Hi guys! My name is Alexis, as I am sure most of you know, because a few of you actually call me Lexy. Anyway, I love reading, playing games on my xbox, reading, going out with friends, reading, sketching, and reading. I am a USA Network addict! I watch Burn Notice, White Collar, N.C.I.S., Necessary Roughness, and Law and Order: S.V.U. I am a member of Wren's NHS and Beta Club, as well as the Celtic Club. I have the best group of friends and family a geek like me could possibly ask for, and I do love them dearly.
Response to Gen. 1-3
February 26
Being the granddaughter of a preacher and whatnot has its perks. One of them in particular that I enjoy using is that my biblical upbringing now allows me to view passages like these from the bible in a much more analytical perspective. One thing that I realized as I was reading this is the repetitive use of the words “and God saw that it was good.” The continuous use of this phrase made me think back to our reading of A Single Eye, when the author claimed that because God created all things good, there was no evil. What I also realized is that until God called upon Adam and heard Adam’s story there was no mention of God seeing anything as evil. Even then, it does not say God saw the serpent as evil, but as a cursed being that he made crawl upon its belly for all of time. But at the same time, this is the first time in the bible where we see the Lord acknowledge something as being wrong, apart from the assumption that we make when he tells Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge. This causes me to think back to our reading yet again. This time to where the author claims that sin is only in the imagination, and it is a sin for us to judge that which should be good and that which should be evil. Overall I thought that this tied in very well with what we have read so far and I look forward to what we will do with this in class.
I did not know you were the granddaughter of a preacher. I know that has nothing to do with my response, but I thought that was interesting. You learn something new everyday. Anyways, I like how you compared the two readings. When I was reading both Genesis and The Single Eye, I did not think to compare the two together. I guess everything you said makes sense. I like how everyone has their own views and opinions on how to read what is written in the Bible. -Lacey
Response to "On the Marionette Theatre" by Heinrich von Kleist
March 7, 2013
First of all, I'd like to make it known that this piece of literature is not about how to make a puppet dance, or how a puppet is a better dancer than a human, it goes much deeper than that.
I must admit that the first thing that struck me when reading this was how incredibly insane the entire concept was, but after thinking for a moment I realized it actually made sense. After realizing this I thought to myself "why does it make so much sense?" As I continued to read, the answer soon became much clearer. It seems that what the dancer was trying to say was that from a more scientific standpoint, a marionette was in a sense, mechanical perfection. Humans will never be able to achieve that ease of grace that marionettes have because of their consciousness of themselves and their imperfections. Adam and Eve may have had this ease of grace before they ate the fruit of the forbidden tree, because up until that point they were not aware of themselves in the same way they would be later on. When the dancer tells the story of the young man in the bath, he says the young man was starting to show signs of vanity. When the young man lifted his foot he showed that grace that the dancer said was in the marionette, the grace that was a part of innocence. When the young man saw himself to be graceful though, it seemed as if at that precise moment was when he truly lost the innocence that gave him such wonderful abilities. When he actually tried to be so incredibly graceful and failed over and over again, he was failing to be true to his own humanity and continued to fall further and further into a darkness that brought no joy to him or those who would watch him. It was Innocence that brought the young man that grace and his vanity took it away in only an instant. After reading all this I still don't quite understand one thing, what does he mean about the misconception of the placement of the soul? I can only assume that he means the word soul as a place that draws the eye or attention and/or causes a stir of emotion, but we can not be sure of this.
Though we may have different opinions, I can accept the way that you looked at this and respect it. Everyone has their own opinions and no one is to say which is right or wrong. I do want to point out that our responses are totally opposite and this is quite comical. This is the exact reason why I do not "debate" in class discussion as much as some people do. People have such strong opinions and they all view things differently. Class turns into debate rather than English, which is fine, just different. I do like how you brought Adam and Eve into this. That was very clever and I never thought to compare the two. Good job Alexis. -Lacey
Response to Book 1 of Paradise Lost
March 13, 2013
I think that the way Milton has chosen to think of mans disobedience and their tasting of the fruit from the tree of knowledge as two separate things is pretty awesome. I read around at other peoples responses before I did this and I noticed that one person thought they may have sinned before they tasted of the fruit. I don't entirely agree with that statement. Disobeying God was their first concrete sin, but what happened before that was the knowledge of what they were going to do. This brings me back to the marionette theatre where the young man loses his innocence once he is conscious of himself. This is what happened to Adam and Eve in a way. It was their knowledge that they were going to disobey God that made them lose their innocence, but thoughts lead to temptation, they themselves are not a concrete sin, I guess you could say, but are an abstract sin instead. To think about doing something that disobeys God is a sin in itself but it is not entirely the same as committing the act. In the end however they will all be judged the same. Alexis, I do the exact same thing when it comes to reading other people's responses. It gives me a general idea of how other people view things compared to my own views. It also tells me if I even understand what is going on. Haha. I like how you related Book 1 back to the Marionette Theatre. I never would have thought to do this. When I sit back and think about it, I know that Mr. Alexander has a purpose for all of these stories and I sometimes forget to relate them all together. When I read your response, I had an "Aha" moment. The little light bulb in my head went off and I think I actually said "oh yeah I get that now!" If I didn't actually say it, then I know I definately thought it. I can see how all of the readings can be so different from each other but yet have some sort of relation. I really like how you pulled bits and pieces together to form your opinion. Good job Alexis and thank you for making me think harder than I already do! -Lacey
Response to Book 2 of Paradise Lost
March 21, 2013
First of all I thought that book two was a bit more interesting than the first book because it wasn't so much about background info and it made me feel like we were actually getting somewhere. One of my favorite things about this book was that we really get to see how the fallen angels think when they are discussing their next course of action. Moloc, one of the fiercest fighters in the war against heaven, was the one that wanted complete all out war on heaven a second time. What Moloc thought of as a good idea however, was not very agreeable to the others. Belial was thee first to speak up. When Belial speaks, he reminds me a bit of Beelzebub in a way. He is much more rational and recognizes the reality of the situation for what it is rather than foolishly believing in something that the majority of the Fallen know to be impossible. He urges the others not to fight another war. Mammon then speaks up and asks the council to strive for their own sense of "good" and "peace" by trying to be industrious and create their own "perfect" place. I don't quite understand why Mammon did this. The Fallen Council all knew that they had essentially done something wrong although they believed it to be right at the time, and that being said they are no longer perfect in the way that they once were. But to strive to mimic heaven, the place they purposely rebelled against is almost foolish! Not only would it nearly impossible for them to do so, but they would essentially be trying to create the on thing they disliked enough to leave heaven for, it doesn't make any sense... I agree with you. The second book was much more "eye catching" than the first one. I think that everyone, or most everyone, feels the same way because we are a little more knowledgable towards Milton's writing style. Talking about the fallen angels really blows my mind to think about. Quite frankly, all of what we have been doing blows my mind because it is not something that we physically "know" about. We all just have faith in what the Bible says and we believe that there is a Heaven and a Hell, God and Satan. Talking about fallen angels really makes my little wheels in my brain turn. I do want to point out that these angles/demons have such odd names. I did not even want to talk about them in my response because their names are so weird. I know that sounds really strange of me to do, but hey, kudos to you for taking the extra step and elaborating! I agree with what you said about trying to mimic Heaven when they rebelled against it out of spite. That does not make the slightest bit of sense to me AT ALL. It is quite impossible, and they are just waisting their time. Oh no, there we go again talking about time! I still can't wrap my head around that subject. This repsone to your response is just a bunch of rambling. Haha, sorry if this is hard to understand. I really like your point of view on this, yet again. You're really smart! -Lacey
end of milton
I am overall really surprised that Milton is over just like that, I really enjoyed all of this. Adam was a very interesting character, seeing the way he treated Eve in the beginning and how he slowly changed throughout their time together. And Eve, how she was originally so independent and wanted to be on her own but then slowly came to accept Adam. At first I was kind of angry at Adam for his treatment of Eve, I mean, he was lonely enough to ask for a companion from God, and then to treat the gift he was given in such a way with such high expectations was just wrong. Also for him to physically grab her is wrong on a whole other level. I was taught that true relationships can not exist without an equal level of respect, and I believe that, so when I see something like this I feel it is entirely wrong. On another note, seeing the way Lucifer thought throughout the entirety of this work was really fascinating because their were times when I really came to sympathize with him and the other Fallen. Overall I had fun, I hope Blake will be just as awesome a unit. AMEN! I totally agree with everything you said. What a great way to end Milton by agreeing fully with you Alexis! You are right, relationships should be an equl level of respect. I am whole heartedly passionate about that because I will not give someone any respect if they show me that they are not respectful to me or things that I am interested in. It is pure ignorance. Ha, a relationship can exist in this instance, but it would certainly be a disfunctional one... like ones you see on Judge Judy or something. Oh wow, my response to the end of Milton was about how we could turn it into a romantic movie and now I am saying that it could be turned into an episode of Judge Judy. Wow, how about we just turn this into a parody!!! -Lacey
Hi guys! My name is Alexis, as I am sure most of you know, because a few of you actually call me Lexy. Anyway, I love reading, playing games on my xbox, reading, going out with friends, reading, sketching, and reading. I am a USA Network addict! I watch Burn Notice, White Collar, N.C.I.S., Necessary Roughness, and Law and Order: S.V.U. I am a member of Wren's NHS and Beta Club, as well as the Celtic Club. I have the best group of friends and family a geek like me could possibly ask for, and I do love them dearly.
Response to Gen. 1-3
February 26
Being the granddaughter of a preacher and whatnot has its perks. One of them in particular that I enjoy using is that my biblical upbringing now allows me to view passages like these from the bible in a much more analytical perspective. One thing that I realized as I was reading this is the repetitive use of the words “and God saw that it was good.” The continuous use of this phrase made me think back to our reading of A Single Eye, when the author claimed that because God created all things good, there was no evil. What I also realized is that until God called upon Adam and heard Adam’s story there was no mention of God seeing anything as evil. Even then, it does not say God saw the serpent as evil, but as a cursed being that he made crawl upon its belly for all of time. But at the same time, this is the first time in the bible where we see the Lord acknowledge something as being wrong, apart from the assumption that we make when he tells Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge. This causes me to think back to our reading yet again. This time to where the author claims that sin is only in the imagination, and it is a sin for us to judge that which should be good and that which should be evil. Overall I thought that this tied in very well with what we have read so far and I look forward to what we will do with this in class.
I did not know you were the granddaughter of a preacher. I know that has nothing to do with my response, but I thought that was interesting. You learn something new everyday. Anyways, I like how you compared the two readings. When I was reading both Genesis and The Single Eye, I did not think to compare the two together. I guess everything you said makes sense. I like how everyone has their own views and opinions on how to read what is written in the Bible. -Lacey
Response to "On the Marionette Theatre" by Heinrich von Kleist
March 7, 2013
First of all, I'd like to make it known that this piece of literature is not about how to make a puppet dance, or how a puppet is a better dancer than a human, it goes much deeper than that.
I must admit that the first thing that struck me when reading this was how incredibly insane the entire concept was, but after thinking for a moment I realized it actually made sense. After realizing this I thought to myself "why does it make so much sense?" As I continued to read, the answer soon became much clearer. It seems that what the dancer was trying to say was that from a more scientific standpoint, a marionette was in a sense, mechanical perfection. Humans will never be able to achieve that ease of grace that marionettes have because of their consciousness of themselves and their imperfections. Adam and Eve may have had this ease of grace before they ate the fruit of the forbidden tree, because up until that point they were not aware of themselves in the same way they would be later on. When the dancer tells the story of the young man in the bath, he says the young man was starting to show signs of vanity. When the young man lifted his foot he showed that grace that the dancer said was in the marionette, the grace that was a part of innocence. When the young man saw himself to be graceful though, it seemed as if at that precise moment was when he truly lost the innocence that gave him such wonderful abilities. When he actually tried to be so incredibly graceful and failed over and over again, he was failing to be true to his own humanity and continued to fall further and further into a darkness that brought no joy to him or those who would watch him. It was Innocence that brought the young man that grace and his vanity took it away in only an instant. After reading all this I still don't quite understand one thing, what does he mean about the misconception of the placement of the soul? I can only assume that he means the word soul as a place that draws the eye or attention and/or causes a stir of emotion, but we can not be sure of this.
Though we may have different opinions, I can accept the way that you looked at this and respect it. Everyone has their own opinions and no one is to say which is right or wrong. I do want to point out that our responses are totally opposite and this is quite comical. This is the exact reason why I do not "debate" in class discussion as much as some people do. People have such strong opinions and they all view things differently. Class turns into debate rather than English, which is fine, just different. I do like how you brought Adam and Eve into this. That was very clever and I never thought to compare the two. Good job Alexis.
-Lacey
Response to Book 1 of Paradise Lost
March 13, 2013
I think that the way Milton has chosen to think of mans disobedience and their tasting of the fruit from the tree of knowledge as two separate things is pretty awesome. I read around at other peoples responses before I did this and I noticed that one person thought they may have sinned before they tasted of the fruit. I don't entirely agree with that statement. Disobeying God was their first concrete sin, but what happened before that was the knowledge of what they were going to do. This brings me back to the marionette theatre where the young man loses his innocence once he is conscious of himself. This is what happened to Adam and Eve in a way. It was their knowledge that they were going to disobey God that made them lose their innocence, but thoughts lead to temptation, they themselves are not a concrete sin, I guess you could say, but are an abstract sin instead. To think about doing something that disobeys God is a sin in itself but it is not entirely the same as committing the act. In the end however they will all be judged the same.
Alexis, I do the exact same thing when it comes to reading other people's responses. It gives me a general idea of how other people view things compared to my own views. It also tells me if I even understand what is going on. Haha. I like how you related Book 1 back to the Marionette Theatre. I never would have thought to do this. When I sit back and think about it, I know that Mr. Alexander has a purpose for all of these stories and I sometimes forget to relate them all together. When I read your response, I had an "Aha" moment. The little light bulb in my head went off and I think I actually said "oh yeah I get that now!" If I didn't actually say it, then I know I definately thought it. I can see how all of the readings can be so different from each other but yet have some sort of relation. I really like how you pulled bits and pieces together to form your opinion. Good job Alexis and thank you for making me think harder than I already do!
-Lacey
Response to Book 2 of Paradise Lost
March 21, 2013
First of all I thought that book two was a bit more interesting than the first book because it wasn't so much about background info and it made me feel like we were actually getting somewhere. One of my favorite things about this book was that we really get to see how the fallen angels think when they are discussing their next course of action. Moloc, one of the fiercest fighters in the war against heaven, was the one that wanted complete all out war on heaven a second time. What Moloc thought of as a good idea however, was not very agreeable to the others. Belial was thee first to speak up. When Belial speaks, he reminds me a bit of Beelzebub in a way. He is much more rational and recognizes the reality of the situation for what it is rather than foolishly believing in something that the majority of the Fallen know to be impossible. He urges the others not to fight another war. Mammon then speaks up and asks the council to strive for their own sense of "good" and "peace" by trying to be industrious and create their own "perfect" place. I don't quite understand why Mammon did this. The Fallen Council all knew that they had essentially done something wrong although they believed it to be right at the time, and that being said they are no longer perfect in the way that they once were. But to strive to mimic heaven, the place they purposely rebelled against is almost foolish! Not only would it nearly impossible for them to do so, but they would essentially be trying to create the on thing they disliked enough to leave heaven for, it doesn't make any sense...
I agree with you. The second book was much more "eye catching" than the first one. I think that everyone, or most everyone, feels the same way because we are a little more knowledgable towards Milton's writing style. Talking about the fallen angels really blows my mind to think about. Quite frankly, all of what we have been doing blows my mind because it is not something that we physically "know" about. We all just have faith in what the Bible says and we believe that there is a Heaven and a Hell, God and Satan. Talking about fallen angels really makes my little wheels in my brain turn. I do want to point out that these angles/demons have such odd names. I did not even want to talk about them in my response because their names are so weird. I know that sounds really strange of me to do, but hey, kudos to you for taking the extra step and elaborating! I agree with what you said about trying to mimic Heaven when they rebelled against it out of spite. That does not make the slightest bit of sense to me AT ALL. It is quite impossible, and they are just waisting their time. Oh no, there we go again talking about time! I still can't wrap my head around that subject. This repsone to your response is just a bunch of rambling. Haha, sorry if this is hard to understand. I really like your point of view on this, yet again. You're really smart!
-Lacey
end of milton
I am overall really surprised that Milton is over just like that, I really enjoyed all of this. Adam was a very interesting character, seeing the way he treated Eve in the beginning and how he slowly changed throughout their time together. And Eve, how she was originally so independent and wanted to be on her own but then slowly came to accept Adam. At first I was kind of angry at Adam for his treatment of Eve, I mean, he was lonely enough to ask for a companion from God, and then to treat the gift he was given in such a way with such high expectations was just wrong. Also for him to physically grab her is wrong on a whole other level. I was taught that true relationships can not exist without an equal level of respect, and I believe that, so when I see something like this I feel it is entirely wrong. On another note, seeing the way Lucifer thought throughout the entirety of this work was really fascinating because their were times when I really came to sympathize with him and the other Fallen. Overall I had fun, I hope Blake will be just as awesome a unit.
AMEN! I totally agree with everything you said. What a great way to end Milton by agreeing fully with you Alexis! You are right, relationships should be an equl level of respect. I am whole heartedly passionate about that because I will not give someone any respect if they show me that they are not respectful to me or things that I am interested in. It is pure ignorance. Ha, a relationship can exist in this instance, but it would certainly be a disfunctional one... like ones you see on Judge Judy or something. Oh wow, my response to the end of Milton was about how we could turn it into a romantic movie and now I am saying that it could be turned into an episode of Judge Judy. Wow, how about we just turn this into a parody!!!
-Lacey