12-7-2010

The offense in this game is easy to recognize, but the reasons for it may be harder to articulate. Most obvious is the notion of agency, which here is not reflected in playing as Jesus, but rather in playing against Jesus. Another reason is Christ Killa’s iconoclastic violence, intended to disrupt the reception of the image of Christ on the cross by presenting it within the game’s rhetoric as cause for violence. The player has the ability (and within the game’s backstory, the moral obligation) to kill the cloned Jesus figures. So within the fiction of the game, Jesus is the “bad guy” and the player is the “good guy”—one might even argue the messiah. The player’s ability to immerse himself in the imagined avatar behind the gun invites a procedural violence against Jesus, justified by the assumption that he is “just” a clone. By so disrupting the biblical narrative and blending this disruption with agency as Jesus’ enemy, the game invites a blasphemous procedural rhetoric.

Rachel Wagner: The Play is the Thing: From Bible Fights to Passions of the Christ

In her analysis of why, exactly, Christians are hesitant to make a fully interactive and "free range" depiction of Christ, Rachel Wagner discusses examples of when this does happen, and why Christians do not like them. One example she supplies us with is Christ Killa, in which the player is immersed in a story about killing raving clones of Christ. As Wagner points out, this is a form of iconoclasm on two levels: not only is one destroying an image of Christ, but one is destroying how one views Christ. Essentially, the Covenant we form with that image is shattered, but worst of all, it is shattered by the player. This clearly deviates from the linear-pattern devised by most Christians.

12-6-2010

Aside from simply depicting a contrast with the ordinary, however, the liminal phase of ritual can also depict the ideal of the unstructured community, what Turner calls “communitas.” In communitas, in distinction from the hierarchically structured society, all are equal and there is no ranking to give one power over another (except perhaps the authority of the ritual elders). 20 This form of utopia cannot really exist, as no society can exist without structure— but this utopian ideal of communitas is just as critical to the functioning of society as the realism that requires structure, for it reminds a people of their essential unity and

Lyden: Movies as Religion.

In this passage, Lyden refers to the anthropologist Turner, who noted that societies form "communitas," which are momentary breakdowns of authority which make pleasantly allow all to be equal. His example is that of an Indian ceremony, where cast is reversed, the subordinate becoming insubordinate. Thus, for a brief period, a break-down in society is allowed to occur within the confines of a ritual, much like Gerard would argue violence can be carried out ritually to be cathartic.

12-2-2010

"Vengeance, moreover, cannot be claimed until the verdict of one's private oracle has been confirmed by the secret poison oracle of the local prince, for Zande society is an aristocracy in which the ruling class makes all final decisions. If the logic of these oracles, deaths, and acts of vengeance were analyzed publicly, Evans-Pritchard notes, it would reduce itself to an absurdity, because every new death would have to be attributed to yet another act of witchcraft in an endless circle.

Pals, Daniel. "Eight Theories of Religion." New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

In this passage, Pals discusses how Evans-Pritchard's study of the Zande led him to discover their ritual for handling accusations of death and witchcraft, which goes through a series of 1) Personal oracles, and then 2) aristocratic oracles, which have the final say. Evans-Pritchard argues that this is done to prevent logical absurdities from occurring. However, one must wonder if, perhaps, there is a touch of Marx's theories underlying this: that religion can become another facet of power and social structures.

11-30-2010

"ritualization is a matter of various culturally specific strategies for setting some activities off from others, for creating and privileging a qualitative distinction between the 'sacred' and the 'profane,' and for ascribing such distinctions to realities thought to transcend the powers of human actors."

Nye, Malory. Religion: The Basics. New York: Routledge. 2008.

Nye quotes Catherine bell, who argues that the main function of ritual is to set apart the mundane profane from the exceptional sacred, which truly recalls the Eliadic notions of sacred and profane, but also Durkheims methods of creating ritual. She definitely echoes Eliade's belief that the "sacred" cannot be the day-to-day, and thus a sacred ritual would also transcend this.

11-28-2010

This violent translation of world religious traditions within the Matrix franchise has serious implications for our own violent culture with which it resonates. Already there have been a troubling number of copy-cat murderers who, legitimately or not, have cited the films as inspiration for their crimes. Studio executives strenuously deny any link between the films and real acts of violence.⁶ However, they appear to have recognized some of the public criticism that might stem from the release of the Animatrix “Kid's Story,” which ends with a positive portrayal of teenager's suicide in the matrix, since plans to make the segment available on the Warner Brothers' website were abandoned. The direct association of violence with religion in the films can result in some troubling simplifications by those interpreting the films. In an article detailing some of the most prominent Hindu elements in the first two films, Julien Fielding argues that “even if the movie audience feels uncomfortable at how quickly and without remorse Trinity and Neo blow away the policemen,” this choice must be understood as a product of Hindu ideas about dharma, and should not concern us further.

Flannery-Dailey, Frances and Rachel Wagner. "Stopping Bullets: Constructions of Bliss and Problems of Violence" Jacking In to the Matrix Franchise: Cultural Reception and Interpretation. 2004.

In this passage, Wagner and Flanner-Dailey discuss how copy-cat muderers have been executed in a style startlingly similar to that of the Matrix's. Although Warner Bros. seeks to deny it, the authors hint that they too acknowledge the disturbing violence of their work by refusing to put clips of it online. However, the authors go on to cite that was is truly disturbing about the portrayal of violence is not the violence itself, but its gross over simplification. Just as Morgan argued a religion must use simple, plain symbols to convey an idea to its viewers, so too must movies rely on simple violence with a simple solution to make it seem acceptable.

11-19-2010

But I have also argued from the beginning of this book that one cannot legitimately critique or dismiss films (or religions) without first seeking to understand what they are saying, and violent films are no exception to this rule.

Film as Religion; Lyden, John C.

Before launching into his analysis of violent movies portraying religious-esque sacrifice, Lyden first argues that we are not looking at movies from a point of moral judgement, but understanding; and this, he argues, can only be done when we put aside objectivity for subjective understanding. Essentially, we are to use Geertz's thick description, and think from the bottom-up.

"The ritual of Corpus Christi was celebrated to replace the Inca celebration of the solar deity...at the summer solstice. Incan nobility participated in the procession of the new Christian rite wearing traditional costume that included a solar disk....Yet in creating this substitution via subordination, the Christian rite of Corpus Christi preserved the pre-Christian meaning."

Morgan, David. The Sacred Gaze: Religious Visual Culture in Theory and Practice. Berkley: University of California Press, 2005.

In this passage, Morgan discusses how during iconoclasm, religious icons are not necessarily destroyed, but often repurposed. However, in spite of the attempts to remove their original meaning, their underlying connatations remain; thus, the Sun Disk continues, to the Incans, to have its meaning while appearing Christian, which gives some credence to Chidester's theory of plasticity.

11-13-2010

Passing through the gates, visitors are informed, "Here you leave today, and enter the world of yesterday, tomorrow, and fantasy." As Walt Disney revealed in 1955, the Disney version of time is both American and global, preserving the American past of yesterday in the interest of a global future for tomorrow, dramatizing the "truths that have created America" so that they might be "a source of courage and inspiration to all the world."

Chidester, David. Authentic Fakes. Berkeley: University of California, 2005.

In this section, Chidester uses Disney's tag-line as a way of showing the unique Eliadic "sacreds" of Disney--both a lionization of America's globalization, but a nostalgia for America's olden-days. This creates an interesting blend between nostalgia and transcendence: Disney is claiming it can simultaneously celebrate the old-times of America, while looking to the future. However, what's clear from its statement is that today--the present time--is profane compared to these two times.

11-11-2010

...The Tupperware party, an invention more in the history of Tupperware than the production of Poly-T, because it created a community of sacred allegiance. The Tupperware party was a radical innovation in direct marketing. But it was also an improvisation on basic patterns and processes in the production of sacred space and time.

Chidester, David. Authentic Fakes. Berkeley: University of California, 2005.

In this passage, Chidester is essentially channeling Durkheim, claiming that the true "sacred of tupperware" emerged from the formation of the group, which centers itself around the Tupperware. In this example, he would argue that the Tupperware is totemic; a point of unity bringing people together. However, later Chidester seems to synthesize Eliade into the equation, arguing that the Tupperware becomes a symbol for the sacred of domesticity.

Nov. 8 2010

Different groups and individuals activate a particular display's meaning in different ways--or as in the preceding paragraph, they activate different meanings altogether. Attempts to deal with the inherent instability of meaning in public display contribute to the display's visual character. Religious displays often seek to exercise control of interpretive possibilities by the inclusion of easily legible and widely recognizable symbols and images pared down to their most basic elements. Display may thus purposefully distant itself, in order to retain a high degree of control over meaning, from the sorts of complexities often required of "art."

Morgan, David, Sally M. "Visual Culture of American Religions." University of California.

I picked this quote mostly because it lines up with the project I plan to do; however, it also recalls Morgan's theory of "covenant," which states that ones way of viewing an object is determined by the religious agreement they make with that object (ie: I believe in the Buddha's enlightenment; thus, an image of the Buddha is an image of enlightenment). However, Morgan takes this farther, arguing that religions are aware of the complexity that art may cause in forming a covenant, and thus create very simple works to ensure a limited perception.

In my paper, I'll be talking about certain signs, which are absent of pictures; only text. This ties textuality into the picture, and perhaps makes the claim that textuality is the most limiting interpretation.

November 7, 2010

Roof found within the boom generations a significant subset who identify themselves religiously primarily through their having had an experience of personal salvation....As roof notes, this is a "highly personal" type of faith, and in that sense shares much in common with the overall trend toward individualism in matters of faith. For many "born agains," membership or participation in conventional churches is less important than their experience of faith. "Where" is less important to them than "what." This means that people who think of themselves in this way might readily be members of even denominationally related congregations.

Hoover, Stewart M. "Religion in the Media Age." New York: Routledge, 2006.

Hoover uses Roof's studies on the varying religious movements during the Baby Boom to study the relationship between religion and media. He begins by describing the different qualities of the religious groups, in this case the Born Again. In his opinion, the Born Again is a reflectionist, not viewing how they can relate to their faith, but how their faith can personally relate to them. Thus, they cast aside the requirement of a specific group or place of worship in place for a totem of sentiment--denomination does not matter, so long as the core beliefs are similar.

In the face of growing knowledge about and tolerance of many different faith expressions, we seem to be experiencing an increasing difficulty to define 1) what separation of church and state really means; 2) what constitutes moral or immoral literature in the context of the public schools; and 3) how we should define fantasy literature in the same context. The phenomenon of Harry Potter is a religious phenomenon, precisely because it has forced us to face squarely what it really means to be tolerant of all religious expression in the modern age. The solution may not be to remove Harry Potter from the schools, but to reexamine what separation of church and state really means.

Wagner, Rachel. "Bewitching the Box Office: Harry Potter and Religious Controversy." Journal of Religion and Film, Vol. 7, No. 2. 2 Oct. 2003.

In this passage, Wagner argues that Harry Potter, although a fantasy story series, has brought up many complicated issues that have laid just below the surface of America, which, due to its mixtures of cultures and religions, is comprised of varying (and often conflicting) habiti. Thus, we must now question what separation of Church and State means, and what Church even means. In all, her essay makes us see degrees of competing habiti, and how they can often intermix or repel each other vehemently.

11-02-2010

This zan, according to Tooker, was maintained through the action of carrying: that is, "carrying tradition" in a manner similar to the carrying of rice in a basket on their backs. When asked by Tooker about their 'beliefs,' individual Akha people gave a confusing and seemingly inconsistent variety of statements, but there was a strong element of conformity when it came to deciding what was right practice, or zan."

Nye, Malory. "Religion: The Basics." New York: Routledge. 2008.

In this passage, Nye discusses how "belief" can be viewed in many ways, and in particular to this way, can focus not on actual belief (as in: is there a God?) but on how one carries out that belief. Thus, in the Akha, there is a focus on uniformity in action rather than belief. I must wonder if this doesn't seem to recall the totem of Durkheim: that there is more of a focus on external unity through act than internal through personal views of the world.

10-26-2010

So, Joshua Alston, I’d argue that religion on television looks to live long and prosper on TV. Broadcast and cable channels offer a rich array of shows asking religious questions, exploring religious themes, and providing religious alternatives to secular norms. Several, obliquely commenting on consumerist culture, even mount a subversive charge. This is the more surprising since television, like newspapers, is all about advertising wrapped up as infotainment. It’s not supposed to challenge basic societal assumptions that keep us in a constant state of wanting and needing to buy more. But even as the economic downturn makes consumerism less practical, few political or religious leaders are challenging the notion that spending leads to happiness. How ironic that television is, in some instances, addressing the very spiritual and ethical issues on which our religious and political institutions appear to be taking a pass.

Winston, Diane. "Give Me that Small Screen Religion." Religious Dispatches. 27 Jul. 2009.

C: In this passage, Winston argues that religious work and religion are very different--although these are not her direct words. What she states is that without being explicitly religious, television "[explores] religious themes," and goes so far as to be subversive against the consumerist culture that funds it. Culturally, Winston argues that religion on television, though subtle, is really taking on the roles and battles of more classical notions of religion.

10-24-2010 [a.k.a--the first day I saw "monstrous vagina" in writing]

"The monster, in her argument, is the emblem, not of "the mother," but of that really scary figure in the world made by what she calls "phallic materialism": the lesbian. The lesbian/monster is all that is "unassimilable, awesome, dangerous, outrageous, different"--in short, all that is unfuckable, all that remains chaotic beyond the ordering, taming, controlling power of what she calls the "cock" (ibid.). The lesbian/monster, the fusion of the maiden, beast, and nature, according to Harris, represents the greatest threat to patriarchal men's social problems."

Caputi, Jane. Goddesses and Monsters.

In this article, Caputi refers toBertha Harris' claim that the gynecological monster we often encounter in science fiction not only represents the power and fear of the female sex, but homosexual sexuality as well. Thus, cultural media not only seeks to create hegemonic androcentricity, but hegemonic heterosexuality as well; that the strong female is threatening to the male-order of the world, but lesbianism separates itself entirely from androcentrism, as it is both independent in gender and sexuality.

10-21-2010

"There is a deep vein of androcentrism and phallocentrism in Christian ideologies where a male human-divine figure (Jesus), acting on the wishes of a male creator God, offers hope and promise of a better world, along with truth, wisdom, and salvation for both women and men."

Nye, Malory. "Religion: The Basics." New York: Routledge. 2008.

In this passage, Nye argues that Christianity is inherently androcentric, in that it hinges upon both a male creator and male prophet/salvation/avatar figure. He argues that ultimately this lack of a female presence contributes to the oppression of Christian women, as men are always in hierarchical positions of power, while women are subservient. Even in Catholicism, he argues, women are without a realistic female model of Mary, as she is a virgin and represents an untouchable level of chastity.

However, I wonder if this is accurate--after all, Christ was a virgin for life, unlike Mary, who did bear children later. In fact, Christ is only man in the sense of sex--he really carries out no male gender-roles, and he has no sexuality. In fact, he broke many gender-rules. This is what makes him divine--it is only his flesh and phallus that makes him a man. So, in a sense, Christ was almost the first gender-bender, and though we cannot deny that the Church has placed women into a domestic role, we must also recognize that the androcentrism we see in the New Testament is really caused by the momentum of its presence in the Old.

"Baseball is not a religion," said Lisle Dalton, a professor of religious studies at Hartwick College in Oneonta, N.Y., about 30 miles from Cooperstown. "But if you look at the way people put their emotion and energy, their intellectual ability, into sports, they start to look a lot like people who used to put all that into religion in an earlier era."

C: I've been waiting a really, REALLY long time for someone to write something like this. Basically, Dalton argues that baseball is infused with the same energy of a religion, but it is not--likely, though unexplained by the author, due to the fact that baseball lacks large components key to most definitions of religion: sacred texts, almost otherworldly transcendence, etc. Many of the authors we've read thus far have been seeming to be mistaking simile for metaphors: baseball is like a religion vs. baseball is a religion. Dalton can admit that baseball has religious qualities--totemic connections to the sacred, as Durkheim would argue--but she keeps a certain distance.

A part of me wonders if faith must be integrated into a definition of religion, or belief--something that cannot be proven, but only seemingly felt or experienced by the practitioner.

10-18-2010

Second, baseball supports a sense of uniformity, a sense of belonging to a vast, extended American family that attends the same church. As journalist Thomas Boswall reports in his detailed discussion of the church of baseball, his mother was devoted to baseball because "it made her feel like she was in church." Like her church...baseball provided his mother with "a place where she could--by sharing a fabric of beliefs, symbols, and mutual agreements with those around her--feel calm and whole."

Chidester, David. "Authentic Fakes." Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005.

In this passage, Chidester is discussing baseball's religious like qualities, and in particular to this passage, baseball acting as a community. In particular, it seems like Boswall--quoted here--is channelling Durkheim, as for him the "sharing a fabric of beliefs" is central to baseball as a religion. Thus, one's baseball team, colors, mascot, etc. becomes the "totem," uniting a stadium full of people in one unified belief.

However, Chidester argues this totem is national, if not international--that baseball itself is the totem. Recalling my own experience with sporting events, and watching people supporting different times brawl because, well, they were one different teams, I believe that the totem of baseball is on a much smaller scale--it is to the individual team, and not the sport as a whole. Or, perhaps the religion is baseball, and the team is the denomination, so to speak.

Also, do other countries have this relationship with, say, cricket? Rugby?

10-10-10

"If we ask why animals and plants should be the most common totems, that too is clear. The clan does not want as its symbol something distant and vague; it needs an object that is specific, concrete, and near at hand, something closely tied to its daily experience.

Pals, Daniel L. Eight Theories of Religion. 2nd Ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

C: In this passage, Pals discusses Durkheim's argument about totems, and in particular the earthiness of their symbology. The passage argues that the symbol chosen for totems is so terrestrial as a means of avoiding the vague of the beyond; as it is the symbol of their tribe, it must be something real, something tangible they can share. This likely strengthens their covenant with the object, as it reflects a reality they understand.

However, I wonder why the Abrahamic religions cast aside this earthiness, directly forbidding the embodiment of the spiritual in the physical. At most, the Jews had their Ark and the Muslims the black-rock--yet both of these embody the higher, more ethereal power of God. Perhaps this furthers the importance of their god's omnipotence, but I wonder how this helps their culture stay unified socially.

"In the new context of the costly victory of the North, the national flag acquired a special status, even a presence as the effulgent symbol of national unity."

Morgan, David. The Sacred Gaze: Religious Visual Culture in Theory and Practice. Berkley: University of California Press, 2005.

Though an admittedly short passage, this single sentence spoke to me more than most others I read. In it, Morgan argues that the American flag took on its greatest meaning following the civil war, and that its value was related to this cost. This is reminiscent of Chidester's belief that, for religious work to occur, there must be a degree of sacrifice; that one must suffer or die for the greater, and that in doing so is venerated. Perhaps the flag takes on a symbol similar to a cross to those who are patriotic: it becomes a symbol of many soldiers' sacrifices, and the freedom that sacrifice offers.

Oct 5. 2010

"For Packard, matters came down to the authority to be instilled in students as the principal require to making good citizens of the republic. He elaborated the implications of authority and firmly charged the public school as the state's instrument fro achieving the benefits to be had by inculcating submission to authority. "To this end," he reasoned, "[students] should assuredly be taught that supreme authority is in the Creator and Governor of the world. and that earthly potentates are but his vicegerents and subject to his law."

Morgan, David. The Sacred Gaze: Religious Visual Culture in Theory and Practice. Berkley: University of California Press, 2005.

In this passage, Morgan is referring to Packard's belief of necessitating religious education in school; this passage occurs as one example of many showing how Protestantism became a national religion unofficially, and likewise tried to influence the republic. Thus, as we see in this passage, there is a blending between the nation and religion; that religion does not exist solely for itself, but for the good of the republic, and vise versa.

Interestingly, this recalls the Pledge of Allegiance from my memory, and how it is almost an echo of Packard. True, we have removed most religious connotations from it (minus the Under God), but there is still the call for total allegiance to the state. I think this is a great exercise in showing Marxist hegemonic powers.

8-3-2010

"Bringing their Christian values into the workplace, they sought to serve others selflessly and cheerfully. Moreover, as many were already familiar with the religious concept of male headship, they had no problem taking orders from a male manager who might be new to the company or many years their junior. (Managers, for most of Wal-Mart’s history, were not just male, they were white males.)"

Winstson, Diane. "To Serve God and Wal-Mart." Religious Dispatches. 21 Jun. 2009. 3 Oct. 2010.

In this passage, Winston argues that Wal-Marts succeeded by incorporating Christian values into their design; relying upon and perpetuating former inequalities to make it seems appealing and similar to the system of a church. Winston deems this unfair, as it makes white males superiors over women and other races--much like the church, she feels.

I see her similarities, but I feel like she's missing a very, very important detail: at the time of Wal-Mart's inception, ALL businesses were operated like that. Men and women operated separate spheres; different races, though technically equals, likewise did different and often voluntarily segregated work. WalMart very well may have perpetuated this phenomena, but it did not start it nor can be blamed for it. Businesses rarely makes fads and patterns--it is difficult to shape an entire market, but it is simple to observe a preexisting market and sell to it. Wal-Mart simply is a reflection of the society surrounding it.

Sept. 29, 2010

"The particular virtues they promote depend, naturally, on the kind of society they live in, for "the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch of the ruling ideas." In the middle ages, when farming was the chief means of production, all lands were owned by bishops of the church or by feudal lords...should we be surprised, then, that the moral code of the day stressed devotion to the church, along with warrior virtues such as obedience, honor, and loyalty to one's feudal master?..."

Pals, Daniel L. Eight Theories of Religion. 2nd Ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

In this chapter, Pals explains Marx's perspective on religion, which is ultimately tied to economic oppression of lower classes. Here, he discusses how religion ultimately preaches doctrines which side with the ruling class, enslaving the proletariat unknowingly to the bourgeois. This applies to the modern era, when religion promotes humility and a degree of poverty. Strangely, with the Christian doctrine's preaching of poverty and the meek inheriting the earth, it does almost create a vicious circle: the more oppressed one is, the more tied and connected to their religion they feel. Their reality validates their religion, and their religion validates their reality, creating a nearly unbreakable covenant between them.

This can even be seen in the etiological stories of the Bible--however, in a way these stories promote one's own wealth. In the old testament, we see an obvious favoring of the shepherd, who fulfills a unique niche unable to be taken by others, as the work was deemed unclean to other cultures. And, in other cultures, I know the religion is often the cause of economic overthrow, usually being the first thing affected by the harming of the proletariat. I'd be curious to see how Marx's philosophy is carried into religions beyond the Abrahamic ones.

9-28-2010

"[For Marx], religion is a symptom of a sick social system, which is used by both the ruling class and the exploited workers as a means of obscuring the root problems of economic and political inequality."

Nye, Malory. Religion: the Basics. 2nd Ed. New York: Routledge, 2008.

In this passage, Nye refers to Marxism, and how it does not view religion itself as the cause of economic inequality, but rather is a symptom--that it is not the Church that causes a divide in class, but that the Church hierarchy clearly is a gauge of this inequality. Later Marxist writers will go farther, to say that religion perpetuates inequality, but still is not the cause. There is little to comment on by Nye himself, as he is seemingly absent from his own writing (as usual).

However, one must wonder whether these Marxist writers are "trapped into an ideology that tells them they are free." Truly, as much as communism/Marxism marks itself as an international movement, they fail to recognize that in other nations, it is religion that leads to equalization and revolt. In Buddhist countries, it is often monks who fight back for the lay populace, as their welfare is intimately intertwined with theirs. I think these writers can be used, but within their own context.

9-25-2010

"A caption frames how one should "read" an image, foreclosing certain possibilities and narrowing interpretation as much as possible...Even when words are literally absent in Protestant imagery, textuality is not."

Morgan, David.

C: In this passage, Morgan argues that a caption connected to any visualization is ultimately meant to guide the viewers perceptions; that it allows minimal free-thought, and instead forces the reader to view the object as the creator or commenter would like it to be viewed. Morgan believes that in fundamental Protestantism, the Bible serves as this caption, but is almost a caption to life as a whole.

He uses Anderson's "God's Two Books" perfectly to show this. Although the artist likely is implying that Nature and the Bible are both reflections of God, Morgan argues that the Bible creates a caption to nature and the whole world. In the image of a woman gazing into the woods, the Bible does not allow her to see anything else but the human-form of God. Ultimately, it is the covenant one makes with the image, but this covenant is formed by the provided text.

Q: "...digital technology might somehow dilute the sacredness of a religious message. Is something important lost in the 2005 translation of the entire Bible into SMS, when the first passage in Genesis becomes: 'In da Bginnin God cre8d da heavens & da earth?'"

Wagner, Rachel. "Sacred Texting: When Religious Writ gets Wired." Religion Dispatches. 23 Oct. 2008.

C: In this passage, Wagner questions whether or not modern, electronic adaptations of religious messages can corrupt or dilute the original text or the religion as a whole. She cites the SMS translation of the Bible, which translates the Bible into text-speech, and refers to Tweeting services which send out Biblical passages to those who follow them. Whether or not this corrupts religious texts is not necessarily important to the author, but the implications of changing a text at all is a subject worthy of study when we are analyzing both religions and culture.

Now, to put in my 2 cents on the matter: I think there definitely is a certain degree of corruption that occurs when one tweets a Bible passage, or when one translates the Bible into SMS. However, this corruption does not occur because it is technological, but because by nature it respectively removes the context of the passage, and presents the reader with possible translation errors. When analyzing the Bible, it is important to understand the context in which the text occurs; a tweet removes this, creating an island of text. This sort of "corruption" can occur with a physical Bible, for example, if one is asked ONLY to analyze one passage from the Bible to prove a point, without looking for the context. With SMS translation, we are essentially seeing a copy-of-a-copy; a translation from English, which was derived from Hebrew/Aramaic. So, one must wonder what Bible this SMS was copied from.

Ultimately, these problems with technology are not new, but the medium through which these problems occur is.

Sept. 19, 2010

Q: “Even if we follow [Mullers] advice and read the great/high works of a religious tradition, in so doing we are adding our own interpretations to all the other interpretations that exist on those particular texts. Such a reading is simply a starting point; it cannot be taken as the primary basis for ‘knowing’ or ‘understanding’ the religious tradition.”

Nye, Malory. Religion: the Basics. 2nd Ed. New York: Routledge, 2008.

C: In this passage, Nye proposes a synthesis between textual study and cultural study, arguing that if one were to read religious texts without cultural reference (as Muller proposed), one would simply be interpreting said religion in one’s own perspective, wholly missing both the point of textual study, cultural study, and religious study. He instead proposes that one should study texts, but do so within the context of the practitioner—both modern and ancient.

Ultimately, I think the validity of Malory’s opinion solely rests upon the intention of the scholar—whether they want to study texts for literature or for religious studies. If one is looking to study the almost-pure, untouched text and analyze it as a reader, then Muller makes a good point. However, if one is looking to see how a text affects the modern practitioner, then it is impossible not to study the modern practitioner themselves, and see how they apply and interpret that text.

"A very early image is that of the earth as sacred mother, the source of all living things. The sacred marriage of the divine sky father and earth mother is found in many mythologies [examples are listed]...The sky fertilizes the earth with rain, and the earth produces grains and grass. With the coming of agriculture and close human involvement in cultivation of plants and grains, the earlier symbol of the earth as mother is often overlaid by that of the great goddess..."

Pals, Daniel L. Eight Theories of Religion. 2nd Ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

In this passage, the Pals makes a claim that the notion of the "earth mother" goddess is directly related to humankind's connection to agriculture. He also draws connections between the act of procreation and agriculture, with the masculine sky fertilizing the earth with its water, and the mother earth producing crops. Because of this universality of agriculture, it seems fitting that the earth-mother would like be universal, which Pals does attest to, citing Eliade for this belief.

I am curious to see how this applies to Abrahamic religions, which notably lack this earthy, maternal figure and solely rely upon the notion of the sky god. Eliade does mention that Abrahamic religions forgo nature, and instead embrace history, but he never quite cites why. Although Eliade believes firmly in a definite, firm belief that perhaps defies socio-economic causes. However, I believe that in this case, we cannot deny how agriculture has influenced religion, and this comes through clearly when we consider the difference with Abrahamic religions. After all, in the Pentateuch, the herdsman is glorified over the farmer--after The Fall, it is man's curse to toil in the fields, and it is Cain, the farmer, who does not find favor with the Lord. Etiologically, it seems that most Biblical stories point away from farming, and when we consider the climate and terrain of the ancient Middle Easterner, farming is not practical. Thus, maybe it is the barren, harsh nature of the Middle East that prevented the ancient Jew to believe in a fertile mother goddess, and instead rely upon the more distant, powerful sky god.

Sept. 12, 2010

Q: “‘A religious phenomena,’ [Eliade] insists,

will only be recognized as such if it grasped at its own level, that is to say, if it studied ad something religious. To try to grasp the essence of such a phenomenon by means of physiology, psychology, sociology, economics, linguistics, art, or any other study is false; it misses the one unique and irreducible element in it—the element of the sacred.

Pals, Daniel L. Eight Theories of Religion. 2nd Ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

C:

In this section, the author quotes Eliade directly. Eliade is unique from other religion scholars, in that he did not reduce religion to the factors that influence it—he did not claim that religion is sheerly a matter of economics or politics, but rather something that exists in tandem with these multiple forces.

This perspective also does not reject the feeling of the practitioner; it does not imply that the religious in this world are merely tricked into finding religion because of, say, their social stance. Eliade accounts for authentic experiences and the true intentions of the practitioner, and more importantly believes that these feelings are true. He is not caught up in whether the objective truth of a religion is true, but rather how the subjective truth one finds from said religion is authentically true to that individual.

Challenge: Xena, Warrior Princess

Though I could only deduce little of the plot from clips I found from “The Way,” the references to Hindu lore within the plot were obvious. Gods and avatars are depicted and acted by humans, and fight in epic battle—not all to strange considering the Bhagavad Gita’s epic war. However, the Bhagavad Gita did not make Hanuman look like Chewbacca.

Likewise, Hindu practices such as meditation are portrayed in mystical, exotic, and often negative ways (ie: the Gabriel being tortured in meditation). Even more so, these rituals and the very archetypical sultan “Indrajit” are pitted against Eli, a character who’s Biblical sounding name and Christlike appearance seem to imitate Christ, and thus embody more Western Christianity (a belief I base further upon Indrajit’s calling Gabriel Eli’s “disciple”). Indrajit takes on the metaphorical role of Satan, tempting Eli with promises of glory and wonder. Perhaps we can perceive this as a metaphor for the appeal of Hindu belief, and the evil that some would say lies just beneath its seemingly exotic surface. Created in a time when Eastern religions were growing quickly into white, middle class societies—namely through popular Hare Krishna movements and the New Age movements—this episode seems to be imploring viewers to stay true to their faith, ultimately implying that Hindu beliefs are untrue, or do not fit with reality.

Between that and a God being portrayed as Chewbacca, the Hindu community’s resentment to this episode is understandable.

9/10/2010

[For the record: this was written in a concussed state of mind--if the reader finds that the writing reflects this head injury, please be forgiving of its errors. If it is better than normal, please occasionally beat me in the head]

Q:

Wade Clark Roof...has called this “seeker” or “quester” religiosity, where individuals see themselves to be on a spiritual journey devoted to creating an ideal “self.” This means that religious consciousness is consistent with the overall nature of contemporary life, which Anthony Giddens has suggested is oriented toward the self and self identity. Religion is thus less about belief (in the sense of adhering to a particular creed) than it is about behavior and how specific behaviors are directed toward acquiring ideas, symbols, and resources which one can craft a consciousness unique to oneself.

C:

Essentially, Hoover uses other sociologists to make and emphasize the claim that religion is no longer a matter of culture or society, necessarily, but is now of an increasingly personal nature, in that its center is around how one relates to religion specifically. This fits well with the very nature of our modern world, which also focuses on the self rather than society as a whole—almost an echo of classical American independence.

However, I must wonder where evangelical and more faith-based churches work into this picture—after all, the “super church,” with its massive services, is undeniably community based. I’m also curious to see how churches/religious groups have changed to fit this emerging individualism.

[An unrelated but brief complaint: it bothers me how most of these writers use “self” as the ultimate goal of religion, when Buddhism—an increasingly practiced but misunderstood religion—clearly urges the follower to work towards no-self. A small issue, I suppose, but if we’re going to use ‘God/Gods,’ etc., I kind of wish Buddhists would get a place of respect as well.]

Sept. 6, 2010

Q: We must reconstruct on the evidence of the images themselves the spectrum of messages that were likely to be received by the worshippers who lived with them in vitally interested contemplation on a daily basis throughout their lives. Our job is thus complex and somewhat frightening, protected from guess-work only by an educated eye trained by long and patient looking. Moreover, we must be content with working hypotheses, suggestions, and the description of a range of probable interpretations rather than "proof" for a single meaning identical for all persons who had access to the image.

C:

This quote is a nice change in perspective: it argues that we should try to view religious arts/visualizations within the context of the worshipper; that we must preserve their religious nature. The author admits that this is hard, as religious/anthropological studies can only work with this visual media with their own theories, which can only create a generalized interpretation. In truth, there really is no way to find “a single meaning identical for all persons who had access to the image,” as each person who came in contact with that image was very different.

However, what is refreshing is the way the writer acknowledges that we must try to relate religious iconography back to the religious, and try not to view it from the religious-hermetically sealed position where we often view religion nowadays in our very secular culture. Morgan does a good job of bridging this gap in his chapter, as he uses individual, personal examples and accounts to show a broader perspective, as in having quote by Buddhists about their relation to the image of the Buddha as a way of showing how people relate to iconography.

Sept. 2, 2010

Q: “Arguing against those who subordinated scripture to the effervescent and antinomian dictates of the holy spirit, Calvin insisted on the complete and binding agreement of spirit and scripture. The spirit, he contended, ‘would have us recognize him in his own image, which he has stamped upon the scriptures. He is the Author of the Scriptures: he cannot vary and differ from himself.” ...Is holy writ really free of the cultural interests of its plethora of individual authors and redactors?”

Morgan, David. The Sacred Gaze: Religious Visual Culture in Theory and Practice. Berkley: University of California Press, 2005.

C: Morgan uses this quote from Calvin to show that art has gone almost unnoticed as a means of expressing religious culture due to anti-iconism of Protestants like Calvin. Calvin expresses concerns that one cannot express God/Jesus beyond the teachings offered: that anything else simply creates a false idea that can never sync with the reality of what that spirit is. Morgan claims that this view is archaic, considering that the Bible itself has been changed, edited, translated, added to, and deleted from so many times that it is on level with the picture.

However, Morgan is thinking from a strictly anthropological point of view: he does not care about the religion itself, but how we relate to it. If we look at religion and art in this fashion then yes, Morgan has a point. But if we are to look at religion as something done by practitioners—something to be believed and followed—then what we really see is that perhaps Calvin makes a valid point. A painting of a religious figure or scene is entirely dependent on the imagination of the individual who reads the texts. Thus, when we look at this painting, what we are seeing is not even a copy of a copy, but an interpretation of a copy, which brings us farther from the original text. If we want to see how people interpret religion, then Morgan is correct; if we want to understand the religion itself, as Calvin is saying, then we cannot rely solely on art. Calvin’s quote is essentially being used in the wrong context.