seem to have nearly as positive an impact as actual volunteer community service. That's something I haven't really done in years, and I feel self-centered and self-serving for neglecting something as worthwhile as helping others. I'm afraid I've become too cynical. In thinking about community service and "mission" trips taken by church groups, I've often thought what good does one day or one week of picking up trash or cleaning someone's house really do? With mission work, people often go in with the mindset of what they, as the volunteer, will gain from the experience. That's not what it's about at all. It's about connecting with others and simply sharing in a common humanity. Next semester I plan to do some volunteer work. I want to quell this cynicism and see again the goodness of humanity in a simple act of kindness.
Look at me, adding yet another item to the to do list. I need to learn balance in my life, and to think about things in terms of the experience and not in terms of results. In that spirit, today I decided to take a Drama in New York class this December. I, along with 19 other students and a professor, will travel to NYC, attend seven plays, and keep a journal along the way. I'll also have free time to see the sights when we're not attending the theatre. AND the class doesn't count toward my major. I'm doing it because it should prove to be an exciting, enjoyable experience. Improvement, right?
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
The Most Awesome Paragraph Ever (including The Most Awesome Sentence Ever)
Writing that “…the assault is the more overwhelming as the nature [of the female sex] they attack is the weaker,” Heloise portrays herself as less capable of piety than her former husband Abelard (Letters 133). Perhaps this submissive, anti-feminist approach is a result of her all-encompassing desire to humble herself before him, honoring Abelard as though he is God. Likewise, the Wife of Bath is similarly anti-feminist in order to be forgiving of male misdeeds in her tale: the rape victim is never named and is presumably shamed out of court by the impurity forced upon her by her male oppressor; the old hag becomes both a beautiful and faithful wife after her new husband has presumably learned his lesson about sovereignty, though his decision to let her choose her appearance seems to be based more in frustration over the perceived hopelessness of his situation than in acquired wisdom; and most basically, the entire tale (like the Wife of Bath’s life) is framed around the man’s desires, as he is exonerated for an unatoned-for rape and essentially rewarded for the very crime he committed through the acquisition of the perfect wife, whose good traits, beauty and faithfulness, are really only important in relation to him. The Wife of Bath, based on the self-focused commentary of her prologue, would seem to be a proponent of a confident, decisive womanhood but is rather subconsciously submissive to the men in her life, as is evidenced by the female characters’ relationships to the male characters in her tale. Heloise is clearly more aware of her submissiveness to and dependence upon her husband, while the Wife of Bath seems to think she possesses sovereignty over the other sex, while she actually prostrates femininity in the face of male power.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Facebook friendships reveal sexual orientation
The column was originally published in the Sept. 23 issue of the Beacon, and can be viewed online here.
Anyone familiar with Facebook stalking knows a number of things can be inferred from one’s profile, without such information being explicitly included.
For example, when someone purports to love The Nation (which describes itself as “the flagship of the left”) but does not list their political preference, it’s a pretty safe bet to infer a liberal political leaning. Likewise, someone who lists Thomas Paine in their favorite quotations (or attests to their love of Ron Paul) is likely a Libertarian (or maybe not. Oh the flaws of Facebook stalking). And anyone who mentions Ann Coulter (without a clause of hate attached) is likely a Conservative or a liberal-hater at the least.
For homosexual men, it now seems that a listing of sex (”male”) and intentionally ambiguously blank “interested in” section is not the only indication of gayness on Facebook. Two Massachusetts Institute of Technology students developed a program called “Gaydar” which predicts whether or not a man is homosexual by evaluating his friends’ gender and sexuality: “Using data from the social network Facebook, they made a striking discovery: Just by looking at a person’s online friends, they could predict whether the person was gay,” according to a Sept. 20 Boston Globe article.
The students’ findings have not yet been published. And no, the program is not available, as of yet at least, for those of you interested in outing your Facebook friends of ambiguous sexuality. (The program also fails to identify lesbians and bisexuals; it can only detect homosexual men.)
This nifty, insightful new program, however, is not the reason behind writing this column. As Behram Mistree, one of the creators of “Gaydar,” commented in a Sept. 22 ABCNews.com article, the importance of this discovery lies in the privacy issues that result from the fact that such inferences can be made: “We thought that our work demonstrated a new threat to privacy that we wanted individuals to be aware of.”
Of course, sexuality is not the only private information that might be inferred by such a program or even by a particularly insightful Facebook stalker.
“Who we are can be revealed by, and even defined by, who our friends are: If all your friends are over 45, you’re probably not a teenager; if they all belong to a particular religion, it’s a decent bet that you do, too,” the Boston Globe article warned. “The ability to connect with other people who have something in common is part of the power of social networks but also a possible pitfall. If our friends reveal who we are, that challenges a conception of privacy built on the notion that there are things we tell and things we don’t.”
Does this mean we should un-friend anyone who would seem to discredit the image of ourselves that we hope to convey to the rest of our social networking community? Certainly not. (It might be a good idea to un-friend anyone (for example, Osama bin Laden) with whom your association might reveal your secret identity (as a terrorist) or otherwise covert plans.)
It is good to be aware of the privacy we lose by putting our personal information, whether explicitly or implicitly, into the swirling vortex of information that is the Internet.
If you haven’t already, it might be a good idea to re-evaluate your Facebook privacy settings at the very least. (Check out this link for a guide to some privacy settings whose existence you may have never even imagined.)
Anyone familiar with Facebook stalking knows a number of things can be inferred from one’s profile, without such information being explicitly included.
For example, when someone purports to love The Nation (which describes itself as “the flagship of the left”) but does not list their political preference, it’s a pretty safe bet to infer a liberal political leaning. Likewise, someone who lists Thomas Paine in their favorite quotations (or attests to their love of Ron Paul) is likely a Libertarian (or maybe not. Oh the flaws of Facebook stalking). And anyone who mentions Ann Coulter (without a clause of hate attached) is likely a Conservative or a liberal-hater at the least.
For homosexual men, it now seems that a listing of sex (”male”) and intentionally ambiguously blank “interested in” section is not the only indication of gayness on Facebook. Two Massachusetts Institute of Technology students developed a program called “Gaydar” which predicts whether or not a man is homosexual by evaluating his friends’ gender and sexuality: “Using data from the social network Facebook, they made a striking discovery: Just by looking at a person’s online friends, they could predict whether the person was gay,” according to a Sept. 20 Boston Globe article.
The students’ findings have not yet been published. And no, the program is not available, as of yet at least, for those of you interested in outing your Facebook friends of ambiguous sexuality. (The program also fails to identify lesbians and bisexuals; it can only detect homosexual men.)
This nifty, insightful new program, however, is not the reason behind writing this column. As Behram Mistree, one of the creators of “Gaydar,” commented in a Sept. 22 ABCNews.com article, the importance of this discovery lies in the privacy issues that result from the fact that such inferences can be made: “We thought that our work demonstrated a new threat to privacy that we wanted individuals to be aware of.”
Of course, sexuality is not the only private information that might be inferred by such a program or even by a particularly insightful Facebook stalker.
“Who we are can be revealed by, and even defined by, who our friends are: If all your friends are over 45, you’re probably not a teenager; if they all belong to a particular religion, it’s a decent bet that you do, too,” the Boston Globe article warned. “The ability to connect with other people who have something in common is part of the power of social networks but also a possible pitfall. If our friends reveal who we are, that challenges a conception of privacy built on the notion that there are things we tell and things we don’t.”
Does this mean we should un-friend anyone who would seem to discredit the image of ourselves that we hope to convey to the rest of our social networking community? Certainly not. (It might be a good idea to un-friend anyone (for example, Osama bin Laden) with whom your association might reveal your secret identity (as a terrorist) or otherwise covert plans.)
It is good to be aware of the privacy we lose by putting our personal information, whether explicitly or implicitly, into the swirling vortex of information that is the Internet.
If you haven’t already, it might be a good idea to re-evaluate your Facebook privacy settings at the very least. (Check out this link for a guide to some privacy settings whose existence you may have never even imagined.)
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Virtual college would deprive future students
Published in the Sept. 16 issue of the Daily Beacon, and found online here.
Just last week, I finally acquired the long-sought reasoning to justify my pursuit of a career in humanities education.
“Poetry lifts the veil from the hidden beauty of the world ... The great secret of morals is Love; or a going out of our own nature, and an identification of ourselves with the beautiful which exists in thought, action or person, not our own,” Percy Bysshe Shelley wrote in his “Defence of Poetry.” Through the imaginative exercise of reading poetry, or literature more generally, one may learn to empathize with others, to imagine another’s condition.
In other words, literature professors are responsible for the “moral education of humankind,” my professor exclaimed. What greater good might I aspire to than this?
At last, justification for my eternal studenthood.
Ah, but this euphoria and (seemingly) finally attained purpose for my career aspirations did not last long.
That very night, I came across a Sept. 8 article titled “The Web will dismember universities, just like newspapers,” written by Zephyr Teachout on http://www.thebigmoney.com, a member of the Slate (magazine) Group. The article predicts the demise of the traditional college experience due to the economic unsustainability of the education business and the cheapness of online classes in comparison to traditional ones.
I’m obviously holding onto my newspapers by the teeth, and I will hold onto my traditional education system just as ardently.
The article claims that the fields of education and journalism have survived because they have traditionally provided a commodity: hard-to-come-by information. With the advent of the Information Age and with obscure information readily available on the Internet, the article claims that universities are no longer the sole source of such information.
At the most basic level, I disagree that the college experience consists of a simple accumulation of facts. Education is about much more than simple memorization. The college experience ignites a period of self-discovery and self-definition, based upon interactions with peers and new ideas.
A Web-based college experience will not be a college experience at all. It would further the social disconnection and virtual “relationships” propogated by social networking Web sites. It would also destroy curiosity and creativity, instead demanding memorization of facts and figures and thus denying free thinking and exposure to conflicting viewpoints.
This prediction scares me on multiple levels, my most obvious and palpable concern being the availability of employment opportunities for myself, an aspiring academic. But more deeply, I am concerned for the intellectual development of future generations whose only college education might be virtual. Such a transition will mark the devolution of intellectuality. It’s already uncool to read books — what will this mean for future generations? Will their minds be completely filled with bits of facts, disconnected from any coherent semblance of general knowledge?
Will this next generation be even more self-deluded than our own, with their only postulations being Twitter-esque declarations about themselves? How will they define themselves as human beings, if they don’t have an opportunity to distance themselves from their upbringings and to define their ideologies independently if they are not allowed the opportunity to contextualize their existences within a larger universe of ideas and social connections?
Maybe I’m being idealistic about the yields of the traditional education system, but I certainly wouldn’t want my potential children, or anyone in the next generation for that matter, to be denied the college experience I have had.
Just last week, I finally acquired the long-sought reasoning to justify my pursuit of a career in humanities education.
“Poetry lifts the veil from the hidden beauty of the world ... The great secret of morals is Love; or a going out of our own nature, and an identification of ourselves with the beautiful which exists in thought, action or person, not our own,” Percy Bysshe Shelley wrote in his “Defence of Poetry.” Through the imaginative exercise of reading poetry, or literature more generally, one may learn to empathize with others, to imagine another’s condition.
In other words, literature professors are responsible for the “moral education of humankind,” my professor exclaimed. What greater good might I aspire to than this?
At last, justification for my eternal studenthood.
Ah, but this euphoria and (seemingly) finally attained purpose for my career aspirations did not last long.
That very night, I came across a Sept. 8 article titled “The Web will dismember universities, just like newspapers,” written by Zephyr Teachout on http://www.thebigmoney.com, a member of the Slate (magazine) Group. The article predicts the demise of the traditional college experience due to the economic unsustainability of the education business and the cheapness of online classes in comparison to traditional ones.
I’m obviously holding onto my newspapers by the teeth, and I will hold onto my traditional education system just as ardently.
The article claims that the fields of education and journalism have survived because they have traditionally provided a commodity: hard-to-come-by information. With the advent of the Information Age and with obscure information readily available on the Internet, the article claims that universities are no longer the sole source of such information.
At the most basic level, I disagree that the college experience consists of a simple accumulation of facts. Education is about much more than simple memorization. The college experience ignites a period of self-discovery and self-definition, based upon interactions with peers and new ideas.
A Web-based college experience will not be a college experience at all. It would further the social disconnection and virtual “relationships” propogated by social networking Web sites. It would also destroy curiosity and creativity, instead demanding memorization of facts and figures and thus denying free thinking and exposure to conflicting viewpoints.
This prediction scares me on multiple levels, my most obvious and palpable concern being the availability of employment opportunities for myself, an aspiring academic. But more deeply, I am concerned for the intellectual development of future generations whose only college education might be virtual. Such a transition will mark the devolution of intellectuality. It’s already uncool to read books — what will this mean for future generations? Will their minds be completely filled with bits of facts, disconnected from any coherent semblance of general knowledge?
Will this next generation be even more self-deluded than our own, with their only postulations being Twitter-esque declarations about themselves? How will they define themselves as human beings, if they don’t have an opportunity to distance themselves from their upbringings and to define their ideologies independently if they are not allowed the opportunity to contextualize their existences within a larger universe of ideas and social connections?
Maybe I’m being idealistic about the yields of the traditional education system, but I certainly wouldn’t want my potential children, or anyone in the next generation for that matter, to be denied the college experience I have had.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Damn misogynists!
I was reading about the "original" version of the Bible in my New Testament textbook Monday night. Of course, there is no "original" version, but only older and more reliable manuscripts. There are an unimaginable amount of variations among the thousands of versions of the New Testament. This happened because scribes simply made errors when copying the texts; or because scribes thought there was an error in the manuscript from which they were copying and thus wrongly "corrected" their new version; or because scribes changed the texts to suit their own theological or personal purposes.
One example of this occurs in the portrayal of women in some of these manuscripts. Scholars have discovered (by comparing older copies to more recent copies) that scribes sometimes switched the order of a woman's and a man's name to give prominence to the man, completely omitted a woman's name when mentioned with a man's, or changed the wording of the text to indicate that the woman had less authority, contradicting the message conveyed by the original text.
In Chapter 30 of the book I was reading, Bart Ehrman gives several examples of particular biblical verses that were altered in these ways. As a result, we see that Paul didn't actually contradict himself by encouraging female participation in the church in one place and instructing women to be silent and submissive in another. All of this was edited and added by later scribes. Damn misogynists!
I've gotten pretty riled up about sexism lately.
Here are two incidences of sexism from my recent experiences:
(1)
*country music playing non-stop in the newsroom*
Me: Country music is about desperate women hoping men will rescue them.
(Admittedly, that was a generalization.)
Coworker: *turns up Brad Paisley* Shut up, a man is speaking.
This is followed by general shock in the newsroom.
(2)
A columnist submits a satirical column about the university's budget issues. One of the suggestions is as follows: "I propose cutting such useless money sinkholes as the Student Health Center, university scholarships, women's sports and the College of Business."
At first, I consider adding a note to indicate that the column is meant to be satire, but then, as I ponder the issue, I become increasingly offended. With the exception of women's sports, the other three suggested cuts affect the general student body. Honestly, would the columnist have deemed it admissible to suggest the elimination of minority scholarships or LGBT organizations? No, because that's discrimination. It seems that it's OK to show prejudice toward women simply because it's ingrained in our cultural mindset.
The issue was ultimately resolved with an alternative wording. Was I overreacting to get so upset about something that was meant to be funny?
And why must "feminism" have such negative connotations? It's really about human rights/equal rights for everyone.
One example of this occurs in the portrayal of women in some of these manuscripts. Scholars have discovered (by comparing older copies to more recent copies) that scribes sometimes switched the order of a woman's and a man's name to give prominence to the man, completely omitted a woman's name when mentioned with a man's, or changed the wording of the text to indicate that the woman had less authority, contradicting the message conveyed by the original text.
In Chapter 30 of the book I was reading, Bart Ehrman gives several examples of particular biblical verses that were altered in these ways. As a result, we see that Paul didn't actually contradict himself by encouraging female participation in the church in one place and instructing women to be silent and submissive in another. All of this was edited and added by later scribes. Damn misogynists!
I've gotten pretty riled up about sexism lately.
Here are two incidences of sexism from my recent experiences:
(1)
*country music playing non-stop in the newsroom*
Me: Country music is about desperate women hoping men will rescue them.
(Admittedly, that was a generalization.)
Coworker: *turns up Brad Paisley* Shut up, a man is speaking.
This is followed by general shock in the newsroom.
(2)
A columnist submits a satirical column about the university's budget issues. One of the suggestions is as follows: "I propose cutting such useless money sinkholes as the Student Health Center, university scholarships, women's sports and the College of Business."
At first, I consider adding a note to indicate that the column is meant to be satire, but then, as I ponder the issue, I become increasingly offended. With the exception of women's sports, the other three suggested cuts affect the general student body. Honestly, would the columnist have deemed it admissible to suggest the elimination of minority scholarships or LGBT organizations? No, because that's discrimination. It seems that it's OK to show prejudice toward women simply because it's ingrained in our cultural mindset.
The issue was ultimately resolved with an alternative wording. Was I overreacting to get so upset about something that was meant to be funny?
And why must "feminism" have such negative connotations? It's really about human rights/equal rights for everyone.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Larger classes & the quality of education
Here's another editorial I wrote for the Daily Beacon. It was published in the Tuesday, Sept. 1 issue, and can be found online here.
In the Monday, Aug. 24, Daily Beacon article titled “UT scheduling provides more seats with fewer class sections,” the Beacon reported that this semester UT offers fewer course sections but has nearly the same number of seats available for students as it did during the fall 2008 semester. As a result, some class sections have been enlarged.
We appreciate efforts to offer the courses students need to graduate in a timely manner, even if this means enlarging section sizes. But how does this increased seat capacity affect students’ educational experience?
“Perhaps the most surprising (and well documented) result in the literature on class size in higher education is that class size seems to have little or no impact on the acquisition and even the retention of basic course material by students,” according to a summary of class size studies, written by Richard C. Schiming and available at http://www.mnsu.edu/cetl/teachingresources/articles/classsize.html.
Perhaps larger classes do yield the same result grade-wise, but are grades the ultimate indication of learning?
In larger classes, professors do not get to know their students. This isn’t the fault of the professor; it’s nearly impossible to learn the names of 200 students, let alone personally interact with all of them about their individual educational goals in a single semester. You think, 200 — that seems like too many. Well, if a professor teaches four classes with 50 students in each class, that’s still the same amount of students to keep up with.
The best classes, the ones that are most beneficial to students, are the ones in which students get to know their professors and take the time to talk with their professors one-on-one about the student’s particular interests. Without this sort of interaction, a class can become a chore, just another requirement on the graduation to-do list.
In larger classes, students may absorb the same amount of information, but mere fact retention is not the sole indicator of intellectual growth. It is important to gain academic knowledge, but often, compelling class discussions (which are many times impossible in large classes) can be more intellectually beneficial than memorizing facts for a test. One or two meaningful conversations are often more enlightening than a semester’s-worth of academic memorization.
Schiming’s article supports this idea, as he writes, “When it comes to the attainment of higher-order academic skills such as problem solving, written expression and critical thinking, students in smaller classes do acquire more of these skills than do students in larger classes. Thus, while the literature demonstrates that large classes prove no obstacle to the acquisition of specific, course-related, factual knowledge, students in larger classes are at some disadvantage in developing an ability to think better by using skills beyond the basic acquisition of information.”
So, while we at the Beacon appreciate UT’s efforts to keep our graduation schedules on-track, we think it is important to consider the ramifications larger class sizes have on the quality of education at UT.
In the end, though, it is up to the student to take the initiative to improve her own academic experience. Unfortunately, all classes will not be conducive to student learning. Therefore it is vital for you, UT student, to initiate your personal, educational growth by making the effort to engage in intellectually stimulating discussions with your professors and peers both inside and outside the classroom.
In the Monday, Aug. 24, Daily Beacon article titled “UT scheduling provides more seats with fewer class sections,” the Beacon reported that this semester UT offers fewer course sections but has nearly the same number of seats available for students as it did during the fall 2008 semester. As a result, some class sections have been enlarged.
We appreciate efforts to offer the courses students need to graduate in a timely manner, even if this means enlarging section sizes. But how does this increased seat capacity affect students’ educational experience?
“Perhaps the most surprising (and well documented) result in the literature on class size in higher education is that class size seems to have little or no impact on the acquisition and even the retention of basic course material by students,” according to a summary of class size studies, written by Richard C. Schiming and available at http://www.mnsu.edu/cetl/teachingresources/articles/classsize.html.
Perhaps larger classes do yield the same result grade-wise, but are grades the ultimate indication of learning?
In larger classes, professors do not get to know their students. This isn’t the fault of the professor; it’s nearly impossible to learn the names of 200 students, let alone personally interact with all of them about their individual educational goals in a single semester. You think, 200 — that seems like too many. Well, if a professor teaches four classes with 50 students in each class, that’s still the same amount of students to keep up with.
The best classes, the ones that are most beneficial to students, are the ones in which students get to know their professors and take the time to talk with their professors one-on-one about the student’s particular interests. Without this sort of interaction, a class can become a chore, just another requirement on the graduation to-do list.
In larger classes, students may absorb the same amount of information, but mere fact retention is not the sole indicator of intellectual growth. It is important to gain academic knowledge, but often, compelling class discussions (which are many times impossible in large classes) can be more intellectually beneficial than memorizing facts for a test. One or two meaningful conversations are often more enlightening than a semester’s-worth of academic memorization.
Schiming’s article supports this idea, as he writes, “When it comes to the attainment of higher-order academic skills such as problem solving, written expression and critical thinking, students in smaller classes do acquire more of these skills than do students in larger classes. Thus, while the literature demonstrates that large classes prove no obstacle to the acquisition of specific, course-related, factual knowledge, students in larger classes are at some disadvantage in developing an ability to think better by using skills beyond the basic acquisition of information.”
So, while we at the Beacon appreciate UT’s efforts to keep our graduation schedules on-track, we think it is important to consider the ramifications larger class sizes have on the quality of education at UT.
In the end, though, it is up to the student to take the initiative to improve her own academic experience. Unfortunately, all classes will not be conducive to student learning. Therefore it is vital for you, UT student, to initiate your personal, educational growth by making the effort to engage in intellectually stimulating discussions with your professors and peers both inside and outside the classroom.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Vanquish apathy!
This is an editorial I wrote for the Beacon, entitled Students should get involved, passionate. It's written in the 1st person plural because it's mean to convey the opinion of the editorial staff as it is an "Our View." This isn't exactly God-, book-, or even tea-related, but it does express something I'm passionate about. Here it is:
Wake up! Take your iPod headphones out of your ears for two minutes, and listen. If you only give your attention to one thing today, let this be it.
Stop going through the motions. Stop living your life as a step-by-step plan predetermined by your parents, our “success”-oriented culture or even yourself.
Care about something. Anything. Please. It’s so disheartening to see you stumbling through your days, hungover from the night before. Yeah, some classes are boring. But, if you dig deeply enough, you’ll be pretty hard-pressed not to find something of interest in every field.
Oh, hey, and stop texting constantly. It detracts from your interactions with others. Yeah, yeah, multi-tasking. Whatever. If you’re too busy typing to some entity on the other end of a cell phone signal, then you obviously don’t care about the people right in front of you. You care, don’t you? You must. We all care about something, right?
Doesn’t something excite you, upset you or otherwise incite you? Do something about it. Spread the word. Tell others why you’re so passionate about it. You’re wasting your life if you aren’t truly taking action against the things that enrage you and sharing the things that excite you.
Don’t you care about yourself enough to live your life passionately? You know the old saying: “You can’t love anyone until you love yourself.” Dive into your mind, discover what matters to you, act upon it and, by doing so, value your own opinions. As a result, your newfound enthusiasm will spread to those around you and inspire them to pursue their own passions.
We’re certainly not perfect and are most likely guilty of texting too often and not always giving our full attention when we should. We just wish everyone at UT (who hasn’t already) would listen to the message of Welcome Week — get inVOLved.
This is not a blanket criticism. We’ve met some amazing, passionate people at UT. This group is a minority though. If you attend major events around campus, you’ll see the same group of about 200 faces at all these events. (Also, maybe you didn’t know, but you’re paying for most of these events on campus. Your student activities fees fund the committees who bring the speakers and performers. So, since you’re essentially a sponsor, it wouldn’t hurt to attend a few campus events.)
Everyone else — Where are you? What are you doing? Sitting in your dorm room, watching ESPN’s commentary on UT’s upcoming football season, while primping for that party and/or pre-gaming with your contraband alcohol? It’s great to be a devoted Vols fan, but, honestly, unless you’re an athlete, your only role on campus should not be that of UT football devotee.
Also, this is not ageist. Many people older than college-age simply go through the motions, living meaningless, passionless lives. They don’t realize, or maybe they don’t care, that their actions affect others. These apathetic adults have served as poor role models for our generation, but that doesn’t mean we should sit back and blame our upbringings, or more largely our culture, for our own apathy.
Don’t be a nameless, faceless entity who blends in with all the other do-nothings of this world. Make yourself known; make your voice heard.
Vanquish apathy. Live. For your own sake.
Wake up! Take your iPod headphones out of your ears for two minutes, and listen. If you only give your attention to one thing today, let this be it.
Stop going through the motions. Stop living your life as a step-by-step plan predetermined by your parents, our “success”-oriented culture or even yourself.
Care about something. Anything. Please. It’s so disheartening to see you stumbling through your days, hungover from the night before. Yeah, some classes are boring. But, if you dig deeply enough, you’ll be pretty hard-pressed not to find something of interest in every field.
Oh, hey, and stop texting constantly. It detracts from your interactions with others. Yeah, yeah, multi-tasking. Whatever. If you’re too busy typing to some entity on the other end of a cell phone signal, then you obviously don’t care about the people right in front of you. You care, don’t you? You must. We all care about something, right?
Doesn’t something excite you, upset you or otherwise incite you? Do something about it. Spread the word. Tell others why you’re so passionate about it. You’re wasting your life if you aren’t truly taking action against the things that enrage you and sharing the things that excite you.
Don’t you care about yourself enough to live your life passionately? You know the old saying: “You can’t love anyone until you love yourself.” Dive into your mind, discover what matters to you, act upon it and, by doing so, value your own opinions. As a result, your newfound enthusiasm will spread to those around you and inspire them to pursue their own passions.
We’re certainly not perfect and are most likely guilty of texting too often and not always giving our full attention when we should. We just wish everyone at UT (who hasn’t already) would listen to the message of Welcome Week — get inVOLved.
This is not a blanket criticism. We’ve met some amazing, passionate people at UT. This group is a minority though. If you attend major events around campus, you’ll see the same group of about 200 faces at all these events. (Also, maybe you didn’t know, but you’re paying for most of these events on campus. Your student activities fees fund the committees who bring the speakers and performers. So, since you’re essentially a sponsor, it wouldn’t hurt to attend a few campus events.)
Everyone else — Where are you? What are you doing? Sitting in your dorm room, watching ESPN’s commentary on UT’s upcoming football season, while primping for that party and/or pre-gaming with your contraband alcohol? It’s great to be a devoted Vols fan, but, honestly, unless you’re an athlete, your only role on campus should not be that of UT football devotee.
Also, this is not ageist. Many people older than college-age simply go through the motions, living meaningless, passionless lives. They don’t realize, or maybe they don’t care, that their actions affect others. These apathetic adults have served as poor role models for our generation, but that doesn’t mean we should sit back and blame our upbringings, or more largely our culture, for our own apathy.
Don’t be a nameless, faceless entity who blends in with all the other do-nothings of this world. Make yourself known; make your voice heard.
Vanquish apathy. Live. For your own sake.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Another Rendition of My Soul
This is probably more accurate: a heavy, organized set of drawers floating in a chaotic, star-filled abyss.
Go make your own!
Go make your own!
My Soul
SoulPancake has a new discussion today, asking contributors to "Sketchify" Your Soul.
I encourage you to follow the directions on SoulPancake's Web site, sketch your soul, and contribute your link to the discussion.
Here's mine.
I encourage you to follow the directions on SoulPancake's Web site, sketch your soul, and contribute your link to the discussion.
Here's mine.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Doubt
One of the last books we read in my Modern American Literature class this summer was H.D.'s Trilogy. It's a religious epic (in three parts), in which she establishes a new religion (whether she was serious about actually guiding followers to practice this new religion is of course up to your interpretation). Anyway, my professor recommended that we read T.S. Eliot's "Four Quartets" if we enjoyed H.D.'s Trilogy. During class discussion, my professor wanted to point out all the period details in Trilogy which placed H.D.'s work into the context of WWII England. At least in looking for the lasting, universal message of a work, I think it's sometimes beneficial to divorce a work from its context; I seemed to get something entirely different from Trilogy than my professor did. I feel that my analysis of "Four Quartets" is also probably a bit out-of-context but hopefully relatable.
Anyway, this particular passage spoke to my personal experience of doubt:
Over time, a person can become disheartened as they may begin to doubt their faith in God, or more generally the divine. Hence, this "resentment at failing powers." This passage may seem pretty obvious in its meaning, so sorry if I'm boring you in my analysis of it.
The next part really resonates with my experience. "Unattached devotion which might pass for devotionless." I've experienced disappointment in my religious experiences. My bitterness, I suppose, could indicate my "devotionless"-ness, or my unbelief. "Unattached devotion" perfectly describes my desire to define my view of the meaning of life, or God, or whatever it is we're all trying to figure out. This devotion, I think, would not necessarily have to be directed toward a traditional divinity but could instead become a "devotion" to science, or something of the sort. Simply devotion to whatever system of thought a person determines to be true. Mine is still not completely defined. It's a journey, and a long one, too.
"In a drifting boat with a slow leakage." Unanchored, in search of a destination, doubt wears a hole in the seeker's faith, or belief, slowly causing the boat to sink unless the seeker reaches a conclusion soon, the shore, the promised land.
"Silent listening to ... the last annunciation." The last announcement of the descent of the divine. Silent in awe? Silent in doubt? Silent in disbelief? The first or the last options are best for the seeker's mental and/or spiritual well-being. Of course, believers in different ideologies would differ on which of these alternatives is best. Doubt can be helpful, as examining why you believe what you believe is important. I think all would agree, though, that doubt ought to be a transitory state, as it wears away joy and contentment in everyday life.
Anyway, this particular passage spoke to my personal experience of doubt:
"There is the final addition, the failing
Pride or resentment at failing powers,
The unattached devotion which might pass for devotionless,
In a drifting boat with a slow leakage,
The silent listening to the undeniable
Clamour of the bell of the last annunciation."
-from Quartet No. 3: The Dry Salvages
Over time, a person can become disheartened as they may begin to doubt their faith in God, or more generally the divine. Hence, this "resentment at failing powers." This passage may seem pretty obvious in its meaning, so sorry if I'm boring you in my analysis of it.
The next part really resonates with my experience. "Unattached devotion which might pass for devotionless." I've experienced disappointment in my religious experiences. My bitterness, I suppose, could indicate my "devotionless"-ness, or my unbelief. "Unattached devotion" perfectly describes my desire to define my view of the meaning of life, or God, or whatever it is we're all trying to figure out. This devotion, I think, would not necessarily have to be directed toward a traditional divinity but could instead become a "devotion" to science, or something of the sort. Simply devotion to whatever system of thought a person determines to be true. Mine is still not completely defined. It's a journey, and a long one, too.
"In a drifting boat with a slow leakage." Unanchored, in search of a destination, doubt wears a hole in the seeker's faith, or belief, slowly causing the boat to sink unless the seeker reaches a conclusion soon, the shore, the promised land.
"Silent listening to ... the last annunciation." The last announcement of the descent of the divine. Silent in awe? Silent in doubt? Silent in disbelief? The first or the last options are best for the seeker's mental and/or spiritual well-being. Of course, believers in different ideologies would differ on which of these alternatives is best. Doubt can be helpful, as examining why you believe what you believe is important. I think all would agree, though, that doubt ought to be a transitory state, as it wears away joy and contentment in everyday life.
Friday, August 7, 2009
SoulPancake
SoulPancake: Chew on Life's Big Questions.
This is an awesome site, created by Rainn Wilson (Dwight from The Office; he's also Baha'i). From what I've read so far, it's more of a forum than a publication. Even the longer posts encourage interaction from the readership. Reading the comments on this Web site is a very different experience than reading the comments on a news site. The community contributing to the site is a far from homogeneous group; they are passionately engaged in conversation. It's refreshing to read such interesting and thoughtful comments, in a virtual world where commenters so often write ignorant, inconsiderate posts.
Anyway, check it out. Here's the explanation of what it's all about.
This is an awesome site, created by Rainn Wilson (Dwight from The Office; he's also Baha'i). From what I've read so far, it's more of a forum than a publication. Even the longer posts encourage interaction from the readership. Reading the comments on this Web site is a very different experience than reading the comments on a news site. The community contributing to the site is a far from homogeneous group; they are passionately engaged in conversation. It's refreshing to read such interesting and thoughtful comments, in a virtual world where commenters so often write ignorant, inconsiderate posts.
Anyway, check it out. Here's the explanation of what it's all about.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
The Development of Divinity
I'm at a journalism conference at the University of Georgia (in Athens) this week, and I have an early morning tomorrow. But, of course , inspiration strikes at the most inconvenient times.
I'm taking a class on modern American literature this summer, and it's been a stretch for me as I tend to focus on antiquity and the medieval period much more than I do on modernism. I'm also pretty ignorant when it comes to American literature in general. Shamefully, I've read very few of the classics. But that means this class has been really interesting for me, because the style and goals of the writing are so totally new.
We've read Susan Glaspell, William Carlos Williams, H.D., Wallace Stevens, and John Steinbeck so far. We read H.D.'s HERmione the week before last, and, unfortunately, I'm missing the lectures on her later poetry while I'm out of town this week. (I'll probably be writing my second paper on her though, so at least I'll get a chance to look more in-depth into the evolution of her writing over the course of her life.)
Anyway (there is a point), HERmione was extremely hard to get into at first. Once I did, I was entranced. I felt I was actually experiencing the character's emotions. The novel is one written by a poet, which is pretty evident from the narrative style. It's largely autobiographical, telling a story of failure and resulting identity crisis. I may have related to it so much simply because Her/Hermione (the main character) is very close to if not exactly the same age as I am (20).
We talked a lot about the writing style and the lack of clearly described events and an easy-to-follow plot. What we didn't delve into much are the religious overtones of the novel. I have no remarkable insight to offer into the topic, but I found the development of Hermione's perspective toward the divine interesting.
Throughout the majority of the novel, Hermione seems confused, almost blinded by herself and her lack of self, really. She seems to describe overwhelming visions and experiences, mostly related to nature. After a certain transitional series of events (which I won't give away in case you decide to read the book), Hermione comes to accept herself and establishes a stable acceptance and understanding of what she deems divinity.
To me, it's very Hindu/Eastern in the fact that it's as if she herself has transformed into a god. Again, she defines her spirituality in nature; she is very conscious of her feet and the feeling of her bare feet in contact with earth and plants. Aware of her connection with the natural world and thus with all life, she finds her way, carves her individual, ancient, divine self into existence: "She wanted just that plunge into grey dusk, just that finding foothold on the half frozen path to help her. ... a feeling of elation caught at Her, a sort of atavism having to do with Olympia." H.D. as a writer and Hermione as a character connected with the ancient Greek world of mythology and ritual. Through it, she defined her self and her relationship with the divine. The Hindu aspect comes in at the end, as she becomes "practical and at one with herself, with the world, with all outer circumstance."
I hope this entry was at least enjoyable to read if not terribly informative, and hopefully you'll be encouraged to pick up HERmione sometime. (Accomplishment for me: I refrained from quoting too extensively!)
I'm taking a class on modern American literature this summer, and it's been a stretch for me as I tend to focus on antiquity and the medieval period much more than I do on modernism. I'm also pretty ignorant when it comes to American literature in general. Shamefully, I've read very few of the classics. But that means this class has been really interesting for me, because the style and goals of the writing are so totally new.
We've read Susan Glaspell, William Carlos Williams, H.D., Wallace Stevens, and John Steinbeck so far. We read H.D.'s HERmione the week before last, and, unfortunately, I'm missing the lectures on her later poetry while I'm out of town this week. (I'll probably be writing my second paper on her though, so at least I'll get a chance to look more in-depth into the evolution of her writing over the course of her life.)
Anyway (there is a point), HERmione was extremely hard to get into at first. Once I did, I was entranced. I felt I was actually experiencing the character's emotions. The novel is one written by a poet, which is pretty evident from the narrative style. It's largely autobiographical, telling a story of failure and resulting identity crisis. I may have related to it so much simply because Her/Hermione (the main character) is very close to if not exactly the same age as I am (20).
We talked a lot about the writing style and the lack of clearly described events and an easy-to-follow plot. What we didn't delve into much are the religious overtones of the novel. I have no remarkable insight to offer into the topic, but I found the development of Hermione's perspective toward the divine interesting.
Throughout the majority of the novel, Hermione seems confused, almost blinded by herself and her lack of self, really. She seems to describe overwhelming visions and experiences, mostly related to nature. After a certain transitional series of events (which I won't give away in case you decide to read the book), Hermione comes to accept herself and establishes a stable acceptance and understanding of what she deems divinity.
To me, it's very Hindu/Eastern in the fact that it's as if she herself has transformed into a god. Again, she defines her spirituality in nature; she is very conscious of her feet and the feeling of her bare feet in contact with earth and plants. Aware of her connection with the natural world and thus with all life, she finds her way, carves her individual, ancient, divine self into existence: "She wanted just that plunge into grey dusk, just that finding foothold on the half frozen path to help her. ... a feeling of elation caught at Her, a sort of atavism having to do with Olympia." H.D. as a writer and Hermione as a character connected with the ancient Greek world of mythology and ritual. Through it, she defined her self and her relationship with the divine. The Hindu aspect comes in at the end, as she becomes "practical and at one with herself, with the world, with all outer circumstance."
I hope this entry was at least enjoyable to read if not terribly informative, and hopefully you'll be encouraged to pick up HERmione sometime. (Accomplishment for me: I refrained from quoting too extensively!)
Monday, July 6, 2009
Who Am I?
For the class (Modern American Literature) I started today, the professor asked us to write a three-page narrative answering the questions, "Who Am I?" and "Why Am I Here?" It was actually kind of cathartic to write, and it helped me assign meaning to some of the mundane aspects of my daily life. This is my abbreviated answer to the first question.
My perfect Saturday morning would involve baking cookies, listening to NPR, and settling in with a good book, my cat, and a cup of tea. I buy books more quickly than I can read them and always have at least 20 checked out from the library. I'm very passionate about and interested in doing research in my two major fields, religious studies and English literature. I enjoy participating in my campus newspaper because I believe journalism provides an important, informative service for the people. For the '09-'10 school year I will be the editor-in-chief of the Daily Beacon. This past year I was able to feed my obsession for proper grammar as the chief copy editor. I have also written news and a few entertainment articles for my paper.
I’ve always felt uncomfortable talking about myself, so please excuse the fact that the above paragraph is a recycled biography. It highlights all my favorite activities and the ways in which I spend most of my time. But do the things I do define who I am? They certainly occupy my mental energy and prevent me from pondering such an existential question as personal identity for a very prolonged period. Since my days are consumed with these activities, I think the best way to define who I am is to examine my reasons for spending my time on such pursuits.
Primarily, I am focused on classes and schoolwork. Why? I love to learn. My career goal is to be an eternal student, a professor. At the moment, I am looking into graduate school in Medieval Studies and/or Medieval Christianity. I loved my Chaucer class last spring. Chaucer was such an interesting guy; his personal opinions about religion, and really most topics, are difficult to discern. He wanted his readers to come to their own conclusions about him. I like that he wanted his readers to expand their minds, to make their own judgments. I would like to be that kind of professor when I “grow up.” I want to aid my students’ intellectual growth, but I want that growth to be independent of my own opinions and interpretations.
Secondly, during the regular school year I spend a good deal of time working at the Daily Beacon. The amount of time I spend there will increase quite a bit this next year, because, as I said above, I will be the editor-in-chief. My friends at the Beacon work there in order to gain journalistic experience, but I’m not interested in a career in journalism. I participate because I think the Beacon provides an important service to UT’s students. All good journalism should be informative and expose the truth when necessary. I know the Beacon at times falls short of such a lofty goal, as many journalistic outfits do these days. Journalistic integrity and quality are declining. An article I read claims that journalists have brought about their own demise, as they have forgotten the most important standard of quality: “Substantive writing and reporting isn't everything, it's the only thing.” So, the reason I work at the Daily Beacon is because of a sense of social duty.
I’m also on Issues Committee. We’re responsible for spending a large portion of the student activities fee to bring “interesting and informative speakers” to campus. I like being on Issues because, well, to be honest, it’s pretty cool to meet famous, or semi-famous, people. Also, it’s a bit aggravating because UT students seem so disengaged and uninterested in most of our events. Name recognition drives attendance, but our best speakers are usually those little-heard-of writers, who really are experts, but get little to no interest from UT students. So, indirectly, my membership on Issues Committee shows that I wish students would show interest in something other than beer, parties, and the resulting meaningless sex. That was a bit of an odd connection to make, but I’m really disappointed by my peers’ apathetic detachment from political issues and intelligent discourse in general.
I’m in a handful of other organizations, which I hope speak to a facet of my personal identity, but sometimes I worry my activities become just another line on the resume. Since childhood, I always defined myself in terms of religion. My parents and I attended a Presbyterian, a Methodist, and then a Southern Baptist church. Seeing the light of liberalism in college, I’m appalled by the political agendas and hypocrisies of the evangelical churches of my past. I know this is true of many different denominations and of other religions, but regardless it’s disheartening to see such bureaucracy diminish spirituality. Humanity is fallible, and I’ve pretty much lost faith in organized religion, as a result of a few experiences that I won't mention here. That doesn’t mean I’ve lost faith in God, but I’m still in the process of sorting out my beliefs and discerning the proper way to honor God. So, my religious experience at this point means I am seeking truth about existence, whatever “truth” means and wherever I may find it.
So, who am I? I am a student, hopefully an eternal one; I am a journalist who writes out of a sense of social duty; I am a young adult, disappointed by the apathy of my peers; and I am a seeker of divine and existential truth.
My perfect Saturday morning would involve baking cookies, listening to NPR, and settling in with a good book, my cat, and a cup of tea. I buy books more quickly than I can read them and always have at least 20 checked out from the library. I'm very passionate about and interested in doing research in my two major fields, religious studies and English literature. I enjoy participating in my campus newspaper because I believe journalism provides an important, informative service for the people. For the '09-'10 school year I will be the editor-in-chief of the Daily Beacon. This past year I was able to feed my obsession for proper grammar as the chief copy editor. I have also written news and a few entertainment articles for my paper.
I’ve always felt uncomfortable talking about myself, so please excuse the fact that the above paragraph is a recycled biography. It highlights all my favorite activities and the ways in which I spend most of my time. But do the things I do define who I am? They certainly occupy my mental energy and prevent me from pondering such an existential question as personal identity for a very prolonged period. Since my days are consumed with these activities, I think the best way to define who I am is to examine my reasons for spending my time on such pursuits.
Primarily, I am focused on classes and schoolwork. Why? I love to learn. My career goal is to be an eternal student, a professor. At the moment, I am looking into graduate school in Medieval Studies and/or Medieval Christianity. I loved my Chaucer class last spring. Chaucer was such an interesting guy; his personal opinions about religion, and really most topics, are difficult to discern. He wanted his readers to come to their own conclusions about him. I like that he wanted his readers to expand their minds, to make their own judgments. I would like to be that kind of professor when I “grow up.” I want to aid my students’ intellectual growth, but I want that growth to be independent of my own opinions and interpretations.
Secondly, during the regular school year I spend a good deal of time working at the Daily Beacon. The amount of time I spend there will increase quite a bit this next year, because, as I said above, I will be the editor-in-chief. My friends at the Beacon work there in order to gain journalistic experience, but I’m not interested in a career in journalism. I participate because I think the Beacon provides an important service to UT’s students. All good journalism should be informative and expose the truth when necessary. I know the Beacon at times falls short of such a lofty goal, as many journalistic outfits do these days. Journalistic integrity and quality are declining. An article I read claims that journalists have brought about their own demise, as they have forgotten the most important standard of quality: “Substantive writing and reporting isn't everything, it's the only thing.” So, the reason I work at the Daily Beacon is because of a sense of social duty.
I’m also on Issues Committee. We’re responsible for spending a large portion of the student activities fee to bring “interesting and informative speakers” to campus. I like being on Issues because, well, to be honest, it’s pretty cool to meet famous, or semi-famous, people. Also, it’s a bit aggravating because UT students seem so disengaged and uninterested in most of our events. Name recognition drives attendance, but our best speakers are usually those little-heard-of writers, who really are experts, but get little to no interest from UT students. So, indirectly, my membership on Issues Committee shows that I wish students would show interest in something other than beer, parties, and the resulting meaningless sex. That was a bit of an odd connection to make, but I’m really disappointed by my peers’ apathetic detachment from political issues and intelligent discourse in general.
I’m in a handful of other organizations, which I hope speak to a facet of my personal identity, but sometimes I worry my activities become just another line on the resume. Since childhood, I always defined myself in terms of religion. My parents and I attended a Presbyterian, a Methodist, and then a Southern Baptist church. Seeing the light of liberalism in college, I’m appalled by the political agendas and hypocrisies of the evangelical churches of my past. I know this is true of many different denominations and of other religions, but regardless it’s disheartening to see such bureaucracy diminish spirituality. Humanity is fallible, and I’ve pretty much lost faith in organized religion, as a result of a few experiences that I won't mention here. That doesn’t mean I’ve lost faith in God, but I’m still in the process of sorting out my beliefs and discerning the proper way to honor God. So, my religious experience at this point means I am seeking truth about existence, whatever “truth” means and wherever I may find it.
So, who am I? I am a student, hopefully an eternal one; I am a journalist who writes out of a sense of social duty; I am a young adult, disappointed by the apathy of my peers; and I am a seeker of divine and existential truth.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Just a speck of dust
I'm looking at my cat, sitting in a little ball on the floor. He's afraid of the storm. When the power went out, he ran around the room, looking for someplace to hide. I, on the other hand, opened the blinds just so I could watch the storm roll in, see the lightning, and feel the thunder. I suppose there's a certain fascination in watching a storm, but I'm not afraid. And why not? Do I feel invincible? Or just disconnected from the majesty of nature? I think it's the second. And I don't like that I've come to such a conclusion.
I'm not too good at living in the moment, at looking at the world around me and experiencing the present. Where's my awe for the dichotomy of violence and beauty in the natural world? Why am I not constantly aware of the immediacy of life, of being?
I hate to say it, but I'm reminded of the Lee Ann Womack song "I Hope You Dance":
Also, I really love Kimya Dawson's "I Like Giants." It reminds me of how microscopic, how tiny I am in comparison to life as a whole:
This included none of the requisite themes (God, tea, or a good book), at least not blatantly. But it's my attempt to write at least one blog entry each week and to make an observation about existence, even if such an observation is only beneficial to me.
I'm not too good at living in the moment, at looking at the world around me and experiencing the present. Where's my awe for the dichotomy of violence and beauty in the natural world? Why am I not constantly aware of the immediacy of life, of being?
I hate to say it, but I'm reminded of the Lee Ann Womack song "I Hope You Dance":
I hope you never lose your sense of wonder
You get your fill to eat
But always keep that hunger
May you never take one single breath for granted
God forbid love ever leave you empty handed
I hope you still feel small
When you stand by the ocean
Whenever one door closes, I hope one more opens
Promise me you'll give faith a fighting chance...
Also, I really love Kimya Dawson's "I Like Giants." It reminds me of how microscopic, how tiny I am in comparison to life as a whole:
When I go for a drive I like to pull off to the side
Of the road, turn out the lights, get out and look up at the sky
And I do this to remind me that I'm really, really tiny
In the grand scheme of things and sometimes this terrifies me
But it's only really scary cause it makes me feel serene
In a way I never thought I'd be because I've never been
So grounded, and so humbled, and so one with everything
I am grounded, I am humbled, I am one with everything
Rock and roll is fun but if you ever hear someone
Say you are huge, look at the moon, look at the stars, look at the sun
Look at the ocean and the desert and the mountains and the sky
Say I am just a speck of dust inside a giant's eye
I am just a speck of dust inside a giant's eye
This included none of the requisite themes (God, tea, or a good book), at least not blatantly. But it's my attempt to write at least one blog entry each week and to make an observation about existence, even if such an observation is only beneficial to me.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
God, clothed in human language
This blog is not a collection of random musings. But maybe it should be, maybe it would be more interesting that way. In this blog, I'm aiming to explore God, religion, and human belief or non-belief in either or both. I haven't posted in awhile because I've had trouble deciding what to write about, but the truth of it is that I see God everywhere. Or at least I see God or religion or a human attempt to describe such matters in everything, especially in the literature I read for my English classes or for pleasure.
In reading about St. Ephrem the Syrian for my summer research internship, I have discovered a new way to look at Christianity. Ephrem's metaphorical, devotional approach is refreshing coming from a lifelong familiarity with the Greek Church fathers, who are sometimes much more concerned with legalism than with actual connection with God. That's not to say that Ephrem, a voice of Eastern Orthodox or more simply Asian Christianity, was always poetic and never polemical, because in some cases he certainly was.
While I'm focusing on his Hymns on Paradise in my research, last week I read several introductions about Ephrem's life and his theological perspective. In particular, I found his 31st Hymn on Faith of interest. Academically, Ephrem is interesting because he is a theologian expressing his beliefs in poetry rather than prose. So to me, his convictions seem much less specific and more free-form, and this allows for personal interpretation of his metaphors, which is what I personally find intriguing about him.
So, this 31st Hymn on Faith employs some of Ephrem's favorite imagery, that of clothing and being clothed. In this hymn, God clothes himself in humanity's language in order to make it possible for it to understand Him. (Though Ephrem demands the impossibility of understanding God.)
In reading about St. Ephrem the Syrian for my summer research internship, I have discovered a new way to look at Christianity. Ephrem's metaphorical, devotional approach is refreshing coming from a lifelong familiarity with the Greek Church fathers, who are sometimes much more concerned with legalism than with actual connection with God. That's not to say that Ephrem, a voice of Eastern Orthodox or more simply Asian Christianity, was always poetic and never polemical, because in some cases he certainly was.
While I'm focusing on his Hymns on Paradise in my research, last week I read several introductions about Ephrem's life and his theological perspective. In particular, I found his 31st Hymn on Faith of interest. Academically, Ephrem is interesting because he is a theologian expressing his beliefs in poetry rather than prose. So to me, his convictions seem much less specific and more free-form, and this allows for personal interpretation of his metaphors, which is what I personally find intriguing about him.
So, this 31st Hymn on Faith employs some of Ephrem's favorite imagery, that of clothing and being clothed. In this hymn, God clothes himself in humanity's language in order to make it possible for it to understand Him. (Though Ephrem demands the impossibility of understanding God.)
1. Let us give thanks to God
who clothed Himself in the names of the body's various parts:
Scriptures refer to His "ears"
to teach us that He listens to us;
It speaks of His "eyes,"
to show that He sees us.
It was just the names of such things
that He put on,
and—although in His true being
there is no wrath or regret—
yet He put on these names
because of our weakness.
Response: Blessed is He who has appeared to our
human race under so many metaphors.
2. We should realize that,
had He not put on the names of such things,
it would not have been possible for Him
to speak with us humans.
By means of what belongs to us did He draw close to us:
He clothed himself in language,
so that He might clothe us
in His mode of life.
He asked for our form and put this on,
and then, as a father with his children,
He spoke with our childish state.
3. It is our metaphors that He put on—
though He did not literally do so;
He then took them off—without actually doing so:
when wearing them, He was at the same time stripped of them.
He puts on one when it is beneficial,
then strips it off in exchange for another;
the fact that He strips off
and puts on all sorts of metaphors
tell us that the metaphor
does not apply to His true Being:
because that Being is hidden,
He has depicted it by means of what is visible.
4. In one place He was like an Old Man
and the Ancient of Days,
then again, He became like a Hero,
a valiant Warrior.
For the purposes of judgment He was an Old Man,
but for conflict He was Valiant.
In one place He was delaying;
elsewhere, having run,
He became weary.
In one place, He was asleep,
in another, in need:
by every means did He weary Himself so as to gain us.
5. For this is the Good One,
who could have forced us to please Him,
without any trouble to Himself;
but instead He toiled by every means
so that we might act pleasingly to Him of our own free will,
that we might depict our beauty with the colors
that our own free will had gathered;
whereas, if He had adorned us,
then we would have resembled
a portrait that someone else had painted,
adorning it with his own colors.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Metafiction & Repetition
In my World Lit class, we're reading postmodern literature; one of its characteristics is the presence of metafictional devices. This means that the texts themselves talk about storytelling, or aspects of the writing process. In Samuel Beckett's absurd play, the Endgame, the main character, Hamm, struggles to compose the story of his life. He seems to doubt that his life has been meaningful and that he has acted benevolently to others. He aims to ascribe meaning to his life through storytelling. If only he can articulate his experiences, then they will have mattered.
Likewise, in reading the chapter entitled "Genesis" in Killing the Buddha, the author (A.L. Kennedy) talks about the human desire to make a record of the beginning, or origin, of important events. This of course includes the creation story and subsequent tales contained in the book of Genesis. By composing such a narrative, the Jewish people added legitimacy to their tradition and beliefs. The author does point out the dark, sinful nature of humankind within Genesis, wondering what this says about the fundamental tendencies of people as well as why God would create such a destructive race.
Kennedy started the chapter by talking about his childhood growing up in church and how it conflicted with his parents' actual convictions about religion. He said his mother was just going through the motions with little faith, seemingly bored and disheartened by her experiences. I think it is easy to become disheartened with the state of churches today. So often they are run as businesses, furthering political agendas and disregarding the people. *Sigh* However, on the boredom front, I'm not so sure. I grew up in a Baptist Church, where the hymns, the sermons, and the announcements varied each week. When I began attending an Episcopal campus ministry, I thought, "Oh no. The words will become meaningless once memorized, and then I'll just be going through the motions and not really worshiping." However, I've found this to be quite the opposite of what I expected. Knowing the words and the prescribed plan of action for the service allows your mind to dwell more on the presence of God than on the words and motions of the service. Likewise, I was just reading an article about the Eastern Orthodox Church. The author (Frederica Mathewes-Green) encourages visitors to not be deterred by the repetitive nature of the liturgy. Instead,
Likewise, in reading the chapter entitled "Genesis" in Killing the Buddha, the author (A.L. Kennedy) talks about the human desire to make a record of the beginning, or origin, of important events. This of course includes the creation story and subsequent tales contained in the book of Genesis. By composing such a narrative, the Jewish people added legitimacy to their tradition and beliefs. The author does point out the dark, sinful nature of humankind within Genesis, wondering what this says about the fundamental tendencies of people as well as why God would create such a destructive race.
Kennedy started the chapter by talking about his childhood growing up in church and how it conflicted with his parents' actual convictions about religion. He said his mother was just going through the motions with little faith, seemingly bored and disheartened by her experiences. I think it is easy to become disheartened with the state of churches today. So often they are run as businesses, furthering political agendas and disregarding the people. *Sigh* However, on the boredom front, I'm not so sure. I grew up in a Baptist Church, where the hymns, the sermons, and the announcements varied each week. When I began attending an Episcopal campus ministry, I thought, "Oh no. The words will become meaningless once memorized, and then I'll just be going through the motions and not really worshiping." However, I've found this to be quite the opposite of what I expected. Knowing the words and the prescribed plan of action for the service allows your mind to dwell more on the presence of God than on the words and motions of the service. Likewise, I was just reading an article about the Eastern Orthodox Church. The author (Frederica Mathewes-Green) encourages visitors to not be deterred by the repetitive nature of the liturgy. Instead,
"Relatively little changes from Sunday to Sunday; the same prayers and hymns appear in the same places, and before long you know it by heart. Then you fall into the presence of God in a way you never can when flipping from prayer book to bulletin to hymnal."So, really repetition isn't a bad thing; it's possibly even a means to deeper experience, as long as your mind is focused on encountering God.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Holy Saturday
I've been trying to articulate my feelings about Holy Week in general. Last year, I spent Lent preparing for a pilgrimage to Scotland, which took place during my spring break which was also Holy Week. After such an experience, I found it hard to forge a Lenten practice this year and even harder to understand what I was feeling about the current Easter season.
Holy Saturday (which technically ended at sundown) is indicative of the dark feelings I have about this season. When I was younger, Easter was all fun and happiness — dying eggs, awaiting the Easter bunny, and celebrating a risen Savior. As I grew older, I recognized the truly sad nature of Good Friday, the event necessarily preceding the Festival Day. I find it hard to forget the feelings of sadness, guilt, and mourning associated with Jesus's sacrificial death to celebrate his resurrection just two days later. I almost feel like the period of grief should be longer: to really dwell on and fully understand this sacrifice; to recognize the conspicuous absence that occurs on Holy Saturday; to feel and confront loneliness, experiencing a real and painful desire for God. Not to be a sadist, but I think this is something Christians need to be reminded of more often and not just during Lent and Holy Week. To have an extended Holy Saturday would create a better understanding of the spiritual vulnerability of being human.
Holy Saturday is a day of silence, a day of waiting. God is dead. This day expresses the disconnection of modern humanity from God. So for now, I'll be depressing. Tomorrow is the day for hope.
Here are several meditations by Cardinal Ratzinger, the current pope, who writes more eloquently than I.
Holy Saturday (which technically ended at sundown) is indicative of the dark feelings I have about this season. When I was younger, Easter was all fun and happiness — dying eggs, awaiting the Easter bunny, and celebrating a risen Savior. As I grew older, I recognized the truly sad nature of Good Friday, the event necessarily preceding the Festival Day. I find it hard to forget the feelings of sadness, guilt, and mourning associated with Jesus's sacrificial death to celebrate his resurrection just two days later. I almost feel like the period of grief should be longer: to really dwell on and fully understand this sacrifice; to recognize the conspicuous absence that occurs on Holy Saturday; to feel and confront loneliness, experiencing a real and painful desire for God. Not to be a sadist, but I think this is something Christians need to be reminded of more often and not just during Lent and Holy Week. To have an extended Holy Saturday would create a better understanding of the spiritual vulnerability of being human.
Holy Saturday is a day of silence, a day of waiting. God is dead. This day expresses the disconnection of modern humanity from God. So for now, I'll be depressing. Tomorrow is the day for hope.
"O Lord, God of my salvation, when, at night, I cry out in your presence, let my prayer come before you; incline your ear to my cry.
"For my soul is full of troubles, and my life draws near to Sheol. I am counted among those who go down to the Pit; I am like those who have no help, like those forsaken among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, like those whom you remember no more, for they are cut off from your hand. You have put me in the depths of the Pit, in the regions dark and deep. Your wrath lies heavy upon me, and you overwhelm me with all your waves.
"You have caused my companions to shun me; you have made me a thing of horror to them. I am shut in so that I cannot escape; my eye grows dim through sorrow. Every day I call on you, O Lord; I spread out my hands to you. Do you work wonders for the dead? Do the shades rise up to praise you? Is your steadfast love declared in the grave, or your faithfulness in Abaddon? Are your wonders known in the darkness, or your saving help in the land of forgetfulness?
"But I, O Lord, cry out to you; in the morning my prayer comes before you. O Lord, why do you cast me off? Why do you hide your face from me? Wretched and close to death from my youth up, I suffer your terrors; I am desperate. Your wrath has swept over me; your dread assaults destroy me. They surround me like a flood all day long; from all sides they close in on me. You have caused friend and neighbor to shun me; my companions are in darkness."
-Psalm 88
Here are several meditations by Cardinal Ratzinger, the current pope, who writes more eloquently than I.
Change of Plans
Who was I kidding? I couldn't stick to the plan I laid out for myself. I've always had this problem with having too many interests, so much so that I'm pulled in so many different directions that I can't focus on one thing for too long without becoming bored. I'm practically schizophrenic about my interests and want to learn about everything that interests me, but there's just too little time to do so. Thus, I rarely finish books or stick to my plans for reading (at least in the realm of leisure).
I wish that I could write freely on subjects that readers would find interesting without first having to be prompted. As of yet, this seems impossible. I've had this problem with writing creatively and expressing my own ideas, without citing some other source that either backs up or argues against my point. Sure, this makes my writing stronger from an academic sense, but it also limits my modes of expression. I've never had the inspiration, or perhaps courage, to try creative writing. Maybe I'm just so afraid that if anyone ever read my writing, they would hate it. Maybe I'm afraid that my ideas aren't original and exciting, and therefore not worth reading.
So, anyway, I've amended my plans for the blog a bit. I have two other books that I'm going to be reading now. Hopefully, this will keep the blog from being too dry and boring by only commenting on crusty old academics.
In addition to Huston Smith's "World Religions," I've just begun reading "Killing the Buddha" by Peter Manseau and Jeff Sharlet. The subtitle of the book is "A Heretics Bible"; it's a book containing stories of individual religious experiences, outside traditional religion. But the thing about heretical belief or experience, as the authors say in their introduction, is that it is a response to orthodoxy and defines a personal belief, a kind of orthodoxy in itself — if that description makes any sense. I discovered this book because I first discovered their Web site of the same name. I feel like I'm a little behind, as they founded the site in 2000, but it has some really interesting, relatable, and enjoyable stories.
And the third book I'll be reading and commenting on is "Jesus, Symbol of God" by Roger Haight. I think this will round out the trio really well. This way, I'll have an academic book, a book based on personal experience, and a theological book. I found out about Haight and his ideas because of this article on Religion Dispatches. (Which is also an awesome Web site to which I have included a link on the right hand side of the page.) Haight is a Catholic priest who used to teach at a Catholic university. There was a lot of controversy about this book because the Pope said that it disagreed with traditional Catholic doctrine. Haight seems to take his faith more symbolically/metaphorically and less literally than the Catholic Church would like. (That's just what I took from the article, but I'm sure I'll get much more insight into his ideas about Christology as I read the book.) As a result, Haight has been banned from teaching at all Catholic universities, though he retains his Catholic faith.
I'm looking forward to reading all three of these books and sharing my insights about them. Hopefully, by mixing it up I will retain interest in all three and calm my tendency for boredom. I'll hopefully be adding some substantive content to the blog soon and as a result stave off the boredom of my reader(s?) as well.
I wish that I could write freely on subjects that readers would find interesting without first having to be prompted. As of yet, this seems impossible. I've had this problem with writing creatively and expressing my own ideas, without citing some other source that either backs up or argues against my point. Sure, this makes my writing stronger from an academic sense, but it also limits my modes of expression. I've never had the inspiration, or perhaps courage, to try creative writing. Maybe I'm just so afraid that if anyone ever read my writing, they would hate it. Maybe I'm afraid that my ideas aren't original and exciting, and therefore not worth reading.
So, anyway, I've amended my plans for the blog a bit. I have two other books that I'm going to be reading now. Hopefully, this will keep the blog from being too dry and boring by only commenting on crusty old academics.
In addition to Huston Smith's "World Religions," I've just begun reading "Killing the Buddha" by Peter Manseau and Jeff Sharlet. The subtitle of the book is "A Heretics Bible"; it's a book containing stories of individual religious experiences, outside traditional religion. But the thing about heretical belief or experience, as the authors say in their introduction, is that it is a response to orthodoxy and defines a personal belief, a kind of orthodoxy in itself — if that description makes any sense. I discovered this book because I first discovered their Web site of the same name. I feel like I'm a little behind, as they founded the site in 2000, but it has some really interesting, relatable, and enjoyable stories.
And the third book I'll be reading and commenting on is "Jesus, Symbol of God" by Roger Haight. I think this will round out the trio really well. This way, I'll have an academic book, a book based on personal experience, and a theological book. I found out about Haight and his ideas because of this article on Religion Dispatches. (Which is also an awesome Web site to which I have included a link on the right hand side of the page.) Haight is a Catholic priest who used to teach at a Catholic university. There was a lot of controversy about this book because the Pope said that it disagreed with traditional Catholic doctrine. Haight seems to take his faith more symbolically/metaphorically and less literally than the Catholic Church would like. (That's just what I took from the article, but I'm sure I'll get much more insight into his ideas about Christology as I read the book.) As a result, Haight has been banned from teaching at all Catholic universities, though he retains his Catholic faith.
I'm looking forward to reading all three of these books and sharing my insights about them. Hopefully, by mixing it up I will retain interest in all three and calm my tendency for boredom. I'll hopefully be adding some substantive content to the blog soon and as a result stave off the boredom of my reader(s?) as well.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
My First Blog Entry
So, I'm new to blogging. I'm currently trying to catch up on a few of the classics of religious studies, by scholars such as Huston Smith, Mircea Eliade, and Ninian Smart. My plan is to read a chapter and then write a response to it, in order to better formulate my ideas and thoughts about the reading and whether or not I agree with the opinion of the author. This will be good for me because I'll have a goal in mind while reading leisurely. In a way, I'm giving myself the assignment to read for pleasure and reflect upon it.
I'm going to begin with "The World Religions: Our Great Wisdom Traditions" by Huston Smith. First published in 1958, some of his ideas will likely be outdated in comparison to the commonly accepted understanding of modern scholars of religious studies. The primary reason I am interested in reading his work is because my religious studies professor said that Smith basically assumes all religions to be generally the same and to be reaching for the same ultimate goal. I think this is an interesting concept, because all people do seem to be striving to gain a greater knowledge of god, or at least an understanding of why the world is the way it is and what, if anything, will happen after death. Anyway, my professor said that Smith is "putting us all out of business" by saying that all religions are the same. Even if all religions serve the same purpose for humans, they arose from different cultural and historical backgrounds, making them fundamentally different from each other. On the other hand, if all religions do seek the same goal yet arise from such different cultures and philosophies, then that says something about an inherent human need for god, which is deserving of examination in and of itself.
Anyway, here's the link to the book on Amazon, where a summary and reviews are available.
I'm going to begin with "The World Religions: Our Great Wisdom Traditions" by Huston Smith. First published in 1958, some of his ideas will likely be outdated in comparison to the commonly accepted understanding of modern scholars of religious studies. The primary reason I am interested in reading his work is because my religious studies professor said that Smith basically assumes all religions to be generally the same and to be reaching for the same ultimate goal. I think this is an interesting concept, because all people do seem to be striving to gain a greater knowledge of god, or at least an understanding of why the world is the way it is and what, if anything, will happen after death. Anyway, my professor said that Smith is "putting us all out of business" by saying that all religions are the same. Even if all religions serve the same purpose for humans, they arose from different cultural and historical backgrounds, making them fundamentally different from each other. On the other hand, if all religions do seek the same goal yet arise from such different cultures and philosophies, then that says something about an inherent human need for god, which is deserving of examination in and of itself.
Anyway, here's the link to the book on Amazon, where a summary and reviews are available.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
