.jpg)
The Catholicism of J.R.R. Tolkien
September 20 2006
So, I'm in the Honors colloquium about Tolkien. And I'm finding it completely inappropriate. Why, you may ask? Oh, let me count the ways.
1. The course is entitled "Tolkien." This leads me to believe that we will be viewing him holistically. We have so far explored his Catholicism. We have met four times (3 hr. each).
2. We were required to read 180 pp. of The Silmarillion for today. We discussed three pp. of it. All of it dealt with the theme of "how can there be freedom in submission?".
3. John Parker is in the class and says nothing but farkochte conditional statements while sucking up to Dr. Craven.
4. Robert Streeter pronounces Melkor "Melekor" and is an idiot.
5. Brian Baskette cannot make a point.
6. Dr. Craven: "You're using sociology to explain this. Don't--I want to stay on philosophy."
7. My points have so far been pooh-poohed, one and all.
8. Dr. Craven has repeatedly degraded Protestantism and referred to it as "Sauron." I find this inappropriate.
9. Dr. C asked Chloe Callis in class today if she intended to submit to her husband. Again, inappropriate.
10. We had to read 40 pp. of Marian literature for the last class. I did not sign up for a cathechism course.
11. The scope of this "interdisciplinary" colloquium is too narrow. It is not titled "The Catholicism of J.R.R. Tolkien." Something else must have influenced this man, and there must be more contextual information for LOTR than the sanctity of the BVM. I feel as though I am being taught Dr. Craven's dissertation in exacting detail.
Basically, the whole thing feels like a really bad Cor meeting. Think of me what you will, but I don't like to discuss the philosophy behind the nitty-gritty bits of religion; if I'm going to do philosophy, I prefer "what is lying" "is it right to..." The annoying people who never advance the discussion, yet always seem to be talking, were even there. I'm considering taking a W for this class instead of having to deal with it for 3 hours every week. I'm busy, and have better things to do with my time.
1. The course is entitled "Tolkien." This leads me to believe that we will be viewing him holistically. We have so far explored his Catholicism. We have met four times (3 hr. each).
2. We were required to read 180 pp. of The Silmarillion for today. We discussed three pp. of it. All of it dealt with the theme of "how can there be freedom in submission?".
3. John Parker is in the class and says nothing but farkochte conditional statements while sucking up to Dr. Craven.
4. Robert Streeter pronounces Melkor "Melekor" and is an idiot.
5. Brian Baskette cannot make a point.
6. Dr. Craven: "You're using sociology to explain this. Don't--I want to stay on philosophy."
7. My points have so far been pooh-poohed, one and all.
8. Dr. Craven has repeatedly degraded Protestantism and referred to it as "Sauron." I find this inappropriate.
9. Dr. C asked Chloe Callis in class today if she intended to submit to her husband. Again, inappropriate.
10. We had to read 40 pp. of Marian literature for the last class. I did not sign up for a cathechism course.
11. The scope of this "interdisciplinary" colloquium is too narrow. It is not titled "The Catholicism of J.R.R. Tolkien." Something else must have influenced this man, and there must be more contextual information for LOTR than the sanctity of the BVM. I feel as though I am being taught Dr. Craven's dissertation in exacting detail.
Basically, the whole thing feels like a really bad Cor meeting. Think of me what you will, but I don't like to discuss the philosophy behind the nitty-gritty bits of religion; if I'm going to do philosophy, I prefer "what is lying" "is it right to..." The annoying people who never advance the discussion, yet always seem to be talking, were even there. I'm considering taking a W for this class instead of having to deal with it for 3 hours every week. I'm busy, and have better things to do with my time.
Elizabeth
September 21 2006
Gah! I'd tell you to complain to those in charge, but that'd be Connie, and we all know that it would accomplish nothing.
