City Lights(1931) ( GB Favor)

Before viewing City Lights, I considered myself a huge fan of film, despite the film being my first silent film. I have now realized that this is not the case, at least for right now, because there has been an entire notable genre of film that I have been ignoring and that is the genre of pantomime. City Lights is Chaplin’s love letter to Hollywood as he acts as not only an actor in the work, but also the writer and director. His dedication to the design of his film, whether that be through the film style or the choreography of the actors, really shows the audience how much of an art film truly is and proved to me what I have been missing out on from this art style. 

Systematic Argumentation Workshop

A sophomore attending a Great Books workshop aimed at freshman GB students? Wow, weird right? Wrong. Great Books is an experience where you can always learn something new, even if you have already discussed and heard of the subject before. In fact, it was just my luck that Dr. Fullman and Dr. Jacobs presented to the attendees a writing strategy called SIEL. SIEL stands for State your point, Illustrate with a quote, Explain how the quote demonstrates your point, and Link to the next idea or point. This strategy is a key idea that my fellow GB students, including myself, need to remember to use when we tackle our essays and comments. Great Books can become a confusing course, but this strategy brings its students back to reality of what the professors want them to achieve...a concise and interpretative way of receiving the text. If the students achieve this, they have a better chance at becoming better writers for the course and for their future careers! So, yes, it is wise to attend an old GB workshop because you never know what your mind may need to be refreshed on.

Can a Fallen Angel be Entirely Evil?

In Christopher Marlowe’s play, Doctor Faustus, a German doctor named Faustus is searching for purpose in his life. He ultimately comes to the decision of choosing necromancy over more logical choices, such as philosophy or physics. Faustus does many things that we, as Christians, deem blasphemous. One of his first acts of necromancy is summoning a servant of Lucifer, Mephistophilis, who he desires to become his personal servant on Earth as long as he lives. Mephistophilis only agrees to the wish if Faustus sells his soul to Lucifer after twenty-four years and Faustus agrees to the request. Throughout the play, it becomes more apparent that Mephistophilis hates his duty to Lucifer as a servant and does not despise God as other fallen angels might. He does not appear to have any hatred towards God like Lucifer does, and, because of this, is not seen being any part of plotting revenge against Him. Mephistophilis comes off as a grievous character in his scenes because he knows he is at fault for his twisted morals and knows that he has no power over his situation. This characteristic is what utterly allows the audience to gain sympathy for him rather than the main character, Faustus, who ends up making numerous unwise decisions.

As mentioned in the previous paragraph, we first meet Mephistophilis when he is summoned by Faustus. Faustus comes to ask the demon what he did to become out of Hell, where he is eternally damned. What Mephistophilis replies to the doctor with is a reply weighted with shameful woes. “Why this is hell, nor am I out of it. Think’st thou that I who saw the face of God and tasted the eternal joys of Heaven, am not tormented with ten thousand hells”(Marlowe 13). Mephistophilis even continues on by begging Faustus to not go down the same path that the demon had once endured. “O Faustus! Leave these frivolous demands, Which strike a terror to my fainting soul” (Marlowe 13). Mephistophilis may reside in Hell, but when he begs Faustus to take another path, the reader notices that he is slightly virtuous in the sense that he does care if others are given the same fate as him. Certainly, there are those who do not realize their acts are against God and there are those that realize they are, Faustus is one of those who knows his is committing blasphemy against God by performing his sinful acts. Yet, a demon, who you would think would encourage the temptation and sin, pleads for the sinner to not carry themselves down the path of unrighteousness any further for they have the chance to be redempted unlike the demon.

Mephistophilis does not only have the characteristic of being virtuous, he is also extremely loyal to his duty as a servant to Lucifer even though he despises it. When the irrational Faustus finally lists the conditions of his deed with Lucifer, Mephistophilis becomes the earthly servant of him. When Faustus asks of his new servant where Hell exactly lies, Mephistophilis answers in a similar manner that he did when the doctor had asked him earlier of how the demon came to be out of the pit of eternal fire. “Within the bowels of these elements, Where we are tortur’d and remain for ever; Hell hath no limits, nor is circumscrib’d in one self place; for where we are is hell, and where hell is there must we ever be” (Marlowe 22). Faustus proceeds to ask Mephistophilis of many things until he suddenly decides to repent. Still being a servant to both Lucifer and Faustus, Mephistophilis continues to try to

convince the doctor that he is eternally destined for Hell ever since he already conditioned the deed. Mephistophilis’ reasoning for the reminder is not because he wants Faustus to turn back to his previous unholy ways, but of the demon’s servitude to Lucifer and the mere fact that Faustus had already signed away his soul. He is stating facts that go along with his service to Lucifer and not stating a personal opinion, thereby showing his loyalty.

In conclusion, Mephistophilis plays a more noble and sympathetic role than Faustus did in the entire play because he does not morally decline in character. Like Faustus, who goes from wanting to serve God to wanting to serve Lucifer. He is completely loyal, unfortunately, forever to Lucifer and stays loyal to Faustus within the limits of his deed with Lucifer. There may be times where Mephistophilis is stating how much he hates what he has to do, but that does not make him disloyal to his master, Lucifer, because he does not perform any acts to go along with his disgruntled statements.

He is a fallen angel who has experienced the joys of Heaven and, therefore, tries to keep others from becoming like him. These character traits are what make Mephistophilis have more of a tragic downfall than Faustus ever did.

        

Works Cited:

                   Marlowe, Christopher. Dr. Faustus. Dover, 1994.

Why Pleasure Shouldn't Be Allowed in Utopia

In Thomas More’s satirical work, Utopia, he writes about a flawless world with its citizens, the Utopians. The Utopians live an uncommonly public lifestyle as they share a house with other couples and their houses have no locks on the doors. The citizens endure an essential life and are not allowed to contribute to anything that could be considered a waste of their time. Though their life is not without pleasures. The lifestyle that these citizens are taught to maintain is exactly why pleasures should not be allowed in their society.

Now, you may be thinking of why these certain citizens could be considered unworthy of the chance at pleasure. It is simply due to the fact of how they were raised. The citizens are accustomed to using their time efficiently and not doing anything that allows their brains to become lazy.  

“All the rest of the twenty-four they are free to do what they like-not to waste their time in idleness or self-indulgence,but to make use of it in some congenial activity”(Book II, pg.56).

If there is a sudden shift in that mindset, one of those shifts being a pleasure, it would be something unnatural to them and they would not know what to do. In the case of being pleasured, whether that be mentally or physically, the Utopians would become too addicted as they are so used to doing an activity that does not necessarily focus on being intellectually challenging. Utopia being the perfect civilization that it is, this imperfection would not be allowed and would contradict everything the citizens stand for. “No living creature is naturally greedy, except from fear of want”(Book II, pg.61). Addiction is the excess use of a particular activity, so this would allow for time to be wasted inefficiently.

Another explanation for my reasoning includes the types of pleasures that are allowed in the Utopian society.In Utopia, they have physical and mental pleasures. The physical pleasures resulting from a conscious sense of enjoyment and a healthy immune system. As for the mental pleasures, they result from the satisfaction of understanding a certain subject.These do not sound like unpleasant happenings, I understand, but where the contradiction comes in is this “perfect society” performing them. If a society thinks they are perfect, they will assume everything else they do is perfect and essential to them. From pleasure results happiness, but only perfect happiness is obtained in our second life when we are with God. I take this idea from the beloved philosopher, St. Thomas Aquinas. He states the following in one of his books, Summa of the Summa:

“Wherefore it is impossible to have true Happiness in this life. Secondly, from a consideration of the specific nature of Happiness, the vision of the Divine Essence, which man cannot obtain in this life. Hence it is evident that none can attain true and perfect Happiness in this life” ( Summa of the Summa, pg 394-395).

More’s work here is obviously satirical and supposed to be nonsensical, but if we are thinking about the society realistically, the mayor and citizens are going about achieving pleasure and happiness in the wrong light. The citizens also find pleasure in making fun of those who are mentally deficient which is a whole different issue in itself that I will choose not to discuss.

Dealing with the religion side of this subject, More also presents the Utopians of being a part of many different religions and not pertaining to just one. “Of course, many Utopians refuse to accept Christianity, but even they make no attempt to discourage other people from adopting it..”( Book II, 99-100). I am not saying the Utopians should lack pleasure because they refuse to be Christians, but they can not achieve the perfect feeling of happiness in their earthly lifetime unless they have knowledge of God. A knowledge that will end up benefiting them eternally.

In conclusion, I do not think the Utopians would value the gift of pleasure very much as other societies would and do. They are just so accustomed to the perfect and essential lifestyle, that the feeling of pleasure would set them off the track of the life they want to lead. Also, when they are given the ability to have pleasures, they use them in the wrong means that ultimately make them non-essential. They desire perfection and being useful human beings. If they are to acquire that role, they must follow and know God.

                                                           Works Cited:

                  More, Thomas, and Paul Turner. Utopia. Penguin Books, 2003.

             Thomas, and Peter Kreeft. A Summa of the Summa. Ignatius Press, 1990.

Dante's Use of Imagination in "Inferno"

In Dante’s first epic poem of his well-known philosophical series, Divine Comedy, he enters Inferno. Inferno, which is better known as Hell, is where Dante and another famous poet, Virgil, travel through to get to Purgatory, and eventually, Heaven. In Dante’s version of Hell exists nine circles differentiated based on the sin committed by that certain individual in their lifetime. Dante makes Hell exciting by providing interesting and horrific views on the sin-related punishments. While I think this, I see Inferno as a piece of imaginative work as well rather than just philosophy. Though, mentioning that it is imaginative does not take away from the epic’s overall effectiveness.

Dante tends to write his view of punishments of those in Hell as the punishments they should have received in their previous life or performing what sin they committed on earth for eternity, but metaphorically, of course. For example, in the fourth circle of Hell, where the avaricious and prodigal endure the torment of eternal jousting. “Now you can see, my son, how short a jest are the good things assigned to Fortune’s care..for which the human race squabble and squall”( Canto VII, 61-63).  The eternal jousting could, in a sense, represent the constant fight back and forth these two groups went through in their earthly life to receive their money in a greedy fashion. Another prime example of this view stems from Canto XX, where those who used to seek the future in their past lives have their heads turned backwards as to not see what is ahead of them, also known as, not being able to seek the future. “For backward to the kidneys turned the face, and backwards always did they have to go, as they had lost sight of things ahead” (Canto XX, 13-15). My reasoning for the use of imagination on this specific subject comes from Dante’s detailed description of the punishments rather than just the biblical worldview that Hell is only a tortuous place containing a pit of fire.

As Dante and Virgil go deeper into the circles of Hell, Dante writes of each punishment environment growing colder and colder as they tread on through. Each sin becoming a more cruel one than the last. “At that I turned, and saw before my feet a lake of ice, which in the terrible cold looked not like frozen water, but like glass” (Canto XXXII, 22-24). Hell is talked about very vaguely in the Bible and, as mentioned in the above paragraph, is only really detailed as a pit of eternal fire. So, Dante describing Hell as losing its warmth the deeper you travel into it is something that others may not usually think Hell would seem like. Dante treats like losing this warmth as they go deeper as if he is symbolizing that all of the soothing warmth comes from the Lord Himself. Those that are in the last few circles have completely forsaken God and, therefore, are undeserving of the light of His love.

As a poet, one might think Dante would insert concepts of the Bible into his tellings of his journey to the Promised Land, but rather Dante just inserts his own intriguing commentaries and certain opinions other than plain facts. As mentioned, Dante creates upper, middle, and lower levels of punishments. The upper level (lust and greed) representing the sinners of lust, the middle level(anger and blasphemy) representing the sinners of bad choices, and the lower level (violence and fraud) representing the sinners of malevolence. “And since the usurer takes a different path, setting his hope in something else, he sins, despising Nature and her follower” (Canto XI, 109-111). This dividing of punishments is obviously an commentary from Dante based on his own judgements. As it would have been widely known that Hell is structured in such a way.

In conclusion, the imagination that Dante suggests to be presenting to the readers does not take away from the overall Christian, political, and poetic value of the poem. Even from a Christian’s perspective, I do not believe the poem would have been nearly as expressive and strong if Dante had only carelessly taken the view of Hell from the Bible rather than his own creative version. By providing such detailed scenarios and sceneries, the poet produced various locations that were depressing, but still remained alive through the innovative ideas of what Hell could be like, which continued to keep the readers, including myself, engrossed with the poetic series.

                                                              References:

Dante, Alighieri, 1265-1321. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri: Inferno. New York: The Union Library Association, 1935. Print.

Consolation of Creativity (Creative Paper for GB II)

I used to know how to be a creative person. In my youth, I would write short stories for my peers all the time. But now, my creativity has forsaken me and the tears retreating from my eyes act as small droplets of hope escaping my existence. What had I done in my growing age to make my creativity resent me? Nevertheless, I still hold my small hands over the black keys of my keyboard as if my hands would do the job for me. The more I glare at the keys, the more my urge to bang my head against them and cry increases. When I go to do just that, a hand stops me halfway. I look up to find a middle-aged woman in a pencil skirt and a button up shirt. Her hair was in a bun and she smelled of chalk and depression. She was the first one to speak.

“Oh my dear child, have you gone absolutely mad?,” she said calmly. “Who- who are you?” was the only thing I replied. “Have you forgotten who I am? I am called Creativity,” the woman said. “Great. Can you help me write this essay for my honors class?,” I asked. “That is why I am called Creativity. Now, what seems to be the problem, my student?” “I have to write an essay in the style of Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy, but my creativity has abandoned me,” I told her. “Do you have a topic of this mentioned essay?” “I do indeed. It is going to be about a figure teaching me how to play soccer in the correct sense,” I told her. “Good. Now, you say you are not creative, but you already have a topic for your paper do you not?” “I do,” I replied. “Then you are not completely abandoned of your creativity. Do you argue?” “I do not,” I told her. “Very good.” She cracked her knuckles and continued on.

“Now, why do you think your creativity has abandoned you?” I sighed and told her I had not written in since I had become a teenager. She then asked me, “In your view, does one lose one’s creativity as they age?” “Yes, that is my view.” “Then how old does one have to be in order to lose creativity?” “I would say at least when they reach 16 years of age.” “What does one do to lose creativity at such a young age?” I had never thought of things that way, but I answered her. “ I suppose one has to forsake one’s childlike innocence?” “Now, what does innocence have to do with creativity?” “Both of these things fall under the category of being things for children.” “So, creativity is only for children?” “I suppose so.” “Now you, a college student who has just recently surpassed 18 years of age, have no creativity?” “We have established that, yes.” “Let me ask you this then. Have you heard of Facebook?” “I have, yes.” “Do you know of its creator, Mark Zuckerberg, and of how he was only just a college student when developing the website?” “I have heard of him.” “He became a multi-millionaire when he was only just two years older than you are now. How did he get there? He was smart and came up with a creative idea.” “You are making a fair point. Go on.”

“What else seems baffling to you about the concept of creativity?” The figure asked. “I understand Mark Zuckerberg and his creative idea, but as one ages do they not become more forgetful of creativity due to responsibilities with adulthood?” “My dear student, have you just forgotten what I had just told you? Being creative is not exclusive to a specific age range, but is used by those of all ages. Creativity is a trait you learn as a child, yes, but as you grow older it is still inside of you to use as a form of self-expression. Do you agree that you have never stopped expressing yourself?” “I do agree with you on that.” “As you mentioned earlier, you are writing a paper on playing soccer, so, therefore, you know how to play?” “That is true, yes. Ever since I was a little child,” I told her. “Playing a sport is a form of self-expression. It shows others your interests in life.” The figure had left me speechless after this. How could I have been so blind to the truth about creativity. One never loses it, but it aids them in life by showing them how to have fun and create successful business, in Mark Zuckerberg’s case at least. “You have convinced me, Creativity. Thank you.” The figure smiled at me and said, “Great. Now let us get started on this essay, shall we?” I smiled, turned around, and we began typing.

The Act of Love in Nicomachean Ethics

Nikki Huett
Dr. Andrew Jacobs
Great Books I
November 2, 2018

                                                  The Act of Love in Nicomachean Ethics

      When a person falls in love, do they truly “fall” for the person or do they “fall in love” with the idea of loving them? In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he discusses his view of love. “Yet each, in fact, loves not what is good for him, but what appears so” (1155b 25-26). My perception of what he means here is that most people consider the love they think they deserve, rather than the amount that they do. Whether that love originates from friendships or romantic relationships. People obsess over this idea of being loved and as they grow older, they begin to make more mature relationships, but with this maturity also comes ignorance. The type of people who obsess over love ends up only obsessing over the idea of it.

  Let us first start off with the love that comes from friends. Since the world is an imperfect place, we sometimes happen upon friends who treat us unfairly or, in other cases, we are the ones that treat them unfairly. There are two types of friendships, one where both friends reciprocate the love and second, where it is one-sided and the other is deriving pleasure from the fact that someone is fond of them. Aristotle even points this out by saying, “Therefore, those who love on account of utility feel affection for the sake of their own good, just as those who love on account of pleasure feel affection for the sake of their own pleasure”( 1156a 14-17). Thus, in that case, where one derives pleasure, this friendship is toxic and will not last as long as one intends. As the person who is a “user” will eventually grow tired of the same friends and move on. Sure, in a normal friendship, pleasure is produced, but where it becomes abnormal is when that is the only reason for the friendship to exist.

 Next, I would like to bring up the romantic type of relationships. Though in both friendships and romantic relationships, love is produced, romantic relationships can become far more dangerous when either the male or female becomes damaging. As in these relationships, the two people become far more intimate with each other. It is not too rare for romantic relationships to begin because one or both of the people in the relationship want to derive the type of pleasure of being physical to satisfy certain wants. Aristotle starts to bring up this for a little bit when he states, “ For the greater part of erotic love is bound up with passion and is based on pleasure, which is why they love and swiftly cease loving, often changing in course of the same day” (1156b 37-39). Most people these days, do not marry out of true affection, but out of the facade that that someone is a human being that has shown them attention. This, though very pessimistic sounding, is the true fact of how ignorant any type of relationship can become.

In conclusion, though it sounds as if I am stating that all love is fake, I am not. I am simply pointing out that some people use their feelings in a manipulating way and that is not how our Lord intended them to be used. People are so enticed with their need for pleasure and/or for the want to know that someone holds high affections for them that they confuse both of these instances for the true meaning of being loved and loving someone. This can become such a nasty habit that one can possess as it makes them not only manipulate others but themselves as well. This self-manipulation can be inferred from Aristotle stating in the text, “Yet this will make no difference at all, since it will be what appears lovable [that each will, in fact, regard as good and so love”(1155b 26-27). So, the way to correctly achieve healthy relationships (romantic or not), we must love each other unconditionally. Though this world is going to continue to be foolish, we must try our best to treat each other with the love we deserve, not the love we think we deserve.




                                                              Works Cited:
             Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by Robert C. Bartlett and Susan D. Collins,
                              University of Chicago Press, Reprint edition, 2012.