In the
two Canterbury tales that we recently read, we saw how greed, selfishness, and
cunning brought the men to their deaths and how equality given to women in a
marriage brought prosperity. These lessons can still be applied to our
lives today, especially the Pardoner’s Tale. I’m pretty sure everyone has felt
the temptation of greed and self-gain before. Even though sharing is encouraged
in society as a form of social etiquette, the human instinct inside of us
desires to have everything for ourselves. This may be because we as humans put
ourselves before others in order to survive in prehistoric times. For example,
when there are only two of your favorite cookies left, you want to eat all of
them because they’re so delicious, but your moral side tells you to save one
for your sibling. Not sharing will not bring you to your death, but it is moral
to do so. There should also be a sense of trust if you’re working with a team
to accomplish a common goal, so that nobody takes all the credit for something.
In the second Canterbury tale, this can still be related to modern society
because women still desire sovereignty over their husbands, but in a more
gender-equal modern society in the U.S., this is less of a problem than
third-world countries. I agree that there needs to be a balance of power in a
relationship for it to last long.
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Saturday, September 14, 2013
Truth
In the novel Grendel, the truth was often manipulated and skewed due to the Shapers that sung of different versions of history. Truth was passed down in a glorious, exaggerated version that was preferred by most men because it exemplified their heroic kings and deeds. I can infer that after generations and generations of rulers pass down slightly different accounts of people and events, the version known as "truth" is probably completely false.
Grendel struggled with discerning the truth from the Shaper's persuasive and enticing songs. He wanted to believe the positive version of history that the blind man depicted because it gave him hope for the world, as it did for other men. However, the optimistic, nihilistic part of him fought to retain the version of history that he saw with his own eyes. He knew deep down that foolish killing and raiding caused unnecessary bloodshed. He knew that men's and animals' lives were wasted for one kingdom to gain power and wealth. He wanted to keep this truth in his mind because it gave him an excuse to view the world as one that's against him.
Some parts of the Shaper's songs did call out to him, such as the account of the fight between Cain and Abel, which he chose to believe. So really, he thought that the Shaper spoke some truth. It was ironic how the blind man was the one telling the king's men history because being blind, he has never seen what really happened. This showed that some, or most aspects of his songs were made up or exaggerated. The paradox was that blind man changed what the others saw of their king and their cause.
Grendel struggled with discerning the truth from the Shaper's persuasive and enticing songs. He wanted to believe the positive version of history that the blind man depicted because it gave him hope for the world, as it did for other men. However, the optimistic, nihilistic part of him fought to retain the version of history that he saw with his own eyes. He knew deep down that foolish killing and raiding caused unnecessary bloodshed. He knew that men's and animals' lives were wasted for one kingdom to gain power and wealth. He wanted to keep this truth in his mind because it gave him an excuse to view the world as one that's against him.
Some parts of the Shaper's songs did call out to him, such as the account of the fight between Cain and Abel, which he chose to believe. So really, he thought that the Shaper spoke some truth. It was ironic how the blind man was the one telling the king's men history because being blind, he has never seen what really happened. This showed that some, or most aspects of his songs were made up or exaggerated. The paradox was that blind man changed what the others saw of their king and their cause.
Thursday, September 5, 2013
Modern Day Beowulf
Believe it or not, some of Beowulf's characteristics are probably in all of us. Who can say that they don't have any devotion towards their family or that they never felt truly confident from their past successes? But the question is, who exemplifies his character the most? I think Jeremy Lin is an excellent example of a modern day Beowulf. He displayed loyalty to his nation, God, and family while he was famous, which were some traits that Beowulf also showed during his battles with monsters and giants. They're both characters who are confident about what they do and never backs down from a challenge. For Lin, his challenge is to live up to the high expectations of his newfound fans from the "Linsanity" period and to uphold his fame, so to speak. Beowulf also engages in battles continually because he wants the glory and the fame from being the victor. Before going into battle, Beowulf thanks God for giving him safe passage into Denmark and allows God to decide who wins in the battle with Grendel. Jeremy Lin also has a similar belief and displays it just as publicly as Beowulf. Before every game, he does a handshake where he pretends to put on his glasses, open a Bible, and then point upwards. This shows that he gives all the credit to God, no matter what happens in the game. He also has loyalty towards his nation and his family because even though he could go to another country to play for their basketball team and be the celebrity player, he sticks with the NBA. He shows devotion to his family by paying many visits to Taiwan to meet with relatives and spend quality time with them. The only difference between Beowulf and Lin is that Lin is more modest and does not announce how great he is all the time. Other than that, I think they are similar people that are willing to face hardships when the time comes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)