Tempest Pre-Reading due 10.19.05
POST your response as a comment, please.
posted by erdecker @ 9:23 AM
30 comments
JM AP English Government
A resource for John Marshall's Advanced Placement English and Government class. Woo-hoo!
Monday, October 17, 2005
About Me
- Name: erdecker
- Location: Lanesboro, Minnesota, United States
Enchanted April at Roc Rep Jan 2016 (Sound Design). Donnybrook's Dilemma Murder Mystery Jan 10 (Donnybrook actor). Valentine's Murder Mystery at Plummer House Feb 13 (actor). Ole and Lena in Love at Rochester Sons of Norway March 19 (Director).
30 Comments:
Montaigne puts an interesting spin on perception and relavitism in "Of Cannibals." He describes Europe perceiving natives as barbaric cannibals. True, they eat their prisoners but only after they are dead to not be wasteful. Michel then sites examples of worse cruelties in admired Scythians, his own society, and in the city of Alexia. Through these examples, Montaigne shows relative to the natives, Europians are the barbarians.
I was impressed that Montaigne held a view that probably attracted alot of contention at that time. However, he was so wrong on the behaviors and social aspects of the Brazilian peoples. I've been to South America twice on nature/historical tours, and can assure you that his information was still very biased from the times. These people were not as savage as he portrayed, even though he defended it.
-Kirin
After reading “Of Cannibals” I found it interesting how societies can differ so greatly. Things that I find disturbing, such as eating another human or chopping a human into thoushands of pieces, are considered completely natural for different cultures. This article showed me that even though some ways of life are different than mine, I shouldn’t label them barbaric or weird. We all should look at the circumstances they lived under and try to understand where they are coming from and why they do the things they do before we judge them as different.
Sibley
I was a big fan of Montaigne's "Of Cannibals" (once I could actually concentrate for 5 minutes in class today...grrr). Anyway, he did a great job of setting up his thesis about how Europeans are barbaric by using a cannabalistic culture, then comparing it to other cutlutes, while finally arriving at the Europeans. If the The Tempest is based partially off of this, hopefully it will be good. I think we'll get the most comments on this part because as Sara said, once we actually read The Tempest, we'll understand what's going on with the other two. Seeing as the theme was described as "order vs. chaos," it should be a good read. That's life right there, nothing more or less. There's just a whole lot of chaos, entropy if you will (if you're in bio or physics right now...ha better get studying for those tests on Wednesday!). okay I'm done now, I've proved myself a nerd (as if I needed to...??).
Calling someone a barbarian is all relative. Every society views certain actions as barbarous. For instance, we think it's barbarous for middle-eastern countries to cut off the hands of thieves, but they consider it barbarous for us to have girls in micro-bikinis and mini-skirts. So who's the real barbarians? Count it... yep I got all the sentences I need. I'm outty.
Don't be too quick to judge, lest ye yourself be guilty of the crime; This seems to be Montaigne's main point in this essay. He makes strong arguements in pointing out that the natives were not the only people to practice cannibalism, but many in history resorted to it as a means to survive. He just wants people to think a little more before slapping labels on everything.
-Mike M.
"I find as far as I have been informed, there is nothing in that nation that is either barbarous or savage, unless men call that barbarism which is not common to them"... this is clearly seen in society today. Prejudgments about people you've never met before, or saying you don't like something if you've never tried it, or talking about a society or situation you've never been in. This quote really reminded me of (here you go disney lovers) Pocahontas! "you think the only people who are people are the people who look and think like you, but if you walk the footsteps of a stranger you'll learn things you never knew you never knew" ahhhh I love that song anyway, pocahontas had it right....one will never know what something is like unless you walk exactly in there shoes and have lived through all their experiences. you can't discriminate against a culutre, religion, or society because whatever one you grew up in that's the one you've ever known and that's the "right way of seeing or doing things"
" we have no other aim of truth and reason than the example and idea of the opinions and customs of the country we live in"
I agree with mike.....and montaigne's idea that we have to think and experience before setting labels to things or discriminating againts something unless you've completetly expereinced whatever that scenario may be in this case it would be growing up in a culture with cannibalism
I think Montaigne did a good job defending his view points on the term of Barbarians. People in general have a tendency to believe others to be savages if they are different. Customs and traditions can seem very strange to those who aren't accustommed to them. Everyone has their own paradygms and are afraid to change them.
I found Montaigne's perspective on cannibalism very intriguing and brutally accurate. He makes the first description of the Brazilian cannibalism nearly reasonable when compared to the later comparisons. Especially since he began with a sketch of their society, making it seem very rational and a healthy way to live, up until he introduces the facet of cannibalism. He then goes on to describe other interpretations of cannibalism, reaching his final point of European society being the true barbarism. (syllogism!!!!)
~Alyssa
I found Montaigne's perspective on cannibalism very intriguing and brutally accurate. He makes the first description of the Brazilian cannibalism nearly reasonable when compared to the later comparisons. Especially since he began with a sketch of their society, making it seem very rational and a healthy way to live, up until he introduces the facet of cannibalism. He then goes on to describe other interpretations of cannibalism, reaching his final point of European society being the true barbarism. (syllogism!!!!)
~Alyssa
Ok, I'm going to head off on a bit of a different tangent than has previously been explored. That whole canabolism dealio was pretty interesting, but one thing that I really liked from this essay was towards the begining when they were describing the two things that the tribe valued. One was war (encompassed in that is the eating of one's enemies)...and I think we've beaten that horse to death, but the other was loving their wives. Now, from a perspective of a possible future wife, I gotta say, that's pretty cool. If we had loving one's spouse up there as one of the two most important things one should focus on in life, I think we would enjoy life a whole lot more. In the Brave New World study guide, this concept is approached under Moral Technology. It implies that once the "basic institution [namely], the family" breaks down, (which is happening now with the wider acceptance of divorce, moral decay, nasty mass media, etc) the result could be similar to that of the society in Brave New World. Now whether you believe that is a good thing or not is yet to be seen and most likely yet to be explored in another posting, in response to another prompt, at another time.
The first few pages of "Of Cannibals" gave me the impression that Montaigne had a desire to be more in contact with the pure and beautiful nature he described. I could definitely understand where he was coming from in this. As we read in the first article of this packet, the Renaissance was in full bloom and I believe that Montaigne had a feeling of wanting nature to remain mysterious, beautiful, and simple. Instead, Europe was undergoing a rebirth and the world was shrinking.
Montaigne describes a society that lives in relative harmony. They are void of influences from the materialistic world, and the sole concern of the tribe is that of the well being of the society they have created. I believe that was the point Montaigne was trying to illustrate for his readers in hopes that they too would see the Brazilians as an influence and strive for a similar social harmony rather than individual gain.
- Mark
Montaigne's essay "Of Cannibals" justifies the aspects of the Brazillian natives' culture, by comparing their culture with that of western society. Ironically, he says western society is the true barbarous culture, rather than that of the natives. Also, he believes nature is superior to man's creations. I agree with him on both of his statements. The native's traditional ways of cannibalism is for valor towards the enemy or "resolution in war." Whereas, western ways of cannibalism is only cruel and unjust, because the prisoner is not killed first. I also agree with his second statement. Whatever made naturally from nature is pure and virtuous; however, man's creation is artificial and altered, which is often termed "savage" by humans. With this said, I believe that everyone in the world should relinquish his or her dogmatic views on life and try to understand the world through other people's perspectives. Because in doing so, it may lead to invaluable insights, and a person may even find his or her own culture barbarous.
-Kevin Han
Taking Montaigne on a different spin: he mentions at least twice how the natives have "an inviolable affection" (said by the prophets)and a "lovingness unto their wives" (said by the men in the morning). I think this shows the feminist side of Montaigne. He said most of the native's customs were better than the European way he was living in. He must have seen the importance of being thankful for all of the contributors to a 'successful' society. I wonder if we'll see this in The Tempest?? Interesting tibit: "Of Cannibals" was put on the Index of Forbidden Books (Catholic censorship list) 100 years after it was written (it took them that long to see how influencial his writings could be?)
Well, well Mr. Montaigne. Quite the adventurous one. Not only does he challenge the long-held views of the Europeans, he also puts the infamous Plato in his place. Montaigne even goes so far as to say Lycurgus and Plato could not truly imagine what society could be with "little art and human combination". Montaigne continues to prove his point, again specifically addressing Plato in his comment that with no structure, authority or knowledge perfection may indeed, actually and finally, be reached. Aaaanyway... This guy's got the guts. The end.
Sincerely, Tiiiina.
3 to 4 sentences just isn't what is used to be...hard to say something no one has said yet. I guess I just liked what he said about how humans think that something complex is automatically better. These "savages" value a simple life and therefore are lowered in status. While we civilized humans find beauty and meaning in our "artificial devices", the "savages" find meaning in life as it is, pure and simple.
The issue I found more interesting than the difference of culture is the idea that the natural state of nature is more desirable than the world we have created for ourselves. Although humans may be more advanced than other forms of life, this does not mean we should seperate ourselves so drastically from all other life. Montaigne said of the Brazilians, "The laws of nature do yet command them." From this comes both what he sees desirable in their society and what the European society sees as barbaric. This extends beyond just the cannibalism which is the main focus of Montaigne. Think about what was seen as barbaric and primitive about the Native Americans. It was their behavior which allowed them to live with nature, not against it. But why is it seen so barbaric? What happened to our society that we have such hatred and contempt for the natural way of life? Or, is the way we are living the natural way for humans, since we have higher intellectual power? I could go on and better explain myself, but I'm already over the limit...
I found the section on the idea of nature being the best way intriguing, to say the least. Very soon, we will be facing a decision on this issue in our own society and I belive it will be a pivotal turning point. I'm talking about cloning and genetic engineering. Is it our place to decide that nature isn't good enough? And should we use the ingenuity given to us, along with the technology we have created from it, to step into the role of "God"? If we do, will our "nest" be a success or fall short compared to our prevailing nature?
The point that stood out the most to me in Montaigne essay was the way he used the Brazilians and there anti-materialism. This is one of the main faulty of our society, whether we want to admit it or not. The Brazilians are excellent examples of how we should be, by trying the help the common good of mankind instead of trying to make ourselves feel better with having more material goods then another man. This is the point that stuck with me from Montaigne's essay.
Reeping, Kyle
After reading "Of Cannibals" I would have to say that I liked how Montaigne was able to describe the Brazilians and compare them to so many other things effectively. Although I did find some of it a little bit haard to understand. make sure you don't get me wrong though, I do not think eating other people is good under any circumstances, but I think he did a good job of defending them and giving descriptions.
- Jessica Steiger
For Michel de Montaigne to write this essay at this time and age, the Renaissance, was simply crazy and unheard of at that time; to stray away from Catholic and Protestant view of salvation, and dive into the criticism of a society in which he lives in. However, even though it was rare for someone to do that, it had to be done. Montaigne points out the hypocrisy by comparing two things, the "barbarous horror" of cooking a man and eating him, and the European ways of torture by "tearing a body limb from limb by racks and torments." Michel basically says it is more barbaric to eat a man alive rather than when he is dead. A quote from a lecturer Dale Carnegie comes in mind, “Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain – and most fools do.” At the time, western civilization viewed things and immoral and disgusting, but yet they were too blind to see the destruction and impurity in themselves. Yup, count that. I rule.
While I think just about everything has already been said by somebody, I'll venture a comment. Montaigne's essay was valuable because it taught an important lesson about keeping an open mind and checking your own prejudices, but overall it didn't quite seem logical to me. My biggest question was one that Dalena already mentioned, how is a perfect society one completely natural, without art? If art has sprung up for centuries as a natural form of expression, how exactly are we definining natural if this definition doesn't include art? And how is eating people any more natural than writing a song? While this essay forces one to wonder if our society if perfect or barbaric, it also seems to force one to think of literature, music, philosophy, art and progress as something negative, which didn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
-Caty Schmitter
I liked how he stated that being a barbarian was relative to where you were coming from. Then he goes on to compare severaly different views of what a "barbaric" action actually is, when he lists how all of the different society's treat an enemy/ dead body. " We may call them barbarous in regard of reason's rules, but not in respect of us that exceed them in all kinds of barbarism."
katie b
Montaigne puts things into perspective with his writing "Of Cannibals." Everything is relative, and there are many different ways of looking at many different things. Cannabalism can be seen as eating people or as eating meat not needed by its owner. Michel chooses to see eating the flesh of dead people as economical as opposed to disrespectful and goes further to say that Europeans do far worse and therefore are the barbarians. Montaigne's argument is interesting, but I'd still take a steak over a freshly cooked human.
Montaigne makes a good point in his essay. It is important to evaluate circumstances from all points of veiw,and before Europeans in this time period can call other civilizations savage they must first evaluate themselves from the others prospective, but in the case of cannibalism i vote nay! Even if it is culturally acceptable and this group was taught from birth that their behavior was correct i still believe their act is disgusting and grotesque. I'm sure the "civilized" world at the time had commited far worse acts but i donnot think this justifies the acts of the natives. It would be a better example if it were not veiwed by so many as a moral issue and not a mechanical/physical one, perhaps agricultural of scientific.
-Becky
Holy moly. I definitely think I'm the last person on here. OH WELL! I liked Danielle's and Heather's comments about the Brazilians' devotion to their wives. It was awesome to see that some cultures, as barbaric as they may seem to us, give their women so much respect. It's a lesson to be learned from these "natives" that once core aspects of family and working relationships have been stabilized, the rest of society will be able to function happily. Ok that's it. I love you all. Especially you, Tina Scott. You and your comedic ranting...woop.
*My internet was and still is down "YUCK!"*
I found it all disgusting. In 8th grade we read of people trapped in a snowstorm, who ate eachother to survive. i can see how someone could make themselves do it to survive, but I can't comprehend someone desiring to eat human flesh. I pray to God I'm never in that situation. The author praises the way they kill/eat the people but looks down on their (Brazilian's) motives. I was surprised at how many cultures he was able to reference that do similar acts.
I think that one of Montaigne points is that barbaricness is undefinable because everyone has different opinions of what truely is barbaric. he says "I have been informed, there is nothing in that nation that is either barbarous or savage, unless men call that barbarism which is not common to them." It is peoples judgment and opinions that make others barbaric, not the others or the others actions.
That is all
Bre to the ann Bender
I found that Montaigne shed more light on the situation not only between European society and the native cannibals, but also on the relationship between the un-Utopia of BNW and the Savages. While The citizens of the 'civilized' world thought the reservation housed barbarians, when John the Savage was immersed into the new society, he found many barbaric customs in a supposedly non-barbaric community.
Post a Comment
<< Home