Showing newest 25 of 42 posts from March 2008. Show older posts
Showing newest 25 of 42 posts from March 2008. Show older posts
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Essays: Gender values in Fairy Tales
Many stories have been written to comply with a value system that is based on the essence of a patriarchal society. Such stories have a biased or nave view towards the gender roles of women, ensconcing...
(click title to read rest of article)
(click title to read rest of article)
Essays: To the Lighthouse
The method of communicating the information about characters and events within a novel is fundamental in comprehending its central ideas, themes and issues. To the Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf employs...
(Click title to read rest of article)
(Click title to read rest of article)
Essays: Translations by Brian Friel
The values and attitudes of the audience may often come into conflict with the representation of (a) certain character(s) within a play. These perceptions may mean the protagonist, or her, of a text, may not be viewed as such, and rather as a fool. A fool is defined as a person who lacks judgement or sense, although it is a different sort of fool who has taken its place in the history of literature. The fool was originally a court jester, part of the entertainment that served as the link between royalty and the commoners. This evolved as a professional art form, and eventually made its way into literature (Shakespeare was well known for incorporating this particular stock character). Translations by Brian Friel explores the dispossession of the Irish by the English, literally, culturally and linguistically. We, as the audience, are presented with the perspective of the situation from a number of different characters, and thus are more inclined to form our own views under the influence of our values and attitudes. Three of the most prominent characters within the play are Yolland, Own and Jimmy Jack, who reveal the central ideas, themes and issues of the play through their perspective. It is essentially the audiences’ values and attitudes that influence the perception of each of these characters as either a hero or a fool.
The status of Owen as a character is in much conflict throughout the duration of the play. There are a number of valid reasons as to why Owen can be seen as a stereotypical fool. The word fool is defined as a weak minded or idiotic person, and is also associated with the words to trick, deceive, or impose upon, (as in to fool). 'The Fool' int he more traditional sense, was essentially a social construct meant to intertwine the masses to the polished and refined life of the nobility. Shakespeare's' fool would often speak words of advice to the downtrodden. In a sense, Owen is all of these. Owen acts as a go-between for the two opposing cultures, due to his grasp of language. He is forced to take on a sort of double identity in order to appear complacent to both sides. To translate is to change words from on language to another, often losing meaning in the process. Owen, in his role as translator, changes meaning deliberately, revealing the apathetic attitude he has to the (linguistic) dispossession of the Irish. Thus, Owen is the link and the deceiver, but towards the end of the play, when he begins to reclaim his identity, he becomes the 'wise man', akin to Shakespeare's characters. Fools enact the raw material of a culture, ceremoniously demonstrating and articulating what becomes of a society if it forsakes the 'burden' of tradition.
Personal values and attitudes come into play when constructing a view of Yolland. He is both a hero and a fool, through his actions and his words. There are two kinds of fool; the natural fool, a physically challenged or retarded person, and the artificial fool, a witty entertainer and social critic. Yolland is representative of both, in that he is challenged and inhibited by the Gaelic language, and that his position serves as a critique of the barriers we have created in society. Yolland is English, an assisting officer to Lancey, both in Ireland to assist in its remapping by the Ordnance survey. He has no knowledge of how to speak Gaelic, although his friendly nature towards the Irish assists in his romance with Marie (who cannot speak English). Yolland becomes an example of how language can transcend any boundaries or barrier, but also how it creates differences and conflict. It is his romance with Marie and simply his status as an Englishman that cause problems for both sides. Although there have been possible inciting incidents towards conflict between the two sides, Yolland is essentially the catalyst. Yolland can be seen as a foll because he understands the implications in his relationship to an Irish woman, and the difficulties in communication between the two cultures, but, in essence, he is also a hero because he opposes the indifferent, almost superior attitude of the other English officer Lancey. The view of Yolland as a hero or a fool is dependent upon the audience's personal values and attitudes, although one could say that he is equally both.
An audience coming from a Western, particularly European culture could easily identify with the characters and themes within Translations. Most European countries, and any country colonized by the British Empire, is likely to share a certain empathy with the Irish. Jimmy Jack Casey is perhaps the best example of 'The Fool' within Translations. He is the physically challenged fool, who constantly questions our perceptions of wisdom and truth and their relationship to everyday experience through his references to the legends and culture of Ancient Greece. Folly, the philosophy of the fool, is a ritualized outlet for repressed sentiments. Jimmy Jack is the perfect tool for examining societal constructs and perceptions of wisdom, as he is the relatively harmless old man who is not directly involved in the cultural conflict in the narrative. Alternatively, the conflicts presented by and difficulties in the acts of translation and communication would be acknowledged and respected by anyone who is from a culturally and linguistically diverse background (particularly those who have had to learn English as a second language). The experience in the audience of the above two situations has particular influence in shaping their experience of a text, and especially their views on its characters.
translations touches upon a number of sensitive thees and issues, which rely both on the character construction as well as the attitudes and values of the audience to provide an interpretation. Owen is representative of the literal, cultural and linguistic dispossession of the Irish, and his compliance and lack of rebellion until the end make him out to be a fool, in all senses of the word. The perception of Yolland as a character is essentially dependent upon the values and attitudes of the audience. One could say that while Owen can be seen as a fool, Yolland is equally a hero and fool through his beliefs that the Irish are equally a people, his rebellion to his superiors, and his seemingly good natured ideas. The perception of the true protagonists and antagonists within the play Translations can be seen as relying largely on the values and attitudes of the audience, particularly those coming from other cultures and times. The perception of a play and the influence had by certain characters varies depending upon the audience's personal background, attitudes and values, age and experience, or identification with the themes and issues as presented in the play.
The status of Owen as a character is in much conflict throughout the duration of the play. There are a number of valid reasons as to why Owen can be seen as a stereotypical fool. The word fool is defined as a weak minded or idiotic person, and is also associated with the words to trick, deceive, or impose upon, (as in to fool). 'The Fool' int he more traditional sense, was essentially a social construct meant to intertwine the masses to the polished and refined life of the nobility. Shakespeare's' fool would often speak words of advice to the downtrodden. In a sense, Owen is all of these. Owen acts as a go-between for the two opposing cultures, due to his grasp of language. He is forced to take on a sort of double identity in order to appear complacent to both sides. To translate is to change words from on language to another, often losing meaning in the process. Owen, in his role as translator, changes meaning deliberately, revealing the apathetic attitude he has to the (linguistic) dispossession of the Irish. Thus, Owen is the link and the deceiver, but towards the end of the play, when he begins to reclaim his identity, he becomes the 'wise man', akin to Shakespeare's characters. Fools enact the raw material of a culture, ceremoniously demonstrating and articulating what becomes of a society if it forsakes the 'burden' of tradition.
Personal values and attitudes come into play when constructing a view of Yolland. He is both a hero and a fool, through his actions and his words. There are two kinds of fool; the natural fool, a physically challenged or retarded person, and the artificial fool, a witty entertainer and social critic. Yolland is representative of both, in that he is challenged and inhibited by the Gaelic language, and that his position serves as a critique of the barriers we have created in society. Yolland is English, an assisting officer to Lancey, both in Ireland to assist in its remapping by the Ordnance survey. He has no knowledge of how to speak Gaelic, although his friendly nature towards the Irish assists in his romance with Marie (who cannot speak English). Yolland becomes an example of how language can transcend any boundaries or barrier, but also how it creates differences and conflict. It is his romance with Marie and simply his status as an Englishman that cause problems for both sides. Although there have been possible inciting incidents towards conflict between the two sides, Yolland is essentially the catalyst. Yolland can be seen as a foll because he understands the implications in his relationship to an Irish woman, and the difficulties in communication between the two cultures, but, in essence, he is also a hero because he opposes the indifferent, almost superior attitude of the other English officer Lancey. The view of Yolland as a hero or a fool is dependent upon the audience's personal values and attitudes, although one could say that he is equally both.
An audience coming from a Western, particularly European culture could easily identify with the characters and themes within Translations. Most European countries, and any country colonized by the British Empire, is likely to share a certain empathy with the Irish. Jimmy Jack Casey is perhaps the best example of 'The Fool' within Translations. He is the physically challenged fool, who constantly questions our perceptions of wisdom and truth and their relationship to everyday experience through his references to the legends and culture of Ancient Greece. Folly, the philosophy of the fool, is a ritualized outlet for repressed sentiments. Jimmy Jack is the perfect tool for examining societal constructs and perceptions of wisdom, as he is the relatively harmless old man who is not directly involved in the cultural conflict in the narrative. Alternatively, the conflicts presented by and difficulties in the acts of translation and communication would be acknowledged and respected by anyone who is from a culturally and linguistically diverse background (particularly those who have had to learn English as a second language). The experience in the audience of the above two situations has particular influence in shaping their experience of a text, and especially their views on its characters.
translations touches upon a number of sensitive thees and issues, which rely both on the character construction as well as the attitudes and values of the audience to provide an interpretation. Owen is representative of the literal, cultural and linguistic dispossession of the Irish, and his compliance and lack of rebellion until the end make him out to be a fool, in all senses of the word. The perception of Yolland as a character is essentially dependent upon the values and attitudes of the audience. One could say that while Owen can be seen as a fool, Yolland is equally a hero and fool through his beliefs that the Irish are equally a people, his rebellion to his superiors, and his seemingly good natured ideas. The perception of the true protagonists and antagonists within the play Translations can be seen as relying largely on the values and attitudes of the audience, particularly those coming from other cultures and times. The perception of a play and the influence had by certain characters varies depending upon the audience's personal background, attitudes and values, age and experience, or identification with the themes and issues as presented in the play.
Speech: T.S. Eliot
The poetry of Thomas Stearns. Eliot critically examines the role of religion and women within the confines of contemporary society. Religion is essential to create meaning and substance to life, according to the implications presented by the form, technique and language as presented by Eliot’s poetry. Eliot does not deviate far from traditional ideas in regard to women, as they are present in stereotypical roles. These two themes are substantial within the poetry of T.S. Eliot, and deserve further examination.
“God is dead”. Friedrich Nietzsche, German philosopher. This idea, that the Christian conception of God has become unbelievable, is one that permeates throughout T.S. Eliot’s poetry. Eliot has a long history of affiliation with religion, and it is perhaps for this reason that he portrays life without a religious impulse as meaningless. During his early years, he was influenced by the Uniting and Catholic Churches, but chose to enter the Church of England in 1927. He spent many years studying alternative schools of thought, such as Sanskrit and Hindu, although was known to gravitate towards the works of Charles Maurras, who was a known supporter of both the French Monarchy and the Catholic Church. It is his experiences, perhaps, that enable Eliot to examine the way society had been originally constructed on Judeo-Christian social mores, and the distance it has deviated from tradition. Eliot’s value of Christian ideology is high and consistent within his poetry, and relates to the view that society and life within Western civilization has become a ‘wasteland’, in that he believes that Western civilization needs to be sustained by religion in order to function correctly.
The Hippopotamus uses mostly traditional poetic techniques to present a critical view of the Roman Catholic religion. The title the Hippopotamus may have been an intentional reference to the ancient name of the modern city of Bone in Algeria (then Hippo Regius) or perhaps, more specifically, to its benefactor, St. Augustine of Hippo. Augustine is considered to have been one of the most important figures in the development of Western Christianity, and to have framed the concepts of original sin and just war. The epigraph included at the beginning of the poem is known as the Epistle to the Laodiceans, referenced in the bible in Colossians 4, versus 16, purportedly written by Paul the apostle. The inclusion of this epigraph in the introduction reinforces the critical view of Catholicism as presented in the poem. The connotations provided by the language used in the poem suggest that the hippopotamus is the symbol for mankind. In the first stanza, for example, the tone of the speaker portrays contempt for man’s tendency to believe that they are more important than they really are, when they are “merely flesh and blood”, which, as the second stanza emphasizes, is “weak and frail / susceptible to nervous shock”. Despite this critical perspective of mankind, in relation to the ‘true Church’, or the Roman Catholic Church, as is hinted (both by the epigraph and its base upon a rock), mankind is “among the saints”, “while the true Church remains below”. The Church, in the poem, has bowed to the pressure of materialism, and “need never stir/to gather in its dividends”.This criticism of the Churches’ want for money is also present in Mr. Eliot’s Sunday Morning Service, where the oxymoron “sapient sutlers of the Lord”, indicates preachers of the Lord’s word are also peddlers. Again, in the fifth stanza, the priests are shown as accepting money in return for the forgiveness of sins, or “piaculative pence”. Ultimately, the epigraph of the poem, drawn from the play The Jew of Malta, sums up the state of religion in the context of the 1920’s: “Look, look, master, here comes two religious caterpillars”.
Many cultures have been built around a hierarchical, patriarchal society. The majority of Eliot’s poetry presents females as subordinates to males by aligning them with the spoken vernacular as opposed to the prestigious and more valued discourse of the written and literary heritage. There is an emphasis on the stereotypical roles of the lower class female, such as the maid, and most frequently, the prostitute. Eliot’s theme of de-contextualized sex and promiscuity is present in many of his poems, such as in Preludes, Mr. Eliot’s Sunday Morning Service, The Wastelands’ A game of Chess. Women in The love song of J. Alfred Prufrock and Portrait of a Lady are represented as both fickle and also as constricted by the expectations of society – “My buried life, and Paris in the Spring…”.
Preludes, to be more specific, in the third canto, closely details the life of a prostitute. She is presented as lower than “the yellow soles of feet”, her soul constituted of a “thousand sordid images”. Although the narrator compels the reader to identify by using the pronoun ‘You’, there is no sense of sympathy or other identification to the character. This is the same as the character Lil, in the third part of the Wasteland, A game of Chess. The speaker, who is talking to Lil, tells her “You ought to be ashamed...to look so antique”. This statement reflects the attitudes of society and the presentation of women as pretty objects useful only for procreation, as capricious and petty.
The representation of women in The love song of J. Alfred Prufrock and Portrait of a Lady are much the same in that they are seen as coquettish but bound by “the cups, the marmalade, the tea”, the constrictions of society, and dependent on male figures. ‘But what have I, my friend, To give you, what can you receive from me?”.
These two differing yet similar angles on women are paralleled in the context of the society of the time, and in that Eliot does not deviate from tradition, but rather from his criticisms of society.
The effect of the representation of women and religion in Eliot’s poetry is substantial. His poetry presents the view that women should follow their stereotypical positions within society, and that religion is essential to create meaning and purpose within life.
“God is dead”. Friedrich Nietzsche, German philosopher. This idea, that the Christian conception of God has become unbelievable, is one that permeates throughout T.S. Eliot’s poetry. Eliot has a long history of affiliation with religion, and it is perhaps for this reason that he portrays life without a religious impulse as meaningless. During his early years, he was influenced by the Uniting and Catholic Churches, but chose to enter the Church of England in 1927. He spent many years studying alternative schools of thought, such as Sanskrit and Hindu, although was known to gravitate towards the works of Charles Maurras, who was a known supporter of both the French Monarchy and the Catholic Church. It is his experiences, perhaps, that enable Eliot to examine the way society had been originally constructed on Judeo-Christian social mores, and the distance it has deviated from tradition. Eliot’s value of Christian ideology is high and consistent within his poetry, and relates to the view that society and life within Western civilization has become a ‘wasteland’, in that he believes that Western civilization needs to be sustained by religion in order to function correctly.
The Hippopotamus uses mostly traditional poetic techniques to present a critical view of the Roman Catholic religion. The title the Hippopotamus may have been an intentional reference to the ancient name of the modern city of Bone in Algeria (then Hippo Regius) or perhaps, more specifically, to its benefactor, St. Augustine of Hippo. Augustine is considered to have been one of the most important figures in the development of Western Christianity, and to have framed the concepts of original sin and just war. The epigraph included at the beginning of the poem is known as the Epistle to the Laodiceans, referenced in the bible in Colossians 4, versus 16, purportedly written by Paul the apostle. The inclusion of this epigraph in the introduction reinforces the critical view of Catholicism as presented in the poem. The connotations provided by the language used in the poem suggest that the hippopotamus is the symbol for mankind. In the first stanza, for example, the tone of the speaker portrays contempt for man’s tendency to believe that they are more important than they really are, when they are “merely flesh and blood”, which, as the second stanza emphasizes, is “weak and frail / susceptible to nervous shock”. Despite this critical perspective of mankind, in relation to the ‘true Church’, or the Roman Catholic Church, as is hinted (both by the epigraph and its base upon a rock), mankind is “among the saints”, “while the true Church remains below”. The Church, in the poem, has bowed to the pressure of materialism, and “need never stir/to gather in its dividends”.This criticism of the Churches’ want for money is also present in Mr. Eliot’s Sunday Morning Service, where the oxymoron “sapient sutlers of the Lord”, indicates preachers of the Lord’s word are also peddlers. Again, in the fifth stanza, the priests are shown as accepting money in return for the forgiveness of sins, or “piaculative pence”. Ultimately, the epigraph of the poem, drawn from the play The Jew of Malta, sums up the state of religion in the context of the 1920’s: “Look, look, master, here comes two religious caterpillars”.
Many cultures have been built around a hierarchical, patriarchal society. The majority of Eliot’s poetry presents females as subordinates to males by aligning them with the spoken vernacular as opposed to the prestigious and more valued discourse of the written and literary heritage. There is an emphasis on the stereotypical roles of the lower class female, such as the maid, and most frequently, the prostitute. Eliot’s theme of de-contextualized sex and promiscuity is present in many of his poems, such as in Preludes, Mr. Eliot’s Sunday Morning Service, The Wastelands’ A game of Chess. Women in The love song of J. Alfred Prufrock and Portrait of a Lady are represented as both fickle and also as constricted by the expectations of society – “My buried life, and Paris in the Spring…”.
Preludes, to be more specific, in the third canto, closely details the life of a prostitute. She is presented as lower than “the yellow soles of feet”, her soul constituted of a “thousand sordid images”. Although the narrator compels the reader to identify by using the pronoun ‘You’, there is no sense of sympathy or other identification to the character. This is the same as the character Lil, in the third part of the Wasteland, A game of Chess. The speaker, who is talking to Lil, tells her “You ought to be ashamed...to look so antique”. This statement reflects the attitudes of society and the presentation of women as pretty objects useful only for procreation, as capricious and petty.
The representation of women in The love song of J. Alfred Prufrock and Portrait of a Lady are much the same in that they are seen as coquettish but bound by “the cups, the marmalade, the tea”, the constrictions of society, and dependent on male figures. ‘But what have I, my friend, To give you, what can you receive from me?”.
These two differing yet similar angles on women are paralleled in the context of the society of the time, and in that Eliot does not deviate from tradition, but rather from his criticisms of society.
The effect of the representation of women and religion in Eliot’s poetry is substantial. His poetry presents the view that women should follow their stereotypical positions within society, and that religion is essential to create meaning and purpose within life.
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ
AN interesting book I found in a secondhand bookstore, a re-write of the life of Jesus from a mostly philosophical pov. Here is a summary:
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ
The Philosophic and Practical Basis of the religion of the Aquarian Age of the world
and of
The church universal
Transcribed from The Book of Gods Remembrances known as the Akashic Records
by Levi
Copyright 1920, Mrs. Eva S. Dowling, England.
Chapter 3.
The time was nearly due for Jesus to be born, and Mary longed to see Elizabeth, and she and Joseph turned their faces toward the Judean hills. And when upon their way they came to Bethlehem the day was done, and they must tarry for the night. But Bethlehem was thronged with people going to Jerusalem, the inns and homes were filled with guests, and Joseph and his wife could find no place to rest but in a cave where animals were kept; and there they slept. At midnight came a cry, A child is born in yonder cave amoung the beasts. And lo, the promised son of man was born....Three persons clad in snow white robes came in and stood before the child and said, All strength, all wisdom and all love be yours, Immanuel.
Chapter 7
...
Elihu and Salome took Mary and Elizabeth out to the sacred grove near by where they were wont to teach. Elihu said to Mary and Elizabeth, You may esteem yourselves thrice blest, for you are chosen mothers of long promised sons...And you must teach your sons, and set their souls on fire with love and holy zeal, and make them conscious of their missions to the sons of men...The only saviour of the world is love, and Jesus, son of Mary, comes to manifest that love to men...This age will comprehend but little the works of Purity and Love; but not a word is lost, for in the Book of God's Remembrace a registry is made of every through and word and deed.
Chapter 8
Again Elihu met his pupils in the sacred grove and said, No man lives unto himself; for every living thing is bound by cords to every other living thing. Blest are the pure in heart; for they will love and not demand love in return. They will not do to other men what they would not have other men do unto them. There are two selfs; the higher self and the lower self. The higher self is the human spirit clothed with soul, made in the form of God. The lower self, the carnal self, the body of desires, is a reflection of the higher self, distorted by the murky ethers of the flesh. The lower self is an illusion, and will pass away; the higher self is God in man,and will not pass away.
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ
The Philosophic and Practical Basis of the religion of the Aquarian Age of the world
and of
The church universal
Transcribed from The Book of Gods Remembrances known as the Akashic Records
by Levi
Copyright 1920, Mrs. Eva S. Dowling, England.
Chapter 3.
The time was nearly due for Jesus to be born, and Mary longed to see Elizabeth, and she and Joseph turned their faces toward the Judean hills. And when upon their way they came to Bethlehem the day was done, and they must tarry for the night. But Bethlehem was thronged with people going to Jerusalem, the inns and homes were filled with guests, and Joseph and his wife could find no place to rest but in a cave where animals were kept; and there they slept. At midnight came a cry, A child is born in yonder cave amoung the beasts. And lo, the promised son of man was born....Three persons clad in snow white robes came in and stood before the child and said, All strength, all wisdom and all love be yours, Immanuel.
Chapter 7
...
Elihu and Salome took Mary and Elizabeth out to the sacred grove near by where they were wont to teach. Elihu said to Mary and Elizabeth, You may esteem yourselves thrice blest, for you are chosen mothers of long promised sons...And you must teach your sons, and set their souls on fire with love and holy zeal, and make them conscious of their missions to the sons of men...The only saviour of the world is love, and Jesus, son of Mary, comes to manifest that love to men...This age will comprehend but little the works of Purity and Love; but not a word is lost, for in the Book of God's Remembrace a registry is made of every through and word and deed.
Chapter 8
Again Elihu met his pupils in the sacred grove and said, No man lives unto himself; for every living thing is bound by cords to every other living thing. Blest are the pure in heart; for they will love and not demand love in return. They will not do to other men what they would not have other men do unto them. There are two selfs; the higher self and the lower self. The higher self is the human spirit clothed with soul, made in the form of God. The lower self, the carnal self, the body of desires, is a reflection of the higher self, distorted by the murky ethers of the flesh. The lower self is an illusion, and will pass away; the higher self is God in man,and will not pass away.
Essays: Greek Tragedy
Greek Tragedy was based on myths and stories well known to the audience, and challenged their values and own sense of themselves through the issues outlined in the play. These myths displayed societies unconsciousness, and common thesmes often involved man’s fallibility, being seen at the mercy of the god’s and/or fate, men and men in the city, norm, transgression, punishment and self freedom. Tragic drama presented views opposed to those of the time, which included that war was heroic, the gods were to be revered, and that men were superior in status to women. This was particularly evident in Euripides play Women of Troy, a tragic story about the fate of those left surviving the Trojan War. Euripides presents Women of Troy with an iconoclastic view, choosing to underline the issues of war, gods and equality, opposing the conventional values at the time.
Tragic drama was a literary composition written to be performed by actors in which a central character called a tragic protagonist or hero suffered some serious misfortune which is not accidental and therefore meaningless, but is significant in that the misfortune is logically connected with the hero’s actions. This misfortune is generally underserved in regard to its harshness, and contributes to the theme of the vulnerability of humans and creates sympathy in the audience with the plays character(s). Many of the plays of the time were based on myth and story, in particular (as with Euripides) the Trojan war. Each author would rewrite the play so as to capitalize on its dramatic potential. Euripides was considered the most unconventional in his iconoclastic perception of societies values at the time.
A tragedy deals with dangerous material. A 5th century BCE predominantly male audience to Euripides play would find themselves both sympathizing and opposing views and values presented in the play, which undermined the pre-dominantly patriachal society of the time. Women of Troy consistently runs with the theme of critiquing the gods and mans fate. This is particularly evident in Hecube’s dialogue where she questions the gods, asking “Where are you?” , in her life, and prodding the audience to consider their faith in the gods. Her strength of character and intelligence is a powerful feature, giving validity to the view of the true character of the gods. Their fickle nature, arrogance, manipulation, selfishness, greed and even immorality is revealed in the play by many of the characters speeches, not least the introduction, headed by Poseidon and Athena, (which was uncommon to plays at the time). Euripides states that “the day for the worship of gods is past.” Belief in the gods was an underlying yet prominent feature of the society, and such blatant questioning of such a ground in feature of the community and life would challenge the audiences own self of themselves.
Bringing forward the issue of equality often in his plays, Euripides was viewed as somewhat of a feminist, challenging the traditional patriarchal views of the time. By lighting the true suffering and treatment of the women and children in war, Euripides highlights the real perception of male and female characteristics and nature. He subverts the original view of feminity, creating his characters with what would be regarded as very masculine traits. Some examples are intelligence, determination, strength of character, resilience, and even occasionally aggressiveness. Although there is a distinct separation between women of power and wealth and those without, Euripides supports the idea of women banding together to gain a voice, and that they are truly viewed as objects when they should be subjects. They are brought up to a level with the male characters, particularly noticeable with Hecabe’s dialogue with Menelaus. His character is also presented as ignorant, arrogant, careless and oblivious to the suffering of the women. The male nature is also evident in the murder of Astynax, Andromache’s son, “fit for a man without feeling or decency..” revealing their violent and careless nature, especially to those who pose a their to their society. The underscoring of this particular issue would be radical, causing the audience to sympathize with the characters, and to consider the nature and values of the community.
War was a common and revered feature of ancient Greek life. War was glorified and heroic, immortalized in story and song. The names of men who died fighting were revered, those who caused the death of many other worshipped like gods. Euripides denounces this value on war in Women of Troy, by revealing the suffering and tradgegy that is the result for both sides. He highlights the sadness and mourning of those who are left behind, and outlines the issue of death through language used in dialogue. The play is peppered with the language of war, describing the destruction and desertion it brings. The Women of Troy was thought to be a reflection of the capture of the Aegean island of Melos by the Athenians in 415BCE, the same year the play premiered. Euripides challenges the idea that war and death is heroic and glorified, that it is more heroic to die in war that to come home, and how men were valued on heroic qualities. Women of Troy is a cautionary tale, revealing how winners can also be very much losers, and that there is a price to play for everything. Such a raw revelation on the nature of war and death was anarchistic to the views of the time, challenging the values of Greek society.
Tragedy, particularly in Euripides state, was radical, challenging the nature and values of the community and their own values of themselves. It deals with dangerous material, critiquing views that are traditional and cherished. Euripides effectively questioned and underscored the values that would be considered of more modern standard, outlining the issues that he believed most relevant to him and that which needed to be exposed to the patriarchal society of the time.
Bibliography
The Bacchae and other plays. 1973 Translated by Phillip Vellacott. Penguin Books
Women of Troy – Euripides
Multiple Authors, 2005, The Trojan Women (online), available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_Women
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Access date 11.03.06
Women of Troy pg 131
Women of Troy pg 90 Introduction
Women of Troy pg 116 Talthybius
The Trojan Women – Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
Tragic drama was a literary composition written to be performed by actors in which a central character called a tragic protagonist or hero suffered some serious misfortune which is not accidental and therefore meaningless, but is significant in that the misfortune is logically connected with the hero’s actions. This misfortune is generally underserved in regard to its harshness, and contributes to the theme of the vulnerability of humans and creates sympathy in the audience with the plays character(s). Many of the plays of the time were based on myth and story, in particular (as with Euripides) the Trojan war. Each author would rewrite the play so as to capitalize on its dramatic potential. Euripides was considered the most unconventional in his iconoclastic perception of societies values at the time.
A tragedy deals with dangerous material. A 5th century BCE predominantly male audience to Euripides play would find themselves both sympathizing and opposing views and values presented in the play, which undermined the pre-dominantly patriachal society of the time. Women of Troy consistently runs with the theme of critiquing the gods and mans fate. This is particularly evident in Hecube’s dialogue where she questions the gods, asking “Where are you?” , in her life, and prodding the audience to consider their faith in the gods. Her strength of character and intelligence is a powerful feature, giving validity to the view of the true character of the gods. Their fickle nature, arrogance, manipulation, selfishness, greed and even immorality is revealed in the play by many of the characters speeches, not least the introduction, headed by Poseidon and Athena, (which was uncommon to plays at the time). Euripides states that “the day for the worship of gods is past.” Belief in the gods was an underlying yet prominent feature of the society, and such blatant questioning of such a ground in feature of the community and life would challenge the audiences own self of themselves.
Bringing forward the issue of equality often in his plays, Euripides was viewed as somewhat of a feminist, challenging the traditional patriarchal views of the time. By lighting the true suffering and treatment of the women and children in war, Euripides highlights the real perception of male and female characteristics and nature. He subverts the original view of feminity, creating his characters with what would be regarded as very masculine traits. Some examples are intelligence, determination, strength of character, resilience, and even occasionally aggressiveness. Although there is a distinct separation between women of power and wealth and those without, Euripides supports the idea of women banding together to gain a voice, and that they are truly viewed as objects when they should be subjects. They are brought up to a level with the male characters, particularly noticeable with Hecabe’s dialogue with Menelaus. His character is also presented as ignorant, arrogant, careless and oblivious to the suffering of the women. The male nature is also evident in the murder of Astynax, Andromache’s son, “fit for a man without feeling or decency..” revealing their violent and careless nature, especially to those who pose a their to their society. The underscoring of this particular issue would be radical, causing the audience to sympathize with the characters, and to consider the nature and values of the community.
War was a common and revered feature of ancient Greek life. War was glorified and heroic, immortalized in story and song. The names of men who died fighting were revered, those who caused the death of many other worshipped like gods. Euripides denounces this value on war in Women of Troy, by revealing the suffering and tradgegy that is the result for both sides. He highlights the sadness and mourning of those who are left behind, and outlines the issue of death through language used in dialogue. The play is peppered with the language of war, describing the destruction and desertion it brings. The Women of Troy was thought to be a reflection of the capture of the Aegean island of Melos by the Athenians in 415BCE, the same year the play premiered. Euripides challenges the idea that war and death is heroic and glorified, that it is more heroic to die in war that to come home, and how men were valued on heroic qualities. Women of Troy is a cautionary tale, revealing how winners can also be very much losers, and that there is a price to play for everything. Such a raw revelation on the nature of war and death was anarchistic to the views of the time, challenging the values of Greek society.
Tragedy, particularly in Euripides state, was radical, challenging the nature and values of the community and their own values of themselves. It deals with dangerous material, critiquing views that are traditional and cherished. Euripides effectively questioned and underscored the values that would be considered of more modern standard, outlining the issues that he believed most relevant to him and that which needed to be exposed to the patriarchal society of the time.
Bibliography
The Bacchae and other plays. 1973 Translated by Phillip Vellacott. Penguin Books
Women of Troy – Euripides
Multiple Authors, 2005, The Trojan Women (online), available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_Women
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Access date 11.03.06
Women of Troy pg 131
Women of Troy pg 90 Introduction
Women of Troy pg 116 Talthybius
The Trojan Women – Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
Essays: Cat's Eye, Magaret Atwood
The narrative point of view and the presence of a narrator in a text are imperative in shaping the readers opinion on a particular set of ideas and values. Cats Eye by Margaret Atwood has been written with a single, female narrator in first person point of view. It is a subvert of the techniques and structures of a traditional novel, but its distinctly unique construction and representation of characterization, themes and issues, values and attitudes are essentially built, firstly, from the singular naïve point of view it is presented from. The symbolism and imagery that is present throughout the novel is a reflection in relation to the narrators’ attitude, ideas and values. The most prominent feature of Cats Eye is, in essence, its narrative point of view and the consistent presence of the same narrator. It is this that has built the main themes and issues in the novel, and the naivety of the point of view is inevitable in shaping the reader to sympathize with the narrators values.
The point of view presented in the novel is essential for an accurate understanding of the ideas, issues and events outlined. As Cats Eye is first person point of view, with the story as told by the main character, we as the readers are encouraged to believe that what we are told is correct. Despite this, the fallibility and obvious flaws of the very much insecure narrator highlights that the ideas and issues to be discussed and explored throughout the novel are not an entirely accurate, unbiased representation of fact or truth. The point of view presented is essentially only one version of reality, and thus only one representation of the ideas and issues underlined. The most prominent themes brought forward in Cats Eye are gender construction, relationships, time/space, age, and identity. These themes are portrayed through different events in the story. They are linked by the constant connection between past and present, and thus are portrayed with a somewhat biased point of view. One such example is Elaines’ (the narrator/main character) relationship with men at her present age, always constantly being in comparison with the men in her past. Her opinion, and thus the readers opinion, is constructed through this measure between the two relationships. The narrators point of view is the only one enforced on the reader, and thus the reader is unable to build an accurate view of events.
The themes and issues in Cats Eye have been constructed through the narrators point of view, and have been portrayed through a number of symbols and different images in the novel. Identity is a central theme which is built upon continually through several different avenues, although explored and discussed through the representations and reflections of the main character/narrator. Each character in the text has a distinct and separate identity, with the exception of the combination of Cordelia and Elaine. It is this separation and exploration of identity and the differences and similarities between the two main characters that is the basis of the text. “I’m not afraid of seeing Cordelia. I’m afraid of being Cordelia. Because in some way we changed places, and I’ve forgotten when” is one of the most revealing lines to the constant comparing of Elaine and Cordelia, and the way how they have been constructed as two halves of the one person, that each is “Half a Face”, (the only painting which Elaine has done of Cordelia). These paintings are the most recognizable symbolism in the text, and provide for a clear but yet subtle comprehension of the main ideals, despite being viewed only though the eyes of the narrator.
The readers opinion on the set of particular ideas and values represented in the text is inevitably shaped by the narrative point of view. In Cat’s Eye, the constant presence of the singular female narrator gives only one perspective, one portrayal of the events as occurring in the text, and thus the reader is unable to form a coherent, accurate view of the events, and fashions his or her idea of it through the facts as received from the narrator.
The point of view presented in the novel is essential for an accurate understanding of the ideas, issues and events outlined. As Cats Eye is first person point of view, with the story as told by the main character, we as the readers are encouraged to believe that what we are told is correct. Despite this, the fallibility and obvious flaws of the very much insecure narrator highlights that the ideas and issues to be discussed and explored throughout the novel are not an entirely accurate, unbiased representation of fact or truth. The point of view presented is essentially only one version of reality, and thus only one representation of the ideas and issues underlined. The most prominent themes brought forward in Cats Eye are gender construction, relationships, time/space, age, and identity. These themes are portrayed through different events in the story. They are linked by the constant connection between past and present, and thus are portrayed with a somewhat biased point of view. One such example is Elaines’ (the narrator/main character) relationship with men at her present age, always constantly being in comparison with the men in her past. Her opinion, and thus the readers opinion, is constructed through this measure between the two relationships. The narrators point of view is the only one enforced on the reader, and thus the reader is unable to build an accurate view of events.
The themes and issues in Cats Eye have been constructed through the narrators point of view, and have been portrayed through a number of symbols and different images in the novel. Identity is a central theme which is built upon continually through several different avenues, although explored and discussed through the representations and reflections of the main character/narrator. Each character in the text has a distinct and separate identity, with the exception of the combination of Cordelia and Elaine. It is this separation and exploration of identity and the differences and similarities between the two main characters that is the basis of the text. “I’m not afraid of seeing Cordelia. I’m afraid of being Cordelia. Because in some way we changed places, and I’ve forgotten when” is one of the most revealing lines to the constant comparing of Elaine and Cordelia, and the way how they have been constructed as two halves of the one person, that each is “Half a Face”, (the only painting which Elaine has done of Cordelia). These paintings are the most recognizable symbolism in the text, and provide for a clear but yet subtle comprehension of the main ideals, despite being viewed only though the eyes of the narrator.
The readers opinion on the set of particular ideas and values represented in the text is inevitably shaped by the narrative point of view. In Cat’s Eye, the constant presence of the singular female narrator gives only one perspective, one portrayal of the events as occurring in the text, and thus the reader is unable to form a coherent, accurate view of the events, and fashions his or her idea of it through the facts as received from the narrator.
The conversion to an imitation of Existentialism
English Journal
Creative writing
The conversion to an imitation of existentialism.
Asleep.
Its quietly refreshing. But hard to care. There's no motivation there, without emotion. Its kind of a numb, but pleasant emptiness. There is no purpose, no meaning, therefore no motivation. The emotion driving action and thought has been lost, is gone. All is left is a relaxed drift along the river, existance in the routine path of life. What would have been felt, what should have hurt, what guilt rebounds, is absent. It just really doesn't matter. Nothing does. Just a pair of eyeballs, floating relaxed on the breeze. There is no outer being, no vulnerable skin that exposes and reacts to emotion and being. Just simple observation of sound, noise, touch, hearing and taste, from an acknowledged inner core. Pleasure is taken from the difference in heat and cold. Nothing truly affects. There is just gentle appreciation of what is and what was, no regrets. Everything lives, and therefore it is beautiful. But, that central apprehension, that everything needs a purpose, and purpose that is currently niether seen nore felt. Worthlessness is immaterial and over done, for the central being is concrete, and controlled. There is no need, for feeling, per se. Just act and observe according to the moment, not dictation or precedence. Precedence does not, or rather should not, set action, for existance precedes essence. Existance creates, constructs essence. These moments and occurences are all that is given, and proper appreciation does not lie in the embodiment of chemical reaction. Blindness is a thing of creationism, science is a thing of perception, and faith is a thing of choice. Choice lies in belief, belief in choice, coresponding. The way action and observance is a reaction to the interaction of other events. This authenticity, the widening of eyes to see past the set naivety that controls race, allows for observance, and therefore authenticity in action. The core, acknowledged being, once having observed the percieved truth of the naiveity of outer events, can react accordingly, and according to the chosen faith or belief in the 'rightness' of that action, specifically in that it holds the value of being true to that core and belief. In summary, emotion creates blindness, and observance to the objective perception of outer events without that naivety of emotion allows for action that is authentic in being true to what is believed to be authentic beliefs.
Purpose does not necessarily matter, but moments and actions do. Action, effect, and responsibility for the consequences. Therefore, to a certain extent, action is easily dictated by consequence, and therefore precedence. Disregard to consequence allows for an authenticity to action, but must allow for responsiblity to be taken for consequence to action. An example; the killing of the Arab by Mersault in the Outsider. Without purpose, yet responsibility was taken for the consequence. Purpose does not need to dictate life, yet for most constructs it, and many will lose focus without purpose or meaning. Those without pre-constructed purpose or meaning, or those who choose to not construct a purpose or meaning, may in a sense be freer. They are free to move and act without precedence or conformity. Yet again, action without emotion allows for a larger measure of control, but with a sense of freedom, for emotion cannot dictate action. Moments may decide action, for example, things decided in the spur of the moment, without premediation on them. True freedom lies in action or decision without reflection on consequence or coresponding event, and without precedence.
In this view, the generally acknowledged and conformed view of what is right and what is wrong is blurred. Generally, action is dictated by the innate sense of rightness, what goes in agreement with precedence and others views, in order to advoid conflict. Any sort of disagreement with this conformity is labelled as wrong and disregarded in order to advoid conflict. Humans mostly want peace and acceptance, and it is this sense of belonging and purpose and the driving emotion behind it that has constructed these views of right and wrong. Even so, this perception of one side or the other varies from person to person, culture to culture. Within a particular group, agreement generally occurs in order to complete that sense of belonging, and those within the group eventually construct themselves in thier belief and action to conform with eachother, to advoid conflict, and to satisfy emotion that dictates that purpose and meaning is required for existance. Once purpose and meaning, and/or that driving emotion is lost, that questioning of shared beliefs and pre-dictated actions occurs, and observance of the authenticity of action and event can occur. Once the preconstructed conformity is lost within a certain group, the individual is allowed to fashion thier own set of choices, beliefs, actions, without the precedence of emotion or acknowledged purpose, or set function in being.
Existentialism is the philosophy of sensation, perception and construction, to accept full responisbility for our actions, and to embrace truth and the value of life. The theory is that all knowledge comes from sensory experiences, such as sight, hearing, smell, tough and taste, and that only things that are immediately percievable or capable of perception are real, outruling the value of abstaract labels (e.g. love or God) and thier existance. We may construct realms of being, categories or rules on the basis of fact, but they are biased constructions and have no external reality. Existentialists understand that each person has thier own set of beliefs and there is no condermnation or discrimination of those actions or beliefs unless cowardice in taking responsibility or false authenticity occurs.
Life, in the existentialist view, is absurd. It is devoid of purpose and meaning, but full of generalized conformity and superficialness. The need for explanation is constant within all things, the need for purpose and reason to organize what is in reality a world of chaos.
Creative writing
The conversion to an imitation of existentialism.
Asleep.
Its quietly refreshing. But hard to care. There's no motivation there, without emotion. Its kind of a numb, but pleasant emptiness. There is no purpose, no meaning, therefore no motivation. The emotion driving action and thought has been lost, is gone. All is left is a relaxed drift along the river, existance in the routine path of life. What would have been felt, what should have hurt, what guilt rebounds, is absent. It just really doesn't matter. Nothing does. Just a pair of eyeballs, floating relaxed on the breeze. There is no outer being, no vulnerable skin that exposes and reacts to emotion and being. Just simple observation of sound, noise, touch, hearing and taste, from an acknowledged inner core. Pleasure is taken from the difference in heat and cold. Nothing truly affects. There is just gentle appreciation of what is and what was, no regrets. Everything lives, and therefore it is beautiful. But, that central apprehension, that everything needs a purpose, and purpose that is currently niether seen nore felt. Worthlessness is immaterial and over done, for the central being is concrete, and controlled. There is no need, for feeling, per se. Just act and observe according to the moment, not dictation or precedence. Precedence does not, or rather should not, set action, for existance precedes essence. Existance creates, constructs essence. These moments and occurences are all that is given, and proper appreciation does not lie in the embodiment of chemical reaction. Blindness is a thing of creationism, science is a thing of perception, and faith is a thing of choice. Choice lies in belief, belief in choice, coresponding. The way action and observance is a reaction to the interaction of other events. This authenticity, the widening of eyes to see past the set naivety that controls race, allows for observance, and therefore authenticity in action. The core, acknowledged being, once having observed the percieved truth of the naiveity of outer events, can react accordingly, and according to the chosen faith or belief in the 'rightness' of that action, specifically in that it holds the value of being true to that core and belief. In summary, emotion creates blindness, and observance to the objective perception of outer events without that naivety of emotion allows for action that is authentic in being true to what is believed to be authentic beliefs.
Purpose does not necessarily matter, but moments and actions do. Action, effect, and responsibility for the consequences. Therefore, to a certain extent, action is easily dictated by consequence, and therefore precedence. Disregard to consequence allows for an authenticity to action, but must allow for responsiblity to be taken for consequence to action. An example; the killing of the Arab by Mersault in the Outsider. Without purpose, yet responsibility was taken for the consequence. Purpose does not need to dictate life, yet for most constructs it, and many will lose focus without purpose or meaning. Those without pre-constructed purpose or meaning, or those who choose to not construct a purpose or meaning, may in a sense be freer. They are free to move and act without precedence or conformity. Yet again, action without emotion allows for a larger measure of control, but with a sense of freedom, for emotion cannot dictate action. Moments may decide action, for example, things decided in the spur of the moment, without premediation on them. True freedom lies in action or decision without reflection on consequence or coresponding event, and without precedence.
In this view, the generally acknowledged and conformed view of what is right and what is wrong is blurred. Generally, action is dictated by the innate sense of rightness, what goes in agreement with precedence and others views, in order to advoid conflict. Any sort of disagreement with this conformity is labelled as wrong and disregarded in order to advoid conflict. Humans mostly want peace and acceptance, and it is this sense of belonging and purpose and the driving emotion behind it that has constructed these views of right and wrong. Even so, this perception of one side or the other varies from person to person, culture to culture. Within a particular group, agreement generally occurs in order to complete that sense of belonging, and those within the group eventually construct themselves in thier belief and action to conform with eachother, to advoid conflict, and to satisfy emotion that dictates that purpose and meaning is required for existance. Once purpose and meaning, and/or that driving emotion is lost, that questioning of shared beliefs and pre-dictated actions occurs, and observance of the authenticity of action and event can occur. Once the preconstructed conformity is lost within a certain group, the individual is allowed to fashion thier own set of choices, beliefs, actions, without the precedence of emotion or acknowledged purpose, or set function in being.
Existentialism is the philosophy of sensation, perception and construction, to accept full responisbility for our actions, and to embrace truth and the value of life. The theory is that all knowledge comes from sensory experiences, such as sight, hearing, smell, tough and taste, and that only things that are immediately percievable or capable of perception are real, outruling the value of abstaract labels (e.g. love or God) and thier existance. We may construct realms of being, categories or rules on the basis of fact, but they are biased constructions and have no external reality. Existentialists understand that each person has thier own set of beliefs and there is no condermnation or discrimination of those actions or beliefs unless cowardice in taking responsibility or false authenticity occurs.
Life, in the existentialist view, is absurd. It is devoid of purpose and meaning, but full of generalized conformity and superficialness. The need for explanation is constant within all things, the need for purpose and reason to organize what is in reality a world of chaos.
Speech: Capital Punishment
The effect of a death caused by murder spreads far past the abrupt shortening of the victims own valued life. His or her personal plans for the future are prematurely aborted and they are robbed of their right to the experience of their life to come. Unlike suicide, tragic as it is, murder strips the life from a victim that presumably would rather have kept it. This we will always presume, as there is no way of telling how a dead person has reacted to their death, however their families and loved ones bear almost the full weight of this unwarranted departure and are expected to continue with their lives with nothing but photos and memories to fill the new found space. These loved ones’ anger is understandable. For a mother to outlive her child, especially when the reason for his or her life’s denial was caused by another person, is surely an immensely heartrending experience. The effect of such grief in a family or close community, while varied, can be significant and certainly permanent. It is reasonable that these people will desire some form of punishment to stand towards the offender, both to discipline them and to somehow make them pay for some of the pain they have caused, through some suffering of their own. This is where the justice system falls into place, a fair system whereby offenders are punished for their actions. It is in the hands of one or more unbiased outsiders who decide on the sentence, following preset guidelines that define the law. The justice system weighs up the seriousness of the crime, the circumstances present, and decides on a suitable reprimand.Most people, consciously or subconsciously, make decisions regarding their actions (and responses to those of others) based on what they perceive to be morally right or acceptable. There are cases, however, where for a multitude of possible reasons this line between right and wrong is blurred or totally disregarded, often as a result of testing circumstances and high emotions, and people will act on pure reflex. This is why the justice system is so important. At the very least, the knowledge that we will be punished severely if we transgress the criminal law by committing a serious crime like murder or rape is likely to be one of the most important and socially positive experiences, ultimately shaping or altering our subsequent actions. It is obvious that a system that supports such weight must be watertight and completely unbiased. A significant flaw (or several) in a system so important is obviously going to cause problems in society. If society relies so heavily on the consistency and dependability of the justice system its imperfections must be accentuated and dealt with.
Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is the execution of a convicted criminal by the State or a serious crime, often known as a capital crime or offence, such as treason and murder. Capital punishment is a controversial and strongly debated issue, but an excellent example of where personal morals come into play in the justice system. In the past, capital punishment has been used in nearly all societies both to punish crime and suppress political dissent. Currently, it is reserved as a punishment for premeditated murder, treason, and espionage. In some countries with a majority religious based population, adultery, sodomy, and some religious crimes carry the death penalty. Other countries carry capital punishment for serious cases of corruption and human trafficking, as well as in military justice where courts-martial have issued death sentences for offences such as cowardice, desertion, mutiny and insubordination. As of 2005/2006, 88 countries have abolished the death penalty for all offences (including Australia), 11 for all offences except under special circumstances, 29 have retained without use for a decade or more and 69 countries have retained capital punishment fully, (including the United States of America). Is capital punishment effective overall, and an effective deterrent for crime? Is it a fair measure for justice, or is there too much of a risk of innocent deaths? Should capital punishment be re-introduced in many of those democratic and non-democratic countries which have abolished its use, including and specifically Australia? If so, does it need to be very specific, applying only to certain individuals in certain situations once a definite and fair protocol has been followed?
Sending those who have committed the most hideous of all crimes, murder, to be executed, effectively means the murderer by taking anothers life has forfeited the right to his own. The death penalty protects further murders or crimes from being committed – the recidivism rate (percentage of freed prisoners who commit further crimes) is 60% in the United States and 50% in England, and provides a deterrent for other would-be killers. If the prospect of going to prison where you are able to receive nearly as many amenities as before, if not more, (e.g. television) complete university degrees, even publish your own book, what sort of deterrent does it provide? Most Australian prisons provide education and training in various careers such as tutoring, computing, reception and administration. They are allowed to make purchases such as computers, televisions, and play stations, and a large majority of the prisons are also heated and air-conditioned[1], and the inmates receive three full (often hot) meals a day, with the freedom to choose their meals from the canteen. There is also no need to pay bills. The ability to confirm the guilt of a murderer increases as does the strength of today’s technology and crime fighting methods. The way in which capital punishment needs to function is that of a selective, thoughroughly checked process. For example, the recent reports of death sentences in Indonesia for “the Bali nine” drug mules. The difference in sentencing between the mules and the alleged ringleaders is an example of how the severity of the crime depends on the sentencing. If the death penalty was to be introduced, it would be for certain crimes and even in specific situations. For example, a man could be found guilty of murder, but under new laws be given one year for appeal, and if gains a successful appeal (innocent) is allowed to receive a lesser or no sentence. If the death penalty was to be introduced, it would mean all those found guilty would need a second trial close to the date of their execution to ensure innocence. In many cases it is agreed that capital punishment is the correct and only sentence for those who have committed. grievous crimes. One opinion amongst those who were surveyed in this assignment stated that the death penalty should be reserved for specific crimes, particularly convicted terrorists (also see bibliography). The death penalty is an effective deterrent for crime.
To play the devils advocate, there is a considerable and perhaps more justifiable argument presented by abolitionists of the death penalty. A fundamental example of basic rights is necessary but not present in every country in the world. A huge number of executions still occur, often in secret, for various so called political or religious reasons in what we consider a backwards and utterly inhumane manner and environment. Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to life” (while we could consider that murder forfeits the right to the murderers life, there is still the large question of circumstance and accuracy and fairness of conviction). Article 5 of the Declaration states that, “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment”. Not only does the death penalty come into conflict with that, but often the confession of cases occur under duress, or when torture, beating or threats have occurred,. In 1988, Gemandy Mikhasevich was executed in the Byelorussian republic on multiple charge of murder, rape and robbery. The case received wide public attention because 14 people had already been convicted of these crimes, one of whom had already been executed. Newspapers said the 14 were beaten and tortured until they confessed to the crimes. One of the 14 had gone blind in prison and another had been released with apologies after serving a 10 year term. Recently, President Bush has agreed to a ban on torture used by US army personnel, which has been considered a rather late move to adhere to the Declaration of human rights. Many states in the US still practice the death penalty. Another question about the justifiability of the death penalty is the execution of those who were found to be mentally ill or disabled, and the extent to which someone can be excused for murder due to what is called “diminished responsibility”. A well known example is that of James Terry Roach. He was executed in 1986. In 1977 he pleaded guilty to the murder of two white teenagers and to additional charges including sexual assault and kidnapping. He was 17 at the time. He was sentenced to death despite a finding by the trial judge that he had acted under the domination of an older man, was mentally retarded, and had a personality disorder. He was reportedly very passive, co-operative and wanted the approval of everyone around him on the day of his execution. By the time of his death, aged 25, he was found to have a total IQ of 70, that of a 11 to 12 year old child. One final, horrifying argument to the abolition of the death penalty is the reports of its inefficiency, no matter what the method. In Taiwan, for example, a prisoner was found to be breathing over an hour after the first two volleys from a firing squad had been fired. A Thai construction worker hanging in Kuwait in 1981 took more than nine minutes to die because, as medical reports revealed afterwards, his slight weight did not suffice to break his neck, and he died of strangulation. James Autry was executed by lethal injection in Texas in 1984. The US magazine Newsweek reported that “he took at least ten minutes to die and throughout much of that time he was conscious, moving about and complaining of pain”. In 1986 the Military Governor of Niger State ordered that people convicted of armed robbery should be executed slowly, by successive volleys of bullets fired at intervals, starting with shots aimed at the ankles. The Nigerian courts have passed at least 33 death penalty sentences since 1999. The Islamic Penal code of Iran stipulates: “In the punishment of stoning to death, the stones should not be so large that the person dies on being hit by one or two of them; they should not be so small either that they could not be defined as stones”, with the most recent case for execution by stoning being May 2001 for a woman for adultery, and is still in use. On the 28th June 2000, In Missouri, America, Bert Hunter had an unusual reaction to the lethal injection, his violent convulsions prolonging an agonizing death. Reports from the Deathpenaltyinfo.org website have numerous cases from the 1980’s up to this year of botched lethal injectionexecutions, considered to be more human than the gas chamber or electric chair, of up to half an hour for a vein to be found and around 10 minutes for the convicted to die. Not only that, but once the IV is connected, the inmate is left alone to die, and it was revealed recently that it was known that a percentage of the inmates are conscious and experience a drowning sensation and severe pain. A recent report by the Human Rights watch stated that the drug used in the third stage of the cocktail for condemned men has been deemed by vetenarians too cruel for putting down dogs and cats.
Capital punishment is a controversial and very much current issue. Is the death penalty justifiable as a form of punishment for political dissent, adultery or armed robbery? Is a life for a life the correct way to function, or in some cases a life taken for many lives? Can we justify the percentage of released inmates who recommit crimes, even though we cannot know in reality what the executed would have done once released? Is the main question the protection of further innocent lives from convicted murderers? It has been said that it is better to let ten guilty men go free than one innocent life be lost. Do we need to modify the method of trial used in those countries that use the death penalty? If all were to abolish it, do we need to modify the number of years without parol to a capital crime? If one has been found guilty of murder, treason, espionage or other forms of assault, are they entitled to receive three full meals a day, entertainment and a higher education and training when any life or opportunity has been unjustly taken from the victim? Do we need to investigate the desolate conditions those on death row are kept in even today? Even if the act of murder effectively forfeited ones right to life, can we tolerate the violent, often prolonged, painful and inhumane methods used to kill?
Although there are many considerable and justifiable arguments both for and against capital punishment, the most immediate action needed to be taken is the kind of treatment inmates on death row receive, and the methods of execution, Once that has been changed, we need to question the validity of the death penalty as a punishment, and the accuracy and circumstance it is delivered in, such as for world wide agreed crimes such as murder and acts of terrorism and perhaps not lesser crimes such as adultery or peaceful political dissent, no matter what the religion or beliefs. The questions facing the death penalty and the problems with it often depend on a personal point of view. I invite you to form your own opinion on capital punishment.
Critique: E.e. cummings
Satire, being the definitive of irony, sarcasm or caustic wit used to attack or expose idiocy, debauchery or stupidity, or the branch of literature consisting of such works, is a prominent theme to Cummings poetry. He utilizes irony in particular, expressing something different from and often opposite to its literal meaning. Cummings is emphatic on the values and ideas expressed in his poetry, but chooses to outline the main concerns through application of various poetic techniques, and thus creating a layered effect in the meaning. “I sing of Olaf glad and big”, “pity this busy monster, manunkind”, and “next to of course god America I” are excellent examples of Cummings employment of satire, criticizing human vice and stupidity that are an obtrusive feature of our nature.
“I sing of Olaf, glad and big” is a satire on war, patriotism and societies values. It tells of the kind of treatment one who is soft hearted can expect to receive in the American army, contradicting its glorified and patriotic image. Cummings compares it to the Nazi’s in different lines. “a yearning nations blueeyed pride”, mocks the blatant patriotism of America, and references it to the ‘aerean’ race that Hitler aimed to achieve, also in the last line “more blond that you”. The poem also dictates the truth of what sort of action is accepted and employed by those “most succinctly bred”. Olaf, the unconformist, is abused and beaten until he is “to all intents a corpse”, all in the supposed name of patriotism and authority of the educated , those “kindred intellects”. In the next verse, an undertone of rape is present, but the courage of Olaf in standing up for his own moral conviction in the face of adversity is evident. Despite this, he is called a “yellowsonofabitch”, a coward because he did not agree with the truth and ideology of war. The last verse of the poem reveals the main concerns of the poem, “preponderatingly because unless statistics lie he was more brave then me:more blond than you”. Cummings criticizes the way men are treated simply as objects, as numbers and statistics in war, referencing the number of unknown and unidentified men who died for the few in power. His poetry on war was both personal and general in relativity, as it showed his criticism for what is known to be personally experienced and universally felt and recognized. It is the ironic nature in which it has been portrayed that is so convincing in cummings poetry.
e.e cummings was fond of comparing and relating man to nature, and emphasizing natures brilliance through satirizing our vice and folly. Pity this busy monster manunkind, not, dictates the way humanity is obsessed with its own expansion and greatness in the order of things, “plays with the bigness of its littleness”, forgetting to care for what is left behind in the path of ‘progress’. We are the finest specimen “of hypermagical ultraomnipotence” in our own opinion, thinking that the world will last through the destruction we continually cause it – “listen, there’s a hell of a good universe next door; let’s go”. Despite degrading humanity, Cummings also implies that we are the victims of a comfortable disease, of progress and science, as well as that poets are the doctors or healers of nature – that they know man is ‘a hopeless case’. His explicit and frequent use of irony, along with manipulation of traditional sentence structure and word form is an essential part of conveying the main concerns or ideas and values behind his poems.
“Next to of course god America” is a satire about patriotism, nationalism and politics. Cummings mocks the idea that America is viewed as equal to god by fanatical nationalists, incorporating the American national anthem in its lines. Cummings also includes his oft used theme of war, and criticizes the way history has been beautified and glorified despite the “roaring slaughter” that occurred,although its importance in shaping a nations image of itself is also noted. The poem is an excerpt of a speech, (finishing at) the last line “he spoke. And drank rapidly a glass of water” giving the reader/audience the impression that it has been spoken by a politician, perhaps on election day to garner the support of such a patriotic country. The way in which it has been styled has the effect of a rushed, bitter and somewhat forced speech, washed down and swallowed by both the politician and his audience, also as a form of brainwashing in its own way. The glass of water gives the image of a nervous, sweating politician anxious to get his spiel out, and also inevitably makes a note on politics inability to disguise truth. It is this last line, the ironical final twist, that causes the reader to look further into the true meaning and sentiment behind the first verse.
“I sing of Olaf, glad and big” is a satire on war, patriotism and societies values. It tells of the kind of treatment one who is soft hearted can expect to receive in the American army, contradicting its glorified and patriotic image. Cummings compares it to the Nazi’s in different lines. “a yearning nations blueeyed pride”, mocks the blatant patriotism of America, and references it to the ‘aerean’ race that Hitler aimed to achieve, also in the last line “more blond that you”. The poem also dictates the truth of what sort of action is accepted and employed by those “most succinctly bred”. Olaf, the unconformist, is abused and beaten until he is “to all intents a corpse”, all in the supposed name of patriotism and authority of the educated , those “kindred intellects”. In the next verse, an undertone of rape is present, but the courage of Olaf in standing up for his own moral conviction in the face of adversity is evident. Despite this, he is called a “yellowsonofabitch”, a coward because he did not agree with the truth and ideology of war. The last verse of the poem reveals the main concerns of the poem, “preponderatingly because unless statistics lie he was more brave then me:more blond than you”. Cummings criticizes the way men are treated simply as objects, as numbers and statistics in war, referencing the number of unknown and unidentified men who died for the few in power. His poetry on war was both personal and general in relativity, as it showed his criticism for what is known to be personally experienced and universally felt and recognized. It is the ironic nature in which it has been portrayed that is so convincing in cummings poetry.
e.e cummings was fond of comparing and relating man to nature, and emphasizing natures brilliance through satirizing our vice and folly. Pity this busy monster manunkind, not, dictates the way humanity is obsessed with its own expansion and greatness in the order of things, “plays with the bigness of its littleness”, forgetting to care for what is left behind in the path of ‘progress’. We are the finest specimen “of hypermagical ultraomnipotence” in our own opinion, thinking that the world will last through the destruction we continually cause it – “listen, there’s a hell of a good universe next door; let’s go”. Despite degrading humanity, Cummings also implies that we are the victims of a comfortable disease, of progress and science, as well as that poets are the doctors or healers of nature – that they know man is ‘a hopeless case’. His explicit and frequent use of irony, along with manipulation of traditional sentence structure and word form is an essential part of conveying the main concerns or ideas and values behind his poems.
“Next to of course god America” is a satire about patriotism, nationalism and politics. Cummings mocks the idea that America is viewed as equal to god by fanatical nationalists, incorporating the American national anthem in its lines. Cummings also includes his oft used theme of war, and criticizes the way history has been beautified and glorified despite the “roaring slaughter” that occurred,although its importance in shaping a nations image of itself is also noted. The poem is an excerpt of a speech, (finishing at) the last line “he spoke. And drank rapidly a glass of water” giving the reader/audience the impression that it has been spoken by a politician, perhaps on election day to garner the support of such a patriotic country. The way in which it has been styled has the effect of a rushed, bitter and somewhat forced speech, washed down and swallowed by both the politician and his audience, also as a form of brainwashing in its own way. The glass of water gives the image of a nervous, sweating politician anxious to get his spiel out, and also inevitably makes a note on politics inability to disguise truth. It is this last line, the ironical final twist, that causes the reader to look further into the true meaning and sentiment behind the first verse.
e.e cummings chose to reflect on a number of prominent themes and ideas that were relative both to himself and the rest of society, often writing satires to give his opinion on various ideas and values. The ironical way in which almost all of his poetry has been written is essential in portraying the truth in his seemingly childish and insensible, intelligible poems. Cummings is extremely effective in causing the reader to reflect in the various ideas represented in his poetry, as he was revolutionary in his extremely modern ideals for the time. Although cummings enjoyed employing and manipulating many poetic techniques as well as basic rules for written English, it was his utilization of satire and irony that were the most important, the most prominent and persuasive in his poetry.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Chocolate
(A.K.A My favourite subject).
Chocolate - comprises a number of raw and processed foods that are produced...but who really cares? Until it was revealed I had to go on a gluten and dairy free diet, all I've ever paid attention to was whether it was dark, milk, or white.
Chocolate is one of the universally known treats that people enjoy. Most people, that is, because I have actually met someone that doesn't like the taste of any chocolate - that being said, they did have an extreme eccentric personality and taste in clothing. It has been linked to balancing serotonin levels in the brain, and scientists have claimed that eating it in moderation can lower blood pressure. Supposedly, chocolate has also been identified as an aphrodesiac, but there haven't been any studies I've found that have proved that, and thus the stimulant is supposed to have been created from the sheer pleasure of consuming chocolate.
Chocolate also comes in gluten and/or dairy free varieties (and sugar free, but I'm not brave enough to try those). One of my favourite varieties is produced by Sweet William Australia, . Unfortunately, this particular type has about the same amount (or more) kilojoules as in your regular chocolate bar. The biggest plus, I think, is the fact that they produce dairy free and soy easter eggs and rabbits.
Now, if someone could convincingly explain why we associate rabbits, eggs, and chocolate all together with Easter, please feel free to email me! I was rather astonished to find, upon arrival in France at that time of year, that there were no bunnies, and they had chickens and fish instead. One local commented, "but of course! Rabbits don't lay eggs!".
Hot cross buns I can understand, as they represent the symbology of Jesus on the cross. I had always supposed eggs and rabbits are symbols of new life (nb. anyone see the alternatives? ;) , celebrating birth and rebirth etc. But what I will never quite get, is why they call it GOOD Friday.
The only exception to this peculiar rule is Arabic and Chinese speaking countries, where they call it Sad Friday and Day of Christ's Suffering, respectively. I believe if everyone went around calling it Bad Friday then the sheer weight of the name would cause bad moods and general doom and gloom everywhere (think of Monday as everyday of the week).
Alright. Enough about Easter. Its a whole week away and I have clothes shopping to do, birthday presents to buy, selling my old cd's, and not to mention drawing the Adventures of Lexman during another torturous period of Legal Research and Writing.
Thanks for reading. And, if you didn't get anything of use or interest out of the above post, here's something I learnt today:
A Garbologist is one who studies a society or culture by examining or analyzing its refuse. So if you ever feel like looking down on the garbage man again, he's probably just as well educated as you are.
Chocolate - comprises a number of raw and processed foods that are produced...but who really cares? Until it was revealed I had to go on a gluten and dairy free diet, all I've ever paid attention to was whether it was dark, milk, or white.
Chocolate is one of the universally known treats that people enjoy. Most people, that is, because I have actually met someone that doesn't like the taste of any chocolate - that being said, they did have an extreme eccentric personality and taste in clothing. It has been linked to balancing serotonin levels in the brain, and scientists have claimed that eating it in moderation can lower blood pressure. Supposedly, chocolate has also been identified as an aphrodesiac, but there haven't been any studies I've found that have proved that, and thus the stimulant is supposed to have been created from the sheer pleasure of consuming chocolate.
Chocolate also comes in gluten and/or dairy free varieties (and sugar free, but I'm not brave enough to try those). One of my favourite varieties is produced by Sweet William Australia, . Unfortunately, this particular type has about the same amount (or more) kilojoules as in your regular chocolate bar. The biggest plus, I think, is the fact that they produce dairy free and soy easter eggs and rabbits.
Now, if someone could convincingly explain why we associate rabbits, eggs, and chocolate all together with Easter, please feel free to email me! I was rather astonished to find, upon arrival in France at that time of year, that there were no bunnies, and they had chickens and fish instead. One local commented, "but of course! Rabbits don't lay eggs!".
Hot cross buns I can understand, as they represent the symbology of Jesus on the cross. I had always supposed eggs and rabbits are symbols of new life (nb. anyone see the alternatives? ;) , celebrating birth and rebirth etc. But what I will never quite get, is why they call it GOOD Friday.
The only exception to this peculiar rule is Arabic and Chinese speaking countries, where they call it Sad Friday and Day of Christ's Suffering, respectively. I believe if everyone went around calling it Bad Friday then the sheer weight of the name would cause bad moods and general doom and gloom everywhere (think of Monday as everyday of the week).
Alright. Enough about Easter. Its a whole week away and I have clothes shopping to do, birthday presents to buy, selling my old cd's, and not to mention drawing the Adventures of Lexman during another torturous period of Legal Research and Writing.
Thanks for reading. And, if you didn't get anything of use or interest out of the above post, here's something I learnt today:
A Garbologist is one who studies a society or culture by examining or analyzing its refuse. So if you ever feel like looking down on the garbage man again, he's probably just as well educated as you are.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Lexemes Audio
Lexemes posts, from An Imaginary Life to It's just the means to an end...
Created and read by TextAloud (using the free voices because I can't afford the others!).
Relatively high quality - I used TextAloud to listen to my exam notes last year - so if you can't be bothered to or don't have time to read the posts, here's the audio file.
(Files are enclosed - when viewed as a feed, it will show - if not, click on the title of this post)
The .rar file is 10mb, the .mp3 file is 13mb.
http://www.mediamax.com/lexemes/Hosted/LEXEMES%20B.mp3
http://www.mediamax.com/lexemes/Hosted/LEXEMES%20B.rar
Created and read by TextAloud (using the free voices because I can't afford the others!).
Relatively high quality - I used TextAloud to listen to my exam notes last year - so if you can't be bothered to or don't have time to read the posts, here's the audio file.
(Files are enclosed - when viewed as a feed, it will show - if not, click on the title of this post)
The .rar file is 10mb, the .mp3 file is 13mb.
http://www.mediamax.com/lexemes/Hosted/LEXEMES%20B.mp3
http://www.mediamax.com/lexemes/Hosted/LEXEMES%20B.rar
It's just the means to an end...
Today is the 12th of March, and I've just discovered that there really is something worse than legal ethics 101 (think bad fringes and a nasal voic), and its name is legal research and writing. So much so that in my desperation, and severe lack of intellectual stimulation, decided I would dedicate a comic to it - called The Adventures of Lexman. Lexman will be the symbol for my blog and any consequent websites I sign up to (eg Myspace). Lexman is composed of the russian equivalent of the letter L, with a head and body attached.
I'll probably end up drawing it on file paper in the middle of lectures. Basically, Legal Research consists of how to use a computer, using Google, finding a book in a legal database, and finding books in your local library. I pity anyone who has already had the same disadvantage of 3 years of highschool spent doing exactly that. We do have a court visit soon, which should be interesting, but its the group presentation I'm dreading - weekly meetings with people who generally have a lot more on their plate than I do. You know what I mean?
I think everyone has experienced the frustration of trying to get large groups of people together at the same time. Even planning weeks in advance has its difficulties, because youre generally never sure of whats going to change or come up in the future.
Thats all for now!
I'll probably end up drawing it on file paper in the middle of lectures. Basically, Legal Research consists of how to use a computer, using Google, finding a book in a legal database, and finding books in your local library. I pity anyone who has already had the same disadvantage of 3 years of highschool spent doing exactly that. We do have a court visit soon, which should be interesting, but its the group presentation I'm dreading - weekly meetings with people who generally have a lot more on their plate than I do. You know what I mean?
I think everyone has experienced the frustration of trying to get large groups of people together at the same time. Even planning weeks in advance has its difficulties, because youre generally never sure of whats going to change or come up in the future.
Thats all for now!
Monday, March 10, 2008
BEST POEM EVER
Wok in a box,
Rocks my socks,
School is knocks,
I eat chocs.
Icecream be,
Sugar up me,
Go hug tree,
Desk I see.
Win points I,
Sure don't lie,
No more cry,
Hard I try.
A random little poem
The meaning of life.
You see death
And see the face of every man, woman and child you ever knew or will know.
That androgyny.
You see death
And see from still birth to cancer to the ravages of old age.
That egality.
You see death
And see that the meaning of life is to live and for all to live
That is it.
You see death
And see the face of every man, woman and child you ever knew or will know.
That androgyny.
You see death
And see from still birth to cancer to the ravages of old age.
That egality.
You see death
And see that the meaning of life is to live and for all to live
That is it.
Cleisthenes, Ephialtes and Pericles
Cleisthenes introduced a new tribal system of ten tribes with 3 demes (villages) to a trittye, and 3 trittyes to a tribe. He changed Solon’s council of 400 to a council of 500, with 50 citizens elected form each tribe to rule for one tenth of the year. The council of 500 had a probuletic function in drafting legislation for the Ecclesia (the assembly), which now, due to Cleisthenes, included the lowest of the 4 property classes, the Thetas. Cleisthenes also introduced the system of lot, where candidates would be pre-selected for the position of Archon, then names would be drawn out. Cleisthenes also had new legislation introduced so that one Archon from each of the ten tribes, from the top 2 property classes could be elected, where it had previously been 9 archons made up of the aristocracy. The demes supplied experienced politicians, and were the basis of citizen registration polls. The demes also had to supply men for the military. Cleisthenes also introduced ostracism, which would happen if the people agreed it was needed. A man needed 6000 votes out of the roughly 25000 citizens to be ostracized, or exiled.
…
Cleisthenes’ reforms increased democracy in Athens as it decreased the power of the nobility and allowed a larger majority of the citizens to take part in politics. His new tribal system broke up the power groups and greatly decreased factional strife, meaning that the people thought of themselves as Athenian and not just members of a particular tribe. The council of 500 gave more of a chance for the lower class members to take part in politics, and along with the Ecclesia ensured that legislation was fair and reflected the will of the people. The system of lot meant that elections became far more democratic, ensuring equal chances and preventing pressure or influence (on voting). The inclusion of the Thetas to the Ecclesia and the Helialia, or people’s court was a good reflection of Cleisthenes move towards democracy. Ostracism prevented, or rather discouraged, tyranny, but could also be used to get rid of enemies in political strafing. Cleisthenes did not create a full democracy as the lower classes could not often afford to leave their jobs for a whole tenth of a year, or for other magisterial positions. The thetas nor the zeugitae could not hold the position of archon, and therefore not be a member of the Areopagus, who still held a large influence over the outcome of legislation.
…
Ephialtes main change to the Athenian system of government was passing the legislative (guardianship of laws) and main judicial powers of the Areopagus down to the council of 500 and the Ecclesia, with the exception of original jurisdiction over murder cases. This took away the power from what had always been in the aristocracy, and ensured a more democratic form of government. He gave the Ecclesia the right to ask magistrates to step down. Ephialtes also changed the tradition that ex-archons were members of the Areopagus for life, to one year. The ability to veto and/or influence legislation of the Council and Ecclesia was removed, as well as the ability to decide on cases other than those involving murder. Ephialtes reform meant less corruption of the Areopagus and the archons. Both were seen as a direct insult to the traditional, conservative power of the Areopagus, and thus it was not long before he was murdered. The central investigators, the Areopagus, never discovered the culprit.
…
Ephialtes felt these reforms were necessary to create a more efficient and representative form of government. Mostly, he recognized the corruption occurring throughout the Archonship and the Areopagus. By eliminating the Areopagus having the ‘Guardianship of laws’ he ensured that they could not veto or influence legislation from the Ecclesia, which meant previously the rights of the Ecclesia were effectively annulled. Ephialtes also meant to prevent further tyranny (such as the Pisistratus).
…
Pericles introduced a number of reforms to ensure further democracy in features of the Athenian government. His most central reforms were lot and pay, but he also introduced the idea that to be a true Athenian citizen one must have had both Athenian parents. Previously, candidates had been selected before being chosen by lot, so Pericles removed the pre-selection. Pericles also allowed the Thetas to participate in elections after 430 for Archonship. Pay meant that all citizens could be a part of the political and judicial system of Athens, as Pericles introduces legislation to give a salary to members of the jury in the Helialia, and other magisterial positions, including that of Archon. He also introduced a salary for all members of the military and navy. Pericles reforms meant that all citizens could directly vote any other citizen of their choosing. Pay ensured every man was able to take part as a politician. Although the reforms of Solon, Cleisthenes and Ephialtes had built up to democracy, Pericles’ reforms took it to the level of direct democracy where all citizens could participate.
He believed partially, in equality. Although his reforms meant that the people still looked up to him as leader, without thinking him a tyrant, even though he still could exercise a large measure of control over the Athenian government. Pericles limited democracy through restricted citizenship. His reform cut down the numbers of Athenian citizens, and meant less people participated in the political and military processes, but also even ruled out two of his own sons. Democracy was also limited through the use of lot. Although it ensured fair voting, it meant there was a large possibility of a man to be elected who was unfit to lead. Pericles also contradicted the theory of democracy by forcing it onto his allies, and exploiting them for his own use.
…
Cleisthenes’ reforms increased democracy in Athens as it decreased the power of the nobility and allowed a larger majority of the citizens to take part in politics. His new tribal system broke up the power groups and greatly decreased factional strife, meaning that the people thought of themselves as Athenian and not just members of a particular tribe. The council of 500 gave more of a chance for the lower class members to take part in politics, and along with the Ecclesia ensured that legislation was fair and reflected the will of the people. The system of lot meant that elections became far more democratic, ensuring equal chances and preventing pressure or influence (on voting). The inclusion of the Thetas to the Ecclesia and the Helialia, or people’s court was a good reflection of Cleisthenes move towards democracy. Ostracism prevented, or rather discouraged, tyranny, but could also be used to get rid of enemies in political strafing. Cleisthenes did not create a full democracy as the lower classes could not often afford to leave their jobs for a whole tenth of a year, or for other magisterial positions. The thetas nor the zeugitae could not hold the position of archon, and therefore not be a member of the Areopagus, who still held a large influence over the outcome of legislation.
…
Ephialtes main change to the Athenian system of government was passing the legislative (guardianship of laws) and main judicial powers of the Areopagus down to the council of 500 and the Ecclesia, with the exception of original jurisdiction over murder cases. This took away the power from what had always been in the aristocracy, and ensured a more democratic form of government. He gave the Ecclesia the right to ask magistrates to step down. Ephialtes also changed the tradition that ex-archons were members of the Areopagus for life, to one year. The ability to veto and/or influence legislation of the Council and Ecclesia was removed, as well as the ability to decide on cases other than those involving murder. Ephialtes reform meant less corruption of the Areopagus and the archons. Both were seen as a direct insult to the traditional, conservative power of the Areopagus, and thus it was not long before he was murdered. The central investigators, the Areopagus, never discovered the culprit.
…
Ephialtes felt these reforms were necessary to create a more efficient and representative form of government. Mostly, he recognized the corruption occurring throughout the Archonship and the Areopagus. By eliminating the Areopagus having the ‘Guardianship of laws’ he ensured that they could not veto or influence legislation from the Ecclesia, which meant previously the rights of the Ecclesia were effectively annulled. Ephialtes also meant to prevent further tyranny (such as the Pisistratus).
…
Pericles introduced a number of reforms to ensure further democracy in features of the Athenian government. His most central reforms were lot and pay, but he also introduced the idea that to be a true Athenian citizen one must have had both Athenian parents. Previously, candidates had been selected before being chosen by lot, so Pericles removed the pre-selection. Pericles also allowed the Thetas to participate in elections after 430 for Archonship. Pay meant that all citizens could be a part of the political and judicial system of Athens, as Pericles introduces legislation to give a salary to members of the jury in the Helialia, and other magisterial positions, including that of Archon. He also introduced a salary for all members of the military and navy. Pericles reforms meant that all citizens could directly vote any other citizen of their choosing. Pay ensured every man was able to take part as a politician. Although the reforms of Solon, Cleisthenes and Ephialtes had built up to democracy, Pericles’ reforms took it to the level of direct democracy where all citizens could participate.
He believed partially, in equality. Although his reforms meant that the people still looked up to him as leader, without thinking him a tyrant, even though he still could exercise a large measure of control over the Athenian government. Pericles limited democracy through restricted citizenship. His reform cut down the numbers of Athenian citizens, and meant less people participated in the political and military processes, but also even ruled out two of his own sons. Democracy was also limited through the use of lot. Although it ensured fair voting, it meant there was a large possibility of a man to be elected who was unfit to lead. Pericles also contradicted the theory of democracy by forcing it onto his allies, and exploiting them for his own use.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Truth/Morality
Truth
What relativists believe, is that there is no simple, absolute truth, but that truth is relative to a particular person or culture. For example, we have as history as Christians of not having to justify ourselves in making others believe what they do is wrong, because our religion or beliefs call for it, when others may think what they are doing is right. I disagree. I believe there are certain, absolute truths that should be applied to all cultures and people, e.g. killing, whether in the name of your religion or otherwise, is wrong. I believe that equal rights for men and women should be a part of all cultures,or at least removing the practice of ideals that severely restrict quality of life. Alternatively, to educate other peoples on why their cultural practices or beliefs may be wrong from our perspective.
Morality
As morality is a vast and much debated subject, here's just one example of the argument for/against it.The myth of Gyges is a dialogue present by Claucon and Ademanthus to challenge Socrates to justify why a man should live a moral life. The story tells of Gygyes the Shepherd and how he found a magic ring that had the ability to turn him invisible. With this, he managed to seduce the queen and with her help slew the King of Lydia and took the kingdom. The reader is asked to consider that no matter if a man who took the ring was just, no man could be considered to be of such iron nature as to stand fast in justice, not when he could safely steal or kill anything or anyone he wished.The story takes the argument that w are just out of necessity, perhaps for fear of punishment or expectation of reward in following in following a just path, that is in our natures to think that injustice is far more profitable and anyone having obtained the ability of invisibility and never doing any wrong would be considered entirely stupid for not taking advantage of the situation.
Soul/Abortion
Soul
I remember when I was little, thinking that the soul was located in the ankle, just below the ankle, because it had the same sound as sole, and was always the first thing I thought of. Then again, where is the soul located? it has always been the essence of spirituality. But is it our sole connection to God? (No pun intended). Does it truly exist, even with the idea of losing 21 grams at the point of death (do people who come back from the dead gain 21 grams again?). Is it our consciousness, our mind, personality and identity, the very thing that defines who we are? What would w be without a soul? Would we be dead, or compared with animals? Would we exist as just shells, bodies with no compulsion to move, perhaps not even to breathe? does everything have a soul? Can a soul be reincarnated, live again in another body, another life? If so, does that mean it is not who we are inside, but what we do that makes us?In almost every story, as soul is of the most importance. Some say that you are master of your own soul, and cannot sell it to any., Others tell of the wickedness of those who have 'sold their soul to the devil". A man without a souls is a man lost, or dead, whichever way it is looked at from a story. Harry Potter is one example. one of the creates in the series are called dementors, aptly named for the condition they bring with them, cold and madness as ever good thought and feeling is drained from you, and every nightmare and horror revisited, time and time again. Any who have been 'kissed by a dementor have been painted as mere shells, silent and oblivious even to themselves. Another series, the Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan, tells of the Grey Men, those who have voluntarily given up their soul to be assassins for the dark side, able to blend in with the crowd unless one takes a good look in their eyes.This brings up another point. the eyes are often said to be the window to the soul. To read someones eyes correctly is often to truly see what they feel and think, but perhaps that we can convey so much emotion with two globes of flesh, considering the fact that our soul could possibly be located in the brain. Certainly science has proved that everything we do is controlled by it, so perhaps our soul, said to be the essence of the human being, is located there.
Abortion
Abortion is defined as the termination of pregnancy before the fetus is capable of independent life. Abortion, as far as I consider it, is more of a religious debate than a moral one, I do not believe that it is murder to kill and unborn child, up to a certain stage in the pregnancy. officially, there are two main types of abortion. Spontaneous, otherwise known as a miscarriage, or induced. It is considered a premature pregnancy is 20 weeks old and weighs over 18oz, an abortion if it is less than 20 weeks and weighs less than 18oz. The further the women is in the pregnancy, the more complications in abortion there is.In my personal opinion, abortion should be allowed fairly to all, and the child kept only if the mother is entirely willing to keep and care for it. If abortion was banned, there would likely be a population measure put in place similar to that of China, and unwanted babies left out in the streets to die, such as has often happened in America (according to a report in the Readers Digest, of a woman who makes it her job to bury them, and provide good homes for those she can). The population surge would cause economic and environmental repercussions all over the world.Some religions who forbid contraception, and likely abortion, often are at some loss without it. For example, say, a woman was found to be pregnant before her wedding day, it may cause dishonour to her family and soon to be husband (even if he is the father), and she maybe driven out and disowned. An abortion not only covers that, but would stop children being born in a family that may not be able to afford extra mouths to feed.
Essays in part: Eliot
The poetic techniques used by T.S. Eliot have been constructed to present an exacting overview of society. A particularly critical view of society and its “masquerades” is conveyed in the poems Preludes and The Hippopotamus. Preludes examines the importance of time and the importance of structure, while the Hippopotamus reflects both the deemed frailty of mankind and Eliot’s personal criticism of the Roman Catholic Religion. Eliot constantly uses imagery to symbolize his perspective and ideas in his poetry, but as in the Hippo and Preludes, utilizes a number of other poetic techniques (e.g. allegory and juxtaposition) as well as connotative language to underscore a socially critical perspective.
The Hippopotamus uses mostly traditional poetic techniques to present a critical view of the Roman Catholic religion. The title the Hippopotamus may have been an intentional reference to the ancient name of the modern city of Bone in Algeria (then Hippo Regius) or perhaps, more specifically, to its benefactor, St. Augustine of Hippo. Augustine is considered to have been one of the most important figures in the development of Western Christianity, and to have framed the concepts of original sin and just war. The epigraph included at the beginning of the poem is known as the Epistle to the Laodiceans, referenced in the bible in Colossians 4, versus 16, purportedly written by Paul the apostle. The inclusion of this epigraph in the introduction reinforces the critical view of Catholicism as presented in the poem. The connotations provided by the language used in the poem suggest that the hippopotamus is the symbol for mankind. In the first stanza, for example, the tone of the speaker portrays contempt for man’s tendency to believe that they are more important than they really are, when they are “merely flesh and blood”, which, as the second stanza emphasizes, is “weak and frail / susceptible to nervous shock”. Despite this critical perspective of mankind, in relation to the ‘true Church’, or the Roman Catholic Church, as is hinted (both by the epigraph and its base upon a rock), mankind is “among the saints”, “while the true Church remains below”.
The Hippopotamus uses mostly traditional poetic techniques to present a critical view of the Roman Catholic religion. The title the Hippopotamus may have been an intentional reference to the ancient name of the modern city of Bone in Algeria (then Hippo Regius) or perhaps, more specifically, to its benefactor, St. Augustine of Hippo. Augustine is considered to have been one of the most important figures in the development of Western Christianity, and to have framed the concepts of original sin and just war. The epigraph included at the beginning of the poem is known as the Epistle to the Laodiceans, referenced in the bible in Colossians 4, versus 16, purportedly written by Paul the apostle. The inclusion of this epigraph in the introduction reinforces the critical view of Catholicism as presented in the poem. The connotations provided by the language used in the poem suggest that the hippopotamus is the symbol for mankind. In the first stanza, for example, the tone of the speaker portrays contempt for man’s tendency to believe that they are more important than they really are, when they are “merely flesh and blood”, which, as the second stanza emphasizes, is “weak and frail / susceptible to nervous shock”. Despite this critical perspective of mankind, in relation to the ‘true Church’, or the Roman Catholic Church, as is hinted (both by the epigraph and its base upon a rock), mankind is “among the saints”, “while the true Church remains below”.
Dreams and Reality
Dreams and Reality
Everybody has dreams. Few remember them. Dreams are said to be our subconscious mind working out issues for the next day while we are asleep, proving that the mind is never fully at rest. Dreams can be extremely vivid, to the point that you are shocked when you wake and find it was all in your imagination. Dreams do not always make sense, woven as they are with bits and pieces of our subconscious. Dreams could be predictive or a view of something Long forgotten. They often reveal our true fears, our true hopes and longings that may have been suppressed without knowledge.
We live on the assumption that what we see, hear, feel, taste and smell are what is real. Then, reality is truly a bunch of neurons sending signals to and around different parts of the brain. The move The Matrix explores this idea, when in the future we are being grown like crops by machines to be their power source, kept docile by the extremely complex program of neuron signals sent to our brain which we are all connected to, making us unaware that there is anything outside of what the machines have created. Alternatively, humans have a limited ability in their senses. Other animals have a much higher ability in being able to hear and see and smell, and in some cases, taste.
Humans have a natural need for control and familiarity, they develop a reality, a world out of what they perceive, which may be completely different to the next persons. Only through language are we able to understand what everyone may see, part of the Truth of what is out there in the world. On the other hand, if our reality is based on signals in our brain, then whats to say that we think we are awake we are dreaming and when we think we dream we are actually awake?
Everybody has dreams. Few remember them. Dreams are said to be our subconscious mind working out issues for the next day while we are asleep, proving that the mind is never fully at rest. Dreams can be extremely vivid, to the point that you are shocked when you wake and find it was all in your imagination. Dreams do not always make sense, woven as they are with bits and pieces of our subconscious. Dreams could be predictive or a view of something Long forgotten. They often reveal our true fears, our true hopes and longings that may have been suppressed without knowledge.
We live on the assumption that what we see, hear, feel, taste and smell are what is real. Then, reality is truly a bunch of neurons sending signals to and around different parts of the brain. The move The Matrix explores this idea, when in the future we are being grown like crops by machines to be their power source, kept docile by the extremely complex program of neuron signals sent to our brain which we are all connected to, making us unaware that there is anything outside of what the machines have created. Alternatively, humans have a limited ability in their senses. Other animals have a much higher ability in being able to hear and see and smell, and in some cases, taste.
Humans have a natural need for control and familiarity, they develop a reality, a world out of what they perceive, which may be completely different to the next persons. Only through language are we able to understand what everyone may see, part of the Truth of what is out there in the world. On the other hand, if our reality is based on signals in our brain, then whats to say that we think we are awake we are dreaming and when we think we dream we are actually awake?
Doctrine of Philosophy: Consurgo
Consider the newspaper. Every headline is negative. We flock like carrion birds to scenes of tragedy, yet many simply want to fulfill that ever present need to satisfy their curiosity, and not to assist. Consider the way we are connected. Every television, computer and phone is consistently inundated with scenes of negativity.
We are the epitome of capitalism. We are selfish, living in our own little cocoon, fulfilling our desires. We know somewhat of the suffering that others go through around us and around the world, yet many do not care. They are concerned only with the basics. The family, car, house, dog, and perhaps holiday home and acceptable circle of friends, not to mention an acceptable amount of money.
We are all victims of the silent shout. We believe that God or some greater power will come to our aid, help us in our inner and outer anguish. We still hope that we will become celebrities, rock stars, media moguls, oil sheiks, billionaires, do well in the share market and least of all win lotto. We know that these people have spent their entire lives, time and money pursuing their dream, and that luck, particularly in the latter, is given only to a select few, yet we want instant material happiness. Our world is ever so gradually sliding. Where are our manners, our basic respect for fellow human beings?
We have not really changed in our quest to survive. Some might say surviving has become no less difficult, simply somewhat more comfortable. In all our conveniences we, particularly in first world countries, have become lazy and stupid in our ignorance and selfishness. Where is our solution to global warming? Our temperature and sea levels rise more and more every year. Where is our cure for HIV and AIDS? Yet about as many die from aids as simple diarrhea in third world countries, because we have failed to assist in educating them of a simple and cheap remedy. Where is our cure for cancer? Just about everything will give you cancer these days, and you can get cancer everywhere. Why are there no beds in hospitals, and not enough people to care for the sick and ailing?
They say before long, everyone's average height will be 6 foot because of the hormones in our food, and depression and diabetes will be two of the major killers. We, here, have become morbidly obese while our fellow men across the ocean, some even in our own countries, are dying from lack of food and proper healthcare. Our children have gone to the streets and the clubs, to the alcohol and drugs, and find solace in destruction and violence and killing of others their own age, not to mention more and more, themselves. We are misguided, delusional, and oblivious, yet we are capable of so much better. Who am I to make these statements, these assumptions of knowledge? No-one, but in the age of free speech and instant global communication, I wish to make a point.
I propose to open eyes and re-align goals. I propose to build more hospitals by spending less money on the consumer industry, to give more of the desolate and destitute a chance, and not to be guided by prejudices and obstinacy. I dream of spreading the word of consurgo. In every major city, let there be at least one who sees the state we are in. Think Fight Club, but without any violence or destruction. Spread the word, and let there be more understanding and consideration for different points of view. Mark the sign of the new revolution everywhere until it is noticed, and let them wonder. Let everyone wonder what the goal is, what drives it, what is our purpose. Let them think for themselves for a while.
Then, perhaps, they will know how many we are leaving behind in our fight to have the most. How many voices have been silences, and how many people in the world have become lost, purposeless, hopeless, and disillusioned in this day and age. We can only rescue ourselves. Gather your hope, your courage and compassion, and know that every individual makes an impact. Open your eyes. So much more than a thought this world can ever hold.
Consurgo.
We are the epitome of capitalism. We are selfish, living in our own little cocoon, fulfilling our desires. We know somewhat of the suffering that others go through around us and around the world, yet many do not care. They are concerned only with the basics. The family, car, house, dog, and perhaps holiday home and acceptable circle of friends, not to mention an acceptable amount of money.
We are all victims of the silent shout. We believe that God or some greater power will come to our aid, help us in our inner and outer anguish. We still hope that we will become celebrities, rock stars, media moguls, oil sheiks, billionaires, do well in the share market and least of all win lotto. We know that these people have spent their entire lives, time and money pursuing their dream, and that luck, particularly in the latter, is given only to a select few, yet we want instant material happiness. Our world is ever so gradually sliding. Where are our manners, our basic respect for fellow human beings?
We have not really changed in our quest to survive. Some might say surviving has become no less difficult, simply somewhat more comfortable. In all our conveniences we, particularly in first world countries, have become lazy and stupid in our ignorance and selfishness. Where is our solution to global warming? Our temperature and sea levels rise more and more every year. Where is our cure for HIV and AIDS? Yet about as many die from aids as simple diarrhea in third world countries, because we have failed to assist in educating them of a simple and cheap remedy. Where is our cure for cancer? Just about everything will give you cancer these days, and you can get cancer everywhere. Why are there no beds in hospitals, and not enough people to care for the sick and ailing?
They say before long, everyone's average height will be 6 foot because of the hormones in our food, and depression and diabetes will be two of the major killers. We, here, have become morbidly obese while our fellow men across the ocean, some even in our own countries, are dying from lack of food and proper healthcare. Our children have gone to the streets and the clubs, to the alcohol and drugs, and find solace in destruction and violence and killing of others their own age, not to mention more and more, themselves. We are misguided, delusional, and oblivious, yet we are capable of so much better. Who am I to make these statements, these assumptions of knowledge? No-one, but in the age of free speech and instant global communication, I wish to make a point.
I propose to open eyes and re-align goals. I propose to build more hospitals by spending less money on the consumer industry, to give more of the desolate and destitute a chance, and not to be guided by prejudices and obstinacy. I dream of spreading the word of consurgo. In every major city, let there be at least one who sees the state we are in. Think Fight Club, but without any violence or destruction. Spread the word, and let there be more understanding and consideration for different points of view. Mark the sign of the new revolution everywhere until it is noticed, and let them wonder. Let everyone wonder what the goal is, what drives it, what is our purpose. Let them think for themselves for a while.
Then, perhaps, they will know how many we are leaving behind in our fight to have the most. How many voices have been silences, and how many people in the world have become lost, purposeless, hopeless, and disillusioned in this day and age. We can only rescue ourselves. Gather your hope, your courage and compassion, and know that every individual makes an impact. Open your eyes. So much more than a thought this world can ever hold.
Consurgo.
Cloning
the word clone has been applied to cells as well as organisms, so that a group of stem cells stemming from a single cells is also called a clone. Usually the members of a clone are identical in their inherited characteristics, that is, in their genes except for any differences caused by mutation. Identical twins, for example, who originate by the division of a single fertilized egg, are members of a clone, whereas nonidentical twins, who derive from two separate fertilized eggs, are not clones (Microsoft Encarta 97 Encyclopedia). There are two known ways that we can clone humans. The first way involved splitting an embryo into several halves and creating many new individuals from that embryo. The second method of cloning a human involves taking cells from an already existing human being and cloning them, in turn creating other individuals that are identical to that particular person.It is an idea that has abounded and rebounded throughout science fiction novels, and now seems a distinct possibility in the not too distant future. Sure, there will no doubt be technical problems in the production of human cloning, but the real issue is the moral and ethical side of it. Is it right? if a clone turns our to be identical, down to the last personality quirk, would we lose our sense of identity? Would clones be made for mere acceptance for the way thins our, and not include the natural human instinct to question and explore what is and was, and would be only fit to serve? Would they make clones for the army, killing machines that don't seem so human after all, and name their regiments Bob, John and Alex, with Alex including Alex 1 to 200? Will they, (like in the movie The Island) grow clones to adulthood for 'spare parts' for their wealthy counterparts?The movie the Island, in itself, presenter several interesting subjects on the issue of cloning. The owners and pioneers of the facility that held the clones hid the truth from the world, that the clones were just as human as anyone else. One interesting scene was the presentation of the idea to interested buyers by an owner, claiming that the clones were mere vegetables. he did not say that the first run did not work, on the grounds that the clones could not function and grow without proper mental stimulation and social interaction.
Roman Religion
Roman religion, at its earliest, was orientated around what we call a pagan or multi-deity worship, along with a strong belief in the respect and worship of history and specifically ancestors and family. Later it was the respect paid to ancestors that set up many of Rome’s rulers, such as Julius Caesar to be consequently deified. The Romans worshipped a number of gods, each of which was responsible for a separate section of daily life and home. Religion at the household level included Janus, spirit of the doorway, Vesta, guardian of the hearth, Penates, the guardian spirits of the store chamber, and Lares, the guardians of the fields and family property. There was also in some cities small temples for those of the same profession. Religion at the state level was controlled by a number of colleges of priests, but involved far more major deities that included Mars, Neptune, Apollo, Venus, Mercury, Jupiter, Juno, and Hera. During the end of the Republic and that of the Empire, religion and cults from foreign nations became widespread, such as Hellenistic idealism, Egyptian worship and others that came later such as Mithraism. Romans placed great value on the importance of sacrifice and ritual, but the larger festivals that were held honored both the gods and human achievement. They had no sacred writings other than the formulae of prayers, and so were free to think and believe what they wanted about their gods, provided that rituals were performed correctly.
Religion in Rome began with the very story of its founding. The legend, both extremely popular and widely believed, stated that the twin grandsons of the legitimate ruler of Alba Longa, one of the seven original hills of Rome, were cast into the Tiber River by an usurper to the throne but were miraculously saved and suckled by a she-wolf. The twins, Romulus and Remus, were soon found and raised by a shepherd and one grown eventually restored the throne to their grandfather and decided to found a city of their own. Romulus founded a settlement on the Palatine Hill in 753BC, and later killed his brother Remus in a quarrel. Both were respected in Rome as deities and celebrated during the festival of Lupercalia. Following that, the Etruscan take over of Rome and influence from the sixth century onward was once of the earlier origins of the major ideals and values in their religion. The importance of life after death, as evident in the elaborate necropolis or cities of the dead and the tombs of the Etruscans along with the triad of gods Tini, Uni and Merva were two main concepts carried over and consequently transferred into the gods Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. Divination (the act of finding out whether the gods approved of an action by studying the organs of animals and the flight of birds) was also introduced by the Etruscans. During the fifth century the site of the oracle of the sibyl or priestess in the Greek city of Cumae became an important feature in their religion. The prophecies of the sibyl, which were written in Greek, were collected by the Romans and kept permanently in the form of the Sibylline Books or Books of Fate. Generally these prophecies, when interpreted, instructed the Romans to introduce a new Greek god or ritual into the framework of traditional Roman religion, thus resulting in a slew of similarities to religions of the east. Greek influence eventuated in the Roman triad of gods becoming affiliated with their Greek counterparts – Jupiter (protector of the state) with Zeus, Juno (protector of women) with Hera and Minerva (patroness of craftsmen) with Athena. Mars was associated with Ares and Neptune with Poseidon. Rome assimilated a huge number of gods from foreign countries that included various Celtic gods. Besides them , the Roman worship of spirits was even more impressively wide ranging. The spirits, or numina, included the protectors of the household, but other major ones involved The Manes, the spirits of the dead, a possible origin of the idea of each person having a soul, The Fates, rather abstract in respect to the mother and process of birth, The Furies, the female spirits appointed to carry out the vengeance of the gods upon men and women, and finally Nymphs, female personifications of natural objects such as rivers, springs, trees and mountains.
Romans combined religion and state, which resulted in religion and politics being very much interspersed, and in religion being manipulated for political reasons. The separation in class between the patrician aristocracy and the plebeians was very much evident in religion for the patricians were politicians and had a great measure of control over the state religion, whereas plebeians were excluded from any part in administration of religion and important priesthoods. This allowed for a greater measure of control over the masses by the patrician class, and often resulted in an interpretation of religion that fitted them personally. There were a number of colleges or groups of priests and priestesses who looked after specific areas of the state religion. Divination was also an important aspect of the state religion but was utilized by a magistrate with imperium before an important civil or military action. The head of all state priests was called the pontifex maximus, who unlike the other priests, was elected for life by the people, and was an esteemed political role often held by Rome’s later rulers. The position was only open to patricians until 254BC, when a plebeian occupied the post. Originally devised to assist the Etruscan kings in all matter of things religious, once the monarchy was overthrown the pontifex maximus took over all the religious duties and rituals previously done by the king, but was also originally prohibited from assuming any political office or sit in the Senate as a precaution to prevent further tyranny, a feature which changed during the Empire. Amongst the full colleges of priests there were the pontiffs, augurs, fetiales, flamens and vestal virgins. The 16 pontiffs were nominated for life and advised chief magistrates, established the earliest criminal code, and arranged the calendar, which included fixing the dates of religious festivals and special events, along with announcing which days on which there was to be no business. The 16 Augurs were also nominated for life and supervised and interpreted the auspices, the divination of discovering the gods meaning depending on the pattern of birds flight in the sky, in a ceremony known as taking the auspices. The Fetiales, of which there were 20, interpreted laws governing international relations, were in charge of rituals for declaring war and concluding treaties, and protected foreign ambassadors and supervised extradition. The Flamens were 15 but had 3 nominated major flamines, those of Jupiter, Mars and Quirinus. The Flamens were specialized priests of individual gods, to whom they sacrifices. The Vestal Virgins, who numbered 4 to 6 and were chosen from children aged 10 to 16, cared for the sacred fire of Vesta, goddess of the hearth, and were responsible for seeing that the flame did not go out. They were to remain celibate and unmarried for thirty years, devoting themselves to offering sacrifices and performing the other rites ordained by law. During the first ten years their duty was to learn their functions, the second ten to perform them, and during the remaining ten to teach others.
Roman religious festivals known from ancient time were few in number. So many new festivals were adopted eventually that they outnumbered the work days on the calendar. Among the most important of the Roman religious festivals were the Saturnalia, the Lupercalia, the Equiria and the Secular games. The Satunalia was celebrated for seven days, from December 17th to 23rd, where all business was suspended, slaves were given temporary freedom and gifts were exchanged. The Lupercalia was an ancient festival originally honoring Lupercus, a pastoral god of the Italians. The Equiria, a festival in honour of Mars, was celebrated on February 27th and March 14h , traditionally the times when new military campaigns were prepared. The Secular games, which included both athletic spectacles and sacrifices, were held at irregular intervals, traditionally once only in about every century, supposedly held when the last person who had witnessed the previous Secular games died, marking the beginning of a new era.
One of the best known facts about Roman games and spectacles is that of the gladiators, and of the coliseum. The gladiatorial games came from the concept of what was originally two slaves fighting at a funeral to honour the dead man with blood, which eventually became bigger and bloodier to evolve into a form of entertainment for the crowds. The gladiator was a professional fighter who fought against animals, condemned criminals and often other gladiators, very often to the death. They came from both slaves, convicted criminals, and prisoners of war, with the occasional volunteers. The choice of the gladiators survival depended on their entertainment value and the will of the audience, and a successful gladiator was allowed to retire or be released.
The responsibility for the organization of public festivals and spectacles fell to the curule aedile, (which also included responsibility for the cities food supply). The aedile would essentially need to be wealthy, for the more lavish the games he presented, the more popular he was and more likely to succeed in any electoral ambitions he had. One of the most notable aediles was Caesar in 65BC – it was said he imported exotic animals in frequently, flooded the coliseum for naval battles, and once had so many gladiators in that his political rivals hurried to pass a bill limiting the number of gladiators one could have. An important factor in Rome’s’ spectacles were those of the triumph. The ceremony consisted of a spectacular parade, opened by the chiefs of conquered peoples (afterwards executed in the Tullianum), followed by wagons of gold and other valuable spoils captured during the campaign (including slaves), musicians, dancers, placards drawn with scenes of the war, then came the victorious general at the head of his troops. Other celebrations included chariot racing, one of the oldest forms of entertainment used in special circuses which could hold over 100, 000 people, and the lesser dramatic theatre, with the first permanent theatre being built by Pompey in 55BC.
Rome’s religion, games and spectacles were a huge part of life from the very beginning right until the fall of Rome. The importance of various festivals and celebrations as well as religious positions held both a general and political value. The aedile was very much responsible for providing ‘bread and circuses’ for the urban mob, and by doing so ensured his political success and popularity. Without that provision life in a very much overcrowded Rome would be extremely difficult, and one of the main reasons for the city’s attraction to the plebs. Religion changed from the basic theology it was in ancient times, to the multi-faceted, multicultural and very much political deal it was during the time of the Empire, to finally the switch by the emperor Constantine to Christianity. Constantine knew how important religious values were to the Romans, and to make the transition smoother incorporated many of their pagan beliefs. One example is the 25th of December celebrated as the birth of Christ, which is also consequently the same date of the Natalis Invicti, a feast date of the religion of Sol Invictis which precluded Christianity in Rome. Religion and the various games and spectacles were very much tied together and interspersed, providing Rome for a foundation to the structure of both politics and life in general. They were the way the citizens of Rome were to be kept in line, a form of control used by the elite, and a measure of power. Year 11 Ancient History
Topic 3.1
Religion, Games and Spectacles
Websites
Roman Religion, available at
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/religion.html (accessed 15 Oct 2006)
Caly et al. July 2005, Ancient Roman Religion (online), available at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Roman_religion (accessed 20 Oct 2006)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sol_Invictus
^ New Catholic Encyclopedia, "Constantine the Great", 1967
Nova Roma – Multiple authors
http://www.novaroma.org/ludi/html/history.html
Books
Bradley, P. 1990, Ancient Rome: Using Evidence, Hodder Education, Australia
Adkins, L., Adkins, R.A. 1994, Handbook to life in Ancient Rome, Published Facts on File, Australia
Religion in Rome began with the very story of its founding. The legend, both extremely popular and widely believed, stated that the twin grandsons of the legitimate ruler of Alba Longa, one of the seven original hills of Rome, were cast into the Tiber River by an usurper to the throne but were miraculously saved and suckled by a she-wolf. The twins, Romulus and Remus, were soon found and raised by a shepherd and one grown eventually restored the throne to their grandfather and decided to found a city of their own. Romulus founded a settlement on the Palatine Hill in 753BC, and later killed his brother Remus in a quarrel. Both were respected in Rome as deities and celebrated during the festival of Lupercalia. Following that, the Etruscan take over of Rome and influence from the sixth century onward was once of the earlier origins of the major ideals and values in their religion. The importance of life after death, as evident in the elaborate necropolis or cities of the dead and the tombs of the Etruscans along with the triad of gods Tini, Uni and Merva were two main concepts carried over and consequently transferred into the gods Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. Divination (the act of finding out whether the gods approved of an action by studying the organs of animals and the flight of birds) was also introduced by the Etruscans. During the fifth century the site of the oracle of the sibyl or priestess in the Greek city of Cumae became an important feature in their religion. The prophecies of the sibyl, which were written in Greek, were collected by the Romans and kept permanently in the form of the Sibylline Books or Books of Fate. Generally these prophecies, when interpreted, instructed the Romans to introduce a new Greek god or ritual into the framework of traditional Roman religion, thus resulting in a slew of similarities to religions of the east. Greek influence eventuated in the Roman triad of gods becoming affiliated with their Greek counterparts – Jupiter (protector of the state) with Zeus, Juno (protector of women) with Hera and Minerva (patroness of craftsmen) with Athena. Mars was associated with Ares and Neptune with Poseidon. Rome assimilated a huge number of gods from foreign countries that included various Celtic gods. Besides them , the Roman worship of spirits was even more impressively wide ranging. The spirits, or numina, included the protectors of the household, but other major ones involved The Manes, the spirits of the dead, a possible origin of the idea of each person having a soul, The Fates, rather abstract in respect to the mother and process of birth, The Furies, the female spirits appointed to carry out the vengeance of the gods upon men and women, and finally Nymphs, female personifications of natural objects such as rivers, springs, trees and mountains.
Romans combined religion and state, which resulted in religion and politics being very much interspersed, and in religion being manipulated for political reasons. The separation in class between the patrician aristocracy and the plebeians was very much evident in religion for the patricians were politicians and had a great measure of control over the state religion, whereas plebeians were excluded from any part in administration of religion and important priesthoods. This allowed for a greater measure of control over the masses by the patrician class, and often resulted in an interpretation of religion that fitted them personally. There were a number of colleges or groups of priests and priestesses who looked after specific areas of the state religion. Divination was also an important aspect of the state religion but was utilized by a magistrate with imperium before an important civil or military action. The head of all state priests was called the pontifex maximus, who unlike the other priests, was elected for life by the people, and was an esteemed political role often held by Rome’s later rulers. The position was only open to patricians until 254BC, when a plebeian occupied the post. Originally devised to assist the Etruscan kings in all matter of things religious, once the monarchy was overthrown the pontifex maximus took over all the religious duties and rituals previously done by the king, but was also originally prohibited from assuming any political office or sit in the Senate as a precaution to prevent further tyranny, a feature which changed during the Empire. Amongst the full colleges of priests there were the pontiffs, augurs, fetiales, flamens and vestal virgins. The 16 pontiffs were nominated for life and advised chief magistrates, established the earliest criminal code, and arranged the calendar, which included fixing the dates of religious festivals and special events, along with announcing which days on which there was to be no business. The 16 Augurs were also nominated for life and supervised and interpreted the auspices, the divination of discovering the gods meaning depending on the pattern of birds flight in the sky, in a ceremony known as taking the auspices. The Fetiales, of which there were 20, interpreted laws governing international relations, were in charge of rituals for declaring war and concluding treaties, and protected foreign ambassadors and supervised extradition. The Flamens were 15 but had 3 nominated major flamines, those of Jupiter, Mars and Quirinus. The Flamens were specialized priests of individual gods, to whom they sacrifices. The Vestal Virgins, who numbered 4 to 6 and were chosen from children aged 10 to 16, cared for the sacred fire of Vesta, goddess of the hearth, and were responsible for seeing that the flame did not go out. They were to remain celibate and unmarried for thirty years, devoting themselves to offering sacrifices and performing the other rites ordained by law. During the first ten years their duty was to learn their functions, the second ten to perform them, and during the remaining ten to teach others.
Roman religious festivals known from ancient time were few in number. So many new festivals were adopted eventually that they outnumbered the work days on the calendar. Among the most important of the Roman religious festivals were the Saturnalia, the Lupercalia, the Equiria and the Secular games. The Satunalia was celebrated for seven days, from December 17th to 23rd, where all business was suspended, slaves were given temporary freedom and gifts were exchanged. The Lupercalia was an ancient festival originally honoring Lupercus, a pastoral god of the Italians. The Equiria, a festival in honour of Mars, was celebrated on February 27th and March 14h , traditionally the times when new military campaigns were prepared. The Secular games, which included both athletic spectacles and sacrifices, were held at irregular intervals, traditionally once only in about every century, supposedly held when the last person who had witnessed the previous Secular games died, marking the beginning of a new era.
One of the best known facts about Roman games and spectacles is that of the gladiators, and of the coliseum. The gladiatorial games came from the concept of what was originally two slaves fighting at a funeral to honour the dead man with blood, which eventually became bigger and bloodier to evolve into a form of entertainment for the crowds. The gladiator was a professional fighter who fought against animals, condemned criminals and often other gladiators, very often to the death. They came from both slaves, convicted criminals, and prisoners of war, with the occasional volunteers. The choice of the gladiators survival depended on their entertainment value and the will of the audience, and a successful gladiator was allowed to retire or be released.
The responsibility for the organization of public festivals and spectacles fell to the curule aedile, (which also included responsibility for the cities food supply). The aedile would essentially need to be wealthy, for the more lavish the games he presented, the more popular he was and more likely to succeed in any electoral ambitions he had. One of the most notable aediles was Caesar in 65BC – it was said he imported exotic animals in frequently, flooded the coliseum for naval battles, and once had so many gladiators in that his political rivals hurried to pass a bill limiting the number of gladiators one could have. An important factor in Rome’s’ spectacles were those of the triumph. The ceremony consisted of a spectacular parade, opened by the chiefs of conquered peoples (afterwards executed in the Tullianum), followed by wagons of gold and other valuable spoils captured during the campaign (including slaves), musicians, dancers, placards drawn with scenes of the war, then came the victorious general at the head of his troops. Other celebrations included chariot racing, one of the oldest forms of entertainment used in special circuses which could hold over 100, 000 people, and the lesser dramatic theatre, with the first permanent theatre being built by Pompey in 55BC.
Rome’s religion, games and spectacles were a huge part of life from the very beginning right until the fall of Rome. The importance of various festivals and celebrations as well as religious positions held both a general and political value. The aedile was very much responsible for providing ‘bread and circuses’ for the urban mob, and by doing so ensured his political success and popularity. Without that provision life in a very much overcrowded Rome would be extremely difficult, and one of the main reasons for the city’s attraction to the plebs. Religion changed from the basic theology it was in ancient times, to the multi-faceted, multicultural and very much political deal it was during the time of the Empire, to finally the switch by the emperor Constantine to Christianity. Constantine knew how important religious values were to the Romans, and to make the transition smoother incorporated many of their pagan beliefs. One example is the 25th of December celebrated as the birth of Christ, which is also consequently the same date of the Natalis Invicti, a feast date of the religion of Sol Invictis which precluded Christianity in Rome. Religion and the various games and spectacles were very much tied together and interspersed, providing Rome for a foundation to the structure of both politics and life in general. They were the way the citizens of Rome were to be kept in line, a form of control used by the elite, and a measure of power. Year 11 Ancient History
Topic 3.1
Religion, Games and Spectacles
Websites
Roman Religion, available at
http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/religion.html (accessed 15 Oct 2006)
Caly et al. July 2005, Ancient Roman Religion (online), available at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Roman_religion (accessed 20 Oct 2006)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sol_Invictus
^ New Catholic Encyclopedia, "Constantine the Great", 1967
Nova Roma – Multiple authors
http://www.novaroma.org/ludi/html/history.html
Books
Bradley, P. 1990, Ancient Rome: Using Evidence, Hodder Education, Australia
Adkins, L., Adkins, R.A. 1994, Handbook to life in Ancient Rome, Published Facts on File, Australia
Anarchist Utopia
While searching for topics on which to muse, I found an essay prescribing we all kick the government out and start a new world order that sounded suspiciously like socialism. It stated that there would be no social classes, and each individual just that, an individual. There would be laws on which all agreed, and no monetary system. The society would supposedly survive on the principle of altruism, which states that all people care for each other. Right and wrong would be determined by a persons inherit rights, and they who violated such right would be punished by the whole society accordingly.Now, although it doesn't sound too bad so far, it wouldn't work.
Throughout history we have functioned on the rule of social classes and the monetary system. Next, the essay prescribes the lack of an education system, that each generation teach the next. There would be no circulation or discovery of new knowledge, no disputation. It then states that, 'in the ideal society, where the aforementioned principles are taught, people don't need to work in order to buy material possessions. Instead, the sole motivation to work is to gather the necessities of life (i.e. water, food, shelter etc) and each generation would teach what is needed to be known in order to get these things'. Simply existing on the basic necessities in this almost indigenous society would never allow it to grow and evolve as we know those who have followed the same way have. The essay then goes on to further explain the treatment of conflict/violence, in much the same way you would expect a tribe to do. The economy is proved to be entirely socialistic, with 'any luxury item the individual wants outside of the society to be obtained through trade'. That particular sentence indicates that such a society is likely to be mutually exclusive, as has been indicated by similar societies in the past. It is interesting to note the admittance of the amount of people likely to live in such a society, which is very small, and that sole maintenance of the society comes of the acceptance and abidance of its principles, (stated as a 'contract'). Despite the way its fundamentals have been described previously, the society would have TV, music etc, that 'nothing will be censored, because that is the way people are informed'. As it is likely this allowance of information to cause dissatisfaction amongst those following the anarchist society, it continually stresses the importance of abidance to the 'contract'. Such a society would never work. History, and human nature, are proof enough.
Throughout history we have functioned on the rule of social classes and the monetary system. Next, the essay prescribes the lack of an education system, that each generation teach the next. There would be no circulation or discovery of new knowledge, no disputation. It then states that, 'in the ideal society, where the aforementioned principles are taught, people don't need to work in order to buy material possessions. Instead, the sole motivation to work is to gather the necessities of life (i.e. water, food, shelter etc) and each generation would teach what is needed to be known in order to get these things'. Simply existing on the basic necessities in this almost indigenous society would never allow it to grow and evolve as we know those who have followed the same way have. The essay then goes on to further explain the treatment of conflict/violence, in much the same way you would expect a tribe to do. The economy is proved to be entirely socialistic, with 'any luxury item the individual wants outside of the society to be obtained through trade'. That particular sentence indicates that such a society is likely to be mutually exclusive, as has been indicated by similar societies in the past. It is interesting to note the admittance of the amount of people likely to live in such a society, which is very small, and that sole maintenance of the society comes of the acceptance and abidance of its principles, (stated as a 'contract'). Despite the way its fundamentals have been described previously, the society would have TV, music etc, that 'nothing will be censored, because that is the way people are informed'. As it is likely this allowance of information to cause dissatisfaction amongst those following the anarchist society, it continually stresses the importance of abidance to the 'contract'. Such a society would never work. History, and human nature, are proof enough.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
