Sufi Poetry

As most students in the class, I was a bit nervous to try and write a Sufi poem because I felt only the poets who’d master this style could produce such a work. I tried to capture the imagery that is so common in many of the poems, using key themes like flight, love, god and death. I actually liked how my poem turned out. I find Sufi poetry to be interesting when it is actually broken down into simple terms in class; the underlying messages can give one a lot to think about when it comes to life, morals and things of that kind.

Sufism

After being introduced to Sufi poetry, it seems to me their main focus is their devotion to god and love. For instance, there are poems that deal with flight and death as a way to get closer to god. Also is a sense of searching for who they are and where there place in life is. Sufi poems are often in first person narrative which makes the words and context more personal and reflective. The video, along with the background information, of how Sufi poetry can be performed was really interesting. I found the whole idea of “tripping” in order to fully experience the style quite attention-grabbing.

Catallus

Similar to Sappho, Catallus’ poems speak openly about sexuality. Some of his lyrics come across as very perverted and appalling almost when you figure out what he is trying to convey. He tends to include the names of individuals in his poems; whether they are enemies or good friends. The poems we’ve discussed in class seem to either praise his friends or highly humiliate his enemies.

Sappho

Before this class I was not familiar with the work of Sappho. Her form of writing is completely different than the works we’ve discussed in the past. The language is more blunt and straight forward; displayed by her willingness to openly talk about sexuality as she does. Her poems are a little hard to interpret because they tend to send off mixed messages. Some unique characteristics of Sappho’s poems include the author’s name in her own work, and the ambiguity as to whether she is referring to a man or a woman. Sappho speaks of love between all genders. The word lesbian derived from Sappho.

Othello Acts I and II

As I read Othello, I found it to be one of those plays that I just wanted to intervene and set everything straight. First off, the character Iago (obviously the antagonist), is so deceptive and conniving; he just uses the characters to make situations play out in his favor. He would pretend to be one type of person with one character and completely switch his words and personality with another character; playing each and every one of them for fools. He seems to be trying to bring Othello down, but Othello is oblivious to this plan. Secondly, Othello is portrayed as this naïve character that seems to trust Iago. So far, the play follows the characters through this conflict and Iago’s plot of Othello’s demise.

Medea

Medea was a very interesting play to read. We came across this woman who deceived her family and killed her own brother for the man that she loved. Ultimately her love was so unconditional and deep for this man, that his deception drove her to a point where she was willing to hurt her own children. This play emphasizes a woman’s strength and displays the capabilities of a woman who has a plan; a woman who feels double crossed by her lover. I was surprised she actually killed her sons, but it made for a dramatic ending and left me speechless. It makes you wonder how love can drive individuals to certain actions and the extents to which people can be provoked.

Medea

Euripides Medea tells a story of the supposed granddaughter of the Sun. This woman, Medea, helps Jason (who was in pursuit of the Golden Fleece) to complete tasks set forth by her own father Aeetes. While helping Jason, she actually ends up betraying her father and killing her brother. Medea and Jason end up fleeing from Colchis, Medea’s homeland. The play takes place in Corinth, the place they ended up after running away. Throughout the play she is portrayed as a cunning and determined woman who sought nothing but revenge against her husband, who betrayed her with another woman; a revenge so desired, she would hurt her own children to see it through.

Agamemnon and Oedipus Rex

The closing of Agamemnon was very interesting because it became apparent how fake and deceitful Clytaemnestra was from the beginning of the play. She was a woman with a plan and she had every intention of seeing it through. She killed Agamemnon and was quite upfront about how she went about doing it but made sure to justify her actions with the revelation of Agamemnon’s past deeds as well.

The plot of Oedipus is very interesting and captivating. I couldn’t help but get caught up in the drama that surrounded Oedipus. First off, Oedipus is the adopted son of Polybus and Periboea and birth son of Jocasta and Laius. He ran from home upon learning of a prophecy that claimed he would kill his father and marry his mother (thinking that meant Polybus and Periboea and unbeknownst to the fact that Laius, his birth father, got rid of him when he was just a baby). What ends up happening is that Laius and Oedipus crossed paths and Oedipus kills him and later on brings down the Sphinx, then replaces Laius as king of Thebes. Further on in the tale, Oedipus is struck with the task of healing his state, Thebes, and therefore reaches out to the Gods and is told that In order to restore his state he must get rid of the murderer of Laius. Not knowing that he himself was the murderer of Laius, Oedipus sets this curse upon the murderer and seeks their downfall, basically digging his own grave. This play is enticing because of this irony and unveiling of truths that Oedipus did not know. It is funny how determined he is to find this murderer and ends up accusing innocent people, when he is the actual perpetrator.

Agamemnon

In the play Agamemnon it is obvious that the chorus plays a vital role in the development of the events. The chorus spends a lot of time sharing the details of the actions, much more than what is spent actually acting out the play. Also another obvious detail of the play is the portrayal of Clytemnestra as a very strong, almost male-like, character. I found this to be unusual considering women’s words and feelings are often times suppressed within texts and are presented as inferior to men. I feel because of her depiction as such a strong individual with such a vengeful purpose throughout the play, she steals the attention from many of the other characters. The play consists of drama that I found myself eager to see unveil as I read.

The Ramayana

Ramayana was an interesting read because it is quite different from the epics we’ve already been presented with in class. Ramayana includes the Hindu religion; speaks of the religion’s ideal figures and ideology. One underlying theme was the challenge of being a good leader and a good husband; this was evident as Ram struggled to believe his wife over his subjects when they doubted her chastity, he sided with them. For this reason, he is an ideal ruler being that a ruler cannot allow his private life to affect the public, but the reverse is acceptable. Ramayana is repetitive, one example being the repeated phrases of what a good person Ram is, and for this reason is a very didactic epic. Presented is the idea that Ram is a good person, an ideal figure in Hinduism and for that he must prevail over the evil Ravan; good prevails over evil. Both Ramayana and The Illiad consisted of protagonists who were depicted as ideal figures in society; Ram was an ideal leader, while Achilles was an ideal man and warrior.

The Illiad

I found the Illiad was much easier to comprehend, compared to the other epics, which is why I enjoyed reading it. The conflicts and confrontations were interesting to watch unravel and play out, for instance the argument between Agamemnon and Achilles (who I found to be an intriguing character because of his passion and talent). I took special notice to the interactions between the humans and the gods; the humans would pray to the gods and the gods would respond to them favorably or not, but the exchanges were obvious. I was surprised at how upfront the gods were with some things they would say, especially Hera and Zeus when they argued; she never hesitated to confront him on anything, and he never hesitated to say what was on his mind as well. This epic was entertaining, it kept me wanting to read on to watch the next conflict unravel.

Metamorphoses

Metamorphoses, although similar to the other creation stories, presented some differences. The story describes the forming of the earth, to the times of corruption and follows through the ‘remake” of mankind and what follows after. It presented the gods in a more vengeful and unforgiving light. I found it interesting that after flooding the earth and wiping out mankind, for the most part, Jupiter was not remorseful at all; he was quite content with the fate that was the flood and the annihilation of the inhabitants of the earth. This is also different in the sense that it is more for storytelling, as oppose to Genesis which is more didactic and used for moralistic teaching. The subtle comparisons to real life issues were interesting to break down and relate to the story, one example being the comparison of Julius Caesar to mankind.

Comparison

There are many differences and similarities between Genesis and the Epic of Gilgamesh. For instance, some differences include the detailing of Genesis, which was written for the bible ( a religious book followed by so many people that devote themselves to the teachings) while Gilgamesh was purely for storytelling, so Genesis had the noble and spiritually devoted Noah. However the epic contained imperfect people like Utanapishtim who was said to go against the god’s wishes to ignore wealth and seek living things while preparing for the flood. This is so because the bible is to instill certain morals into the readers and to do so it must present people who do the right thing getting rewarded while the wrongdoers get punished. Another difference I noticed was that in Genesis, which speaks of one God, God came around to the idea of forgiveness by himself; he was able to promise to take care of the inhabitants of the earth from the flood on. On the other hand, in Gilgamesh ( polytheistic), Enlil needed the other gods to tell him of his wrong doing and help him to come to terms with forgiving the inhabitants of the earth.

There are also similarities between the two stories. For example, both stories are very detailed when describing the building of the boat and the occurrence of the flood. Not only are the stories detailed, but they are also repetitive; this is done so the stories will stick as time goes on.

I am quite familiar with genesis, but i have never taken apart the story such as we did in the classroom. I found it interesting how repetitive the story was, which we established was a way to make the story stick. It was also interesting to see God transform from this angry God to a more forgiving God which many individuals now know and accept him to be today which he reminds them of through the symbolic rainbow. As I read the passage I wondered, why it was accepted to drink wine and become drunk, as Noah did, but so many other things are deemed sinful?