(((home)))

I’ve been spending a lot of time thinking about one word. Assuming you’ve read the title, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the word I’ve been thinking about is “home”. As I’ve been thinking about this, I’ve noticed a few connections to what I’ve read for the honors program this semester. It’s kind of a rare and strange feeling when what I learn in a class and what I learn in life line up. Anyway, my college experience and a few of Leslie Marmon Silko’s writings have led me to what I believe to be a basic truth for all humans. This truth is that everyone needs a home. We all need to belong.

The previous statements are purposefully vague because I think that people can belong to many different things. They can belong to a place, a person, or a set of ideas/beliefs. Silko’s novel Ceremony and her memoir The Turquoise Ledge both seem to touch on this idea of belonging. In what I’ve read so far, it seems to me that Silko has found her sense of belonging in the land around her and in her culture.

While thinking about home and belonging, I came across a song called “Home” by a little-known band called SPOOK HOUSES*. I immediately thought of Silko when I heard the lines, “A home is a home and I know where I am, I found all the dirt and I loved all the land; I burrowed deep and I burrowed hard, I know that a home is a good place to start”. These lines seem to parallel the Native American view of nature and land. The singer knows the land that he calls home and even claims to love it. So much of The Turquoise Ledge is dedicated to memories of Silko walking or riding through the arroyo or desert right by her house. Her personal passion for the land can be seen in her own beautiful descriptions of the desert. For example, she writes, “Night. Heavenly delicious sweet night of the desert that calls all of us out to love her” (The Turquoise Ledge, 88). Through the eyes of Native Americans, there should be a mutualistic relationship between people and the land that they call home. Throughout Tayo’s journey for reconciliation in Ceremony, he comes to respect and appreciate the beauty of nature. Tayo found his home in the land of his people, but he really found belonging in their culture.

The catalyst for Tayo’s healing is the medicine man named Betonie. He guides Tayo through the modern ceremony that connects him to the culture and traditions of his ancestors. Silko’s belonging to her culture can be seen in her connection to her ancestors. She dedicates a large portion of her memoir (76 pages) to talking about her ancestors. Their beliefs and traditions are carried on through Silko’s actions, writings, and life.

I think that turquoise stones can represent Silko’s belonging to her home and culture. Turquoise played many important roles in Native American society. The most important purpose was to combat witchcraft. Silko finds many turquoise stones around her house and claims that it is right above what she calls “The Turquoise Ledge”. This “Turquoise Ledge” seems to symbolize the connection that her home has to the land and ancestors.

When I consider where my home is, I think that my home is my family. Some of Silko’s other writing has motivated me to keep in touch with my family and grandparents. It has been incredibly rewarding to begin to purposefully learn their stories and learn from their wisdom. In closing, I’d encourage others to seek out where they belong in this world. To seek the answer to this question:

Where is home?

* Some people think that quoting lyrics isn't appropriate, but to me, songwriters are just authors with rhythm

(I've spent way too long trying to think of a title other than "Reflection 1" so this is what you get)

    This semester has been challenging, but I’m sure that anyone involved in this course isn’t surprised by this statement. One of the products of a student attending college is the testing and determination of their opinions and beliefs. This reflection is the first of three that allow me to take a few steps back and consider my current thoughts on class discussions and group readings. With a busy semester, this is really the first time that I have done so for this class.

    I was very excited when I found out that the group I was placed into would be studying Leslie Marmon Silko. She is a current Native American writer who focuses on parts of Native American culture such as storytelling, man’s relationship to the Earth, and their relationships to each other. Initially, I was attracted to Silko because she was described as “The Storyteller” by one of the professors. Storytelling fascinates me because I’m awful at it. I was also excited to find out that Silko is part Native American because, according to my dad, my great-great-grandfather was a Cherokee Indian who was adopted by my European ancestors. I think it’s important and helpful for a reader to find a connection to the author that they are reading.

    So far, my group has read two of Silko’s works: Ceremony and Yellow Woman and a Beauty of the Spirit: Essays on Native American Life Today. Ceremony has presented me with an obvious issue between the Native American and White American cultures. This is the issue of land ownership. The thought of European explorers and immigrants forcing the Native Americans out of their homes really bothers me because of the injustice in that situation. I have never been in a situation like that, but I imagine it would be like an unknown and malevolent alien race with superior technology telling humans that we must leave Earth and live somewhere else. This may sound ridiculous, but to Native Americans, the idea of people owning land sounded ridiculous. These days, the United States Government have Indian Reservations set up, but it’s not hard to see that the Native Americans still drew the short straw in this arrangement, and it still doesn’t remedy the cultural differences on property ownership. When Silko’s characters talk about America, they often refer to it as “stolen land”.

    The reason that this issue upsets me so much is that I see no easy solution to it. It’s obvious that the land can’t be given back for multiple reasons. These include finding new homes for the +300 million Americans who currently live here, damage done to the environment by the industrialization and modernization of this country, and infrastructure such as roads, buildings, and tunnels that can’t be removed. So, what are we to do? I’m not sure what an American is to do, but last week’s chapel sessions give me an idea of what a Christian can do.

    To briefly summarize, last week’s chapel sessions were about the responsibility of Christians to take care of the environment and God’s creations. While listening to the speaker and the panel discussion, I kept noticing similarities in the Christian and Native American attitudes toward nature, even if they have different motives. Both share a respect for nature and feel a responsibility to take care of it. So, in a short statement, I think that the best way to remedy this injustice is to try to share and take care of the land alongside the Native Americans.

Honors "Final"

this blog post doesn't deserve a title

            If I am being completely honest, I don’t see the point of the reading for this week.  To me, it just seemed like the reflections of a man in a cell, trying to provide some sort of comfort to himself.  Boethius even acknowledges this himself (even though he probably doesn’t mean to) when he refers to the personification of philosophy as “the perfect comforter” and a source of “strength”.  What Boethius desires from Philosophy is not knowledge or wisdom, but he asks for her to “show me quickly what true happiness is” (Boethius 37).  This demand that he makes does not sound like a demand that would be made in a Christian text.  While the majority of this writing focuses on the natural logic and reason of man, it is still considered to be a Christian text, but should it?

            Throughout Boethius’ conversation with Philosophy, she uses natural logic and reasoning to help Boethius come to the conclusions that he comes to.  In the writing, there were obvious influences of philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle.  It seemed to reference philosophy and reasoning more than it did Christianity.  In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle writes that “we conceive happiness to be the most desirable of all things” (Aristotle, 14).  Then in The Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius writes “To true happiness, to the goal your mind has dreamed of” (Boethius 37).  And I haven’t yet mentioned the writing style of Boethius’ prose.  The dialogue of The Consolation of Philosophy closely resembles that of Plato’s The Republic in that one character (Philosophy and Socrates) propose thoughts and ideas from logic, then their listeners agree or occasionally ask a question for clarification (side note: this structure really bothers me as the author is just attempting to validate their own arguments).  I don’t think that this should be considered a Christian text if it has more in common with philosophy than Christianity.

            Some would argue that it is a Christian text because it was written by a Christian and is a reflection on God.  Boethius claims that “we must agree that the most high God is full of the highest and most perfect good” (Boethius 55).  While reading this through a Christian lens, one may find nothing wrong with this statement.  However, I think that followers of other monotheistic religions would also find nothing wrong with it while reading it through their lens.  For example, the Quran claims that “God is most compassionate towards you, a dispenser of grace” (Surah 57).  Both of these quotes speak of God’s goodness and grace, but the difference is that one is just the reflections of a man, while the other is actually from a religious text.  The later is about the Islamic God but the former is just a statement on whatever divine being exist outside of our world.  The only piece of information that we have that would lead us to believe that Boethius is referring to the Christian God is the fact that he was a Christian.  There is no actual evidence in the text itself.

            *mic drop*

            Okay fine.  I’ll actually write some sort of conclusion.  I don’t think that any text should be considered a Christian text except for the Bible.  As Basil had pointed out, there is a place for pagan literature and we can still learn from it, but this text is not to be considered a religious text like the Bible is.

Doofus

            Ever since Ian Cron spoke on addiction in chapel on November 9^th, I’ve been thinking about addiction (you can watch it at http://tinyurl.com/gp34npr ).  We as humans typically confine addiction to very specific cases such as addiction to substances, gambling, sex, and many other things.  Mr. Cron pointed out that we are all addicted to several things whether we know it or not.  St. Augustine writes about his personal experiences with this in his work Confessions.  The goal of the honors class is to consider what it means to be human.  Based off of the reading for this week, I would venture to say that being human means to be addicted to sin.

            I’ll be the first to admit that the statement that I made above makes me uncomfortable, but I think that it a good thing.  I would hope that this doesn’t sit well with anybody.  St. Augustine wrote on his experience with this idea.  To briefly summarize for those who are unfamiliar with the text, Augustine recalls stealing pears from his neighbor, when he himself already had better pears.  He did not steal “so as to enjoy the fruits of my crime, but rather to enjoy the theft itself, and the sin.” (Augustine 36).  There is a French phrase, L’appel du vide, that references this idea.  The phrase translates to “the call of the void” and refers to self-destructive impulses that one experiences in their everyday life.  These both point to the natural human tendency to sin and act destructively.  The Bible also supports this in its claim that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23 ESV).  But a tendency to sin is not the same as an addiction to sin.

            In chapel this semester, the overall theme has been considering what we are “hungry” for.  We all have a longing for something that this world cannot satisfy.  Seeking to satisfy his hunger, St. Augustine writes “Such were the empty shadows on which I then fed, and was not fed.” (Augustine 52).  He sought relief from this hunger in sin to the point that he felt sick of “the foods that do not perish… because the more empty I was, the more nauseating I found them” (Augustine 45).  He lost the desire to obey and follow God, which in turn, led him to seek satisfaction in sin.  This is how we all develop an addiction to sin. 

Throughout writing this blog post, I thought of the song “I Have a Problem” by Beartooth.  I would not recommend the song, but I feel like it relates to the topic.  The lyrics say “God I wanna call you my father / I'm sick of drinking my life away / I can't remember anything / This isn't fun anymore”.  This part of the song relates to many ideas that were brought up, such as seeking satisfaction in God and sin and being addicted to destructiveness and sin.  It may have been St. Augustine’s rhetorical skills, but his writing helped me to realize addiction to sin as a part of human life.  I’m not saying that it is a good thing, or that we will ever be able to totally overcome it, but we need to try.

Title note:  When I sin, I often imagine God looking at me and asking “Why would you do a stupid thing like that doofus?”

Punk Monk

            The Rule of St. Benedict was an interesting reading and I found myself disagreeing with a lot of it.  I understand that it was not written for a college student to read.  It was written to serve as a set of rules for monks (I think.  We didn’t receive any background information on this text and I was too busy to spend my own time sifting through the internet to find some rare nugget of information that would help me understand this better).  After reading, I concluded that I would make a bad monk.  Nevertheless, the two major issues that I had were the authority of the Abbot and lack of individuality among the monks.

            The Abbot is basically the leader and overseer of a monastery.  He is responsible for “the welfare of the souls entrusted to him” (Benedict, 6).  This shows the amount of responsibility and authority that comes with being the Abbot.  Where I start to disagree with St. Benedict is when he writes on humility and obedience.  He wrote that “As soon as anything hath been commanded by the Superior they permit no delay in the execution, as if the matter had been commanded by God Himself” (Benedict, 10).  This seems dangerous to me.  In Romans, it says that “None is righteous, no, not one” (Romans 3: 10b (ESV).  Man is naturally sinful.  To blindly obey a man in authority as if what he commanded was from God seems like a bad idea.  St. Benedict later explains that the Abbot is elected based on the “merit of his life and the wisdom of his doctrine” (Benedict, 72) but no man is perfect (except for Jesus, but he is not the Abbot).  The amount of trust placed in the Abbot alone scares me a bit if I’m being honest.

            The second part of the reading that left me feeling uneasy was the lack of individuality among the monks.  St. Benedict writes against the monks doing what they have not been told to do, speaking without being spoken to, being quick to laughter, and many other things.  There are even rules about what they can wear.  I think that these rules strip the monks of their individuality.  This doesn’t sit well with me.  God has made every person different.  There has never been anyone like me or you and there never will be.  It reminds me of the show Veggie Tales when it would say, “God made you special, and He loves you very much”.  We were never intended to be robotic God-worshiping machines.  We are unique for a reason.

            Overall, I disagreed with a lot of The Rule of St. Benedict, but I think that’s okay.  Unlike the monks, I don’t think I should listen to and obey a man as if he were God.  To me, it seems like a lot of the honors students are afraid to disagree with the readings that we go through.  This makes me think of a quote by George S. Patton.  He said, “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking”.  This quote encouraged me to write about what I thought of the text, even if most other people disagree.

Heated Blankets Save Lives

I was excited yet nervous to read selections from the Quran this week.  I had heard that it was like the Bible in some ways, but I had also heard that it was radically different.  I was interested to find out for myself what was in it and how it compared to Christianity and the Bible.  While there were some similarities, there were differences in how man is to relate to nonbelievers and how man relates to God.

The intolerance of nonbelievers in the Quran was almost shocking to me as a Christian.  It is rather straight forward with its stance on this issue when it says “Thou canst not… love anyone who contends against God and His Apostle” (Surah 58, Page94).  Again, at the end of Surah 60, it says “Be not friends with people whom God has condemned!” (Surah 60, Page 979).  This is drastically different from the Christian perspective on this issue.  During the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says to “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5: 44 ESV).  This is a difference that cannot be overlooked by either side.

In both religions, man is called to love God.  However, the Bible and Quran can help provide insight to the motivation behind this love.  The Quran mentions the men and women who “offer up unto God a goodly loan” and expect to “be amply repaid, and shall have a noble reward” (Surah 57, Page 954).  To me, this sounds as if man is motivated to serve God out of selfish desires, to be rewarded for their love.  Can this actually be considered love?  I would say no as I have never seen anyone truly love another for the sake of gaining something.  The converse of this can be seen in the Christian’s motivation for loving God.  The Bible says that “We love because he first loved us.” (1 John 4: 19 ESV).  Christians don’t love God for a reward.  Christians love God because of who He is and what He has done.  I was recently reminded of what God has done for me when I visited The Shrine of Christ’s Passion with a friend this past weekend.  The Shrine of Christ’s Passion has many life-sized bronze statues that depict Jesus’ journey from the last supper, to his death on the cross, to his resurrection.  The life-sized statues really helped to remind me of what God has done for me and the rest of humanity, even before we loved him.  Therefore, the Christian loves God.

The interaction between man and man and man and God is critical to both religions discussed in this blog post.  These relationships impact the way that others perceive and interact with these religions and their religious texts.  For both religions, it is important to know who to love and why one should love.

           

Title note:   I found comfort in my ignorance on the topic of the Quran.  Much like one finds comfort in a heated blanket.  However, it is sometimes necessary to leave our comfort zones as we cannot grow or accomplish anything in comfort.