THE STORY OF BEGINNINGS
(11/30/19)
As our discussions on Stephen Greenblatt and A.O. Scott came to a close, it was time to begin a new topic of discussion. And speaking of beginnings, that is exactly what we decided to tackle next: creation itself. Creation stories, however, have many variations based on the author’s personal beliefs, their cultural influences, and the time period in which they wrote/translated the story.
John Dryden translated his version during the Augustan/Neoclassical era – an era in which English rules began becoming stricter and stricter. This is evident in that his poetry is strictly constructed by these rules. Each line is written to be ten syllables each, each line ends with punctuation (no enjambement), each line is made up of five feet of two syllables each, the lines rhyme, he uses heroic couplets, etc. However, while Dryden sticks with these rules throughout his entire translation, he occasionally breaks them to disrupt the flow of his writing and call attention to that specific line. For instance, if every line has exactly ten syllables with the exact same stress and unstress pattern, if that model is suddenly abandoned and followed with an eleven syllable line, the reader will pay specific attention to what Dryden is trying to convey in that line. Additionally, the translation is written in a similar manner of Latin texts. By structuring his sentences in particular ways, Dryden not only conveys meaning through words, but he also includes meaning in the order and word choices of each line.
Unlike Dryden, Charles Martin translated his version of Ovid’s creation story in 2005 when the English language calmed down with the strict rules Dryden felt obligated to follow. His translation is still poetry, however, he uses some different tools to convey the story. For instance, Martin writes with an unrhymed iambic pentameter and he does not always end his lines with punctuation (enjambed). With this structure, Martin loses some of the effect that Dryden gets through keeping strict rules, but in my opinion, his translation is easier to understand. So, although they were written in different time periods and use different rules, neither translation is more correct than the other. In fact, having both versions accessible together adds me content to both stories.
As we move forward as a class, I hope to continue discussing the differences between the Dryden and Martin texts, and additionally, I hope we continue learning about the other translations that we have looked at as a class. And, once we finish discussing every author and their intentions together, I’m excited to then tie the themes that the creation authors used together with the themes we’ve used when talking about Greenblatt and Scott.
FREE WILL OR AGENCY?
(11/13/19)
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
CRITICIZING CRITICISM
(06/29/19)
While analyzing Stephen Greenblatt’s piece Renaissance Self-Fashioning, his dialectical language changes the way a number of individuals with a variety of different backgrounds think: he changes mindsets of literary scholars, historians, religious people, social scientists, philosophers, and curious non-experts. For instance, his book shows religious individuals how religion itself has acted (and continues to act) as an authority throughout history, and simultaneously, his message cators to historians by demonstrating how history and all historical arguments are not linear, but dialectical.
However, while the messages may vary in context for each group of people, what remains consistent for each audience is the idea of self-fashioning and forming identities. Throughout life, while many people have the false idea that they are in full control of who they become, they are unaware that the aliens and authorities that surround them are acting as cultural influences that truly shape who they become. And, as Greenblatt argues, without recognizing that these forces are shaping our perceptions and actions, we have little to no control over who we become.
This is Greenblatt’s gift to us. While as an AP Lit class we are only looking at a small section of his work, Greenblatt cicinctly argues that Renaissance Self-Fashioning trains his audience to think differently and to recognize the aliens and authorities around us -- this does not give us autonomous agency, but it grants us agency in choosing how we respond to our world, therefore, giving us a piece of power during our own self-fashioning. Whether we choose to submit to an authority or reject it as an alien, recognizing that we have control in the first step of aligning ourselves with a higher power is what gives us agency.
While I enjoy the idea that I have agency in forming parts of my own identity, I feel cheated when thinking of myself becoming self-fashioned as a result of this book. I did not refuse to read this book, so technically I had agency in choosing to abide with a healthy classroom environment and participate in discussions. Still, I feel that I have little to no power in how this book self-fashions me. If I decide to align myself with Greenblatt’s argument, then I’ve turned Greenblatt himself into an authority, which, in essence, is Greenblatt manipulating his readers into viewing him as a higher power than his audience. However, if I choose to disregard his ideas and reject his notions, I would still be validating his ideas since that rejecting his arguments for self-fashioning would only categorize him as an alien, which still fits his self-fashioning model. This makes it impossible to reject or unacknowledged his arguments after reading his text, just as all other authorities still self-fashion people around them regardless of whether or not they submit to them.
As our analysis for Renaissance Self-Fashioning comes to a close, I speculate that we’ll end by discussing how we can take Greenblatt’s message to stay mindful and maintain control over our actions in our day to day lives. Finally, I hope and believe we connect our conclusions on Greenblatt with the conclusions we found while reading A.O. Scott’s Better Living Through Criticism to tie our analyses into one cohesive framework.
Criticism generally needs facts and/or logical opinions to effectively back up an argument and persuade others to listen to you. Simply saying “because I said so” is a losing argument in almost every situation – however, A.O Scott mentions in Better Living Through Criticism that the main exception is with the judgment of taste. Subjectivity lays the foundation for taste, and in current day 2019, many live to disagree on their perception of beauty because their arguments can be solely based on opinions.
​
However, when Immanuel Kant investigated the fundamental nature of taste in the late eighteenth century, he introduced the crucial paradox known as “subjective universality.” This concept states that what is beautiful to one is beautiful to all. Edmund Burke, a worldly intellectual, agreed with this notion and stated that if a hundred people saw the same beautiful thing, they would “all immediately agree that it was beautiful” (Burke 51). To Burke, subjective universality is a simple fact, but his skewed common sense most likely lies in the fact that his hypothetical crowd of 100 people all live relatively similar lives and have relatively similar minds. In addition, with the Enlightenment, people increasingly became more drawn to the idea of individualism, so more people naturally disagree on taste in hopes to stand out.
​
While people commonly disagree on the beauty of a piece of art, a more modern argument questions the classification of art. In many instances, people ask “how is this even art?” to which Scott argues in response, “...because it moved them” (Scott 61). While this argument may not ring true for everyone, it definitely exemplifies itself in the form of the piece, “The Artist is Present.” This artwork is a human display of the artist herself as she connects to people who see her face to face. Although human interaction is one of the most common aspects of our everyday lives, the artist, Marina Abramovic, connects herself with others so well with her presence that many believe she is falling in love with them. They feel an overwhelming sense of recognition which ultimately acts as a “temporary antidote to the profound alienation” (65) we experience in our everyday lives. And, this feeling of alienation seems so prevalent to the viewers of “The Artist is Present” that many people leave their interaction in tears. Others become so connected that they feel inclined to take their clothes off within the presence of Abramovic.
​
I don’t believe the AP Literature and Composition course will entice me to strip my clothes off, however, I believe the literary artwork presented in this course will help grow my appreciation for classical literature. As I’m sure we’ll experience, many students will express their differing opinions and perspectives on the books we read and the fundamental themes we exhibit. That being said, I predict that the AP Lit course will thrive on critical thinking discussions and cooperation from each student. These conversations will help us discuss our differing opinions on topics such as Kant’s notion of subjective universality and the idea of taste, which is bound to present itself as a recurring theme throughout the year – especially as we practice respecting each others’ personal opinions as a class. With these concepts in mind, we’ll learn how to effectively participate in intellectual conversations, which will play major roles in our lives both in highschool and outside of a school environment.
THE ART OF ASKING (07/17/19)
Innovation plays a major role in almost every aspect of our lives. However, while Apple or Subaru continually improve on their products to give the best possible experience to their consumers, the education system in America (and many other countries) has remained untouched for over a century – in fact, based on Warren Berger’s A More Beautiful Question, not only are we continuing to practice the same teaching methods across the country, but we’re also educating our youth ineffectively.
​
In order to build a more educated society, people need to express a natural desire to explore new information and educate themselves based on their personal interests. As Berger points out, children between the ages 4 and 5 are the best demographic to represent this creative, curious mindset. They have the language skills to ask questions that require sufficient explanations, their brains are still highly expansive (making roughly 3 times as many synapse connections than adults on a daily basis), and they’re able to see the world without labels. This unique combination makes 4-5 year olds the perfect explorers and scientists of the world, always seeking out explanations for concepts they have yet to be exposed to.
​
However, as soon as these kids develop curious and creative mindsets, we immediately stifle their cognitive growth by teaching too much too soon. Beginning as early as preschool, we shove answers to questions they never asked down their throats, overwhelming them with too much information to continue seeking out their own answers. This rigorous academic system stems from the foundation of regular school, so once they graduate from preschool, they will continue learning with a limited ability to ask questions. As school is designed to prepare one for life beyond the classroom, the education system inherently takes away a child’s willingness to continue learning in what could be a more curious and intelligent society.
​
Rather than basing preschool off of regular school, I believe we should base learning off the ideology that every student is 4-5 years old, and that every student should be able to seek out the answers to their own questions. By encouraging kids to ask questions rather than being told “shut up and eat your french fries” (CK 39), kids will carry their curious and creative mindset past age 5 and begin applying their creative/curious minds at higher academic levels. Berger also mentions that kids generally ask more questions in environments where they feel more comfortable. By encouraging individual curiosity, students will naturally feel more comfortable while in school, ask more questions, and go off into the world as a more confident and educated person.
​
After reading A More Beautiful Question, I believe the AP Lit class will base its learning off asking questions and seeking our own answers. As students advancing towards higher education, it’s crucial that we develop sufficient research based skills by mimicking the cognitive development stage of a toddler. To achieve this, our class has to collectively indulge ourselves in uncomfortable conversations that will ultimately test the validity of our opinions. Discovering these levels of discomfort will enable us to further stretch our brains, figure out how to develop stronger opinions, and better prepare us for intellectual ideas and conversations outside of the classroom.
THE TRUE MEANING OF IDENTITY THEFT (08/06/19)
Prior to the sixteenth century, a sense of self consciousness seemed to only belong to the elite. However, this mindset became widespread largely due to updated translations of the New Testament. In years prior to the 16th century, Augustine declared “hands off yourself… try to build yourself up, and you build a ruin.” In contrast, Geneva’s 1557 translation states that Christ “was disfigured to fashion us. He died for us.”
Forming your own identity (self-fashioning) quickly became a widespread mindset within Christianity. With it came a need for parents and teachers to help guide future generations into building their own identities. Finally, people were thinking for themselves throughout their day-to-day lives, and through literature, they could also express their thoughts and opinions.
Or so it seemed.
​
Stephen Greenblatt, in his introduction and epilogue of Fashioning Renaissance Self-Fashioning, begins by introducing this idea of self-fashioning but quickly expresses, that we have never been in control of our ideas, core values, or identities. He explains that it’s virtually impossible to build your identity without the major influence of your culture or surroundings. You may choose which types of people you surround yourself with or the places you go, but to an extent, your options are limited. Nobody chooses their parents or where they are born, so at the bare minimum, you spent the first 18 years of your life without much control. Even afterwards, your parents, teachers, and the students that have interacted with you, intentionally or not, have contributed towards making you who you are. It’s not your choice. You have no control over your identity.
​
While I do believe to an extent that we have limited control on our lives, I think taking on this viewpoint can add a destructive pointlessness to our lives. If we can’t control anything about ourselves, then what’s the point of trying? Why go to school? Why interact with people? Why even get out of bed in the morning? This mindset can derail us – change us entirely – but in the end, it’s our choice whether we let it affect us or not. We are in control of choosing, and in this way, we are in control of determining our identity.
​
We may not be able to choose our parents or childhood surroundings, but if we learn how to think and purposefully expose ourselves to new ideas, cultures, and opinions, we can get a better grasp on the world and become the people we choose to be. In our AP Literature and Composition course, I imagine we’ll incorporate this mentality to better embrace each others ideas as students. Likewise, I imagine we’ll discuss literature written by people from various backgrounds to better expose us to global mentalities. It will introduce us to new ways of thinking that we would otherwise never be exposed to. By keeping an open mind and embracing what each author/poet has to offer, we can form our own educated ideas, practice articulating them, and ultimately become the people we seek out to be.
