The oldest Hit

Posted on by
1

As I read the Odysseus I found it interesting as how the text was written first and foremost as most of the literature we read was told as stories and this one was written as a song.I can visually see this story being told in a tavern in which one had come home from a long day and needed something to keep their mind distracted or entertained.I saw this in the first stanza in the story in which they say “o friends o ever partners of my woes” it seems to get the people to feel invested in this story as its sung.I was also wondering as to why they were using quotations within stanza 2,3,4,5,6 but I found it very interesting that they wouldnt close the quotation until stanza 6.I was thinking when they wouldnt finish a quotation in which i can see it as a pause in which the speaker catches their breath and tries to rile their audience and try to get banter from them.Stanza six could be seen as a way for the speaker to finish the story by getting the audience to finish the story as if they expect the audience to already know of the story.within the text I found evidence in which they would use exclamation points every so often in order to emphasize a revelation or a action.while the story itself I didnt feel was impactful it was the use of their description and world building that had me going through the story in which “flowery meads the sportive sirens play” not only did I find this as the only description I needed of the mermaids of the story It had me thinking how they defined the feminity of mermaids indirectly in which they described the mermaids to be laying in a beautiful field of flowers.

Week: 4, Oceanic Distortion

Posted on by
2

Steve Mentz’s passage, “Deterritorializing Preface,” provides readers with a set of deterritorializing terms to aid in navigating the blue humanities. I wanted to focus particularly on number six, “Distortion,” because of what Mentz had stated about water bending light. Mentz mentioned visual distortion and how “water-thinking makes distortion a baseline condition” (xvii). I read this as distortion not being a physical aspect of water, but a metaphorical one that emphasizes how human perception of the ocean makes them uncomfortable. As we have discussed in class, humans find mermaids unsettling; this “distortion” aspect that Mentz is talking about shows just that. Mermaids are classified as unsettling not only because of their half-human, half-fish nature, but because of the fear that is brought forth by their home, the ocean.

Mentz also stated the “tri-dimensionality of water,” which highlights the comfort of the surface of the sea and the terrifying depths of the undiscovered bottom of the ocean. After reading this, I instantly thought of how it’s similar to the life of mermaids, both being of the surface and depths of the ocean. Emphasizing the idea that mermaids are never entirely of “one world,” which distorts the world’s perception of them. Also, in a literal sense, the distortion of water messes with how oceanic life is perceived, making something small and innocent seem gigantic and terrifying.

This sense of distortion that Mentz talks about can also be compared to how mermaids are scary because they are a reflection of us. They are the water distorted versions of ourselves, and that is what is terrifying to them. We as humans see the ocean through this water-distorted lens, a reminder that what humans fear most in mermaids is what they see in themselves. I like the idea that water bending light distorts, because when you think about it sometimes tends to look creepy underwater, especially if the water is moving. And it’s interesting to think about how we are terrified of the deep ocean because of the mere fact that we cannot approach it without facing the instability within ourselves. The fear of water is the fear of our own self-image; that distorted version of ourselves is our greatest fear.

Study Song of the Week: Falling Stars by A Shell In The Pit

This one is not so much Mermaid core, but it felt very oceanic, and I honestly don’t know how to explain it further.

The Poetics of Planetary Water: Blue Humanities, Poetics, and Striving for Change

Posted on by
2

In Steve Mentz’s work, “A poetics of planetary water: The blue humanities after John Gillis”, Mentz writes, “A poetics of planetary water aims to clarify the relationships between humans and water in all its forms and phases” (Mentz 139). He also adds, “The intimacy between humans and water, an element that surrounds our planet and permeates our bodies, provides a rich reservoir for ideas about change, resilience and the possibilities for new ways of thinking an living” (Mentz 152).

These statements are important because they encapsulate the chief intellectual and philosophical purpose of the article: Blue humanities consider the ocean not as one big abstract space but water in all forms-liquid, ice, vapor-than can associate closely and materially with human bodies, cultures, and histories. Through the various states of planetary water, the article argues that literary, cultural, and poetic approaches shed light on how water’s presence in collective imagination and lived experience allows the accommodation of present environmental catastrophes and ongoing climate change.

Poetics of planetary water are of essence because they imply accepting the interdependent relation between human beings and the more-than-human environment. Where scientific discourse measures, records, and explains, the poetic framework places feelings, ambiguity, and multiplicity upfront. This proves especially important in environmental crises that happen to be rapid in transition, not clearly defined, and that require resiliences and adapting instead of trying to maintain everything. The article argues rightly that such a framework could cut disciplinary boundaries and scales-from global systems down to the personal and sensory encounters at the shore, according to Mentz’s findings in Whitman and Dickinson’s works (Mentz 138).

Moreover, poetics allow blue humanities scholars to gather together representation, materiality, and imaginative possibility, as they stress dynamics and transition on the three water phases. It is more than simply theoretical; it is a call to accept that our ways of thinking, writing, or living must mirror the very substance that defines and sustains life. These are powerful and timely ideas when seas rise, ice melts, and atmospheres become unstable.

Power of Blue Humanities

Posted on by
2

In the “Deterritorializing Preface,” Steve Mentz suggests replacing “field” with “current.” At first this may seem small and hold little meaning, but it changes how we think about knowledge and ideas. A “field” is something that usually means stable, rooted in one place, and often controlled. When I think of the word “field,” I think of a piece of land that’s fenced off or a “field of study.” Both of these appear to be pretty defined with not much movement. By using the word “current” instead, we can think about knowledge as something that is moving and shifting instead of stuck in the same place. 

A current is always moving. It goes in all directions and connects one place to another. The text asks, “What if instead we redescribe the adventures of thinking as currents, as a rate of flow and change?” This quote really stood out to me because it suggests that knowledge is placed into specific categories, and the word “current” allows ideas to circulate between people, cultures, and environments. Knowledge is something that should never be stuck or kept in one place. The movement of knowledge is what is important. We would never be able to advance or grow if everything we discovered had to stay put. 

Just like the ocean, knowledge is something that no one can own or control. By describing knowledge as something that is “current,” it allows us to see that knowledge is always changing and moving from place to place. Describing it as a “field” doesn’t work because knowledge is something that has no limit and will forever be growing. Knowledge becomes even more meaningful when it flows from person to person. This means we should expect ideas to change over time, and we should learn to see value in motion rather than in stability. 

Replacing the word “field” with “current” does more than just change a word. It gives us a whole new perspective on learning, history, and even politics. Instead of looking for straight answers or permanent solutions, the metaphor of “current” teaches us to look for connections and that motion is good. It means we are growing and adapting to what is new. 

The Poetry of Water in Odysseus and The Sirens

Posted on by
Reply

What is intriguing about poetry is its fluidity. It is a genre of writing that has subgenres so vast and so up for interpretation. In “A poetics of planetary water” Steve Mentz states that “The term“poetics” […]functions as a singular concept: a poetics of planetary water aims to clarify the relationships between humans and water in all its forms and phases” (Mentz 139). Using a poetic lens in literature, especially in reference to water, not only deepens our understanding of water in human and planetary life, but it complicates it too. Using Mentz insight, The Sirens portion of The Odyssey water is not just background or a mere setting, it becomes an active force that shapes human fate and meaning. 

Water may be material that sustains life but it has throughout time and place carried symbolic and poetic meaning. Homer wrote about Odysseus’ journey through the ocean, and at one point Odysseus encounters Siren seas described as: “Sunk were at once the winds; the air above, / and waves below, at once forgot to move” (Penguin 11). Homer does not simply use the water as a means of transportation or material environment but instead uses it as a metaphorical threshold. The imagery creates a feeling of stillness that is both eery and enchanting. A poetic style, in this case, does what prose cannot; with a poetic style the sea is used to embody human vulnerability and temptation, as it shifts between calm and chaos. Whereas with prose you can use imagery but the rhythm and rhyme that helps support that shifting may get lost. 

Beyond the symbolic meaning poetics can help us connect natural phenomena, like water, with cultural meaning. We see in The Odyssey that elements of earth, wind and water, are personified: “Some demon calm’d the air and smooth’d the deep, / hush’d the loud winds, and charm’d the waves to sleep” (Penguin 11). When talking about elements—earth, air, wind, fire—one usually thinks of Science. Something that provides people with all the answers. Yet, this moment in The Odyssey may be scientifically calm, but poetically it is full of imagery of the supernatural and the unexplainable. It has even more personification of the elements which goes against black and white thinking that humans crave so deeply. In this case human imagination transforms water into a source of narrative, intrinsically linking myth and environment together.

The Flow of Language: Perception Sets the Seascape

Posted on by
2

Perception is how we see the world, how we understand it, how we explain it –– but it’s also how we create our world. In Steve Mentz’s “Deterritorializing Preface” for Ocean, he calls for the reader to adapt their territorializing perceptions with adjusting the language we use. Mentz offers seven words to adjust, one I found particularly interesting was flow instead of progress. Mentz states, “thinking in terms of cyclical flows rather than linear progress makes historical narratives messier, more confusing, and less familiar. These are good things” (xvi). I find with changing language to flow there is less emphasis on an outcome than progress, reframing expectations and allowing for developments outside of the perimeters of anticipated progress.

Here’s why I think it matters, words carry weight and word choice frames perception. How we perceive the world is limited within the words we choose. If the attributes of a word are rigid we will accept what is being described as being rigid and incapable of flexibility. This might and often is not true, but the language and habit of that language limits the approach and the ability to change it.

For example, in the Westerner perception a term that is used often when describing non-white people is “minority”. This frames the Western perception (and dare I say myth) of a white majority. While it may be true in some areas it is not an encompassing truth and should not be passed off as one. Adding to that in our political and cultural understanding a majority is the “leading” group, this sets a dangerous precedent that influences behavior and opinions. What of instead of minority we used the term global majority? The frame of reference changes when considering the entirety of the planet and not just one corner or current of it.

As Mentz points out with his word adjustment, it changes the narrative. In the context of a minority and majority, understanding humans only inhabit a small portion or minority of the planet it reframes our perception of humans’ place on it. This awareness and could influence the decisions we make as a territorial minority to the seascape. As we could breach into uncharted waters that reframe our approach and attitudes, perhaps there will be more caution and discernment. Perhaps there will not be one understanding but an acceptance of how we are all in common water. Maybe then we can create our world not in the rigidity of territories and borders, but in the flow of the environment we exist in.

The Forbidden Fruit of Knowledge

Posted on by
1

For centuries, stories about Sirens have been used to tell morals or pass down certain values to the next generation due to their wisdom. Though some stories use explicit language to tell readers what they should or should not believe, other tales are more subtle in their messages, and it is through literary elements (such as tone) that the audience is able to come to their own conclusion about the story. The use of literary elements to send a message can also be found in “Odysseus and the Sirens” from The Penguin Book of Mermaids, as the author uses negative language to describe the Sirens and their seductive ways. In particular, the author paints the Sirens as more animalistic than human to paint them as “devious” and “dangerous.” By painting the Sirens in this negative light, the text aims to illuminate the idea that, though these creatures are harbingers of knowledge and wisdom, humans must resist the temptation of knowledge that is not meant for them.

An example of the author using animal language to create a negative connotation around the Sirens and the dangers they possess occurs when Odysseus and his crewmen begin to sail past the Sirens. He notes that “Celestial music warbles from their tongue, And thus the sweet deluders tune their song” (34). The word “warbles” is particularly interesting since it is commonly used to describe when a bird is chirping or singing, something that you would not associate with human song. Using the word “warbles” becomes a deliberate choice from the author since it positions the Sirens as more animalistic than human and, thus, more untrustworthy. Rather than describing the Sirens as softly singing, the author uses this term to instill in the audience that while they may have some human features, their animal hybridity gives way to their deceitful nature. Odysseus and his men must resist the temptation of wanting to “learn new wisdom from the wise” (34) since it may not be to their benefit due to the Sirens’ duplicitous nature. Much like in the Garden of Eden, the Sirens try to tempt sailors with “information” that could lead to their downfall. The story of the Sirens becomes a cautionary tale of forbidden knowledge and the dangers it can have on those who are not meant to have this information.

Week 4: Deterritorializing Preface Thoughts

Posted on by
3

Thesis: Mentz’s preface challenges us to shift our mindsets beyond what we are familiar with

Steve Mentz’s preface to Deterritorializing challenges and invites readers to think beyond the typical land-based metaphors and instead explore in further depth the ocean’s fluidity as a framework for the way we think. Mentz references Deleuze and Guattari’s idea of deterritorialization, and he reframes the ocean as not just a physical environment but also a philosophical medium. It is unstable and constantly changing, redraws boundaries, and provides new possibilities for reimagining culture, politics, and history from a more open, less structured perspective.

Something that stands out to me most is Mentz’s emphasis on language, more specifically shifting away from land terms to ocean terms. His seven proposed terms of current, water, flow, ship, seascape, distortion, and horizon help readers to reshape their perspectives away from the typical, comfortable “land” themes. “Fields” and “ground” suggest permanence, while “currents” and “water” imply motion and uncertainty. The word “ground” also means stabilizing as a verb while “current” means movement as a verb. By shifting our vocabulary, we shift the way we view knowledge, progress, and even political structures. It allows us to feel more comfortable with shifting ideas rather than being trapped in one worldview. This is not just language but a form of intellectual reorientation. Additionally, it reflects the larger goals of the “blue humanities,” to remove land as the dominant metaphor and to recognize the ocean’s vast role in shaping life as we know it, from geography to culture.

Personally, I find Mentz’s reason behind using “ship” particularly interesting to me. Thinking of politics in terms of ships meeting at a port by the sea where they would trade and interact with other vessels, the word captures the relational and often unstable interactions between diverse cultures more realistically than the previous verbage of a “state.” Similarly, Mentz’s mention of distortion resonates with how perception itself changes in an water-like, fluid environment. Instead of seeking perfect clarity and 100% hard truth, Mentz suggests that distortion is not a flaw but simply a different, new perspective when viewed through water. This idea challenges widely accepted assumptions about knowledge, truth, and perspective.

Ultimately, Mentz encourages us to re-evaluate not only how we talk about the ocean but also how we engage with the world. Deterritorialization pushes us to accept instability, different perspectives, and allow for movement in thought. If we can change our metaphors and the way we think through something as simple as the verbiage we commonly use, Mentz argues, we may begin to change our imagination and with it, begin to make larger changes in the world.

Mer-interpretations

Posted on by
2

“The mermaid is a hybrid beast.” Unlike other forms of mythological hybridity, humans have split crossroads when it comes to interpreting these beasts. Do they impart knowledge? Are they friendly? Deadly? Sexual? Unassuming? Just curious? In an interesting analysis, Steve Mentz finds that interpreting shape-shifting clouds “essentially follows a hybridizing theory of interpreting forms of water… about how vaporous forms assume multiple meanings… The challenge is devising a language to understand their forms”. As hybridized water beings, mermaids are vaporous. That is, they are vague, and lacking in clarity. Like hazy clouds, interpretation of mermaids shape-shift throughout time and place. Their soaked and shrouded dwellings cultivate a sense of mystery. We humans are apt to judge. Clothes, cars, houses. We gain a sense of constancy knowing what kind of person we encounter based on their address. So, an ability to construct mermaids into a coercing presence comes from their watery lodgings; able to assume multiple meanings. The church can depict them demonically or hyper-sexualized, myths can represent beings to overcome or avoid, pop culture can take their voices. These representations help push an agenda that is difficult to object when we are wrestling to grasp an interpretation of water, let alone an interpretation of these hydrobeings. Furthermore, examining Mentz’s grappling with the interpretation of the forms of water, he states: “The challenge is devising a language to understand their forms.” Mentz has faced this challenge head on in his preface to his book Ocean. He impels to manipulate the use of terracentral language: changing the word field to current, or state to ship. When we use these words, among others, we stop tethering ourselves to land. Water, in all its forms, becomes less threatening and more of an everyday interaction. This change of language changes our relationship to planetary water, consequently, changing our relationship to the beings that inhabit it. I can’t help wondering, what our merbeing myths would hold now if we had the relationship we have with water today, hundreds or even thousands of years ago.