2. What do you believe the demon symbolizes in The Story of the Fisherman and the Demon? What allegories do you read in this story?

I think the demon symbolizes everything the fisherman does not want. Which is failing his family dying. The demon explains to the fisherman that because the fisherman has freed him the demon will reward him with death. It was interesting because the demon never gave of a vibe through discussion that he was innately evil or that he was not joking, but this led to the eventual stand of between the demon and the fisherman with the “long-necked brass jar,” threatening to throw it in the sea. What was so different about this demon is that he spoke very intelligible, yet was described as being a hideous monster, with a head which looked like a tomb and so forth. Thus the demon symbolized not only what he didn’t want, but perhaps even as over excitement. That is to say that the fisherman was content with his daily routines and struggling for food life style and when he ran into the demon he was upset that he ever found him and now has to deal with him.

It was interesting how much was mentioned about “god,” yet at the same time there really was not that much meaning behind the god talk. For example, the fist think the demon says is “O Solomon, prophet of God forgive me, forgive me. Never again will I disobey you or defy your command.” This was strange because the very next thing the demon says is I will kill you for freeing me etc. of course there could be a number of metaphorical meanings behind these two characters purpose such as the king going against innocence.

The whole story had an excessive amount of referencing to god, no fish then “god eats the fish” or during their argument “spare me, and God will spare you, destroy me, and god will destroy you.” This was interesting coming from the demon to the fisherman, which I would assume to be a confusing situation. The demon threatens to kill the fisherman, then uses god as an excuse for the fisherman not to kill him, even though the demon did something bad against god resulting in his imprisonment from which the fisherman saved him. Alas, through all of this the demon eventually took back his threat and claimed it was a joke, only after the fisherman had the power of the demons life in his hands. A confusing story, but so many lesson which can be gained from it. The whole Arabian Nights was one of my favorite stories for sure, because it allows for so much deconstruction and life lessons.

1. In Silko’s “Yellow Woman,’ what do the stolen beef and the Jell-o have in common? How do these elements break the prevailing mood?

The concept of the story has a tone of a woman who does not feel a part of anything important, thus opening up her gullibility when the man informed her she is in fact a “yellow woman,” adding much desired intrigue in herself. She wants to believe the self proclaimed spirit (Silvia), but has some doubts, although all the events the spirit is telling her match the yellow woman myth she learned so perfectly. There were many “prevailing mood changers, such as Stolen Beef which was a major turning point in the story because the spirit tells her he is a cattle rustler and later Silvia is preparing cow meat to sell in town, only on the way to town a rancher claims Silvia stole the meat and a gun battle ensued. Shots rang out in the background as the “yellow woman” rode her horse off to town, not knowing who was the certain victor. This is the turning point where the woman decides to go home and not stay with the spirit any longer, almost like she was under a spell which had been broken. Maybe adding some validity to the the spirit, if he was killed during the shooting resulting in the spells disintegration. Her grandmother was making Jello when the woman returned home from her spiritual affair, which could first appear as a mundane activity. For me this acted as a symbol of plainness, because now that she has left her mythical experience behind her she is returning to her “regular” lifestyle. I found the story pretty culture based, because there was a lot of cultural folklore entwined in it and an apparent battle between modern and ancient life experiences.

2. After reading Saadawi’s “In Camera,’ how do you feel about Leila Al-Fargani’s father? Upon what evidence do you base your judgement?

Well, from my own viewpoint on what is right or wrong I feel like her father was pretty uncaring throughout the whole fiasco. Although because of the cultural norms they were a part of, his reactions seem just that, normal. Because Leila voiced her opinion, especially against the president’s intelligence, she was criminally charged. This story brings about multiple of touchy subjects in today’s “politically correct” movement. Because the issue in this story was primarily of ancient religious practices, which minimize a females role in society, especially as far as opinions are concerned perhaps that would be the root of the culture shock from the readers. Which brings us back to the father, because culturally he was acting as was expected with such anti-religious (rules) and political outspokenness. He wishes his daughter and himself would die instead of becoming so shamed in the eyes of society. There were many subjects in the story about the horrible abuse towards women being the norm, and those who abused them seemed to have a high degree of duty in those horrific actions. Truly a sad subject matter, saddest most is that it is reality for many women in today’s “modern” societies. For example, if a woman is raped in Dubai and reports it to the police, it is she who becomes imprisoned, not those who committed the crime. So at that I will conclude that I really hope those sorts of traditions will be weeded out, but until then, her father acted culturally correct and unfortunately in their society, it was Leila who was the criminal.

3. What is the importance of the title of the story “Death Constant Beyond Love’? What does it tell us about the stories central thematic concerns?

The title seems to be saying two things, fist death is constant and the second is that there is nothing beyond love. The senator discovers his imminent death, or should I say more extreme immediacy of his death, because death is always imminent. The central theme seems to be the senator trying to find peace, only not with his family but with someone else, a woman named Laura Farina. I got a vibe from the senator character that he lost interest in all responsibility or, for good reason future consequences. Therefore he came to terms with the fact that he was going to lose everyone he loved when he died so he would rather find love in the now, which is what drove him to become so obsessed with Laura. I almost feel like he wanted to love someone he did not know very well, because he knew he was going to die soon and didn’t want his wife or children to “ruin” his mood, so to say. Thus the only way for him to be happy and his family to avoid sadness, was for him to love someone and die with what comfort he could get from his brief affair. The main premise of the story is that we will all die and when we are dead all love dies with us, so we may as well be happy and love while we are still alive (a hippyesque mentality).

1. What is the relationship between Gregor and his family? What clues in the story suggest that his relationship with his family, particularly his father, is unsatisfactory?

It is a little bit difficult to totally understand from the perspective of an insect, but his father beats Gregor back into his room, probably symbolizing his fathers control and overpowering of Gregor’s ability to change in the open. His mother does wish to see Gregor even with his transformed state, which shows a high degree of caring no matter what Gregor becomes. Interestingly both Gregor’s father and sister are against his mother seeing him, which could be expected from the father, but not the sister who feeds him bread and milk while he slept. Following her discovering that Gregor desire a different type of food, she begins bringing him old nasty foos which fills his insect apitite. Through out the story Gregor’s father seems to always doubt or assume the worst of Gregor, through showing distrust and resentment. His mother and sister except Gregor’s transformation and try to change the house to fit his new state of need, such as crawling space. Although over time his whole family begin to feel as if Gregor is a burden, which results in Gregor dying and his family become happy. The whole story seems to outline how change can be good for ones self, but can result in negative consequences of those around you. And with Gregor’s insect self, he can no longer support his family. Although his father finally finds employment, resulting in the families rejection of Gregor’s worth. So maybe the moral of the story is that people can care about you when you are what they need you to be, but when you change, if they cannot get what they need they will seek it out else whaere and leave you behind.

2. Discuss the central events in each of the three sections of The Metamorphoses. In what ways do these events suggest that the weakening of Gregor results in the strengthening of the family as a whole?

The first section is focused on Gregor and how he had changed, what he was thinking about, and what he was afraid of. He was the most concerned with losing his job, which is central piece of the fist section, with his manager coming and running away in fear of Gregor. Also, after the manager runs in fear is when Gregor’s father pushes him back into his room, halting his efforts at chasing the manager and explaining his absence from work. For the second section, the main premise seemed to be his family and their reactions to his situation. Such as his sister feeding him and taking up his chore duties. The other members of his family seemed to become more close through their joint efforts in “dealing” with Gregor’s appearance/shape in every day activities. This is also the section where Gregor’s fate is being considered by his father and his sister is against the fathers with for him to be killed. In the third section, we begin to learn of Gregor’s unhappiness and pain. Furthermore, now his sister is also employed which was interesting because even though all of them were employed they were still poor from Gregor’s situation. Over time the family lost time to spend with Gregor and now he was almost merely a novelty of their Gregor. In the end they believed Gregor to be an “it,” free of all human qualities, a burden on the family and indeed must be put down. The whole story is building upon the fact that his family becomes more close, because his position in the family was replaced by his sister around the house and his fathers employment.

3. How effective do you find Akhmatova’s Requiem as a political protest? Requiem was not published until well after the purges were over and Stalin was dead; is it, then, totally lacking in influence?

I think the sheer fact that it was banned has some merit to its effectiveness as a protest. I think it was a little bit of a taunt to the Stalin regime, because it spoke of suffering, but did not do so where the author blamed the Soviet Union for the troubles, even though any ready would know through real context who was at fault. It is not totally “lacking,” because although it was banned, we get a glimpse of the sort of ideas which were against the Soviet era political control. At the time of the Soviet Union, most forms of scientific or artistic literature had to hide certain meaning because they could go against the political regime, yet non the less the truth was the truth and can be found hidden within many pages of that eras regional texts.

4. How should we interpret the famous command at the end of Archaic Torso of Apollo?

Well, it seems to be telling us to understand what is on the inside of yourself, because through recognizing what’s there you will understand what needs to change. I suppose there are a number of other ways to interpret it, but to me it is about self-awareness, self-acceptance, and acceptance of changing ones-self.

1. Is Tartuffe in fact anti-religious, or does it only attack corruptions of religion?
Well, it could be interpreted as “anti-religious,” but I doubt it was intended to be. Tartuffe, was in fact a hypocrite, which I believe was the moral of the story, because even though a person is religious, it is rare that anyone abides by the principles they teach. In addition it provided an example of how trusting a person merely on what they say could be dangerous, not just for people, but for a kingdom or society. I think, like a lot of writings from times of conflict, we will find hidden meanings giving alternate perspectives and how the world is through poetic reinterpretation. Corruption in a religion was portrayed in Tartuffe and I think the truths present gave the poem a contemporary meaning. Or really I guess this story could be useful in becoming aware of corruption in any circumstance, because the surface of an individual or idea could be covering hidden agendas or hypocrisy presentation of those beliefs.

2. In what respects is Hugo’s Satan a heroic figure? How does Hugo’s account differ from Dante’s?
La Fin de Satan (the end of mr Satan) gives us a different take of satan, one where he falls from heaven and morphs into a creature with remnants of human qualities such as a personality. Could satan in this poem be considered a hero? Of course, because one’s hero is another’s enemy and vise versa; just because Satan was cast from heaven does not mean that those who cast him out were in the right. I think the fact that Satan is a product of following what he believes no matter how dark the outcome, makes him a hero. Also if we compare him with some points of The Hero’s Journey, we will see the he can almost match up with the first half of the chart, ending in the abyss with the rebirth of Satan and the transformation of his image and outlook. Although that is where his journey ends, because he refuses to provide atonement for what he has done, which the knowledge of eternal darkness because of his refusal, adds a certain hero-esque quality to this satan character. Dante’s version of the devil is cold with bat winged chins who, according to this story, was once a perfect being shamed by ugliness, being a part of hell and not the master of it. Whereas in La Fin de Satan, Satan is presented through his journey, allowing the reader to better understand his position and character before he transforms into a beast, which is something Dante did not do.

3. Discuss and compare the images in any two poems assigned for this week.
The imagery of To Sylvia by Leopardi and A Pine is Standing Lonely by Heine, give a vivid picture of nature, yet also interpret the falseness of nature and the reality instead of the beauty it promised. In To Sylvia, such questions asked were why nature could not keep its promise, why the beauty could not remain in infinity through long life. Instead the reality is that we are mortal and even though we are eagerly trying to climb to the top of the mountain of youth, the journey’s completion is not certain, and even when we get to the top humans share the fate of death. To Sylvia is written with a lost tone, a feeling of being left behind. A Pine Standing Lonely, does describe loneliness, but also a wish to be somewhere else, not cold or frozen, but warm and peaceful with palm trees rather than desolate horizons. I liked how they both provided images of what the characters would be seeing, and they would augment what they see to how they want it to be. To Sylvia was the most imagery-dependent poem, because almost every idea was surrounded by words such with meanings of nature, or of innocence.

1. Granted that Machiavelli’s own historical context is remote, how far does his pattern of contrasts between political ideals and concrete realities apply today?

I think a lot of what he said is the reality of today, including the concept of the difference of morality between public and private purposes. The US has a history of using excessive means to destabilize international political figures who do not match the US interests, or possibly even choose a new leader of a nation by supporting an opposing figure through financial or military assistance. Whether or not modern political actions are being implemented with Machiavelli, it is doubtful, I would guess that many of his ideas were already common practice and he only outlined it. This sort of obviousness makes me wonder if there was an ironic tone in his writing, maybe he was merely stating how it could be with no absolute intention for it becoming that way. The Prince was even banned by the Catholic church, which asserted it was going against god, which is funny because the book outlined the Catholic church’s personality pretty well. In today’s world, the powers of a nation are often spread over many individuals, which the people trust will make the right decisions for the good of the nation. Not being in politics myself, I wonder what it is actually like for politicians, how they decide what is right and what is wrong for society, and how would they determine what wrong can justify a right. Machiavelli was a advocate for putting the people first even if that meant acting in a corrupt manner and making decisions which would not have the popular support of the people, not thinking about morality, but how it would improve the nation. I don’t think his work necessarily applies today, but I do believe some of the attributes he described a Prince would need can be found in modern and ancient contexts.

2. Sister Juana de la Cruz cuts off her hair to force herself to learn more quickly, although she knows that among young women, “the natural adornment of one’s hair is held in such high esteem.’ Finally, she enters the convent (where woman had their heads shorn). What other works have you read that emphasize the importance of a woman’s hair? Why does it seem to have so much symbolic value in such a range of cultures and times?

Hair represents many thing in cultures around the world, in Sister Juana de la Cruz case, she felt she would only deserve to keep her hair if she had the knowledge to deserve it. Therefore, she only got to keep it as long as she learned, and cut it off if she failed to learn. She believed, hair represented beauty, but beauty is less important than the beauty of knowledge. An example of other cultures would be the mythological story of Medusa, who had a head of snakes instead of hair, representing wickedness instead of beauty. The bible invokes the power of hair through the character Samson, who loses his power when it is cut off. In modern society, the female hair is thought of as a beauty characteristic, but what is interesting, is with current battles against breast cancer, females will cut their own hair in support and respect for those who lost their hair during cancer treatment. Hair symbolizes beauty, but when it’s removed it can symbolize strength and the idea that beauty is not superficial.

3. Bear in mind that the Aztec warrior’s highest duty is to bring home live captives for sacrifice. Give the Song for Admonishing a careful reading and decide–without researching the entire Cantares Mexicanos–what possible meaning might be assigned to the figurative terms “flower’ and “song.’

Well, the line “Sacred flowers of the dawn are blooming in the rainy place of flowers,’ makes me think the flowers are those who are about to be sacrificed, and the rainy place could represent the place were blood flows and the flowers bloom in the eyes of the gods. Furthermore, the line “giving a gift of flower brilliance to the eagle-jaguar princes,’ represents to me that the flowers are representing life and a gift through sacrifice to the god princes. The term song, seems to represent the screams of those sacrificed flowers, and the chanting of war cries of those who captured the flowers. I think this song could be viewed in a number of ways, but being that war was the main focus of the culture, I would assume war is what they saw as beautiful, thus describe it in a beautifully poetic way.

1. The Tenth Story of the Tenth Day: Why is Griselda being tested?

This was the tale of Gualtieri who picked a wife but does not necessarily believe in the need for having a wife. Thus he tries to show that his wife (Griselda, would not stick with him through thick and thin. He first forces the notion that he killed their two children, and still she stays by his side. He then tries to get her to believe that he has found love else where, yet still she persists to be totally dedicated to their marriage. So after his various escapades of testing Griselda he finds that she truly is worth being his wife and reintroduces her to the two children that he never killed. The test he seemed to be poking at women and had a tone of male superiority, such as commanding of women. It seems to me that the mane test was how much hurt a woman could take from her husband and still remain 100% dedicated to him alone. Interesting story, but certainly not expectable action by modern standards.

2. Compare the frame tales in the Decameron, and The Thousand and One Nights. In each case, what is the reason for telling stories? Do the stories accomplish the purpose for which they are intended? How important is the relationship between the tale and the teller?

I think what was most interesting bout both stories is that there are female perspectives being told, because 1001 nights is told by a female and Decameron is told from the perspective of 7 women and three men. In 1001 nights the stories are an aversion of death from the king, but Decameron is not necessarily an aversion but a way to pass time as the tellers stay hidden from the Black Death. There is certainly a form of gender bias in the stories, where females told tales with happy endings and males spoke stories where women played tricks on men. I do believe there is a degree of importance between the tale and the teller, because the stories tell the views of the teller played out using various characters and plots. I do think the stories give the intended perspective which get the readers to ponder on real issues through fictional stories.

3. In Laustic, what does the nightingale symbolize? Explain your answer.

Well, in the story the nightingale held some “love” based symbolic meaning. The poor nightingale was killed because Marie used it as an excuse for why she would leave her and her husbands bed at night. Because she claimed she would go to her window at night to her the beautiful songs of the bird, her husband had the bird caught and killed it in front of Marie to dissolve any further disturbance. The death of the bird, symbolized the death of her love affair. The end of the bird meant the end of their meetings, and when Marie had the bird sent to the neighbor knight of the affair, he understood that the beauty of their relationship was dead. I am not sure why the knight kept the birds body, but maybe it symbolized the love he could not have or the love he always wants to remember.

1. What do you think Dante learned on his journey through Hell? How does it differ from what you learned while reading about the journey?

He learned about himself, he began by feeling ashamed/sorry for the condemned soles sentenced to hell and the punishment they received. He began changing his opinions of these sols as he journeyed deeper into hell, becoming less of a sympathetic and more judgmental. It seems as he got further into hell, he learned more about human sin and the purpose of their damnation. He sees some people he knew and despised in life, which he got joy from seeing suffering. As the journey progresses he becomes more in tune with god by understanding why these people in hell suffer, there morals were corrupt, yet Dante has no wish to abolish his morals and end up in hell with those less worthy. Over all I think Dante learned how to stay true to god and rather than feel pity for those who suffered, feel lucky that he was not them. Furthermore he is trying to reach heaven in aims at finding the woman who he loves, which may be interpreted as a selfish act, rather than morally driven purpose.

As I was reading the story I could not help but wonder why him judging others was appropriate, because only god could deem a sole unworthy for heaven and sent to hell, but he does begin to conflict through his own judgment of others. In Dante’s Inferno, Heaven and hell seemed more connected than in normal traditional sense, because in this story heaven ran hell and would command a level of hell to let Dante pass. As the reader the story told of the wickedness of humanity and the need for all of us to avoid doing such morally wrong things. The readers journey is not so different from Dante’s because the story is primarily about the levels of hell not necessarily about learning. The story was away to present a connection to god by describing what horrible things will happen to you if you stray from the moral guide. The story was interesting, because it provided a new interpretation of hell that countered the current hell definitions ambiguity. Because now the readers can imagine what sort of sins would be punishable and the sort of suffering they could expect. Now the reader can imagine how a life traveling on a sinful road leads to greater and greater suffering in hell by the roads end. Although because Dante does not reach heaven, but instead returned to earth. Perhaps the thing he learned most was how he had to live his life in order to truly be worthy of heaven.

1) The madness is sparked through an unintentional discovery of his wife laying with a “kitchen boy,’ catalyzing Shahrayar’s reevaluation of women and his own view on the nature of human virtue. I believe this story is not meant to show macho versus un-macho sorts of male behavior, but rather the frailty of all seemingly perfect relationships, no matter what society they’re from. Faithfulness, as he discovers, is not a prominent trait, even for someone as important to society as himself. He was not a special case, as his brother can attest.

2) In any poetic/mythical story it is common for animals to be part of the cast, yet the type of animal usually is a strong indicator of the animals’ purpose in the story at hand. For example in the tale of the Ox and the Donkey, where a gifted man could understand his Ox and Donkey conversing about their daily activities. Therefor the Ox discussed how his work day went, what lame food he received, and how extremely tired the combination made him. The Ox further complained about how pampered the Donkey’s life was in comparison. Thus the Donkey recommended playing sick, like a school child does to avoid going to class. Following that the Donkey was recommended to take the place of the Ox by the merchant to the plowman. Thus resulting in the Donkey complaining and the Ox relaxing, only now the Donkey is eager to find a way to get his pampered lifestyle back and return the Ox to his original place behind the whip in the fields. This story to me represents that sometimes the only way to be happy is at the misfortune of others. So perhaps this story also speaks of staying out of other people’s business, or else it could affect your own in a negative way. Because the merchant overheard the conversation of the two animals, the results were unforeseen by the Donkey and maybe that is how Vizier thought his daughter would be affected.

The Tale of the Merchant and his Wife had a good conscience versus bad conscience vibe. Expressing that women should be put in their place, because they live in a patriarchal society. Through the rooster’s influencing the beating of the woman, it showed the daughter that she must respect men and fear the possibility of being beaten if she disobeys.

As for the Tale of the Merchant and the Demon, it presented a story about how a man accidentally killed the demon’s son via high velocity date pits. This story I believe is meant to show that even men are below other life and defenseless to the abilities of nature.

3) Sin is so subjective and the penalties of sinning are decided by those who defined sin. I do not believe the penalties suffered are appropriate because those deciding a person’s need for suffering are as guilty, if not more guilty, as the ones receiving judgment. Sin cannot be used as a way of placing people into different categories of suffering through biased perceptions of what is sin, because that is after all how so much of modern discrimination and hate crimes occur. Not only is a sin subjective, but it is often defined by people who are personally against specific behavior. For some a sin could be the fact that a person believes in a different god, or to others a sin is a person of one ethnicity marrying a person of another. The fact that sins are categorized and religiously subjectively defined is at the root of the issue. The definitions of the types of sin in Dante’s Inferno are very inappropriate, and are all based on people doing innocent things, which just so happen to go against the god. For example the Sixth Circle is for heretics, which only means they do not believe in the same god as those who invented this definition of the sin.

1) Any story which does not require a “triumph” is usually a poor effective motivator for morality or other sorts of life models. The fact that Rama is “perfect,” I believe is pointing out the perfectness in us all, so it’s not his deeds which are entirety of the story, but more the the fact of him being, him. It was interesting being told that he was perfect at the beginning because I found myself searching for any imperfections of his character, but reached the conclusion that “perfection” is purely in light of the cultural standard being depicted. Achilles would have been deemed perfect by any war driven society, as he indeed was. I do wonder if him appeasing the people by banishing his wife could be considered imperfect, because after all why is the crown worth more than his wife (and children). His mother Kausalya
Decided to use her boons to have her younger son become king, thus Rama was banished for 14 years in the forest. His mother did not have the complete dedication to dharma as Rama did, she could not find value in it when nothing she wished for became real. The meditation required is present in today’s Hindu cultural practices, yet it seems like Rama’s mother, not all are dedicated and few if any reach the desired pinnacle of Rama perfection.

2) Arjuna is afraid to fight because the opposing army consisted of their own blood. Consideration of who they are fighting and what it is worth can be found in numerous epics from many cultures. Achilles reconsiders his choice of war and contemplates settling down because the battles are not his, but others political disputes. Honor and glory were Achilles motivators, yet he would not be disrespected no matter whose side assaulted his pride. Madea on the other hand, was Arjuna’s position, but instead of reconsidering she found more elegant ways of murdering her closest family members. All these characters have conflict, but only for the greater good or self fulfilling “good.” Hinduism is against violence towards people or animals, but war is inevitable and questions of why violence should not be the answer was shown by Arjuna’s questions. Although the same type of questioning can be found in other epics, usually directed at a god. Many other religions point out the immoral nature of murder, and especial touch on the topic of the immorality of killing ones own kin. The primary route of thinking I believe all of these characters find the selves tangled in is whether or not everything they are ding is worth it.

1) In Islam, they do view Hell similar to that of Christianity, but not so much as Judaism. It is a place of damnation, where endless torture is the only pastime from more torture. Jannah or Paradise is what heaven is called in Islam, but even though they have a similar heaven the atmosphere is a lot more natural than Christians vision. There are rivers and gardens, not streets paved in gold etc. Interestingly, in the Islamic view of heaven, they believe there is no such thing as “original sin,’ thus everyone goes to heaven as long as they don’t do evil. Although Islamic heaven and hell are divided into multiple tiers for severity of good or evil dead which brought them to the end road. Out of all three religious sects, only Christianity and Islam have both an heaven and hell form of propaganda.

3)There are various demigod and characters in Christianity such as Jesus, Virgin Mary etc., as well as various forms such as the holy trinity. The dove from Christianity also represented a zoomorphically theistic concept, which is found in many pagans religious. There is an interesting film called Zeitgeist, which breaks down how Christianity became what it is by essentially engulfing other culture religious elements to make Christianity seem more “friendly.’ Furthermore, Christianity switched out pagan religious day’s with Christian holy day furthering the smooth transition into “holiness.’ In addition now that the Old Testament is not the focus, the New Testament can yank on peoples need for love rather than fear that was the tactic of the Old Testament. Oddly enough, each religion is bursting with metaphors, so a big part of successful religions is the ability for there to be ambiguity through interpretation, meaning everyone could find some aspect of it applicable to their own well being. Everyone wanted gods on their side, and if the Christian god could fill the void of being protected, then more people would be willing to conform to the rules. Also it is poetic in how it describes the events in the New Testament, drawing the listeners to feel as though it was actually happening.

3) The god of older mythologies equated to a polytheist realm of understanding why things happen the way they do. When Christianity came about it combined all gods into one “god’ with various deity time characters remaining for easy transition from poly- to monotheism. In both Gilgamesh and the Iliad Gods were more like guides for the main characters to find themselves, whereas the New Testament is manly focused on taking a sinner and turning them into a righteous one. Because a person who did bad knows what evil is worth leaving for holy reasons they are more in tune with god, but if a person never sinned then they are never aware of what god has to offer and negating the concept of original sin. Intervention is found a lot in both Christianity and paganism, yet the severity of those interventions depends greatly on the moral of the story. There also seemed to be an aspect of cosmopolitan in Christianity, “everyone,’ is included in the various promises no matter if their rank is of king or their title is slave. In the Iliad and Gilgamesh, the guidance from the gods seemed rather biased and focused on why, who, and consequences of actions. Also in Greek mythology not everyone worshiped the same gods, thus battles raged between men and gods of their respective positions on diplomatic or moral disputes.