Honors Final Project: Medieval Group

        Since I am in the medieval group I decided to do my research on two subjects that go hand in hand: medieval dance and music.  Both dancing and music were important in the daily lives of people in the medieval period. They were both used in times of celebration, holidays, and festivals. Their origins are also similar because they were both used for religious purposes but then evolved into secular purposes. Whether you were poor or rich during the medieval times, dancing and music was something you could enjoy and participate in, which is something very unique about both of these subjects.

        In the beginning dancing was not viewed very fairly by the church, but as the arts became more admired dancing became a part of masses. Medieval dances also became a way to relay imperial messages to people. For example the “Dance of Death” was to evoke emotions that reminded people that everyone will die and have to face their judgement one day. Dancing eventually moved on to also be a way of expressing joy, relieving one of the labors of daily life, displaying elegance and wealth, celebrating special occasions, encouraging bodily health, communicating with people, and creating a unified and unique culture.  Three common dances throughout the medieval period were the Carole, which involved multiple people in a circle formation; the Estampie, which involved couples facing the audience; and the Saltarello, which involved lively and leaping steps.

        Music was extremely important during the medieval period because not only did it maintain religious purposes as well as secular purposes, but also the basis of all music evolved from the music of the medieval period. Medieval music was introduced and influenced by multiple things including the Norman conquest of 1066, the Crusades, Arab poetry and love songs, changes in society and culture, the morals of courtly love and chivalry, the music and songs of French troubadours, Trouveres, and minstrels, and the patronage of medieval nobles and women.  Throughout the medieval period alone music evolved from a unison melody such as the chants used in masses to the addition of harmonies and eventually a form of musical notation developed to signify note length. There were various instruments that were used during this time including the recorder, a wooden flute, lute, lyre, timpani drums, tambourine, and bells. As music grew it gained respect from nobles and towns who would employ their own musicians. It is evident that throughout the medieval period, music and dancing both aided each other in their own success.

Honors Final Project Shakespeare Scenes

     I will be playing the part of Quince in Act III scene 1 of Midsummer Night's Dream. I looked into the history of his character in the context of the rest of the play, and it was interesting to learn that he was originally perhaps intended to be a parody of Shakespeare, or a Shakespeare wanna-be. All the players have other working backgrounds, making them simple working men (which explains much of their actions in the play). Quince was often thought of as a bookish character, who often struggles with Bottom for control, and who is very worried about the correct execution of the script he wrote. He can be played with a more authoritative air as well. It will be interesting to see how we will interpret this. 

     I also play the part of Verges, who will accompany Dogberry. I did not really know much about these characters, but with research I discovered that they are idiots. Though only in charge of the night watch, Dogberry has an enlarged sense of self and continuously botches everything he tries to do. Ultimately, they have some redemptive qualities, but in this scene they are basically just pompous dumb men. 

     I am one of the witches in Macbeth, and looking into this role I discovered that their origins are from ancient literature and folklore. Their roles are more like prophets, and originally they are referred to as the weird sisters. It will be interesting to experiment with the voices and attitudes of the witches in this scene. Over all, I am very excited to experiment with these very different parts. 

Oh, that's right. I have a blog due tonight.

Creation was not so vast a work as redemption; for it is written of man and
of all things that were made, ‘He spake the word, and they were made’ (Ps. 148.5). But to redeem that creation which sprang into being at His word, how much He spake, what wonders He wrought, what hardships He endured, what shames He suffered! Therefore what reward shall I give unto the Lord for all the benefits which He hath done unto me? In the first creation He gave me myself; but in His new creation He gave me Himself, and by that gift restored to me the self that I had lost.

That last sentence really go to me when I read this yesterday. In my analytical mindset,  I had always thought that the greater thing was creation. Possibly because I find it a much greater thing to build a car rather than to fix it. But upon reading this, I was really struck by the reasoning behind this. For God to create the universe, all he had to say was "Be" and it existed. However, in order to bring that creation back to Him, He had to sacrifice Himself so that we can live. Just something I noticed though.

~~Cody Martin~~

PS. I commented Here

Thread of Love

The theme of both “The Cloud of Unknowing” and “On Loving God” is to love selflessly. Chapter three in “The Cloud of Unknowing” tells the reader to lift up your heart to God in humble love. It follows to say love God for himself and not what you can get out of him. It says that we should think only of God and let nothing else enter our minds. As follows, chapter IX of “On Loving God” also talks about this absolutely selfless love that we should have for God. It says that we should be lost in him, completely absorbed in his love. “As a drop of water poured into wine loses itself, and takes the color and savor of wine: or as a bar of iron, heated red-hot. Becomes like fire itself, forgetting its own nature; or as the air radiant with sunbeams, seems not so much to be illuminated as to be light itself.” This is what we as Christians should strive be like in Christ.

I commented on Molly’s.

Losing my senses?

"Whenever you are prompted by grace and mean to follow up on your 'blind seeing, make sure that with firm, wise, and earnest sorrow you put away your physical senses (hearing, sight, smell, taste, and touch), your spiritual senses (by which you understand things), and all that is known through these two channels"

     I don't know about you guys, but this passage really bothers me! How can one put away their physical and spiritual senses and still be able to do anything? I understand that the author is stressing the reader to remove and put away anything not of God, but didn't God create the senses? He gave us both physical and spiritual senses to be able to know His presence. Wouldn't a person be a coma like state if they removed both of these things? Or is the author suggesting a state of prayer like this? If the author is, how can one really pray in this state. It seems impossible to me! When I pray I need my thoughts, just as I need my voice in a conversation.  

     Then it goes on to say, "Take care that none of those foolish people who live by their senses hear of these matters. 'Foolish' is my word for those who are attached to knowledge and who love things that can be known and have beginnings."  What those this mean exactly? I am foolish for trusting in my senses? Or is it that I rely to heavily upon them? Maybe I do.  But I have this is in way is really weird to me, how can one completely detach themselves from their senses and have a connection with God? Although, I'm not saying one cannot, Jesus never taught his disciples to sit all day, somewhere seculsive and pray by detaching themselves from their bodily senses and their spiritual senses. Did Jesus teach to pray in solitude? Most definitely! But not where it consumed all our time, our days.  If we as Christians were designed to seek God this way, we would not have the Great Commission. 

   I know this blog is late and its a rant, but this stuff was running wild in my mind! Maybe someone can help me make sense of this!

P.S. commented on Jamie's post

Unknown

As I sit here in my dorm room, I see things and "know" them.  They have recognizable shapes, measurable in three dimensions.  Their functions are predictable because of the design, and even if they were to malfunction, they would do so in ways that I or someone else could explain using human logic or reason based upon the way our world works.  Take my microwave, for example.  I can recognize it, based on its physical characteristics.  If I were to put a piece of metal inside it and turn it on, I would expect it to malfunction in a predictable way (Sparks and fire, it wouldn't turn into a vacuum cleaner).  Ultimately, the function of my microwave is not beyond my grasp.  If I decide that I want to know anything and everything about how a microwave works, I can learn.  I am limited only by time and personal dedication.

Then, there are other people.  They too are easily recognizable, in both form and function.  From a purely biological standpoint, I can learn how the human body functions because I have full access to it. Even if all the processes aren't fully understood, we have the ability to study them because we have full access to them.  The mind is a bit tricker, but still not incomprehensible.  Through psychology and sociology, we can understand how people tend to function.  Sure, no two people are the same, but they are still limited by this three-dimensional world, by life one moment at a time.  Even if we can't predict what choices will be made by each individual, we can understand human function, both socially and biologically.  Furthermore, even though we may not know another persons thoughts or predict their exact actions, we can connect with other people on an emotional level.

God can't be classified or analyzed in this way.  It is so hard to describe God apart from his creation because he is beyond the realm of our understanding.  We can't fully comprehend things outside of the limitations of our world.  We understand physical things in three dimensions, and we understand time as a constant continuation of moments.  We understand good and bad based on how we feel, and justice based on what we know.  To think that we, as limited and minuscule as we are, could even begin to really understand the almighty power, the intelligence, the magnitude of God, is laughable.  He has shown Himself to us in ways that we can understand, though His Creation and His Word.  He has allowed us to have relationships with Him.  And we should grow closer to God in every way possible.  God should be our only desire.  But humanity will get in the way.  We do have to eat, we have to breath, etc.  We are limited.  To say that we could even come close to understanding or praising God just for who he is outside of what he has done for us really doesn't make sense to me.  Because outside of His creation and the things we have experienced personally, we simply cannot as humans begin to comprehend who God is.


Commented on Meghan's "knowing the Creator"

Where is He.

Let me level with you here; this weeks reading has certainly been the toughest for me to follow along with. I respect the Mystics in the sense that they have given away their lives to constant study and veneration of God. However, it is hard to follow their ideals because I see no experience in the field. One truth is that the Mystics commission believers to love the creation of God, whether tree or human. On the other hand, it seems that their lifestyle is empty of this action, other than those closest to them. There are other things that bothered me, so I will harp on them for a small portion. 

We briefly reviewed page 61 of our reading today, and I struggled to find the point within the portion of the text. The author starts out by stating that if one removes the selfish conditions of the heart, particularly those that are relevant to God, then it is he who will find God and pure experience. I do not believe in this, considering there are numerous passages of Scripture where God intentionally wishes man to hold on to the gifts that He bestows. Paul states in Romans that "For the gifts and calling of God is irrevocable"  and I believe even the selfish relations with God are important. God grants us Spiritual Gifts which vary in dozens of ways, and if one were to remove them and their purpose in their experience, I think that would be detrimental to the concept of God's grace. God meant for us to know Him by provider, and I though i'm no expert, I believe the Mystic's missed the mark in that sense. 

P.S. I commented on Tinsley Griffin's "Tomorrow is fresh, with no mistakes in it."