Great Works I: Remixing Memory

“Othello” (1995) directed by Oliver Parker is an excellent adaptation of William Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice. Even thought, the movie departs from the original play, due to the cutting of many dialogues, and an addition of new scenes, still this infusion of the author’s vision and Shakespearean genius not only changes a common perspective of the play, but also uncovers the new angles of the characters ‘souls.

The director’s accession of a chessboard in the production is a very strong allegory, while both Othello and Desdemona are the chess-pieces Iago is playing with whenever he appears as a narrator of what is to come. Iago can predict their destiny, since he controls their figures’ motion, he knows their motives and steps and he plays with them at will. Especially symbolic this moment in the culmination of the movie, when Iago drops both figures in a water. He foretells the faith of this affection. In the finale we see a boat slowly sails towards a red sky, which symbolizes the sunset of great love and passion, and the dusk of their lives. The director is interrupting this progress, and we see the Venetians sending Othello and Desdemona’s corpses, forever joined with garlands and flowers, to the depths of the sea. Therefore, the Parkers choice to draw a parallel with the chess figures and human life, interrupted by someone’s wicked game, is very remarkable and emblematic.

Also, another noteworthy feature of this adaptation is Othello’s dreams filled with images of adultery. I found this part very interesting, since it helps us to see through the Othello’s inner state, understand his feelings and see how rapidly he let his imagination to win over him. Additionally, Parker did a really great job with using “voice-over” with some critical monologues, which helps to create the complex characters and scenes. For example, when Iago is smiling to the Othello’s face, meanwhile possessed with the idea to break him. By listening to this evil monologue in his head and looking at Iago’s facial expression we are introduced to his “double-faced Janus” nature.

Furthermore, the director’s casting decisions are remarkable. Iago is a very difficult and strong character, and the actor, who plays him in the movie, not only was able to reflect his complexity, but also added some irony to his image. Kenneth Charles Branagh, who plays Iago, seems very open and modest man. It was hard for me in the beginning to associate him with an evil mastermind. But after a while, I start to notice some irony in this visual dissonance. Especially after the Iago’s legendary remark “Man should be what they seem; Or those that be not, would they might seem none!”(3.3.150) Which makes Kenneth Branagh’s Iago intense in his evil wickedness, and wonderful in his show of innocence, love and concern for his master-friend, when he is in the company of Othello.

Also, very interesting choice of director is characterization of Rodrigo, who in the play appears to us as a comic personage and an unwise prey of Iago’s manipulation, while the movie uncovers his personal drama and shifts his character from traditional minor position. Unlike Casio, who, as I think, is remained in the shadow in this adaptation .

Overall, the Parker’s production of Othello is mirroring the Shakespeare’s original play. Despite his addition to the traditional plot, he did not change the context much. His slight infusion of symbolism adds complexity to the story and keeps it compelling and moving.

I choose the painting “Othello” by Hannah Tompkins.

The most interesting aspect of this painting is the author’s selection of insignias. She uses two main contrasting colors, white and black, in order to symbolize the tragedy – the fight between good and evil, light and darkness, truth and falsehood. In addition, she uses auxiliary colors in this picture, which provide contextual connectivity with the audience and mirror the predicament of the story. For instance, green or blue color that we could see on a web, Desdemona’s face, and one small patch in the right side of Othello’s forehead represents an “infection of jealousy”, that weaves the web of intrigues, contaminates Othello’s mind and eventually kills Desdemona. The composition of the picture is also very interesting. The central figure of Othello is divided by the shadow into two parts, black and white. This represents his nature, described as an alienation of a man, trapped among his emotions and inner fight between truth and hate. The hand that stifles Desdemona, albeit matched with Othello’s, arises from the darkness possessing Iago’s colors. That could be interpreted as that the hand of Iago, rather then Othello, killed Desdemona.

Behind the Othello’s back we could see the Iago’s figure. His eyes are covered with a black mask. His hair and beard are white giving him the appearance of “goodness”, while his facial expression alludes to his success in counterfeiting his wicked intentions with a demonstration of “virtue”.

Emitting from the center of Othello’s head is the grim web that intersects with a secondary web issued from Iago. The diffusive impurity of all the colors in the web reaffirms and emphasizes Othello’s confusion and his inner struggle with all existing intrigues.

At the bottom of the picture we could see the Desdemona depiction. Her face is blue, lifeless and emotionless. Unlike Iago and Othello, her image seems pure, without adding any dark colors. The emissions of white color around her head reminds a halo, which implies at her innocence.

Allegorically, this trio, depicted by Hannah Tompkins, may be interpreted as following: negative emotions ( Iago) such as jealousy, anger and hate always exist in a human nature (Othello). They are interconnected by the same unbreakable chain or web, but each person makes the choice for himself, whether one would go on about the pride and anger, thus kills one’s inner light and truth (Desdemona), or would sided the light and truth and listen to one’s heart. There is always a choice, but general solution for everybody doesn’t exist

.

Islamic culture has devoted quite diminutive consideration to the theoretical features of the visual arts. Even thought, art was observed as a vital phenomenon. God has created the world and has given man the power to elaborate it. Beauty or aesthetics results from a mixture of the natural assets of creation and artificial involvement of human beings. I choose this piece since it’s perfectly present the idea that aestheticism of Islamic art originates from learning and talent rather then from genius and inspiration. This is the cover of Karan scripture embossed with gold and silver, and inlaid with semi-precious stones, lapis lazuli. The script itself is also aesthetic and represents a form of art in Muslim culture. Besides, calligraphy is considered dominant decorative art and we could also find numerous examples of it in the text of The Arabian Night. (The Tale of the Envious and the Envied, p 105, the example of 7 different scripts). The prevalence of calligraphy in Islamic culture is resulted from the status of the Koran as the word of God. On the other hand, metaphorical images were at times connected to magic and ascribed enchanted or therapeutic qualities. Effigies were used as talismans protected against animals and monsters.

Bringing art to perfection is the form of worshiping God. Art is viewed as created in human soul rather then being produced by mystical powers. Art was connected to the work of craftsmen and artisan and not to the individual expression of the mastermind of the artist. Moreover, it served both as a form of displaying wealth and luxury and as a status symbol for rulers and the urban elite. Art was destined to amaze, as something beautiful and unique. Various uses of ornaments, precious metals and stones, natural and botanic motives, geometrical patterns and traditional bright colors are the components of Islamic aesthesis. Likewise, in the Arabian Nights we could find a numerous depiction of the interior of the palaces or beautiful weapons and wardrobe, which also epitomizes the form of art. (The story of the porter and the three Ladies, 66-67 description of the wardrobe of the princes.) (The Twenty First Night, 54 description of the palace, furniture)

References to the art in the stories of the Arabian Nights are mostly limited to the description of decorations and valuable objects, calligraphy and craftsmanship.

My analysis focuses on three translations of the famous Li Po poem by Ezra Pound, Amy Lowell and Wai-Lim Yip.

In Pound’s version the feeling of the woman speaker is presented throughout specific phases of her emotional development. We could feel how Pound divides the poem into different strophes, in order to define more contrastively the succeeding steps of revelation. He starts with: “While my hair was still cut straight across my forehead I played about the front gate, pulling flowers.” Use of words “while “ and “still” initiates into the story an anticipated feel of sentiment, nostalgia, lost purity and succeeding frustration, experienced by the narrator before she married her extant “Lord.” However, even thought the narrative tone of the poem is melancholic, it does not possess dramatic finish, rather regretful touch about transience of time, her naïve nature and sureness in everlasting passion that is implied in “Forever and forever and forever” line. Therefore, at the start of the poem a feel of ambivalence and nostalgia is implied, and the succeeding connection of the past state of innocence, through the stage of acceptance. Even thought the second part of the poem is very emotional, still we could trace this connection between the tone of childish and carefree insouciant and the regretful gravity of a young wife suddenly made older by the loneliness and anxiety of separation. Remarkably, this poem doesn’t offer you any explicit version of what was happened. Yes, we could understand that the narrator is struggle with loneliness, from the lines “They hurt me and I grow older”, but still, she seems too modest to complain openly, and Pound remains rather too tactful to hint at this, since she seems to have no reason to reproach her husband.

Lowell’s version, entitled “Ch’ang Kan”, contrasting can be viewed as a dramatic speech. The difference between the two translations would be that in the Pound’s version the speaker’s emotion and attitude would be generated from within the narrative and the perspective provided, while in the Lowell a more external, outside-looking-in approach is embraced. Lowell’s version is more implied and we could see it right from the beginning. The narrator, “ the Unworthy one” start her story by using the third-person pronoun “she” and “her” in the first two lines. These third-person forms could indicate that Lowell wants to invoke the superficial Western stereotypes for self-effacing oriental modesty by making the woman-speaker ironically refer to herself in the third person. “Then you, my Lover…” in the third line is probably an attempt at irony. Similarly in the seventh line: “At fourteen, I became the wife of my Lord.” For some reason, this version for me sounds ironic and more emotional, then the first one. First part of the poem is explicitly telling the audience what happened with “the Unworthy one”, she is failed and frantic “I often thought that you were the faithful man / that I should never be obligated to ascend to the Looking for husband ledge” She is blaming her husband for everything that what happen to her: “my heart is beating with grief / the bloom of my face has faded, sitting with my sorrows”. For me this version is associated with a fresh wound, since it hurts and bleeds and you could never forget or distract from it, while the first version is reminds me the concealed long illness, when you could only approximate your condition. The interesting fact is also the use of tenses; in the Lowell’s version, in the second paragraph the author uses generally Present Progressive tense when he describes the feelings of the narrator, while Pound uses Past tense. Therefore, this grammatical mechanism could emphasize the fact of more melancholic and calm tone of the Pound version, compare to intense and dramatic tone of Lowell’s one.

The last translation I choose is the Wai-Lim-Yip version. For me this version has the most traditional feel. The author avoids excessively lengthily single lines, preferring where necessary to use two rather then one. So it gives to the author more poetic control. This version is less emotional then other two, and looks like translation without the author’s interpretation of the text or any emotional undertones. Likewise this version doesn’t have any formality, compare to the previous version, which softened by the direct address of “you” and “I”.

Perhaps, my favorite translation is The River – Merchant’s Wife: A Letter by Ezra Pound, since this version is feel more like interpretation rather then translation, and this particular version brings imaginative insight that strengthening our understanding without reasoning to amplification (as, for example, we can see in second version). This translation is a golden mean between two extreme versions discussed above. It has the right amount of emotions, elegantly and intelligently presented to the audience. Also, I like that Pound has transported over and constructed the image of a gentle, emotionally sophisticated and mature woman in his version without “emotional nakedness” of Lowell’s version and plain character of Wai-Lam Yip’s version.

just in case my link doest work.

http://http://library.artstor.org.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/library/secure/ViewImages?id=8DNQZjU4ODA5Jy80fTJrKngqVXQteF95fQ%3D%3D&userId=hzdCdDck&zoomparams=

The image illustrates the scene, when Rama was getting ready to be sending to the forest for fourteen years to fulfill his father promise and the wish of his mother Kaikeyi. The composition of the picture is very interesting, since its not only echoes the text of Ramayana itself, but also adds additional layers of meaning. We observe a broad perspective, which shows the empty streets, where random people either run towards the group depicted in the center of the composition or hide behind the corners of the houses. This moment is also vividly conveyed in a text “ What a moment ago had been a world of festivities had become one of mourning. Crowds thronged hither and thither, stood in knots at the street corners, watched the portals of the palace..” (p. 50) In the center of the image we could see the royal family surrounded by slaves dressed in white clothes. The slaves intentionally depicts proportionally smaller to royal family in order to emphasize the caste system in ancient India. They lie on the ground, crying and grieving. In the middle of the royal family we could see Rama’s father. He is inconsolable, half-conscious; surrounded advisers supporting his arms, since he is unable to stand by himself, he is almost dying because of his grief. The most remarkable figure, depicted on this picture is Rama itself. He is blue skinned, (same as Krishna), with a slight smile on his lips, down on one knee in front of his father. His pose is humble and quiet, his hands is in Namaste position. Right behind Rama, we could see the figure of his brother, who has the same facial expression as Rama does, and also holding his hands in Namaste position. Another interesting moment about this image, that the author’s use of color in a visual composition is conflicting with depicted situation, since colors are bright and festive, which is contradict to traditional, even western representation of dramatic scenes. For instance, if we evoke the visual from biblical texts we could notice that the illustrators using very dark, intensive colors, and sometimes frightening symbols to exemplify sensitive and tragic moments like this. So, how could we decode this unusual pallet of color for depiction of such a wretched moment? Since this vedical text suggests many layers of understanding, maybe we should take a closer look at this picture. This unusual use of color and dissonance with overall visual composition of the picture could signalize to the change of the literal perception to symbolic one; which suggests that Rama’s acceptance of his fate, willingness to pay off his karmic debts, and recognizing of his purpose is the greatest spiritual lesson to humankind. This is teaching people patience, self-sacrifice and humility. Since people are accepting their karma and understand the unavoidability of certain events, dramatization in this case is meaningless. Therefore, on this illustration we could not see any dramatic effects: dark colors or symbols.

Therefore, one of the main lessons of the Ramayana is that one should keep one’s promise at any cost. As we can see from the text, when Rama was told of the wish of his mother Kaikeyi, the prince who ready to ascend the throne did not even flinch. To Rama both positions held the same importance. “I will carry out his wishes without question. Mother, be assured, that I will not shirk. I have no interest in kingship, and no attachments to such offices, and no aversion to a forest existence”. (p. 45) On a picture we also can see this motive through Rama’s body langrage. He humbly kneels before his father, his face does not express any negative emotions, neither despair nor anger, or fear. His folded hands,“ Namaste”, means “the divine in me welcomes the divine in you” and literally translates as “Nama” – “bow”, “ste”- “you”, or “I bow to the divine in you”, which in this particular moment shows Rama’s respect to his father and admiration as well as his dedication to him and his will, his believe in karma or self-purpose, karmic debt that he has to fulfill. “Sometimes a river runs dry, and then it cannot be said to be the fault of the river – its dry because the havens are dry. So, also, our father’s change of mind, or the apparent hardheartedness of Kaikeyi, who has been so loving and kind, or Bharathas’ chance of succession…. There are really not our own doing, but some higher powers have decreed them. Fate…” (p. 52)

Same facial expression and body language showing the man behind Rama, his brother Lakshamana who has decided to follow Rama on his journey and showed his determination to Rama. “I know no mother and no father, other then you”. (p. 52)

In a way Rama was thankful to Kaikeyi for being instrumental in bringing about the journey to the forest where the main purpose of his life laid. “…my privilege is renunciation and the association of enlightened hermits of the forest.”(p. 52) “Rama’s main aim was to get rid of the demons that had been harassing the sages and his beloved devotees for years.”

Therefore, the illustration not only echoed the actual text, but at the same time adding something else to the traditional understanding of this story. For instance, the use of color in this illustration, which may seems odd, since the scene, depicted by this visual is tragic, but instead of using dark colors, the author use bright, to shows Rama’s acceptance, unavoidability of events, karma, and purpose. This situation is not punishment; it is lesson, or result of Rama’s own choice that will lead him to a higher level of spiritual development.

http://http://library.artstor.org.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/library/secure/ViewImages?id=8DNQZjU4ODA5Jy80fTJrKngqVXQteF95fQ%3D%3D&userId=hD1AfDwu&zoomparams=

http://http://library.artstor.org.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/library/secure/ViewImages?id=8DNQZjU4ODA5Jy80fTJrKngqVXQteF95fQ%3D%3D&userId=hzdCdDck&zoomparams=

The image illustrates the scene, when Rama was getting ready to be sending to the forest for fourteen years to fulfill his father promise and the wish of his mother Kaikeyi. The composition of the picture is very interesting, since its not only echoes the text of Ramayana itself, but also adds additional layers of meaning. We observe a broad perspective, which shows the empty streets, where random people either run towards the group depicted in the center of the composition or hide behind the corners of the houses. This moment is also vividly conveyed in a text “ What a moment ago had been a world of festivities had become one of mourning. Crowds thronged hither and thither, stood in knots at the street corners, watched the portals of the palace..” (p. 50) In the center of the image we could see the royal family surrounded by slaves dressed in white clothes. The slaves intentionally depicts proportionally smaller to royal family in order to emphasize the caste system in ancient India. They lie on the ground, crying and grieving. In the middle of the royal family we could see Rama’s father. He is inconsolable, half-conscious; surrounded advisers supporting his arms, since he is unable to stand by himself, he is almost dying because of his grief. The most remarkable figure, depicted on this picture is Rama itself. He is blue skinned, (same as Krishna), with a slight smile on his lips, down on one knee in front of his father. His pose is humble and quiet, his hands is in Namaste position. Right behind Rama, we could see the figure of his brother, who has the same facial expression as Rama does, and also holding his hands in Namaste position. Another interesting moment about this image, that the author’s use of color in a visual composition is conflicting with depicted situation, since colors are bright and festive, which is contradict to traditional, even western representation of dramatic scenes. For instance, if we evoke the visual from biblical texts we could notice that the illustrators using very dark, intensive colors, and sometimes frightening symbols to exemplify sensitive and tragic moments like this. So, how could we decode this unusual pallet of color for depiction of such a wretched moment? Since this vedical text suggests many layers of understanding, maybe we should take a closer look at this picture. This unusual use of color and dissonance with overall visual composition of the picture could signalize to the change of the literal perception to symbolic one; which suggests that Rama’s acceptance of his fate, willingness to pay off his karmic debts, and recognizing of his purpose is the greatest spiritual lesson to humankind. This is teaching people patience, self-sacrifice and humility. Since people are accepting their karma and understand the unavoidability of certain events, dramatization in this case is meaningless. Therefore, on this illustration we could not see any dramatic effects: dark colors or symbols.

Therefore, one of the main lessons of the Ramayana is that one should keep one’s promise at any cost. As we can see from the text, when Rama was told of the wish of his mother Kaikeyi, the prince who ready to ascend the throne did not even flinch. To Rama both positions held the same importance. “I will carry out his wishes without question. Mother, be assured, that I will not shirk. I have no interest in kingship, and no attachments to such offices, and no aversion to a forest existence”. (p. 45) On a picture we also can see this motive through Rama’s body langrage. He humbly kneels before his father, his face does not express any negative emotions, neither despair nor anger, or fear. His folded hands,“ Namaste”, means “the divine in me welcomes the divine in you” and literally translates as “Nama” – “bow”, “ste”- “you”, or “I bow to the divine in you”, which in this particular moment shows Rama’s respect to his father and admiration as well as his dedication to him and his will, his believe in karma or self-purpose, karmic debt that he has to fulfill. “Sometimes a river runs dry, and then it cannot be said to be the fault of the river – its dry because the havens are dry. So, also, our father’s change of mind, or the apparent hardheartedness of Kaikeyi, who has been so loving and kind, or Bharathas’ chance of succession…. There are really not our own doing, but some higher powers have decreed them. Fate…” (p. 52)

Same facial expression and body language showing the man behind Rama, his brother Lakshamana who has decided to follow Rama on his journey and showed his determination to Rama. “I know no mother and no father, other then you”. (p. 52)

In a way Rama was thankful to Kaikeyi for being instrumental in bringing about the journey to the forest where the main purpose of his life laid. “…my privilege is renunciation and the association of enlightened hermits of the forest.”(p. 52) “Rama’s main aim was to get rid of the demons that had been harassing the sages and his beloved devotees for years.”

Therefore, the illustration not only echoed the actual text, but at the same time adding something else to the traditional understanding of this story. For instance, the use of color in this illustration, which may seems odd, since the scene, depicted by this visual is tragic, but instead of using dark colors, the author use bright, to shows Rama’s acceptance, unavoidability of events, karma, and purpose. This situation is not punishment; it is lesson, or result of Rama’s own choice that will lead him to a higher level of spiritual development.

1. Homer uses the idea of spiritual growth as one of his underlying themes in the Odyssey. He relates this massage through various situations, characters their adventures or actions. Spiritual development is brought on by rough times, long journeys and restrictions. One of the  examples of the underlining idea about of personal development, pride and spirit, Homer express when Odysseus encounters the Cyclopes.I would like to focus my analysis on book 9, which, as i think , perfectly demonstrate this idea. After out-smarting the Polyphemus , Odysseus shouts out his name . These were his words to Polyphemus “ if any man on the face of the earth should ask you who blinded you , shamed you so- say Odysseus, raider of cities, he gouged out your eye.”(B. 9, p227) Instead of being humbled by the experience, Odysseus tries to brag about what he has done, while in reality, it was the gods who blessed him with the ability to escape his situation.
2. Therefore, Homer raises important questions by this passage? Is the Odysseus really a hero, or he is just selfish, arrogant human being with the lack of spiritual sense? What moral lesson teaches us this demonstration of human weaknesses? And what Homer was trying to say by this passage?
3. Homer presented to us two-sided image of Odysseus personality in order to lead us to the road of many personal transformation, spiritual odyssey; and show how Odysseus become the man of words, who is capable, brave, sensible, modest and patient.

Cyclopes is just exaggerated image of human weaknesses. This monster characteristically is depicted as deformed image of humanity, his distorted human features corresponding to a defective inner nature that possesses certain negative human traits while lacking other positive ones, as example, lack of hospitality, religion, abusing of his physical strength lack of intelligence and enormous arrogance. But Odysseus, like Cyclopes, also has paid the price for the folly of arrogantly boasting. After blinding Polyphemos and escaping from his cave, he cannot resist the temptation to assert his own power. Like Cyclopes he cannot control his appetite for recognition, pride and appreciation of his intelligence. By revealing his own name, in a deeper sense, his error lies in forgetting the power of the gods and claiming to be the sole author of his own success. In Book 9 Homer plants numerous clues that the hero’s success has depended on divine assistance. It isn’t only that Odysseus prays to Athena for guidance before he plans his escape. He also acknowledges the stroke of luck that the Cyclops drove all his flocks into the cave that night, speculating, “or god led him on” (9.p.222). When it comes time to undertake the fearsome attack on the sleeping monster, “as some god breathed enormous courage through us all” (9.223), he says. And finally, there is the testimony of the other Cyclopes, who tell Polyphemos that his blinding must be “ a plague sent here by mighty Zeus and there ‘is no escape from that” (9.224). Overcome by pride in the success of his trickery, Odysseus misses the truth, which only repeat his earlier statement that “Respect the gods, my friend . We re suppliants –at your mercy! Zeus of the Strangers guards all guests and suppliants: strangers are sacred- Zeus will avenge their rights” (9.220).
 The power of Odysseus own intelligence makes him arrogantly forget the temporary nature of his own victory. When Odysseus’s clever scheme of giving his name as “Nobody” works and the other Cyclopes are mislead, he is so overjoyed with his own intelligence that he spurts out laughing, but this self-delight paves the way to his arrogant boasting once he thinks he is safely away.

Homer is obviously signifying that the intellectual side of humanity coexists only with tension of moral basis and in equal proportions. In other words, Odysseus not better then Cyclopes, his inner monster, pride and arrogance, hide the truth from him, mislead and curse him. Only when he was able to fight his own inner monster he became a man worth a legend. Later, in his journey he was able to strengthen his spirit. As an example, resistance to siren songs and on the island of Thrinakia where Odysseus demonstrates this self-control, refusing, despite the most extreme pangs of hunger, to eat the cattle of the sun god.

These last two similes of the book 5, the recovering father and the preserved fire, could be a subject to many contextual interpretations, but leitmotif of the last pages of book 5 is echoed with the theme of resurrection and renewed life from the spiritual death of Odysseus on the Calypso island. Odysseus first glimpses Phaeacia, the land that offers salvation from the storm and will complete his return to Ithaca: as <“Joy… warm as the joy that children feel when they see their father’s life dawn again, one who’s lain on the sickbed racket with torment, wasting away, slowly under some angry power’s onslaughts – then what joy when the gods, deliver him from his pains. So warm, Odysseus’ joy when he saw that shore…. >”

Odysseus’ joy is like the joy of the children who have been expecting the death of their father, conceivably, the loss of the family. They have watched him suffer for a long time as his life is being eaten away; Odysseus too has been watching his life erode as he sits in a golden cage, weeping in desire for his home even though he is surrounded by an island paradise. The simile suggests that Calypso’s island has been the land of death; the sea is the place where death is only threatened; the land of Phaeacia, with its prospect of return to Ithaca, is the gift of life. If the simile had stated that Odysseus welcomed this land as much as the father welcomed the return of good health, it would have been clear but would have failed to emphasize the perspective of the children who have watched a life decline and draw near its end. That external and impartial view is the position of Odysseus. In book 5 he is presented as a man who can see his own life as an observer and choose from among the paths open to him, while throughout the rest of the poem Odysseus will be presented as the man who seeks to serve not only himself but also his family, wife, son, and father. So this simile has a dual approaching, warmth joy of revivification, from induced submissiveness and spiritual and mental death, and joy from long-awaited returning of the protector and brave warrior.

Also another interesting simile is the symbol of olive tree that provide a shelter to him. “<…beneath two bushy olives sprung from the same root , one olive wild , the other well-bred stock….>” What Homer was trying to sad with this mixture? Interweaving of divine and human providence , fate itself or this is just another allegory that resolve in a future. The olive tree itself is a thoughtfully selected symbol. In Greece the olive tree symbolizes peace and prosperity, as well as resurrection and hope. “This was demonstrated by the events after the burning of Athens by the Persian King Xerxes in the V century BC. Xerxes burned the entire Acropolis city, within which was the centenary of olive trees of Athena, which was also burned. However, when the Athenians entered the scorched city, the olive tree had already grown a branch, symbolizing the rapid recuperation and renovation of the Athenians in the face of adversity.” (Wikipedia, olive tree in mythology) “Odysseus crept beneath the dead lives” as a symbol of rebirth, theme of renewed life.

Another simile that symbolize of  revival or his return could be found in a last passage of book 5: “as a man will bury his glowing brands in a black ashes, off on a lonely farmstead , no neighbors near , to keep a spark alive – no need to kindle fire from somewhere else – so great Odysseus buried himself in lives..” Fire is a traditional symbol of warrior, purity through destruction or rebirth in some religions. Additionally, just as Odysseus feels small and endangered by overpowering forces, so the fire is diminished in size—though not in potential. This is the sign of Odysseus, returning king, the audience is learned through similes, that Odysseus even at his lowest moment is a faithful father to his family , he is returning to life, and he will sooner become that force that will successfully lead his people to reconstruct Ithaca and clean his land from enemies , like fire does.

The critique of writing in the Phaedrus has enthused discuss about prominence of historical transition of the dialogue from oral to literacy form. In very broad terms, this passage presented philosophical critique of writing and unnecessary of literacy. According to this passage, invention of writing has detrimental effect on process of thinking, “creates forgetfulness in the learners’ souls, because they will not use their memories”, and creates “only the pretense of wisdom”, which generates just a shallow “knowledge without the reality”. Socrates draws a parallel between writing and painting, and argue that “for the creations of the painter have the attitude of life, and yet if you ask them a question they preserve a solemn silence …same way be said of speeches; you would imagine that they had intelligence, but if you want to know anything and put a question to one of them, the speaker always gives one unvarying answer”. Therefore, Socrates saw more value and vivacity in live dialogue then voiceless letters. Dialogue, according to Socrates is “the word of knowledge which has a living soul” while “written word is properly no more than an image.”

Ultimate and shortsighted belief that its either/ or is the key misstep in discussions like these. Conclusive position that one or the other is good or better, ergo the new format has no value, eventually ineffectual. Socrates, again, is most right. Reading alone does not granted you true knowledge or actual understanding of certain concepts. However, speaking and dialogue alone cannot distribute and preserve knowledge and ideas to those able to learn it the way writing can. Therefore, one does not need to be better than the other, for they are completely able to coexist, and, in fact, should.

It is hard to understand the whole illogicality and paradox of Socrates’ protest against writing. Despite the fact that Socrates is clearly “shares Thamus’s view”, he “ grants that there are practical benefits to capturing one’s thoughts in writing –“ as memorials against the forgetfulness of old age”. (The Oral World vs. The Written Word) Besides, we wouldn’t have Socrates’ records at all if Plato hadn’t written them down. One of the reasons why Plato, is himself a writer, critiques writing, probably, rooted to elitism. “In Plato’s time, and for centuries afterward, heightened consciousness was reserved for an elite.”(The Oral World vs. The Written Word) Plato and Socrates belong to an exceptional superior class – philosophers. Socrates claims that, “If any one of you has composed these things with a knowledge of the truth, if you can defend your writing when you are challenged, and if you yourself make the argument that your writing is of little worth, then you must be called by a name not derived by these writings, but rather by those things which you are seriously pursuing.” Philosophical writing is presented and defended on unusual terms. While the writing itself must be of little worth, philosophical writing gains its strength through the defense that its author (or another advocate) offers. As Plato presents it, philosophical writing in itself is little more than a meaningless artifact. It is only when the written words are invoked by a philosopher that the words have meaning.” ( Pithos , Spring 2014 Process and the rhetoric of writing in Plato’s Phaedrus, by Ryan Murphy)

Plato’s Phaedrus, written 360 B.C.E. highlights the idea that “the technology of the alphabet will alter a person mind, and not for the better”( The Oral World vs. The Written Word) many centuries after, same idea and anxiety over the increasingly cold modes of electronic communication, Internet and new educational evolution emphasized in Nicolas Carr’s article. The author claims that new technology modifies our way of thinking and not for good. It “shape the process of thoughts … , chipping away the capacity for concentration and contemplation, weakened capacity for deep reading”, and making us “decoders of information” rather then deep and cautious readers. (Is Google Making Us Stupid?) I disagree with the author, furthermore his argument is just another consistent belief that the old way is superior , ergo the new format has no value. Subsequently he is trying to plea to our moving nature to not only confront change, but to rebel against a technology which is turning us intro “pancake people” who is click too much, read too little, and remember even less, with flat and artificial intelligence. Why comprehend this word, as “of Kubrick’s dark prophecy”, Mr. Carr? Yes, Internet is changing the way people think, but it does not mean we become robots with artificial intellect. Language is the technology for communication. Internet is just a medium for the exchange of language, in every form imaginable. The reason why people prefer Internet to other form of communications is its simplicity and speed. As we move from specialization to generalizations it becomes necessary to deal with the wide range of problems however, human intelligence is limited. “In a purely oral culture, thinking is governed by the capacity of human memory” (The Oral World vs. The Written Word) and the capacity of human brain changed not so much since Socrates era. Moreover another limiting factor has added- time, which today is the most valuable and irretrievable resource. The faster you find solution, information or source, the better. Therefore the creators of Google have realized our limitation and find the way to add the brain’s capacity for knowledge. Therefore, my point is- same as writing enables the communication of discourse over time and space, internet helps us find information faster, be more efficient and productive. In order to move forward we should not be categorical. Similarly to Socrates’ dilemma of writing or speaking relevance, Carr’s argument against Internet, in favor of books and live text, not optimized by exclusion of one or the other. The compromise and the only ingenious elucidation could be found through maximization when used together.