tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.comments2024-02-14T01:20:39.377-06:00Lit HumLit Humhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15874450288224688235noreply@blogger.comBlogger241125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-23643144658454494512023-12-12T18:27:20.035-06:002023-12-12T18:27:20.035-06:00wow its so amazing!!wow its so amazing!!Tomo Sushinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-18495561107695657072023-01-18T10:58:01.619-06:002023-01-18T10:58:01.619-06:00It seems to me that the haiku is the epitome of sp...It seems to me that the haiku is the epitome of speed in poetry. Failed haikus fail because they're too fast--trying to pack concepts too big into 3 lines.Bad Horsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10735227563256689679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-61722209922370882922022-09-16T05:59:35.412-05:002022-09-16T05:59:35.412-05:00Fairly interesting explanation indeed! Thank You!Fairly interesting explanation indeed! Thank You!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-46796057664969088632022-03-02T14:07:20.467-06:002022-03-02T14:07:20.467-06:00prayers Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon you...<a href="https://africanparadiseworld.com/" rel="nofollow">prayers</a> Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I'll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon. Big thanks for the useful info.Asad shahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00672214701147921130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-72675935544479666472021-11-17T03:55:52.977-06:002021-11-17T03:55:52.977-06:00Nice one.Nice one.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06589941651921170175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-60991129393927089242021-10-03T11:58:16.205-05:002021-10-03T11:58:16.205-05:00Thank you for engaging with this post. Lots to thi...Thank you for engaging with this post. Lots to think about...Lit Humhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15874450288224688235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-81794537127211398572021-10-03T08:08:27.753-05:002021-10-03T08:08:27.753-05:00[2/2, long post :P ]
Fourth, it seems strange to...[2/2, long post :P ]<br /><br /><br />Fourth, it seems strange to suggest that the written word induces the adoption of a new societal mindset that is "primarily responsible for fostering patriarchy" in newly literate societies. In what sense is this influence “primary” (that is, the influence of the mindset created by the written word over the construction of societies the author considers patriarchal)? Is the author suggesting that pre-literate societies were not patriarchal, but that the influence of this mindset made them so? that the mere mindset of such a literate society makes it patriarchal? that societal changes that coincided with the adoption of this mindset may have produced either an egalitarian or patriarchal society but that the influence of this mindset caused society to lean to the latter? Perhaps the answer is hidden in the ellipsis, but all these interpretations seem problematic to me: The first seems contradicted by what we know about prehistoric societies, or at the very least undermines the authors point; if prehistoric societies are admitted to be patriarchal, they must have a patriarchal mindset independent of writing, which certainly discounts the primacy of the writing-induced mindset. The second makes the statement somewhat meaningless (literate societies’ mindsets induce patriarchy because the mindset a society obtains from literacy is patriarchal?). The third seems to discount the interrelatedness of the societal advancements that coincided with writing. Land must be managed by bureaucracy, which needs record keeping and therefore writing; large trade routes require currency and debt, which relies on record keeping; the examples are legion here: the elevation of writing is not a single act—it is also the elevation of centralization, business, and other things I don’t doubt this author would class as patriarchy. But it is not clear that the latter results from the former; if anything, it seems easier to argue that the elevation of writing is a result of a system of “patriarchy,” the opposite of the author’s point. <br /><br />On the other hand, perhaps the author is not interested in studying the development of writing in societies. The last paragraph seems to offer some of this: “Whenever a culture elevates the written word at the expense of the image, patriarchy dominates. When the importance of the image supersedes the written word, feminine values and egalitarianism flourish.” I think this kind of dichotomy has become relatively accepted in recent years: masculine values imply inequality, feminine values imply equality. But personally I don’t think this is true. Women may call the drive towards material and social success in societies where men dictate cultural currents “oppressive” or “patriarchal.” They may not be incorrect; this drive is certainly part of the male psyche in a way it isn’t in the female psyche. But it is just as certain that men would call the lack of such a drive in a society where women dictate culture currents “oppressive” or “matriarchal.” If we are to admit that the two genders have different values, as this author does, it seems ridiculous and somewhat offensive to presume that one gender has values that when implemented lead to the suffering of a part of humanity and that the other has values that would not do so. Short of extraordinary evidence to support the author’s claim, this argument is the same as the argument once made by reactionaries: that women don’t know what’s good for them and that it’s better they be placed under the control of men. In an industrialized society, where societal roles are not determined by body composition, it seems to me ridiculous to suggest anything other than compromise between the genders.George K.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17038917592847608626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-8173124190415965562021-10-03T08:07:42.827-05:002021-10-03T08:07:42.827-05:00I understand that you, the owner of this blog, are...I understand that you, the owner of this blog, are just reposting an interesting excerpt from a book written by someone else, and that perhaps your hopes for your posts that they will, as you say in your about page, provoke and inspire. I hope you'll take my disagreement with the argument given in this excerpt as an example of someone engaging with your post, not as someone missing the point of the blog entirely. Please forgive the messy nature of this reply; it’s just a series of arguments against the excerpt’s claims, without much in the way of organization.<br /><br />In the first place, I question the author’s preoccupation with alphabets. Are alphabets in some way more masculine and patriarchal than syllabaries or logographic? Were/are the culture of the Far East significantly less patriarchal than those in the West simply because their writing is logosyllabic? The author might argue that since these writing systems are centered around images, they are more feminine, but on the contrary, if abstraction is taken to be masculine, the few lines that often are made to represent much more complex physical objects in logographies (look for instance at the development of early Chinese character) are much more abstract than early alphabets, where each symbol is nothing more than a sound one makes with one’s mouth.<br /><br />Second and most importantly, there are serious problems with the claim expressed here: “Conceiving of a deity who has no concrete image prepares the way for the kind of abstract thinking that inevitably leads to law codes, dualistic philosophy, and objective science, the signature triad of Western culture.” Does the author forget that the first culture who had all of these, indeed the culture which we commonly credit with their invention and codification, and which we sometimes consider the best example of all three, the Ancient Greeks, had deities with concrete images? That the Romans did as well? That the Egyptians in their religion, which had visible and concrete images of their gods, maintained an implicit material dualism? And that the Mesopotamians did as well? (Consult Encyclopedia Britannica: “Historical varieties of religious dualism”). This claim seems remarkably ill-founded: the development of all of these concepts (which the author links with the conception of an abstract deity) was done almost entirely by societies that did not have such a conception. <br /><br />Thirdly, it seems to me that the author is failing to engage with the long philosophical tradition examining the relationship between speech and writing. Derrida interacts extensively with Rousseau’s argument about the primacy of the spoken word in his Grammatology, but the author doesn't write like he’s familiar with this at all. Perhaps this is covered in a separate section, but in this case the author’s insistence on the complimentary-oppositeness of speech and writing seems to me very vulnerable to a postmodern critique. And this is especially surprising to me since Feminist thought seems to have so much embraced deconstructionist methods over the past few years.<br /><br />[1/2, this post is quite long :P]George K.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17038917592847608626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-75235385476044758772021-01-24T19:45:07.680-06:002021-01-24T19:45:07.680-06:00I heard this on a Zoom church service. I could har...I heard this on a Zoom church service. I could hardly read this to my husband without LOL!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00182087145058020595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-30019021694343533272020-10-20T20:38:23.305-05:002020-10-20T20:38:23.305-05:00I love the quote. I take drift, though, somewhat l...I love the quote. I take drift, though, somewhat less in the J.J.Rousseauian sense, "couché dans mon bateau que je laissais dériver au gré de l'eau`...(cinquième promenade), than the way we say `Do you get my drift?" Whitman, in "Shut not your Doors" seems to me to be alluding to the very act, the very transcendence, of indication. Do not mistake the finger for the moon. The words are a fallout in the wake of the movement of Whitman's thought. "Tokens" as he curiously calls them sometimes.Not "intellectually" linked to the other volumes in the proud library, yet apt to thrill "ye untold latencies." True, this poem/moment drifts away (in 1865, the year the Civil War ended) from what preceded it, but its "drift" is strong, new, and nothing vague.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10591856419152597006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-48601263551999414772020-01-05T19:19:08.370-06:002020-01-05T19:19:08.370-06:00I believe you're right. That's my vague re...I believe you're right. That's my vague recollection as well.Lit Humhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15874450288224688235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-43252173506743399472020-01-03T20:55:23.303-06:002020-01-03T20:55:23.303-06:00I believe this was a question concerning the young...I believe this was a question concerning the young man's service in the war, was it not? He died in the war, if I remember correctly. Willard Russell Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03779770002708375801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-29066973435096690572019-01-07T19:30:45.270-06:002019-01-07T19:30:45.270-06:00Made the change, thank you!Made the change, thank you!Lit Humhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15874450288224688235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-45506052435209555532019-01-06T04:47:33.165-06:002019-01-06T04:47:33.165-06:00"apple-lanterns"???"apple-lanterns"???Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11591276845210656746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-2290793203941844662018-05-11T12:48:28.175-05:002018-05-11T12:48:28.175-05:00Reminds me of Don Juan in Hell: "They are not...Reminds me of Don Juan in Hell: "They are not moral: they are only conventional. They are not virtuous: they are only cowardly. They are not even vicious: they are only frail."Nhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07015564170553771113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-14889164555640111542018-05-03T02:27:12.823-05:002018-05-03T02:27:12.823-05:00I would like to revere a part of the day with the ...I would like to revere a part of the day with the certainty that the sun will rise. sthealthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10395128768244797550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-16824819584845375552018-03-28T07:00:19.008-05:002018-03-28T07:00:19.008-05:00The Great Work of Your Life by Stephen CopeThe Great Work of Your Life by Stephen CopeLit Humhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15874450288224688235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-31617854467863088752018-03-27T20:30:12.056-05:002018-03-27T20:30:12.056-05:00What is your source? I'd love to know. Thanks!...What is your source? I'd love to know. Thanks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-18104064327783889322017-12-06T12:12:21.879-06:002017-12-06T12:12:21.879-06:00Wow,great post.Wow,great post.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16387790147166580804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-87007023083088943072017-05-18T08:39:43.810-05:002017-05-18T08:39:43.810-05:00Excellent and very exciting site. Love to watch. K...Excellent and very exciting site. Love to watch. Keep Rocking.<br /><a href="http://elkfarm.org" title="humor" rel="nofollow">humor</a><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00248296275628982891noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-54936560593176714302017-04-07T08:54:03.943-05:002017-04-07T08:54:03.943-05:00wonderful!!!wonderful!!!laural - laura anabel lópezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07349714287501757428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-23419867110650349822017-04-06T13:40:02.211-05:002017-04-06T13:40:02.211-05:00My pleasure, thanks for writing it! Warmly, KellyMy pleasure, thanks for writing it! Warmly, KellyLit Humhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15874450288224688235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-16962165969739667832017-04-06T13:24:19.325-05:002017-04-06T13:24:19.325-05:00thanks for posting my poem! warmly, rustythanks for posting my poem! warmly, rustyAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02292111899526106607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-66832706636289114582017-01-06T05:44:25.816-06:002017-01-06T05:44:25.816-06:00Good piece.Good piece.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8850528079740158873.post-72149779898501498672016-11-21T08:00:34.789-06:002016-11-21T08:00:34.789-06:00Great to hear that you find it useful and pleasura...Great to hear that you find it useful and pleasurable. Thanks!Lit Humhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15874450288224688235noreply@blogger.com