BUFFY: How do you get to be renowned? I mean, like, do you have to be ‘nowned’ first?
Oh my. I’m definitely saving this for World Lit this fall (hope the link is still active by then): a flash animated tour of Dante’s Inferno.
I salute the artist, a friend of a friend of scholar and author Kim Paffenroth, who calls it “without a doubt, the most adorable rendering of the Inferno evah!” I must agree.
JMNR reminds us that the sciences need the humanities:
Knowing what a thing is made of, after all, does not tell us what it is.
. . .
Literature, the fine arts, theater, and music teach humans what it is to be good, true, and beautiful. They point to meaning. What does it profit a man to learn all mysteries of matter and energy if he does not have love? Science can only simulate or stimulate the feelings of love, but . . . cannot create one real passion.
That first sentence, as Reynolds very well knows, is a paraphrase from a conversation in C.S. Lewis’s The Voyage of the Dawn Treader:
“In our world,” said Eustace, “A star is a huge ball of flaming gas.”
“Even in your world, my son, that is not what a star is but only what it is made of….”
How I hope that the makers of the movie don’t lose or obscure that particular bit of wisdom!
But I think this movie Son of Rambow (yes, that’s the spelling) might be worthwhile:
Here are some reviews. You’ll probably have to look hard to find it locally, so might have to wait for the DVD.
One of the courses I’ve been teaching this semester is an upper-level seminar on Postcolonial Literature, mainly books and films from British/Commonwealth and former British colonies.
Nita’s Wide Angle View of India posted this interesting summary of a comparative study of “cultural variables”:
Hofstede laid out certain ‘dimensions’ of culture which he used to compare different nations. These “dimensions” are not individual traits…but simply “averages” or “tendencies” of whole groups. The Hofstede dimensions are as follows:
- Power Distance (PD) The attitude of people towards differences in power and wealth …countries with a great power distance will have strict hierarchies and this will be accepted by those in the lower levels of the hierarchy.
- Individualism Collectivism (IC) This measures the ability to live in groups or choose ones own path, regardless of what the group/community is thinking or doing. Individual achievement is highly valued.
- Masculinity (MF) This measures a culture’s “masculine” traits like competitiveness, aggression and giving importance to material things and “feminine” traits like sensitiveness, empathy, importance given to quality of life. This masculine/feminine terminology has also been dubbed as Quantity of Life vs. Quality of Life. [...]
- Uncertainty Avoidance (UA) This dimension (added later by Hofstede) shows how people react to uncertainty in their environment. This dimension also shows the level of tolerance in a society for differences
Where does your culture or the culture where you grew up fall on the these scales? But note the possible exceptions and criticisms of these hypotheses, footnoted at the end of the post.
In case anyone’s interested the Postcolonial Lit seminar, three intrepid explorers*, has read:
In retrospect, I think (and students agreed) I would have chosen Rabbit-Proof Fence or Whale Rider as one of the films representing Australia/New Zealand. Nevertheless, overall it has been a horizon-expanding semester. Also, I chose Achebe’s Anthills of the Savannah, because I figured most of us had already read Things Fall Apart. Anthills is so oblique, however, and depends much more on the reader’s being fairly familiar with modern African culture. We all agreed that re-reading Things might have worked better.
*The small size makes the class, officially, three independent studies meeting simultaneously. Still worthwhile, though.
The English 102 classes have been reading A Midsummer Night’s Dream and viewing parts of the film version directed by Michael Hoffman (with Michelle Pfeiffer as Titania, Rupert Everett as Oberon, Stanley Tucci as Puck, and Kevin Kline as Bottom). One enterprising student found this clip of the Beatles doing the “Pyramus and Thisbe” play-within-the-play:
The extremely enthusiastic audience participation gives you an idea of an actual Elizabethan performance. Or perhaps not.
Tuesdays and Thursdays are my busy days this semester, so I haven’t been able to alliterate as regularly as I’d like. Nevertheless.
Things I’m thinking about today:
And the three stacks of essays I’ll have to grade at the end of today.
In encouraging news, the CU Multicultural Council saw successful results for the second annual Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of Service.
January is very, very busy. I’m juggling five courses, and even though three of them are essentially the same course, they’re on two different schedules, so after I’ve presented the same lesson on literary symbolism three times over two days, I’m a bit boggled.
Had dinner last night with some friends we hadn’t seen for a long time, but had to miss seeing Bride and Prejudice, which I’d encouraged all my students to see, for various reasons. Of course, I’ve seen it myself several times—but it’s still fun. Tonight, another social event—my sister’s Mardi Gras party.
Now, I love my sister, and I fully expect to enjoy myself at her party, but in doing various things around the office this afternoon, I came across this essay reprinted in one of the potential composition readers publishers keep sending, which explains quite well why I look forward to some quiet time now and then. Maybe next weekend!
…after an hour or two of being socially “on,” we introverts need to turn off and recharge. My own formula is roughly two hours alone for every hour of socializing. This isn’t antisocial. It isn’t a sign of depression. It does not call for medication. For introverts, to be alone with our thoughts is as restorative as sleeping, as nourishing as eating.
Not surprisingly, a lot of professors tend to be introverts, high energy in the classroom, then hiding out in libraries or offices.
My colleague Ken Morefield has boldly ventured into the lair of the 2007 Beowulf movie. I warned him, but he went anyway. Read his comments.
Film critics are heroes—they willingly dare all manner of dreadful culture-dreck, thus saving the rest of us from wasting our money. If we read their reviews. If we don’t, we have only ourselves to blame.
Students have been asking me if I’ve seen the new Beowulf movie. Generally, I am willing to see a movie for myself before passing judgment on it, and I did just that with the 2005 Beowulf and Grendel movie (filmed in Iceland, with real live Gerard Butler as Beowulf). It had its moments, mostly involving scenic Iceland; its attempt to provide Grendel with a touching backstory was unsuccessful, as was the pointless insertion of a witch into the plot. Why doesn’t someone just go all the way and film John Gardner’s Grendel? It would make more sense.
However, one glimpse of Angelina Jolie in the trailer for the Zemeckis/Gaiman/Avary Beowulf, and I knew it would be a travesty. No one who had actually read the poem could take her seriously as Grendel’s mother, especially not with six-inch stilettos apparently growing from her heels. Clearly this movie was going to set up some kind of seduction…where that would lead would certainly not be pretty. Posters proclaimed “Pride is the Curse!” Well…one of the possible curses, at any rate. Talk about a vast oversimplification. So all right, I haven’t seen it. I hear the 3D effects are thrilling…and occasionally comical. But a movie that’s only worth seeing for 3D visuals doesn’t seem like much, especially when it’s based on one of the world’s classic tales of adventure, courage, combat, and sacrifice.
If I do see it, I’ll report. But I’ve already seen at least one reviewer write that he now “understands” Beowulf after seeing this movie. I think that’s extremely unlikely
So I’m putting together a reading list for a course I’ll teach next semester on “Postcolonial British Literature.” One title that occurred to me was Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake, which I read this past summer not long before I saw the movie—twice—the second time with my dad—and enjoyed it both times. Since Lahiri describes herself as Indian-American, I guess I can’t quite justify including her novel in a British lit course, but I can still recommend it, and Lahiri’s eloquent description of her experience as a particular type of third-culture-kid:
While I am American by virtue of the fact that I was raised in this country, I am Indian thanks to the efforts of two individuals. I feel Indian not because of the time I’ve spent in India or because of my genetic composition but rather because of my parents’ steadfast presence in my life….
I have always believed that I lack the authority my parents bring to being Indian. But as long as they live they protect me from feeling like an impostor. Their passing will mark not only the loss of the people who created me but the loss of a singular way of life, a singular struggle.
