There's Nothing 'Civil' About a 'Civil War', and No 'Civilization' With Savagery

Being civil in our society is not as valued as it used to be.  Chivalry used to be a big thing, and it was encouraged for young men to be chivalrous to women in order that they my treat their future wife in the same gentle way.  There are two definitions for civil - one means "civil and polite", and the other is "of or relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military matters".

A Civil War is far from Civil - it is the end of civilization and the beginning of vicious, animal savagery.  It is the split of a nation, and breaking democracy and all things that unite, and therefore does not fall under normal citizens and their concerns, because a war is between governments, and their tin soldiers that are no longer human - they become numbers.  All soldiers are numbers once they step onto the battlefield.  Casualty numbers, ranks, coordinates that they are located at...the list goes on.

People in a war are no longer people.  We refer to them as a group - a faceless group who dies off and where people are killed,  but it is just a group.  Civilians are just "civilians" or "civilian casualties".  They aren't specific people.
We put a certain meaning on these things, but the deaths are a passing thing and mean nothing to us.  It's an unreal situation when someone dies - whether in war or someone close to us.  William Golding explains it well - after all the boys kill Simon when Ralph and Piggy are talking: Ralph continued to rock to and fro.  "It was an accident," said Piggy suddenly, "that's what it was.  An accident."  His voice shrilled again.  "Coming in the dark-he had no business crawling like that out of the dark.  He was batty.  He asked for it."..."You didn't see what they did-" (157).

The boys start to convince themselves that they were never in the circle that killed Simon, even though they are just as guilty as all the rest of the boys who have turned savage.  They convince everyone else around them that they were on the outside and didn't take part in the dance.  The thing becomes 'an accident', as Piggy says (Golding 157), and the boys force themselves to believe that it never happened and was all a dream.  Any death takes on a surreal quality - even the death of something as small as the death of a wild animal.  There seems like a sacred line that cannot be crossed unless you are cruel.

I cannot stand blood, though I write about it in my books.  Blood means life, and it also shows the absence of life.  Killing an animal, to me, is crossing the line from civil to savage.  Now, I'm not talking about the meat we eat for food - that is fine with me because I don't see it done and it is done for food.  I'm talking about the brutal killing of something just for sport.  Most people when they hunt, hunt to get venison or meat as well as hides and pictures and antlers.  What I see as savage is poaching.  That is falling into the cold-blooded killing of a being without good reason to kill except for evil black market money.

In Lord of the Flies, the killing of the sow (Golding 135) illustrates this savagery perfectly.  When the boys go hunting, they don't really go hunting for meat.  They could just eat fruit and they would survive just fine without the meat, but instead, they go hunting, and when they find the sow and are ready to strike the killing blow, they torture her and stab her for a long time just to see her blood.  They don't end her pain swiftly as most hunters would do, but purposely try to bring her pain before they kill her.  When they finally do kill her, though, the exhilaration fades quickly and soon they are back to hunting for food and not for sport.  The urge to injure and hurt overpowers them, and the savagery overpowers the civility they might have once had when they might have just killed the pig straight away and not tortured her.  There can be no civility where savagery reigns.

I think that killing pigs is a way for Jack to look superior because he can hunt and Ralph cannot (image), but also because he has a thirst for blood.  He wants to kill because some primal urge in him is pushing him to 'turn to the dark side' and kill only for the exhilaration of killing something (savagery).  This is also what pushes him and the boys to beat Robert: Presently they were all jabbing at Robert who made mock rushes.  Jack shouted.  "Make a ring!"  The circle moved in and around.  Robert squealed in mock terror, then in real pain...the butt end of a spear butt fell on his back as he blundered among them...They got his arms and legs.  Ralph, carried away by a sudden thick excitement, grabbed Eric's spear and jabbed at Robert with it.(Golding 114).

At this point in the story, I thought that Robert would be killed, because the boys then chant "kill him!  Kill him!" and Robert begins to struggle.  What is strange is how the boys, after this point when they realize that they want to kill someone (and almost kill Robert), they go straight to 'that was a good game' as Jack says (Golding 115).  They don't seem to want to admit that they are turning savage, though the evidence of their savagery is everywhere.  They don't care about the conch anymore.

It only has power for Piggy and Ralph, and Jack says that it doesn't work on the side of the island that he controls: "And the conch doesn't count at this end of the island-" (Golding 150).  They want to kill and hunt more, and they even make a 'tribe' where Jack says they will have fun.  They call him Chief, even though they elected Ralph chief, and all are referred to as savages.  They lose their identity and names and become just 'savages'.  They no longer know who they are, and are fully inducted into the savage tribe, where their identity is.  Even their chant betrays their true inner feelings and how swayed they have been by blood and savagery: "Kill the pig!  Cut his throat!  Kill the pig!  Bash him in!" (Golding 114).  Or as seen when they do their dance that kills Simon: "Kill the beast!  Cut his throat!  Spill his blood!" (Golding 152).

Once savagery begins to take root, then civilization ceases to exist and order is replaced by chaos.  It is almost impossible to fix and change back to order again.  Just as it is difficult to move from one end of the good and evil alignment chart (provided here for your benefit), it is hard to move from chaos to order, and from savagery to civilization.


The only thing that is not hard to do is make a good person evil and change a good civilization into a savage one.  The easiest way to do that is to create a 'civil' war as Ralph and Jack did in Lord of the Flies.

-bookhouse4

Sources:

• Lord of the Flies by William Golding
• The picture on the right -->
• Google definitions

Hopeful In Fear: Stories of the Value of Hope and Fear

Hope.  The light at the end of the tunnel.  Lots of people think that hope is just another word, like what we've made love into.  It's meaningless.  All is meaningless.  "Love" is just a word in the English language.  In Greek there are six different words for love - they all mean different things.  The different words are eros, philia, ludus, agape, pragma, and philautia.  Love in our language is just a word.

Hope shouldn't be just a word.  Hope is so much more.  I'll begin by telling a story, because that is what I love to do.  Stories can be more powerful than articles, which are what most blog posts are.  This is different.

Disclaimer: I made these stories up to illustrate a point.  Some of the following stories are based off of historical occurrences, and some stories may be based off of current events.  Don't take them seriously.  They are not facts.  They are just ideas.

Story #1 - Based off the Graphic Novel MAUS (I and II)

Pain ends pain ends pain ends, the terrified woman thought to herself.  It was the time that people would later refer to as World War II, and the young woman was trapped in a concentration camp called Auschwitz.  The Auschwitz motto over the gate was "ARBIET MACHT FREI" or "work makes one free".  It was a lie.  Every day the woman lived in constant fear of everything that might happen to her.  There was the fear that if she didn't stand right, then the Nazis would kill her, and there were many more fears like it.  It was a horrible existence.  She didn't know whether she would live or die.  The only hope she held was of escaping the camp - that and the fact that her husband was in the other Auschwitz camp.  He was waiting for the war to end.  He had planned to get transferred to her camp as a worker, so they could see each other (Spiegelman 56)

It was love, but yet something about it made it seem like it was obligatory.  That the love was to prove something to the world.  It was beginning to feel fake.  The woman didn't want it to be, but there was no mistaking it.  This was a fear she carried with her, or at least she thought it was fear...

What she actually felt was anxiety.  An overwhelming, crushing thing that wanted to destroy her.  Anxiety is the worrying about something that is just a rumor or that may happen, but is not guaranteed.  Fear in the Auschwitz camp is fear, because the Jews knew the consequences for doing something that the Nazis had "outlawed", but the fear of thinking that your husband doesn't truly love you is anxiety because it might not be true.  You just worry that it is true (Godin 1).

As told in MAUS, Vladek Spiegelman and Anja, his wife, are struggling to keep a relationship and each other alive so that they can be together after the war.  They seem to have such a great relationship, but it seems a bit overdone, and Anja doesn't accept all of the food that Vladek sneaks to her.  Soon after they see each other for the first time since they were transferred to the concentration camps, Vladek is beaten because he spoke to Anja.  This became a fear for him - that he would be beaten again or that Anja would get beaten but wouldn't survive (Spiegelman 56).

Story #2 - Based off The Lady or the Tiger

You stand in an arena, surrounded by the subjects of the kingdom.  You stand charged of loving the daughter of the king.  He has devised a test to figure out how to punish people who are charged of doing wrong.  Behind you are two doors.  One has behind it a lady, whom you will marry if you pick her door.  The other has an enraged, starved tiger behind it.  If you pick that door, then you will be dead in an instant.  You stare up at the king and his daughter.  The king is about to announce that you need to pick a door.  Everyone knows the procedure, but the king wants to reiterate it just in case anyone happened to miss it, and also for formality.  Your eyes turn toward your lover.  You know that they know which door the lady and the tiger stand behind - they probably found out as soon as it was announced that you were to stand trial.

They point a finger, very casually and secretively, to the right.  Not a trace of doubt clouds your vision as you turn and walk to the door on the right to open it.  You know that your lover chose for both of you what was best, and even though you don't know what is behind the door, you know that your lover made the right decision.  As you open the door, something shifts in the shadows...
But what was behind the door?  Were you killed in an instant, or were you married?  There is no storybook ending to this, where the lady behind the door is really the princess, who disguised herself and tied up the lady that was supposed to be there.  And the tiger is not tamed.  The doors and the rooms behind them are filled - that you know for sure.  There is no chance of the tiger's room being empty, and there is no chance that neither of them are filled.
What did they choose?  This question haunts your steps as you walk.  Your lover just decided your fate.  What did they choose?  It echoes in your mind as your hand closes on the handle to the door on the right.  It is agonizing to wait in suspense.

And what did you want them to choose?  Death by the tiger so that you didn't have to marry the woman, or the woman so that you did not have to die?
In the story The Lady or the Tiger, this scenario is played out.  There is fear on both sides - for both you and your lover.  The princess is afraid for losing her would-have-been husband - whether it be by the marriage of you to another lady (whom the princess is jealous of and hates), or through death by tiger - and you are terrified that they made the decision that you didn't want.  But first you have to figure out this: what did the man want, in the story?  Death, or marriage and life?
There is hope that the princess chose life for you, and there is fear that they chose death.  Everyone is afraid of death, until they are in a situation where they will inevitably die.  Frank Richard Stockton says this in the story: Every heart stopped beating, every breath was held, every eye fixed immovably upon that man.  Without the slightest hesitation, he went to the door on the right, and opened it (7).

Hope is powerful, and fear is powerful.  Sometimes they seem like almost the same thing.  You cannot have hope without fear.  Fear controls you until you believe that there is a light at the end of the tunnel and there is a way out.  Sometimes it seems like you have to sacrifice more to win that hope, but there are always sacrifices.  As Kurt Vonnegut explains in All the King's Horses, "Necessity, like a child counting eeny, meeny miney, moe around a circle, pointed its finger at the one chessman who could be sacrificed.  There was only one" (16).

Story #3 - from All the King's Horses by Kurt Vonnegut

In the story, an American Colonel is forced to play a game of chess against the Asian warlord Pi Ying - but his chess pieces are his own men, and when they are captured by the warlord, they are immediately killed.  Soon there are only a few of the Colonel's men left, as well as his wife and twin boys.  Suddenly the Colonel sees that the only way he can win the game and put Pi Ying in check is to offer a sacrifice to bait the warlord.
Colonel Kelly begins to think of the one person to be sacrificed as only x in a "mathematical proposition", and then sees the hope - he may get out alive, with everyone else, if he sacrifices that one person.  He no longer feels fear of losing the one, but the hope of getting the rest of them out alive.
Margaret, the Colonel's wife, feels something entirely different.  She is consumed by the fear of losing her sons, and so her actions, had she been in the place of Kelly, would have killed them all and left them no hope of escape.  I don't know exactly what I'm trying to say here, but the two emotions are powerful.  They can be hard to define, but fear and hope are two of the most powerful emotions in the world (in my opinion, the other three are faith, love and courage/bravery.  Feel free to dispute the connection between the last two words, I am not going to go there).

Story #4 - based off of Unbroken by Laura Hillenbrand

Prisoners of war, trapped in Japan, face fears every day.  The fear of being beaten.  The fear of a psycho camp commander.  All these fears raise anxiety to a point that is unbearable.  Yet some POWs were able to stand and have courage in the face of death, danger, and fears.

In Unbroken, Mutsuhiro Watanabe (or "the Bird") terrifies all the prisoners with his unexpected outbursts.  Suddenly they have fears that if they do something, the corporal will beat them or even kill them.  This leads to anxiety about everything, which may be how some soldiers who fought in wars end up with PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder).  Those soldiers who have it are scarred and constantly wary.

During World War II, there was a Japanese corporal who was very abusive and would lash out for no reason at all against the Prisoners of War in his camp.  One time, a man mentioned the word "gangway!" to clear his men out of the corporal's way, and was then beaten.  Then Watanabe had a change of heart and apologized, but then changed his mind yet again.  "After Bush went to bed, Watanabe returned and forced him to his knees.  For three hours, Watanabe besieged Bush, kicking him and hacking off his hair with his sword.  He left for two hours, then returned again.  Bush expected to be murdered.  Instead, Watanabe took him to his office, hugged him, and gave him beer and handfuls of candy and cigarettes.  Through tears, he apologized and promised never to mistreat another POW.  His resolution didn't last.  Later that night, he picked up a kendo stick...and ran shrieking into a barracks, clubbing every man he saw" (Hillenbrand, 158).

Fear can control us, but hope can reach past it, even though hope isn't always a good thing (as illustrated in All the King's Horses).  You can't have hope without fear, and you cannot have fear without hope for something better.  When you have fear, you look for hope, but when you have hope, you do not look for fear.  You are still hopeful and do not want to leave.

These emotions can be powerful, but hope and fear can be a choice as well.  They can be instincts, or things that nag at the back of your mind, but they are still powerful.

  

-bookhouse4

Sources

• the Bible
• http://www.yesmagazine.org/happiness/the-ancient-greeks-6-words-for-love-and-why-knowing-them-can-change-your-life
• MAUS II (and I - I read both)
• All the King's Horses, by Kurt Vonnegut
• The Lady or the Tiger, by Frank Richard Stockton
• Unbroken, by Laura Hillenbrand
• Fear and Anxiety by Seth Godin

A Cave, Luxury, and Justice Today

"And now," I said, "let me show in a figure how far our nature is enlightened: -Behold! human beings living in an underground den, which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching all along the den; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legs and necks chained so that they can not move, and can only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads.

"Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show puppets..." (Plato, Book VII The Republic pg 177)

Here's what that kind of looks like:

Allegory of the Cave: Greatest, most repeated idea ever.  People in cave, looking at shadows that they think are real, then someone comes in and frees someone and shows them the light outside the cave, and then...AAAAAAUUUGGGGHHH I'M BLINDED BY THE TRUTH LIGHT!  SOMEONE HELP ME!!!

That's just my summary of it.  If you really want to know what the 'Allegory of the Cave' is, then go here to see more of what it's about and what I'm going to be talking about (this is to anyone who just happens to stumble upon this blog post).

I think that there is a parallel between the Allegory of the Cave and how our education system works.  The Cave is where we are when we enter school and learn the shadows of things along with everyone else.  We aren't told the whole truth, but we are all given shadows of truth to watch.  When we enter Quest, that all changes.  Suddenly we see things that weren't there before, like the truth behind who Christopher Columbus really was (horrible guy - why does he have his own day?), and what justice truly is (I'll get to this later in this post).  In Quest, we are advanced, and so the world of our knowledge and understanding that we thought was expanding is actually changing from darkness and shadows into light.  We go from knowing shadows of things to seeing the light outside the Cave - sometimes so brightly that it hurts our eyes, our heads, AND challenges our hearts.

It is then that we realize that we were not told everything, and we try to go back into the Cave to bring others out.  Sometimes we just scare and confuse them, but sometimes what we say catches their interest, and they want to understand what we understand.  Then we can bring those people into the light and show them the truth, and they become "Quest", even if they are technically not in the Quest class.

Quest can be the guardians going into the Cave to save others, but we need to approach the others - who are left in the Cave - the right way.  This is difficult, because we often feel the temptation to ridicule and insult and "win" over the other side, which just pushes them away from our point of view and pulls them closer to their shadowy point of view.

The Cave is only one subject that is hard to understand.  The other that I am choosing to talk about is the idea of luxury.  In The Republic, Glaucon dislikes Socrates' state (called the city of pigs), because everyone in it gets the bare essentials and only works for what they need to survive every day.  Glaucon wants the people to have more than enough food and materials so that they can have luxury items like those brought from other states.  Luxury can be good - it can up self esteem and the wealth of the city, but luxury also makes justice really hard because everyone has a different level of luxury.

Not everyone is on the same plain.  Some people have more than the standard, and some have less.  Luxury means that in order to keep fights from breaking out between those with more and those with less, there must be justice to say what is right and wrong.  Luxury without justice is dangerous.

In our society, there must be justice so that we know when someone has overstepped their "place" in society.  Those who are poor cannot become rich by stealing from the greater people, and those who are rich cannot steal from the poor to increase their riches and wealth, because that is unjust and against the law.  Sometimes they cannot even give away their money to help certain causes because the causes are unjust, or people say "why are you giving money to that cause when you could be helping this cause?" or something like that.

Justice brings the possibility of bad justice to come about, though, which adds another layer of complexity to the already-complex idea of justice.

What more people need to understand is this: justice is impossible.  No one can be truly just.  It's just too hard to be "just", and when you are, you do not live a happy life.  You cannot have perfect justice - ever.  People will always be faced with hard decisions (people who are supposed to be 'just'), and they will never be able to make the perfect decision that is completely just and that every person will accept.  Even if we did retaliate every time there was a murder of someone of another race, we have to understand that justice will never be fully served.  Leaders cannot please everyone.  Not everyone will always be happy with decisions, but it is (sometimes) impossible to change those decisions.  We can protest, but if the government and their "justice" doesn't agree with what you are doing, then you will have to live with their decision.  They may even label YOU "unjust", but there is nothing you can do.

Justice can never be perfect.  That is what people need to understand so that the world can be a better place.

-bookhouse4

Sources:

• The Republic  by Plato
• Class discussions
• Something that I'm currently blanking on - sorry

When Things Fall Apart and Traditions are Forgotten - A Blog Post on the Book by Chinua Achebe

Things Fall Apart is a book illustrating change.  At first I couldn't figure out what the title meant, and then I thought it might be that Okonkwo's life is falling apart, but now I realize that the title shows two things: a tradition-based culture falling apart, and the beliefs of one man destroyed and breaking down.

What not a lot of people realize is that traditions are important, even on the brink of change (be it dramatic or not).  Traditions can lend meaning to things that people do not entirely understand, and explain to a specific group of people why certain things happen, or the role(s) of those things in our lives.

In Things Fall Apart, traditions help to settle disputes and keep everyone peaceful during one week, as well as explain the "supernatural" happenings around them (such as ogbanje).
During the Week of Peace in Umofia (Achebe 29-31), beating your wife is not allowed, nor is any other sort of violence.  When that tradition is broken, there are punishments:

Okonkwo's neighbors heard his wife crying and sent their voices over the compound walls to ask what was the matter...It was unheard of to beat somebody during the sacred week.  Before it was dusk Ezeani, who was the priest of the earth goddess, Ani, called on Okonkwo in his obi..."The evil you have done can ruin the whole clan...The earth goddess...may refuse to give us her increase, and we shall all perish." His tone now changed from anger to command. "You will bring to the shrine of Ani tomorrow one she-goat, one hen, a length of cloth and a hundred cowries" (Achebe 30-31).

 That occurrence was the first time in many years that someones had broken the sacred peace.  The traditions demanded that Okonkwo pay for his disregard for traditions, and also sought to reveal why others should not follow in his footsteps and why they should refrain from breaking the peace.
Another place that traditions are helpful in protecting and holding together a culture is when it is time for the "spirits" of the nine tribes come to settle lawsuits and prevent fights from breaking out between clansmen and between relatives.  The "spirits" are part of the tradition of the culture in Umofia, and can sometimes get through to people who would not accept anyone else's opinion or rebuke -

"I don't know why such a trifle should come before the egwugwu," said one elder to another.   

"Don't you know what kind of man Uzowulu is?  He will not listen to any other decision," replied the other (Achebe 94).

Some men in the clan (like Obeirika) do not understand why some traditions are necessary, such as throwing twins into the forest to die.  Obeirika wonders what crime they committed that they had to be killed.  He wonders why the accidental killing of a clansmen by Okonkwo warrants such a harsh punishment of seven years in exile.

Why should a man suffer so grievously for an offense he had committed inadvertently?  But although he thought for a long time...He was merely led into greater complexities.  He remembered his wife's twin children, whom he had thrown away.  What crime had they committed? (Achebe 125).

Crimes against their gods and/or goddesses are those offenses that warrant punishment in their culture.  Rules and laws dictated by years of their specific culture, through specific rituals, are those that must be followed.  When a tradition is not followed, as mentioned before, there are punishments.
The reason why those traditions are not so easily changed is the fact that most everyone accepts them.  The whole village scorns other teaching, and is fully devoted to the following of their gods.  Attempting to change a way of thinking is really hard do do, and so the traditions and rules must continue to be followed, no matter what someone else thinks.

On the verge of change, traditions offer some comfort to those who are seeing the change as "bad" or as something needing to be destroyed and struck down.  The culture of Umofia dictated that kinsmen must band together, as in the feast Okonkwo prepares for his kinsmen right before he is to return to Umofia.  One of the oldest members of the umunna said this about kinship:

"As for me, I have only a short while to live, and so have Uchendu and Unachukwu and Emefo.  But I fear for you young people because you do not understand how strong is the bond of kinship.  You do not know what it is to speak with one voice.  And what is the result?  An abominable religion has settled among you.  A man can now leave his father and his brothers.  He can curse the gods of his fathers and his ancestors...[to Okonkwo] Thank you for calling us together" (Achebe 167).

These people in Mbanta don't understand how a village as strong as Umofia could fall to a foreign religion, but they take comfort in the fact that they are unmoving, and they have a place to hide from the "abominable" religion.

For those who have seen the new religion as something more, their old beliefs are something to compare their new beliefs to.  They can look back at their culture, see what they have done and what doesn't fit, and then embrace wholeheartedly the new religion, with no doubts about their choice.
Nwoye makes the decision to fully and completely leave his family, because he does not like the way his father is allowed to treat him in his house (Achebe 152).  Okonwko's older traditions and culture actually drive a huge rift between him and his first-born son, while Nwoye embraces the new religion, as well as a new Father and new sisters and brothers in the faith.  He sees the traditions as wrong, ever since he learned that his father killed Ikemefuna (Achebe 62), and maybe even before that.

For people kind of right in between in the choice of changing or refusing to change, their known culture helps them to ease into a new culture, with new traditions.  They see that the new religion is not being destroyed, even though it is planted in the Evil Forest, and they check themselves against their culture and the new one, to see where they got it wrong.

Those who decide to change, change slowly - easing into the new culture in a comfortable way.  Once in, they accept the change and leave their old culture behind.
Those who cannot decide stay where they are - not fully accepting their old culture, but not ready to choose a new culture and its traditions.

As I was reading this, I also happened to be reading Divergent for the first time.  I started making some connections.  In Divergent, there is also a culture and a way of life on the verge of change.  Erudite is targeting the leadership, and trying to control the rest of the factions.  In Things Fall Apart, the change is not so violent, and actually comes peacefully through the pastor Mr. Brown.

When the world of Divergent starts to change and things "fall apart", the main character, Tris, starts to worry about her life.  She will be factionless if she does not join Erudite.  This new culture and traditions seems scary at first, just as Christianity looks scary and odd when it first comes to Umofia.
After a while, though, Tris discovers other Divergent like her and begins to place herself into a new "faction" - the Divergent.  The old ideas of "factions" may be falling apart, but Tris finds a way to ease into it by creating her own personal faction, and mentally adding other Divergent to it.

Last summer I read the amazing book Fly By Night by Frances Hardinge.  That book sets down a place with a very interesting culture: there are hundreds and hundreds of "little gods" called the Beloved.  Each Beloved has a job, be it keeping "snarps" from stealing children, or controlling the flies...and each person chooses a Beloved to worship.  If you're born on a certain day at a certain hour, you're named for the Beloved of that hour.  The main character was named for the Beloved Goodman Palpitattle, He Who Keeps Flies Out of Jams and Butter Churns.  There are actually two main characters: Mosca Mye (the one named for Goodman Palpitattle) and Eponymous Clent.
Near the end of the story, when Mosca is finally given the chance to be free and to know how to read, she is able to read some things of her father's: things that showed him to be an atheist.

"My father's book was much better...all the men praying for the Beloved's advice felt a great wind about them...They run out of the cathedral with Beloved swarming all over them, like bees over a beekeeper, all buzzin' their wishes at once...When the men was almost goin' mad with the sound of thousands of voices, they covered their ears and yelled for the Beloved to leave 'em to decide everythin' for themselves.  The Beloved said they were needed there to keep the moon-blot beetles out of the lanterns, an' peel the skin from the milk, an' stop the snarps stealin' children.  But the men told 'em to leave the world anyway...an' the Beloved did.  And nothin' changed at all, 'cause there never were any Beloved, just people making their voices up in their heads..." 

"That is a very charming story, Mosca.  Never tell it again."  (Hardinge 476-477)

Mosca goes on to say that her father didn't believe in the Beloved, and Clent explains that they need to let the clerics and scholars decide whether or not they need the Beloved.  Then they walk past a shrine, with citizens walking past and leaving an offering for each of the Beloved.  Mosca realizes that the Beloved were needed to give people something to believe in, or there would be confusion, and no one would know what to think (Hardinge 478).

Mosca is ready to embrace a world without beloved, and Clent is not.  He wants to stick to his beliefs in the Beloved, like the people of Umofia to their culture that is so unlike what Christianity teaches.
People need something to believe in, until they are ready to take a step into the unknown and change their traditions as their culture changes.

-bookhouse4

Sources:

• Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe
• Divergent by Veronica Roth
• Fly By Night by Frances Hardinge
• McCallum 

Why a Pattern? Women now compared to women in Hamlet

I think that women are being viewed in the play as weak and easily controlled.  They are thought of as worthless or of lesser value because they are "weaker" than men, even though certain characters (like Ophelia), to me, were worth more than the male characters in the story.  When Ophelia is insane, she is speaking truth about Gertrude and Claudius' treachery, without being blamed for it because she is actually insane.

Other than that, most other women characters (there was like two total) are considered weak, and women in general are considered weak.  Hamlet says: "Frailty, thy name is woman!" (1.2.146b).

And then, before he battles Laertes, he is feeling anxiety, and a strange feeling that something will go wrong in his fencing match.  At that time, he says this: "It is but foolery, but it is such a kind of gain-giving as would/perhaps trouble a woman" (5.2. 203-04).

Hamlet obviously believes in the superiority of men, and also that he has the "right" to try and control a woman, like he tries to use Ophelia to further the extent of his fake insanity (that I believe eventually turns into insanity). [Ophelia] " 'My lord,...Lord Hamlet,...with a look so piteous in purport As if he had been loosed out of hell To speak of horrors -- he comes before me.' [Polonius] 'Mad for thy love?' [Ophelia] 'My lord, I do not know.  But truly, I do fear it.' [Polonius] 'What said he?' [Ophelia] 'He took me by the wrist and held me hard...And, with his other hand thus o'er his brow, He falls to such perusal of my face As he would draw it.  Long stayed he so...That done, he lets me go, And, with his head over his shoulder turned, He seemed to find his way without his eyes, For out o' doors he went without their helps, And to the last bended their light on me' "(2.1.77-100)

I believe that this scene was a scene to show how Hamlet uses his love for Ophelia to help shape part of his fake insanity.  He is trying to use her, yet still love her.  At the same time.  GREAT IDEA HAMLET.  WHILE YOU'RE AT IT, HOW ABOUT GETTING A LIFE OTHER THAN INSANITY?

Hamlet also says something about how all women are seductive and trick men into choosing them for their beauty: [Hamlet] " ' Or, if thou wilt needs marry, marry a fool, for wise men know well enough what monsters you make of them.  To a nunnery, go, and quickly too.  Farewell.' " (3.1.138-39).
 Hamlet is telling Ophelia that all women are seductive, and cannot be trusted.  And also that their love is false and blows away, like Hamlet's mother's love for Hamlet's real father: [Hamlet] " 'Is this the prologue or the posy of a ring?' [Ophelia] ' 'Tis brief, my lord.' [Hamlet] 'As woman's love.' " (3.2.137-39).

Last point: Hamlet also mentions, near the end of the play, that no makeup can save a woman from death: " 'Alas, poor Yorik!...Not one now to mock your own grinning?  Quite cheapfallen?  Now get you to my lady's chamber and tell her, let her paint an inch thick, to  this favor she must come.  Make her laugh at that.' " (5.1.start at line 168, then 175-77).
I think that this is a metaphor for treachery.  No matter how much you try to cover up what has been done, that cover cannot hide your treachery.  No veil can cover your shame.

There is lots of similarity between the ideas portrayed in Hamlet and the ideas about women in the modern world.  Today, women are still kind of thought of as the "weaker sex" - not as strong as men at everything.

We're getting better at having strong female characters - in books, in movies, and in video games (characters like Chell from Portal; Kitana, Sonya Blade, and Mileena from the Mortal Combat Series; and Irileth from The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim), but we are also making women the "seductive" sex as well, with those same books, movies, and video games (games such as  League of Legends, which is targeted at males and features many female characters dressed immodestly).

Many movies have a love interest, where the male likes the female, or the female uses her beauty to seduce the male into doing something for her (this is usually when she's working for the bad guys).  There are even lots of women characters that are on the "bad side" or the "dark side" or the "evil side".  I think that in those stories, women are being portrayed as the dark side, and men are the poor guys who are preyed on by those "dark side" females.

And there are still people who say (and I am guilty of this as well) "you scream like a girl!" or "come on, don't be a girl." or even "fight like a man!"; "man up!".  That's mainly the guys talking (most girls usually say "c'mon and fight like a girl!").  Or even in Big Hero 6, when GoGo Tomago says "Stop whining.  Woman up." to Hiro - we're trying to fit people into a category.  If they're a guy, then they are "supposed" to be masculine or fit into a preset "code" of what men are supposed to be.  And sometimes we try to fit women into that code, too - except they don't fit, and so apparently they are not worth as much because they don't fit the "one size fits all" template for men.

We still act like there is one pattern that everyone should fit - either one for men and one for women, or one for everyone to try to fit into.

-bookhouse4

Sources:

• http://nfs.sparknotes.com/hamlet/ (No Fear Shakespeare)
• http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Women_Characters_in_Video_Games
• My personal experience with "personalized" ads from League of Legends  and watching my cousin play it.
• Big Hero 6
• The original play
• Shakespeare
• Other people
• Stuff

I Am From...

*Don't mistake this poem for a horribly done piece; I purposely wrote it so that not everything rhymes or goes together.*

I'm from family trips and sleepless nights,
From perfectionists and "try-hards".
From the climbing tree within our sight,
And from the north star in the cold.

I'm from "Thank you, Father" and running behind,
From the digital pictures of sunsets.
From the hugs of Grandma,
And from the already-known jokes of Grandpa.

I'm from Buffalo and Minnesota,
From Germany and Ireland.
From "Land of the Free",
And from orchestra and even band.

I'm from paw prints in the snow,
From black against the cold.
From love before anything else,
And from gone before I knew.

I'm from "Jesus loves me",
From pearly gates.
From memory verses,
And from "patiently watch and wait".

I'm from Amy and Chris,
From eleven aunts and uncles.
From football on Thanksgiving,
And from innumerous cousins.

I'm from mice and frogs,
From watching the stars.
From running down the hill,
And from fear of driving cars.

I'm from squishing anthills,
From saving the forest.
From wishing for Australia,
And from talking in a British accent.

I'm from silly pointless videos,
From thousands and thousands of photos.
From birthdays without presents,
And from hiking to another waterfall.

I'm from many groups of friends,
From minimums and over achievers.
From jumper cables,
And from fruit ninjas.

I'm from poetry and writing,
From millions of words.
From challenging the limits,
And from learning new chords.

I'm from acting out stories,
From singing to myself.
From crying under the covers,
And from missing friends lost.

I'm from hating evolution,
From the Truth and not the Lie,
I'm from trusting in the Cross,
And from having no fear if I die.

I'm from debating sometimes losing,
From people-rejected ideas,
From persevering on,
And from succeeding in the end.

I'm from Max Mortingham,
From Heretida and Circeryn,
From Kamani and Aero,
And from more of their kin.

I'm from myself and my life,
From my days and my times,
From choosing my own path,
And from living beyond time.

-bookhouse4

I HATE HAMLET AND THIS IS A DIFFICULT BLOG TO WRITE BECAUSE I CAN'T BE CREATIVE IN IT - Essential Question #6

How are women viewed in the play and how are some of those ideas and perceptions resonating today?

I HATE THIS STUPID BLOG.  DIE DIE DIE HAMLET STUPID HAMLET YOU DESERVE YOUR DEATH.  FORTINBRAS WAS SO MUCH BETTER THAN YOU.

Okay.  Done ranting.

Let me first start this off with this: I am not the greatest fan of Hamlet.  I liked The Tragedy of Julius Caesar  better.  But that's just me.

I am also really bored and frustrated with this blog, because you told me what to write.  I hate that.  I also hate having many constraints on blogs.  (450 words < blog; 3 quotes from book; 4-8 OTHER REFERENCES to other things that "support my answer"; strong thesis or claim; etc.)

Anyway, here's my blog:

[STRONG THESIS OR CLAIM]
I think that women are being viewed in the play as weak and easily controlled.  They are thought of as worthless or of lesser value because they are "weaker" than men, even though certain characters (like Ophelia), to me, were worth more than the male characters in the story.  When Ophelia is insane, she is speaking truth about Gertrude and Claudius' treachery, without being blamed for it because she is insane.

Other than that, most other women characters (there was like two total) are considered weak, and women in general are considered weak.  Hamlet says:
[QUOTE #1 FROM PLAY]

"Frailty, thy name is woman!" (1.2.146b).

 And then, before he battles Laertes, he is feeling anxiety, and a strange feeling that something will go wrong in his fencing match.  At that time, he says this:
[QUOTE #2 FROM PLAY]

"It is but foolery, but it is such a kind of gain-giving as would/perhaps trouble a woman" (5.2. 203-04).

Hamlet obviously believes in the superiority of men, and also that he has the "right" to try and control a woman, like he tries to use Ophelia to further the extent of his fake insanity (that I believe eventually turns into insanity).
[QUOTE #3 FROM PLAY]

[Ophelia] " 'My lord, as I was sewing in my closet, Lord Hamlet, with his doublet all unbraced; No hat upon his head; his stockings fouled, Ungartered, and down-gyved to his ankle; Pale as his shirt; his knees knocking each other; And with a look so piteous in purport As if he had been loosed out of hell To speak of horrors -- he comes before me.' [Polonius] 'Mad for thy love?' [Ophelia] 'My lord, I do not know.  But truly, I do fear it.' [Polonius] 'What said he?' [Ophelia] 'He took me by the wrist and held me hard.  Then goes he to the length of all his arm, And, with his other hand thus [<-450th WORD]o'er his brow, He falls to such perusal of my face As he would draw it.  Long stayed he so.  At last, a little shaking of mine arm And thrice his head thus waving up and down, He raised a sigh so piteous and profound As it did seem to shatter all his bulk And end his being.  That done, he lets me go, And, with his head over his shoulder turned, He seemed to find his way without his eyes, For out o' doors he went without their helps, And to the last bended their light on me' "(2.1.77-100)

I believe that this scene was a scene to show how Hamlet uses his love for Ophelia to help shape part of his fake insanity.  He is trying to use her, yet still love her.  At the same time.  GREAT IDEA HAMLET.  WHILE YOU'RE AT IT, HOW ABOUT GETTING A LIFE OTHER THAN INSANITY?

Hamlet also says something about how all women are seductive and trick men into choosing them for their beauty.
[QUOTE #4 FROM PLAY]

[Hamlet] " ' Or, if thou wilt needs marry, marry a fool, for wise men know well enough what monsters you make of them.  To a nunnery, go, and quickly too.  Farewell.' " (3.1.138-39).

 Hamlet is telling Ophelia that all women are seductive, and cannot be trusted.  And also that their love is false and blows away, like Hamlet's mother's love for Hamlet's real father.
[QUOTE #5 FROM PLAY]

[Hamlet] " 'Is this the prologue or the posy of a ring?' [Ophelia] ' 'Tis brief, my lord.' [Hamlet] 'As woman's love.' " (3.2.137-39).

Last point: Hamlet also mentions, near the end of the play, that no makeup can save a woman from death.
[QUOTE #6 FROM PLAY]

" 'Alas, poor Yorik!...Not one now to mock your own grinning?  Quite cheapfallen?  Now get you to my lady's chamber and tell her, let her paint an inch thick, to  this favor she must come.  Make her laugh at that.' " (5.1.start at line 168, then 175-77).

I think that this is a metaphor for treachery.  No matter how much you try to cover up what has been done, that cover cannot hide your treachery.  No veil can cover your shame.

In the modern day, there is a lot of similarity in thought to what is believed in the characters in Hamlet.  In the modern world, women are still kind of thought of as the "weaker sex" - not as strong as men at everything.

[REFERENCES TO OTHER STUFF THAT APPARENTLY IS SUPPOSED TO SUPPORT MY POINT.  I'M TOO LAZY TO MARK THEM ALL WITH MY SARCASTIC BRACKETS.]
We're getting better at having strong female characters - in books, in movies, and in video games (characters like Chell from Portal; Kitana, Sonya Blade, and Mileena from the Mortal Combat Series; and Irileth from The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim), but we are also making women the "seductive" sex as well, with those same books, movies, and video games (games such as  League of Legends, which is targeted at males and features many female characters dressed immodestly).

Many movies have a love interest, where the male likes the female, or the female uses her beauty to seduce the male into doing something for her (this is usually when she's working for the bad guys).  There are even lots of women characters that are on the "bad side" or the "dark side" or the "evil side".  I think that in those stories, women are being portrayed as the dark side, and men are the poor guys who are preyed on by those "dark side" females.

And there are still people who say (and I am guilty of this as well) "you scream like a girl!" or "come on, don't be a girl." or even "fight like a man!"; "man up!".  That's mainly the guys talking (most girls usually say "c'mon and fight like a girl!").

I don't really know how to end this, and I have way more than enough words, but lets just say that I think I got everything, and this post has become my absolute least favorite blog post of them all.  It's just dragging on for me, and so I'm ending it.

Bye.

-bookhouse4

Sources:

• http://nfs.sparknotes.com/hamlet/ (No Fear Shakespeare)
• http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Women_Characters_in_Video_Games
• My personal experience with "personalized" ads from League of Legends  and watching my cousin play it.
• The original play
• Shakespeare
• Other people
• Stuff