Xenia in the Odyssey

Xenia, or, simple hospitality is shown in every single home that's been described in the Odyssey (except for the cyclops). Telemachus visits both Menelaus, and Nestor's households. On page 45 (book 4), Menelaus has Telemachus and Mentor (Athena in disguise) to join a massive feast complete with maids that lathered them down in various oils, dressed them in furs, and then served them a silver tray, filled with water that had been poured from a golden pitcher so they could wash their hands before eating. On page 42 (book 3), Telemachus was bathed in oils by Nestor's youngest daughter. She then dressed him in lavish robes, and he was then sent forth to take a seat by Nestor himself. 

Telemachus' father, Odysseus received similar treatments. Calypso, the nymph daughter of Poseidon, obsesses over Odysseus and sort of holds him captive on her island paradise. On page 74 (book 5), when Calypso goes to give Odysseus to Hermes, e book mentions that Odysseus had been reluctantly having intercourse with the nymph. Even if it was unwanted, she still treated him with the greater fineries that the world outside of the island had to offer. Before this, Calypso seats Hermes in her cave, which is fragrant with different nature-based perfumes. After escaping Calypso, Odysseus comes across the lotus eaters (book 9, page 127). These people give Odysseus and his men some lotus flowers to eat, which may not seem like much, but, it is really an intoxicating drug that puts the consumer in a state of ecstasy. Circe, the witch/goddess ( book 10, page 154) has her unsuspecting male guests bathed in oils and clothed in fleecy garments. 

Why does The Odyssey start out with Telemachus' journeys instead of his father's?

The first four books of The Odyssey are known as the "Telemachy," as they introduce us to the voyage of Odysseus' adolescent son, Telemachus. Why do you think that The Odyssey begins with this story, and what are the most important things that we learn about Telemachus?

I believe the book starts off this way because Telemachus has to find his father, Odysseus, for whom this book is written for. Odysseus has to come back some how, and since he seems to be caught under some sort of love enchantment/spell with the nymph, Calypso, I don't think he will be completely available to continue the rest of his Kleos and then his Nostos without being given a small bit of assistance. Aside from this, we learn more about Telemachus and his personality. He is a young adult, who has yet to recognize it. He is constantly degrading himself and throwing mini- tantrums when he is in any sort of dilemma or something doesn't go his way. Now, these actions aren't very surprising coming from the spoiled, rich, and slightly bratty child of the Queen and King figure of an entire city in Ancient Greece. Having read this much about Telemachus and his few encounters with people outside of his palace back home  makes me wonder about how long he may last during his  journey to rescue his father.  

Living in a video game.

I don't play video games very often. I have never been very good at finding my way through cyber space land where my main goal is to shoot people, grab coins, or win a car race. Yet, I have always marveled at these different cyber-worlds that you (the gamer) would explore. Since I have never been very good at playing them, I usually watch others do it, giving me plenty of time to think about the setting, characters, and effort that was put into making the entire thing. I do remember one day, my friends were talking about "how cool it would be to live in a video game!" I, however, hold a completely different opinion.

 Life would be completely awful if one lived in a video game. If I was a video game character and my game is opening up for the first time on someone's screen, I would begin by begging the player to actually do a good job. If he or she is a total failure at video games, I would be the one character in the game that glitches all of the time, telling them to just hand the game over to someone that will win. The majority of video games made today involves death in a horribly slow and painful way. It seems like the only way to actually fail a level is to fall of a cliff, get shot, get eaten, set on fire, etc. Take a character like Mario for example. It is a pretty harmless game, but, you have to pass through 12 or so worlds that range from awkwardly happy and dangerous to extremely dark, shady, and dangerous. All to rescue a ditzy princess who will just get kidnapped again in the next game. If you pass through these worlds, great, that means you gotten passed the singing turtles, enraged mushrooms, murderous venus flytraps, and all of the cliffs and pitfalls. You wouldn't even have to be a main character to have a completely horrible life. 

 Even if I was an unimportant character in the game. One that could quietly slip in and out of my cyber-space realm without being noticed, I would still have a horrible time. Simply because I would have to travel into another land, pass through all of those levels without dying, just to get to my location. Every place you go, you are in some form of danger. Buying a house in a video game land would be completely out of the question. Considering that the majority of the time would be spent running away or hiding from dragons, aliens, natural disasters, assassins/ hit men, and various mythical creatures, simply to walk across the street or travel somewhere. So, to sum this post up in a few words is to say that if someone feels like a video game would be in any way a normal living condition, they wouldn't last an hour without gunpowder, magical swords, or a force field. 

Final blog post for Maus

Functionalist:

The functionalists believe that everything that happens in society needs to be in a certain order for society to thrive and function properly. Thinking this way in relation to The Holocaust probably means they would lean more towards the nazi's point of view. Functionalists during this time (that were not Jewish) would believe that Jewish people were lesser and they had to be wiped out for Germany to function properly, and return to its former glory. I feel that the amount of Jewish functionalists would be quite rare considering they were the ones effected by this type of thinking. For example, a functionalist could say men should have a job, and women should cook and clean. The functionalist here would most likely be the man, since the negatively effected group would be the women. 

P.S.

Just to clear up any misconception, I am not saying all functionalists hold bigoted views on society, but, during this time period, and especially in this country, they probably would have if they weren't Jewish. 

Conflict:

Conflict theorists believe that society is constantly changing due to people's constant want to do more than the last thing. In other words, we are in eternal conflict. Similar to the functionalist's possible views during this time, conflict theorists might say that the nazi's tried to assassinate the Jewish population because they were trying to "improve" Germany. Conflict theorists who were Jewish, or Germans that were against the nazis may think in a conflict perspective and say that the holocaust happened to make Jewish people stronger as a people, and to make other Germans realize how truly horrible Hitler was, so that this may never happen again.     

Symbolic Interactionist: 

Believing that people progress through interaction with one another, symbolic interactionist may believe in something that could cross paths with the conflict theorists. When I said that some conflict theorists could argue on the side of the Jewish people and say that the holocaust may have made Jewish people stronger, I think this is what symbolic interactionists could argue as well. The interactions between the Jewish people and the nazis were less than pleasant. This being the case, a few years from then it would become a public matter. When people finally found out what was happening, society has become a bit stricter when intolerance- related problems come up.  

Postmodernist:

Postmodernism is quite difficult to actually define since it usually refers to the arts. In relation to the people of Germany, the Jewish population would probably be the overwhelming majority to agree with is perspective. Postmodernist contradict modern theories and thoughts. Postmodernist would typically be more content with the perspective Maus was written in, since it depicts the tale of a Jewish man and his fight for freedom through the holocaust. Postmodernists believe in the freedom and equality for anyone and everyone. 

Jewish stereotyping and Spiegelman's father

1. On a few occasions in the book, Spiegelman writes about his concern about representing his father as a Jewish stereotype. What characteristics does his father have that seem to match up with these stereotypes, and what events in his life might have caused him to behave in this way?

I remember there being a few examples of Jewish stereotyping in Maus. The one that comes to mind though is the stereotype of Jews being very greedy. Yet, I found that Speigelman did a good job of not applying these stereotypes to his dad or any of the other characters. If he did, I think most people would find it to be a stereotype, but, in reality, everyone, no matter what ethnicity they may be would be greedy if they had to go through something like the holocaust. When people are out to get you, and eventually, everything comes down to the situation where it is either your life, or the other persons. Most people would try to save themselves before they decide to take the bullet for another person. In the holocaust, everyone would fear death, because death wasn't a quick and painless sort of thing, it was slow and painful. They were either tortured in concentration camps, starved, or just shot for no reason. 

The challenges in drawing another person's story.

The challenges one could face while drawing out someone's story are mainly linked to the satisfaction of the person or people who are being drawn. I am an artist, and I can honestly say that there is no worse a feeling than delivering a portrait to someone that has asked for one, and they are embarrassed, disgusted, or ashamed of it. That is, after all, only an example of a portrait, not a full book/story. When you are drawing a graphic novel, you begin with the design of the characters. After the character sketches have been complete, you then need to make sure that the character is recognizable in each comic block or square. Facial expression and clothing is also crucial. If you are drawing someone you know or someone you have been in contact with, you need to express their personality through their appearance. A kind and good  person may wear white and have upward-slanted eyebrows to show their meek personality. A mean or cruel person usually is seen in black or a dark shade of any other color. If they aren't wearing elaborate black robes and capes, their eyebrows will go downward showing their anger and wickedness. In the book Maus, Art Spiegelman's drawings are not very realistic, they are more cartoonish because it is easier to visualize personification through a cartoon than any other medium. People visualize themselves as something they are not, that is why it is difficult to draw self portraits because they usually end up not looking like the artist who drew it. Because of this, I have always thought of art as a form of show business. Art is constantly critiqued and reviewed by the public. Graphic novels have become quite popular now, and if someone has their own visual of a character in a book or a real person, they would expect the images in the graphic to fully visualize that person. If they don't get the same emotion or visual while reading the graphic novel, they won't like it as much.  

Final Alchemist post- The mysteries of the "language of life" and the "language of the desert"

The "language of the desert" and "the language of life". These two topics have been constantly addresses in The Alchemist. Santiago learned about these languages through the Alchemist he met. The only people in the book that (seemingly) understood this mysterious language from the beginning aren't people at all. On page 121, Santiago mentions that his "horse knows the language of life". The boys horse and the Alchemist's hawks have been examples of "the language of the world" for the boy and the Alchemist. These animals seem to have been associated with this language, as if that is how animals are communicating with their squeaks, squawks, and growls. When the Alchemist first appeared in the book, he immediately stuck out (to me) as some sort of mystical being. Not just by his title, but by his entire image. The long white cloak, a hawk on his shoulder, and his interaction with the cobra shows the reader that he has been in close contact with animals before. Since he has spent however many years he has with these creatures, he should be well educated on their ways of life. This also raises another question/theory. Since the alchemist has spent such a long time with the animals, he could have learned something from them. Could the animals be the Alchemist's toutor on the "language of life" and the "language of the desert"?