The Rape of The Lock is a satirical poem that was written about an actual event. The version that we read in our text rewritten after the original was published. The second version incorporates mythical creatures that serve as primary players in the poem. They are described as being from the elements. They are as much a part of an individual as their physical aspects and cannot be separated except in death. These characters are integral to the plot because they serve to help demonstrate characteristics of the human personality and demeanor.
For when the Fair in all their Pride expire,
To their first Elements the Souls retire:
Different creatures are determined by, or the cause of, what the person is in life.
The Sprights of fiery Termagants in Flame
Mount up, and take a Salamander's Name.
Soft yielding Minds to Water glide away,
And sip with Nymphs, their Elemental Tea.
The graver Prude sinks downward to a Gnome,
In search of Mischief still on Earth to roam.
The light Coquettes in Sylphs aloft repair,
And sport and flutter in the Fields of Air.
Know farther yet; Whoever fair and chaste
Rejects Mankind, is by some Sylph embrac'd:
For Spirits, freed from mortal Laws, with ease
Assume what Sexes and what Shapes they please.
The sylphs are used to illustrate a component of an epic by being deigned guardian of the main character Belinda. The poem suggests that she is the innocent that would require intervention from a superior or supernatural being to be kept from harm, something she is incapable of alone. On her own, she would be influenced too easily and lead astray.
Oft when the World imagine Women stray,
The Sylphs thro' mystick Mazes guide thier Way,
Thro' all the giddy Circle they pursue,
And old Impertinence expel by new.
What tender Maid but must a Victim fall
To one Man's Treat, but for another's Ball?
When Florio speaks, what Virgin could withstand,
If gentle Damon did not squeeze her Hand?
With varying Vanities, from ev'ry Part,
They shift the moving Toyshop of their Heart;
Where Wigs with Wigs, with Sword-knots Sword-knots strive,
Beaus banish Beaus, and Coaches Coaches drive.
This erring Mortals Levity may call,
Oh blind to Truth! the Sylphs contrive it all.
The poem presents the lost lock being attributed to not only the man who took it, but only at the demise of her protector.
Ev'n then, before the fatal Engine clos'd,
A wretched Sylph too fondly interpos'd;
Fate urg'd the Sheers, and cut the Sylph in twain,
It is from this point forward that all is lost and the "war" is waged between the human characters and the immortal ones.
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Aphra Benhn's Oroonoko
The story of Oroonoko was extremely controversial in the time it was written due to the statement it made concerning slavery. The story was presented as factual and took place in a British colony in the West Indies on a sugar plantation. It tells how Oroonoko, a prince in his native land, was captured through deceit, bought, placed into slavery on the plantation, and his treatment once he arrived there.
The initial description of Oroonoko begins the controversy. He is decribed as having a "greatness of soul", "refined notions of true honor", "absolute generosity", and "softness that was capable of the highest passions of love and gallantry". She goes on to say that "the most illustrious courts could not have produced a braver man, both for greatness of courage and mind, a judgment more solid, a wit more quick, and a conversation more sweet and diverting. He knew almost as much as if he had read much: he had heard of and admired the Romans: he had heard of the late Civil Wars in England, and the deplorable death of our great monarch; and would discourse of it with all the sense and abhorrence of the injustice imaginable. He had an extreme good and graceful mien, and all the civility of a well-bred great man. He had nothing of barbarity in his nature, but in all points addressed himself as if his education had been in some European court.His physical description warranted more controversy."
His physical description warrants more attention as a source of controversy. She describes him in a very sexually charged manner. "He was pretty tall, but of a shape the most exact that can be fancied: the most famous statuary could not form the figure of a man more admirably turned from head to foot. His face was not of that brown rusty black which most of that nation are, but of perfect ebony, or polished jet. His eyes were the most awful that could be seen, and very piercing; the white of ’em being like snow, as were his teeth. His nose was rising and Roman, instead of African and flat. His mouth the finest shaped that could be seen; far from those great turned lips which are so natural to the rest of the negroes. The whole proportion and air of his face was so nobly and exactly formed that, bating his color, there could be nothing in nature more beautiful, agreeable, and handsome. There was no one grace wanting that bears the standard of true beauty."
The controversy arises from the fact that she compares Oroonoko to white British men in a manner that would imply him to be at the very least their equal. In the same paragraph she states that wit and intellegence like his isn't an attribute that can be confined to the white race or men of religion. She singles out Christian men in a way that implies that he is of a stature even greater than theirs.
This is only the first few examples of how the written account of Oroonoko was a piece that was politically charged and made a stance against slavery. It illustrates the writer's view that slavery was an injustice simply by the way she chose to narrate the events that had transpired.
The initial description of Oroonoko begins the controversy. He is decribed as having a "greatness of soul", "refined notions of true honor", "absolute generosity", and "softness that was capable of the highest passions of love and gallantry". She goes on to say that "the most illustrious courts could not have produced a braver man, both for greatness of courage and mind, a judgment more solid, a wit more quick, and a conversation more sweet and diverting. He knew almost as much as if he had read much: he had heard of and admired the Romans: he had heard of the late Civil Wars in England, and the deplorable death of our great monarch; and would discourse of it with all the sense and abhorrence of the injustice imaginable. He had an extreme good and graceful mien, and all the civility of a well-bred great man. He had nothing of barbarity in his nature, but in all points addressed himself as if his education had been in some European court.His physical description warranted more controversy."
His physical description warrants more attention as a source of controversy. She describes him in a very sexually charged manner. "He was pretty tall, but of a shape the most exact that can be fancied: the most famous statuary could not form the figure of a man more admirably turned from head to foot. His face was not of that brown rusty black which most of that nation are, but of perfect ebony, or polished jet. His eyes were the most awful that could be seen, and very piercing; the white of ’em being like snow, as were his teeth. His nose was rising and Roman, instead of African and flat. His mouth the finest shaped that could be seen; far from those great turned lips which are so natural to the rest of the negroes. The whole proportion and air of his face was so nobly and exactly formed that, bating his color, there could be nothing in nature more beautiful, agreeable, and handsome. There was no one grace wanting that bears the standard of true beauty."
The controversy arises from the fact that she compares Oroonoko to white British men in a manner that would imply him to be at the very least their equal. In the same paragraph she states that wit and intellegence like his isn't an attribute that can be confined to the white race or men of religion. She singles out Christian men in a way that implies that he is of a stature even greater than theirs.
This is only the first few examples of how the written account of Oroonoko was a piece that was politically charged and made a stance against slavery. It illustrates the writer's view that slavery was an injustice simply by the way she chose to narrate the events that had transpired.
John Donne's Holy Sonnets
The Holy sonnets are a written representation of man's struggle with his human nature, shown here as sin, and his aspiration to be of a strict moral fiber worthy of God.
It shows a contradiction of a desire to die because of self-imposed shame and a desire to saved from death through God's grace. The overwhelming sense is one of desperation and self-defeat.The illustation of this begins in sonnet one, line 3, with a spoke desire to die.
I run to death, and death meets me as fast,
In sonnet 9, man's justification of his actions and his his struggle with God is shown.
If poisonous minerals, and if that tree,
Whose fruit threw death on (else immortal) us,
If lecherous goats, if serpents envious
Cannot be damn'd, alas ! why should I be ?
Why should intent or reason, born in me,
Make sins, else equal, in me more heinous ?
And, mercy being easy, and glorious
To God, in His stern wrath why threatens He ?
It is an exemplary example of the struggle with religion and deity as a whole, that many encounter at some point in their life. As you read on though the sonnet and into the following sonnets, you see how he has returned to his beliefs and continues to ask for his savior to rescue him from himself, even confronting death himself.
Death, be not proud, though some have called thee
Mighty and dreadful, for thou art not so ;
For those, whom thou think'st thou dost overthrow,
Die not, poor Death, nor yet canst thou kill me.
From rest and sleep, which but thy picture[s] be,
Much pleasure, then from thee much more must flow,
And soonest our best men with thee do go,
Rest of their bones, and soul's delivery.
Thou'rt slave to Fate, chance, kings, and desperate men,
And dost with poison, war, and sickness dwell,
And poppy, or charms can make us sleep as well,
And better than thy stroke ; why swell'st thou then ?
One short sleep past, we wake eternally,
And Death shall be no more ; Death, thou shalt die.
Sonnet 14 then illustrates his reverence for God and his belief that God can overcome all obstacles and is truly the supreme and omnipotent being of his faith.
Batter my heart, three-person'd God ; for you
As yet but knock ; breathe, shine, and seek to mend ;
That I may rise, and stand, o'erthrow me, and bend
Your force, to break, blow, burn, and make me new.
The last of the sonnets, number 19, is a concise picture of the thoughts and feelings of most religious people that I have encountered. It shows that faith requires an daily submission to and renewal of their beliefs. It is an active process.
Oh, to vex me, contraries meet in one:
Inconstancy unnaturally hath begot
A constant habit; that when I would not
I change in vows, and in devotion.
As humorous is my contrition
As my profane love, and as soon forgot:
As riddlingly distempered, cold and hot,
As praying, as mute; as infinite, as none.
I durst not view heaven yesterday; and today
In prayers and flattering speeches I court God:
Tomorrow I quake with true fear of his rod.
So my devout fits come and go away
Like a fantastic ague; save that here
Those are my best days, when I shake with fear.
It shows a contradiction of a desire to die because of self-imposed shame and a desire to saved from death through God's grace. The overwhelming sense is one of desperation and self-defeat.The illustation of this begins in sonnet one, line 3, with a spoke desire to die.
I run to death, and death meets me as fast,
In sonnet 9, man's justification of his actions and his his struggle with God is shown.
If poisonous minerals, and if that tree,
Whose fruit threw death on (else immortal) us,
If lecherous goats, if serpents envious
Cannot be damn'd, alas ! why should I be ?
Why should intent or reason, born in me,
Make sins, else equal, in me more heinous ?
And, mercy being easy, and glorious
To God, in His stern wrath why threatens He ?
It is an exemplary example of the struggle with religion and deity as a whole, that many encounter at some point in their life. As you read on though the sonnet and into the following sonnets, you see how he has returned to his beliefs and continues to ask for his savior to rescue him from himself, even confronting death himself.
Death, be not proud, though some have called thee
Mighty and dreadful, for thou art not so ;
For those, whom thou think'st thou dost overthrow,
Die not, poor Death, nor yet canst thou kill me.
From rest and sleep, which but thy picture[s] be,
Much pleasure, then from thee much more must flow,
And soonest our best men with thee do go,
Rest of their bones, and soul's delivery.
Thou'rt slave to Fate, chance, kings, and desperate men,
And dost with poison, war, and sickness dwell,
And poppy, or charms can make us sleep as well,
And better than thy stroke ; why swell'st thou then ?
One short sleep past, we wake eternally,
And Death shall be no more ; Death, thou shalt die.
Sonnet 14 then illustrates his reverence for God and his belief that God can overcome all obstacles and is truly the supreme and omnipotent being of his faith.
Batter my heart, three-person'd God ; for you
As yet but knock ; breathe, shine, and seek to mend ;
That I may rise, and stand, o'erthrow me, and bend
Your force, to break, blow, burn, and make me new.
The last of the sonnets, number 19, is a concise picture of the thoughts and feelings of most religious people that I have encountered. It shows that faith requires an daily submission to and renewal of their beliefs. It is an active process.
Oh, to vex me, contraries meet in one:
Inconstancy unnaturally hath begot
A constant habit; that when I would not
I change in vows, and in devotion.
As humorous is my contrition
As my profane love, and as soon forgot:
As riddlingly distempered, cold and hot,
As praying, as mute; as infinite, as none.
I durst not view heaven yesterday; and today
In prayers and flattering speeches I court God:
Tomorrow I quake with true fear of his rod.
So my devout fits come and go away
Like a fantastic ague; save that here
Those are my best days, when I shake with fear.
Whether a religious person or not, his ability to convey such commitment and conviction is to be admired.
King Lear (Week Two)
In the beginning of the play, King Lear banishes his daughter Cordelia because she refused to make a public proclamation of her love for him and take part in a public ritual, of the King's own design, in which he divides his kingdom according to his daughters' decree of love for him. As a result, he divides the kingdom and gives it to his two eldest daughters who indulge him with false flattery.
The king has a reunion with Cordelia near the end of the play. At this time, he has been abandoned by his oldest children who have conspired against him and are motivated by their own selfishness and greed. Cordelia returns from France to reclaim the Kingdom for her father but finds him in a disheveled state and unsound mind.
Scene 4.7 lines lines 68-77
CORDELIA
These lines show the Kings true remorse. He regrets his treatment of Cordelia. The reunion is one that is bittersweet. The older sisters have conspired to gain sole rein of the kingdom. They have turned against each other.
Although you would think that the King would be angry at the thought of his kingdom being overthrown and now being a prisoner, his only thoughts lie in the joy of being with Cordelia. He seems truly grateful to, at last, have something that is sure and stable in his his life, even if it entails imprisonment.
Scene 5.3
KING LEAR
The play concludes with the death of Edmund, Goneril, and Regan. Lear, who has escaped death thus far, dies of a broken heart over his now dead and beloved' Cordelia.
O, look upon me, sir,KING LEAR
And hold your hands in benediction o'er me:
No, sir, you must not kneel.
Pray, do not mock me:CORDELIA
I am a very foolish fond old man,
Fourscore and upward, not an hour more nor less;
And, to deal plainly,
I fear I am not in my perfect mind.
Methinks I should know you, and know this man;
Yet I am doubtful for I am mainly ignorant
What place this is; and all the skill I have
Remembers not these garments; nor I know not
Where I did lodge last night. Do not laugh at me;
For, as I am a man, I think this lady
To be my child Cordelia.
And so I am, I am.KING LEAR
Be your tears wet? yes, 'faith. I pray, weep not:CORDELIA
If you have poison for me, I will drink it.
I know you do not love me; for your sisters
Have, as I do remember, done me wrong:
You have some cause, they have not.
No cause, no cause.
These lines show the Kings true remorse. He regrets his treatment of Cordelia. The reunion is one that is bittersweet. The older sisters have conspired to gain sole rein of the kingdom. They have turned against each other.
Although you would think that the King would be angry at the thought of his kingdom being overthrown and now being a prisoner, his only thoughts lie in the joy of being with Cordelia. He seems truly grateful to, at last, have something that is sure and stable in his his life, even if it entails imprisonment.
Scene 5.3
KING LEAR
No, no, no, no! Come, let's away to prison:The tool Goneril and Regan (the two elder sisters) have used to attain complete power, a young man by the name of Edmund (who has his own nefarious goals), has sent the King and Cordelia to their unbenounced death at the hand of his captain.
We two alone will sing like birds i' the cage:
When thou dost ask me blessing, I'll kneel down,
And ask of thee forgiveness: so we'll live,
And pray, and sing, and tell old tales, and laugh
At gilded butterflies, and hear poor rogues
Talk of court news; and we'll talk with them too,
Who loses and who wins; who's in, who's out;
And take upon's the mystery of things,
As if we were God's spies: and we'll wear out,
In a wall'd prison, packs and sects of great ones,
That ebb and flow by the moon.
The play concludes with the death of Edmund, Goneril, and Regan. Lear, who has escaped death thus far, dies of a broken heart over his now dead and beloved' Cordelia.
King Lear (Week One)
The character of the Fool seems to
have an ability to state the unvarnished truth concerning events that
take place in King Lear without any restriction or repercussions from even the King himself. Beginning with line 133 and ending in line 160, the Fool speaks to the King about the inevitable results of his actions when he divided his kingdom and gave it to two of his daughters. It is a synopsis of what has transpired and stated in a manner that is blunt and unencumbered with flattery. It is also somewhat foreboding of the events that follow in the play.
Fool
Fool
Dost thou know the difference, my boy, between aKING LEAR
bitter fool and a sweet fool?
No, lad; teach me.Fool
That lord that counsell'd theeKING LEAR
To give away thy land,
Come place him here by me,
Do thou for him stand:
The sweet and bitter fool
Will presently appear;
The one in motley here,
The other found out there.
Dost thou call me fool, boy?Fool
All thy other titles thou hast given away; that
thou wast born with.
KENT
He further prepares the King in lines 166-182.
Fool
This is not altogether fool, my lord.Fool
No, faith, lords and great men will not let me; ifKING LEAR
I had a monopoly out, they would have part on't:
and ladies too, they will not let me have all fool
to myself; they'll be snatching. Give me an egg,
nuncle, and I'll give thee two crowns.
What two crowns shall they be?Fool
Why, after I have cut the egg i' the middle, and eatThe Fool is telling the King that he is a fool, more than the Fool himself, for giving away his land and his power. That although he remains a King by title, he is now at the disposal of his two eldest daughters and that decision will come back to haunt him.
up the meat, the two crowns of the egg. When thou
clovest thy crown i' the middle, and gavest away
both parts, thou borest thy ass on thy back o'er
the dirt: thou hadst little wit in thy bald crown,
when thou gavest thy golden one away. If I speak
like myself in this, let him be whipped that first
finds it so.
He further prepares the King in lines 166-182.
Fool
I have used it, nuncle, ever since thou madest thyKING LEAR
daughters thy mothers: for when thou gavest them
the rod, and put'st down thine own breeches,Singing
Then they for sudden joy did weep,
And I for sorrow sung,
That such a king should play bo-peep,
And go the fools among.
Prithee, nuncle, keep a schoolmaster that can teach
thy fool to lie: I would fain learn to lie.
An you lie, sirrah, we'll have you whipped.Fool
I marvel what kin thou and thy daughters are:In these lines the Fool not only foreshadows the upcoming events but he give insight to the audience of the plot. He, as a Fool, demonstrates boldfaced truths that King intuitively knows, but is in denial of.
they'll have me whipped for speaking true, thou'lt
have me whipped for lying; and sometimes I am
whipped for holding my peace. I had rather be any
kind o' thing than a fool: and yet I would not be
thee, nuncle; thou hast pared thy wit o' both sides,
and left nothing i' the middle: here comes one o'
the parings.
Monday, November 26, 2012
Shakespeare's Sonnets
Several of the sonnets exhibit a cultural view that was relative to the time that Shakespeare's sonnets were written as well as today. They invoke a feeling that beauty is directly related to age. Society often views the elderly as unattractive. Beauty is equated, at least partially, to youth. Sonnet 12 displays this perfectly: "When I behold the violet past prime, And sable curls all silver'd o'er with white; When lofty trees I see barren of leaves Which erst from heat did canopy the herd, And summer's green all girded up in sheaves Borne on the bier with white and bristly beard, Then of thy beauty do I question make," Further evidence of this is given in Sonnet 15, lines 1 and 2: "When I consider everything that grows Holds in perfection but a little moment;" The last line in Sonnet 62 states "Tis thee, my self, that for myself I praise, Painting my age with beauty of thy days," Sonnet 65, lines 5-9 "O how shall Summer's honey breath hold out Against the wrackful siege of batt'ring days,
When rocks impregnable are not so stout,
Nor gates of steel so strong but time decays?"
These are but a few examples that invoke the feeling that much was related to age. Regardless of the standards the society set before him, Shakespeare found his immortality through the his sonnets as well as other works he wrote when he obtained an immortality of sorts through his words when he put them to paper.
|
Hero and Leander by Christopher Marlowe
Hero and Leander is a poem written by Christopher Marlowe during the Elizabethan Era. It is a love story about a young man named Leander who falls in love with a young girl named Hero. The poem has an erotic tone in places despite the fact they are both very young and have no experience with love.
The first area that you see lines with a sexual connotation lies not in the description of the fair Hero, though she is beautiful and beyond compare of even Venus herself, but in the description of Leander. Line 88 is written as being the perspective of an unnamed gentleman who proclaims, "Leander thou art made for amorous play;". Another prime example of this involves Leander and Hero. It is the segment from lines 403-408 and tells about when Leander first takes Hero into his arms. "Till in his twining arms he locked her fast, And then he wooed with kisses, and then at last, As shepherds do, her on the ground he laid, And tumbling in the grass, he often strayed Beyond the bounds of shame, in being bold To eye those parts that no eye should behold;" The erotic references don't end with Hero and Leander alone. Later in the poem, Leander finds himself the object of Neptune's amorous attention. Line 639 states, " Whereat the sapphire-visaged god grew proud,". The sapphire-visaged god refers to Neptune, god of the sea. The rest of the line is interpreted by the translators in our text as meaning that he (Neptune) is sexually aroused. |
"Leander now, like Theban Hercules,
Entered the orchard of th' Hesperides,
Whose fruit none rightly can describe but he,
That pulls or shakes it from the golden tree,"
What is initially viewed as being a story about young love that meets a tragic end and appears to focus much on mythology actually comes to light as being somewhat more controversial in nature.
What is initially viewed as being a story about young love that meets a tragic end and appears to focus much on mythology actually comes to light as being somewhat more controversial in nature.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
"The Shepheardes Calendar: October" by Edmund Spenser
As a reflection upon the section of "October", I feel that there is a theme that runs throughout the lines that would pertain to the justification of Edmund Spenser's worth
as a poet.
He came from meager and simple means to acquire his education and has since become a renown poet, but was not taken seriously in the literary community of his era. Point in case was Sir Philip Sidney who wrote "The Defense of Poetry" which essentially stated that the English had not had a poet deemed worthy of influential status since Chaucer.
Chaucer, having written pastoral poetry such as "The Nun's Priest's Tale" from "The Canterbury Tales", was the initiating influence for Spenser's "The Shepheardes Calendar". The prod to write was the demoralizing views of the literary circles both in England and abroad.
The form of pastoral poetry in "The Shepheardes Calendar" mimicked Chaucer thus defending the poetry of Spenser's beloved country and gives evidence of a personal nature weaved between the lines. The character Piers embodies the voice of those who have told Spenser that he needs to write aspiring toward the more affluent society and leave his own roots and style behind. This is in reference to Sidney's view that English poets of the then present era were "bastard poets" and "poet-apes,". Line 40 of "The Shepheardes Calendar: October" says, "Turn thee to those, that weld the awful crown." This is generally interpreted to mean that the character Cuddie is directed to turn from "...the rural routes to thee doe cleave". (Line 26)
Cuddie's stance is reflected well in lines 13-15 , "The dapper ditties, that I won't devise, To feede youthes fancie, and the flocking fry, Delighten much: what I bett for thy?" This could be interpreted to mean that writing to please the court and others is a futile exercise that would not honor the voice of the poet himself, thus producing a piece that is contrived expressly for the literal critics and not faithful to the process of creativity and muse as an influence for art.
He came from meager and simple means to acquire his education and has since become a renown poet, but was not taken seriously in the literary community of his era. Point in case was Sir Philip Sidney who wrote "The Defense of Poetry" which essentially stated that the English had not had a poet deemed worthy of influential status since Chaucer.
Chaucer, having written pastoral poetry such as "The Nun's Priest's Tale" from "The Canterbury Tales", was the initiating influence for Spenser's "The Shepheardes Calendar". The prod to write was the demoralizing views of the literary circles both in England and abroad.
The form of pastoral poetry in "The Shepheardes Calendar" mimicked Chaucer thus defending the poetry of Spenser's beloved country and gives evidence of a personal nature weaved between the lines. The character Piers embodies the voice of those who have told Spenser that he needs to write aspiring toward the more affluent society and leave his own roots and style behind. This is in reference to Sidney's view that English poets of the then present era were "bastard poets" and "poet-apes,". Line 40 of "The Shepheardes Calendar: October" says, "Turn thee to those, that weld the awful crown." This is generally interpreted to mean that the character Cuddie is directed to turn from "...the rural routes to thee doe cleave". (Line 26)
Cuddie's stance is reflected well in lines 13-15 , "The dapper ditties, that I won't devise, To feede youthes fancie, and the flocking fry, Delighten much: what I bett for thy?" This could be interpreted to mean that writing to please the court and others is a futile exercise that would not honor the voice of the poet himself, thus producing a piece that is contrived expressly for the literal critics and not faithful to the process of creativity and muse as an influence for art.
"The Obedience of a Christian Man" by William Tyndale
In "The Obedience of a Christian Man", Tyndale goes to great lengths to
compare the application literal word of the Bible to "proverbs, similitudes, riddles, or allegories......Borrowed of the Scripture to declare a text or conclusion of the Scripture more expressly, and to root it and grave it in the heart.". He says that both can be studied and applied in life equally
as truth but only when you can cite and prove "with an open text, that which the allegory doth express.".
I feel that this statement has a direct correlation to the conflict of the Catholic and Protestant church during the Protestant reformation. The main proclamation of the Protestant movement was that man could read and interpret scripture without the interference of or strict interpretation given from the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church stood by the practice of interpretation being delivered through the papacy. Man, in general, without the ordination of the Catholic Church, was incapable of reading the Bible and interpreting it. It had to be done through the priest, who was a cog of the greater machine of the Catholic Church and supremely controlled by the Pope.
In other words, Tyndale believed that the structured and inflexible interpretation of the Catholic Church was unnecessary to achieve salvation. Man could do this on his own and without the aid of the rigid, ritualistic, and hierarchical religion.
Tyndale's translation of the Bible into English was the act that preceded "The Obedience of a Christian Man" and eventually ensured his demise, as ordered by King Henry VIII. This is especially ironic when you take into consideration that just two years after Tyndale's death, Henry the VIII named "The Great Bible" (translated, in part, by Tyndale) as the Bible for the Church of England.
I feel that this statement has a direct correlation to the conflict of the Catholic and Protestant church during the Protestant reformation. The main proclamation of the Protestant movement was that man could read and interpret scripture without the interference of or strict interpretation given from the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church stood by the practice of interpretation being delivered through the papacy. Man, in general, without the ordination of the Catholic Church, was incapable of reading the Bible and interpreting it. It had to be done through the priest, who was a cog of the greater machine of the Catholic Church and supremely controlled by the Pope.
In other words, Tyndale believed that the structured and inflexible interpretation of the Catholic Church was unnecessary to achieve salvation. Man could do this on his own and without the aid of the rigid, ritualistic, and hierarchical religion.
Tyndale's translation of the Bible into English was the act that preceded "The Obedience of a Christian Man" and eventually ensured his demise, as ordered by King Henry VIII. This is especially ironic when you take into consideration that just two years after Tyndale's death, Henry the VIII named "The Great Bible" (translated, in part, by Tyndale) as the Bible for the Church of England.
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Utopia Book One - Sir Thomas More
"Utopia - Book One" was written by Sir Thomas More to place "Utopia-Book Two" into context. It is a written regurgitation of a fictional conversation between Raphael Hythloday (the main character and a fictional one), Peter Giles (a real life acquaintance of More's), and Sir Thomas More himself. The language of the conversation is (of course) one that was used in period and is one that, unlike today, very formal. Initially, the language appears very polite. By today's comparison, one may think that to bo be true. Upon closeer inspection, you can see that isn't the case at all.
If you evaluate the way things are said only in the piece,
solely on the surface and removed from the context of the time, it does seem as
if they are being painstakingly polite. I site the line on page 579 for my
example. It reads, "It is clear, my dear Raphael, that you seek neither
wealth nor power, and indeed I value and revere a man of such a disposition as
much as I do the mightiest persons in the world."
Plucked from the context of the time, the identity of the author, and isolated from the text, it seems as if he were paying Raphael a great compliment. However, he immediately follows the statement with the line, "Yet I think that if you would devote your time and energy to public affairs, you would do a thing worthy of a generous and philosophical nature, even if you did not much like it."
Sir Thomas More was a man in who was a personal counselor to Henry the VIII. He had strong and controversial ideas. In this respect, he never compromised and would place his thoughts in the ear of the court, and the king himself, even at the risk of personal detriment. It was his strong convictions that eventually caused him his life when King Henry VIII had him beheaded.
I feel that More was actually insulting Raphael. He was essentially stating that it was all well and good to sit back and reflect on what is wrong with the world, but the real challenge was in applying yourself to make a change in the world you find fault with. Reading the work, is obvious the scorn that More has for those in power and he said he revered Raphael as much as he revered the mightiest in the world. That, in my opinion, was not very polite at all.
Should we follow this same pattern of speech in today's world? Sometimes we do. We are often more flattering and polite to strangers or others in the workforce. We often will placate someone with niceties and know when others are nice to us with ulterior motives in mind. The expression "kill them with kindness" puts it in perspective. Things are not so different from now and then at all.
Plucked from the context of the time, the identity of the author, and isolated from the text, it seems as if he were paying Raphael a great compliment. However, he immediately follows the statement with the line, "Yet I think that if you would devote your time and energy to public affairs, you would do a thing worthy of a generous and philosophical nature, even if you did not much like it."
Sir Thomas More was a man in who was a personal counselor to Henry the VIII. He had strong and controversial ideas. In this respect, he never compromised and would place his thoughts in the ear of the court, and the king himself, even at the risk of personal detriment. It was his strong convictions that eventually caused him his life when King Henry VIII had him beheaded.
I feel that More was actually insulting Raphael. He was essentially stating that it was all well and good to sit back and reflect on what is wrong with the world, but the real challenge was in applying yourself to make a change in the world you find fault with. Reading the work, is obvious the scorn that More has for those in power and he said he revered Raphael as much as he revered the mightiest in the world. That, in my opinion, was not very polite at all.
Should we follow this same pattern of speech in today's world? Sometimes we do. We are often more flattering and polite to strangers or others in the workforce. We often will placate someone with niceties and know when others are nice to us with ulterior motives in mind. The expression "kill them with kindness" puts it in perspective. Things are not so different from now and then at all.
Everyman - A Middle Ages Morality Play
"Everyman" is an example of English morality plays that were written in the middle ages. This particular play was written around the middle of the era that these plays existed (1400-1579). It also corresponds with a tumultuous point of the protestant reformation movement in England. I think that the morality play, citing examples specifically from "Everyman" was a tool used by the Catholic church to reach the public and an attempt to dissuade them from the protestant church.
The play's main theme involves the salvation of Everyman through Good Deeds. Everyman is visited by death and after approaching the personified Kindred, Cousin, Goods, Knowledge, Beauty, Strength, Five-Wits, Discretion,and Fellowship. Each forsakes him and he is left with only Good Deeds (whom he resurrects through charitable actions). It is Good Deeds that ultimately get Everyman into heaven.
Although it is Catholic doctrine that embraces entry into heaven through charitable works, this is not the reason that I feel Everyman was a specific tool of the Catholic Church to battle Protestantism.
It is the characters Knowledge and Five-Wits that I find most suspect. Beginning in line 758, Knowledge states, "Sinful priests giveth the sinners example bad: Their children sitteth by other men's fires, I have heard; And some haunteth women's company With unclean life, as lusts of lechery. These be with sin made blind." This would be the voice of the Protestant movement whose secession was partially related to the corruption of the priests in the Catholic Church (among other reasons of course). The rebuttal of the Catholic Church follows as a response from Five-Wits, "I trust to God no such may we find. Therefore let us priesthood honor, And follow their doctrine for our souls' succor. We be their sheep and they shepherds be By whom we all be kept in surety." Essential, the Catholic Church is telling the audience, don't listen to what others tell you they know, use your wits. You could not have been witnesses yourselves (using your 5 senses) of such things, so don't listen.
Many types of art (visual, literature, architecture, song, plays) were commissioned by the Catholic Church and I believe that "Everyman" is an example.
The play's main theme involves the salvation of Everyman through Good Deeds. Everyman is visited by death and after approaching the personified Kindred, Cousin, Goods, Knowledge, Beauty, Strength, Five-Wits, Discretion,and Fellowship. Each forsakes him and he is left with only Good Deeds (whom he resurrects through charitable actions). It is Good Deeds that ultimately get Everyman into heaven.
Although it is Catholic doctrine that embraces entry into heaven through charitable works, this is not the reason that I feel Everyman was a specific tool of the Catholic Church to battle Protestantism.
It is the characters Knowledge and Five-Wits that I find most suspect. Beginning in line 758, Knowledge states, "Sinful priests giveth the sinners example bad: Their children sitteth by other men's fires, I have heard; And some haunteth women's company With unclean life, as lusts of lechery. These be with sin made blind." This would be the voice of the Protestant movement whose secession was partially related to the corruption of the priests in the Catholic Church (among other reasons of course). The rebuttal of the Catholic Church follows as a response from Five-Wits, "I trust to God no such may we find. Therefore let us priesthood honor, And follow their doctrine for our souls' succor. We be their sheep and they shepherds be By whom we all be kept in surety." Essential, the Catholic Church is telling the audience, don't listen to what others tell you they know, use your wits. You could not have been witnesses yourselves (using your 5 senses) of such things, so don't listen.
Many types of art (visual, literature, architecture, song, plays) were commissioned by the Catholic Church and I believe that "Everyman" is an example.
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Middle English Lyrics
The Middle English Lyrics are a collection of short verse from the middle ages. I chose to discuss the pieces "Westron Wind" and "My Lief Is Faren in Londe". Because of their brevity, I will include the entire texts here.
Westron Wind
"Westron wind, when will though blow?
The small rain down can rain.
Christ, that my love were in my arms,
and I in my bed again."
I believe that this particular piece of literature was one that was not normally written, but was sung by sailors out to sea,. It was said almost as a prayer. The Vikings had invaded Middle Ages England and are well remembered for their proficiency on the sea. I think that this song was sung by the viking sailors and soldiers who traveled from England to their home. It was a song that was sung out of a longing to be home in their motherland and with their wives.
My Lief Is Faren in Londe
"My lief is faren in londe -
Allas, why is she so?
And I am so sore bonde
I may nat come her to.
She hath myn herte in holde
Wherever she ride or go -
With trewe love a thousand folde."
This poem is somewhat the opposite. Here, the fair maiden is again the beloved, but it is she that has traveled far from home. This verse speaks of longing to be near her but he is unable to due so due to the distance now between them. This doesn't alter his love for her, but rather, it seems to strengthen it as expressed in the last two lines.
Westron Wind
"Westron wind, when will though blow?
The small rain down can rain.
Christ, that my love were in my arms,
and I in my bed again."
I believe that this particular piece of literature was one that was not normally written, but was sung by sailors out to sea,. It was said almost as a prayer. The Vikings had invaded Middle Ages England and are well remembered for their proficiency on the sea. I think that this song was sung by the viking sailors and soldiers who traveled from England to their home. It was a song that was sung out of a longing to be home in their motherland and with their wives.
My Lief Is Faren in Londe
"My lief is faren in londe -
Allas, why is she so?
And I am so sore bonde
I may nat come her to.
She hath myn herte in holde
Wherever she ride or go -
With trewe love a thousand folde."
This poem is somewhat the opposite. Here, the fair maiden is again the beloved, but it is she that has traveled far from home. This verse speaks of longing to be near her but he is unable to due so due to the distance now between them. This doesn't alter his love for her, but rather, it seems to strengthen it as expressed in the last two lines.
Chaucer - A Nun's Priest's Tale
In the Chaucer's "The Nun's Priest's Tale", Pertelote (Chauntecleer's wife) has a strong reaction to Chauntecleer's emotional state following a nightmare he had in which he died. I believe that Pertelote's reaction is contradictory to the socially accepted gender roles of the Middle Ages and is what ultimately forces Chauntecleer into a role that would be deemed more appropriate for a man. This forces him to face his fear and overcome it.
During the Middle Ages, women were perceived to be the inferior sex. This is made evident in story. My main reference for justification is this: in lines 343-346 Chauntecleer quotes a Latin phrase to Pertelote. He tells her that the phrase "In principio, Mulier est hominis confusio" means "Woman is man's joy in all his bliss". In actuality, it is translated to mean "Woman is man's ruination". Pertelote was Chauntecleer's saving grace. She forces Chauntecleer out of the hall and into the yard. Beginning in line 90, after the nightmare, She tells him "Now han ye lost myn heart and al my love! I can nat love a coward,by my faith. For certes, what so any womman saith, we alle desiren, if it mighte be, To han hosbondes hardy, wise, and free." She continues to belittle Chauntecleer through line 149. Some may perceive this to have pushed Chauntecleer into harms way. This is not so. It was Pertelote's aggressive and dominant nature exhibited through "henpecking" that eventually drove Chauntecleer into the yard and saves his manhood.
If he had stayed inside the hall, succumbed to his fear, his wives would have been the target for the fox and he would have been ridiculed for being a coward. Since he did confront the fox and ultimately win, he changed the course of action, proved the dream to be wrong, and was a hero.
During the Middle Ages, women were perceived to be the inferior sex. This is made evident in story. My main reference for justification is this: in lines 343-346 Chauntecleer quotes a Latin phrase to Pertelote. He tells her that the phrase "In principio, Mulier est hominis confusio" means "Woman is man's joy in all his bliss". In actuality, it is translated to mean "Woman is man's ruination". Pertelote was Chauntecleer's saving grace. She forces Chauntecleer out of the hall and into the yard. Beginning in line 90, after the nightmare, She tells him "Now han ye lost myn heart and al my love! I can nat love a coward,by my faith. For certes, what so any womman saith, we alle desiren, if it mighte be, To han hosbondes hardy, wise, and free." She continues to belittle Chauntecleer through line 149. Some may perceive this to have pushed Chauntecleer into harms way. This is not so. It was Pertelote's aggressive and dominant nature exhibited through "henpecking" that eventually drove Chauntecleer into the yard and saves his manhood.
If he had stayed inside the hall, succumbed to his fear, his wives would have been the target for the fox and he would have been ridiculed for being a coward. Since he did confront the fox and ultimately win, he changed the course of action, proved the dream to be wrong, and was a hero.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)