This was a wonderful field trip! The temple and Reverend Kaz were not what I expected. He was very laid back and humorous.It was a lot easier to learn about Buddhism from the lecture than from the documents, although those provided a more monastic viewpoint.
I really enjoyed the meditation. Usually I have a lot of trouble focusing, but this was much easier. I think the concept of "looking for the silence" along with the slowly fading out bell sound helped. No one will be ever be able to experience total silence or completely clear their mind, so the idea of constantly working towards that point works better. I was very relaxed- almost fell asleep at one point but I stopped myself! It felt much shorter than 15 minutes, and when I walked outside I felt completely refreshed. It was honestly incredible, like a weight had been lifted off of me. So I guess I finally was able to meditate somewhat successfully.
I also liked the idea of mediating during other activities too. I think I've actually done music meditations before, just without calling it that. It's really interesting to see how different pieces of the song work together. I still want to know which Lady Gaga song the girl was listening to. What would definitely be good for me is eating meditations. I usually only eat when I am bored or distracted- and I won't notice just how much I'm eating. I tend to eat pretty inconsistently because of this. Now I'm trying to focus on having set meals, where I actually take the time to sit down and enjoy the food, as opposed to eating entire boxes of chips without realizing it. I'm already feeling a bit better because of it!
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
I Ching Interpretation (K'un and Ken)
K'un- The Receptive, Earth
This hexagram is made up of broken lines only. The broken lines represents the dark, yielding, receptive primal power of yin. The attribute of the hexagram is devotion; its image is the earth. It is the perfect complement of THE CREATIVE--the complement, not the opposite, for the Receptive does not combat the Creative but completes it . It represents nature in contrast to spirit, earth in contrast to heaven, space as against time, the female-maternal as against the male-paternal. However, as applied to human affairs, the principle of this complementary relationship is found not only in the relation between man and woman, but also in that between prince and minister and between father and son. Indeed, even in the individual this duality appears in the coexistence of the spiritual world and the world of the senses. But strictly speaking there is no real dualism here, because there is a clearly defined hierarchic relationship between the two principles. In itself of course the Receptive is just as important as the Creative, but the attribute of devotion defines the place occupied by this primal power in relation to the Creative. For the Receptive must be activated and led by the Creative; then it is productive of good. Only when it abandons this position and tries to stand as an equal side by side with the Creative, does it become evil. The result then is opposition to and struggle against the Creative, which is productive of evil to both.
Movement in lines 3 and 6
Ken - Keeping Still, Mountain
The image of this hexagram is the mountain, the youngest son of heaven and earth. The male principle is at the top because it strives upward by nature; the female principle is below, since the direction of its movement has come to its normal end. In its application to man, the hexagram turns upon the problem of achieving a quiet heart. It is very difficult to bring quiet to the heart. While Buddhism strives for rest through an ebbing away of all movement in nirvana, the Book of Changes holds that rest is merely a state of polarity that always posits movement as its complement. Possibly the words of the text embody directions for the practice of yoga.
This was a fun exercise, but in a way it felt like reading a horoscope. I can force my situation to fit what is described, but if I had a different reading, I would've molded my opinion to fit that. Initially I misunderstood the lines with movement, and thought that my second hexagram was Chen. Trying to figure out what that had to do with me and then finding out that I wasn't even looking at the right thing lessened my interest.
Although I do see how both of these hexagrams could relate to me. I became pretty frustrated reading the description of K'un. For years I have been beating myself up about not putting enough effort into my own writing and creative output. I remember reading a section from Foucault's Pendulum (a book I never finished) where a character talked about how he could only edit books, never write them. It struck me then, and I was again reminded of it looking at the hexagrams. Am I truly incapable of occupying the position of The Creative, or am I just too lazy and nervous to try?
All my life I have been "yielding". Reading not writing, listening not speaking. Always waiting for someone else to put themselves out there so that I won't have to. It takes me too long to take one step forward. Do I really need to be advised to yield further?
And "Keeping Still"? Christ, I barely leave the house. When have I ever moved to quickly, or too much?
This hexagram is made up of broken lines only. The broken lines represents the dark, yielding, receptive primal power of yin. The attribute of the hexagram is devotion; its image is the earth. It is the perfect complement of THE CREATIVE--the complement, not the opposite, for the Receptive does not combat the Creative but completes it . It represents nature in contrast to spirit, earth in contrast to heaven, space as against time, the female-maternal as against the male-paternal. However, as applied to human affairs, the principle of this complementary relationship is found not only in the relation between man and woman, but also in that between prince and minister and between father and son. Indeed, even in the individual this duality appears in the coexistence of the spiritual world and the world of the senses. But strictly speaking there is no real dualism here, because there is a clearly defined hierarchic relationship between the two principles. In itself of course the Receptive is just as important as the Creative, but the attribute of devotion defines the place occupied by this primal power in relation to the Creative. For the Receptive must be activated and led by the Creative; then it is productive of good. Only when it abandons this position and tries to stand as an equal side by side with the Creative, does it become evil. The result then is opposition to and struggle against the Creative, which is productive of evil to both.
Movement in lines 3 and 6
Hidden lines.
One is able to remain persevering.
If by chance you are in the service of a king,
Seek not works, but bring to completion.
Dragons fight in the meadow.
Their blood is black and yellow.
Ken - Keeping Still, Mountain
The image of this hexagram is the mountain, the youngest son of heaven and earth. The male principle is at the top because it strives upward by nature; the female principle is below, since the direction of its movement has come to its normal end. In its application to man, the hexagram turns upon the problem of achieving a quiet heart. It is very difficult to bring quiet to the heart. While Buddhism strives for rest through an ebbing away of all movement in nirvana, the Book of Changes holds that rest is merely a state of polarity that always posits movement as its complement. Possibly the words of the text embody directions for the practice of yoga.
This was a fun exercise, but in a way it felt like reading a horoscope. I can force my situation to fit what is described, but if I had a different reading, I would've molded my opinion to fit that. Initially I misunderstood the lines with movement, and thought that my second hexagram was Chen. Trying to figure out what that had to do with me and then finding out that I wasn't even looking at the right thing lessened my interest.
Although I do see how both of these hexagrams could relate to me. I became pretty frustrated reading the description of K'un. For years I have been beating myself up about not putting enough effort into my own writing and creative output. I remember reading a section from Foucault's Pendulum (a book I never finished) where a character talked about how he could only edit books, never write them. It struck me then, and I was again reminded of it looking at the hexagrams. Am I truly incapable of occupying the position of The Creative, or am I just too lazy and nervous to try?
All my life I have been "yielding". Reading not writing, listening not speaking. Always waiting for someone else to put themselves out there so that I won't have to. It takes me too long to take one step forward. Do I really need to be advised to yield further?
And "Keeping Still"? Christ, I barely leave the house. When have I ever moved to quickly, or too much?
Monday, March 5, 2012
Line-By-Line Interpretation
Heaven and earth are enduring. The reason why heaven and earth can be enduring is that they do not give themselves life.
Heaven and earth are eternal and do not die or end. Because all that lives must die, heaven and earth do not die, and are thus enduring. Heaven and earth embody all, instead of taking on one specific individuality or life, they encompass everything, and they are everlasting.
Hence they are able to be long-lived.
Heaven and earth do not give themselves life, which is why they are able to be long-lived. They are not focused on the self, so they do not give life to themselves. They are everything, so they are long-lived.
Therefore the sage puts his person last and comes first,
The sage does not focus on his own life, his individual self. Instead, he puts it last by focusing more on the whole, and being more like heaven and earth. Because he does not focus on his own life and self, he is able to benefit and have a good life.
Treats it as extraneous to himself and it is preserved.
The sage separates himself from the way as a whole, and in this way he can preserve his own life. The sage does not think in terms of the mortal self, but eternal heaven and earth. In this way he preserves himself.
Is it not because he is without thought of self that he is able to accomplish his private ends?
The sage takes himself out of his own situation and because of this he benefits and is able to live a fulfilling life and accomplish things.
Qi Gong
I did not expect this to be nearly as hard as it was. I thought the exercise would be similar to what we did early in the year- 18 minutes of silence. I didn't do as well at that as I had hoped then, so I wanted to try and improve with the meditation. Unfortunately, Qi Gong proved much more difficult.
I was almost immediately thrown off by the positions described in the tape. I found the sitting position uncomfortable and I wasn't sure where to put my hands and tongue. The physical aspect of meditation distracted me the entire time, and by the end I had given up on reaching a meditative state. I thought some of the imagery provided by the master was gorgeous and peaceful, but I couldn't focus on it.
Something I found interesting was the master/translator talking about naturally expressing sounds and movements you feel inside. I heard many sounds in my mind, but of course, I did not act on them. No one did. I think I would've felt uncomfortable letting myself go, or seeing anyone else do it. I have to wonder if it would be different trying this meditation completely alone. Maybe the presence of others struggling like me was what was really distracting.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Wall-E Seminar Questions Part 3
6. Identify one item in the "avalanche of detritus" you feel is an important symbol. Why?
I loved the recording from Hello, Dolly!, especially since it was referenced throughout the movie. This is Wall-E's first knowledge of humans (unless if he remembers them from when he was first built), and ironically, it comes from a machine. The music seems anachronistic in comparison to the Axiom and desolate Earth, but it fits and helps tie the movie together.
I loved the recording from Hello, Dolly!, especially since it was referenced throughout the movie. This is Wall-E's first knowledge of humans (unless if he remembers them from when he was first built), and ironically, it comes from a machine. The music seems anachronistic in comparison to the Axiom and desolate Earth, but it fits and helps tie the movie together.
7. The Axiom might be described as a "utopic" existence. Do you agree or disagree with that description?
There is no suffering on the Axiom. Everyone is at peace, and has all of their needs and want. So I would agree that it portrays a utopian society. The word "utopia" actually seems to have gained some negative connotations with books like 1984 and Brave New World. The Axiom reminds me a lot of the society in Brave New World. People had everything they needed and there was no bad feeling, but they weren't able to take care of themselves or experience true emotion or critical thoughts. They weren't living fulfilling lives, because they didn't really notice or interact with the world around them.
There is no suffering on the Axiom. Everyone is at peace, and has all of their needs and want. So I would agree that it portrays a utopian society. The word "utopia" actually seems to have gained some negative connotations with books like 1984 and Brave New World. The Axiom reminds me a lot of the society in Brave New World. People had everything they needed and there was no bad feeling, but they weren't able to take care of themselves or experience true emotion or critical thoughts. They weren't living fulfilling lives, because they didn't really notice or interact with the world around them.
8. What is the impact of an almost complete lack of dialogue?
The lack of dialogue at the beginning of the movie was barely noticeable, surprisingly. The scenes did not need dialogue to convey emotion and hold the audience's interest. Pixar did a similar thing at the beginning of Up, although the time period without dialogue was much shorter.
The lack of dialogue at the beginning of the movie was barely noticeable, surprisingly. The scenes did not need dialogue to convey emotion and hold the audience's interest. Pixar did a similar thing at the beginning of Up, although the time period without dialogue was much shorter.
9. How does the film depict the human condition and what contemporary references could you use as analogies?
Every film depicts the human condition. Everything depicts the human condition. Broad question! But like we were saying in class, what's interesting is the robots taking on human characteristics that humans themselves seem to have abandoned. It forces you to think about how much technology can change the act of being human. A lot of things that would have once taken long periods of work can now be accomplished with button clicks. Is that bad?
Every film depicts the human condition. Everything depicts the human condition. Broad question! But like we were saying in class, what's interesting is the robots taking on human characteristics that humans themselves seem to have abandoned. It forces you to think about how much technology can change the act of being human. A lot of things that would have once taken long periods of work can now be accomplished with button clicks. Is that bad?
10. The Captain states, "I don't want to survive, I want to live." Interpret this statement.
Surviving on the Axiom is very easy; it means nothing. So the Captain wants to do something worthwhile with his life. Staying in space would have ensured the survival of everyone on the Axiom, but their lives would be monotonous and unfulfilled. By returning to Earth, the Captain is able to discover new things, work hard, and truly think about and experience the act of living.
Wall-E Seminar Questions Part 2
2. The genre of "Wall-E" is an allegorical romance. Why do you think that classification is appropriate?
I thought this was an odd way of looking at the romance between Wall-E and Eve, because I didn't initially see their romance as directly symbolizing any one thing in the way that an allegory does. They represent different aspects of love and romance, but I didn't really want to analyze it in that manner. However, after thinking about it, I do understand what could be seen as allegorical about the romance in this movie. As people have pointed out in class, the two characters most capable of human emotion are machines. As humans continue to give more aspects of lives to technology, from physical activity and labor, to entertainment, perhaps we are slowly eroding at our humanity. The lives of humans in Wall-E are completely dictated by machinery. After letting machines take over so many aspects of life, could we unintentionally sacrifice something as crucially human as emotion?
That seems a bit drastic, especially considering that even the people in Wall-E were capable of some level of emotion as soon as they became more aware. But I can see aspects of this even in present day. People live their lives though screens because they are unwilling to live through themselves. If you let Google research for you, if you let a computer think for you, and you let screens create entertainment for you, what is left for you to do? Of course, I'm not exempting myself from this, and I don't think technology is all bad. The computer and internet has helped to make great leaps in communication and accessing information, but we can't let an Auto-Pilot make our decisions for us!
I kind of side-tracked from the question here, but basically, I think it's a profound idea that the two individuals most capable of experiencing human life and emotions like love are not in fact human.
3. What environmental message does Wall-E send?
The first time I saw this movies in theaters, I found the opening scenes jarring, especially since they do not seem that far removed from reality. If we continue to abuse our planet and create more and more, we can not sustain it. And still we produce and produce irresponsibly. There needs to be a much greater effort to work towards sustainable development. Wall-E highlights the dire effects of not being careful- we can ruin the beautiful world we inhabit.
4. How does the movie relate to self-identity? (ontology)
Both Wall-E and Eve first tie their identity with their directive, yet as the movie progresses, they identify themselves with their relationship towards one another. Yet even at the beginning of the movie, Eve seems more self-aware than the people on the Axiom. Eve's directive is to find life. Humans have no directive, except to consume. There isn't critical thought in either instance, but Eve is more motivated and experiencing more. And when Wall-E and Eve meet each other, they continue to develop their self-identity by making decisions for themselves instead of doing what they are programmed to do. And it takes Wall-E and Eve to help others find their own identity (in the cases of the Captain and two people they run into).
I thought this was an odd way of looking at the romance between Wall-E and Eve, because I didn't initially see their romance as directly symbolizing any one thing in the way that an allegory does. They represent different aspects of love and romance, but I didn't really want to analyze it in that manner. However, after thinking about it, I do understand what could be seen as allegorical about the romance in this movie. As people have pointed out in class, the two characters most capable of human emotion are machines. As humans continue to give more aspects of lives to technology, from physical activity and labor, to entertainment, perhaps we are slowly eroding at our humanity. The lives of humans in Wall-E are completely dictated by machinery. After letting machines take over so many aspects of life, could we unintentionally sacrifice something as crucially human as emotion?
That seems a bit drastic, especially considering that even the people in Wall-E were capable of some level of emotion as soon as they became more aware. But I can see aspects of this even in present day. People live their lives though screens because they are unwilling to live through themselves. If you let Google research for you, if you let a computer think for you, and you let screens create entertainment for you, what is left for you to do? Of course, I'm not exempting myself from this, and I don't think technology is all bad. The computer and internet has helped to make great leaps in communication and accessing information, but we can't let an Auto-Pilot make our decisions for us!
I kind of side-tracked from the question here, but basically, I think it's a profound idea that the two individuals most capable of experiencing human life and emotions like love are not in fact human.
3. What environmental message does Wall-E send?
The first time I saw this movies in theaters, I found the opening scenes jarring, especially since they do not seem that far removed from reality. If we continue to abuse our planet and create more and more, we can not sustain it. And still we produce and produce irresponsibly. There needs to be a much greater effort to work towards sustainable development. Wall-E highlights the dire effects of not being careful- we can ruin the beautiful world we inhabit.
4. How does the movie relate to self-identity? (ontology)
Both Wall-E and Eve first tie their identity with their directive, yet as the movie progresses, they identify themselves with their relationship towards one another. Yet even at the beginning of the movie, Eve seems more self-aware than the people on the Axiom. Eve's directive is to find life. Humans have no directive, except to consume. There isn't critical thought in either instance, but Eve is more motivated and experiencing more. And when Wall-E and Eve meet each other, they continue to develop their self-identity by making decisions for themselves instead of doing what they are programmed to do. And it takes Wall-E and Eve to help others find their own identity (in the cases of the Captain and two people they run into).
5. What might be the significance of calling the corporate company "Buy 'n Large"?
Buy 'n Large recalls the likes of WalMart, Target, and IKEA. Out of these three, I've only been to Target, but it is easy to see the huge influence places like these hold in America. Go to one of these stores and you can spend hours buying...everything! Everything is one place, and you are constantly encouraged to buy bigger and buy more. In a way it creates a feeling of uniformity- which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but in this case it means that we become more and more alienated from the product. We are also buying a ton of crap. Does anyone really need all of this stuff? Like in the movie, just about everything will be trash one day.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Wall-E Seminar Questions, Part 1
1. Quote from NY Times article, Walt Rich, "Wall-E for President": This movie seems more realistically in touch with what troubles America than either the substance or the players of the political food fight beyond the multiplex's wall. Do you agree or disagree with this statement, and why?
Wall-E touches upon many problems which are facing America today that are ignored or touched upon in a superficial way. The first time I watched this movie, the first thing I noticed was the jarring environmental message. We are consuming resources and producing at a rate at which the Earth can not keep up with. Our population has been growing rapidly since the industrial revolution, and as a group, we do not behave responsibly enough to handle everything we are doing to the world around us. I remember learning in Environmental Systems last year that some scientists see this as another wave of extinction- this is how severely we are harming the other species around us .
This movie also focused on corporatism and mass production, which contribute heavily to the irresponsibility in environmental matters. They also make consumers dependent on them- without these corporations and mega-stores, so many would be without a source of income or a place to buy products. I think that Wall-E demonstrated how becoming reliant on a company such as Buy n' Large and their products diminishes our individual autonomy and puts too much power in the hands of company owners. I especially liked Jordan's comment on how people in oligarchic-like states can turn to these cheaper, easier kind of stores, which then turn into tyrannies.
If one has been paying any attention to the GOP primaries, it is pretty easy to see that the political atmosphere is not centered around the big problems which are relevant to the country as a whole. We are taking up a massive amounts of debt, greatly hurting our environment, and having a lot of problems internationally. Yet, because some of these problems are difficult to face, politicians chose to ignore them outright.
Wall-E touches upon many problems which are facing America today that are ignored or touched upon in a superficial way. The first time I watched this movie, the first thing I noticed was the jarring environmental message. We are consuming resources and producing at a rate at which the Earth can not keep up with. Our population has been growing rapidly since the industrial revolution, and as a group, we do not behave responsibly enough to handle everything we are doing to the world around us. I remember learning in Environmental Systems last year that some scientists see this as another wave of extinction- this is how severely we are harming the other species around us .
This movie also focused on corporatism and mass production, which contribute heavily to the irresponsibility in environmental matters. They also make consumers dependent on them- without these corporations and mega-stores, so many would be without a source of income or a place to buy products. I think that Wall-E demonstrated how becoming reliant on a company such as Buy n' Large and their products diminishes our individual autonomy and puts too much power in the hands of company owners. I especially liked Jordan's comment on how people in oligarchic-like states can turn to these cheaper, easier kind of stores, which then turn into tyrannies.
If one has been paying any attention to the GOP primaries, it is pretty easy to see that the political atmosphere is not centered around the big problems which are relevant to the country as a whole. We are taking up a massive amounts of debt, greatly hurting our environment, and having a lot of problems internationally. Yet, because some of these problems are difficult to face, politicians chose to ignore them outright.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)