Week IV: Women, The Other, and The Ancients
Hey everyone, you know the deal about the blog now. Due to the fact that we are a bit behind schedule, this week you have an option. You can write about the readings on Islam and do a stronger comparison of the Bible and the Quran than last week based off of the lectures that the professor has given. Compare your perspective before being exposed to the Quran and the perspective you have after hearing some facts and reading the scriptures of Islam. You also have the option to write on Medea if you feel the urge to. When it comes to Medea, focus on the purpose of Greek plays. Why are we still studying an ancient play from a society that isn't quite as similar to ours as we normally perceive it to be. Good luck and happy posting!!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Medea is about a distraught wife whose husband, Jason, has just left her to marry the princess of Corinth. Although some say that this play slanders women, like many pieces of literature do, I feel as if this shows a sort of empowerment to women. The idea that Medea has the wit of a man and “charming words” to get herself out of this situation is astounding. She was able to talk her way into getting an entire day before being banished from Corinth, which she then used that day alone to kill the princess, the king, and her two sons in revenge of her husband leaving. Going based off of that, some may argue that Euripides is portraying women as evil vengeful creatures that destroy everything, but to me I see a woman who has enough courage to risk being killed and “bad luck from the gods” to save her from the humiliation and not giving the satisfaction to her enemies. To me this stood out because it showed that although at the time women were seen as the “weaker sex” (this is idea is coming from Medea’s rant about how men can leave a marriage and have more right to leave, but women are stuck in the marriage) Medea is able to be smart enough to persuade people to get what she wants, and is smart enough to perform charms and even make deals. For example, Medea makes a deal with Aegeus, the king of Athens, to house her once she is official banished from Corinth. However, Medea makes sure that he won’t only promise a place to live, but safety from anyone who is out to get her. I feel like this shows how smart Medea is because she isn’t naive and makes sure she is protected because if her plans happen, she will be wanted by the angry people of Corinth. I also like the fact that Medea was able to deceive her husband, Jason, into thinking that she was actually okay with him marrying another woman. It just proves my idea that the play Medea was not slandering women, but empowering them. Jason, who had just recently talked to Medea, buys that she is fine with it out of his pride. This shows that Euripides made the man foolish, instead of the woman who is doing something that is seen as “evil.” Even Though Jason just “walked off in a huff” from Medea because she was not taking his words for what they were and even though Jason said that she was too stubborn, he still believes that she has changed? In the matter of hours? A little strange don’t you think? Medea is a great play, and I think that it shows how women can be strong and intelligent.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do agree with you that the play empowers women, I still do believe that the play also portrays Medea as evil. Yes she is absolutely smart and witty an very clever. It is amazing that she is able to fool everyone even after threatening them hours earlier. However, this does not take away from the fact that she kills the king, the princess and her own two sons. I do not see how that would not be seen as evil. Even if she did not kill her sons and she just killed the king and princess and maybe Jason, Medea would become a better liked character. But because her sons were two innocent boys, and she had no real good reason for harming them, her actions make her monstrous. I did see Medea as a strong woman who was able to use her brain and persuasive words to get what she wanted. But I also ended up hating her and feeling badly for Jason who tried to save his sons in the end.
DeleteWhen I read Medea, I could not decide whether I should be annoyed at her acting in a stereotypical female way (such as being emotional and hysterical) or if I should be happy that she is clever, witty, and taking charge of her own destiny in a male-dominated world, despite the horror of the situations she puts herself in. I agree with your statements about Medea. The ideas in the book are representative of misogynistic society, but I feel that a redeeming quality for her is the fact that she recognizes that being a woman (in that time period) kind of sucks. The fact that she recognizes this and wants to do something to prove herself as being just as capable as a man to get/do what she wants is admirable, even though I was disappointed that she acted out because of her emotional state after being "dumped." Although I did also sympathize with Jason at the end of the story, in the end, Medea got her revenge by doing what she knew would hurt him the most, killing their children. It seems absurd to do something that would not only hurt your significant other, but also yourself. In her mind, that was the only way for her to "win," especially after Jason tried to convince her that his adultery was ultimately for her benefit.
DeleteWhen it comes to comparing the Old Testament in the Bible to the Qur'an, contrary to popular Westernized belief, the Qur'an seemed more egalitarian when describing God, or Allah's approach to punishing Adam and Eve for taking a bite out of the forbidden fruit. The Qur'an also seemed accepting of Jews and Christians and describes women with more respect than the Bible, with Genesis in particular. The Islamic holy book actually helped me to understand the Bible much better because a lot of the Qur'an takes note of the same parts and characters.
ReplyDeleteIt was eye-opening to see that the character who lured Eve and Adam into taking a bite into the forbidden fruit was Iblis, the Islamic version of Satan. This is different from the Bible, which mentions the serpent being the culprit that lures only Eve into taking a bite out of the forbidden fruit. In both versions, it can be understood that if Adam and Eve hadn't taken bites out of the forbidden fruit, then extensive knowledge of so-called taboos, sex in particular, would not exist to this day, leading to the possible extinction of the human race, which is not what God would intend to happen.
It was also satisfying to see the misconception be cleared about why women still face gender inequality in the Middle East, in spite of the Qur'an mentioning respect for women and treating them with dignity. The thousands of years of patriarchal tribal customs still trump Islamic teachings about treating women equally since these customs have become second nature to many Arabs, thus, being nearly impossible to change.
I was also satisfied to read about the different ways many diverse countries with large Muslim populations interact with Islamic culture, whether it be in countries like Turkey where it is discouraged to display Islamic dress, or countries like Saudi Arabia where it is a legal requirement for women to cover up large proportions of their bodies. Whereas women can't drive and struggle for the right to vote in certain countries, many can ride motorcycles and fly planes, as well as hold public office, with Benazir Bhutto having once been a Prime Minister of Pakistan.
Last but not least, the five pillars seem to give the majority of Muslims the spiritual sustenance they need to accomplish daily tasks and life goals, as well as keep their resilience through adversity. I took note about how prayer five times per day toward Mecca is like giving the soul five meals per day, nourishing the spirit.
Medea was a nice break from the literature we have been reading in class up to this point. Previously, we had read how men were perceived as a greater being in the Book of Genesis, and that women were at fault for most things, like the eating of the forbidden fruit. We made a step in the right direction in the Qur’an. Women were not being made the scapegoat. Both Adam AND Eve eat the forbidden fruit in the Qur’an, so the blame could not be fully placed on Eve.
ReplyDeleteAlong came Medea, the Greek play written by Euripides. Medea’s husband, Jason, has the chance of a lifetime, to marry the princess of Corinth. The only problem is that he is already married and has two children. Instead of giving in and not fighting for what she thinks is right, Medea stands up. Medea was scheduled for exile but extends her deadline in order to carry out her plan: kill her children.
This is where the play takes the wrong turn. Up to this point, Medea had defied all stereotypes of women. She didn’t give up when a “man” told her what was going to happen, she took action. It’s just that the action is not right in my opinion, kill your own children? Maybe times were different back then but I do not agree with how she dealt with the situation. It takes away from the good qualities of Medea. Instead of proving all former notions of women wrong, in the end, she still made a mistake, in my opinion, in killing her children. I know there will be lots of posts about how this book changed the view and women, and I don’t disagree with that. All I am saying is that it changed the view for the better UNTIL the killing of the children, I just do not agree with that. The argument can be made that she was sticking it to Jason, which is true, but didn't the kids mean anything to her?
Honestly, this post made me laugh. I like your tone here. You bring up a good point on the contrasting nature of the portrayal of women in Medea. Try to think about specific lines in the text that point to these portrayals. Keep up the humor, but bring more light to what has been translated as what Euripides wrote within the context of your point.
DeleteI’m with you on this one. I felt the same way while I was reading Medea and while we were discussing it in class. At first I had sympathy and understanding for her emotions, which lasted up until the decision whether or not to kill her children. I felt like since Euripides was from a patriarchal society he wanted the character Medea to be as dynamic as possible. First by allowing the audience to connect with the character emotionally and have the audience take her side. Then flip it completely and feel fear and disgust that a human could commit such a terrible act. In my opinion Euripides is playing with two ideas. The first is the feminist view, making a strong opinionated woman who will not fall to man, which goes against societies norms. The second is the killing of her children; he is still conforming to his time by allowing her to commit murder against her own children. Suddenly instead of feeling sympathy you feel anger and puts into the light the ugliness of this women. In turn this makes Jason then seem like the good guy in the story and women the bad or lesser in a sense. The story allows interpretation to open up on both ends of the spectrum and I don’t think there is really one side that is totally correct.
DeleteBefore reading the Qu’ran I had very little knowledge about the religion and its views. Today’s society is so obsessed with broadcasting the Muslim extremist groups, that it overshadows the true intentions of the Islamic people as a whole. I am glad that by reading a portion of the Qu’ran that I am able to appreciate and understand the Islamic faith much better.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the Qu’ran and the Bible are said to be derived from the same God, there are many differences between the two texts. One interesting difference was the story of Satan. In Genesis, there was actually very little said about Satan. Some people infer that Satan was portrayed by the serpent in the Garden of Eden, however it was never said in the text. I feel that there is much that isn't explicitly said in the scripture that has just been passed down and taught as facts over the years. The Qu’ran on the other hand goes into great detail about how Satan was an angel until he refused to bow to man. The story of Satan makes so much more sense according to the Qu’ran, because it clearly states the reasoning behind Satan becoming evil and what events happened.
Another key difference I found to be interesting was the creation of man. In the Bible, Eve was created from Adam and in the Qu’ran both man and woman were created simultaneously. By being created at the same time it shows that man and woman are equal in the Qu’ran. I found this interesting because the media portrays Muslim women as suppressed and inferior to men, however according to the Muslim story of creation they are equal. From looking at the literature from an objective point of view, it is the bible that makes women inferior to males. This is the opposite from how I perceived the stories to be in the Bible and the Qu’ran.
I strongly agree that much of the stories of the Bible and the Qur'an are brought to each generation by word of mouth. For me, growing up in a very Catholic family, I was always taught the story of the fallen angel, Satan, and it did not occur to me that that story was in the Qur'an. Along with this, things such as the forbidden fruit being an apple and the serpent being Satan, are never actually stated in the Bible, but they were taught to me anyway, because they were inferred. I also, was not aware that the Muslim religion is similar to the Christian beliefs, so I have found our comparison of the Bible and the Qur'an quite interesting! There are so many things that I have learned from these comparisons which I was previously ignorant of.
DeleteAlthough my overall perspective for religion hasn’t taken any drastic change, since I’ve read the Quran it has allowed me to look at the Bible with different views. Not only that but it got me very interested in looking more into the text of the Qur’an while we compared the two. In the Old Testament “creation” was a somewhat straightforward text to understand. What God created, how long it took him to create it, what Man and Women were created out of and ultimately what his creations (specifically Adam and Eve) did to be sent away from the Garden of Eden.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn’t until I read the Qur’an when I found myself asking different questions and I soon realized that there are no clear-cut answers that I was looking for. After the reading and what we talked about in class today I understand that according to the Qur’an, after God created Adam it was God’s belief that all of the angels should prostrate themselves to Adam. The only one who didn’t was Iblis, who at the time is considered by many people to have been one of Gods favorite angels or was some type of extremely good person previously. He didn’t think he should prostrate himself to a man that was made from dust; he didn’t believe that Adam was this miraculous thing that God was claiming him to be. God was saying that Adam was in fact his best creation. Iblis then later went on to say he would prove that Adam wasn’t this.
My question was that if Adam was God’s best creation and Iblis was viewed in Gods eyes as his favorite angel (or something so amazing that he then became an angel), how could both Adam AND Iblis be in the wrong? Iblis only became the devil when he questioned God about prostrating himself to Adam. If Iblis was wrong, then shouldn’t Adam have been able to resist the temptation of The Tree of Eternity that was presented to him in the Qur’an? Since Adam did eat the forbidden fruit and in fact in the Qur’an he was more responsible for doing it then in The Old Testament, then wouldn’t that go to prove that when Iblis wouldn’t prostrate himself to Adam that he wasn’t wrong for doing so?
I really liked reading the Qur’an, especially Genesis because I felt that it provided a little more explanation behind the occurrences of the creation story in the Bible. For example, in Genesis in the Old Testament, the serpent simply appears, and we are given no prior knowledge that the serpent is representative of the devil. But in the Qur’an, in just the second surah, we learn about Iblis in line 34, and about how he refuses to bow down to God’s order to all the angels to “Bow down to Adam.” Then on line 36, it is clearly stated that it is Satan who has caused Adam and his wife to sin in the Garden of Eden. I think the Qur’an provides the reader with a reason for Satan to be the way that he is, whereas the Bible just casts the serpent as the role of Satan, without providing any background information about Satan until much later in the Old Testament.
ReplyDeleteAnother major difference between the Qur’an and the Bible is the tone between God and Adam. In the Bible, God makes it clear that humans are divine beings, superior to plants and beasts. Humans were created to “fill the earth and subdue it,” emphasizing their powers over all earthly creatures. God even allows Adam to name all of the creatures, including his human partner. But there isn’t much of a relationship between God and Adam, or cross dialogue between the first human and his creator until the fruit is eaten off of the tree and God banishes them both harshly. However, in the Qur’an, much more emphasis is placed on Adam’s importance among ALL of Allah’s creations, including the angels. In the Qur’an, Allah teaches Adam the names of things and asks him to repeat what he learned to the angels, this is much different from the Bible, where God asks Adam to name his creations. Also, very different from the Bible, Allah demands that the angels bow down to Adam, highlighting Adam’s superiority to the angels, this in turn causes Iblis to become jealous, and then ultimately to devote his life to trying to prove to God that humans are lesser creatures. The tone between Adam and Allah is different in the Qur’an because God talks about Adam to his other creations and acknowledges Adam’s importance in dialogue. In the Bible, Adam is seen as a superior creature, but only to the other earthly creations. I think this proves that in Islam, important humans are regarded more highly or closer to God than in the Bible. In the Bible, God would not be seen asking others to praise Adam. I feel that this is because the Bible stresses the almighty nature of God and the need for all humans to blindly follow him, whereas in the Qur’an Allah is seen as more compassionate and accepting.
I'd like to comment on two things you said, one about how God doesn't talk much or form a relationship with his creation in the Bible but does in the Qur'an, and the other about how the Bible stresses that humans must blindly obey, while the Qur'an's Allah seems to be more compassionate. Growing up in a Christian household, this was always something that bothered me. In church I was told that I could have a close, personal relationship with God, but when I read the Bible, God (especially in the Old Testament) seemed very distant and set on humans just blindly following orders. The story of the first sin bothered me as well, because even if God told Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit of the forbidden tree, why should they have obeyed him? They had literally no knowledge about this being that was "God" and yet God expects them to just do what he said because he said it. They aren't given a reason to do what he says, and he has told them nothing to indicate that he is someone that should be obeyed. They don't even have knowledge of good and evil yet! How could they know that God is good and so they should obey him? The Allah in the Qur'an also asks for obedience, but seems much more compassionate and close to his creation than the God in the Bible, in my opinion.
DeleteUp until now I was always under the impression that the Quran and the Bible were two completely different things with very different ideals. I was surprised to find that there were many similarities between the two pieces of literature. Such as they both view Abraham as an overall “good” person and that the earth was created in six days. However, there are also many differences between the two texts. One difference that I believe is very noticeable is how women are viewed. Even though both seem to look down upon women, the Quran states things that make women equal to men. For example the fact that in the Quran Adam is equally punished for eating the forbidden fruit. The blame was not placed completely on Eve. Also, in the Quran Eve was created at the same time as Adam instead of being created from him. This places no one in a higher standing than the other.
ReplyDeleteThen there is the difference in the story of Iblis. The Bible does not go into as much detail as the Quran did. After reading the Quran it makes more sense about why Iblis “fell” from God’s good grace. Iblis did not want to prostrate himself to someone he saw as inferior. So far with everything that we have read, God is always testing people. God told all the angels to prostrate themselves to Adam because he was His best creation. This could have been a test and God could have already known that Iblis would refuse and so Iblis was the example of what would happen if one were to disobey God. Then Iblis attempts to tempt humans to disobey God out of spite. Thus resulting in yet another test for mankind.
I was also unaware of the similarities between The Bible and the Quran. I have never read the Quran before this class, therefore, never would have imagined how closely related it is to the Bible. I agree that the Quran creates equality between males and females. I liked this aspect a lot since the Bible is a little harsher and looks down upon women. Overall, the Quran has a calmer tone than the Bible does. The punishments that God gives Adam and Eve come across as horrible, whereas in the Quran, God gives them "guidance" and they seem grateful for the outcome. This difference in tone creates a very different view on the story of Adam and Eve. The story of Iblis is also very interesting. I have never heard this story before reading the Quran.
DeleteI'd have to say Medea is acting out what allot of people feel after a bad breakup. When you get used to having someone around, and depending on them, it's really hard to see them go. It's fitting of the Hellenistic times to take such a realistic view of these things, and for Euripides to win 3rd place for this play shows the parallels to our own times and society, when a movie like this (in my view) would be feasible. It goes to show that women are just as human, and feel just as much emotional pain as men, and have the power to act in revenge of that pain.
ReplyDeleteThe play questions the actions of men who see only the social mobility of themselves at stake in life, and promotes true love, and devotion to ones partner I feel the most successful relationships are ones in which there is no fear by either party of betrayal, abandonment, or intrigue, and Euripides must feel this same way. He comments on the useless tendency of men to try to achieve something greater than they are capable of achieving, and says that only leads to failure. I feel that through the voices of the characters in Medea Euripides own voice can be heard saying that he only wants a simple life with a woman who he will be faithful to and vice versa.
I can't say that I agree with the actions of Medea, or that the play was fun to read, but it was a Greek tragedy and fulfilled the age old tradition to a t. The slaying of ones own children doesn't show that women can be strong, it shows that they can be mentally out of a control, which is definitely the case as seen from my own experience. but that's not to say they can't be strong, it's just an analyses of the image shown by the text of the play... Strong women I guess would find some other way to rise up in their lives, maybe taking a more positive approach, however hard that may seem after such a devastating event.
I agree with many of the points that you touch on here. I do think that Euripides is trying to convey a much deeper message through this play about trust and relationships. I also see how Medea may have been seen as out of control and crazy through the action of killing her kids. However, I do think that it is important how she was portrayed in the rest of the play. She is completely contradicting the view on women during that time period by standing up for what she believes in and literally fighting for it. She takes it to extremes in the play, but I believe it’s important to recognize the feminist views of this plays with the strength in her character. One may argue that there are misogynistic views especially when Jason claims that the only thing women are good for is child birth. I make the argument that Euripides includes this in the play to make a point that Jason sounds ridiculous and really means to portray a feminist view overall.
DeleteBefore reading and analyzing the Qur’an and the Bible, I had very little knowledge behind each piece of scripture. I always knew that there were similarities between them but I didn’t know that the Qur’an is known as the corrected and perfect version of the Old Testament and the New Testament.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I knew that there were many similarities, I learned that there were many things that were exactly the same and there were things that were completely different. I found it very interesting that some stories in the Bible were told very differently from the stories that were told in the Qur’an although the message behind each story is the same.
I found it very interesting that in the Qur’an, it tries to steer away from using specific names. From previous readings and other classes that I’ve taken, I knew that in the Islamic faith it is inappropriate to worship any other being that is not God but I did not realize that names were not used in stories such as the story of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, etc. I really like that in the Islamic faith, that God is the supreme power and that nothing and no one compares to the power of God.
Another thing that I found really interesting, was the story of Adam and Eve. I didn’t think that in the Qur’an that the women would be created equally as the man, knowing that in the majority of Islamic cultures, women are not treated as equals to men. Also that, God doesn’t say that he is punishing Adam and Eve for eating the forbidden fruit but instead Adam and Eve tell God they are sorry for what they have done.
It amazes me how the Qur’an and the Bible are so similar but so different and they both from completely different cultures.
Before reading excerpt from the Quran I did know that there were a lot of similarities in the stories of both the Bible and the Quran. What I did not expect was that women were viewed very differently in both text. Coming from a Catholic background (although mostly Agnostic) it was clear to me that women were never seen as equal or even viewed as close to an equal to men. With this in mind I thought that it was even worse in the Muslim religion. Since women are always (from what I see in the media or sometimes in person) forced to wear specific clothing I thought that there was less respect for women in middle eastern countries. The fact that women are actually respected in most of the countries shows that the Quran has qualities that can be seen as better compared to The Bible.
ReplyDeleteSomething else that struck me as important is the narrators of the Quran and the Bible. The Bible is written in third person compared to the Qur’an which is narrated by mostly the prophets and God. Why is it that in the Bible the prophets are not narrating the story although they were there? Is it not important to know who is telling the stories of the Bible? Why is it that God never narrates a story in the Bible? I feel that having Allah actually speak in the Quran and tell a story directly to us makes the people who read the Quran daily more connected to their religion. Of course, this idea does not apply to all but compared to most christians, Muslims are required to pray five times a day, attend special settings that show respect and faith to Allah. There are so many different actions that need to be made by Muslims that show so much commitment to their god.
I agree. I think the style of writing in the Qur’an is much more effective, because it is actually being spoken by God. This gives it more credibility than if the story is just being recorded by many different writers. The Bible is written by many authors, who often are not even the prophets themselves, which means there is a much higher chance many of the stories are not fully accurate, or have been distorted. In addition, there is often a change in the style and tone of the Bible due to its various authors. I think the Qur’an’s single voice, Allah, flows much better and is more impactful because the book is more credible and in its original form, rather than the Bible which has been altered over the centuries.
DeleteLike you and Eric mentioned, the directness in revelation from Allah does come across as effective. At a couple points of reading the Qur'an scriptures I got the feeling of how charismatic the text is in its own way. Had I been indoctrinated into the Muslim faith from birth, it's easy for me to see how potent the Qur'an 's message can become. Also, I think one amongst many reasons that Muslims walk a devout lifestyle is because they are swept up by the many daily obligations of prayer and family values which they are accustomed towards.
DeleteI found it interesting that the portrayal of women in the Qur’an is not a reflection of how they are treated currently in society. The general perception in the West is that Muslim women are suppressed and almost seen as property, however when we studied the Quran, God made it clear that both men and women are equal. In the Qur’an Adam and Eve are molded from the same clay— Adam and Eve are equal in all senses from their creation to their consequences pertaining to eating the forbidden fruit and listening to Satan. It is also mentioned that God is not a human like figure/displays a specific gender, giving him a title that no one can be like him.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, the Bible is perceived in a more masculine way, which implies women are inferior. The general perception about the West is that women are treated equally, given opportunities and allowed to express freedoms. However unlike the Qur’an, Eve is created from Adam, Eve feels guiltier eating the forbidden fruit, and Lot offers his daughters to be prostitutes for visitors. In addition God is considered a male figure/ Father, which alludes to the fact the power is derived from masculinity.
Although people interpret the Qur’an and Bible differently and there are deep rooted traditions that may seem like inequality to the western world, there is a paradox within their respective societies pertaining to their treatment of women and the social stigma that surrounds women in western culture vs. women in Islamic culture. What is the different reasoning for this? Why do we feel that Islamic women are suppressed even though it was not portrayed in the Qur’an? Why do we feel that western women are entitled to more freedoms even though they are portrayed as inferior in the Bible?
From a personal perspective, since God is not defined as a male or female in the Torah, I was taught me that God could be anything and everywhere at any given point, however the interesting thing is that in my head I still envision God as an old man, crossed legged in the sky with a beard that stretched out for miles. This implies that each religion influences each other and over time can change the way one perceives their own religion due to ideas that are prevalent in modern society and in the media.
You touched on a really important concept: that ideas in modern society, media, and other religions have influences on one's own perception in their belief system. I find this concept intriguing not only because I have always wondered how modern society and other religions helped me understand Islam better, but also because I feel like such influences can either make or break someone's faith. Islam has always been in the media spotlight and since it came after Judaism and Christianity, the influences those religions have are just as important.
DeleteThe questions you asked referring to the paradoxical treatment of women in the Christian West and the Islamic world are questions that deserve well thought out answers. I can begin to say that quite simply, most people are misinformed. As civilians in a world where politics and ulteriorly motivated corporations, including CNN and FOX, control mass media, it is easy to accept one group as free and another as oppressed. Although it may be true that western women enjoy more freedoms than their counterparts in certain muslim countries, media takes it a step further by leading some to believe that the Qur'an is misogynistic, when it is the complete opposite. This problem not only exists here however, foreign societies that censor mass media deal with such issues as misguidance and misleading information as well. The misogynistic societies of some muslim countries then, cannot be traced to Islam and the Qur'an. Perhaps it was the traditions of pre-Islamic middle east that remained popular. Perhaps it was people who twisted certain verses to match their misogynistic ideals. Either way, it is important for us to study scriptures as we just did, through the scriptures themselves, rather than men who mistreat their women.
The Quran in further reading and comparison to the Bible makes me feel like I understand the Old Testament more and more. It also has a few differences and although those differences are small they are a big deal.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that really surprised me about the Quran and that I did not see in the few readings of the Bible is the idea that Muslims believe that no matter your religion it is ok as long as they are allowed to believe in what they want you can believe in what you want. In sura 109 it states that clearly and I think that’s an important thing that everybody should believe and that should be in all religious texts.
Another key difference is the story of Noah. In the Bible it appears that God told Noah to escape because everybody else was sinful. In the Quran it seems more that Noah tried to warm others and help other people but no one would listen.
Another thing that really struck me about the Quran is its repetitiveness compared to the Bible. The Bible seems to try and drill one fact after another in chronological order while the Quran usually repeats things especially how merciful and kind God is to those that believe. Overall it is interesting how the Quran has many of the same stories as the Bible just written in different ways and from slightly different views.
In agreement with Dan’s earlier post, Medea was a nice break from the literature we began the class with. As others have said, I also think that Medea provides a unique portrayal of women in literature from this time period, as the titular character takes action and refuses to be shamed by the role of a woman in a marriage in patriarchal society. However, Medea is driven solely by the fact that her husband spurned her, leaving her motivated by her emotions toyed with at the whims of a man.
ReplyDeleteI think this relates back to our class discussion earlier in the week. In discussing the depiction of women in both the Old Testament and the Qur’an, although definitely more in the former, we focused on the portrayal of women as “seductresses,” who take God’s will lightly and lead men astray. We have seen this in the Bible’s depiction of Eve, who tempted Adam with the apple, as well as in the wives of both Lot and Job. Lot’s wife is punished for disobeying her husband, and by extension God, and Job’s wife encourages his to abandon God in a fit of emotion.
Although Medea defies the patriarchal expectation of a meek, helpless woman dependent on her husband, she is also ruled by her “ungovernable rage,” which is in keeping with the continuous portrayal of women as hysterical and emotional. Up until her first appearance in the play, all the audience hears from her are wails and sobs at her misfortune, and the Nurse’s, not unfounded, fears that she may kill her own children. Although she does eventually present herself as “cool and self-possessed,” and effectively convinces Creon to give her another day in Corinth, and uses her intelligence to defy the expected roles for women at the time in an ultimately feminist depiction, she is undeniably ruled by emotion and driven to the murder of her own children, which is consistent with the portrayal of women we have seen in the Bible and Qur’an thus far.
I absolutely agree with you. I, too, think that Medea is similar to both the Bible and the Qur'an in the views and depictions of women as emotional and problematic. Medea, while she is portrayed in some instances as a strong woman standing up for herself, she ultimately goes crazy and sinks to the murders of her own children. She is driven 100% by her emotion and by the pain she feels because of Jason's betrayal and lies.
DeleteWhile reading the Quran, I thought it was interesting to see that many of the "details" of the stories such as the story of Abraham was not included in the Quran. While there were a few important parts such as Abraham sacrificing his son Isaac- but being stopped by God, there as no detail explanation of how this occurred or the story leading up to this situation. Also, it was interesting to see that while in the Bible, Abraham was being tested by being asked to sacrifice his son; in the Quran, Abraham offered to sacrifice his son without God asking him.
ReplyDeleteAnother part of the Quran that surprised me most is the fact that there was such a detailed explanation of Devil (Iblis) while there was little to none about the Devil besides the serpent in the bible. In the scriptures of the Quran it states that there is religious tolerance of Christians and Jews, yet there is a specific talk about the Devil unlike the bible where there is no talk of religious tolerance and also no specific talk of the devil either. The correlation I am trying to make is that the Quran- which to me seems like a relatively tame scripture; talks about the Devil, killing of Noah’s son, and Abel’s murder being covered up and “forgiven”. Although it talks about tolerance, and no violence unless attacked first, it seems like it is thoroughly explaining that there are consequences to the things that you may or may not do that goes against the religion itself. To me, it seems pretty hypocritical in terms of some verses talking about one thing and then another verse reciting another.
Going into reading the Bible and the Quran, I knew that there were many similarities and that they shared many of the same roots. I also knew that Muslims were very diverse, with varying levels of sex equality and orthodox practices. I think this is an important fact that people don’t really take into account. They see pictures of Muslim women covering their heads or faces and think, “how terrible!” but you can see the same things among Christian and Jewish women as well, depending on the level of orthodoxy. We need to remember that different people will take different meanings from their religious texts, whether they’re Muslim or not. In this instance, very similar things are said in all three texts, and different people choose to act on that in different ways. I think the thing that scares people the most is when the government isn’t secular, which is very different from our own perceived governments, but similarities can still be found in the “western world” with the Vatican and Israel to name a couple.
ReplyDeleteThe main thing that surprised me about reading these two texts was how much more in depth the Quran was than the Bible. If the works were not religious texts, but instead novels, I would think the “author” of the Quran would be rated much more highly. For example, the story of the forbidden fruit in Genesis was basically God saying, “don’t eat that fruit”, the serpent saying, “eat that fruit”, Adam and Eve eating the fruit, and God saying, “gggrrrr u disobeyed me, now I’m punishing you.” However, in the Quran, it goes much more in depth about how Iblis wants to get back at Allah for putting him below humans when he thinks he is above them, so he tries to corrupt the humans.
I really enjoyed reading the first Act of Medea. I found myself smirking and giggling to myself as I was reading, and I also jotted down a few beautiful bits of poetic prose (you can speak sweetly enough, you can make honey in your mouth like a brown bee). I thought the line, "it's a bad thing to be born of high race and brought up willful and powerful in a great house unruled and ruling many, for then if misfortune comes it is unendurable, it drives you mad" was very applicable to modern day society. I also found this play to be easier to comprehend than the Islamic texts we have read in the past. There are various elements that compose a typical Greek tragedy in Medea… the theme of love, loss, pride, the abuse of power and the fraught relationships between men are themes present in Medea. I also believe that speaking out "at the sky and ground" is a common action in a Greek tragedy. Typically the main protagonist or character of a tragedy commits some terrible crime without realizing how foolish and arrogant he has been, and slowly as he realizes his error the world crumbles around him. A true tragedy should evoke pity and fear on part of the audience (Given that the previous sentences' information was found on the internet) I find it interesting how Medea is the main protagonist, being that she is a woman and especially since she is holding her ground pretty damn well. Medea refuses to lose her cool, and even regrets the fact that she cried and begged in front of Creon as she has done no wrong. The tension that is between her and Jason is not so much about marriage, love or lust but rather frustration due to Jason's betrayal. "Jason's Medea's worst enemy, who should have been Her dearest protector." Medea is an alarming character due to her nature, I find it compelling how this Greek tragedy refers to witchcraft and drugs.
ReplyDeleteThough interpretations of the play Medea often state how this play is damaging to the portrayal of women, I believe that (in the first Act at least) Medea uses words and wit to "manipulate" those around her to get out of being exiled temporarily. She is strong and decisive which are supposively male traits. This play also shows Medea to be a bit hysterical and mad at times, stopping at nothing to get what she wants which puts women in a bad light. Jason reinforces the idea of patriarchy by trying to protect his family from this mad woman. Medea's ability to take matters into her own hands is representative of feminist ideology, but her rash decision making based on emotion rather than logic is a negative portrayal.
That was a really interesting point you made about the idea of a tragic hero. It's really interesting to think about the fact that Medea did not fall from great heights to be in the position she finds herself in. As you mentioned, the tragic hero often invokes some semblance of pity in the audience members, as they watch the main protagonist face these challenges presented to them. Medea is a character that the audience is wary about right from the beginning, and, being a woman of few other known qualities that may render her actions redeemable or worthy of pity, the audience is not as likely to see her as a hero of any sort. Medea is strong in that she fights against those who have wronged her, but her constant rethinking of the plan, her emotional outbursts, and the fact that her actions are largely motivated by her emotions kind of dampen her role as a strong female hero.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt was hard to grasp the message behind switching from the Bible and the Qur’an to Medea and I still don’t understand why the big jump from analyzing religious scriptures to a theatrical scene, but I found the switch and the play itself to be interesting. In the manner that we learned today that theatre was not considered a leisure activity but a religious outing and just like the religious scriptures provides the drama, mystery, and suspense theatre brought it to life.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion they are not interconnected as scriptures, as they could be if they were aiming at trying to send similar messages. I feel that this tragedy portrays women in a violent, seductive, manipulative, frustrated and impatient way. In the play Jason tries to explain to Medea that he is only doing this for his kids and for her and if she could stop being so envious she would see it. This shows her lack of listening skills and how so taken up by anger that she was convinced to follow through with her plan no matter what. Just like in almost every chapter of the bible that we read the women are portrayed as trying to seduce the men into doing something or not following orders.
In Medea various themes are explored, not only the theme of revenge but also passion and rage which can also be seen in the Bible and the Qur’an for example with the narrative of Satan and how he became disobedient after the creation of people and decided to seek revenge on human kind for the rest of his life. In a way this can be seen with Medea as she is willing to go as far as die in order to make Jason suffer for breaking his oath, she exclaims “And kill them both even if I am to die for it”. The statement reiterates how angry she is and how far she is willing to go to make her husband suffer and this is proven when she kills her children and does not allow Jason to give them a proper burial. Ultimately the pleasure of watching Jason suffer is greater than the remorse she’ll have for killing her children. A similar story can be concluded in Satan’s case as he causes great tribulations to human beings on Earth because he thinks of himself as better according to the text from the Qur’an.
Other than the comparisons to the Bible, the way that I see it Medea was in fact was a compelling play in the way it brought about different interpretations of how the audience can see a woman. It is more of a direct comparison to men and she is not seen as weak or impotent or dependent on men. I will also like to point out that maybe the sons were a representation of her marriage to Jason, and once that failed she did not want to be reminded of her having to bear his children and live with his memory and of what he did, so she put her motherly instincts aside and terminated the problem. Another thing could be that she did not want someone else to take revenge on her children, which all ties in with her manipulative ways.