• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Stop wasting time looking for files and revisions. Connect your Gmail, DriveDropbox, and Slack accounts and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio will automatically organize all your file attachments. Learn more and claim your free account.



Page history last edited by PBworks 12 years, 9 months ago



Hello all,

This is my first attempt at anything wiki so I would like to apologize ahead of time for things being awkward and disorganized. I suppose I should start by explaining my name. It's nothing special, just a phrase from a song on a Pink Floyd album: Division Bell. My Dad and I spend a lot of time talking about music and Pink Foyd is just something we're both really into.

Today is the first day that I started to get an idea of what we are talking about in class. I started to think about what Rich was saying about beginnings and the whole reference to Quentin Tarantino's movies. I started to think about Pulp Fiction (my favorite movie of all time!) and how it, like Resevoir Dogs, doesn't begin at the beginning. Isn't it strange how we as viewers accept this? We even like it. And many of us think that Tarantino is a genius in part because of his disorganization of time. Hell, Dane Cook even made "Tarantino" into an adjective on his album Retaliation. While it's true that we like our stories to start at the beginning, it seems somewhat limiting to the audience. Because Pulp Fiction or Resevoir Dogs or whatever Tarantino movie one chooses doesn't begin at the beginning, the viewer is given the option of judging the characters and the situation. When a story begins at the beginning, we tend to be coached by the author/director/producer,etc., to think certain things about the character(s) and/or the situation(s). What if the Bible began differently? If Tarantino directed the movie version, viewers might be inundated with Adam and Eve graphically having sex in the first scene. What judgements would we pass then?

It seems to be far more entertaining not to begin in the beginning. It isn't safe, and allows the reader or viewer to perceive things in his or her own way, without being coached first. In a way, isn't this what Rich is asking all of us to do?





Rumi's 4th Discourse


Rumi's 4th discourse really intrigued me for a number of reasons. In the beginning (not THE BEGINNING, but the beginning of the discourse), Rumi suggests that there is one thing that must never be forgotten: why we, as humans, are put on this earth. I, following a set of Christian beliefs, understand this to mean that regarding duties, we each have but one, and that is to adopt God into our hearts and to live by His word. I immediately thought to myself: "I do not attend church anymore due to time contraints (a silly excuse, I know) and because I don't have anyone to accompany me (also, a silly excuse), and so I certainly am not fulfilling God's wishes." However, when I did attend church with my family, my good friend and minister, Robert Heydenreich once told me in so many words: "Any Joe can attend church every Sunday, but that doesn't mean that he isn't a bastard every other day of the week." And so I have hope. I reached a sort of epiphany after thinking on this for two days: Maybe I'm not desregarding my duty to God just because I don't attend church. I think that sometimes, rituals can be empty promises when people lose sight of their devotion. One musn't attend church to convince themselves.

I can now be content with the life that I live! This brings me to my next point. Rumi discusses the King's son and his ability to dazzle others with his knowledge of the sciences. His failure to identify the ring in his father's hand reinforces my aformentioned ideas about church and God, basically, "You can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?"





Genesis Remix!


Original Text- King James Version Genesis 1:26-31

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.




And God said, I will create man in my image, and because I am perfect, man will be perfect. Since I am creating him in my likeness, I will give him some agency, just as I have agency. Man will rule over every creature deemed less than he. And because God desired for the earth to populate and thrive, he made a woman as well. He instructed the couple that he had equipped them with tools for success, and that he had equipped all creatures lesser than man with tools for success. And God shoved the man and the woman off on their own with high expectations, just as the weeping yet hopeful parents watch as their first-born leaves for college.


My mother and father are much like the one entity that is like God to me. Like God created Adam and Eve, my parents created me. In both instances, the created is equipped with the necessary tools for success, though I was coached by my mother and father for all of my life, and Adam and Eve were merely given a few instructions before they were sent out on their own. It makes me wonder, was God mistaken here, or was he using the trial and error method? Did God think that because he made man in his own image that there was no possibility for failure? I assume that Adam and Eve were placed on the earth as adults, therefore, they simply did not have the benefit of years of coaching before left to make their own decisions...





I want to preface this comment by saying that I have not floated and have no plans to do so. I got a feeling in class today that there were negative feelings about those who floated and were uncomfortable being alone with themselves. I discussed the experiment with my friend as she had read the newspaper article in The Collegian and we both could not understand why there was negativity surrounding not being comfortable when left to one's self. I personally, appreciate and look forward to daily stimuli, because, when left to myself I tend to worry about silly things and dwell on past regrets. Who wants to do that? I do, however, think that taking time out for self reflection can be healthy on occasion.





Due to my grandmother's passing last Tuesday and going out of town to be with family, I unfortunately had to miss classes last week and missed talking about Rumi, which really disappoints me, but life happens. I'll need to catch up with the Heart Sutra business, because I was really out of the loop on Tuesday. Most of my confusion stems from Doyle's comments on "flexing the emptiness muscle". I understand lessening the impact of suffering, but I do not understand that the reaction to emptiness is also empty...leading me to believe that any reaction to emptiness is an over-reaction? Can we say then, that any negative reaction is also an over-reaction? I feel that reaction in and of itself is a reflex. Would there be a benefit in learning not to react to something? Like myself, I'm sure that many people enjoy reacting positively, but there are situations in life when it is necessary to react to negatives, such as learning that we have cancer, learning that a loved one has died, etc. The theory works with something as trivial as finding that you are left with no potato chips at the bottom of the bag, but does it work when you walk into your grandmother's house only to find it empty because she is gone?


I don't know who you are Paperdove, but I have lost all of my grandparents, so I feel empathy for your situation. I think once I accepted that all beings are born and eventually die that I understood emptiness. Thus, in the big scheme of things, all of our thoughts, actions, desires, etc. are all empty on some universal level. And I think that once I accepted all of this, I now live my life more grateful, in the moment, and happy. I used to get very upset and recoil from society if someone rejected me, died, or I felt loss. Now I see these all as parts of life. For example, I think it is part of a relationship to feel and have loss, because it is going to happen eventually. Paraphrasing Mobius, there is no need to get worked up over obstacles in life, because part of life is overcoming obstacles. Anyways, back to the enjoying life part; so now, on a daily basis, a thought enters my mind which tells me I should enjoy what I have now – in the moment – rather than worrying about things that are inevitable. Does this make sense?




Gonzo- Thanks for understanding the grandparent thing. Somehow, from your explanations I want to draw this conclusion: Because we as human beings essentially have no control over fate, any feelings/reactions (can these be paired?) attributed to that which we cannot control, are in fact empty if not just plain wasteful. Does this make sense? Worry, along with other negatives is just another one of those empty feelings that we are prisoner to. I think this jives with what you're saying. -PaperDove




First, I'm sorry about the loss of your grandmother.


Second, in expressing condolences over a death we so often refer to it as a loss, which no doubtedly it is. Also, when relatioinships fail society often refers to it as a loss. Interesting use of language. However, when we empty our bottle of chocolate milk we don't see it as a loss. We've enjoyed the sweetness with the expectation that it would be relatively short-lived enjoyed and emptied. With humans, though, we have more time. We have more depth. We have more attachment. So in saying that emptiness is the same in the context of relationships with people and with relationships with material goods is entirely different. Sure, I can lose a book, a piece of jewelery or a shirt, but I don't consider it the same type of emotional loss.


Something Gonzo said resonates strongly with me. In viewing ourselves as empty we are able to much more clearly appreciate what we have in the moment with the knowledge that when it goes away we will again be left with emptiness. So, even the next "thing" is appreciated as a distraction from the emptiness. I think that there is something extremely useful in the Heart Sutra's emphasis on emptiness. Without working toward a state of emptiness we have a notion of ourselves that we are somehow "full" and therefore it is we who contribute to the planet and somehow deserve to be honored for our contributions. When we aren't honored we are blindsided by the emptiness that is uncovered. But, when we see ourselves as empty we know that fulfillment is outside of ourselves (even though it requires inner emptiness to see). In striving toward emptiness we are able to see that fulfillment in many ways comes from outside sources. Only by being empty can we manipulate those outside sources to be fulfilling. In and of themselves, outside sources are not fulfilling. I'd argue that pure emptiness is not satisfying either. But, when combined, the emptiness allows us to adjust our views to appreciate the fullness of how we handle anything either outside or inside of us. I'm not sure if the last few sentences were clear, but they were an attempt to clarify that through inner emptiness we may better find fulfillment through both outer and inner circumstances. --http://biotelemetrica.pbwiki.com/happygirl"-happygirl





Due to many academic/personal issues occuring in the past few weeks, it has been difficult for me to focus on a choice for the Scared Text presentation. Fortunately, having some spare time tonight, I have made a decision! Since I am completely unfamiliar with paganism, I decided to research Aradia, The Gospel of the Witches which is pretty much THE sacred text for these people. I have since ordered it from Amazon, and have previewed some of it electronically and it is pretty wild.


http://faculty.goucher.edu/eng240/online_editions_of_chaucer.htm - A new mission! More on this when I don't have mid-terms to study for.


Chaucer Research Paper.doc - An old mission (accomplished!)





Regarding our discussion on Philip K. Dick's Valis, I was noticing that his style/language resembles that of Carolyn Forche. She wrote a lot of political poetry concerning her own human rights work in El Salvador and I was especially reminded of a famous poem of hers, The Colonel, written in the seventies.Her newspaper article style reflects her work as a journalist and so her writing in this particular way may not have been intentional. The short easy-to-read sentences in Dick's Valis and Forche's The Colonel aids the reader in concentrating on what is being said; it causes readers to slow down so as not to miss what's happening, forcing them to focus more intently. Some may argue that short "elementary school" sentences cause a reader to skip ahead, but in fact they cause the opposite.





So, I have been feeling pretty down-trodden for the past week or so due to a variety of things. One thing that has been on my mind lately is getting back on the treadmill, since I had to take a break from running due to a work-related injury at the end of August. Yesterday, I was feeling so down that I actually craved exercise, and when I went to the gym and got on that treadmill, I ran harder and longer than I ever have before. There are so many things to say about the experience. I literally felt that as I ran, the negativity was just falling away from me. And while it did so, I gained some sort of super energy that continued to propel me forward. The greatest realization I had while running yesterday was that "mind over matter" is real. I was in tune with expending all of my negative energy while being completely detached at the same time, and I came to understand that my previous problem with endurance was simply my brain dictating my physical limitations, while in reality, my body was capable of much more. Discovering this about myself leads me to believe that I have infinite capabilities, and having experienced this, I will never tell myself or let anyone else tell me that I cannot achieve something!


That sounds awesome PaperDove. I feel the same way when I am lifting. When I broke my finger I felt really down - though I understand loosing someone can be much more painful - because I couldn't lift. For so long lifting was an outlet - a method to keep myself in a state of balance. I feel so fortunate because through all of the pain in my life since the age of 16, I have had weightlifting to fall back on. I hope you continue your treadmill endeavors.




PaperDove, I appreciate you thinking of me in your weightlifting endeavors. With that said, I think Ronnie Coleman is a narcassistic, obnoxious, overgrown boy. I am not a big fan of Bodybuilders like Ronnie Coleman. I think there is a common misperception. I do Olympic Weightlifting. Olympic Weightlifting, or Weightlifting, is a gracefull, fast-twitch, mentally challenging, flexible, technique driven sport; like gymnastics. Here is one of my favorites in the sport, Pyrros Dimas lifting 3 times his bodyweight over his head.





I recently received a copy of Aradia or the Gospel of the Witches in the mail, and it is quite interesting. Apparently, the witches believe in listening to their own "inner voice" rather than listening to the voice of the church, state or to mass opinion. Basically, being a witch involves thinking for his or herself, but there is a part of me that finds a discrepancy with this. Along with thinking for one's self, the Gospel of the Witches preaches against oppression. By preaching against oppression, aren't these people being oppressive? The Gospel of the Witches pre-programs worshippers to discount the voice of the church, state or mass opinion, which they deem as "oppressive" and this is hypocritical in itself. If one is to think for one's self, isn't it necessary to evaluate all opinions and options before making a decision or taking a side? It's like people who desire to be non-conformists-- there is no such thing as a non-conformist, because one is conforming by joining such a group...




Wow, I can't believe it has been two weeks since I've posted. I believe Mobius told me that writing on the wiki is like exercising. By doing it a few times a week, you eventually form a routine. Well, I haven't even had the chance to exercise in two weeks. Isn't it strange that I ran today and am also writing on the wiki?

I was grappling with something that we discussed in class on Tuesday during our discussion of the devil. Because I'm not currently understanding my notes, I'm going to try and piece together what was posed to the class. I believe that the question went something like this: Can we get rid of the devil? Concerning our discussion of opposites, I came to this: How is it possible to have good without evil? (Someone said something of this nature in class and I was thinking the same). I mean, to define a lot of things, we need to decide what they are not, or what their opposites are. What would constitute "good" if we had nothing to compare it to? It's almost as if it wouldn't be able to exist.




I'm upset to hear this happend to you. First of all, I feel that anyone grabbing your wrist is unacceptable in any circumstance - except wrestling, and of course, in the most inimate of moments where roughness is acceptable. What should you do? Only you know that. But what would make me feel better is confronting the boyfriend with how I feel. I would confront it in terms of how "I feel". For example, "I felt like it was unacceptable for you to grab my wrist. I feel like you overreacted." And if he is unwilling to change his behaviors then I would consider finding other accomidations for next year. I think that your girlfriend could be in denial, and if that is the case, standing up for yourself could be a catalyst for change.


If they are both friends and potential roomates then I would definetely go and talk to him one-on-one. I think it will make you feel better about yourself, and my guess is, if he is a decent human being, he will consider changing his behaviors.







Though Thanksgiving break was a short one, I am glad that it's out of the way and I am back in class. I know the last three weeks of classes are going to be packed with last minute assignments that I don't want to do, but on December 22, I am graduating from PSU. This is an extra semester for me, and they like to call my breed the "super senior". Not only will I enjoy graduation on the 22nd and Christmas on the 25th, I am flying to St. Martin, an island in the Carribean, on January 2nd, and staying in a house with my family and friends. What more could I ask for? Currently, I am denying the terrifying reality that when I return, I only have my wage payroll job to look forward to. I guess that's what the surprise of graduating earlier than I thought affords me.


Anyway, I was doing some more research for my presentation on the sacred text of the witches, and found that Charles G. Leland, author of Aradia, or the Gospel of the Witches, was nothing more than a Princeton graduate from Philadelphia PA. I guess I pictured him as living the life of a recluse, practicing wizardry and witchcraft and brewing potions in his basement. Instead, he studied all types of folklore and enjoyed teaching the arts, especially woodburning techniques to his students. Who knew? Nonetheless, I'm excited to see how he got involved in writing one of the most influential texts for Italian witchcraft.



Interesting stuff, particularly the emphasis on folklore for the sources and the role of Leland as the "remixer" of these traditions. It might be interesting for you to go back and read some of the texts associated Northern European Witchcraft and its suppression. The http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/ Malleus Maleficaram] is the most famous medieval text from thios period, and very much worth exploring. mobius once wrote but did not complete a paper on the eyes of wolves and their magical effects in the Malleus. yes, there is still time...





Yes, yes, I know that class is over, but I am still taking this opportunity to discuss my final paper. Why is it that I chose to write a paper and not explore some other means for conveyance of my incredibly interesting research?


Chaucer's dream visions are really more interesting that I anticipated. I was reading The House of Fame, which is an extraordinary story. I hope to analyze a specific portion of this text through Artimedorus's Dream Book and see what happens. I think it would be cool to compare it to Freud's Interpretation of Dreams as well, which, however ambitious, seems necessary to me. I have my work cut out for me.


12/14/07 (again)


I just completed reading The House of Fame (not in its entirety really, but skimmed it more or less). Because Chaucer is known for his implication of rhetorical devices, I think I have found the focus of my topic which begs the question: Is there any truth to Chaucer's dream visions? I have already found some interesting criticism...and have plenty of my own.





Here is the result of countless hours of pulling my hair out over what to write! Because I could not find any criticism on the topic of my choice, the ideas in this paper are entirely my own and I wish I could have had more time to articulate them. The gist of this thing is such if you have trouble decoding it:

1) The House of Fame as a dream vision satisfies the convention, but is clearly a work of fiction

2) Chaucer uses said literary convention in order to convey personal opinion as "truth"

3) Chaucer uses first person narrative technique to detach from the text as its author

4) Use of various mechanisms to disguise text as truth, all argued

5) The identity of the poet resurfaces once text has been "mulled over" as a result of its falsehood. The reader has been "had." Chaucer escapes scot-free.


Hope the above information is explanatory and helpful when trying to decipher some of my garbled thoughts! More importantly, I hope you enjoy the paper!


Merry Christmas! (Yeah, I SAID IT)



PS- Mobuis! I saw HappyGirl today before my final and asked her if she would grade my paper---in return I will grade hers.



Chaucer Dream Visions Final Draft.doc



Paperdove, Thanks for grading my paper.


Your paper really kicks tail. You did a graet job with it. I surely don't know the entire side of all arguments, but I agree it seems like Chaucer fabricated The HOF. I didn't know anything about dream visions prior to this, but it is a really interesting paper topic. I think that it would have been a topic thought provoking enough that it wouldn't have been boring to write--and it wasn't a boring read!


I think you deserve an A, as long as Mobius agrees that the quality of your paper compensates for the quantity. Seriously, great job.


Have a great break...and Merry Christmas to you too!--happygirl

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.