great works ii – 2850 jta 12:25-2:05: love letters from the world

“Floating Worlds”

As some of you noted, there are quite a few red light districts in this country (albeit illegal, except for in Nevada). It’s a profession that seems global in scope (and I wonder if there are any countries where it really does not exist).

In many of these places, however illegal they may be, the police often look away. Many of you note that there are indeed benefits to this profession, but there are also many negative elements. Questions to consider: Should it be legalized? In Saikaku’s floating world, is the narrator justified in her choice of life

Some of the more salient benefits that you observed:

increase in revenue (tourism, related business, both legal and illegal); a more tolerant attitude towards sexuality; source of income for young people; source of income for people who would have no other means of supporting themselves and their families; historical significance (some of these areas are quite old, and show a kind of evolution of a part of this society, throughout the years). 

Some of the less savory elements to this profession:

increase in crime in the surrounding area (drugs, theft, but also violent crimes); discomfort and/or a lack of safety for people in the surrounding area; sex trafficking; abuse of the prostitute; child abuse; increase in the spread of disease (would legalization help to decrease this problem?).

Ihara Saikaku, from Life of a Sensuous Woman: The narrator’s various and often contradictory relationships with men compels Saikaku to present several kinds of ambiguity.

 Several comments points to the love/hate relationship the narrator has with her profession. At times she seems to enjoy it, and at other times, it distresses her. There is the comment that although she feels guilt, she soon forgets the guilt. What do others think? Does the narrator feel true guilt? Should she feel guilt? Does she feel true regret? Should she? Susanna makes a very interesting comment, when she says that after the narrator’s failed relationship with the Samurai, that Saikaku sets the tone for the entire narrative, that love isn’t possible in this world. What do others think?

Others point out the ambiguity between love and lust, that we began discussing in class. Questions that came up: Is the narrator actually looking for love, or is she satisfied with the physical relationship? Does she actually find love? What is her definition of love (or does she have one)? What is your definition of love? If she does find love, is there a kind of progression or disintegration in her ability to find love (Jorge G.’s interesting idea)? Does she truly try to connect with others, or is she often manipulative?

Maria brings up the idea of her being “married” to the priest; in fact, she is his “temporary wife.” Does she experience anything of true marriage, or is this “marriage” simply a euphemism for prostitution?

Some other questions your comments provoked:

Is her narrative a confession, and if so is her “confession” an apology? And if you agree with that, who is she apologizing to? (Daphne’s question) Is she in fact simply apologizing to herself? Does she need to apologize to anyone else? Do any of us?

Is she happy in her life? Does she delude herself when trying to have a positive attitude about her situation?

Did she lead an immoral life, and if so, whose value system are you judging her by, hers or yours?

Do we have the right to judge others from our own value system?

Does she take responsibility for her life?

Does she gain maturity and insight as she grows older?

Journey to the West (pdf): The Heroic Journey

Thanks for all of your perceptive, thought-provoking posts!  I’ve organized your posts according to the character you’ve discussed.

Monkey:

Muneeb; Jacqueline; Susanna; Jiwoo; Aly; Preston; BIntou; Keauna; Nicole; Maria; Onu; Joaquin; Rebecca.

 Some comment rightly that Monkey isn’t satisfied with his “ordinary” world, specifically with the future, and so is compelled to leave his comfort zone and go in search of what he is missing. Aly makes an interesting comment, that as “soon as the boy gives his a name, he [Monkey] feels more important.” He is willing to “face new challenges” (Jacqueline) and he is curious (Annie), and ready to take up the call to adventure (Preston, Bintou, Nicole) all of these traits are important to the hero. Susanna points out that Monkey easily passes through the first four stages of the journey, but he does have problems when faced with obstacles. Maria mentions that although he takes ups the call to any adventure, he “gives up” easily when criticized. The question is, does he truly learn and grow? Joaquin says that he is on the path, but has not yet learned enough. Some believe that Monkey does finally learn that all obstacles are part of the path (Jiwoo) and so is on the way to Enlightenment. Keauna makes a very interesting remark, when she points out that Monkey had been a “great sage” of heaven, but that was not enough to win him salvation; he must learn to “humble himself” so that he can truly follow the right path. Onu points out that the period Monkey was imprisoned served as a time for contemplation and the threshold to the new world, when he is released. Rebecca’s comment is quite a perceptive one, in that she notes that Monkey’s deepest fear is facing his own mortality, and isn’t that the fear we all face, and something we will all one day have to reconcile ourselves to? In this sense, does Monkey perhaps need to learn that true Enlightenment is the way we behave with each other?

 Tripitaka:

Jorge G.; Francesca; Annie; Daphne; Jorge M.; Joseph; Tara; Katerina; Farhan.

One comment points to Tripitaka as the true hero, but the question is, where is the proof in the text? Remember to use quotes to support your assertions. Others of you point out that Tripitaka may have some problems, such as easily giving up (Jorge M.) or even not really wanting any helpers (Monkey/Pigsy) as Francesca points out. Another disagrees, saying that Tripitaka very graciously accepts his helpers, so this is another question to ponder. Joseph and Tara both suggest that Tripitaka takes up the “call” to adventure when he accepts the obedience cap for Monkey. So here, is Tripitaka accepting his role as leader?   Just a question. Katerina points out that although Tripitaka is in charge of this expedition, he is not a true leader, because he cannot truly act. Farhan agrees with these, yet reminds us that Tripitaka is indeed compassionate, and that is also an important aspect of the hero (someone who is trying to get to a sense of self-realization, and helping others to get there, too).

Journey to the West, Chapter 1: Wake-to-Vacuity

Thank-you all for your perceptive and (often) thought provoking comments!   Please read over my response, as I have pointed to the more salient responses.  These responses will help you as we continue reading, and will also help to guide your essay writing and midterm exam.

A few of you point to the validity of Monkey’s quest.

Indeed, Monkey has “midlife crisis” (Jamie) which is funny but absolutely valid, because we must ask ourselves (as we asked ourselves in class) if Monkey’s quest for immortality is, indeed, the right quest. If there is an “emptiness” (Muneeb’s term, and this is a great word to use, in light of your assignment) in his life, then it is important that he acknowledges that emptiness. A question: what is Monkey filling that emptiness with? Also, it is important that Monkey leave his comfort zone (as for us, too) but again, when is something stifling our growth or nurturing it?

Some of you also point to a positive trait of Monkey, and that is his fortitude and willingness to act. Action is very important, and as you continue reading, be very attentive to see if Monkey’s actions are always the right ones. And yes, whether or not Monkey will succeed in his quest, the name Wake-to-Vacuity does seem to indicate that Monkey is (whether he realizes it right now or not) on the path to Enlightenment (Jacqueline; Francesca). As well, as Annie mentions, one needs “to break the suborn vacuity” (where Monkey is now?) in order to “wake” to vacuity, or Enlightenment.   Action is important, of course, but Aly wonders if “Monkey is all about action.”   This is an interesting point, and one we will consider in class, and Jorge M. points out that it is actually difficult to determine in he has been acting viably or not. Preston feels positive about Monkey’s actions, and says Monkey wants to “impact the world.” This is very possibly true, and we need to follow him closely in the rest of the narrative.

Generosity is also an important trait to embody, in order to reach Enlightenment, and Katerina suggests that Monkey has shown this when he decides to go through the waterfall and go on the quest for immortality, as she feels he does this, essentially, for the other Monkeys.

Wisdom: Joseph; Keauna; Bintou

This group made some interesting comments about Monkey and wisdom. On the one hand, he does seem to lack wisdom, in his inability to accept both death, and the responsibility for one’s others. As well, this group asks, is Monkey truly and viably active, or just restless?   On the other hand, as this group (Bintou) points out, does Monkey show aspects of wisdom, when he leaves his comfortable life to find more meaning?

Wisdom: Maria; Nicole; Tara

This group starts off by making a very important comment (Maria) that “to be wise is not only to be smart bu understand what will make the journey to Enlightenment successful.”   Yes, the fact that Monkey is asking questions is very positive. Does he do this enough?   Nicole points out that Monkey recognizes the meaninglessness of his life (or at least he feels it’s meaningless) and this is also very important, because one large question in this text is: what makes our lives meaningful?   And, yes, as Tara points out, Monkey does seem to dismiss the Woodcutter’s life immediately.

Wisdom:   Songyun; Susanna; Jiwoo; Daphne

This group points out that wisdom can be seen in various areas: his willingness to grow his knowledge base and have other experiences; his desire to connect to something more spiritual (and we’ll look at this further, to see if that really is one of his goals); to strive for “infinity” (Daphne’s interesting word) that wisdom is essentially a continual process and not a goal. nd is this what Monkey has been thinking, that his search is a goal and not a process, and is that the true quest or not?

Patience: Onu; Fahran; Joaquin

This group points out that Monkey certainly shows patience in that he has spent, apparently tireless, years on his journey (Onu; Joquin). It is interesting that Fahran points out that determination is also a kind of patience, which I think is quite a valid comment. It will be interesting to see if Monkey continues to be patient, during the rest of his journey.

Hello Everyone,

Thanks to all of you who responded.  You made some really excellent, perceptive comments.

Tao poetry: 

The Tao Te Ching is a set of several poems (you have seen only a few here) generally attributed to the poet Lao Tzu, and possibly dating from the 4^th century B.C. E.  These poems are celebrating the philosophy of Taoism, a philosophy that attempts to show the path to spiritual enlightenment. 

Below I have gleaned the more salient comments and interpretations from your peers.  Notice that you all begin to get an excellent sense of what these poems of the Tao are saying.  These comments will also be important and helpful to remember, when you’re reading Journey to the West:

#25

(Daphne; Nicole)

The idea of connection or being connected is indeed strong here, that all things are somehow interconnected in our universe.  Here some people also see the idea of a higher being, or god, or presence, some “greatness.”

#1

(Joseph; Jorge)

This poem points to the paradox of the Tao, that our existence is both manifest in this world, and invisible, at the same time.  One needs to let go of one’s desires Joseph) to see the truth.  This poem also introduces one of the largest ideas of Tao, and that is that the Tao cannot be named or defined, as it is mystery and ambiguity, and one must simply accept this

#10

(Maria; Rebecca; Jorge)

 There is the idea that finding “balance” is a way to the path of having a fulfilled life, and the ideas of acceptance and patience.  This “balance” can also be see as the intrinsic connection between opposites or “dichotomies” as Jorge puts it.  There is also the idea of innocence, to be “as a newborn babe” (and the idea that presenting as aspect of innocence, may help us to become actually innocent).

 #22

(Farhan; Francesca; Jamie; Onu)

There is the idea of overcoming one’s obstacles by, ironically, being humble and surrendering oneself.  Humility is a large idea that runs through all of these poems. This poem also discusses the idea of ambiguity and paradox, that opposites are often two sides of one idea.  This also contributes to the idea that one needs to be open, to be “adaptable” (Onu’s quote).   

#16

(Susanna)

There is the idea of embracing the “simplicity” of one’s existence (Susanna).   The idea of “emptiness” is in this poem, as in so many of the Tao poems; in other words, one must “empty” oneself, to surrender to what is happening, and then let the answers come to you.   

 #13

(Jacqueline; Annie; Rebecca; Tara; Muneeb; Joaquin)

Here is again the theme that we see throughout all of these poems, that to be humble, to surrender oneself to “misfortune,” or to loss, and to learn that to be “important” is not the path to a better, more fulfilled life.  This connects to the idea that accepting misfortune and disgrace will actually help to strengthen you, and help you to grow. 

 #4

(Preston; Allie)
There is the idea of the Tao as a metaphor of the mind, or that the human mind is a reflection of the Tao?  This is an interesting point.  The idea of the Tao being endless, is also in this poem, as in many of these poems.  There is also the thought that the Tao is not something to be understood, but, ironically, embraced (even as we do not understand it), to embrace the mystery of life.

Yes, you all make very astute comments about the connections between these works: There is a sense of Absurdism, of course, and Nihilism (Stephen’s nice phrase, a humanity “caught in an unsolvable situation); a sense of literal and metaphorical emptiness; Fritz’s nice comment about “song” and the inference about the hope that music (and art) offer; the play between light and dark, entrapment, despair, hopelessness, a frozen, lifeless world, the memory of a once beautiful and viable world.

I’ve copied the poem into our blog space, and I want to continue discussing this on Wed. (so just bring Vol. F, not E). Also, please remember to bring thesis statements for the Final Project.

Responses to Endgame scene anatomy:

Yes, you all discussed some interesting points of comparison and contrast between the actual script of Endgame and the production I asked you to watch: I agree that the set choice by the director lends a darker atmosphere than one might expect (does this make it more difficult to watch?); there are, indeed, slight changes in dialogue, to help to connect more viably with a contemporary audience (is this valid?); the acting choices of both Hamm and Clov (because so little actually happens, and indeed, that is a major theme in the play, that life is actually a series of meaningless, repetitive actions, these two roles are extremely challenging for actors); the idea that the actors must find internal, unstated, conflict to bring forward, because so little happens (were they successful?); the fact that the differences in these two characters need to be brought forward in the production itself; the fact that small props (like the handkerchief or the “bins”) which may not seem very important during a reading, may take on a massive role in a production.

We will continue this discussion in class on Wed.  Remember to bring your books!

Yes, you have all targeted common themes to both these texts: the idea of aging, and what this does to our perception of ourselves; the realization of how our perspective on life changes, from one of innocent happiness in youth to resigned realization as we get older; the need to try to “get back” one’s youth, or one’s former life; the nature of what is real and unreal, which of course is a large part of “Aura”; how one’s fantasy world affects one’s life (both positively and negatively); the core reason for this blur between reality/fantasy (psychological? Metaphysical? Both?); the impermanence of life; the search for true identity and self-realization (is your identity how others perceive you, or how you perceive yourself, even if these seems ridiculous or even psychotic).

We will continue this discussion in class, especially focusing on identity and the relationship between fantasy and reality in Aura.

Yes, you have all touched all the main thematic questions of the play, through the character of Miss Julie: Is this a social comment on the class structure of the late 1800s (and are we developing another class structure now? The 1% versus the 99%?)? A war between the sexes? A psychological exploration of a deeply disturbed individual?

You have all noted the following important ideas: Class structure plays a role; Strindberg seems to ask, is Julie a victim of these tension between classes, or should she be expected, nevertheless, to take control of her life? Julie seems to say that she is the literal product of her mother and father (half-woman, half-man) but is this a viable way to look at her life, or an excuse (or both)? Julie seems to be a paradox herself (as are many of Strindberg’s characters in his works) as she seems “strong” and “dominating” at some points, even abusively so, and at others utterly incapable of making a decision and “projecting” (Michael’s nice term) what Jean wants her to say. Julie’s psychology is very complex, as many of you note. She seems to long for physical intimacy with a man, and at the same time is disgusted by this. She blames her mother, largely, but we might also think about the time this was written (late 1800s).   Ruojun brings up the interesting point that Julie is actually a romantic, someone who desperately believes in love, during a time (or among people, Jean, particularly) when the idea of a perfect love was being scorned as only a fairytale by intellectuals. Ruben brings up a very interesting point when he says that Strindberg is misrepresenting his own main character; in the play, the character of Julie seems to be written sympathetically, as a complex individual, but in his comment, does Strindberg in fact reduce her to a stereotype (just something to ponder)? Think, too, about Jean’s role in all of this. He is also a very interesting, complex (and paradoxical) character.
Strindberg’s idea of the “half-woman” is quite controversial. Is he saying that Julie is not fulfilling her natural role? That she, as a woman, is only “half” the worth of a man? That there are two natures within us, as Jung would later say, the female (anima) and the male(animus)? Is Strindberg anti-feminist; does he intrinsically think of women as needing to fulfill a strict role?

Terell, stacey, mamasiray, Ruojun: dreaming and waking theme

Frank, Jessica, Lauren, Sharada: Bravery

Ruben, Maia, Dajung, Marissa: Anti-Hero

michael , allen, veronica, zheng :trial

Davida, Steven,Brian, Fritz: Nihilism.

Ivy, Alexandria: self-discovery