In seeking everlasting life, Gilgamesh is told "there is no permanence"(106). Regardless of the struggle to attain something forever, you will ultimately fail. Be it life, love or loot, it cannot be possessed indefinitely. Our world is constantly changing. Nothing remains forever. The newest thing is soon to be obsolete, replaced with something even newer.
Due to the impermanence of life, humanity begins ever-present detachment. Because it is known that in time what you have will be gone, we detach ourselves. Rather than cherishing moments, people and objects human beings remove themselves. To go about daily life believing your life is valueless, to focus on the common lot of man, to see the future not the present, is bad. As James Taylor professes, “"The secret of life is enjoying the passage of time.” The impermanence of all things--concrete or abstract--often taints life. Believing there is no worth in becoming attached because it soon will be gone threatens the quality of life. Taylor is saying in enjoying life, and treasuring what is possessed while it is possessed is the secret to leading a happy life.
Though, as time progresses, knowledge is gained about impermanence. Due to this acquired knowledge-be it from Utnapishtim or even Mufasa-the idea that "there is no permanence"(106) is further enforced. In reference to the movie, The Lion King, at a young age Simba learns about death. His all-knowing father, King Mufasa, tells him of his temporality on Earth, and what is to come in the afterlife. After explaining how the stars are "the great kings of the past," Mufasa then assures Simba "those kings will always be there to guide you and so will I"(The Lion King). When we die, what remains on earth is why we live. Upon dying, a life is measured. Mufasa tells Simba, his life is lived so when he dies, as all creatures do (thus completing the circle of life) he shall guide those after him.
A sense of eternal life is established through beliefs, and often times religion. An “everlasting” life is a common term for the Catholic Church. Though deceased, the spirit is still alive in all of the people it touched. A sense of eternal life is instituted through the belief that there is an afterlife, along with the concept that the spirit still lives in those who remain alive. What ultimately is remembered of us once we pass gives meaning in life. The legacy left behind is worth living. The concept of coloring yourself a “legend” allows life to be lived believing eventually the bigger picture will be colored.
Though in literally dying, a life ‘ends,’ symbolically a life ends many times. Stages are completed multiple times throughout a life. Despite the continuation of life with little regard to the ‘stage’ just graduated, in reflecting upon a matured life periods of change are evident. Enkidu experiences monumental change in transforming from beast to man. Following his first transformation, Enkidu ‘knew’ much more than the harlot. Soon, “his heart was filled with the thoughts of man and his mind filled with wisdom”( 65). Many cultures even formally recognize the ‘death’ of one phase and progression to another. Bar mitzvahs, confirmations, quiceaneras etc. all officially mark the end of a chapter in a life. The culmination of ‘psuedo-mini-deaths’ is in they all eventually leading to the real ‘death.’ That marks a life.
If dwelled upon too much, life seems meaningless and dull. Because of the impermanence of all it is important to live while you’re alive, and not take for granted the time you have with what you have. Though immortality is not attainable, in essence it is possible to live forever. Despite failing to achieve immortality, all characters of Gilgamesh are still alive today-though not physically. The legend left behind measures a life. Why we live is so when die, our legacy is left behind. How strongly a life is remembered measure the quality of the life.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Monday, September 17, 2007
"So you want to be a hero kid? Well, whoopdie doo"
In a utopian society there would be no need for heroes. When problems arise that trouble the society, a hero is created or formed. The ‘hero’ possesses the necessary traits to deal with and conquer the problem at hand. Be it in ancient epic tales, such as The Odyssey, mid 20th Century iconic musicians, or present day figures, the idea of a hero is omnipresent. The one who flies in to save the day, the person always there to catch you before you plummet downwards, the human invincible to all, possessing qualities others deeply wish they attained- the hero. Heroes have existed for as long as time, there has always been the person who, against all odds, prevails and saves the city, world, damsel etc.
Often times the actions of a hero, out of context, would be viewed much differently. To many, soldiers are viewed as heroes, and rightfully so. When placed in the time and place, when and where hope is needed, soldiers are heroes. The thought of vulnerability and susceptibility fears nations, thus a solution is made. In idolizing the brave, sly, fearless, indestructible figure, the nation puts itself at ease. In almost immortalizing the humans, people will lull themselves into security because of the presence of heroes. Firefighters, police officers, and various other professions where, on a daily occurrence, heroism is exemplified, calm society. The logical fears such as fires, and crimes are, perhaps prematurely, cast away in thinking about the protection they are getting from the ‘Herculean’ citizens.
Heroines, though understates, are present in history as well. In a male-centric society, however, traits which would qualify a man as a hero, often casts a different shadow on women. Maya Angelou is a prime example of double standards in classifying heroes. Though brave, courageous, persevering and bold—traits that would certainly certify a man a hero--caused great debate regarding Angelou. She was seen as a black female who didn’t accept her place in a society dominated by white males. Heroines are less recollectable due to the fact that they are understated and undervalued due to societies biases.
Heroes create an unnecessary reliability. It’s clear in every movie, book, or TV show staring a male hero-be it Lois Lane, Princess Leia, or any other damsel in distress-they await the hero. There is no need to act with heroism when in no time, she will be saved and swept off her feet by the hero.
Brecht was astute in stating “unhappy the land that needs heroes.” When a hero, or heroine, is present there is no need nor urge to step up. Why become braver, fight harder, and persevere longer when society will turn to the immortalized figure for help and idolization regardless? There is no need to. In hyperbolizing traits every human wishes they had—bravery, mental and physical strength, courage, etc.—society is brought down. There never will be a perfect citizen, merely an exaggerated and embellished concept of a hero to which nobody can compare.
Often times the actions of a hero, out of context, would be viewed much differently. To many, soldiers are viewed as heroes, and rightfully so. When placed in the time and place, when and where hope is needed, soldiers are heroes. The thought of vulnerability and susceptibility fears nations, thus a solution is made. In idolizing the brave, sly, fearless, indestructible figure, the nation puts itself at ease. In almost immortalizing the humans, people will lull themselves into security because of the presence of heroes. Firefighters, police officers, and various other professions where, on a daily occurrence, heroism is exemplified, calm society. The logical fears such as fires, and crimes are, perhaps prematurely, cast away in thinking about the protection they are getting from the ‘Herculean’ citizens.
Heroines, though understates, are present in history as well. In a male-centric society, however, traits which would qualify a man as a hero, often casts a different shadow on women. Maya Angelou is a prime example of double standards in classifying heroes. Though brave, courageous, persevering and bold—traits that would certainly certify a man a hero--caused great debate regarding Angelou. She was seen as a black female who didn’t accept her place in a society dominated by white males. Heroines are less recollectable due to the fact that they are understated and undervalued due to societies biases.
Heroes create an unnecessary reliability. It’s clear in every movie, book, or TV show staring a male hero-be it Lois Lane, Princess Leia, or any other damsel in distress-they await the hero. There is no need to act with heroism when in no time, she will be saved and swept off her feet by the hero.
Brecht was astute in stating “unhappy the land that needs heroes.” When a hero, or heroine, is present there is no need nor urge to step up. Why become braver, fight harder, and persevere longer when society will turn to the immortalized figure for help and idolization regardless? There is no need to. In hyperbolizing traits every human wishes they had—bravery, mental and physical strength, courage, etc.—society is brought down. There never will be a perfect citizen, merely an exaggerated and embellished concept of a hero to which nobody can compare.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
