Nietzsche

Nietzsche is mostly known for his call of "the death of God." Although there is some truth to this, religion has prevailed so far and seems to be gathering quite a group of dedicated follower. Modern science has definitely brought doubt to many of the older ways of looking at God, but the religious leaders have simply stuck to their guns and keep proclaiming  "God allows (new scientific thing that does "good") to happen." They always find a way to keep God in a good, moral light. I think they have a flawless plan here. It's kind of like Apple Inc. with the iPhone. Every time a new Android phone comes out, all of the iPhone faithful start quoting the commercials about how iPhone was there first and made all of this smart phone stuff possible. Even though that's not true, people believe it. They eat it up. They've just got such a great marketing team over there at Apple.

Where Nietzsche really hit the mark with me is his view on how everyone is full of crap. We all see things through our own perspective and rarely, if ever, take the time to try and look at things in a different way. I had dinner with my GF, along with her sister and brother in-law. We were at an Italian restaurant and the subject of traveling and seeing the world was brought up. I've always wanted a chance to do just that, see the world and all of the different people first hand and get a feel for them on my own. She thought that was the stupidest idea that any person or animal could ever even slightly begin to imagine, much less actually think about it and agree with it. I'll paraphrase her comments on it, but she basically said that she saw no reason to travel whenever she could just look at a picture and see it. She then pointed to a picture of a Tuscan sunset on the wall and reaffirmed her statements by saying something like, "See? There's a sunset. Big deal. I can see it right here and not spend a bunch of money and have to deal with foreigners." So she'll never see or hear or feel any of that stuff on her own. She'll live her life through other people with that sort of logic. That kind of thinking just seems about as fake as anyone can get. I guess it's the same as when people who read books about people who do things, exciting things, merely finish the book and do nothing but read the next one without exploring the adventures in the previous one. Those people are the wallflowers of the world.

As it was stated in class, Nietzsche shifted criticism from finding truth to finding meaning. I like to think that Mulder finally realized this on his quest for the truth. Although there is truth out there somewhere, the important thing is that whatever that truth is, the meaning that it holds is what someone should be trying to obtain. As in reading books and watching movies, there are many great lessons for the readers and viewers to focus on and take away with them at the end. I think this is what Nietzsche envisioned when he saw religion taking a fall and literature taking over in its place as to where people could gather their moral senses.

Baudelaire

I became somewhat intrigued with Baudelaire last semester when Mrs. Garner told me that a few lines of a poem I had written for her creative writing class reminded her of his poem The Corpse. While reading through this and other poems I also started to read about him and discovered his adoration for Edgar Allan Poe. He translated Poe's work and garnered a lot of attention for this task. He held Poe in high regard which caught my attention even more, being that I prefer Poe's work over pretty much anyone.

In reading the sections from Baudelaire's The Painter of Modern Life, I felt that Baudelaire fit in the category of flaneur. To write about people in the way that he did would have required a great deal of people watching and studying their tendencies. I'm a people watcher myself and tend to only interact when I want to learn something about somebody. So I definitely understand the appeal of this lifestyle from that aspect.

The way the dandy was described reminded me of the hipsters(they are also called scenesters, but I'm pretty sure only hipsters use that word) that we have today. The type that wears more daring fashions, ones that most people think are kind of cool looking but would never actually wear, and are always trying to stay ahead of the new fashions and even help create the new trends. These dandies, I'm sure, would have been just as hilarious to me as the hipsters of today. Every time I see fedoras, skinny jeans, feathers in peoples hair, or just anyone that dresses like Denise Cosby in the first few seasons of The Cosby Show, I can't help but smile and think how dandy it is that we live in the time that we do.

Samuel Johnson

I couldn't agree more with Samuel Johnson's description of works of fiction and what he believes their purpose should be. They are to be true to life stories that bring about a lesson or inspiration to the reader. He thought that they should show guidance in how to live. Where I disagree with Mr. Johnson is when he states that "if the world be promiscuously described, I cannot see of what use it can be to read the account." This seems to be heading back into Plato territory. This type of logic leads me to believe that Johnson had as little faith in humanity as Plato. Of course this could also be a sign of the number of uneducated people at the times and simply a precaution that was well deserved.

Maimonides

Maimonides is very confusing to read, but according to him, from what I've gathered, that is my fault. He seemed to be saying that the reader holds the responsibility in understanding the writer rather than the writer having to put his work down in a way that is understandable to reader. This makes sense to me for the fact that anyone with an exceptional vision should not dumb down their ideas or hold them back, but should put them out there to be explored by other people. As for any work that I will do, or have done, I want my work to be read by as many people as possible and understood to the fullest. Samuel Clemons once, sorta kinda, said that great literature is like wine and that his writings are like water. Everyone drinks water. So I believe the writer has the responsibility to edit and publish his work in a way that allows readers to comprehend and appreciate them. Maimonides and I clearly have a disagreement there.