Overview of the Semester

I would have to say that my favorite piece of literature that we ready this semester was Dante's inferno.  Mainly because I have read it before and it was a lot easier to understand, and the imagery made it easy to follow along.  Everything was separated out into different circles and pouches which made it so much easier to follow along.

My least favorite piece of literature would have to be King Lear.  I have never been good at interpreting and understanding Shakespeare.  Each night of reading the play I would have to go on No Fear Shakespeare and read the play in modern language, and then I would go back and read the actually play written by Shakespeare himself.

I think the purpose of literature is to expand our mind, and open it up to new thoughts, ideas, belief systems, and culture.  It has allowed me to vastly expand my knowledge of the subject, and helped me in interpreting many of the pieces of literature that we have read this semester.  It was interesting to read literature from a variety of cultures all the way from Japanese to European.  Some of them were more difficult to understand than others, but in the end it gave me a better idea and perspective on the values and beliefs of other cultures.

I really wish that we could have read the Odyssey as it has always been one of my favorite stories to read, mainly because of the number of crazy gods with different personalities and powers.  I am somewhat disappointed we did not have the opportunity to read it this year.

Gloucester, Edgar and Lear

While reading Act 4 I came across a specific part that interested me.  Edgar takes Gloucester to the Cliffs of Dover in order for the old man to commit suicide by jumping off.  The cliff is described as being so tall that the people walking on the beach below appear to be the size of mice, while the boats do not look much bigger.  At this point Gloucester is blind after his scruffle with Cornwall. He is coping with this opposing hatred upon himself by wanting to jump off of a cliff.  Edgar is smart for lying to Gloucester saying that he was descending off of the cliff.  Gloucester believes it because he doesn't know any better because he cannot tell whats around him, and his sense of proprioception or where he is in space is obviously blocked because of this blindness.  Although it makes me wonder how Gloucester didn't realize that Edgar was lying to him.  Clearly Gloucester was suffering no pain, so there is no way he could have fell the distance that Edgar was describing.  Edgar also saves Gloucester later in the play by jumping in front of a sword for him and killing Oswald.

I get a feeling that in this play there is a theme of confusion.  Gloucester is confused early on in Act 4, but he is not the only one, Lear is confused himself.  Its almost as if Edgar and Cordelia keep Lear and Gloucester somewhat sane, while Goneril and Regan only cause trouble for the two.  At the end of act four when Cordelia is speaking to Lear and trying to wake him up from his anger driven sleep due to his evil daughters, it is clear the compassion she has for her father.  They share tears, and she comforts him with her love, and Cordelia is the only person recognized by Lear as soon as he wakes from his "Coma."

The Storm

So now that we no that King Lear is selfish and and begs his daughters to keep the knights, he becomes enraged at that and decides to leave the castle.  I did not see this coming, I mean what difference does it make if Lear has 25 knights or 50.  He seems a little selfish at this point thinking he needs all of these people to protect them, which then again may make sense because he is becoming very old and he needs all of the help and guidance, and reassurance that he can get.

Lear storms out of the castle and is frustrated and takes the Fool along with him.  The Fool does him no good throughout his frustrated battle through the storm, but who would expect him to?  It is storming, thundering. lightning, and is even described as so intense that it keeps the animals hidden in their homes.  Usually animals could travel through pretty severe weather, but in this case the storm was too intense.  The text is full of imagery, and the storm is describing how angry Lear is at the time, as well as the state of France, and life back at the castle.  There is a sense of tension and uprising in all of these areas and the storm only exemplifies this situation.

It is somewhat ironic that Lear is offered shelter, even though it is just a little hut, and enough to keep away from the storm which Lear continues to fight.  I cannot imagine this old King making his way through these gruesome conditions and still coming out alive.  The storm is so strong it is causing floods, it is strong enough to split trees, and to singe the white hair on Lear's head.  Maybe this could be possibly foreshadowing Lear being struck by lightning?  We will see as we continue to read further, but up to this point i see the storm as describing the state of France, Life back at Gloucester's castle, and Lear's mind, which is all in a fury of enragement

King Lear as a Person

I am going to start off by saying that I think King Lear has many flaws as well as triumphs.  Overall, I do not think he is that good of a ruler, because I personally think that he is lazy.  One quality of a ruler is that they must rule the people, with authority, but take into consideration the thoughts and beliefs of the people. An example that shows King Lear being a bad ruler is when he lets his daughters take control of  his land, but he still wants to have the power.  This shows that he is lazy and wants them to fulfill the obligations of a king, and do all the hard work that is involved, while he sits back and enjoys the power of being a king.  He is immature for putting his daughters in charge of his land mainly because of the manner he picked them.  He asked them "Which of you shall we say doth love us most" showing that he only cares about what they say, rather than if they actually love their father or not.  In this instance he chooses public display of affection over real love. 

I am 100% on Cordelia's side and I think that she does the right thing when she states that she loves her father because he is her father.  She is being honest, and not lying to Lear in this case, which I think shows trust and bravery.  Despite the fact that Cordelia is Lear's favorite daughter, he doesn't accept her plead for fulfillment of duty to her father, but instead is blind to her case, and accepts the false plead from his two other daughters Goneril and Regan.  I think King Lear will regret this decision in the end, and wish he would have chose Cordelia to control the land instead of his other two daughter, because they are selfish, and want the land just to feel like they have power.

Gilgamesh vs. Sunjata

One thing I noticed when reading these two stories is that they are both epics, therefore they have many things in common. First of all just like in Gilgamesh, Sunjata himself goes on an epic journey and later returns back to his home. Sunjata definitely shows that he is way more mature that Gilgamesh, as far as a ruler goes, and he shows this maturity through his actions. One thing that was a little questionable to be was when Sunjata decided to cut his calf off just to help his companion Bala. Also there is some similarity in the two epics between the role that women play. In both of these stories, considering the time period women were both treated to follow the man, and live in the shadow of man. In the epic of Sunjata, Sunjata is a great king and many people look up to him, as well as his wife. Another similarity between the epic of Gilgamesh and the epic of Sunjata is the tole that nature plays. In the epic of Gilgamesh nature is seen as pure and powerful, and it is viewed the same way in Sunjata. For example, the tree is hard to split and it splits from the top to the bottom, showing the purity of nature and how powerful nature can be and how much it means to the culture.


Overall this was a very tough read for me considering the culture and the difficulty of pronouncing the names and terms. This is understanding because of the time period as well as the culture, and I found this as the most difficult to read and interpret to this date.

The Tale Of Genji

I find this specific story to be quite interesting from a man's perspective.  There can obviously be many opinions made about Genji, but i am here to tell you mine.  Personally, I think Genji has had too many partners, even though during his time polygamy was most popular.  He goes through women like a bag of popcorn at the movie theatres.  He take a quick look at them, and makes quick judgements on what type of person they are and if they are right for him.  I think this is very immature, because clearly you cannot look at someone and after a few moments decide they are not right for you, and that they have flaws that stick out.  Well guess what, unfortunately we are all human, and we all have flaws, and this is one of Genji's flaws.  He cannot make up his mind on a woman, and seemingly peels them apart like an orange before he even really gets to know them.
I personally think that Genji needs a role model, like Virgil in Dante's inferno to guide him through all this mess with women.  It is clear than Genji is immature, and too young for a stable long-lasting relationship.  He is extremely emotional, and gets upset over the smallest of things.  It makes me wonder how people even look up to this guy.  If Genji were around today he would have trouble living a role as a typical man in society, because in my opinion he is total opposite of guys today, and he needs to learn to grow up and settle on one woman.  Beggars can't be choosers.

Love in Present Times

The Dove's Necklace, written by Ibn Hazm, is an interesting story to read, and it caught my attention more than any of the other stories that we have read so far.  Even though the version in our text is translated, and not the original version of this poem, it still relates to what love is like, and how it is viewed today.

The Dove's Necklace reminds me of relationships today in so many ways, and is portrayed this way throughout the entire poem.  When it states "Love has certain signs which the intelligent man quickly detects and the shrewd man readily recognizes, of these first is the brooding gaze."  It continues along to discuss the signs of love.  This hold true to love today, when the first thing that is noticed is the gaze by the lover, and how much attention he pays toward her.  The second paragraph explains how when the loved one is speaking, how much attention the lover pays toward him or her.  So many times I have seen someone interested in another person, and they will laugh at all the jokes they tell even if they are not funny and they will also seem so interested in what the loved one has to say.  Later on in the poem he discusses that when lovers equally love each other, they will fight over the smallest things for no reason, and soon after they will be best friends again.  I know I have seen one of my friends fight and argue with his girlfriend on the phone one second, then a couple hours later he is as happy as can be, and everything is resolved between the two.  These characteristics hold true in my relationship as well.

Hazm, states that "the variety of love is divided into two classes: When a man falls head over heels in love with a mere form without knowing who they are, and a man that forms an attachment at first sight, with a woman that is known to him."  Focusing on the second class of love, which is usually seen more often, he makes a key point that I feel holds true even today.  When relationships progress quickly, they usually end sooner, and when they move slower, they usually last longer.  For example, people today who tell their partner that they love them after two weeks of dating usually don't stay together too long.  As for those who take their time,  and progress slowly (Waiting to say "I love you", waiting a while to have sex, and not being around each other all the time in the early stages) will usually be together longer.  There is always exceptions to this rule, as well as some bizarre cases of love, but for most this hold true.

The Pouches

I think the way the pouches are separated out is a great idea.  It shows all of the punishments, and judgements can be made based off how fair these punishments are.  The contra passo is extremely arguable based on the sin done by the sinner.  For example, the Hypocrites are punished in the inferno by wearing capes and masks and having to wear massive amounts of lead that weighs them down.  I think this punishment makes sense because someone who is a hypocrite most likely second guesses themselves leaving them with a leftover weight on their shoulder.  In The 8th circle, fourth pouch, the Divinist's or those who look into the future are punished by having to walk in a straight line forever with their heads turned around facing behind them.  I also think this punishment makes sense because instead of looking into the future and focusing on now, they are forced to look behind them, or whats in the past.  Doing this while increase the chance that they wont attempt to do this again.  The punishment may make sense, but I dont think it is fair because there is no need to punishment someone who is simply trying to predict the future.  In my opinion this isnt a sin, and therefore shoud not be punished for.

Overall I like the way that punishments and sins were divided up.  It shows that even though this was a long time ago, Dante did a pretty good job at organizing the sins, and covering a wide range of them as well.  I am impressed with the way he portrayed this with great imagery, which is why this story has been passed through many generations, and still lives on today

Dante as A Character

I view Dante as a character who is lost in life, and is seeking to reach his ultimate goal of salvation.  He cannot reach salvation until he travels through the circles of hell.  It appears to me that Dante is a description of many things.  First, I think he does serve as the author because he seems to tell the story from his view.  Also, he could be a description of everyman, and how every man appears to be lost in their journey to salavation and needs a helping hand to guide them to a path of righteousness.

Once again, it seems as if you are right there in the circles of hell traveling down on a journey to the purgatory with Dante.  The imagery is immense, and so descriptive that it seems as if Dante had to be writing this from personal experience.  I do not know how Dante was as a person, only through reading this book, but if he is indeed the author he has no problem with being honest and truthful.  For example he starts off in the beginning in a "dark wood" and states that he is lost.  Some people have trouble writing or talking about their beliefs or their problems in life, but Dante was very clear in that he was in a state of confusion and needed to better his life.

Dante could also be seen as a depiction of every day man, in the fact that most men today are lost when it comes to salvation, and most probably dont know what salvation is or what it consists of.  Also, just as Dante had to travel down the circles of hell to see what life would be like, some people experience this today.  Some must experience the worst: maybe a friend dying, or some unfortunate event that tears them apart emotionally before they can have faith in God and he will lead, and guide us with his helping hand.  God in the Inferno could be represented as Virgil, because he is divine and powerful, and shows Dante to the depths of the Inferno that have not been seen by human beings.

The Inferno

The whole time while reading Dante's Inferno I feel trapped in a world of darkness with only a slim chance of hope.  As Dante travels through the stages of hell it only seems to get worse and worse each time.  It reminds Dante that he has sinned, and if he continues to do so then he will end up like all the people in the stages of hell.  One of the things that caught my eye is the imagery of the story, as you can almost see yourself next to Dante going through this journey to the stages of hell.  All the human sinners, and betrayers ripping eachother's heads off, and eating at one another creates a strong image in my head.  I picture these humans, or creatures being similar to Golum in Lord of the Rings because they have no hair, and nothing to eat but one another, and looking to be rescued by someone who has something more than they do.

I also think that the guide, Virgil plays a key role in the first part of Dante's Inferno.  In the beginning Dante is found "in the wood" or in the darkness of the forest, and seems lost and confused in search of virtue and faith, which will lead to his salvation.  Dante seems very timid as what to do in his situation at first, but when he is joined with Virgil his soul is comforted.  Along the journey Dante is in a total state of confusion, and Virgil does a great job as a guide to answering his questions and leading him on the right path to reach salvation.  Virgil seems to know his way around, and is there at Dante's side when he becomes fearful of what may happen.  All of the negativity that Dante is surrounded by is soon comforted by Virgil.  Virgil and Dante's relationship is similar to that of Gilgamesh and Enkidu because without one another they would have to discontinue their journey.  Dante's whole journey through the underworld reminds me of someone who may be spiritually lost and in search of God.  To reach the ultimate destination in Heaven one must first go through the stages of hell or in this case the life before eternal life.

The creatures of the different stages of hell are quite interesting to me.  First off, they may appear evil, but they do no harm to Dante I think because he is protected by Virgil.  Also, I find it odd that the conversations with Charon, and Paolo and Francesca are so brief.  It seems as if they can only spare a few sentences before they must get back to their suffering.  They are basically there as the nails in the toolbox to hammer in Dante's head what brought them to the certain stages of hell.  They teach Dante many lessons of what not to do, so he doesn't end up suffering himself.

Overall a very fun read, and it continues to get more exciting the further the travel into the underworld of darkness

The Ramayana

I thought this epic was a lot more difficult to read and interpret than the rest, mainly because of the vast amount of characters.  Not to mention the fact that them names are extremely hard to pronounce and spell. Time to dulge in.. Two main things that caught my mind were actions and character of Rama as well as Hanuman's role in the story, which I will get into later.

It is clear to everyone that Dharma is looked at highly by everyone in Hinduism.  Three main things must go along with dharma. First, one must obey their parent's (especially the father), authority figures, and women should obey their husbands.  Second, keeping promises is extremely important in dharma.  The last and most important order of dharma is that your actions and decisions, whether good or bad must be done with the right attitude.  Although Rama is not perfect he fits the criteria for dharma to the tee.  For example, as mentioned many times in the reading Rama obeys without question, and has a positive attitude about everything he does, even if it is not in his interest.  For example, when king Dasaratha told Rama that he could not be king, and he would have to go to the forest, he complied.  Could you imagine that? Say on the day you were being elected into office your father told you that you could not take the position because he said so, and instead someone else should take your place.  Rama didnt do anything wrong, and he had no reason to be kicked off.  Even though Laksmana tells Rama to fight back and make his point that he has done wrong he refuses to because it would break the code of Dharma.  Since Dasaratha owed Kaikeyi two boons he had to keep his promise or else he would be breaking the rules.  As soon as Kausalya told Rama of the news he said right away that he would head to the forest and follow what was promised of him while he lived in the forest.

A little later in the story Hanuman, who I believe was some time of god-like bird was sent on his way to the city of Lanka (present day Sri Lanka) to rescue Sita, Rama's wife.  Hanuman also portrays these features of dharma.  He is supressed by many gods of the oceans, winds, and other demons, but he simply tells them he is on his way to rescue Sita from Ravana.  He listens to his authority figure (Rama) and travels over 800 miles and searches for long periods of time.  Hanuman must keep his promise to the righteous Rama, and he does it with joy.

So far Hanuman has searched all over Lanka and in all the rooms for Sita, but he has yet to find her.  The suspense is building up, but that is as far as I have gotten and I look forward to the next reading to see how he discovers Sita.  Has Ravana already eaten her? Could she have been seduced by Ravana? Only time and words will tell.

Until next time..

Sophocles: Antigone

First off this reading surprised me and it turned out to be a lot better than I thought.  I am not a huge fan of plays, in fact I havent read one that I have liked until Antigone.  I thought the play started of a little slow but in the second half really picked up and caught my attention.

There are many conflicting beliefs in Antigone which leaves many ways to agree or disagree with what the characters believe.  I personally think that Antigone is right to give Polynices the proper burial, but i also think that Creon is right in being angry at Antigone for wanting a proper burial.  I understand that Polynices gathered outside help to help destroy Thebes, which made Creon and Polynices enemies, but did Polynices destroy Thebes? Nope didnt think so. Therefore Creon should have been angry at first, but then realize "Wait Thebes is still here and I am still king."

As far as the role of women goes I think ismene is much more knowledgeable of women's place in society than is Antigone.  Ismene knows that if she participates in the proper burial of polynices' body then she too herself will be killed.  Antigone is somewhat reckless in her method of handling this situation.  Another flaw that Antigone has is that she is hyopcritical, especially when saying that her family is the greatest blood and loyalty,but then turning her back on her sister by disowning her for not helping her bury Polynices in what she believes is the correct way.  Antigone believes she will die and honorable, glorious death, while Ismene believes that she will die an awful death like Polynices is expected to.

So here is where it gets sticky.  Antigone's loyalty is to the god's or the ancient law, while Creons loyalty is to the state and societal roles.  Antigone is loyal and continues to proceed with her beliefs, but it is not the same for Creon.  When Tiresias comes to speak of the death of Haemon even after a brief attempt to rescue him from killin himself, Creon realizes that he has been loyal to the wrong thing the whole time.  Creon instead of being so stubborn and stuck to the state laws and what his opinions are becomes peeled back and exposed by the death of his son and realizes that his heart has been facing the wrong direction this whole time.  Then to make things worse by the death of his lovely wife Creon becomes absolutely torn with himself, almost seeing himself as worthless.

This whole scene at the end of the story just shows the Creon even though he was the ruler was loyal to the wrong thing and the gods were extremely angry with creon for how he treated Antigone as well as everyone else.  In the end though, creon suffers for what I think he deserved, and I am happy that he finally realized how important the value of life is.

World Lit 1

After reading the Epic of Gilgamesh there have been many thoughts racing through my head.  When I read the first half of Gilgamesh I didn't think that there was any sexual relationship between Gilgamesh and Enkidu.  After reading the second half it was clear that there was something sexual going on between the two.  They always relied on eachother's efforts and had each others back.  Something else that came to mind was how amazing the journey was for Gilgamesh.  Once Enkidu died, Gilgamesh remained strong though he was very emotional.  He fought through the depths of the mountains and the harsh conditions because he was determined to reach what he thought was his destiny:eternal life.

I was impressed with how great the descriptions were of the characters and how well the epic was written considering it was written on stone and passed down for thousands of years.  Especially Humbaba who was portrayed as a ferocious beast who breathed fire, and with his powers he could blow Gilgamesh and Enkidu off their feet.  The heroics of Gilgamesh still amaze me after reading.  He conquered the world, and proved to everyone that he was the best and deserved to be praised by everyone in the City of Uruk for his efforts.

Another topic that struck me was the role of nature, and how much it affected the story.  First off, the transition of Enkidu from out in the wild to being civilized was pretty significant and it really caught my attention.  It was pretty interesting how he was civilized by being slayed by the Harlot and somewhat trapped in her sexuality.  Enlil was enraged when he became aware that Gilgamesh and Enkidu cut down all of the trees in the forest.  Nature is pure and divine so I believe he has a great reason to be frustrated.  Even though Humbaba was portrayed as a monster who everyone feared he did nothing wrong but protect the nature, so I think that the two killing Humbaba was like killing nature because he was the protector of nature

Overall it was a much more exciting read than I expected, and kudos to the preservation of this Epic and I hope it continues to live on and on.