Learning in this course occurred in so many ways for me as the assignments were so diverse. I was very open in the beginning about being a bit overwhelmed with the thought of this course and each week I found myself breathing heavy as I opened the module. Having opportunities to process the readings through the varied analytical approaches was positive. The books chosen if in the very least taught me tremendously to look at the elements I would not normally consider when reading. While religion was a common thread woven in each, I gained a better ability to search out the themes, look for them consciously instead of just reading to read. Not that reading for the pure enjoyment is wrong, it is wonderful, but reading to gain purpose and insight has power to evoke change and I haven't always embraced that.
I appreciated the discussion board more so than I expected I would. So many of you have such incredible life experiences and they were reflected in your writings. I gained wisdom from each of you. There were moments I was dumbfounded at the intelligence represented in the collective. I claim to be very tolerant and to make great effort to be understanding of others religious views and perspectives, yet I noticed at times, I was far from the place I professed to be at. My Name is Asher Lev and The Power and the Glory really challenged me to step outside of my comfort zone of faith and consider beliefs I wasn't so knowledgeable about. Not just to consider them, but to extend acceptance to them and all that comes with them, good, bad and everything in between.
I do feel the course objectives were met entirely. The two that most impacted me were:
-Examining religion and its importance to humanity. How could someone complete this course and not have some truths resound in them regarding religions influence on humanity?
-Graduate level written and oral communication skills. This was the first course that has challenged me to think outside my box in the way that I did so far in my graduate work. The expectations were at such a different level than most of the courses I have already taken. I was at first terrified of that. I stand at the end quite thankful, surprisingly, for that high expectations. I have a better knowledge of MLA format, writing skills and a greater ability to think analytically.
I think my one greatest a-ha moment in this course didn't necessarily come from a text but from advice Christine gave me. She reminded me to not take myself so seriously and allow myself to enjoy the stretch that was occurring in my learning process. I am thankful for her reminder as it centered me in focusing on the value of the experiences I was gaining and to enjoy the steps along the way.
If there were a change in the course, I would consider adding the opportunity for students to read a work of their choice and present the work to classmates in a project or paper format. Having so many other glimpses into how religion in literature can impact us would be insightful and interesting. It might open doors for the student to make additional connections by providing them with additional books to explore.
Great course, great classmates, great leadership. Didn't always love the text choices but I do respect the learning that occurred from them. There value in growing us is evident!
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Saturday, May 3, 2008
The Power and the Glory
Wow, I don't know where to start. I guess I will begin by saying this novel has to be one of my least favorite books I have EVER read. Maybe it is seen as literary genius, but I guess others opinions of genius are lost on me. I wanted some redemptive spirit to resound in me when I read the final paragraph and I was just left with "blah". As I read the last half of the book this morning (Saturday), I actually had to close the blinds so I couldn't see outside as my urge to mow the yard (my absolute least favorite thing to do) was so much greater than reading the end of this story. Maybe a bit harsh, but oh, isn't it great to be able to express an opinion.
Now, moving on, the title of the novel, The Power and the Glory was a bit lost on me. The power part I get, the glory part, not so evident to me. When I think of the word glory, the passion in it is more in the action of "glorify", and I didn't feel as if I could glorify anything related to the story. If anything, I can only connect the title to what the past was referenced as in comparison to the present situation that played out in the words of the novel. I also found it a bit harder in reading as it seemed disjointed and I found myself trying to keep track of the connections throughout. I am sure that was the intent of the author to weave things so that they came full circle in understanding at the end, but as the reader, it made it harder for me to invest in the authors efforts of bringing me full circle.
The Power and the Gl0ry was sad and depressive, and the thread of hope stated at the very last moment that not all the priests were gone, well, that wasn't even hopeful enough to mask the despair the novel blanketed life with in that place and time. Other moments that seemed to have little weight in the novel spoke much more to me than what I perceived as the "evident, big picture moments". For example, early in the novel on pg. 26, it spoke of Juan's father beating him for thinking he had lied. Later, he apologized when he learned his son had told the truth. Juan replied to his father's apology, "Dear father, just as our Father in heaven has the right to chastise when he pleases..." In that entire exchange, the thing that stood out to me the most and was the most powerful, even over the humility of a child stating his father had the right to chastise, is the apologetic nature of the father. I adamantly believe that in life, it is important for children to hear adults apologize when they are wrong. Too often adults take the stance that as the grown up, it isn't necessary or warranted. I think it speaks such grace and is such a teachable moment of forgiveness when adults admit to a child they are not always right, that they make mistakes and that it is important for adults to show that repenting nature towards a child. I think kids don't see that enough. For Juan's father to have done it in the time period of the novel surprised me as the parents role was so authoritative (at least in my mind it was).
In the novel, happiness was nearly an illusion, so few of the characters seem to have any ability to capture it at all, and if they did, it was for a fleeting moment. Captain Fellows seemed to be one of the only people to hold tight to it and even he was effected greatly. On pg 37, Captain Fellows thought was immensely profound to me, "He walked slowly; happiness drained out of him more quickly and completely than out of an un-happy man: an unhappy man is always prepared." What a statement! This notion was strikingly accurate when I thought about it.
Coral Fellows was an interesting little girl. She was portrayed a lot like Eva in that her "ailing" mother contributed to her life being much different than it should have been. But Coral unlike Eva, didn't carry the same child life persona. Coral was so grown in actions and lacking emotions and sentiment. The one thing she did seem to have that paralleled Eva from UTC was a wisdom beyond what should have been natural for her age. At one point, the Priest was trying to explain to her why he couldn't renounce his faith that it was out of his power. Coral followed the priest's rational with, "like a birthmark?" What a word picture to root faith as something so basic, innate, and with such permanence that it cannot be discarded.
Probably the most powerful aspect of the novel to me was the fallacies and falsehoods man has towards religion were laid out in many instances. What I am trying to say is, many times, we as man put degrees on religious doctrine or we have created rules that weren't God implemented but man implemented. Then, when people don't abide by the "man" rules or doctrine, they are chastised as having forsaken the faith or to have a lesser measure of faith than others. Moments in the novel unveiled many of the doctrine issues I have heard debated and argued many, many times by Christians amongst themselves. One example, on pg 62, the people were burying a child and it was urgent that they HAD to have a priest to say the prayer or blessing. The argument that people have been taught to depend on priests or pastors and have forgotten the power within themselves to pray and speak forth blessings comes to mind in this piece of the story. In several instances throughout the novel, there is reference to paying a fee for the priest to perform mass, communion or a baptism. I have watched entire faiths falter because "Godly men" took money for something that should have been done in love to edify the people in the name of God. This is not to be confused with provision for the priest in general, but in the novel, he seemed as if he would deny the people the blessing of God and drawing closer to God in walking out their faith if they could not pay him to initiate the acts. Why was there a charge to do the work of God? On pg 78, the priest stated, "there's nothing sacred in wine. Only it's hard to get hold of here." The sacred nature of communion and communion elements are again often of great contention in discussion of faith. Whether it is ok to deny someone communion if they are not of that faith or baptized, or if it is for all as in the bible when Jesus shared indiscriminately with saint and sinner. These types of references in the story were the real meat of this writing. I think that today, much of the intolerance in religion is because of the rules we impose that were never meant to be imposed. And the ensuing arguments that come just worsen the taste of the whole mess in the mouths of those trying to figure out if following God is even worth it.
One final thing I have to make note of before ending this blog.... so often in the novel, the priest was referred to as "giggling". This drove me nuts. The word giggle was so ill used by Greene to me. Men don't "giggle" It gave me a very wimpy perception of the priest. Was this Greene's intention?
Lines that caused me to take pause:
pg 33 ..while she stayed in a cemetery no one visited, in the big above-ground tomb.
pg 133 ..time depends on clocks and the passage of light.
pg 199 You always have answers which mean nothing.
Now, moving on, the title of the novel, The Power and the Glory was a bit lost on me. The power part I get, the glory part, not so evident to me. When I think of the word glory, the passion in it is more in the action of "glorify", and I didn't feel as if I could glorify anything related to the story. If anything, I can only connect the title to what the past was referenced as in comparison to the present situation that played out in the words of the novel. I also found it a bit harder in reading as it seemed disjointed and I found myself trying to keep track of the connections throughout. I am sure that was the intent of the author to weave things so that they came full circle in understanding at the end, but as the reader, it made it harder for me to invest in the authors efforts of bringing me full circle.
The Power and the Gl0ry was sad and depressive, and the thread of hope stated at the very last moment that not all the priests were gone, well, that wasn't even hopeful enough to mask the despair the novel blanketed life with in that place and time. Other moments that seemed to have little weight in the novel spoke much more to me than what I perceived as the "evident, big picture moments". For example, early in the novel on pg. 26, it spoke of Juan's father beating him for thinking he had lied. Later, he apologized when he learned his son had told the truth. Juan replied to his father's apology, "Dear father, just as our Father in heaven has the right to chastise when he pleases..." In that entire exchange, the thing that stood out to me the most and was the most powerful, even over the humility of a child stating his father had the right to chastise, is the apologetic nature of the father. I adamantly believe that in life, it is important for children to hear adults apologize when they are wrong. Too often adults take the stance that as the grown up, it isn't necessary or warranted. I think it speaks such grace and is such a teachable moment of forgiveness when adults admit to a child they are not always right, that they make mistakes and that it is important for adults to show that repenting nature towards a child. I think kids don't see that enough. For Juan's father to have done it in the time period of the novel surprised me as the parents role was so authoritative (at least in my mind it was).
In the novel, happiness was nearly an illusion, so few of the characters seem to have any ability to capture it at all, and if they did, it was for a fleeting moment. Captain Fellows seemed to be one of the only people to hold tight to it and even he was effected greatly. On pg 37, Captain Fellows thought was immensely profound to me, "He walked slowly; happiness drained out of him more quickly and completely than out of an un-happy man: an unhappy man is always prepared." What a statement! This notion was strikingly accurate when I thought about it.
Coral Fellows was an interesting little girl. She was portrayed a lot like Eva in that her "ailing" mother contributed to her life being much different than it should have been. But Coral unlike Eva, didn't carry the same child life persona. Coral was so grown in actions and lacking emotions and sentiment. The one thing she did seem to have that paralleled Eva from UTC was a wisdom beyond what should have been natural for her age. At one point, the Priest was trying to explain to her why he couldn't renounce his faith that it was out of his power. Coral followed the priest's rational with, "like a birthmark?" What a word picture to root faith as something so basic, innate, and with such permanence that it cannot be discarded.
Probably the most powerful aspect of the novel to me was the fallacies and falsehoods man has towards religion were laid out in many instances. What I am trying to say is, many times, we as man put degrees on religious doctrine or we have created rules that weren't God implemented but man implemented. Then, when people don't abide by the "man" rules or doctrine, they are chastised as having forsaken the faith or to have a lesser measure of faith than others. Moments in the novel unveiled many of the doctrine issues I have heard debated and argued many, many times by Christians amongst themselves. One example, on pg 62, the people were burying a child and it was urgent that they HAD to have a priest to say the prayer or blessing. The argument that people have been taught to depend on priests or pastors and have forgotten the power within themselves to pray and speak forth blessings comes to mind in this piece of the story. In several instances throughout the novel, there is reference to paying a fee for the priest to perform mass, communion or a baptism. I have watched entire faiths falter because "Godly men" took money for something that should have been done in love to edify the people in the name of God. This is not to be confused with provision for the priest in general, but in the novel, he seemed as if he would deny the people the blessing of God and drawing closer to God in walking out their faith if they could not pay him to initiate the acts. Why was there a charge to do the work of God? On pg 78, the priest stated, "there's nothing sacred in wine. Only it's hard to get hold of here." The sacred nature of communion and communion elements are again often of great contention in discussion of faith. Whether it is ok to deny someone communion if they are not of that faith or baptized, or if it is for all as in the bible when Jesus shared indiscriminately with saint and sinner. These types of references in the story were the real meat of this writing. I think that today, much of the intolerance in religion is because of the rules we impose that were never meant to be imposed. And the ensuing arguments that come just worsen the taste of the whole mess in the mouths of those trying to figure out if following God is even worth it.
One final thing I have to make note of before ending this blog.... so often in the novel, the priest was referred to as "giggling". This drove me nuts. The word giggle was so ill used by Greene to me. Men don't "giggle" It gave me a very wimpy perception of the priest. Was this Greene's intention?
Lines that caused me to take pause:
pg 33 ..while she stayed in a cemetery no one visited, in the big above-ground tomb.
pg 133 ..time depends on clocks and the passage of light.
pg 199 You always have answers which mean nothing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
