Rise Of Nationalism

Hey guys, this is Cristy.
Just thought i'd open some discussion on Neoclassicism. One of the influences of the neoclassic age was the rise of nationalism. In european history we read Voltaire's opinion on patriotism and how one should aspire to be a "citizen of the world" because "to wish for one's country's greatness is to wish harm to one's neighbors". I don't think we would find many people who would fit voltaire's description of "a citizen of the world" because we all have predjidice and biases that sway our allegiance towards our "fatherland" or another.
Nationalist influence can be found in about every piece of writing in the Neoclassic packet as I'm sure we'll discuss in class. It was confusing to learn last year, in more depth the reasons for america's revolution. Before, I had believed that the reasons to revolt were overwhelmingly just. I didn't imagine that the colonies had any choice but to revolt! Last year as I learned more, the subject suddenly became debatable. In reality, the taxes that are so abominably described to us when we are in elementary school were actually not very high. All other Brittish citizens were paying much much higher taxes. I'm not saying we shouldn't have revolted or that it was wrong, but I felt like my education has been slanted to make me believe the revolution was just and unpreventable. Does Nationalism really result in more hurt like Voltaire believes or does the good outweigh the bad? Does nationalism divide more than it unites? Maybe Voltaire is right, that Nationalism is based on something that doesn't exist. I think that Nationalism in a way is a necessary evil/good because without it we would not be able to see a "bigger picture" and we would just live as an individual on the Earth, and look after our own private interests. But if nationalism didnt exist maybe we wouldn't go to war over things we have in the past.
I think Nationalism is a part of human nature, that we want to be a part of something bigger than ourselves. Still, I was suprised to read U.S. nationalism in the writings of Phillis Wheatley who was abducted from Africa and sold as a slave.

The Irrationality of Rationalistic Thought

Hey everyone, it's Stephanie.
This weekend, I read over our class notes on Deism. The people who believed in Deism thought that the universe was explainable; still a mystery, but able to be deciphered through rationalism. If the universe could be explained rationally, wouldn’t God have to be rational, since the sole existance of the world likewise proves the existence of God? This confuses me a little; if God (and for some, Christ) is supposed to be divine and omniscient, why does he need rationalism?
Also, did Deists take the Bible as the ‘word of God’? The Bible is comprised of spiritually derived manifestations from God; doesn’t that contradict rationalism and logic?
If Deists believed man was perfectable, and could so ‘make himself perfect’ through logical progression of thought and proving of hypotheses, did they require preists, or attendence at mass at all? If not, who or what kept Deism alive for the time being? What if you believed that you had, in fact, reasoned out the existance of God and the universe by means of rational thought. What then, was your faith, your religion, if your religion was explained by man?Does that mean man is on the same level as God? Then where is the Great Chain of Being?
Sorry about all of the questions, but I’m interested to hear everyone’s thoughts.

Puritan practice

Hey, it's Erin. This is from John Winthrop's "Modell of Christian Charity"

God Almighty in His most holy and wise providence, hath so disposed of the condition of mankind as in all times some must be rich, some poor; some high and eminent in power and dignity, others mean and in subjection. First, to hold conformity with rest of His works, ... Secondly, that He might have the more occasion to manifest the work of His spirit, ... Thirdly, that every man might have need of other, ... All men thus (by divine providence) ranked into two sorts, rich and poor, under the first are comprehended all such as are able to live comfortably by their own means duly improved, and all others are poor, according to the former distribution. There are two rules whereby we are to walk, one toward another; justice and mercy. ... There is likewise a double law by which we are regulated in our conversation, one towards another; in both the former respects, the law of nature and the law of grace, or the moral law of the Gospel. (1) For the persons, we are a company professing ourselves fellow members of Christ; (2) the care of the public must oversway all private respects by which not only conscience but mere civil policy doth bind us; (3) the end is to improve our lives to do more service to the Lord, the comfort and increase of the body of Christ whereof we are members; (4) for the means whereby this must be effected, they are twofold: a conformity with the work and the end we aim at. ... Thus stands the cause between God and us: we are entered into covenant with Him for this work; we have taken out a commission, the Lord hath given us leave to draw our own articles, ... if we shall neglect the observation of these articles ... the Lord will surely break out in wrath against us. ... Therefore, let us choose life, that we, and our seed may live; by obeying. His voice and cleaving to Him, for He is our life and our prosperity.

Car Commercials and Existance

Hello all, it's Paige.
I had a Merchant's of Cool flashback a few days ago while watching TV with my sister. My sister and I were zoning out as a car commercial came on, and my sister mentioned how it was interesting how usually car commericals have great music in the background. The Flaming Lip's alternative rock song "Do You Realize" was blasting during what appeared to be a SUV feature. We came to the conclusion that a lot of commercials these days use music to munipulate us, and that the car commercial was trying to make it appear as if automatically a person would be in touch with alternative music if they were to only buy the corporation's car. I don't know if any of you have heard the lyrics to this particular Flaming Lip's song:
"Do You Realize - that you have the most beautiful face
Do You Realize - we're floating in space -Do You Realize - that happiness makes you cry
Do You Realize - that everyone you know someday will die
And instead of saying all of your goodbyes
- let them knowYou realize that life goes fast
it's hard to make the good things last
You realize the sun doesn't go down
It's just an illusion caused by the world spinning round"

It just made me sad to think that these words that put a lot of perspective on life for me could be twisted around to promote a machine that hurts the environment, and deepens our dependence on oil. I guess it all goes back to what Hayakawa taught us about how words can be used in different ways, and they can unique in their usuage and existance because they can mean completely difference things depending on the audience.

This post is going to be a little different...

I've been thinking a lot about what Mr. Lazarow had to say the Wednesday before Thanksgiving break. I remember thinking to myself the entire time that it was the most depressing speech I had ever heard. I even shared my thoughts with Grace, and she responded by saying that it was truly inspiring. I guess we were both right.

I feel that grades are completely useless. In that sense, the speech was inspiring, for it completely backed the truth that grades are an empty honor. However, I felt that I fit completely into what Mr. Lazarow was describing- a student driven by grades and not learning. For me, it was a kind of reality check. Entering high school freshman year, I knew that I'd have to work hard to get the A's that I had earned in middle school. But the learning aspect never even occurred to me. As Sophomore year passed and I entered Junior year, this became even more of a reality, because everyone around me was saying how Junior year "makes or breaks" your ability to get into a top-notch college. But, as Mr. Lazarow said (and as I have heard and previously ignored countless times), all undergraduate education is more or less equal, from Harvard to BCC.

In addition, the grade aspect of high school is emphasized by the school, driving competitiveness among students and even a false atmosphere in learning. While most of my friends could be considered "intelligent" and fall in the 10% of our Junior class (as well as my competitors for college), I feel that the grading system causes me (and them as well) to even encourage forgoing friendship for the "elusive 'A.'" On another note, how can receiving a grade be indicative of what has been learned? If I simply have a photographic memory, then would that not allow me to memorize the myriad of major dates of European history and processes of biology? Not to seem like a sycophant, but I feel that our English class is one of the few classes that the grade does point to how much we have taken away from the experience. After all, it is technically a college-level course, and it is not expected that we get amazing grades on everything. Besides this class, however, only a few choice classes stand out in their ability to actually teach me anything at all (for me, biology).

The most unfortunate thing about it all is that it cannot be stopped anytime soon. We have all experienced or seen those hellish demons called "helicopter parents," who hover around their children and, for lack of a better word, force them to do well in school. For what? So they can get into an Ivy-League institution, make money, and be happy. All three of which do not follow by any twisted logic. My only hope is that we try to learn in all that we do: make LEARNING the priority and make the GRADE the product that follows from our learning.

Anne Bradstreet and Predestination

Hi, it's Jasmine.

Anne Bradstreet's writing is definitely easier to understand than Edward Taylor's, but some sections of her poems still confuse me.

In "Prologue [to her book]", she emphasized the importance of knowing one's position and duty on earth by stating,
A Bartas (French poet she admired) can do what a Bartas will,
But simple I according to my skill.

I thought this meant that Bradstreet thought each person should "strive not above what strength hath got" (as stated by Taylor in one of his poems), because humans don't have the strength to fight against what is destined by God. She again emphasizes this when she writes, Let Greeks be Greeks, and Women what they are. I felt like she contradicted herself, because she had written earlier that she did not want to conform to the notion of what a woman should be like - one that has a needle, not a pen, in her hand. But wasn't people's belief that women should be inferior to men destined by God?

Also, in "Verses upon the Burning of our House," she wrote that she cried out to God, asking for help, when she saw the fire. Why would she plead to God for help if she thought that the fire was predestined? She could pray, but nothing would happen. In Taylor's "Upon a Wasp Chilled With Cold," we learned although the wasp reaches out to the sun, the sun merely does what it always does - prayer has no effect.

I guess what really confuses me is predestination. Do you think Bradstreet started to doubt it, but felt like she was being disloyal to God? I feel like Bradstreet often started to doubt God's plan, but always caught herself and reaffirmed her loyalty to him ("He knows it is the best for thee and me"). Since Puritans were taught to believe in predestination from a very young age, did that mean that they didn't see anything as unjust or unfair (since everything was determined by God)? Were they taught not to regret anything they did because their actions had been predestined? Did humans have any free will?

Taylor and Bradstreet similarities:

Hey, its Amy.
I think it's interesting how both Bradstreet and Taylor show examples of modesty and relation to the audience in their poems. Taylor, as we discussed in class, put himself close to the same level as those he was preaching to. "Lord, clear my misted sight that I may hence view Thy divinity..." In the second stanza of "Upon a Wasp Chilled with Cold) Taylor uses "I" to show that he, too, has no way of knowing if he is one of the elite who are predestined to go to heaven. He, too, is in search of enlightenment and relates to the problems that everyone in Puritan society faces. We see another example of this as he writes, "Till I enravished climb into the Godhead on this ladder do, where all my pipes inspired upraise and heavenly music furred with praise." The demonstrations of some modesty allow him to become closer to his audience and their issues.

Bradstreet accomplishes similar things as in her prologue to her book she summarizes that there are many areas open to criticism in her work and that she is not a poet; she simply wrote her thoughts and didn't edit to make sure that they were gramatically correct or pleasant for the reader. This idea of modesty and her view that her work is nowhere near perfect is evident in the first stanza as she writes, "To sing of Wars, of Captains, and of Kings, Of Cities founded, Common-wealths begun, for my mean pen are too superior things; or how they all, or each their dates have run, let Poets and Historians set these forth. My obscure lines shall not so dim their worth." The use of words such as mean and obscure show her thoughts that her poems are not even close to the superiority of the work of true poets and historians. This humbling also brings Bradstreet closer to her audience as it did for Taylor, showing that she is not just an author, but she is just another citizen who can relate to everyone's problems and issues.

Although Taylor's work was meant for public ears, and Bradstreets poems were thoughts that were not formed for the purpose of being published, the ability of both authors to find ways to relate to the audience is what makes these works of Puritan literature such interesting and insightful documents.