Points of interest from The Conquest of New Spain

First, I would like to discuss the gruesome imagry within the context of the book, especially describing Aztec temples and sacrifice rituals. Here is an interesting article about the Aztec religion, which discusses the topic of human sacrifice: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_gx5214/is_2003/ai_n19132056
The vivid descriptions within Diaz del Castillo's writing reminded me of the film, Apocalypto, which is centered around Mayans, but the sacrafice scene is similar to the sacrifice rituals of the Aztecs. Here's a video clip from the sacrifice scene in Apocalypto: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYqEi2d9zEc
Within our reading we can visualize something just as disturbing, "the walls of the shrine also were so caked with blood and the floor so bathed in it that the stench was worse than that of any slaughter-house in Spain" (Castillo 236).
The visualitzation of bloody temples and shrines is so horific that I was shocked to be reading such gruesome images within an early American piece of literature, especially since everybody is complaining how graphic modern day movies, video games, and literature are. We discuss the modern obsession with violence as if our country has degenerated from "what it once was." At least that's how I always saw it, until I began really observing the earliest of our country's literature for this class. I think Justin compared it to a Tarentino film, and I completely agree with him. Our country has always had a fascination with violence since the pilgrims settled here. It couldn't have come from no where--it must be something within our nature.
Now, I've always considered myself to be against violence, but then I ask myself: why were the images of violence and sacrifice the most interesting thing I read within this text? Really!
I certaintly don't promote violence, yet something within me finds it entertaining.
Maybe, we should stop blaming video games for all the violence among teens, because some of the images within Diaz del Castillo's writing disturbed me far more than anything I saw when I played Silent Hill on xbox. By the way, Montezuma was the first Hannibal Lecter! ["I have heard that they used to cook him the flesh of young boys"(Castillo 225).] Anyway, I guess my point is that violence isn't really something we can pin on the country or the media. One thing that does come to mind is something Ishmael Beah said during the Common Book Convocation that has stuck with me ever since. He said that returning to Sierra Leone now would make him feel safer than walking around on the streets of New York. That statement really hit me. I mean is our country really to the point where a former child soldier feels safer in the land where violence consumed his life than he would strolling around one of our nation's most beloved cities?? I guess the reason is that here we don't feel the full weight of violence-we see the glory, but not the consequences. Just like the cartoon idea that was mentioned in the video we watched in class. I guess we can't escape whatever it is within our human nature that finds violence so appealing, but in order to balance it, it is necessary to be educated on the effects of violence. You can't just tell a kid, "Don't do this at home." They gotta see the reality of what could happen if they did. The problem isn't violence, the problem is ignorance.

Puritan View of Punishment

In our class discussion, someone brought up the point that Puritans generally view trials, tragedies, and trouble as a sign of God's disfavor or a form of punishment. This is very consistent with our study of the witchtrials, yet within the text of Mary Rowlandson's captivity narrative we see a new view of tragedy. Mary Rowlandson viewed persecution as a gift from God. This is still a mainstream christian idea. Originally, the Puritan's were fleeing their country in search of religious freedom free from persecution. I think they realize, when they come to the new world that there is no way of escaping religious persecution, regarless of where you are. However, they themselves add to the religious persecution when they attempt to convert the Native Americans. In return, the Native Americans persecute them. This realization that persecution is inescapable leads to a reformation of their view of persecution. Of course, it has always been a theme within the bible that persecution is a blessing from God. But I think the experiences of the new world didn't so much change the idea that persecution is a sign of God's disfavor, but it reinforced the idea that they are God's chosen people. Mary Rowlandson quotes Hebrews 12:6 in her narrative, "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every Son whom he receiveth." She then writes, "now I see the Lord had his time to scourge and chasten me...And I hope I can say in some measure, as David did, It is good for me that I have been afflicted." I think it's pretty interesting that the Puritan's set out to teach the Indian savages about their religion, but It really seems like the Indian's taught them more about their own religion than they could teach themselves. One of the bible's main principles is humility, and that is what the Puritan's were lacking. Mary Rowlandson learned this through her experience with the Native Americans. She writes, "I have seen the extream vanity of this World: one hour I have been in health, and wealth, wanting nothing: but the next hour in sickness, and wounds, and death, having nothing but sorrow and affliciton." She specifically notes how she witnessed how God provided for the masses of Native Americans with just the wilderness to sustain them, "I cannot but stand in admiration to see the wonderful power of God, in providing for such a vast number of our Enemies in the Wilderness, where there was nothing to be seen, but from hand to mouth." Basically, She learned of the vanity of the life she had been living when she would be so contented that she claims to have wished for affliction. Her affliction came and did show her how vain her life had been. Because of the lesson her affliction taught her, she really demonstrates that it is a blessing from God to be afflicted, because it leads to a greater understanding of God. She writes, " The Lord hath shewed me the vanity of vanities, and vexation of spirit; that they are but a shadow, a blsast, a bubble, and things of no continuance; that me must rely on God himself, and our whole dependance must be upon him." I think that this is a really profound lesson that Rowlandson is sharing with her community. She's telling them, especially the one's who did not experience such levels of suffering, that their way of life is vain, and that is not how God wants life to be for them. It's even more that she is a woman, at this time, delivering such a strong and influential message.

Losing Faith

I think that "Young Goodman Brown" ties in wonderfully with Mather's On Witchcraft, not just because of the obviously shared topic of witchcraft, but because they both tell a story of what happenes once we lose sight of our faith. Goodman Brown leaves his angelic wife, Faith, with hopes that when he returned all would be well. As if he expected that there would be no consequences to his actions. In the beginning, he knows that she suspects something bad will come of his going, but he ignores that knowledge. Basically, saying that he'll be good whenever he's finished doing bad. "Well, she's a blessed angel on earth; and after this one night I'll cling to her skirts and follow her to heaven." He abandons his faith in search of knowledge and tangible certainty without realizing that this kind of quest will destroy faith. In Hebrews 11:1, faith is described, "Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." Because Goodman Brown loses all certainty after seeing Faith there in the woods that night, it can be assumed that his "Faith" is gone. The blind certainty is gone. He went in search of knowledge, but found more doubt. His situation was ultimately worse, because now he didn't have certainty in his faith. The Bible also says, "Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding" (Prov. 3:5). Goodman Brown did not stick to this Purtian dependency on God for knowledge or understanding. I see Goodman Brown as a warning against the life of gloom that follows abandoning one's faith in search of worldy knowledge. It warns that it isn't something you can return to. This is something people still do today. We live up our youth, without considering the consequences, and many assume that they'll have time to make condolences once the time of fun is over. But I think we all find, that we can never go back. Just like we can never return to the innocent view of the world we had as children, once we learn about war, murder, poverty, and we witness intentional cruelty. Sure, we can look back at the way we saw things as children, but never through the same eyes. The view has a darker tint. That's what Goodman Brown experiences when he looks upon his lovely angelic Faith after having seen a glimpse into the knowledge of evil. He still sees her, but it's tainted. There's no going back.
Anyway...the Puritan's did this during the witch trials. They lost sight in their principles and their faith. The let their fear of Satan over power their fear of God. If Satan was working within their society, which was something Mather's could feel and so eloquently wrote about. Yet, it wasn't the the witchcraft that signified the Devil's possesion of their society, but the way in which the Puritans lost sight of their faith in response to their fear. Mather's saw the witchcraft as a means of distraction. He really called it for what it was. He wrote, "If we allow the Mad Dogs of Hell to poyson us by biting us, we shall imagine taht we see ntohing but such things about us, and like such things fly upon all that we see....But what shall be done to cure these Distractions?" They took their focus off the fear of the lord, which according to the bible is "the beginning of all understanding." and they turned against each other, because they were afraid of the bodily harm that may come to them if they were accused so they all reached a point of histeria where they began to accuse each other. Really, the one's who died, because they refused to confess in order to spare their lives were the only one's who stuck to their faith. They may be seen as stubborn and foolish for dying, when they could have told one lie to save their life. Yet, the bible says, "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear him who is able to destroy both body and soul in hell" (Matthew 10:28). Thus, the original "Puritan" society ceased to exist. The surviors of the witchtrials were hypocrits. A hypocrit is someone who speaks the words, but does not believe them. They couldn't return to the the faith-based society, but rather became one of self-righteousness in attempts to mask what had really happened. And the country just degenrated from there. They came off looking like a bunch of crazy assholes, which made the "christian" religion less and less appealing to posterity. The Devil won. So...I guess that's the warning I saw in Young Goodman Brown and the witchtrials. You can't go back to the faith that you abandon. If you risk the glance away, when you look back it may already be just a childhood delusion or a mocking version of what it used to be.

My thoughts on Mather's On Witchcraft

When I began reading Cotton Mather's On Witchcraft, I already had some preconceptions about the text. I am familiar with the Witch trials of our nation's early history, as well as the how the puritan people were viewed. Having read Arthur Miller's The Crucible along with the history books, I had an image of the Puritan people as the one's at fault for the whole ordeal. They had always been presented as crazy extremists whose fixation with judgment led them to make pariahs out of any person who made the slightest step out of the lines of their strict guidelines as the chosen people of God. So, needless to say, I was expecting the same out of Cotton Mather's On Witchcraft, but so far I have been surprised. Initially, I was laughing through his over italicized and outlandish descriptions of their purpose and existence within New England. I was prepared to find his "outdated" ideology quite ridiculous, but the more I read I found myself believing him. Once I sensed the genuinness in his thought, I began to take him seriously. After I'd freed myself of premeditated prejudice, everything he was saying began to make sense. I started to believe it. Maybe other people read this and still find the words of a crazy Puritan minister. I know someone mentioned in class that they were amazed at Mather's ability to manipulate. Perhaps that's what it is. If that is, indeed, the case, I applaud Mather for his mastery of language and human thought, which enabled him to write such a succesfully manipulative piece of literature. Nevertheless, this is why is what made sense to me. On the bottom of page 16, Mathers writes, "...the Wretches have proceeded so far, as to Concert and Consult the Methods of Rooting out the Christian Religion from this Country, and setting up instead of it, perhaps a more gross Diabolism, than ever the World saw before." That quote popped of the page to me. I stopped and asked myself the question: where is Christianity in America today? I see the Christian religion being rooted out of our country! People have attempted to pass legislation that would remove the ten commandments and other Christian fixtures from our courthouses and such. We are far from the puritan days in our nation! I just kept thinking, "Man, if only Ole' Cotton were alive today. I'd like to see what he'd write about the Devil's work in our society." Suzanne mentioned the quotation in class today something along the lines of: "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist." If that's the case, I'm pretty sure the Devil has nearly won. Hardly anyone believes the devil exists and hardly anyone even believes in evil. That's pretty shocking compared to the views of Mather's society. One other point I'd liketo make is how Mather's projects New England in comparison to the other nations that had fallen to witchcraft. He writes, "The Kingdoms of Sweden, Denmark, Scotland, yea and England it self, as well as the Province of New England, have had their Storms of Witchcrafts breaking upon them, which have made most Lamentable Devastations: which also I wish, may be The Last." This passage makes me wonder what gives Mather the hope that New England won't succumb to the evils as the other nations had. Or does he have that hope at all? Partly, I believe that Mather shows his self-seeking motive when he admits that he wants the notice of being a part of an end to these evil distractions. He writes, "It is wonderfully necessary, that some healing Attempts be made: And I must confess (If I may speak so much) like a Nazianzen, I am so desirous of a share in them, that if geing thrown overboard, were needful to allay the Storm, I should think Dying a Trifle to be undergone, for so great a Blessedness." Maybe his motives for this blessedness are purely for the glory of God, but I really believe he wanted the credit, especially after learning about his life of living in his father's shadow. What better way to one up daddy's job as the President of Harvard, than to defeat Satan?
Favorite Quote from the reading: "The best man that has ever lived has been called a Witch."