The Wife of Bath Prologue and Tale

I enjoy reading The Wife of Bath Prologue and Tale because it brings out one's inner thoughts and feelings. The narrator speaks her mind openly about marriages, sex, control, and physical attractions between male and female. At the beginning of the prologue, the narrator uses Abraham, Solomon, and Jacob from The Old Testament to prove her point about marrying more than once. She also makes a statement similar to the tale itself; that is a women wants to be the one in control in the marriage
The Wife of Bath Prologue is about a female who has been through five different marriages. She talks of her husbands openly and how she controls each of them. She describes the first three husbands as old, rich, and kind (weak-willed). It seems to me that she wed them for their fortune. Her other two husbands are much younger, but are not as kind to her as the first three husbands. They treated her terribly, yet she loves them anyway. Her fifth husband is much more harder to get for the reasons that he dislikes women and are physically abusive towards them.
The tale on the other hand is a little bit different from the prologue. I did not expect the tale to be about a knight who is given a one year limit to search for an answer to a question. His question by the queen is of all the things in life, what would a women want the most? I thought this question would be difficult to answer. There are so many different opinions from each person. How is the knight be able to answer this question? However, he has helped from an older, ugly looking lady. She saids that women likes to be the one in control the most. This answer surprises me. Relationship nowadays is about two individuals agreeing with each other instead of who is being in control. However, the answer fits perfectly with the prologue.

Kokinshu

The Kokinshu is a collection of Japanese elite poems. Most of their poems are fascinating to me because the poems consist of only 5 lines. I have tried to make poems similar to theirs in high school, but it seems much more difficult than it looks. Even though I have the syllables right, I did not get to express what I want to say. In those 5 lines there are so much emotions stress into the poem. I can see throughout the collection that there are two main themes; seasonal poems and love poems. In the first poem of Ki no Tsurayuki, the poem is about the changing seasons.

"When snow comes in spring--
fair season of layered haze
and burgeoning buds--
flowers fall in villages
where flowers have yet to bloom"

It is basically about the transition of falling snow to plum bossoms. The snow represents the winter season while the bloom represents spring. Japanese write mostly about beautiful things in life. Their poems do not stress anything about bloodshed, being poor, or political life. From reading these poems, I get a totally different perspectives from one's feelings. Japanese poems are totally different than those of the Chinese poems.

Po-Chui

I enjoy reading his poems. His poems are very easy to read. It is straight forward and not too analytical. His poem shows mostly autobiography of his everyday life. As compared to other Chinese poet, Po Chu I is more concerned with his family. An example of his concern for his family is in the Golden Bell and Watching the Reapers poem. Instead of relating it to his occupation, which is being an official whose work is based on government rules and regulations, his poetry is more easygoing. He focuses more on his personal life and his carefree nature. My favorite poem by his is the Pruning Trees.

Trees growing--right in front of my window;
The trees are high and the leaves grow thick.
Sad alsa! the distant mountain view,
Obscured by this, dimly shows between.
One morning I took knife and axe;
With my own hand I lopped the branches off.
Ten thousand leaves fell about my head;
A thousand hills came before my eyes.
Suddenly, as when clouds or mists break
And straight through, the blue sky appears.
Again, like the face of a friend one has loved
Seen at last after an age of parting
First there came a gentle wind blowing;
One by one the birds flew back to the tree.
To ease my mind I gazed to the South-East;
As my eyes wandered, my thoughts went far away.
Of men there is none that has not some preference;
Of things there is none but mixes good with ill.
It was not that I did not love the tender branches;
But better still--to see the green hills!

I like this poem by him because he writes about simple things in nature. During the first part of the Pruning Tree, the only problem here is that the tree with thick leaves is covering his views of the mountain. So he decides to cut off the branches and leaves in order to have a better view of nature from house. With the branches clear off of his view, he can see many scenes from his window.

Kalidasa

I love reading this play. Kalidasa and the Ring of Recollection is about a romance between the king and the daughter of a sage. The play is interesting in many ways. The play keeps us interested in their romance. Out of the seven scenes, their exchange is very brief. Their brief interaction with each other is like a hook for me to keep on reading the play. This is similar to a person falling in love with someone, but he/she can not see each other daily. They will reminisce each other and wanting to see more and more. It keeps me wondering when will they see each other again or when will they express their love for each other. I see that someone who is harder to go after is worth it to wait. Therefore, the king is waiting for the right person to wed to because Sakuntala is harder to go after.
Another interesting part about the play is the plot. The king did not marry Sakuntala in public. Their marriage is a secret affair. There is no witness between them and so Sakuntala does not have any evidence that she is married to the king. This seems to be a major problem when the king loses his memory. The king does not recollect being married to her. Besides that the king loses his memory, he does not know that Sakuntala bears him a child. I dislike this part the most in the play. Sakuntala receives all the disadvantage on her side.

Bhagavad Gita

In the Bhagavad Gita chapters, god Krishna teaches Arjuna how to be free from the cycle of karma. Krishna persuades Arjuna that he should not hestitate to kill because Arjuna is a warrior. The duty of a warrior is to kill. I can see that Arjuna and Krishna's each has their own view. Although I can not say whose view is right or wrong, I can relate more to Arjuna than Krishna's view. I can relate more to him because he is just a normal individual just like any of us. In Arjuna's argument, he is conflicted between his family. Even though he is a warrior, he does not see any reason to fight his own family. Arjuna thinks that it is a sin to kill. If I was to put myself in his situation, I would not want to kll my own family member nor do I want to be killed by them. I can only assume the "what if" questions. What if I give up everything so they can have what they wanted? What if there are more alternatives? There are peaceful ways to resolve a conflict without killing each other.
However, Krishna has a different view on this matter. He speaks that in Arjuna's case it is not a sin to kill in battle. If a conflict is not resolved by words or diplomat, there is no other choice except fighting. Action is the result when using intelligence and knowlegde failed to resolve a conflict. Krishna says that it is action over emotion. Sometimes people have to fight their family for what they believe in. Not unless Arjuna practices ascethic then it is acceptable for him to not fight or be killed for his believe.
Krishna's view is all about duty. The duty of a warrior is to fight despite it is one's relative. Krishna stresses that it is performing one's duty in life is the greater importance.

Ramayana

I have never read an Indian epic before, but Ramayana is a first Indian epic for me. The Ramayana is a Sanskrit poem during India’s heroic age. The poem expresses Hindu values and tells the adventures and exile of Prince Rama of Kosola. The poem has both teachings about religion and ethic. In the poem Prince Rama encounters dharma and karma. Dharma is explained as proper human conduct or how one should carry themselves while karma is a record of a person’s deeds.
When I first read Ramayana, other terms such as brahmin, brahman, atman, samsura, and moksha are confusing. I have to clarify what these terms mean in order to understand the epic better. I have learned that Brahmin is the priest who is knowledgeable while brahman is the Great World Soul (moneistic force). Atman is an individual soul while samsura is a soul that migrate to another body. In order for a person to be released from their cycle of reincarnation, their atman and brahman have to merge called moksha.
After re-reading the epic, those words become more clearer. Because Rama is the reincarnation of God Visnu, whose purpose is to preserve dharma, he is the most virtuous out of the other three princes. Rama lives by the rules of dharma, he is expected to do what the caste requires. Despite the fact that queen Kaikeyi plots to disinherit Rama from his coronation, Rama is happy to give up his position as king. He accepts the 14 years in exile to serve his father's words. This is the most surprising part of the epic. I think he should have questioned and reasoned as to why he is to be exiled for fourteen years. I don't see much reason or logic behind his acceptance.
Rama's adventure into the forest is accompanied by his wife, Sita, and his brother. They face several demons known as Ravana. This demon kidnaps Sita and keeps her as a prisoner. As a result, Rama uses Hunuman, a powerful monkey who can leap the ocean, in search of Sita. Scandals and accusations of Sita's not being faithful arise once Rama saves her from the demon. Overall, the poem has all sorts of myths and tales. I enjoy reading Rama's adventure and also learning the basis of Hindu religion, dharma.

Lysistrata

After reading a couple tragic Greek plays, I do not believe that the play Lysistrata can make me laugh. However, the play proves me wrong. This play is a total satire of the Pelopenesian War. These women are sick and tired of their men fighting in war, and so they decided to end it in a comical way. This play is an excellent shift from the Greek tragedy plays because there is no gloomy image of men fighting for power. I have many good laughs from reading the dialogue. The women's pledge during the beginning of the play is especially funny. Who would have thought that staying abstinence from sex is the key to bring peace? I thought that women use sex to get what they want. Another part that is funny in the play is the dialogue between these men and women. Their dialogue is like a debate between the two sexes where women are much strong-willed than men.

Besides the funny lines in the play, Lysistra is about women's will power. The person with the most drive in the play is Lysistrata. She is not married nor blunt comparing to the other women. Lysistrata is very cunning in her speech and does not show any sexual desires or flirt with men; and most importantly does not post any feminine weaknesses. An instance of her witty is when she instructs the wifes such as Kinesias and Myrrhine on how to have self control over sex. I like the way Lysistrata influences the wifes; the wife can tease her husband and not have any sex. I wonder if once the men is in the mood and yet he can not do anything, wouldn't he go crazy?