Eschatologic Post.

The last post, then, Two scant hours before the final. I'm going to kind of book-end this here with an expression of appreciation for Zeus's seductive strategies versus my earlier condemnation of Dionysus's. The last chapter of Calasso pointed out something I'd never really thought of. Zeus never does seduce (rape, seduce, whatever. I don't think there exists a line for the Greek Gods) a woman as himself. It is always in some lesser form. And that's a nice thought, in opposition to Dionysus who takes women as himself and uses intoxication to disarm his victims. Whatever else can be said about Zeus, at least he gives a nod to the thrill of the chase. It'd be far too easy tro get a woman as the king of the gods, so he infuses his escapades with a bit of excitement. Now, I'm not saying its a nice thing for Zeus to take women by force. Nice doesn't enter into it. Its his due as the master of all creation. All things owe their existance to Zeus, so he can do with them what he pleases. But he doesn't take all the sport out of the game. Zeus seems to realise that what makes life worth living is its mystery, its challenge. What Derrida calls l'avenir. An unknowable future. When outcomes are predetermined, life loses its lustre. So Zeus' lusts are given a chance. Fair play to him.

On another note, I had a good time in this course. Glad I took it. Hope everyone else feels the same way. Have a good break.

Adam

My own little memorization devices.

Just took a gander at Dylan's new blog site, and I like that he described for everyone his means of memorizing the seven stages of the bible. So I figured I'd share some of my strategies as well. I've always been big on mneumonic devices, and I used a few of them for this class.

For the seven biblical divisions, I made up A little story. Kind of.
We Create Revolution. Law is based on Wisdom, not Prophecy, and the Gospels lead to an Apocalypse.

The books of the actual books of the bible I did in much the same way really. Well, some significant differences. A nonsense word, followed by an esoteric little sentence.
GELND for the Pentatuch, which is close enough to Geld that I don't forget it.
Then: JJ are SS. Because I once had a run in with a neonazi named JJ, for Joshua, Judges, Ruth and the two Samuels.
Then comes two kings and their choronicles. Then, just straight repetition to memorize Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. Then, Job peepees. For Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon.
Then, I stopped memorizing because we weren't asked to name any of them on the second quiz.

For Frye's four divisions, a little phrase, "Decon? Ick." As in, don't eat the rat poison, it ain't good. Descriptive, Conceptual, Ideological, Kerygmatic.

Little tricks go a long way as far as memory is concerned. Thing about Dr. Sexson is, I've never taken an exam that he hasn't thrown at least one question I hadn't a clue on. Makes for a much more interesting study experience trying to guess those curveballs.

My Parable.

It completely slipped my mind that we were all going to post our parables. Just found it in my notes.

Coolio was cooking some beans on his oven, when a program about dogs eating pig ears came on the television. Coolio got distracted and sat to watch the entire program. While his attention was away, his beans burned.

To take a page from Jesus, I'm not going to expain that to the general mass of folk. If anyone really wants, we can speak of it privately.

Frye-Tening image post

Somehow, Olympus got erased from the original attempt to post. I'm over it. The caption is at the bottom. Damn technology. Above is a picture of a blast furnace. The rest of these are in a fairly messed up order due to the blogger uploading posts in some order known only to itself. We'll make it a game. Can you match the caption to the image? oh. I guess I figured out a way to make the captions almost match. or it did in the template. Not the actual blog it seems. So see if you can match them up.

Why does it post these things backwards? Anyway, at right is a cave in Puerto-Rico. I once knew a girl from there.

To the right is the summit of Olympus (supposedly. There are many false summits on the trail up)



Above are some cherubim in
the Jardin de Luxembourg,
where I relaxed briefly during
a European trek in '95.

So, Mountain, Garden, Cave, and Furnace. Graphic representation of 'Words With Power,' Part II

Economic Calasso

Calasso postulates on page 91 of "The Marriage of Cadmus and Harmony" that, "For money to emerge in its purest form, the heroes must first kill each other off."

I actually, long ago, wrote a poem that had in it a line about the horror of modern society, where money has replaced excellence as the basis for power. I like Calasso's thought, because the heroes of old cared about principle and excelence, not cash. Look at all Agamemnon offers Achilles in The Illiad to give up a woman who is Achilles' by right of plunder. And Achilles refuses. The woman is his by right, and no amount of compensation is enough to give her up. Achilles is the paragon of the old guard hero. As Calasso says, he is "kingship without a kingdom. He carries his grace within himself and does not need a hierarchical order to sustain it." Achilles will do himself right, by his own code of conduct no matter what. He will not be bought. After Troy, and the destruction of the hero, money arrives on the scene and trashes the old order. A man's own excellence, in mind and body, cease to matter. All that matters is whether that man has enough cash to pay someone to do his dirty work for him. To think, act, and suffer the consequences for him. Money stops accountability.

A quick aside, though we didn't deal with it in this class, I think people haven't paid enough attention to "Great Ajax" in the Illiad. Look through the whole poem, and he is the only hero not to be helped by a God. He is man alone, and he even beats many heros who were favorites of various Gods. And yet he is lost largely in the examination of The Iliad. Ajax is a manifestation of the new power of man in Calasso's third stage. Once we are indifferent to the Gods, we empower ourselves.

Wrasslin' With the Oresteia (a brief summary of a displacement I didn't have time to write)

I really didn't have time to write this, and its a shame because I think the process would have been fairly enjoyable, but heres a quick synopsis:

"Armageddon," world Champeen Wrassler is suspended for 10 weeks after having held one of his "Be-yotches," Irene, in front of him so his opponent accidentally hit her, and while that opponent was holding his head in shame, and not paying attention, "Armageddon," insted of helping Irene, hits the opponent with a chair, thereby sacrificing his daughter to get the win.
"Armageddon" returns from his suspension, which he spent wrasslin' for another company, the T.W.A. (Trojan Wrestling Association), and is welcomed back to the ring by his wife Cleo, who holds out his wrasslin' robe to signify his triumphant return. But, indise the robe is a strait jacket, which Armageddon unknowingly slips his arms into. Cleo proceeds to batter him around the ring into unconsciousness. When Armageddon falls, from the dressing room comes "The Argonaut," to a chorus of boos, who steps on Armageddon, slaps him once, and declares himself to be the new "Champeen of the World." At this point, the TV broadcast ends.

The next show opens with another of Armageddon's "be-yotches" mourning the loss of such a great champeen as she pours a 40 of "Mickey's" out in honor of him. She tells the rest of the wrasslers that she only wishes "Orion," Armageddon's young protege would come back and "put the smack down" on Cleo and The Argonaut. A new, masked wrestler, "The Prodigal Son," takes her aside and, in a confidential whisper heard by the TV audience, but not the other wrasslers, tells her he is Orion, and the uppence is about to come for the two who so badly mistreated his mentor. That night, Orion (masked still as The Prodigal Son) wrassles The Argonaut. Irene is in his corner, Cleo is in The Argonaut's. The Argonaut is soundly defeated, forced to retire, and Cleo is dragged into the ring by her hair. Then, Orion takes off his mask, the truth dawns on Cleo, and she has a massive coronary and dies in the ring. The closing shot of the broadcast is Orion being pursued by referees.

The next broadcast finds Orion at the league commissioner's office, with the referees close behind. He presents his case to the commissoner, A. Paul Lohman, who sends Orion to the The Georgia State Athletic Commission is Athens, GA to plead his case. The refs are none too pleased. We next see Orion at the GSAC, presenting his case before the commission, presided over by Althea, the chair. After much to do, the commisioners split on whether to allow Orion to wrassle again, but Althea (after having received a call from the governor's office explaining how much the people love Orion and how much tax revenue that would mean for the state) casts the deciding vote for Orion, thus allowing him to wrassle again. The broadcast cuts then to the Georgia Dome for the announcement of the next big Wrasslin' Spectacular. But all is not happiness and light because the refs are threatening a strike because they feel they have been robbed of their authority. Althea talks to them, and we see them slip into the dressing room and come out transformed into scantily clad dancers who from that time forward tend to the needs of any wrassler who feels put upon by the league.

Jesus: The Missing Years (Warning, one "dirty" word)

In the Bible, we don't get a full biographical picture of the life of Jesus because the gospels are kerygmatic accounts rather than historical (or, to use Frye's other term), descriptive accounts of the life of Jesus. If I remember correctly, we get nothing of Jesus's time on earth from Cana, where he was but a child, until a couple years before his death in his early to mid thirties. There's a theory kicking around that instead of working full time in Joseph's carpentry shop, Jesus may have travelled a bit, spending time in caravans which included Far-Eastern folk. And, so the theory goes, alot of the radical teachings which got him into so much trouble came from sitting around caravan campfires listening to Taoists, Buddhists, and Hindus. While taking this class and flipping through the Tao Te Ching (which is my method of reading it now), I see many of Jesus's ideas appear in this text that predates Christ by many centuries (even by the most conservative estimates). Examples (From the Mair translation of the Ma Wang Tui manuscripts):

The Tao, verse 12:
Treat well those who are good,
Also treat well those who are not good;
thus is goodness attained.
Translated to the Christian:
Love those who love you. Also love those who do not love you.

The Tao Verse 25:
Seek and you shalt receive;
Sin and thou shalt be forgiven.
In the Christian, I think that is repeated almost verbatum.

There are alot more of these parallels. The question as to whether the 'Good News' of Christ was actually a displacement of Eastern philosophy will never be known, of course. Could be that some sentiments are universal in their appeal to humanity. That somewhere, what it is to be human pre-ordains what is good and what is bad, in a moral sort of way. Or it very well could be that Jesus was a Taoist. Doesn't really matter in the end, does it? Regardless of where it came from, the one commandment Christ actually gives, "Love one another as I have loved you," is something that would be wonderful if all people who called themselves Christians actually did it. But alas, it is not so. Sad, really. More people should read the Bible, and less people should listen to dogmatic interpretation of it. Ah well, as my own Polonian maxim states, "You can wish in one hand, and shit in the other, and see which one fills up first."

Dancing with the Tao: A Wise Post?

So, thinking on the difference between the wisdom of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, I found both while reading the Tao Te Ching. My preferred text is from the Ma Wang Tui manuscripts translated by Victor Mair, so the chapter references are from there and accordingly will be way off a standard translation.

Proverbial:
68.
To be sparing of speech is natural.

A whirlwind does not last the whole morning,
A downpour does not las the whole day.
Who causes them?
If heaven and earth cannot cause them to persist,
how much less can human beings?

Therefore,
In pursuing his affairs
a man of the Way identifies with the Way,
a man of integrity identifies with integrity,
a man who fails identifies with failure.

To him who identifies with integrity,
the Way awards integrity;
To him who identifies with failure,
the Way awards failure.

A fairly straightforward sentiment (especially for the Tao). Success breeds success, failure breeds failure. Contrast that with
Ecclestiastic:
10.
Without going out-of-doors,
one may know all under heaven;
Without peering through windows,
one may know the Way of heaven.

The farther one goes
The less one knows.

For this reason,
The sage knows without journeying,
understands without looking,
accomplishes without acting.

Roll that around your noggin for a bit. Its been over a decade since I first read that passage and I still don't grasp it fully.

Image post: A few representations of "Arabesque"

So, I know we were supposed to google arabesque as an art form, but what is art? Art is certainly music, but this album begs the question, "Is all music art?"

Sculpture is most definitely art, this sculpture is art within art, as dance is an art.

An odd thing, actually including an example of what was asked for in a post.

I'm not an expert on ballet, though I do enjoy the ballet (wouldn't know it to look at me, would you?), but this is a nice arabesque.

Biblical images (variations on a Derridean theme)

Jacob's Dream

The Conversion of Saint Paul

Jacob and the Angel

Samson Blinded

Isaac Blessing Jacob. It doesn't show up to well with the picture being this size, but notice the placement of Jacob's arms. Almost like he's "testifying."

Justification of title: All these works were googled using the title of works used by Derrida in "Memoirs of the Blind." For an incredible discussion of blindness as it relates to drawing and portraiture, see the aforementioned title.

Some more classical (and again, warning: there's some nudity) images

The Flaying of Marsyas by Titian. For some reason I've always really liked this painting.

Leda and the Swan. For another artistic rendering, see my first exam.

The sacrifice of Iphigenia. What we won't do for the winds.

Another statue of Dionysus. "Wine, women and song." A classical and biblical intersection.

The Lion Gate. Supposedly the actual doorjamb to the house of Atreus.

"Frye Me." A relflection on our good buddy Northrop's interpretation of Dante's Hell.

On page 57 of "Words with Power" is written:

"The souls in Dante's hell represent the aspect of life in which one is
imprisoned forever within the sum of one's past deeds, when what one is
and what one has done become, at death, the same thing."

I see a very clear connection between this sentiment and the discussion of demonic time in the Cave section of the book. An eternity reliving the misdeeds of one's life. Several years ago, in the midst of a fairly crushing depression, I wrote a similar sentiment in my own journal. Something along the lines of Hell being a repeated life where a person knows what they do is wrong, but keeps doing it over and over, unable to make the right decisions. So hell becomes, in effect the knowledge of the right path, but inability to take it. Applied to the myth of Sisyphus, hell would be if Sisyphus knew he should just quit pushing his boulder, and could do so at any time, but just kept choosing over and over ad infinitum, to keep pushing the damn thing. Ignorance of ability to change would be bliss. Ignorance of another state of affairs existing would be bliss. It is precisely the knowledge of the ability to, and possibility for altering circumstance, but the inability to take the action that one knows would cause that change that would make a life hellish.

Images from Calasso (Warning, explicit images)

Depiction of the murder of Cassandra

Rossetti's Helen
A statue of Dionysus

Me, being technically inept, I have no idea how to remove this duplicate image

Europa and the bull

A short rant on my dislike of the ejournal as a concept

So, to begin with, a little rant on the ejournal as a whole. No offense here to Dr. Sexson, the fact of the matter being I enjoy immensely taking courses from him, even to the point of reccomending my little sister do so when she came to MSU to decide what she wanted to do after getting out of the Peace Corps, but I really dislike ejournals. It punishes folks like myself who work in flurries rather than bit by bit constantly over a semester. The thing about the ejournal is that it doesn't really seem to me to be a measure of how well a person grasps the concepts covered in a course. Rather, it is a reward for those who work steadily, and a punishment for those who work in brief periods of frenzy. I am one of the latter, of course, and now must devote an enormous period of time at the close of the semester to filling ejournal requirements despite having a fairly good grasp on the subject matter of the course, as shown by test scores. I grant here, of course, that the ejournal is very helpful for some students who really need to work constantly and wrestle often with concepts presented in the required texts and in class with which they had not previously dealt, but for those of us who had little difficulty understanding the concepts presented by Frye and Calasso, and who already had a fairly good grasp on the concepts underlying both the biblical and classical traditions, the ejournal was not necessary. Might I suggest, then, that it would be a better idea to have the ejournal be a suggested practice with perhaps the possibility of extra credit, rather than a requirement. After all (or perhaps I have a mistaken impression of the purpose of a university education?) we should be graded on our level of mastery of subject matter, not the amount of work it took us to develop that mastery. The simple fact of the matter is that had I taken this course in the past, when I went to school to learn rather than get good grades and graduate, I wouldn't have done this ejournal at all, and would have missed 150 points because of it. Which is sad, really, to think that someone who has the same working knowledge of biblical and classical tradition that I have would be able to get no higher than a 'C' in this course. But since I have decided to try and be a "good student" and get good grades this rant is really nothing but a waste of time. I'm going to do the ejournal, so I may as well get on with it.

A Socratic Homage to Tension

A Socratic Homage To Tension

When Jean Jacques Rousseau explained the concept of the General Will, he said that the driving force behind the General Will is the tension created by the sum of the differences in opinion of the members of society. Living in a nation whose social and historical identity is deeply rooted in both biblical and classical tradition, it is important to realize the tension between these two traditions, because it is that tension that is the driving force behind Western thought, and the mixing of those two traditions is so inherent in American culture that most people, if questioned on deeply rooted cultural values, would not be able to distinguish from which tradition a particular belief descended. For example, the Harper’s survey which found a majority of Americans think the central message of The New Testament is “God helps those who help themselves;” a concept much more closely aligned with the classical tradition than it is with the biblical. Taking another classical concept as my mantra, Socrates’ maxim that “the unexamined life is not worth living,” the importance in understanding the tension between biblical and classical tradition (rather than living at the mercy of that tension while being ignorant of it) becomes examining the forces which drive the society to which I belong, and thereby making my life worth living.

Immediately upon deciding to examine the tension between biblical and classical tradition I had to examine what it is that creates tension. Rousseau’s concept of the sum of difference being my starting point, I realized that in order to measure, or even discern difference, there first had to be identified a base of sameness, because in order for tension to exist there must be some sort of fixed base where contact between the two traditions occurs. Think of a rubber band. If at least one end isn’t fixed, no tension can be created and the potential for movement is lost. So it is with biblical and classical tradition in regard to Western consciousness. Tension between the two only exists due to the fact that there are points of sameness, which provide a base from which difference can emerge.

The foremost of these similarities is the belief in a divine. In both biblical and classical tradition, there exists a thinking, reasoning (though not necessarily logical) power set above mankind. Humanity is essentially at the mercy of that power, and existence is a gift granted by that power. At any time, all existence could be snuffed out on a whim. In both biblical and classical tradition, there is always something superior to humanity. In both traditions, upsetting a divine being is a sure path to annihilation. The Sodomites took action which upset YHWH, and he destroyed them. Tantalous took action which upset Zeus, and the curse of the house of Atreus was born. Likewise, finding favor with the divine is a sure path to success in either tradition. Genesis 39:2 is a good illustration of this phenomenon in the biblical tradition, in that the verse starts out by simply stating, “The Lord was with Joseph, and he became a successful man.” Similarly, according to Calasso, in the classical tradition it was Poseidon’s favoring Pelops that allowed him to defeat Oenomaus and marry Hippodameia. So belief in, and dependence upon, the divine is the base from which I see the difference emerge which creates tension between the two traditions.

The emergent differences between biblical and classical tradition are many and varied. Due to temporal and spatial constraints, I shall limit myself to discussion of a central dichotomy which illustrates the tension between the two traditions: that of the attitudinal difference between repentance and defiance, as manifest in a comparison of the reactions of Job and Prometheus after being subjected to torment at the hands of YHWH and Zeus, respectively. Job’s response after suffering at the hands of YHWH is exemplary of the attitude of repentance evident throughout the biblical tradition. Although eventually, after the loss of his property and children, and being stricken with “loathsome sores… from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head,” Job does question God, he ultimately “repents in dust and ashes” (HarperCollins 752-753, 795). This attitude stands in stark contrast to Prometheus in Prometheus Bound who tells Zeus, “You will never win me over with your honeyed words. I will resist you forever, you tyrant” (Aeschylus as cited by Sexson, 2005). In a nutshell, this attitudinal difference is that of theocentric versus anthropocentric moral authority. In the biblical tradition, God decides what is right and wrong. All authority comes from God, and whether an action is right or wrong rests solely on God’s purpose for that action, regardless of whether that purpose is understood by humanity. In the classical tradition, between God and me, I am right. Moral authority rests with the individual. There is no strict mandate for behavior from the divine in the classical tradition, and the gods themselves are often at odds as to what action is right or wrong.

The root of this dichotomy is the tension resulting from the difference in character of the notion of the divine in biblical and classical tradition. In the former, the divine is characterized by omnipotence and benevolence. In the latter, the divine is seen as fallible and indifferent. Despite the inherent differences in the theologies of the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament, the nature of the divine remains similar throughout. God is presented as an all-knowing, all-seeing entity who cares about humanity. All of humanity in the New Testament, as evidenced by Jesus’ commandment to “love each other as I have loved you” (Hunthausen, 2005), and that part of humanity that follows His commands in the Hebrew Scriptures, where God constantly showers favors on His favorites. The benevolence of the biblical God can also clearly be seen in the biblical notion of a paradisal afterlife attained through belief in, and adherence to the precepts of, the biblical concept of God. In stark contrast is the classical tradition, where gods are constantly at odds with humanity and each other, and where, though certain individuals may be favored by one god or another, the mass of humanity is ineffectual to divine beings who rape and kill without reason. Where in the biblical tradition, by following codified rules of behavior one could theoretically be spared the wrath of God, in the classical tradition following the code of one god could lead to one’s rape by another, as in the story of Dionysus’ rape of Aura, whose adherence to a lifestyle in concert with the virtues of Artemis was in part what made Dionysus desire her in the first place.

Examining the tension between the biblical and classical traditions and making an effort to be constantly conscious of that tension as a dynamic, ever-present force in society does make a difference. It allows us to be conscious of the kerygmatic foundations of a society which constantly strives to veil those foundations in favor of constructing a careful, rational worldview at the expense of darkening even further the glass through which, according to Paul, humanity sees the world. This awareness lets us experience a bit of apocalypse and see the world more clearly. Examining the tension between the biblical and classical traditions has helped me lift a veil and see beneath it the cogs driving the machine of culture. To apply Socrates: I have examined life, and made it more worth living.












Works Cited

Calasso, R. (1993). The Marriage of Cadmus and Harmony. New York: Knopf.

The HarperCollins Study Bible. (1993) New York: HarperCollins.

Hunthausen, Archbishop R. (2005, October 15) Homily, Bozeman, MT.

Sexson, Dr. M. (2005, November 14). ENGL 212 Class Lecture.

Thoughts on Group 6's last project

So last night, at six, six members of group six were on their way to converge at Clint's to do our project. Coincidence?

Anyway, had alot of fun doing this one. But then, I got to be all drugged out and go freaky, and I always dig doing that type of thing. Haven't actually seen the final cut yet and wonder if I maybe went just a tidge over the top. But, had fun, learned the assigned bit of the Bible and how they are displaced by the Revelation of John. Really, all the Bible is a displacement of Genesis taken to the root I think. In the beginning there was the beginning, and after that just imitation and displacement. If I had the time on my hands it'd be interesting to go through and actually make all the connections linking layer upon layer of displacement and trying to puzzle out a source. But I don't, so I won't.

So, here are the chapters about which I was bugging out on the DVD that'll be seen by you (and me actually) for the first time in about an hour. All from the Book of Revelation. First one was 11:18, second was 12:3-4, third was 16:2-3, and the last was 18:2-3. Odd. It wasn't planned like that but all my visions were in chronological order in Revelation. Course, the last one also referenced the psalm Brenna did (that's 75 if anyone's counting). And once again, I think if you dig deep enough or stretch connections thin enough you can find connections all over the bible.

So. Hope y'all enoyed the show, and maybe took a bit of knowledge away from today as well.