The Blame Game

Every time I think or hear about how painful giving birth can be, I blame God for giving women this job. I've always thought that this was just Him being unfair, little did I know that it was actually the punishment women get for what happened with the forbidden fruit.

Having heard the story of Adam and Eve told in the way in which Eve took all the blame for so many times, I didn't see what's wrong with it until I read Amelia Lanier's "Salve Deus Rex Judaeorum". It provided a brand new perspective on the responsibility and guilt for what happened in the Garden of Eden. 

As a woman, Lanier argued that women should not "endure it all" (10) because Eve wasn't the only one who went against God's order. "Adam cannot be excused" for he, without hesitation, took the fruit that his wife gave him. He was "most to blame" because he didn't even face any temptation whereas Eve the woman - less powerful, knowledgeable, and significant than men - was tempted by the serpent. With greater power comes greater responsibility, with Adam as the "lord and king of all the earth" (7), how come he was not found as guilty, if not more, than Eve was?

I am not really a Christian, nor that I totally decline the religion. In fact, I've been raised in a Christian school since kindergarten. The stories, the prayers, and the hymns are nothing new, and I actually appreciate many of the Christian ideas of love and helping others.

However, there's something I never quite understand.

If the Bible teaches us to always forgive and to love our enemies, why didn't God forgive Adam and Eve for eating the fruit? Why did he expel them from the Garden of Eden? Why couldn't he love Satan?

Carpe Diem

"There was never a great genius without a touch of madness"

What is madness? In this world where we live in societies with many other people, the most important, normal, or "wise" thing to do is to follow what everybody else does. To do things that the majority doesn't do? That is "madness".

While a genius and a lunatic seem to be the opposite of each other, they share a common feature: both are unusual. Looking at all the geniuses in history: poets, painters, navigators, inventors, etc, what made them so special was that they did something new, something out of the norm.

We take electric lighting for granted nowadays because Thomas Edison made light bulbs so practical and easy for us to use, it would be like a nightmare if all the lights went out. But to people who lived in the era before light bulbs were invented, who lived with candles and fire for light all their lives, it'd be nonsense to think that there could be any other ways to get light. So, yes, scientists might had been called mad men when they were striving and failing and striving again to develop the use of electric light, but look at how that turned out - we can now enjoy one of the greatest inventions of history!

If we look at great artists like Picasso and Dali, geniuses without a doubt, we can see that their success really stem from their touch of madness, or what we call creativity. Picasso is famous for his portraits with distorted faces, where the nose goes up between the eyes and the mouth extends out of the face; Dali is a surrealist painter who loves to draw elongated and melting images. Certainly there were hints of madness that inspired the ridiculous yet remarkable ideas. But people whose artwork that are still world renowned after decades can't be complete lunatics, can they?

Are geniuses mad? Or is it simply us who are too ordinary to understand?

The Shepherd and His Dream Girl

Raleigh's "The Nymph's reply to the Shepherd" is a witty reply to Marlowe's poem "The Passionate Shepherd to His Love".

The shepherd in Marlowe's poem is very idealistic and hopeful towards the love he has for the girl. He makes many  promises and says that he can give her everything because if she accepts his love, they will "all the pleasures prove" (2). The beautiful imagery of nature like "beds of roses" (9) and "Melodious birds sing madrigals" (8), together with examples of materialistic luxury such as "a gown made of the finest wool" (13), creates an ideal picture of their future life, so as to attract the girl to "come live with [the shepherd] and be [his] love" (1).

On the other hand, the nymph in Raleigh's poem has a more mature and realistic view, and she has a counter for each of the shepherd's ideas. First off, she doubts the "truth in every shepherd's tongue" and questions his ability to fulfill all his promises. While the shepherd suggests sitting on rocks to watch the river flow and listen to the birds' songs, the nymph argues that "rivers rage" (6) and "rocks grow cold" (6). Regarding the luxurious gowns and bed offered, she replies that everything will "soon break, soon wither, soon forgotten" (15). Raleigh repeats many of Marlowe's images and ideas, but distort them through the length of time. This is to point out that beauty does not last, therefore all the promises on the perfect idyllic life will all vanishes with the wash of time. At last she leaves a vague hope for the shepherd, saying that if his "youth lasts" (21) and nothing ages, then happiness will last forever and they can be in love.

A shepherd's love story. If we could just add a little twist to it...

Are we done Donne?

The pros of marrying a poet? Instead of a simple 2-syllable "goodbye", you get a lovely 9-stanza poem: "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" - written by John Donne, presumably for his wife on the night of their separation.

The highlight of the poem definitely lies in the last three stanzas of the well-developed metaphysical metaphor of a compass to symbolize the spiritual link between two parted lovers. I have never related a compass to anything near love or romance before I read this. At first it seems strange to compare a couple to a tool like this, but the way Donne puts the metaphor let this all makes sense. As one of the most famous metaphysical poets, Donne demonstrated his skills of creating comparison between things that don't normally relate.

One foot of a compass is fixed, and it only moves when the other foot does. Although it stays on one point, the foot leans to the direction of which the other foot moves to. It is only because it stays still that the other foot can get back to where it started at, and that a perfect circle can be drawn. Similarly, one of the two lovers stay and the other leaves as the two separate. Nonetheless, they stay connected through all the distance. Their firm love for each other makes it possible for their love and reunion to be perfect and eternal just like a circle which has no beginning and no end - "Thy firmness makes my circle just, | And makes me end, where I begun" (35-36).

Now, we're done Donne.

The Bard

William Shakespeare shows his view on love in many of his works such as Sonnets 29, 116, and 130. I especially like Sonnet 116 not only because it is applicable to everyone whereas the other two are addressed to a certain person, but also because it shows a very positive and idealistic side of love with the Bard's beautiful diction. 

In Sonnet 116, Shakespeare depicts true love as enduring and unchanging. Love does not change even when there is “alternation” (3), nor does it allow itself to be “bent” (4) and twisted with the change or departure of the loved one. It is a strong, powerful, and “ever-fixed mark’’ (5) that is “never shaken” (6) even in face of adversity as harsh as “tempests” (6). As time goes by, appearance and beauty – “rosy lips and cheeks” (9) change, but love does not because it is not based merely and superficially on appearances. Time’s “hours and weeks” (12) are “brief” (12) compared to love’s undying essence, its permanence. There are no “impediments” (2) when it comes to love, nothing can stand in its way.

The sonnet’s tone is candid and confident, giving the readers a very positive and optimistic feeling towards love. In the couplet, Shakespeare makes a very strong and clear stand on his view. He claims that if there is any “error” (13) in his illustration of the constant and unmovable nature of love, then he has “never writ” (14), nor has any “man ever loved” (14). The Bard uses various types of poetic devices to illustrate different qualities of love. The constant use of metaphor facilitates the explanation of his ideas of the abstract love with concrete images. Love is compared to “an ever-fixed marked” (5) and “the star to every wandering bark” (7) to show its endurance, dependability, and importance. The use of enjambment not only adds rhythm to the poem, but also hints the passage of time, in which love still stay unchanged.

Hunt All You Want

On a literal level, Thomas Wyatt's "Whoso List to Hunt" is about a hunt of a doe, whom the speaker has given up on after a long weary chase. However, it is believed that the poem is symbolically describing Wyatt's failed pursue of Anne Boleyn, in whom King Henry VIII had already claimed interest.

The speaker, possibly Wyatt himself, depicts his deep fondness of the "hind" beautifully: "as she flee afore,| Faintly I follow" (6-7). He cannot control his desire for the "prey", yet no matter how hard he tries, how the chase "wearies [him] so sore" (3), the goal is still unreachable. His self mockery - "in a net I seek to hold the wind"(8) - gives a bitter feeling that earns readers' sympathy. Or maybe that's just me.

Assuming that the doe of the hunt is really referring to Anne Boleyn, Wyatt did a great job in expressing his pain of losing the woman he loves to anther man, certainly better than many breakup songs we here nowadays. Not only does the poem mourns the impossibility of the two being together, it also serves as a warning to all the other men who, like Wyatt, want to woo Boleyn. Basically he is telling, from his own painful experience, other wooers: don't even think about wooing the King's woman, nobody stands a chance!

The Renaissance!!

The Renaissance has always been my favourite period of history.

It is the time of Shakespeare, Donne, and all the amazing poetry and plays that I'm most familiar with; the time of Michaelangelo, Da Vinci, all the paintings, statues, and masterpieces that still stun the world; the time of beauty and romance and Italy; the time that captivated me in history lessons in grade 8. I'm so excited!

The Talking Head

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight by an unknown author is an example of a Medieval Romance. Gawain, the protagonist, possesses most of the characteristics that define a hero-knight of the Medieval period. He is courageous and open to challenges and adventures.

If we view this in a modern perspective, Sir Gawain can also be an ultimate epitome of male's traditional pride and ego. Since way back in time, men are always expected to be strong and not afraid of anything. If a man's manhood is challenged, he is very likely to act dramatically and do what he normally won't do to prove himself. I remember from last year's Macbeth, Lady Macbeth challenges Macbeth's manhood and successfully forces him into following her plan of killing the king. If Gawain is asked in a casual way whether or not he will chop someone's head off only to get himself killed, he will probably use his common sense to say no to such ridiculous and naive act. However, when it comes to challenge and dare, no man is willing to admit that he is not brave enough, that he is scared, not to mention that he is "the best of knights" and is challenged in front of the king.

Ecclesiastical Pilgrims

The characters of The Canterbury Tales can be categorized into three groups, feudal, ecclesiastical, and urban. I think Chaucer puts in a lot of effort in building up the characteristics of the ecclesiastical group in order to show the malpractice of the people of Church at that time.

Out of the seven pilgrims in this category, five of them are either hinted to have inappropriate behaviour or directly criticized. The prioress is a graceful person with an elegant posture and nice table manners, she speaks fluent but improper French and she wears a brooch that says "love conquers all". Chaucer doesn't give any information on the Prioress' background or history, leaving the readers to wonder the story behind the brooch which isn't what people would expect to find on a nun. The Friar is an obvious bad example. Not only does he not to what the church expects him to do - help the poor - he flirts with young women and only cares about making profit and getting benefits for himself.

The Parson is the ideal figure that stands out from the bunch. He is a true follower of Christ, and he serves as a character foil to the Monk and the Friar. Chaucer describes that he doesn't pay someone else to do his parish duties, earn an easy living by holding masses for the rich people, or do his duties just to seek glory. These examples all suggest that there are other churchmen who do so, further supporting the message that many parts of the church is corrupted.

Medieval

We started reading the Prologue of The Canterbury Tales but only got to about 2 or 3 pages. By far we learnt about the Knight, his son the Squire, his servant the Yeoman and the Nun.

The brief biography of the writer, Geoffrey Chaucer, otherwise known as the Father of English literature was interesting. As a Cantonese speaker, I once had a silly little misconception that English literature means all kinds of literature that's in English, and totally forgot that they are also the literature of the country England. Somehow when I was going through the lines of Chaucer's biography I thought about this and it made me laugh. :D 

Moving On

Today we wrapped up the Anglo-Saxon Period with a comparison between the two translations of Beowulf. I'm so glad that we're finally starting on ballads because they seem a lot more interesting.

We screened through one called "Bonny Barbara Allan" and it reminded me of a similar form of poetry in Chinese literature. Ci 宋詞 was a kind of poetry that was meant to be sung, it was most popular in the Song Dynasty (960-1279).

A beautifully written Ci that later became one of the most well-known song of Chinese culture

Dismemberment

Honestly I don't like Beowulf. The whole hero versus monster thing doesn't appeal to me very much in this ancient setting. But as one of the earliest work in the history of English literature, it definitely has something for us to learn from.

Grendel
Saw that his strength was deserting him, his claws Bound fast, Higlac’s brave follower tearing at His hands. The monster’s hatred rose higher, But his power had gone. He twisted in pain, And the bleeding sinews deep in his shoulder Snapped, muscle and bone split And broke. The battle was over, Beowulf Had been granted new glory: Grendel escaped, But wounded as he was could flee to his den, His miserable hole at the bottom of the marsh, Only to die, to wait for the end Of all his days.

The battle with Grendel is the climax of the poem. 

The anonymous writer makes good use of alliteration to build up the scene of the intense battle. Examples like "bleeding sinews deep in his shoulder| Snapped" and "bone split| And broke"  stress on the defeat of Grendel while "granted new glory: Grendel escaped" emphasizes on the delightful successful of Beowulf. The use of kenning - "Higlac's brave follower" - that describes Beowulf provides more dimensions to the character and "His miserable hole" that describes Grendel's home compliments the flow of the story.