This week, we assigned book 23 of the Iliad (the funeral of Patroclus) and canto 3 of Purgatorio (Manfred). On Monday, we discussed some general points of commonality and difference, focusing on the community’s role in the the physical and spiritual rituals which are undertaken to ensure the proper transition of the soul of the deceased into the afterlife and of the community back to a state of normalcy. The distinguishing characteristic upon which we focused our examination of the difference between these two traditions is the purpose for which the community is galvanized. In the shame culture of the Homeric world, individuals and deities use the occasion of the funeral to display aristeia, the very human problem with which Homer is absolutely concerned (aristeia can preserve communities and bring out its most strident potentials; but it also has the dark potential to erode the bonds and laws–human, natural, and divine– which tie the community together–thus, Achilles’ mistreatment of Hektor’s corpse; the funeral games themselves present the potential for another eruption of strife–I’m thinking specifically of Menelaos and Antilochus in the chariot contest). For Dante’s souls, prayer is the galvanizing business of the community. The subtle, nostalgic desire which Manfred feels for his unburied body tension between the various communities to which he has some connection: the community of the living of which Dante is a representative, whose spiritual care for the soul in the form of prayer he must request, and the community of the church from which he has been expelled.
These are the foundational elements with which we began our conversation on Monday. The students were pretty silent that day; we (teachers) volleyed impressions and ideas back and forth, elaborating where necessary, disagreeing at times, clarifying finer points, and making the effort to elaborate those issues and nuances which were within the broader range of our comparative target.
On Wed., when we pursued a deeper line of inquiry, our students became much more animated. Lots of note-taking; lots of scribbling words and phrases on tablets; but, after about 30 minutes of dialogue between the teachers, the students began, I think, to “get it”–that is, to really engage in the comparative process. Some of the comments and questions were quite profound; and I noticed that many students were making the same effort we were–to listen to each other; to respond thoughtfully; to resist bringing up side-track topics (which may be interesting, but diverting); and to follow-up on each other. We still, obviously, have a lot of work to do–both with each other, with the students, and with the class as a whole. But, the dynamics are really wonderful so far! (There, I knocked on wood!)
Tomorrow, 2 students will actually perform a dialogue based on their own discussions about these readings. 4 other students in the class will respond on our course blog, which has already enjoyed some interesting activity.
Are these upper class students? How many sophomores vs. seniors? I’m curious about how their level of cognitive development affects the speed with which they buy into the process you and Federico are modeling.
I’ll post a blog about this very fine question.
[...] In a post some time ago, Steve asked about whether or not the the composition of our students may have something to do with class dynamics. A very interesting question, indeed, and I’d like to address this. [...]