1. What was the socio-cultural function of the feasts of Corpus Christi? How did these festivals serve as celebrations of "the body?" What socio-political groups interests were served by the festivities?
The feast of Corpus Christi was a grand annual celebration that honored the body of Christ during the middle ages. Though the event was historical in nature, literary and performance scholars (more than historians) have noted the feast's effects on medieval culture. In this essay, I will discuss the socio-cultural function of the feasts. I will also look at how the festivals served as celebrations of "the body" and what socio-political groups interests were served by the feasts.
The feast of Corpus Christi allowed citizens to express a social bond, which contributes to social integration. In other words, the feast aided in creating communitas, the sense of sharing and intimacy that develops among persons who experience liminality as a group. Moreover, Corpus Christi lured people of all status; thus, all occupations were honored (from the peasants to the nobles). This inclusive participation allowed everyone to enjoy the feast, network, and engage in human bonding, which is important to the human psyche. The ritual also placed great importance on celebrating "the body."
The Corpus Christi feasts celebrated the body of Christ. In this context, the term "body" refers to the relationship between the self and the supernatural. In addition to the secular importance, the "body" may have also had social relevance. The ritual was utilized as a way to disentangle social differentation; thus, the masses both affirmed and created the symbol of the social body, which was the body of Christ. Through engaging in this commemorative and social occasion, I believe many of the lower status groups received the opportunity to move up the social ladder.
The middle class (or the gilds) during the era of Corpus Christi reaped the benefits of social mobility. Since this time in history marked the beginning of the middle class, gilds were more equipped to develop famous dramatic cycles that might be recognized by the wealthy. Likewise, a large event such as the Corpus Christi may have brought forth an abundance of commercial activity, which is helpful to both the community (urban markets) and individual working towards upward mobility. Finally, the feast made networking more easily accessible, as the celebration enticed the elite.
In conclusion, the feast of Corpus Christi was a celebration that aided in developing social togetherness. The secular undertone of celebrating the "body of Christ" in combination with the feelings of communitas during the festivities lead to opportunities of advancement in society. My question is: Where can you witness such an event today? How can the middle class advance in society when the middle class is disappearing?
Monday, February 22, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
The Greeks
The Rhapsodes performed Homeric poems in different colored robes and were accompanied by a staff (used to beat the rhythym of the verse). Whether the Rhapsodes sang or spoke, we still are unclear of that fact. Most scholars (Hargis & Lentz) determined that they were song-stitchers who almost chanted works of literature. I believe the issue of whether the Rhapsodes sang or chanted remains important, because the delivery can alter performance outcomes. Perhaps chanting facilitates unison speaking, which builds comunitas.
In addition to being song-stituchers, the Rhapsodes acted as entertainers, educators, and interpretative lecturers. They served the interest of the state by inspiring Greeks to have hatred for the Barbarians, while giving them the courage to fight. Thus, the Rhapsodes reified Greek culture and created a sense of pride among the people. The groups also developed a sense of shared identity betweeen Greeks by expressing the classical words of Homer (Lentz) Nevertheless, some scholars, such as Plato, found faults with the Rhapsodes.
Plato (disguised as Socrates in "Ion") pinpointed a negative correlation between Rhapsodes and "True Art." Rhapsodes, according to Socrates, cannot cure patients like Physicians or have knowledge of the ocean like a sailor. If Ion was able to speak of Homer by the rules of "Art," he would have ben able to speak of all other poets (epic and lyric). Thus, Rhapsodes do not have a larger understanding of "Truth," as they are merely possessed by the Gods (Plato).
Another group, the Sophists, have been compared to the Rhapsodes. Both are entertainers, educators, and interpretative lecturers. In the words of Protagoras: "The poets, hence the Rhapsodes, reall were Sophists who called themselves poets in order to escape the odium of being classed with the Sophists (Protagoras)." Previous scholars have also demonstrated the similarities between the two, as they were both relativists and profit driven.
Following the Greek era, public recitals and public discourse became popular in Rhome. The Romans patterned their way of life after the Greeks. In other words, the Romans borrowed the political system and ways of entertaining from Greece. Though speeches became most popular during this time, oral interpretation remained important.
In addition to being song-stituchers, the Rhapsodes acted as entertainers, educators, and interpretative lecturers. They served the interest of the state by inspiring Greeks to have hatred for the Barbarians, while giving them the courage to fight. Thus, the Rhapsodes reified Greek culture and created a sense of pride among the people. The groups also developed a sense of shared identity betweeen Greeks by expressing the classical words of Homer (Lentz) Nevertheless, some scholars, such as Plato, found faults with the Rhapsodes.
Plato (disguised as Socrates in "Ion") pinpointed a negative correlation between Rhapsodes and "True Art." Rhapsodes, according to Socrates, cannot cure patients like Physicians or have knowledge of the ocean like a sailor. If Ion was able to speak of Homer by the rules of "Art," he would have ben able to speak of all other poets (epic and lyric). Thus, Rhapsodes do not have a larger understanding of "Truth," as they are merely possessed by the Gods (Plato).
Another group, the Sophists, have been compared to the Rhapsodes. Both are entertainers, educators, and interpretative lecturers. In the words of Protagoras: "The poets, hence the Rhapsodes, reall were Sophists who called themselves poets in order to escape the odium of being classed with the Sophists (Protagoras)." Previous scholars have also demonstrated the similarities between the two, as they were both relativists and profit driven.
Following the Greek era, public recitals and public discourse became popular in Rhome. The Romans patterned their way of life after the Greeks. In other words, the Romans borrowed the political system and ways of entertaining from Greece. Though speeches became most popular during this time, oral interpretation remained important.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)