So, after reading Stephen's villanelle, I decided to take a crack at it. It was a really weird way to write poetry for me because usually when I write, I have a phrase or a stanza that materializes and if I can't get it out of my head, I write it down and finish off the poem. My first attempt was rather weak. Initially, I found the rules restricting and had difficulty defining lines that I would be willing to incessantly repeat. I finished the poem but it was... not good. Frustrated with my failure, I decided to go for round two with the villain. My second poem was far better. After getting the feel for the form from the first try, I was able to use the rhyme scheme and line arrangement to stimulate creativity and ingenuity rather than limit it.
Finally, I wanted to write something I'd be willing to share on the blog. So the subsequent round three was a villanelle about the book. Not the aptest use of this style but interesting none the less...
He could not escape the flames
touch, taste, sight, sound, smell
devoured by guilt and shame.
Why couldn't they remember his name
he could hear the pounding of his own knell
he could not escape the flame.
Innocence falls away non servum desire untame
orgiastic riots of the mind he could not quell
devoured by guilt and shame.
Art stirred within him and their came
a change words rhythmic colored vibrant pastel
he could not escape the flame.
The aim became to gain fame and claim
access to heaven not hell
devoured by guilt and shame.
He tried to do good but all the same
the artist fell
under the prophetic name
devoured by guilt and shame.
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Father Stephen
I really don't think Stephen would make a bad priest and if he were
going to make it anywhere, the Jesuit order is a good place for him. For
the following reasons:
Stephen likes hierarchy and order and the structure of the Catholic church provides just that for him. There are clearly separated levels of power and carefully defined rights of passage to climb the ladder of the clergy. He doesn't have to awkwardly puzzle over which priests are his superiors in social situations. He will also have someone always giving him directions which seems, up to this point, a comfort for him.
The Jesuits are a highly intellectual order. The theological, methodological, and philosophical debates under discussion by the other Jesuit fathers would be right up Stephen's alley.
Along the same lines, there are books and books of rules about how a priest is to comport himself. No more sneaking around trying desperately to be unnoticed to avoid a social faux pas of sorts. Stephen wouldn't have to worry so much about figuring out where the straight and proper path is because it would be already clearly drawn for him.
The mysterious, semi-secret power of being a priest also seems to allure Stephen to the priesthood. Maybe it's perverting the purpose of a priest a bit but he loves the idea that he gets to know, read, learn, think, and do things normal people can't. Most of all, he is extremely attracted to the prospect of hearing the confessions, particularly of girls. This probably stems from the fact that Stephen wondered a lot when he was little and people explained very little social and sexual escapades to him.
In the end, Stephen rejects the idea, his intrigue stunted by the general anonymity and monotony of the vocation. For me, this just perpetuates the Satanic narrative that periodically pops its head up in this novel. In this case it sheds its subtlety and becomes rather blatant. Stephen rejects the priesthood, even with his special gift of piety, to search for a less common purpose, just as Satan will not serve God and pridefully searches for minions of his own. Faith and piety are surprisingly different from each other and Stephen's situation exemplifies the distinction that Joyce is trying to make.
Stephen likes hierarchy and order and the structure of the Catholic church provides just that for him. There are clearly separated levels of power and carefully defined rights of passage to climb the ladder of the clergy. He doesn't have to awkwardly puzzle over which priests are his superiors in social situations. He will also have someone always giving him directions which seems, up to this point, a comfort for him.
The Jesuits are a highly intellectual order. The theological, methodological, and philosophical debates under discussion by the other Jesuit fathers would be right up Stephen's alley.
Along the same lines, there are books and books of rules about how a priest is to comport himself. No more sneaking around trying desperately to be unnoticed to avoid a social faux pas of sorts. Stephen wouldn't have to worry so much about figuring out where the straight and proper path is because it would be already clearly drawn for him.
The mysterious, semi-secret power of being a priest also seems to allure Stephen to the priesthood. Maybe it's perverting the purpose of a priest a bit but he loves the idea that he gets to know, read, learn, think, and do things normal people can't. Most of all, he is extremely attracted to the prospect of hearing the confessions, particularly of girls. This probably stems from the fact that Stephen wondered a lot when he was little and people explained very little social and sexual escapades to him.
In the end, Stephen rejects the idea, his intrigue stunted by the general anonymity and monotony of the vocation. For me, this just perpetuates the Satanic narrative that periodically pops its head up in this novel. In this case it sheds its subtlety and becomes rather blatant. Stephen rejects the priesthood, even with his special gift of piety, to search for a less common purpose, just as Satan will not serve God and pridefully searches for minions of his own. Faith and piety are surprisingly different from each other and Stephen's situation exemplifies the distinction that Joyce is trying to make.
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Voices in his head
We've brought up how malleable and imprint-able Stephen can seem at times so I decided to write a blog post about these influences and their implications.
The earliest influences we see in Stephen's life seem to be his mother, his father, and Dante. These are all pretty understandable influences for a young boy to be under. These are the people he knows best and that know him best. His mother is a big part of his conscientiousness while Dante and his father serve as moral guides. I'd say that these influences are not grounds to call Stephen impressionable. Naive maybe but not impressionable.
Soon after, we see Stephen's peers and teachers creep into being influences. Most memorably, his attempts to go unnoticed to fit in with his peers, then when the priest dubs him as a sneaky slacker, and finally when his peers convince him to go to rector. We discussed in class whether he acts for others or for himself. Stephen even notes his influence-ability on page 88, listing the demands of the people in his life.
God also becomes an influence in Stephen's life. God is basically a punisher in Stephen's mind. Stephen is very scared of the repercussions of defying God and subsequently adopts a strict regimen of self mortification. Later, God is such a big influence in Stephen's life he considers being a priest. Even after he's stepped away from his religious upbringing to pursue art, God plays a huge role in Stephen's thinking and understanding of the world.
Some interesting things about Stephen's relationships with his influences are:
1. Love is almost completely nonexistent between Stephen and his influences, save for with the women. I'd say that Stephen loves his mother. He listens to Dante and his father and teachers and peers and God but when he's sick in the beginning of the novel, he writes a letter to his mother. He wants her comforting most of all. He is also emotional affected by a number of women throughout the course of the novel. Although it is hard to say if this is actually love, there is definitely more of an emotional attachment to these women. They even inspire his art.
Maybe this is a comment on the gender roles he's observed. I feel like this is reflected in the fact that when he starts his first poem he does so by following the rules he's observed from Byron. Which moves toward my next interesting thing, that being how influencable Stephen does seem.
2. In spite of Stephen's intense desire to be unique, I found him surprisingly impressionable. I think why it was so surprising to me is because he was so mature in other ways but he was still to naive to start living his own life. That's totally understandable when you think about how young he is for the first bit of the novel. Little kids don't really know how life works so they watch other people's lives and imitate. It's totally normal. But having these little kid actions next to his big thoughts is a little disorienting. I'm sure it happens a lot. Everywhere in life you will find the small or weak or unsure submitting to the bigger, stronger, or more popular. However it's odd to have the young big thinker being so easily manipulated by the desire to fit in.
PS. Since I'm finishing this post so far after I started I thought I'd add the idea that Stephen's possible vocation is yet another voice in his head calling to him and telling him what to do.
The earliest influences we see in Stephen's life seem to be his mother, his father, and Dante. These are all pretty understandable influences for a young boy to be under. These are the people he knows best and that know him best. His mother is a big part of his conscientiousness while Dante and his father serve as moral guides. I'd say that these influences are not grounds to call Stephen impressionable. Naive maybe but not impressionable.
Soon after, we see Stephen's peers and teachers creep into being influences. Most memorably, his attempts to go unnoticed to fit in with his peers, then when the priest dubs him as a sneaky slacker, and finally when his peers convince him to go to rector. We discussed in class whether he acts for others or for himself. Stephen even notes his influence-ability on page 88, listing the demands of the people in his life.
God also becomes an influence in Stephen's life. God is basically a punisher in Stephen's mind. Stephen is very scared of the repercussions of defying God and subsequently adopts a strict regimen of self mortification. Later, God is such a big influence in Stephen's life he considers being a priest. Even after he's stepped away from his religious upbringing to pursue art, God plays a huge role in Stephen's thinking and understanding of the world.
Some interesting things about Stephen's relationships with his influences are:
1. Love is almost completely nonexistent between Stephen and his influences, save for with the women. I'd say that Stephen loves his mother. He listens to Dante and his father and teachers and peers and God but when he's sick in the beginning of the novel, he writes a letter to his mother. He wants her comforting most of all. He is also emotional affected by a number of women throughout the course of the novel. Although it is hard to say if this is actually love, there is definitely more of an emotional attachment to these women. They even inspire his art.
Maybe this is a comment on the gender roles he's observed. I feel like this is reflected in the fact that when he starts his first poem he does so by following the rules he's observed from Byron. Which moves toward my next interesting thing, that being how influencable Stephen does seem.
2. In spite of Stephen's intense desire to be unique, I found him surprisingly impressionable. I think why it was so surprising to me is because he was so mature in other ways but he was still to naive to start living his own life. That's totally understandable when you think about how young he is for the first bit of the novel. Little kids don't really know how life works so they watch other people's lives and imitate. It's totally normal. But having these little kid actions next to his big thoughts is a little disorienting. I'm sure it happens a lot. Everywhere in life you will find the small or weak or unsure submitting to the bigger, stronger, or more popular. However it's odd to have the young big thinker being so easily manipulated by the desire to fit in.
PS. Since I'm finishing this post so far after I started I thought I'd add the idea that Stephen's possible vocation is yet another voice in his head calling to him and telling him what to do.
Sunday, January 27, 2013
Starting at the Beginning
The yesterday in class Mr. Mitchell asked us to contemplate what it
means, in general, in our society, personally etc., to "come of age". I
started my writing with law.
Legally, an individual is no longer a minor after their eighteenth birthday. At that point they can be tried as an adult, sign up to serve in the military, buy cigarettes, and gamble however you still can't rent a car, drink alcohol or even get into bars. It's kind of like a holding period, easing you into adulthood; turning you into a pseudo-adult before you're full fledged. So then maybe 21, is where we should put the marker, but you still can't rent cars from many companies AND if you go to college, you're still in school. This definition quickly gets squishy.
Science is equally unsatisfying. Biologically, we think about starting to become an adult in the teenage years, in the midst of the changes that come with puberty. However, your body continues to change throughout life, never exactly reaching the point where your body is completely "of age".
Socially, popular rights of passage include getting a driver's license, thereby increasing independence, experimentation with drugs and alcohol, and loss of virginity.
However, in class, maybe by virtue of being academically-minded people, we honed in on education as a way of measuring coming-of-age-ness. I would say that as college started becoming more accessible and higher education a normal phenomenon, the process of coming of age in America has become far more convoluted. In a certain time, most kids graduated from high school, got a job, got married, and moved out. It's different now. Now, especially for students like us, college is not abstract it's very real and even expected for some of us. This continuation of schooling prolongs the coming of age process for a great number of years. People can be in grad school for an obscenely long time.
The question soon becomes, "is school a more or less valid way to 'come of age'?" In a way it seems like the more educated person should come more of age, seeing that they spend years and years pondering introspective questions in the safety of schools. However, the case can also made one becomes an adult when they go out into the world and get a job. Also, the degrees that students receive could be considered milestones in aging or immaturely needed pats on the back to motivate students.
It's an interesting debate at whether education facilitates coming of age or is an institution to postpone it but at Uni, it is in many of our futures. Some people didn't like that our discussion was primarily focused on higher education but in a class that is so current and introspective, it only makes sense that we come back to our personal definition of what it is to come of age.
Legally, an individual is no longer a minor after their eighteenth birthday. At that point they can be tried as an adult, sign up to serve in the military, buy cigarettes, and gamble however you still can't rent a car, drink alcohol or even get into bars. It's kind of like a holding period, easing you into adulthood; turning you into a pseudo-adult before you're full fledged. So then maybe 21, is where we should put the marker, but you still can't rent cars from many companies AND if you go to college, you're still in school. This definition quickly gets squishy.
Science is equally unsatisfying. Biologically, we think about starting to become an adult in the teenage years, in the midst of the changes that come with puberty. However, your body continues to change throughout life, never exactly reaching the point where your body is completely "of age".
Socially, popular rights of passage include getting a driver's license, thereby increasing independence, experimentation with drugs and alcohol, and loss of virginity.
However, in class, maybe by virtue of being academically-minded people, we honed in on education as a way of measuring coming-of-age-ness. I would say that as college started becoming more accessible and higher education a normal phenomenon, the process of coming of age in America has become far more convoluted. In a certain time, most kids graduated from high school, got a job, got married, and moved out. It's different now. Now, especially for students like us, college is not abstract it's very real and even expected for some of us. This continuation of schooling prolongs the coming of age process for a great number of years. People can be in grad school for an obscenely long time.
The question soon becomes, "is school a more or less valid way to 'come of age'?" In a way it seems like the more educated person should come more of age, seeing that they spend years and years pondering introspective questions in the safety of schools. However, the case can also made one becomes an adult when they go out into the world and get a job. Also, the degrees that students receive could be considered milestones in aging or immaturely needed pats on the back to motivate students.
It's an interesting debate at whether education facilitates coming of age or is an institution to postpone it but at Uni, it is in many of our futures. Some people didn't like that our discussion was primarily focused on higher education but in a class that is so current and introspective, it only makes sense that we come back to our personal definition of what it is to come of age.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)