Unimportance

Remember how I was talking about maybe converting to Taoism? Well, I don't think that's going to happen since I cant "accept disgrace willingly" by accepting that I'm "unimportant" (13). Whatever, at least my mom tells me I'm important.

In the Analects, many words are capitalized (e.g. Virtue, Way...), making them important. In the Tao Te Ching, I noticed that Self is capitalized, therefore, based on the Tao, it is not disgraceful.

If I am divine though, I will b at one with the Tao (16). So I don't have to be important, just divine.

Filial Piety was mentioned in verse 18. Chapter 18? The page that says eighteen. It is also mentioned in the Analects. Filial piety is to have a respect for parents and ancestors, and it is one of the Confucian ideals. It is also a big deal in Chinese culture in general.

"I am a fool. Oh, yes! I am confused." (20)

It's nice to know that Lao Tzu and I share the same thoughts. To me, this book is poetry. It is teachings of Taoism in the form of poetry, but the page that says twenty, to me, didn't feel like teachings. It felt like actual poetry; the thoughts and feelings of the author. This is officially my favorite page in tonights reading.

This book reminds me so much of the Analects. As mentioned before, Virtue is a keyword in Confucius' text. Apparently, Lao Tzu found it of importance also,

"The greatest Virtue is to follow Tao and Tao alone."

While reading the Analects, we came that Virtue is a set of certain principles to reach something god. When I think of Virtue, I think of what we Latin Americans like to call, juicio (pronounced hwee-see-oh). When a person is juisioso (hwee-see-oh-soh), they are good. Juisoso people are responsible, and don't really get in trouble.

I keep noticing how heaven and earth are mentioned. They seem to be a big deal when it comes to Taoism:

"Why is this? Heaven and earth!

If heaven and earth cannot make things eternal,

How is it possible for man?" (23)

I agree with Lao Tzu, if something as great as heaven or earth can't make something last forever, how can a man?

The Stairway to Heaven

"The name that can be named is not the eternal name" (1)

I'm sorry, but I'm not understanding this, but today is Monday so I'm a little off my rocker. We have finished Confucius' Analects and have moved on to Taoism by reading the Tao Te Ching. I have a feeling I'm going to learn a lot about many different cultures and religions; first we read about Lord Krishna in The Bagavad-Gita, Teachings of God in the Bible, Confucianism in the Analects, and now we are on the Tao Te Ching. Maybe my teacher is on a secret quest to convert us all. All jokes aside though, this book is pretty deep:

"Under heaven all can see beauty as beauty only because there is ugliness.

All can know good as good only because there is evil." (2)

Many of these balances are mentioned, like " long and short contrast each other". Based on this, I think that Taoism has a lot to do with equal balances of things. In class we had a discussion about why there is evil. I wrote that I thought there was evil because we need an equal amount it, since there can't be too much good in the world; maybe I should convert (my teachers evil plan is working).

I am really liking this book. It is like poetry, and I especially like it because it really makes me think. It also shows a nice view of women:

"The valley spirit never dies;

It is the woman, primal mother.

Her gateway is the root of heaven and earth." (6)

Men vs. women is a recurring argument in my class, and I like this citation because it is saying that women are the root of everything. Yay for women! relax, I'm not a feminist, I'm just trying to prove a point.

Heaven has been mentioned many times so far. I always thought that when you die you end up on the golden stairway to heaven. And as you take those steps, you are trying hard not to wet your pants from the fear of the unknown upstairs. When you open the door to heaven, all you see are clouds and you are filled with such joy and everything is okay now. After reading up to chapter twelve, I still have that same mental image, minus the fear. Theres something calming about the text from this book and I'm liking it a lot so far. Its going to keep me thinking about the stairway to heaven

Realizations

Today as I was skimming through the bible I suddenly realized a few things.

1. Chapter 3 - Why do we only hear about the serpent once? What was his deal anyway? i mean, he seemed like an envious little creature, so he tempted Eve, who tempted Adam, and then they all got punished for it, and we never hear about the serpent again. I would have like to seen him again later on in the Bible. He could be the annoying little villain that never leaves people alone.

2. Chapter 4 - Cain was a hateful child who was EXTREMELY jealous of his brother

3. Chapter 7 - God must have hated a lot of people in order to drown them all. Sure he tells Noah to save everybody, but he could've also warned a few other people. Also, if Noah only took 2 of each animal, male and female, how did all these wild mixed races of animals become? Was there some sort of freaky polygamist animal thing going on for forty days and forty nights?

4. Chapter 17 - The whole circumcision thing was a little disturbing, partly because I was eating when I read that chapter.

5. Abraham's son, Ishmael, reminds me of a certain gorilla that I read about.

5. Random Thought #1 - I cannot spell the word "circumcision" and "circumcised" without using spell check to help me out.

7. Chapter 20 - "And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife." (20:12)

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN!? were there not enough women that Abraham had to go get married with his sister? I understand that she is his half sister, but that doesn't make marrying her any less wrong.

8. Chapter 23 - Sarah lived to be one hundred and seven and twenty years old. Does that mean she lived to be 1720 years old?

9. Random Thought # 2 - I read the word betwixt again in chapter 23. I like that word

10. Why does God keep changing peoples names? Is it like a right of passage?

Example: (35:10) "And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel."

Massive Family Trees, Wicked Lifespans, and Circumcision

Everybody is so fruitful and they always multiply! I consider myself to be a god student: I do my work correctly and I turn it in on time, but I honestly only read about 7 words in chapter 10 of Genesis. Don't go thinking that I am lazy, because I'm not (sometimes), but I didnt read this chapter because it just talks about the many generations that came after Noah. I'm not even going to list all the names, but I will say this: one of the children is named Nimrod. I'm sure that back then, Nimrod was a lovely name, but if that kid went to my school today, he would deffinitely have his arse handed to him.

I'm very jealous of the life span back in that time, as seen in chapter 11, everybody seemed to live to about a thousand years old:

"And Salah lived after he begat Eber four hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters.

And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg..."

A new discovery: God created circumcision! Yeah you read that correctly. It all happens in chapter 17, when Lord God changes Abram's name to Abraham, and He changes his wife's name from Sarai to Sarah (at least the Lord knew about simplicity). Lord God decides that he and Abraham should have a covenant, "And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me an you." Theres something in this chapter that didn't settle right for me: God DID NOT get circumcised! My motto is, if I go down, Im taking you down with me, hence: If I'm getting circumcised, you better be right there next to me waiting for your turn. Anyways, Abraham and all the sons after him needs to be circumcised. Whoever is not circumcised will be damned to the fiery depths of hell forever! but not in those words exactly:

"And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant."

Both my mom and I found this to be very interesting.

Isn't Christianity Monotheistic?

We are now interpreting the Bible(King James version) in class. Today, we noticed that in chapter 1 of Genesis, there is God, and in chapter 2, there is Lord God. Why the two God's? I thought Christianity was monotheistic. When Lord God first appears, it is when he is making Adam and Eve, and in the third chapter we hear him speak. Lord God speaks in a way that reminds me of Shakespeare: think words like thou, shalt, thee. Chapter 3 is all about the grden of eden and how Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit. In chapter 4 the Lord comes out. Is the Lord the same as Lord God, or does the bible have Lord God, God, and the Lord? Maybe I'm just over analyzing.

Our class has noticed that Adam is a big oaf and Lord God is confusing. We made our discovery of Adam in the book Ladies and Gentlemen, The Bible!, a funny retelling of bible stories. In the book by Jonathan Goldstein, the Garden of Eden is seen as a village and Adam is seen as the village idiot. In the bible we receive evidence of this after Adam tell Lord God "The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat." So if the woman gave you a gun to put to your head, would you shoot yourself?

Something else that I never thought about is how confusing Lord God is. First, why would he plant the tree if nobody was supposed to eat from it? And if God knows everything, wouldn't he know that Adam and Eve were going to give in to temptation? Was it all a test? I bet they failed...poor suckers.

Adam and Eve have two children, Cain and Abel. Basically, nobody likes Cain because they are too busy worshipping Abel and when each brother presents a gift to the Lord, He neglects Cain's gift and accpts Abel's with open arms. Something clicked in Cain's mind and he got sick of everybody loving Abel, so he performs a sinful act and kills his brother. Talk about sibling rivalry. Later, Cain meets his wife and they have a child, Enoch. And Enoch has his son, Irad, and this cycle goes on for a few sentences. Meanwhile Adam and Eve have another son, Seth to replace Abel, and the whole reproduction system continues.

Disguises and Incest

This, is a story within a story. The story of Myrrha is within the story of Vertumnus and Pomona. Although Vertumnus seems a bit stalker-ish with Pomona, I think it's really cute how hard he tries to get her attention. He tells her about the story of Myrrha and her father, Cinyras. The story took Vertumnus nowhere, and Pomona is smarter than we all think because she knows it's not a sweet old lady telling her the story, but she ends up liking what she sees when Vertumnus takes off his disguise.

Meanwhile, a girl named Myrrha longs for her father, Cinyras. Don't worry folks, she knows that what she is feeling is wrong, but she can't escape it. She ends up getting what she wants, but its not much of a happy ending.

There Are Some Moments People Don't Want To Relive

In this story, we get to see what true love really is. After the reading story of Orpheus and Eurydice, I realized that true love means to always be by the persons side, to be their best friend, their shoulder to cry on, and to go down to hell if Hades takes them away from me. This is exactly what the musician, Orpeheus does. When he gets there, Hades (god of the underworld) is nice enough to give Alcyone back on one condition: she must walk behind Orpheus and he is not allowed to look at her. If your lady got sent to the fiery depths of hell and you were able to rescue her, wouldn't you actually like to see her first? I would, and Orpheus did, so he turned around. This really made me mad because they were so close to exiting through the gates of the underworld when Orpheus decides to turn around. FAIL! As punishment, Alcyone got taken away again, and Orpheus had to relive that moment over and over. Poor Guy.

Enjoy Your Meal

People can be so rude. What was Erysichthon's deal with cutting down the goddess' favorite tree? You would think that after hearing the spirit of the tree telling him he would never get away with it that he would fall on his knees and apologize, but no, he just mocks the spirit and goes to sleep.

After hearing the spirit of her favorite tree, Ceres (goddess of agriculture) sends Hunger after Erysichthon. Hunger defeats Erysichthon to point that he has to sell his own mother to buy food. Remember how I said that Poseidon seems like a mean and powerful god? Well, he's still powerful but in this story we see a softer side of him as he helps the mother after her greedy son sells her. In the end, we witness a perfect example of "karma's a *itch": Erysichthon ends up eating himself.

Why Is Poseidon So Mean?

No more Bhagavad-Gita! Now we are reading Metamorphoses, Mary Zimmerman's version, although we read some stories by Ovid too. Last semester my school did the play, which is probably the only reason why I can understand it. The first story we read is Ceyx and Alcyone. Alcyone is the daughter of Aeolus, the god of winds, and her husband Ceyx has to leave on a long voyage. This was one of the stories where we read both versions. During the voyage, Poseidon (God of Water) got mad, manipulated the waves and killed everybody. Before he killed everybody, however, Ceyx was longing for his bride and he kept repeating her name. It was really cute in kind of a weird way. Afterwards, an somebody impersonating Ceyx goes toCeyx goes tell Alcyone what happened. In the end they turned into seagulls and lived happily ever after. Now thats what I cal weird, it's still a nice love story.

Has anybody noticed how angry Poseidon always is? I mean, was it honestly necessary to go and kill everybody in this story? Another good example: The Little Mermaid. Ariel's father Neptune (not named Poseidon, but still the same person) was always so mad. All my years watching that show and I hardly ever saw him smile!

My bad, Ariel's dad was King Triton, still this is the way I see Poseidon.

The End

There are three ways that lead to the quality of nature: lucidity, passion, and dark inertia. Men of each way sacrifice to different things. Men of lucidity sacrifice to the gods; men of passion to spirits and demons; and men of dark inertia sacrifice to corpses and ghosts. Foods are also divided into these three paths; lucid men like savory, smooth, firm, and rich foods that promote long life, lucidity (obviously), health, pleasure and delight. Passionate men like food that is bitter, sour, salty, hot,and burning. The foods of passionate men cause grief, pain, and sickness. Men that are darkly inert like stale, putrid, and spoiled foods that are unfit for sacrifice. I'm very confused about all of this and I'm very deeply sorry if anybody reading this is as lost as I am.

I just noticed that I went through all this torture just to find out if Arjuna fights or not, well guess what? I still don't know! In the end Arjuna tells Krishna that his delusion is destroyed and that he will act on his words. The only problem is that Krishna says so many words, God only knows which words Arjuna is talking about!

Not Arrogance, Just Trees and Godliness

I have a Hindu aunt and she taught me that Hndu gods can have many mouths and srms and legs, and that they are very colorful and beautiful.

Krishna:
"Arjuna, see my forms
in hundreds and thousands;
diverse, divine,
of many colors and shapes."

Arjuna:
"I see your boundless form
everywhere,
the countless arms,
bellies, mouths, and eyes;
Lord of All,
I see no end,
or middle or beginning
to your totality."

BAM! Proof that Krishna is a god. Krishna tells Arjuna of how he can create world destruction and everything else on earth. I knew he wasn't arrogant!


In teaching 15, Krishna is describing a sacred tree and I suddenly get an image of some sort of Tree of Life.

Godly Arrogance?

I thought that nature only had four elements: earth, fire, water, and air. Krishna's nature has eight: earth, fire, water, air, space, mind, understanding, and individuality. I'm liking Krishna's nature a lot more than mine. It is never really mentioned, but I'm pretty sure that Krishna is a god, because why else would he be the taste in water or the light in the moon and the sun? He also says that nothing is higher than him, that everything thing that exists is woven into him like a web of pearls on a thread. My conclusion to this is that he is either a god or he's extremely arrogant, but I'm leaning more toward god.

In the 8th teaching, Arjuna asks many questions and Krishna answers them. So its possible that Krishna is an arrogant smart-ass, but I still think he is a god.

If every body rely's on Krishna, even men born of evil, they will reach the highest way. So now I need to bow to Krishna, discipline myself toward him, sacrifice him, keep him in my mind and devotion and I will reach him.

Even Arjuna is Confused!

"You confuze my understanding
with a maze of words;
speak one certain truth
so I may acheive what is good"

Thank goodness I'm not the only one who is a little confuzed; not even Arjuna can make sense as to what Lord Krishna is trying to say!

Krishna is always mentioning action and inaction. Hers my understanding:
Action= detachment/sacrifice of desire
Inaction= attachment/giving in to your desires- inaction will be the death of us.

Krishna also keeps talking and repeating things, but what is he really saying? For example, he seems to be urging Arjuna to fight but it's his choice so whatever he chooses is correct.

According to Arjuna (who believes in reincarnation) when we leave our bodies we go to him. We go inside his presence and we seek refuge. We are free from anger and attraction and fear.

Im getting a little lost now. I just read the word "action" on the page 12 times. (No joke, I just counted) Arjuna is talking about keeping our actions in control and not giving in to our desire. He he reminds me of my school's guidance counselor: "Just say no! Don't give in to peer pressure!"

Now there's this big battle between discipline and renunciation. According to Krishna "The man of eternal renunciation is one who neither hates nor desires; beyond dualities, he is easily freed from bondage" while "Men of simple discipline reach the same place that philosophers attain;he really sees who sees philosophy and discipline to be one." However, Krishna goes on saying that renunciation is difficult to attain without discipline, so wouldn't it be better to have both?

Poor Arjuna

Just finished the second teaching of the Bhagavad-Gita, and I'm not sure what to make of it. There's the fact that Lord Krishna seems to be playing with Arjuna's mind, or the fact that we are embodied in our bodies but not really. Lets start with the Krishna/Arjuna issue:

It seems like Arjuna is seriously incapable of killing a person, but Lord Krishna keeps insisting, saying that if Arjuna kills somebody he won't really be killing them. The same ges with death; if the person dies, its not like thier really dead:

"He who thinks this self a killer
and he who thinks it killed,
both fail to understand;
it des not kill, nor is it killed"

I don't understand it!!! If you think you're a killer but you're bot, and if you think you just got killed but you didn't, then what are you?!?!?! It seems like there could be some sense in what Krishna is saying, but not really. It all contradicts. This kind of leads into the next topic.

There are two parts of a person: the actual self and the body. The self is the soul and the body isn't very important; it just shelters the soul, like a blanket or the shell of a turtle. When we die (or when we don't die as Krishna likes to see it) we leave our bodies only to be embodied in another one, like reincarnation. Its like growing out of clothes; after you've grown out of your old clothes, you discard them and get new ones. Apparently, it's the exact same with bodies.

Meanwhile, in a far away land away from this confusion, Arjuna still cannot find it in himself to kill a person. He' aware that if he does kill, he would be forever burdened with a guilty concience, so he would rather "beg for scraps of food than to eat meals smeared with the blood of elders".

Bagahavadagadad-Gita?

What a mouthful of a title!!! I just started reading The Bhagavad-Gita and besides learning that the title wears the pants in this relationship, I've also learned three things.

1. Sanjaya is AWESOME! Mostly because whenever I think of him, Sanjaya Malakar of American Idol pops into my head; this mental image makes reading more fun :)

2. There is some kind of war going on

3. Blood is thicker than water



So, I believe that the war is between families, because Arjuna's big seems to be that he can't bear killing one of his family members. Not even the reward of being a king will change his mind.

"They are teachers, fathers, sons,
and grandfathers, uncles, grandsons,
fathers, and brothers of wives,
and other men of our family.

I do not want to kill them
even if I am killed, Krishna;
not for kingship of all three worlds,
much less for the earth!"

I wish I had that kind of loyalty, I would probably take my brother out in a second (not really!!!!) Still, I feel a little bad for Arjuna, because he seems pretty broken to have to kill a kinsmen.

Tablet 12 of Gilgamesh

THE END!!!

Just kidding

(not really).

:)

Enkidu's spirit was resurected from the Nether World. Gilgamesh asked questions...thats about it folks...

But I wouldn't leave you hanging. Gilgamesh falls through a hole in the floor to what is known as the Nether World, and the sudden image that comes into my head is that of poor Alice going down the rabbit hole. I was a little confused when starting this tablet beacause, as I said before, Enkidu is present, but it took me a minute to see that maybe this place that is starting to remind me of Wonderland is a place where people go to die. I wonder if its the Underworld? It seems t be, the way Enkidu describes it: after he walked through the House of Darkness, vermon started eating away at his body.

Enkidu claims that the fever demon, Ashak, "seized him" into the Nether World. He discovers that it was actually the Cry of Darkness that brought him there, but Ashak brought me back to my Alice in Wonderland theory. At first for some reason, Ashak reminded me of the duches in Lewis Carrol's first book, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. When Enkidu said that Ashak had taken him against his own will I instantly thought of the wretched duchess taking people left and right, while yelling "Off with their head!"

All Alice thoughts aside, I felt that what the writer did was good, bringing the dynamic duo, Gilgamesh and Enkidu, together for the last time.

Tablet 11 of Gilgamesh

This tablet reminds me of Noah's Ark. Utnapishtim tells Gilgamesh a story of how the Ea spoke to him in the night and told him that he should get rid of his house and build a boat. He also told our dear friend Gilgy to bring a piece of every living thing with him so that they could be saved from the flood that was coming.



Utnapishtim decides to give Gilgy a little test. He has to tie rocks to his feet and basically drown while holding a super thorny plant. The plant was called How-the-Old-Man-Once-Again-Becomes-a-Younger-Man. What a mouthful of a name! Gilgamesh decides toshare his reward with all the old men in the city while still having enough for himself.

Tablet 10 of Gilgamesh

Gilgamesh meets Siduri the tavern keeper and explains the purpose of his travels. He is still questioning his death, "Must I die too? Must Gilgamesh be like that?" It seems as if Gilgamesh has morphed himself into Enkidu. Not literally, but he is now hairy bodied and wearing animal skins. Siduri tells Gilgamesh that only, the sun god, has crossed the sea to see Utnapishtim. She tells him that nobody else has made it alive, but Gilgamesh, being two thirds god, accomplishes it. After crossing the sea an old man tells Gilgamesh that no man can beat death and that it has no known time.

Tablet 9 of Gilgamesh

Gilgamesh is questionin his mortality. He says "Enkidu has died. Must I die too. Must Gilgamesh be like that?" He can feel the fear in the pit of his stomach. I think that because Enkidu has died, Gilgamesh realizes that there will be a day when he will die too, and he is terrified. Gilgamesh has decided to go find Utnapishtim, because he will know how death can be avoided. The journey starts and Gilgamesh must travel in what ia described as complete darkness; utterly lightless, black. Gilgamesh keeps repeating that he is companionless, "He was weeping and fearful, alone, without a companion." Slowly, he started to see gray until the blackness was completely gone and, like the idiom, he saw the light at the end of the tunnel, which was filled with fruits, and trees, and jewels, he could see the sea.

Tablet 8 of Gilgamesh

Gilgamesh is a broken man now that Enkidu has died. Gilgamesh has been standing over the body of Eknidu, weeping, recalling memories they shared tgether; killing Huwawa, fightinf the Bull of Heaven, killing it, and sitting down to rest. Gilgamesh keeps asking, " How was your face made dark?". While Gilgamesh is mourning, he asks the whole city to mourn the loss of his beloved companion. Because Gilgamesh doesn't want anybody to forget about Enkidu, he decides to bulid a statue to honor his deeds. Gilgamesh has also made an altar where he has laid, in different bowls, offerings of honey, lapis lazuli, and butter. These offerings were made to honor Enkidu as a god.

Gilgamesh tablet 7

Enkidu is and has had one of his famous dreams. As in some previous dreams, there are many objects that symbolize something, so I made some interpretations. The dream starts out with a griffin. The griffin is described as aman with the head and paws of a lion, but talons of an eagle. The griffin grabs Enkidu and he tries to fight it off, but it doesn't loosen its grip. I think that the griffen symbolizes death. I think it is trying to say that death is coming for Enkidu, and he won't be able to avoid it. There was also a house of darkeness, The House of No Return. I think that this house symblizes straight up death, because once you die, theres no coming back. In the house, there were bodies of kings and princes from different kingdoms. This shows that nobody can escape death's grip, not even men of high class like kings and princes. Overall, this tablet was about death. Enkidu is about to die and it seems like somebdy is trying to tell him that through the dream.

Gilgamesh tablet 6

Gilgamesh and Enkidu have defeated Huwawa in the Cedar Forest, and they are feeling very victorious. The goddess Ishtar walked in on Gilgamesh while he was cleaning himself up, and she fell in love. I thought it was pretty straight-forward of her to tell Gilgamesh " give me the seed of your body, give me your semen; plant your seed in the body of Ishtar." As it turns out, Ishtar is quite the companion and something bad has happened to all of her past lovers. For example, she turned one of her lovers into a frog and left him alone in a tunnel forever. Gilgamesh, being the wise man that he is, thought that history might have a way of repeating itself and denied Ishtar. I thought it was ridiculous how mad she got after this. Ialso thought that Gilgamesh made the right choice by denying her; who want to end up a tortured animal?

Gilgamesh tablets 4 & 5

As tablets 4 and 5 start, Gilgamesh and Enkidu are already in the Cedar Forest on their search of Huwawa. As the days pass, Gilgamesh keeps having these dreams that have him waking up flustered. He tells Enkidu about them and Enkidu reassures Gilgamesh that they don't mean anything bad. For example, Gilgamesh dreamt that a mountain was going to fall on him. Enkidu interpreted it as the fall of Huwawa. He said that Gilgamesh was going to defeat him and the big monster was going to fall. At the end of the tablet, Gilgamesh defeats Huwawa and he and Enkidu decide to take Huwawa'a head back to the city. They also decide to build a gate from the tallest tree of the cedar forest.

Tablets 2 & 3 of Gilgamesh

This book is a little hard to understand at first, but I love how Gilgamesh and Ekidu got over their quarrel so fast. They literally kissed and made up. Almost like a slap in the back nowadays. Gilgamesh seem kind of arrogant when talking about going to the Cedar Forest. Because, even if he dies, al least his fame will be secure. Im a little confused about the companionship between Gilgamesh and Enkidu though. Are they just buddies, or something more? I know that back then the views of sexuality ran freely. Either way, I like how they sent two very big men to venture the Cedar Forest together. You have Gilgamesh, the Wild Ox who is twwo thirds god and one third man. Then you have Enkidu, the wild man that is twice as big and strong as Gilgamesh. It's a very good combination.

Homework :P

Questions:
1. According to this author where does the word blog come from?
2. Why might the writer object to a book about blogs? What is the difference between a blog and a book?
3. How have blogs changed recently?
4. Why might you read a blog rather than a book, or a magazine, or a newspaper?
5. Is there reason to doubt the objectivity of a blog? Why? Why not?
6. If you kept your own blog, what would you title it?
7. Find three blogs that mention our summer reading.

Answers:
1. Acordding to the author, the wrod blog is a shorter term for web log or weblog. It didn't officially become "blog" until Jorn Barger cut weblog into we blog.

2. A writer might object to a book about blogs because they are an obvious dichotomy. books are tight and slow, and they want you to stay between the covers. Blogs are reckless and fast, and they want you to stray.

3. Blogs and bloggers today are everywhere. they go from blogging, to links to different pages, to videos on youtube. Some bloggers don't even write much at all. They pick and choose things they find on line, and when they cant express themselves correctly, they throw in an OMG! (oh my god!) or an emoticon - :-), :-(, >:-(, ;-)

4. Most people would choose a blog over a book because theres so much to do while blogging. With a blog you can click on a link that will take you to a different page. Or if something in a blog interests you, you can look it up on youtube or on the internet.

5. There is reason to doubt the objectivity of a blog because a blog is the point of view of one person. They will not feel considerate of the topic, therefore they will just say what they feel, whether its good or bad.

6.If i had my own blog, it would probably be about something I like. The title would be related to what the blog is about

7. http://scienceguy288.wordpress.com/2010/01/17/science-soul-book-review-ishmael/
http://www.berkeleypubliclibrary.org/content/?p=324

Intro

Hi I'm Gabriel Geter and I'm in Mr. Tangen's pre-ap english class! :)