Most of our discussions this semester will aim to cover three kinds of knowledge at once:
First, the actual content of the works we encounter, which are organized according to major themes in the history of Western ideas about indigenous peoples - for example, the contrast of nature and the wild, or of moral and restricted behavior vs. ungoverned, immoral or amoral lawlessness. This should allow us to analyze and interpret material according to critical themes in culture.
Second, the historical context, such as the background of the classical Greek world that is the setting of the origins of tragedy, or the ancient Hebrew world that gave rise to the Hebrew Bible. This helps us understand the historical and cultural institutions of the productions of culture--for example, the relation of the modern European-American form of slavery to Aphra Behn's novel Oroonoko.
Third, the critical and interpretive methods we use to understand texts, artworks, customs, etc.--whether they survive from cultures of the past, exist in other parts of the world, or are characteristic of the very society in which we live. In other words, we use the same methods to study Greek mythology and the Harry Potter books--the differences depend largely on our relative knowledge of the language, cultural allusions, and belief systems we need to know to understand each example. This reminds us to consider the differences between myths and law codes, philosophy and literature, plays and novels, and so on, as we form hypotheses about interpretation. It also encourages to take seriously how we form interpretations that are both illuminating and well-grounded in logic and fair-mindedness.
This week we'll discuss three works that may be called folklore or perhaps myth. Although they appear in literary forms, each represents a story that has been told in many, many other versions. A large part of the interest in myth and folklore is in exploring why a story is so widely told. How did it achieve the cultural authority it has? Why did this story survive the centuries?
Our study involves the three dimensions stated above:
1. What do these Wild Man stories tell us about some of the themes in popular Western depictions of "savage" peoples? What are the most important actions and characteristics attributed to savages?
2. What do we know about the Greek culture that gave rise to Homer, the Sumerian civilization that fostered the heroic myth of Gilgamesh, and the cultural world of fairy tales?
3. What do we need to know about myth and folklore as a mode of narration to understand stories like these? What does the consideration of narrative tell us about how cultures communicate ideas, and even settle issues of power and authority?
Please think about these aims a little before you offer your own informal comment about the reading for the week. Focus on one story or a common element in all three--and I remind you, interesting as personal associations are, please stick (mostly) to critical thinking about our examples; that is, ideas that come from your analysis (noticing interesting or curious elements of the tales) and your attempts to find meaning in them.
You can post a comment below or create your own post. Please do one or the other by Monday, Sept 28 at 9 am so we can all read them before class.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI was struck by the similarities between the Epic of Gilgamesh and the creation story of the Hebrew Bible. Enkidu in the Gilgamesh story is similar to Adam. Both live in nature and were in harmony with the animals. The harlot came to have sex with Enkidu and he became civilized. Adam had sex with Eve and became the founder of all civilizations after he was thrown out of the Garden of Eden.
ReplyDeleteAt a deeper level the stories have a similar lesson. Gilgamesh was himself a wild man and cruel to his people. Enkidu thought him to obey rules and he became a good king. Adam disobey the rules of God (he ate the apple) and as a result became the father of all mankind.
The Jewish, Christian, and Muslim faiths all have an idea of the perfection of man in nature through the shared story of Adam and Eve. These ideas influenced the French philosopher Rousseau and the French and American Revolution. Rousseau wrote about the perfection of man in nature before man was corrupted by civilization. He was criticizing the society of his day, the French monarchy. These same ideas were used to oppose slavery. The French Kings for Rousseau were cruel like Gilgamesh; Rousseau was a reformer.
As Nate said in his comment, the stories of Gilgamesh, the Cyclops, and Jack and the Beanstalk are part of the culture that justified slavery. The justification of slavery and the opposition to slavery are rooted in the same myths and similar, however.
The civil rights movement around the world works to lift up groups outside of the dominant society (including Indigenous people). Social reform works to improve society by changing laws, in the way the society of Gilgamesh was improved by following laws. Adam and Eve were also taught to obey laws through their misfortune.
Homer’s Odyssey, the Sumerian The Epic of Gilgamesh and the classic fairy tale “Jack and the Beanstalk” can be looked at as field guides of how to deal with the ‘Wild Man’. Although all from different cultures and time frames they all centralize around the idea of how to deal with the savage and produce various justifications for the actions they take. We can also see a direct relation between western ideology of the savage and the savages portrayal within these texts. But what is this common portrayal? It is the general lacking of civilized and/or moral qualities that goes against the grain of societal norms. The Cyclops mocking of Odysseus gods, Enkidu’s feral lifestyle and ignorance to the laws of Gilgamesh or the Giant’s aristocratic lifestyle are all attributes that threatens the idea of a modern society and of the modern man.
ReplyDeleteWhen the Cyclops says, “We Cyclopes do not care about Jove or any of your blessed gods, for we are ever so much stronger than they.” It establishes a justification for the actions Odysseus takes against him. Even though the Cyclopes is clearly economically sound as a goat farmer and probably happy; even with his simple life style, he is not civilized. The Cyclops mocking of the gods and of the Monarchy lifestyle of Odysseus is what is supposed to give hint to the reader that he is a savage. This idea is continued within the tonal syntax of the narration that depicts the Cyclops answers as ‘pitiless.’ This portrays a common theme within ancient Western society that people who do not have the same or any religion as our own or a different governmental system then our own are inferior and savage. This idea is what justifies the blinding of the Cyclops but also would justify any actions taken against societies who could threaten the Greek way of life.
Enkidu is the only savage portrayed within these texts that is actually human or at least has human qualities. It is because of his appearance that violence was not used against him but rather he was brought into the ‘right’ way of life through education. Enkidu was once a man who ran wild with the beasts and one with nature but once he started to interfere with the trappers of Uruk, Gilgamesh ordered for him to be brought into the world of men by being tricked to lay with a woman. Once Enkidu does this he is no longer accepted by the animals and has become fully human. This is not to say he was civilized thought. Enkidu was still a savage until his submission to the laws of Gilgamesh. Although a friendship is established between the two it is not until Enkidu has been beaten by Gilgamesh in a wrestling match and a superiority is established amongst them.
part two:
ReplyDeleteWithin this story we see homage to the idea that savages must be taught and educated and it is the modern man’s duty to do so. We can see this within modern history with such ideologies as white man’s burden. The reason for this mindset is usually fear besides regular ignorance. Enkidu threatened the modern trapper’s lifestyle and threatened Gilgamesh’s right to rule as he did. It is because of their fear towards Enkidu that the decide to corrupt his world view and bring him into modern society. The only true surprise is that Enkidu adapted so well and became a modern man, something that history would show that usually doesn’t happen.
The idea of a savage is not always applied to the common idea of the ‘wild man.’ The fairy tale “Jack and the Beanstalk” is a perfect example of this. Jack, a poor serf, is tricked out of his last family’s cow and fears the worst. Luckily, at top of this giant beanstalk a giant lives who is said to be very rich. This giant though is not uncivilized like the Cyclopes and Enkidu; rather he is married and lives in a very large castle high above the normal people. The story ends with Jack, after stealing gold and a goose who lays golden eggs, is almost caught when stealing a golden harp. The giant awakes and chases after Jack but Jack is able to cut the beanstalk while the giant is climbing down it so it falls and breaks its neck. It is surprising that this story does not end differently and is a moral crusade against stealing. Rather it implies that people who are not like the modern or everyday man have no right to their material goods because that is all they care about. This idea has also been implied to the more traditional idea of a savage and has justified such things as the removal of American Indians from their land. Reaffirming the idea that if the savages or wild man are not using what is theirs in a proper way that fits with the idea of the modern society then it is fine for a modern man to take it away from them.
All of these stories imply certain ideas that are popular within western ideology and because they all justify the actions that western society has taken against inferior society’s they are still held in a certain regard today. It is not a mistake that many popular fairy tales have heavy moralistic or self preservation undertones. It is a way for modern society to preach its own self preservation and maintain a certain control over what the societal ‘rights’ are. These stories show how western society has successfully integrated myths and fairy tales into their culture and uses them in a way to promote their own interest at the expense of the ‘Wild Man.’
The antagonists in The Epic of Gilgamesh, Homer's The Cyclops in the Odyssey, and Jack and the bean stalk all have characteristics of the "savage." Enkidu, Gilgamesh's equal, roamed with the wild beasts outside of civilization. He was "wild" because he was not a part of the normal modern day society. This is the same case with Homer's cyclops and the giant in Jack and the bean stalk. They all were considered savages because they were barbaric. Being cannibalistic, sloppy, and acting on their primitive instincts, they were not a part of modern day society, and therefor justified the invasion of the "civilized man."
ReplyDeleteOdysseus feels he has a right to impinge the land of the cyclops because he is part of a great civilization. In The Epic of Gilgamesh, Gilgamesh has the right to seduce Enkidu away from his wild lifestyle and habitat with a woman. Jack decides he has the right to steal from a rich barbaric giant. Seeing that these stories all come from civilizations that thrived, one can assume that these stories have an influence on the perceptions of a modern day civilization. All of the protagonists can be at fault for provoking a conflict with the "savage men." But the stories are not told through that perspective. All of the protagonists are portrayed as heroic for conquering the conflict that they created with the "wild man."
Being different from the "normal society" is shunned upon in all of these stories. Since the cyclops, the giant, and Enkidu all ran their daily lives differently than the "normal" routine, they were considered different, which meant they were wrong.
These stories all communicate the expectations of what a normal society should be like. They contain examples of what people shouldn't be through the characteristics of each antagonist, and what is acceptable if one encounters one who is not of the "norm," interference.
In the story of Gilgamesh, we are presented with a description of a man who lives among the animals and is, in the purest sense of the word, wild.The story is told in a way that links it to much of Greek mythology the Judeo-Christian Bible. We see this right away. Here, much like in Greek classicism, there are many gods which the people worship and who interact with humans at times. The title character, Gilgamesh, is the son of the gods and is endowed with super-human abilities such as super strength and dreams of the future. Hercules was the son of Zeus and had super strength. The way that Enkidu is described conjures images of a man who is about as close as a man can be to an animal in appearance and behavior. This recalls Greek stories of the minotaur, centaur, satyr. Elements later seen in Greek mythology are clearly present in Gilgamesh.
ReplyDeleteLinks to the Bible are seen clearly present, as well. The goddess Aruru "conceived an image in her mind, and it was of the stuff of Anu of the firmament. She dipped her hands in water and pinched off clay, she let it fall in the wilderness, and noble Enkidu was created." This is very closely resembles the story of the creation of man in Genesis. Enkidu ran with the animals and lived in harmony with nature, just as Adam, though not presented in a "wild man" way, lived in nature with the animals. Then, a woman leads Enkidu away from that life. He tries to return to them but found himself slow, unable to follow them: "And now the wild creatures had all fled away; Enkidu was grown weak, for wisdom was in him, and the thoughts of a man were in his heart." The harlot ruined his carefree life in nature and took away his innocence just like Eve led Adam to "knowledge" and subsequent expulsion from Eden. The idea of a man who is the son of a God, as mentioned above, is Greek, but also a biblical concept. Christ was the son of God and communicated with him, as does Gilgamesh with his creator. Also biblical in content is the section when Enkidu attempts to eat human food for the first time. "Then the woman said, 'Enkidu, eat the bread, it is the staff of life; drink the wine, it is the custom of the land.'” In the gospel, bread and wine are the "body and blood" of Christ.
Another similarity to biblical text is in the style of writing itself. At the beginning of the excerpt, the mutterings of the men of Uruk is written out in quotes. Later, their laments are repeated verbatim by the Lord of Uruk to the god Anu. This happens in several places in the Bible, specifically within the gospels. Groups of people will speak amongst themselves and then repeat the entire thing almost word for word to another person in just a verse later. The feel of the text is, overall, like a hybrid of Greek and biblical stories; in its characters, the plot development and ending, how the two enemies join forces. It is a moral story.
The interactions of man with the Gods in Gilgamesh have many themes that appear later in Greek mythology and Judeo-Christian texts. What appears here that sets a precedent for the Greek chimera is the description of the wild man Enkidu. His hair is matted like a cow's and his body was rough. He is short and "bigger boned." He was "innocent of mankind." He lived and communed with the animals. Later, he is brave and hunts lions in order to protect the people. These are building blocks for the "wild man" in literature. Hairy, strong, brave,athletic, animalistic, yet innocent and righteous. I can see how the term "noble savage" became so common when referring to American Indians. The Europeans must have seen them in very much the same way as they would have seen Endiku.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSavages are exaggerated versions of human beings who lack any sort of redeeming qualities. They are merciless, slow witted, and selfish- but they have played a huge role in folklore for thousands of years all over the world. Their characteristics are so obviously in the wrong that it allows a hero in a story to conquest over them without demanding any sort of sympathy from the audience. And such is the beauty of a fairy tale- there are no grays, only black and white. A story always has the satisfying ending of the good and pure conquering over evil. Western audiences have always been especially keen to storylines such as these. Disney movies are commonly known for their introduction of a savagely evil character that is eventually completely overcome by a flawless hero. The history of America itself can be considered one of these stories. As America was pushing further into the heart of the west, the obstacle of the Natives stood the way of any sort of major progression. Therefore, the media portrayal of the natives changed drastically- they became painted as red skinned, terror inducing beasts without an intelligence but a thirst for the blood of innocence. With this new portrait, the American public had no moral conflict with playing the perfect hero who conquered over the evil that the Indians represented. In actuality, there are no true savages- always hiding between the supposedly inexcusable actions and personas of characters from history or fairytales alike is a hint of a silver lining.
ReplyDeleteWithin these three works, the "savage" man is consistently depicted as a huge, lumbering figure of great strength and brute force. However, I noticed a very strong correlation between the characteristics of (and the reactions to) the cyclops in the Odyssey and the giant in Jack and the Beanstalk. Both have a hunger for human flesh, which instills hatred and fear in their respective protagonists. This drives Jack to steal riches from the giant without feeling the least bit apologetic, and similarly, Ulysses' men in the Odyssey fully expect to make away with the cyclops' cheeses and animals regardless of whether or not they are given to them as gifts.
ReplyDeleteThis logic is passed through folklore as the righteous way to deal with an unfamiliar and seemingly hostile cultures, which may have promoted similar reactions of the Europeans to non-western cultures centuries later.
The content of these stories certainly stems from pre-existing societal standards; in the Odyssey, both Ulysses and the cyclopes are tied down by the power of the god Neptune. The concept of the all-powerful gods is present in most, if not all ancient Greek literature. Similarly, Greek folklore often mentioned beastly creatures of epic and whimsical proportions, juxtaposed with a strong, Greek hero of human qualities but with superhuman strength. This praise and accentuation of the ideal man gives rise to distaste of beings which stray from societal norms. For example, at the very end of the Odyssey, Polyphemus curses Ulysses that he might arrive home "in another man's ship and find trouble in his house." This cultural rule is clearly of great importance and such standards are passively scattered throughout the tale as a reminder of what attributes and actions can and cannot be considered noble.
Of course, these stories are an exaggerated reflection of the societies' values. The repetition of certain phrases and the outlandish settings, characters, and certainly situations which occur are a means of entertainment as much as they are a statement of a people's heritage and belief systems. Of course an enormous beanstalk is not an everyday problem or opportunity, but mixed with the passion of the underdog taking advantage of a terrible and ruthless figure of power, key values and lessons can be communicated in the guise of a colorful tale.