Sunday, January 7, 2007

Arabian Nights Fishbowl 3

Read the passages below, then hit "comment" to answer the questions below them. Take 15 minutes for this one:

"So he drew his scimitar, cut the two in four pieces with a single blow, and left them on the couch....Nevertheless, he could not help thinking about his wife's betrayal, and he kept saying to himself over and over, 'How could she have done this to me? How could she have brought about her own death?'" (4)

"So, King Shah Zaman spent the night in the palace by himself. The next morning, after his brother had departed, he left his room and sat down at one of the lattice windows overlooking the garden. There he rested awhile and became steeped in sad thoughts about his wife's betrayal, occasionally uttering sighs of grief. Now, as he was moaning and torturing himself, a secret door to the garden swung open, and out came twenty slave girls surrounding his brother's wife, who was marvelously beautiful and moved about with the grace of a gazelle in search of a cool stream. Shah Zaman drew back from the window, but he kept the group in sight from a place where they could not spot him, even though they walked under the very window where he had stationed himself. As they advanced into the garden, they came to a jetting fountain amidst a great basin of water. Then they stripped off their clothes, and Shah Zaman suddenly realized that ten of them were women, concubines of the king, and the other ten were white slaves. After they had all paired off, the queen was left alone, but she soon cried out in a loud voice, 'Come to me right now, my lord Saeed!' and all of a sudden a big slobbering blackamoor with rolling eyes leapt from one of the trees. It was truly a hideous sight. He rushed up to her and threw his arms around her neck, while she embraced him just as warmly....
"Now, after Shah Zaman had witnessed this spectacle, he said to himself, 'By Allah, my misfortune is nothing compared to my brother's! Though he may be a greater king among kings than I am, he doesn't even realize that this kind of perfidious behavior is going on in his very own palace, and his wife is in love with the filthiest of filthy slaves. This only proves that all women will make cuckolds out of their husbands when given the chance. Well, then, let the curse of Allah fall upon one and all and upon the fools who need the support of their wives or who place the reins of conduct in their hands!' So, he cast aside his melancholy and no longer had regrets about what he had done. Moreover, he constantly repeated his words to himself to minimize his sorrow and added, 'No man in this world is safe from the malice of women!'" (5-6)

[After Shah Zaman tells Shahryar about Zaman's wife's "betrayal,"] Shahryar shook his head, completely astonished, and with the fire of wrath flaming in his heart, he cried, "Indeed, the malice of woman is mighty! My brother, you've escaped many an evil deed by putting your wife to death, and your rage and grief are quite understandable and excusable, especially since you had never suffered anything as terrible as this before. By Allah, had this been me, I would not have been satisfied until I had slain a thousand women and gone mad!" (7-8)
How would you describe the psychology of male love as seen in these passages? In other words, what does "love" and "marriage" mean to these men? Do you agree with the men that women are full of "malice"? Do you think it's fair for the men to blame the women for having extra-marital affairs and "betraying" their husbands? Take your time on this, and give us some nice critical thinking. Are you seeing ironies and patterns yet? Make sure you include your first name + first initial of family name (example: clayb) in your comment! Always! And feel free to read and respond to other students' ideas: agree, disagree, say what their interpretation "taught" you, whatever.

Read More...

Arabian Nights Fishbowl 2

What do we learn about male and female roles in the society of The Arabian Nights in these two passages?

1: "Therefore, the king immediately ordered generous gifts to be prepared [for his brother], such as horses that had saddles lined with gold and jewels, mamelukes, beautiful maidens, high-breasted virgins, and splendid and expensive cloth" (2).

2: "It so happened, however, that in the middle of the night he suddenly remembered he had forgotten a gift in his palace that he wanted to take to his brother. So he returned alone and entered his private chambers, where he found the queen, his wife, asleep on his own couch, and in her arms she held a black cook with crude features, smeared with kitchen grease and grime. Whe he saw this, the world turned dark before his eyes, and he said, 'If this is what happens while I am still within sight of the city, what will this damned whore do during my long absence at my brother's court?'" (4).
Hit "comment" and show us your thoughts--lots of stuff to see in this one! There's a huge irony here that plays through the whole book. Anybody see it? Write whatever you think! Take five minutes on this one--that's a long time for two short passages! Focus and think....Make sure you include your first name + first initial of family name (example: clayb) in your comment! Always! And feel free to read and respond to other students' ideas: agree, disagree, say what their interpretation "taught" you, whatever.

Read More...

Arabian Nights Fishbowl 1

Read this passage from the Prologue to The Arabian Nights and leave a "comment" answering the question afterward:

"Verily the works and words of our ancestors have become signs and examples to people of our modern age so that they may view what happened to other folk and take heed; so that they may peruse the annals of ancient peoples and read about everything they have experienced and thereby be guided and restrained...." (1)
Question: What sort of "guidance" or "lessons" do you think a reader would learn from reading our selections of The Arabian Nights? Hit "comment," and take only two minutes to leave a short answer--two or three sentences maximum. Try to be clear and specific. Make sure you include your first name + first initial of family name (example: clayb) in your comment! Always! And feel free to read and respond to other students' ideas: agree, disagree, say what their interpretation "taught" you, whatever.

Read More...

Arabian Nights Quiz 1

  1. Is this a feminist story, or anti-feminist? (Be careful. The answer is ambiguous. You have to be a subtle reader to play with this question.)
  2. In what ways is story-telling like magic here? In other words, what powers do good stories give the story-tellers?
  3. What do we learn about Muslim (Arab and Persian/Iranian) civilization, compared to Medieval Christian Europe, when we “watch” these stories (they are like movies)?
  4. What’s the worst story in the selection you read? Why?
  5. What’s the best story in the selection you read? Why?
Hit "comment" and post your answer to all questions. Be sure to number your answers. You have 20 minutes!

Read More...

Friday, January 5, 2007

For All You Feminists Out There

I just read this line from a review of the movie, The History Boys:

“History is a commentary on the various and continuing incapabilities of men. History is women following behind with the bucket.”

It's a pretty witty little interpretation of human history, isn't it?
(Do you think the women in your family would agree?)

Read More...

Tuesday, January 2, 2007

A Tour of Dante's Hell

So you're enjoying your food and presents for the holiday.  Why not take a quick vacation through the nine circles of hell?

Great Flash animation of the Medieval Christian epic poem, Dante's Inferno, here

Why not get an idea of it while you're getting to know what life was like at the same time in the Muslim world?

Read More...

Is School "Good"?

This retired English teacher thinks critically about the life you--yes, I mean you, specifically, reader--live and the "education" you're getting. It's a very original viewpoint: not boring at all. (The full essay from which this is taken is here)



A lot of things don't matter that are supposed to; one of them is well-funded . . . schools. Saying that may be considered irresponsible by people who don't know the difference between schooling and education, but over 100 academic studies have tried to show any connection between money and learning and not one has succeeded. Right from the beginning schoolmen told us that money would buy results and we all believed it. So, between 1960 and 1992 the U.S. tripled the number of constant dollars given to schools. Yet after 12,000 hours of government schooling one out of five Americans can't read the directions on a medicine bottle.

After 12,000 hours of compulsory training at the hands of nearly 100 government-certified men and women, many high school graduates have no skills to trade for an income or even any skills with which to talk to each other. They can't change a flat, read a book, repair a faucet, install a light, follow directions for the use of a word processor, build a wall, make change reliably, be alone with themselves or keep their marriages together. The situation is considerably worse than journalists have discerned. I know, because I lived in it for 30 years as a teacher.

Last year at Southern Illinois University I gave a workshop in what the basic skills of a good life are as I understand them. Toward the end of it a young man rose in back and shouted at me: I'm 25 years old, I've lived a quarter of a century, and I don't know how to do anything except pass tests. If the fan belt on my car broke on a lonely road in a snowstorm I'd freeze to death. Why have you done this to me?

He was right. I was the one who did it just as much as any other teacher who takes up the time young people need to find out what really matters. I did it innocently and desperately, trying to make a living and keep my dignity, but nevertheless I did it by being an agent of a system whose purpose has little to do with what kids need to grow up right. My critic had two college degrees it turned out, and his two degrees were shrieking at me that going to school doesn't matter very much even if it gets you a good job.

People who do very well in schools as we've conceived them have much more than their share of suicides, bad marriages, family problems, unstable friendships, feelings of meaninglessness, addictions, failures, heart by-passes that don't work and general bad health. These things are very well documented but most of us can intuit them without any need for verification. If school is something that hurts you, what on earth are we allowing it for?

Does going to school matter if it uses up all the time you need to learn to build a house? If a 15-year-old kid was allowed to go to the Shelter Institute in Bath, Maine, he would be taught to build a beautiful post-and-beam Cape Cod home in three weeks, with all the math and calculations that entails; and if he stayed another three weeks he'd learn how to install a sewer system, water, heat and electric. If any American dream is universal, owning a home is it – but few government schools bother teaching you how to build one. Why is that? Everyone thinks a home matters.

Does going to school matter if it uses up the time you need to start a business, to learn to grow vegetables, to explore the world or make a dress? Or if it takes away time to love your family? What matters in a good life?

The things that matter in a bad life, we know, are: gaining power over others, accumulating as much stuff as you can, getting revenge on your enemies (who are everywhere), and drugging yourself one way or another to forget the pain of not quite being human. School teaches most kids how to strive for a bad life and succeeds at this so well that most of our government machinery eventually falls into the hands of people who themselves are living bad lives. We're all in deep trouble because of that. It's the best reason I know to keep the machinery of government just as weak and as primitive as possible as soon as we figure out how.

It surprises me how many graduates leave college assuming they know what matters because they got straight “A”s. If we can believe advertisements, what matters to these people most is the personal ownership of machinery: blending machines, cooking machines, driving machines, picture machines, sound machines, tooth-brushing machines, computing machines, machines to kill insects, deliver intimacy, send messages through wires or the naked air, entertainment machines, shooting machines, and many more mechanical extensions of our physical self. Indirect control over even more ambitious machine seems to matter a lot, too: flying machines, bombing machines, heart and lung machines, voting machines, and a great variety of other mechanical creations.

All these devices are meant to defeat what otherwise would occur naturally if they didn't exist. They are all machines to beat human destiny and confer on human beings magical powers and the reach and longevity of gods.

Do they deliver what they promise? Is human life in a net sense better since their advent? I can't answer that for you, of course, but you can look into your heart and answer the question for yourself. Someone has apparently convinced us that what occurs naturally cannot be the way to a good life, hence these battalions of machinery. What percentage of your life is spent talking to machines? Buying them, mastering them, ministering to their needs, then betraying them with ever newer and newer machine loves?

It takes a lot of time, but what does it take a lot of time away from? Television has cost the average 21-year-old about 18,000 hours of time. What would that time have gone toward otherwise? learning to build a house? Going to government-run school takes another 15,000 hours from the young life, 21,000 if you count going and coming and homework. What might this time have gone toward otherwise? From the very small amount of time remaining, machinery other than television gobbles a great deal. What does it give back in return? Hearts-ease? Love? Courage? Self-reliance? Friends? Dreams?

Here we are, at the end of the 20th century, well-machined yet lost in a tunnel of loneliness, cut off from each other, disliking ourselves, envying those with superior machines, looking for self-respect and significance. We have fewer and worse human ties than seems possible if machines justified all the time and money spent on them.

I include, of course, the social machinery of school in this critique. From age five to age 21 there are exactly 140,160 hours. We spend 46,720 of them in sleep and of the remaining 93,000 odd hours, 42 percent are spent watching TV from a chair or sitting in a school seat. Something is wrong here. What is going on? How much do these seemingly essential machines matter? What are they essential for? Each one taken separately can easily be justified, but taken altogether: what are they doing to us?

Well?

What do you think?

You. Think.

What do you think?

It's your life he's writing about. Another Socrates. Another Luther. Another Spong. Another thinker. What do you think? Is school good? Is it making you good? Is it teaching you the Good Life?

"The unexamined life is not worth living." Do you remember who said that? Do you still want to kill him?

Read More...

A Parable

They tell the world, "Everything you believe is a lie."

The world replies, "How dare you be so rude?"

    *   *   *

Someone asks them, "How do you know everything you believe is true?"

And they reply, "How dare you be so rude?"

(The world scratches its head.)

Read More...

Floating in Dreams

Watching that movie of me in Second Life flying around reminded me: I "float" in my dreams.

It happened a couple nights ago. I remembered it for a few minutes after waking, then forgot. I hate that about dreams. They evaporate from memory like clouds from sunny skies.  The dews of our sleepworlds, they're gone by mid-morning.





I've flown a couple or three times in dreams in my 44 years. A few other times, I've simply fallen from very high buildings, cliffs, etc--no flying at all. Terrifying.

But usually--at least until lately, and this is weird to realize--I don't walk or fly, but do something in between. Something like "moon-walking." (And I don't mean the Michael Jackson dance step, for those of you who might know that move.)

You've seen the films of astronauts on the moon, haven't you?  The way they can sort of skip or leap longer distances than on earth, because the moon's gravity is weaker?  That's how I get around in my dream worlds--or at least did, from about age 30 to age 40.  I could leap across a soccer field in two or three steps, like it was a big trampoline.

But I just realized that, over the last four years or so, my mode of travel in my dreamworlds has changed.  

I've graduated from leaping to...floating.

It takes far less energy, and I love it.  I move through crowded rooms, hallways, and public buildings by lightly springing off of my toes into the air, and then, very slow-motion, totally horizontally over everybody else, just <i>float</i> ever so gently past or through them.  It's like the air is water, and I'm lazily swimming around in it, up near the ceiling.  

When I need to turn, sometimes I just kick off the wall a little bit, like the side wall of a swimming pool, to change direction.  

Other times I just paddle a bit with my arms to turn.

The people in my dream a couple nights ago laughed as they saw me floating around (and it seemed like a mean laugh, not a fun one).  I don't know <i>why</i> they laughed--they were all walking, stuck in gravity.

I'm happy about this pattern I've discovered from moon-leaping to floating.  I choose to interpret it this way:  I'm getting lighter of heart, mind, and spirit as I age.

I always feared aging would make me feel less and less light.

Best of all, if the pattern continues, can you see what should eventually happen next?  Someday, I should begin flying.

Read More...

A "Second Life", Anyone?

Meet "Hart Welles," also known as me. 

Here I am hanging out in Second Life.  Teens can't go there, but there is a "Teen Second Life" for them--that adults can't go to.  (Well, teachers can start schools there, but they're not allowed outside of their classes!) 

I'm talking with a friend from Shanghai about buying an island on Teen Second Life and building a school there--with students.  It probably won't be this year, so next year's classes will have to try it.

The video is crappy.  It looks much better in the (un)"real" Second Life world.

Read More...

"The Great Conversation" (part one)

"Did Hobbes read Locke's book?" Julia asked in our history review.

"Yeah!" I said. "Locke's book was an answer to Hobbes' book."

We were two hours into a history exam review that was supposed to only last one hour, so I resisted the temptation to tell Julia about what's called "The Great Conversation." We were all too tired and had too many pressures to just relax and talk about this amazing, beautiful thing.

So I want to talk about it now. Don't read this unless you're relaxed enough to enjoy the pleasure of thinking for pleasure.... (click "read more" for the rest)


What is "The Great Conversation"?

It's what I'm trying to help you discover--and participate in.

It started when writing started, in the earliest days of our species. And it has continued--with a few breaks during Dark Ages and Ages of Intolerance--for the 5,000 years between then and now. It's still going on today.

You have already heard one thread of this "great conversation"--more than one, really--in English class in the first semester. It went like this:

The Sumerians invented writing over 5,000 years ago, at about the same time they invented some of the very first cities. We can bet that writing was first used for practical things. Business, for example: buying and selling, listing inventories, verifying that you paid for that cow and I can't say it's mine any more. Writing down that you owe me money, so I can prove it if you don't pay me back. Stuff like that.

But at some point, we also have to imagine a different type of person--a dreamer, a seeker of god, of answers, of beauty, of wisdom--who realized that writing could be used to make records of things more important than business.

Writing could be used to record ideas. The highest ideas known to the people of his day (and, as we've seen in Gilgamesh, maybe her day as well, since women seemed to enjoy a lot of power in that civilization too).

"We cannot escape death, but our ideas and thoughts can--if we use writing to immortalize them." This must have gone through the mind of those earliest dreamers and seekers.

And they did immortalize their highest ideas and thoughts, as we've seen: Gilgamesh is alive and well in our classroom, while its original creators--those earliest dreamers--have long since become "food for worms," as Hamlet says, and returned to the earth from which they rose. They became dust. Their ideas, though, stayed alive. Alive in books.

And those ideas, like some virus of the spirit, passed into the minds of each new generation, time without end, for thousands of years. Sumer and Uruk fell to invasion and conquest, but the child of the Sumerian spirit--this book called Gilgamesh--survived. It passed into the minds, the beliefs, the cultures that replaced the Sumerians. First into the Akkadians, then the Hittites, and finally, 2,500 years after Gilgamesh lived and died, into the Babylonians.

Babylon built a powerful empire around 800 BCE. That empire still worshipped Ishtar, and Enlil, and Anu, and the other Sumerian gods (though the names changed, just as we no longer call the Judeo-Christian god "Yahweh" or "Elohim", though the early Hebrews did). And it still had conversations about The Epic of Gilgamesh. "Great" conversations--just as we occasionally did, about this same book, in 2006.

That conversation turns very interesting around the year 600 BCE. Because the Babylonians--the worshipers of Ishtar and all the other gods you met--conquered a small kingdom nearby. They destroyed that kingdom's capital city, destroyed its temple and built one to their own gods. And they took the most powerful inhabitants of that city captive--as almost all early empires did, since the elites could mount a counter-revolution--and brought them back to live in the great city of Babylon.

These captives lived in Babylon for the next 50 years. They observed the different culture of their conquerors all that time: saw its forms of worship, of family, of business, of government. Saw its wealth and luxury. They were not treated like slaves; they only had to live in a single area of Babylon so that the Babylonian government could keep an eye on them.

Apparently, many of these captives enjoyed the city. When they had the chance to return to their kingdom, many of them chose to stay. (Their descendants are still in Iraq today.) Apparently, they thought that Babylon was much more attractive, wealthy, and enjoyable than their old kingdom.

Others, though--especially the priests of the conquered people--despised Babylon. Its king had ordered the destruction of their temple. And these priests wrote many religious texts during this captivity.

One of those texts was The Book of Genesis. The story of Adam and Eve was written by priests being held captive by the hated believers in the goddess Ishtar.

And, in a sense, Genesis is an example of "The Great Conversation." Because the writers of Eve had heard the story of Gilgamesh. They had seen the temples to Ishtar, and its priestesses like Shamhat. And many scholars and historians of religion argue that Genesis--with its story of Eve--is those priests' "conversational" answer to the story of Gilgamesh.

Thus, in the Bible, "Babylon" is, like Humbaba, characterized as the highest evil by the writers of Genesis. It was an act of revenge for the Babylonian Empire's conquest of Jerusalem and Judea.

So this is our first example of "the Great Conversation." Two and a half millennia (2500 years) after it was written, Gilgamesh is "answered" in another book--Genesis.

700 years later, a Christian writer added a Christian voice to this conversation in another book: The Book of Revelation. In this last book of the Christian New Testament, which tells of the Christian belief in the end of the world, the final cosmic battle between "Good" and "Evil," and the divine judgment and salvation or damnation of every human soul, special attention is given to describing the ultimate "evil" as...."the whore of Babylon." None other than Ishtar.

It's not the only example of "the Great Conversation" we've seen this semester. But it's definitely one of the angriest ones.

So...Hebrew priests write Genesis in response to an older book, Gilgamesh. Locke writes a book that answers the one he read by Hobbes. (And Hobbes' book, Leviathan, takes its title from the Hebrew book 2,000 years earlier that...answered Gilgamesh. "Leviathan" is the "whale" that swallowed Jonah.)

You see the pattern, I hope?

"The Great Conversation" is one between old books and new readers, critical readers, who respond to the old books with new ideas--in new books; it's a conversation between the past and the present, the dead and the living. It's been going on since writing began 5,000 years ago. And it went on in our classroom last semester.

That conversation would be very, very boring if there were no good, original, independent, critical readers.

It would also be boring if those critical readers were not also good, stylish writers. Who would want to read their "answers" to the old books if their answers were badly written?

So. I spent semester one trying to make you original, "seeing" readers so that you could begin to participate in "the Great Conversation." I succeeded with some of you--toward the end, you began to hear it, and even add to it.

With others, I didn't succeed--yet. You're still treating the Conversation like children at the dinner table, afraid to say anything while the grown-ups converse, and thinking, "I'm a child; I can't have my own ideas."

Well, you have all of semester two to start acting like the growing young adults you're becoming in the body, if not yet the mind. For you, I'll repeat what I said at the beginning of the year--my "Ten Commandments of Reading and Writing":

  1. "Thou shalt not summarize"--which means just "throwing up" what you've read, without digesting it and chewing on it first. Summary is just memorizing. It's not thinking. You're adding nothing to "the conversation" if you just summarize.
  2. "Thou shalt read like an alien"--which means, read critically. Like the Hebrews answering "Shamhat as woman" with "Eve as woman," and like Locke answering Hobbes with his own ideas about how we know and whether we're good or savage in nature, good readers think about what they read, and they often disagree with the books. (And can explain why, by picking out the parts of the book they found problems with.)
Here's a good place to stop: like all great conversations, by returning to the beginning (here, of this school year), and thinking again about its ideas.

[End of Part I. To be continued.]

Read More...