In class today (March 11, 08), we had an introductory discussion of Amilia Lanyer's "Eve's Apology in Defense of Women" and its relationship with Adam and Eve's stories in Milton's "Paradise Lost".
After reading Sam and Francois' posts as well as my feedback, write a commentary essay on Amilia Lamyer's "Eve's Defense of Women" (below). A copy of the poem will be available in the Test Centre, where you should complete the commentary essay by Tuesday March 18, 2008.
Here are some questions to consider in your commentary:
1. What are the speaker's arguments?
2. How does she defend women?
3. How does she indict men (Adam and Plotinus)?
Try to paraphrase the arguments in your own words. You should paraphrase at least five stanzas from the poem (below) to answer the questions above. If you have questions, please post them on the blog, and one of the students who were in class will respond.
Now Pontius Pilate is to judge the Cause
Of faultlesse Jesus, who before him stands;
Who neither hath offended Prince, nor Lawes,
Although he now be brought in woefull bands:
O noble Governour, make thou yet a pause,
Doe not in innocent blood imbrue thy hands;
But heare the words of thy most worthy wife,
Who sends to thee, to beg her Sauiours life.
"Let barb'rous crueltie farre depart from thee,
And in true Iustice take afflictions part;
Open thine eies, that thou the truth mai'st see,
Doe not the thing that goes against thy heart,
Condemne not him that must thy Sauiour be;
But view his holy Life, his good desert.
Let not vs Women glory in Mens fall,
Who had power giuen to ouer-rule vs all.
"Till now your indiscretion sets vs free,
And makes our former fault much lesse appeare;
Our Mother Eue, who tasted of the Tree,
Giuing to Adam what shee held most deare,
Was simply good, and had no powre to see,
The after-comming harme did not appeare:
The subtile Serpent that our Sex betraide,
Before our fall so sure a plot had laide.
"That vndiscerning Ignorance perceau'd
No guile, or craft that was by him intended;
For had she knowne, of what we were bereau'd,
To his request she had not condiscended
But she (poore soule) by cunning was deceau'd,
No hurt therein her harmelesse Heart intended:
For she alleadg'd Gods word, which he denies,
That they should die, but even as Gods, be wise.
"But surely Adam can not be excused,
Her fault though great, yet hee was most too blame;
What Weaknesse offerd, Strength might haue refusde,
Being Lord of all, the greater was his shame:
Although the Serpents craft had her abusde,
Gods holy word ought all his actions frame,
For he was Lord and King of all the earth,
Before poore Eue had either life or breath.
"Who being fram'd by Gods eternall hand,
The perfect'st man that ever breath'd on earth;
And from Gods mouth receiu'd that strait command,
The breach whereof he knew was present death:
Yea hauing powre to rule both Sea and Land,
Yet with one Apple wonne to loose that breath
Which God had breathed in his beauteous face,
Bringing vs all in danger and disgrace.
"And then to lay the fault on Patience backe,
That we (poore women) must endure it all;
We know right well he did discretion lacke,
Beeing not perswaded thereunto at all;
If Eue did erre, it was for knowledge sake,
The fruit beeing faire perswaded him to fall:
No subtill Serpents falshood did betray him,
If he would eate it, who had powre to stay him?
"Not Eue, whose fault was onely too much loue,
Which made her giu this present to her Deare,
That what shee tasted, he likewise might proue,
Whereby his knowledge might become more cleare;
He neuer sought her weakenesse to reproue,
With those sharpe words, which he of God did heare:
Yet Men will boast of Knowledge, which he tooke
From Eues faire hand, as from a learned Booke.
"If any Euill did in her remaine,
Beeing made of him, he was the ground of all;
If one of many Worlds could lay a staine
Vpon our Sexe, and worke so great a fall
To wretched Man, by Satans subtill traine;
What will so fowle a fault amongst you all?
Her weakenesse did the Serpents words obay;
But you in malice Gods deare Sonne betray.
"Whom, if vniustly you condemne to die,
Her sinne was small, to what you doe commit;
All mortall sinnes that doe for vengeance crie,
Are not to be compared vnto it:
If many worlds would altogether trie,
By all their sinnes the wrath of God to get;
This sinne of yours, surmounts them all as farre
As doth the Sunne, another little starre.
"Then let vs have our Libertie againe,
And challendge to your selues no Sov'raigntie;
You came not in the world without our paine,
Make that a barre against your crueltie;
Your fault beeing greater, why should you disdaine
Our beeing your equals, free from tyranny?
If one weake woman simply did offend,
This sinne of yours, hath no excuse, nor end.
"To which (poore soules) we neuer gave consent,
Witnesse thy wife (O Pilate) speakes for all;
Who did but dreame, and yet a message sent,
That thou should'st haue nothing to doe at all
With that just man; which, if thy heart relent,
Why wilt thou be a reprobate with Saul?
To seeke the death of him that is so good,
For thy soules health to shed his dearest blood.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Hi Muhammad
What are we allowed to take into the test centre to write the essay?
A copy of Lanyer's poem is available in the Test Centre, so you really do not need to take anything with you - except perhaps a dictionary if you need one.
Muhammad
Hello Muhammad!
Is it possible for you to post the readings that are due for March 23rd? I can't seem to find them online.
Thanks!
Elizabeth
The short stories are copyright protected, unlike the older poetry included here. The two stories can be found in the course text, the Penguin Pocket Anthology.
YOU HAVE AN EXTENSION: UPTO Wednesday MARCH 26, 2008 - for you and everyone who needs time to find the stories and prepare the posts.
There are a few similarities and differences in the two stories, “The Boat” and “Stones”. Both stories are narrated by men. The main focus of the two stories is their fathers in their childhood. Both boys were the youngest in their family. They came from hardworking families who did what they had to do to survive. Both of the mothers in the two stories were from Nova Scotia and were both hardworking, caring mothers who just wanted what they thought was best for their family. The mother and father in “The Boat” did not get along and in “Stones” they got along until the father went to war. After the father returned from war he was so out of control he tried to murder his wife. War had ruined the father in “Stones” and it changed him so much he ruined his family, which once was a loving family. He became the opposite of a family man and gave Ben, the narrator, the most trouble of everyone. He always ordered him to do things, said harsh things to him, and even pulled him off the bed and broke his collarbone. Their relationship was ruined and could not be fixed. He finally forgave his father when he was pouring is fathers ashes on the land that had ruined his father. The boy in “The Boat” finally got to know his father and understand him after he worked and spent so much time with him. After that he respected, cared and loved his father so much more. In both stories the fathers died and made a big impact on the story. In “The Boat” when the father died in sea all of their family’s traditions did not continue. The mother came from a hardworking family that based their lives around fishing for a living and having everything homemade instead of buying things. That is all she ever wanted to continue in her family. In the end she was alone, all of her daughters married men she did not approve of, her husband died, her only son did not carry on the fishing tradition because he witnessed his father dying in the act. “Stones” was based in an earlier decade, 1940’s, and the “The Boat” took place in the 1970’s. I found that “The Boat” was a lot more descriptive. Everything was in such detail you felt like you were there. The author did an excellent job at specifically describing every little thing in such detail. Everything from how the characters stood, what they looked like, the house they lived in and even all of their processions in their house you could picture exactly. The author wanted you to know exactly what he was talking about. For example, page 343, “The most important room in our house was one of those oblong old-fashioned kitchens heated by a wood- and coal-burning stove. Behind the stove was a box of kindlings and beside it a coal scuttle. A heavy wooden table with leaves that expanded or reduced its dimensions stood in the middle of the floor. There were five wooden homemade chairs which had been chipped and hacked by a variety of knives…”. In “Stones” the author was not as descriptive but still did a good job. He focused on telling the details of the story rather than the details of the people or processions in the story. For example, page 296, “I had never seen a military parade without a band. The effect was eerie and upsetting. Two or three officers came forward into the center of the oval. Somebody started shouting commands and a sergeant major, who could not yet be seen, was heard outside the building counting off the steps.”. I thought “Stones” was an easier read then “The Boat”. I thought it was more modernly written. I think some one the motives of the narrator/writers are quite different. I think the point of “Stones” is proving how bad war is and what it could do to a person and from that a family. It can destroy someone completely and ruin the lives of everyone who loved the soldier. Whether they live or die in war it is just as bad because the person that lived is never the same after everything they lived through, had to do, and witnessed. I think the point of “The Boat” is that they boy never knew or understood his father until he was old enough to see why his father was the way he was. His father would sit in his messy, unorganized room by himself mostly and smoke and listen to the radio. His father spent a lot of his time on the boat fishing. Once he went on the boat with his dad and found out that his dad actually did not like fishing and did not follow his passion he respected him a lot more and understood where he was coming from. His dad died later on and he if had never gone fishing with him he would have never had the chance to truly know his father. His mother pushed her family so hard to be the way she wanted them to be, the men fishing and the women cooking, gathering, making clothes etc. She pushed every member of her family away and ended up alone and unhappy by her bring like that and not accepting any other way to live then her own.
Samantha Greco
803-489-087
“The Boat” and “Stones” are two very contrasting stories with common themes that are portrayed in very different ways.
When we look at the settings in which these stories take place, there is a clear difference between the ocean setting in “The Boat” and the city setting in “Stones”. Quite ironically the ocean seems to play an important role in both these stories. It seems to be the place where the final solace lies for both the father and son characters in each story.
Both stories depict winter in a certain way that best suites the purpose of the writer. In “The Boat” the writer purposely depicts the winter as harsh and unforgiving to emphasize the struggle father and son has to go through in order to survive, not only the harsh fishing conditions, but also more importantly the harshness of life’s realities and hardships. In “Stones” winter is initially depicted as cozy and almost comforting with heavy snow, the smell of coal-“…the perfect winters”. The writer of “Stones” use the latter depiction to create a drastic contrast with the alarming events that will soon take place as the story unfolds.
I noticed a clear difference in the type of relationship that exists between the parents in “The Boat” as opposed to the parents in “Stones”. The parents in “The Boat” seem very far removed from each other to such an extent that even the narrator questions why his father ever got married to his mother. In “Stones” I realized that the family unit was tightly knit and that before the father left for the war, he and his wife were really close to each other. This initial depiction of their close relationship made the events that unfolded as the story progressed, extremely tragic.
There is a slight difference in the way which each respective author chose to narrate his story. Alistair Macleod seems to narrate the story completely in his own words, whereas Findley chose to incorporate quotations of the characters actual words to tell the story. It is my opinion that each respective style of narration suited the feeling the author desired to bring across to the reader.
At the centre of both stories lies the relationship of parents or, a husband and a wife. This spousal relationship influences the children and ultimately the relationship the narrator has with both his parents. It is these relationships that become the source from which each respective story fountains.
Contrast is also visible between the two mother figures. The mother in “The Boat” seems very old fashioned and selfish. She despises her husband and neglects to acknowledge her children’s human desire for self-enrichment and denies them knowledge and personal life experience. The mother in “Stones” does everything in her power to protect her children. She is selfless in caring for and loving her husband even though he becomes abusive and a danger to herself. The mother in “Stones” and the father in “The Boat” are both respectively prisoners in abusive relationships.
Both fathers in these stories seem to have been crippled by the paths they chose for their lives. These paths has taken not only a deeply rooted emotional toll, but also physically harmed their bodies.
“His head was bowed,…His shoulders no longer squared, were rounded forward & dipping towards his centre. His neck was so thin, …something must have cut half of it away” (Stones, p297)
“The salt water irritated his skin…He burned and reburned…His lips still cracked so that they bled when he smiled” (The Boat)
The big difference between the two father characters seem to be that the father in “Stones” made a conscious decision to do what he wanted, whereas the father in “The Boat” seem to have been forced or tricked into his life path through tradition. It ultimately seems as though both fathers’ choices were made in the best interest of their children (the narrator). The father in “Stones” decided to go to war so his children wouldn’t eventually have to. The father in “The Boat” chose to continue to work a job that was harmful to himself in order to provide for his children. It struck me how selfless both these fathers sacrificed themselves in order to secure the best for their children, even though this might not have been the final outcome for the children in “Stones”.
Something that I found interesting was the symbol of cigarettes that was used in both these stories. It seems to me as though the author chose this, as well as alcohol, as symbols to physically embody and represent conscious self-destruction. It is almost as if the writer had to implement these symbols to emphasize the hurt, destruction and deterioration of the fathers’ souls through something more tangible. The opening stanza of “The Boat” the writer describes something as simple and unattractive as an overflowing ashtray in such a beautiful way that I paused and read it a few times over.
“gray corpses on the overflowing ashtray” seems to be a direct foreshadowing of death that will come in the story.
I found it ironic that the father in “Stone” had an almost “romantic” final resting place even though, at first thought, it seems that he doesn’t deserve this ending. The writer leaves it up t the reader to “forgive” the father for what he became. He provides the reader with the opportunity to decide whether the father deserves this ending for being the loving father he was before he went to the war.
The father in “The Boat” who ultimately deserved a “romantic” ending to his life, had a rather mysterious and finally gruesome unattractive end. This made me realize that it is not earthly glory that we should desire after death, but something far better, more peaceful and rewarding that transcends earthly glory.
Post a Comment