Thoughts on Genesis

Genesis was an interesting read, though I’ll admit that at times it was difficult to stay focused while reading it. This was largely because of the passages that focus merely on who begat who, at what age they did so and how long they lived. Despite this, there was still an incredible amount that was very intriguing when given the right amount of focus and consideration. Being an atheist, I view the text from a different perspective than those who are religious, so I’m trying to take into account that this is a very important text to many.

One aspect of Genesis that I really enjoyed reading was the beginning, as various creation stories have always been very interesting to me. I found it fascinating the way different elements of Earth were said to be created, and what came before what, and how it all happened in seven days. One interesting thing about the first part of the text that a friend pointed out to me was the slightly different way it was written. The repetition and style of the first section is not seen again in quite the same way. The theory, they said, was that someone different wrote the first bit and then someone else continued it.

I found things happened both very quickly and slowly, depending on the event, and because of this I may have missed a few things while reading. I surprised by the minimal justification God gave to “blot out from the earth the human beings I have created”. There were all of a few lines of observation of wickedness before the plan for the flood was created. This was a very different feel from the gods of The Odyssey and Medea, as one of them would not single handedly be able to wipe so much life from the earth without consequences. On this point, as I read Genesis I found myself continually comparing this god to the Greek gods, and was fairly focused on the role of the divine throughout the text. However, in hindsight there are many more aspects about humanity and the societies of the time that are depicted to focus on. For example, Joseph’s story was particularly interesting to me with its issues of anger, jealousy, revenge, and forgiveness. I wondered, for one thing, how the brothers dealt with the guilt of having sold Joseph as a slave. Many very emotionally charged events were slightly downplayed I felt. If I were Joseph, having been sold and then wrongly accused of sexual assault, I would be far more damaged and faithless. But I suppose that’s where the role of God came in. that’s another thing I found very interesting, was the total faith that is portrayed in Genesis. With the Greek gods, the characters know that the gods are not always dependable or helpful. But with this god, anyone who is favored by Him must display complete faith.

I would like to comment on the portrayal of women in Genesis, but unfortunately there is simply too much to say. This is a topic I feel I could write multiple essays on for each of the books we’ve read so far, but I’d like to simply not comment on it in this blog post as I would likely ramble for far too long.
Over and out,
Camille

Medea

This play did not end as I expected to say the least. I thought at first that in some way Medea would suffer and be unsuccessful in her plots, but instead she carries out her exact plan and even has a gift from the divine for her troubles, whereas Jason is left to suffer. Before her true insanity and grotesque desire for vengeance are revealed she seems to be nothing but an intensely depressed woman, at a loss for lack of a husband. Her nurse seemed to have such pity for her, I didn’t take her fears so seriously about Medea harming the children. However, after the gruesome description of how Jason’s new wife and father-in-law are killed, I was much less surprised by the atrocity she commits.

I found it interesting how she is determined to place all the blame on Jason, even after she murders their children. She makes him out to be the villain with every breath and feels little personal responsibility for her actions. Perhaps she was happy in a way to be rid of her children who would only be a constant reminder of their father. The quick paced action was very affective in keeping me reading and the whole thing was over before I knew it, quite surprising considering the length of time I spent on the previous book. This was a very different feel from the odyssey, as the play is focused around Medea, a character we’re clearly meant to view as a villain, whereas Odysseus is one who we’re meant to see as the hero and protagonist of the epic. I suppose there was no hero to this play, as everyone had their flaws and none were able to save those who died at Medea’s hands.

As in the odyssey, the theme of deception was prominent, though it played a significantly different role. Medea lied without any trouble, and was hardly questioned at all when her nature changed from angry and bitter to accepting and pleading. It all seemed a bit too easy for her to complete her murders, and I wondered why she waited to extract her revenge. Was it really being exiled that pushed her over the edge and into scheming? Perhaps that was just the final motivation she needed to truly feel guiltless about killing.

I enjoyed reading it, and would definitely like to explore the portrayal of this betrayed woman who becomes a rampaging murderess.

The Odyssey

I had not read the Odyssey before, or anything of that size from that era. I knew very little about the book itself outside of a brief plot summery before I cracked open the cover and began reading, which doubtlessly influenced my experience of it. I had no preconceived opinions on the characters portrayed within the pages and I was never entirely sure of just what would happen next. One aspect that surprised me was the language and way the book was written. Thanks to phenomenal translation, I found I could understand what I was reading without having to concentrate as intensely as I did when I read “The Prince” this past year in high school. That made reading The Odyssey significantly more enjoyable and I found, happily, that finishing this book was not an uphill battle for understanding. What struck me next was the uniqueness of the writing style and structure. I would call reading a hobby of mine, but despite this I have had little experience with tales as old as the odyssey. The flow and tone was interesting and different, the choice of words clearly well thought out. The repetition of certain phrases as the book went on, significantly the description of dawn and her “rose-red fingers”, was something that stuck with me, as I often remember specific lines that I favour in a book. It is not only the plot which must be skilfully weaved in the creation of a tale, but also the style and use of language.

Another aspect that stuck with me was the portrayal of women in the book. As is expected from a tale of this age, the strongest mortal characters were male, and the mortal women were considerably less of a focus. Penelope, a main character of the epic is of course admired for her devotion to her husband and stereotypically feminine traits, rather than traits such as bravery and determination, which her son and husband possess. Though this is of course to be expected of a book as old as this, as gender roles and expectations have changed and evolved, and feminism has come into a stronger light. And it must be acknowledged that the immortal females, prominently Athena, are significantly more strong, decisive, and independent. Certainly though, I’m looking forward to delving into the gender portrayals in the Odyssey, if such a discussion arises.

This was an interesting and intriguing read, unlike anything I’ve encountered beforehand, and I’m looking forward to Monday’s lecture to see what an intellectual and analytical perspective will reveal about The Odyssey.

Beginnings

Hello to all, it was great to get to know a bit about everyone in class! I’m Camille, and if you remember from the little ice breaker we played, I have three brothers, and was born in Vancouver. However, I don’t remember much of this city as I moved to Toronto when I was fairly young. Coming back to Vancouver was a fairly easy choice for me, and I was ready to face a completely new beginning. The enormity of UBC became much less daunting when I found out about the arts one program. Despite growing up in a sizable city, and loving the feeling of anonymity one has in such an environment, I was still intimidated by the idea of having potentially all my classes in a lecture hall of hundreds. So arts one seemed like the ideal transition into university life, and so far I feel that I’ve made the right choice, though the year is only beginning.

To tell you a bit more about myself, I’m interested in history, specifically the enlightenment, and have a strong curiosity when it comes to philosophy. I’ve heard that no one comes out of university with the same future goals they had coming in, but as of now I hope to one day work in aid evaluation. I developed a passion for international relations and politics in high school and would like to travel around the world to evaluate different programs to see how effective they are, and contribute to the improvement of aid. However, I’m very aware that this will likely change, as when I went into high school I was convinced that the only thing I would ever want to do was be a teacher. Before that I wanted to be a chef, but one more fun fact about me is that my cooking adventures don’t always go very well. So I’m keeping my mind open to try to and find my passions.

Hm…. Lets see… my favourite colour is blue? Or sometimes red. And occasionally green. It changes frequently. I’ve been known to be fairly indecisive every now and then, especially the night before an essay is due and I decide halfway through the night that my thesis is awful and scrap the whole thing. It’s a miracle I was ever on time to class with the amount of sleep I got, though now I plan to change my ways and work on time management.

I can’t wait to discuss the odyssey with everyone, and get to know you all better!

Over and out,

Camille