No blog post due Sunday night

Because I wanted to give you time this weekend to work on the first paper draft and the Genesis reading, I'm canceling the blog post that would normally be due by Sunday 8 PM.

Enjoy!

Human Nature

The Epic of Gilgamesh taps into many general human traits, one of which is the pursuit for a better life. Most people would agree that the main goal in life is to be successful – whether in love, money, or history. Gilgamesh goes in pursuit of the Bull of Heaven and Humbaba for this very reason. He wants to be famous, known through the ages, and have the power to defeat that which no one else could. He also builds great walls and statues and takes every virgin for his own to prove his success. It’s in human nature also to overestimate yourself, which is what Gilgamesh’s downfall was. He was so caught up in being a handsome and powerful king that when Enkidu, his equal, died by the hands of the gods, it was a rude awakening to his ego. He searches for eternal life – something that only one other person has accomplished. While Gilgamesh didn’t realize the brevity of his life, he still went out to make himself the best that he could be.

Advancement and Growth

One of the constants for human nature is the human ego, whether the strength is physical or mental the human ego constantly wants one to be on top to advance farther in society. One of the key elements of growth in The Epic of Gilgamesh that Gilgamesh constantly tries to advance is his reputation such as by killing Humbaba. Everything that he does is to try to advance himself in some way. Even his actions before he meets Enkidu emphasize his want to advance himself. He constantly paints himself and strong and when he takes all of the virgins he is making himself seem better than everybody by being the one to take the virginity from all of the women in his city. Gilgamesh does this to strengthen his ego. Another way to tell that the authors believed that the ego was central to the human nature is when Gilgamesh goes against Ishtar and thinks that he is able to be above all other humans as well as above Gods. While he may have been thinking about his best interests at the time he still completely disregarded what was really stronger than him. Even after the Gods kill Enkidu, Gilgamesh still only thinks about himself. He becomes afraid of his own weakness and seeks to become unkillable like the Gods. That in itself shows that humans only think of themselves. At the end of the story, Gilgamesh is nowhere near his city and is only out searching for the way to make himself immortal. He only ever thinks about himself and considers himself to be above all others. This is by definition, ego. Egotism is the very center of a human's nature in the eyes of the authors of The Epic of Gilgamesh.

Advancement and

Human nature

I think that the Epic of Gilgamesh shows that no matter what someone tries get someone to do something, it is human nature to make decisions that you want to do. An example of this in the book, is when the gods created Enkidu to balance out Gilgamesh and to calm him down. However, the two became like brothers and instead of balancing Gilgamesh out, he joined Gilgamesh. The gods didn't intend for the two to become an unstoppable team and to go killing Humbaba and the bull of heaven. It goes the same for any other human, people choose to make their own decision even if they go against what is right. If everyone didn't do what they wanted there would be no need for police because everyone would follow the laws and decisions would be made for us already. In fact, for the past few days we have been talking about what drives humans to make the different decisions that they do, and it is amazing there are so many different reasons why make a decisions. It is different for everyone and some people obviously make better decisions than others and it is a very important part of human nature.

Human Nature Through the Ages

The Epic of Gilgamesh, despite being thousands of years old holds lessons about human nature that stay true to this day. I believe the fact that the text is so old makes the lessons all the more relevant, simply because they show us how much we really haven’t changed throughout the ages. Gilgamesh’s original arrogance was left unchecked until he met his somewhat equal, Enkidu. This has repeated itself throughout history, a recent example being the cold war. The arrogant U.S.S.R was growing by leaps and bounds gobbling up countries, and developing military technologies. It wouldn’t be until J.F.K came along with his space program that the U.S would put up a stand against the U.S.S.R. The bond that the two shared grew by leaps and bounds as they pushed one another to extremes; and although the two countries never shared friendship, they both helped one another out. During the cold war thousands of jobs were created in military technologies, and once the Soviet Union fell, the U.S economy dropped into a small recession. Human nature, however complex it might seem, has its roots imbedded in the simplest of our primal instincts. The need to seek out friendship is one thing that only humans (and perhaps high order primates) have, that no other species on Earth shares with us.

For ever and ever

The Epic of Gilgamesh’s commentary on human nature divulges that the search for preservation, be it through flesh or legacy, is constantly present in the thoughts and actions of mortals everywhere. Gilgamesh initially fears that his legacy won’t live on forever, spurring him into quests for fame and glory. He fondly imagines his people praising his name and telling the tales of his epic deeds to their children, immortalizing him through his actions. Later after witnessing the death of Enkindu, Gilgamesh takes his goal a step further, trying to preserve his life forever in addition to his legacy. This leads him to search for eternal life, which he ultimately finds to be unobtainable.
Many other famed figures tried and failed to gain eternal existences through a number of methods. Pharaohs built their tombs not as places of rest, but as monuments to their lives and reign. Chinese emperors unknowingly drank poison thinking it would extend their fragile lives. Even Voldemort went through many tribulations trying to stay in power forever. On a metaphysical level, many religions promise eternal life in paradise for living moral lives and proper worship. Gilgamesh clearly was not alone in his desire to live forever. And though his story, the authors express an important and inexplicable element of human nature.

Kinks in the Armor

I believe the one thing the authors are trying to get across is that all humans have flaws. Whether it is character flaws or physical flaws, it is inevitable that all humans have them. Like I stated in my previous post, I believe Enkidu and Gilgamesh compliment each other’s flaws very soundly. The cliché statement, no man is perfect was created after the epic of Gilgamesh. I believe that the authors, who remain anonymous, try to paint a picture and give the reader the perspective that Gilgamesh is perfect. The authors say “He had hair like a woman’s; it waved like the hair of Nisaba, the Goddess of Corn.(pg 63)” or “His body was covered with matted hair like Samuqans, the god of cattle.(pg 63)” They paint the picture of this man with unprecedented and unchallenged power who rules his people like the Gods do. That raises the following question to me. If Gilgamesh is so perfect in every aspect of human life, why do the authors need to create an equal to make him tick? I think they use the power of repetition, or over exaggeration, when they are describing him to show that even a man as great as Gilgamesh has kinks in his armor. This then leads me to believe that they wanted to convey the point that everyone has some type of weakness or Achilles heel, if you will. No man or woman is perfect and there is always someone equal to you or better than you.

Enduring Human Nature

The Epic of Gilgamesh offers an interesting commentary on human nature. Looking at a strict interpretation of human nature, it can be defined as a human behavior or The authors seem to comment on the fact that humans do not bother doing things beneficial to others, but rather doing things that will get them remembered in the history books. When Gilgamesh and Enkidu go out to slaughter Humbaba, they are not killing the beast because they think that the world would be better. Gilgamesh openly proclaims that he wishes for his name to be remembered no matter the circumstances of the future. I believe that this counts as one of the crucial parts of human nature that the authors are commenting on. If we take a look at past Presidents of the United States, it becomes clear that this behavior still exists today. Some presidents got their names in the history books for doing truly wonderful things. President Harry S Truman was hailed as a god for making the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan. In this case, he did something that did benefit the country and received due recognition for making such a bold choice. However, the name of President Warren G. Harding still crops up in history even though he did absolutely nothing in office. The same is true of President William McKinley. Andrew Carnegie referred to him as his favorite president because he could buy and manipulate the presidency. It is part of human nature to want to be remembered, even if what you do harms the people around you. The Epic of Gilgamesh shows that this part of human nature has withstood the test of time since it still appears in our government today.

Superiority

The Epic of Gilgamesh supports the aspect of human nature that people need to assert their superiority over others. Throughout the text characters are constantly trying to prove they are superior to the others they come across. In the beginning of the text Gilgamesh leaves no son with his father and no virgin untouched to prove that he’s better than everyone else around him. No one else who tried to do that would be able to get away with it, which validates Gilgamesh’s feeling that he is superior to everyone else. Later on, when Enkidu goes to confront Gilgamesh, he proclaims “’I have come to change the old order, for I am the strongest here.’”(68) This declaration is to let everyone know that he is the strongest, and therefore superior to everyone else. Later on when Gilgamesh and Enkidu decide to kill Humbaba, Enkidu says “’…we will accomplish a work the fame of which will never die.’” (78) Human nature causes Enkidu and Gilgamesh to do something so incredible that it will never be forgotten, proving their superiority over others for all eternity. Once this is accomplished, everyone will know how inferior they are to Enkidu and Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh is also asserting his superiority when he turns down Ishtar’s offer of marriage. By turning her down he is once again proving that he is superior to her…she wants him and humbles herself by asking him to marry her, while Gilgamesh holds all the power, putting himself in a superior position by turning her down. Yet Gilgamesh is not satisfied with this. He wants to prove himself superior to all others by gaining eternal life, a feat he cannot accomplish. Despite this setback, Gilgamesh proves himself superior in the end by engraving the tale in the tablets for others to read, assuring his fame and superiority.

Completion

One of the basic determinates of human behavior is the desire for attention, or more specifically, a deep, mutual relationship between two humans. The desire to be understood, sympathized with, and loved. Gilgamesh offers such insight into human behavior through the relationship of Gilgamesh and Enkidu.

Before Gilgamesh meets Enkidu, he is reckless; Gilgamesh does not care for the needs of his city, he takes any woman, and he “went abroad in the world, but he met none that could withstand his arms” (62). The key word in this statement is but. Rather than use the word “and,” which would imply arrogance of Gilgamesh’s power, “but” suggests that Gilgamesh had been searching for an equal. He is unmatched is power, beauty, and strength, yet these god-bestowed qualities do not satisfy him. He “leaves no virgin to her lover,”(62) but women do not gratify his desire for another to understand his situation. In recognizing Gilgamesh’s recklessness as a result of his loneliness, the gods then create Enkidu, “[Gilgamesh’s] own reflection, a second self, a stormy heart for a stormy heart” (62). In other words, a man that would understand Gilgamesh, and provide him the companion to which they can be “contented together” (62).

From the moment of his enlightenment, Enkidu similarly “longed for a comrade…one who would understand his heart” (65). Enkidu recognizes his power, and his desire for companionship cannot be satisfied by the harlot’s company. But together, “their friendship was sealed” (69), and the two find completion in the other’s companionship. However, once Enkidu dies, Gilgamesh is again left with a void that cannot be filled, for the gods only created one man, Enkidu, worthy of equality with Gilgamesh. Again, Gilgamesh becomes reckless; he abandons Uruk for a fruitless search for eternal life, for again he is left without the satisfaction of fulfillment of another close companion.

Human Nature

In The Epic of Gilgamesh fear of the Unknown prevails as a dominant part of human nature. Even the book itself was created as a tool for answering lofty questions. Human beings fear death because there is no clear answer on what happens to our self awareness after our physical body expires. This fear is also present in Gilgamesh whom, until the death of his close friend Enkidu, is unbothered by the notion of death and believes himself to be immortal. Once Enkidu dies Gilgamesh says it plain and simple “How can I rest, how can I be at peace? What my brother is now, that shall I be when I am dead.” (97). Thusly Gilgamesh brings into account another aspect of human nature, giving meaning to life. It is Gilgamesh’s fear of death that shapes his life for the next part of his journey in which he searches for eternal life. He states “I wish to question you concerning the living and the dead, how shall I find the life for which I am searching?” (106). That is part of human nature, wanting a reason, meaning, or answer for life, but as is explained in this book, just maybe that is the only certainty in life: that it ends and that maybe we never will have all the answers that we inherently seek. Even today this is evident; when people grow old they have a ‘mid-life crisis’. They question what their purpose was in life and what is going to happen when the next step comes...its all part of human nature that can be seen in The Epic of Gilgamesh.

Who is man

The most effective way to judge human nature in my mind is to examine the stages of Gilgamesh and his transformation. In the beginning, Gilgamesh was described as a sheer brute whose "lust left no virgin to her lover" and made sure that "no son was left to his father, for Gilgamesh takes them all." (Page 62) He was an absolute arrogant fool who fancied himself more God than mortal. However, up until this point, Gilgamesh was all alone. In his life he had faced no challenge that he could not battle and defeat with ease which left him feeling untouchable. These assumptions may be broad but this is the interpretation I get from the text, especially when I read " You made him, O Aruru, now create his equal; let it be as like him as his own reflection" (Page 62) The people had never seen their King bested or tested and wished to see this. It so happened that after Gilgamesh met his equal and fought Enkindu, his ways of gluttony and selfish reign over the peasants was curved as he went to face greater challenges in other kingdoms. This seems to show that one who is never challenged or tested in life will eventually grow arrogant and frankly into a jerk. With no adversity in life, it becomes dull and boring and can eventually change the person's personality. Human nature seems to be constantly seek challenges and thrive on adversity, at least from the author's point of view. From my interpretation Gilgamesh only acted out because his life had been deprived of adversity and deprived of having to work for anything. Also supporting my view is that throughout the rest of the story Gilgamesh continues to push and challenge himself with greater and greater opponents, be it Humbaba, the Bull of Heaven, and finally he even challenges death itself. Bringing up Gilgamesh's tangle trying to escape death, the author also seems to state that there is wisdom to be gained in failure. By the end of the epic, Gilgamesh is a great and wise king to go along with his physical gifts. That is because he tried to do something and finally failed. He finally found a challenge that bested him and ended up losing, which was for Gilgamesh a situation very similiar to Enkindu's awakening after he laid with the harlot. He gained the wisdom of what it meant to be man, even if death is the only thing that keeps him that way. They say with most great athletes and champions that losing teaches far more than winning, and that could not have been truer for Gilgamesh.

Human Nature is the Circle of Life

The American Heritage dictionary defines human nature as the sum of qualities and traits shared by all humans. The Epic of Gilgamesh exemplifies this definition by the fact that all humans follow the same circle of life. Everyone is born lives their life and then dies, without being able to avoid death as the ultimate outcome. In The Epic of Gilgamesh, Gilgamesh tries to defy death and human nature by gaining immortality. However, the epic states that gaining everlasting life is impossible. As Shamash states to Gilgamesh, “You will never find the life in which you are looking. When the Gods created man they allotted to him death, but life they retained in their own keeping.” The epic also states that part of human nature is making sure you cherish your life, exemplified by Shamash saying, “..day and night, night and day, dance and be merry, feast and rejoice. Let your clothes be fresh, bathe yourself in water, cherish the little child that holds your hand, and make your wife happy in your embrace; for this too is the lot of man.”I believe the authors of The Epic of Gilgamesh used Gilgamesh as an example of what can happen if you are in search of preserving life instead of living it to your fullest potential. The authors wanted to show that the Gods have absolute reign, and no ordinary human can obtain the power they have; all humans share the same qualities and traits. The authors used Gilgamesh’s failure to obtain life as a God as an example that in human nature not one person has more authority over another, and every human has the same scope of power.

Human Nature over Time

While discussing human nature in terms of present day one would receive many different answers due to our wide array of cultures and practices. However in the time of Gilgamesh it is appeared that there was one ideal of human nature and everyone within the culture was to abide by it. At the center of the Gilgamesh ideal was the idea of loyalty towards the Gods and demonstrating acts of devotion and admiration. The common people were expected to center their daily lives around time of prayer and other such acts of showing their respect and love to the gods. Another ideal in the Gilgamesh age was loyalty and respect towards their leader such as their King Gilgamesh. While in present day it is human nature to look out for oneself and take strides forward individually, the age of Gilgamesh was for cultural advancement as a whole.
The most interesting aspect of human nature the epic Gilgamesh portrays is the idea of going against human nature and this is shown through Gilgamesh himself. While Gilgamesh is two-thirds God himself he does not show the complete and total respect of the Gods that he should due to the one-third human that he does have. Also, while he is the king himself so he doesn’t have to show respect towards himself, it is “human nature” of a King to be a considerate, warm soul who is loved by his people, however Gilgamesh is arrogant and makes his people depressed and scared. Human nature is a controversial topic, and it has certainly evolved over the years to a more self-centered concept.

Hubris

Human nature is viewed differently, depending on where you live, culture, etc. The Epic of Gilgamesh says one thing about human nature: hubris is the downfall of any man.
In the beginning, Gilgamesh was portrayed as arrogant, boastful, and proud. He thought about nobody, save himself. He did what he wanted to do, uncaring of what his people needed him to do. He took the virgins; he took the sons; he had no regrets. Gilgamesh had the perfect body, the perfect strength, the perfect everything. Even he forgot he was only two thirds god, not three thirds god. He forgot about his one third of mortal human. Gilgamesh had forgotten about his humanity, thus allowing hubris to overwhelm him.
Then Enkidu enters the scene. Enkidu is the polar opposite of Gilgamesh – he runs with the animals, he looks like an animal, and he helps the animals. He is very in touch with his mortality. He does not think of himself as a god, or even close to it. The book mentions that after the harlot had cleaned Enkidu up, he was like a god. Yet Enkidu never boasted the hubris that brought Gilgamesh down.
When these two met, they fought, and became friends. These polar opposites became brothers. This is the beginning of Gilgamesh’s downfall. The notion of Enkidu not living for eternity never enters Gilgamesh’s thoughts. He assumes, incorrectly, that they will both live forever. But humanity takes its course, and Enkidu dies, leaving Gilgamesh broken hearted. This death forces Gilgamesh to look at his own humanity, and he suddenly realizes he will die, too. His hubris of believing he was pure god (or merely forgetting he was human) brought his downfall.

Blog Assn #3: What _The Epic of Gilgamesh_ says about human nature.

Please post about the following topic to the blog by Thursday, Aug. 28, 8 PM: What does The Epic of Gilgamesh say about human nature?

response to pleasing the gods

If I were to disagree with one of the posts, it would have to be Josh’s on pleasing the gods, no offense of course. I cannot agree with the statement that pleasing the gods is important to the author or authors of the novel. I feel that if it were important for everyone to praise the gods then Gilgamesh would be getting a lot more respect from his people. I mean, Gilgamesh is two thirds god and he was made specifically by the gods. He is one of the gods’ sons. Why wouldn’t respect first start with him? Wouldn’t Gilgamesh’s mother want for the city of Uruk to respect her son and this would be one way that people could please the gods. Why would the people of Uruk have any problem with any of the actions that Gilgamesh has done. People would see Gilgamesh as a great man and as someone that should be idolizing for everything that he does. People would follow Gilgamesh, and people would seek him for advice because he is two thirds god and a son of a goddess. If anything they should support Gilgamesh. Since Gilgamesh is part god why then would the gods send a rival for him to put him in his place? Also why would the gods take away Gilgamesh’s beloved companion despite the fact that he insulted another god? One would think that the gods would find a compromise between the two and work out a fair conclusion. I do not believe that pleasing the gods could have been that important to the gods.

Love is not a strength

Lindsay said that love was an all powerful force in the Epic of Gilgamesh but I have to disagree. Love is constantly shown but every time it is there, it leads to the downfall of a character. First when Gilgamesh turns down Ishtar's love it results in the death of Enkidu and then Gilgamesh's love of Enkidu as a brother leads him to search for eternal life and become miserable. Also when Enkidu is created in the beginning, he is corrupted by the temple harlot. While this may not be considered love it still leads to the fall of a character and therefore it can be seen as bad. I believe that the authors were trying to get people to understand that while love is important it can also lead to lots of trouble. If love were supposed to be very important in the story, they would have made the outcomes of love less painful for everybody in the story. For example, if Gilgamesh had accepted the love of Ishtar and he became a great king, then the story might be telling the people that they needed to fall in love to get farther in life. Since Gilgamesh turned her down even after she offered all of the glorious things she did, the author's were probably not trying to promote love in that way. Another example would have been if the author's had not mentioned Enkidu losing some of his strength and swiftness when he made love to the temple harlot. If his strength had not decreased then I would have been able to see Lindsay's point.

Rob: Love

I feel kinda weird trying to make an argument to what anyone has really said but here it goes. I thought that there was a strong bond between Gilgamesh and Enkidu but I don't think that love is what the authors really cared about. With all of the journey's that Gilgamesh and Enkidu went on it is obvious they have a strong connection, but the book never really focuses on the love people had for each other. I think the authors wanted to have a story with an action guy that went around and did heroic things. The authors seemed to me to care about how Gilgamesh and Enkidu were near gods and did amazing things when they were together and went on these incredible journeys. Otherwise I feel that the author would have tried to not make the jouney's the focus of the book and try to really show you the softer side of Gilgamesh. Also the only love story that relates to Enkidu is when he has sex with the harlot, and after that the next time they bring up the harlot and Enkidu is when Enkidu knows he is going to die and gets in a fight with her. I think that is just doesn't have enough focus in the book to say that the authors would care about love in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

Re: Josh Henry

I believe that Josh Henry’s view on what was important to the authors of The Epic of Gilgamesh misses the point. He mentions that the people feared the gods wrath, however if this were the case, would they have celebrated Gilgamesh in their folklore? Even though Gilgamesh is punished for directly insulting Ishtar with the loss of his best friend, I highly doubt a group of god fearing people would refer to Gilgamesh with such honor in fear of retribution. Gilgamesh also directly defies the gods by going on his quest for eternal life, even after Siduri warns him that when the gods created mankind they reserved eternal life for themselves. In fact aside from the creation and eventual destruction of Enkidu, the gods take the back seat to the mere mortals Enkidu and Gilgamesh. When Gilgamesh and Enkidu go on their quest to kill Humbaba, the forest guardian commissioned by Shamash, there are no direct repercussions for the duo. If the authors truly feared the Gods, one would think they would go into great depth describing their punishment. Josh also states Gilgamesh is a “horrible” person, when in fact there are references all through the book telling of his great accomplishments for his people. I firmly believe that if the authors of Gilgamesh truly feared the Gods, they would have given Gilgamesh a far worse demise than the honorable one he received.

Response to the Gods

I would hate do this, but I too have to disagree with Josh’s blog. His argument states that Gilgamesh was simply trying to make the Gods happy so all of the problems could simply just be worked out by the divine powers. My argument against that is, if he was trying to make the Gods happy, why would he do the things he did? Why would he rape newlyweds or take children from their father at an early age? I believe that if he was truly trying to make the Gods happy, he would have been a leader that never touched a woman or never sinned or lied to the people of Uruk. I think it is understood that Enkidu was put in this story for a reason. When the story starts off, the authors start praising Gilgamesh about how he two thirds God, one third human, he had a perfect body, perfect beauty and surpassing courage. I think they were trying to plant this image in the readers head because they wanted to think that this god of a man was on a level no one has been before. Also, when the reader first met Enkidu, the author when into great detail about how uncivilized and put emphasis that Enkidu ate and interacted with other animals, like an animal. The authors, who are anonymous, went to great lengths to create such opposites. There is not a great deal of interaction between Gilgamesh and the Gods, the story is based on the ups and downs of the relationship between Gilgamesh and Enkidu. That is why I disagree with Josh’s post.

Response to Josh Henry

According to Josh, the authors were aiming to please the gods by writing a book. However, based on my scant knowledge of the time period, I would say it is much more likely that the authors would have used more traditional methods such as ritual sacrifice to appease the gods. I would agree with Josh’s argument, but there were so many other ways that the ancient Mesopotamians used to settle down the gods that I doubt writing would even come to their minds. I agree with the second half of his argument more because I believe that as an author, I would try to direct people in the right direction more than I would try to do the action myself. This leads me to believe that the authors were doing as Josh said in the second half of his post. They were telling the people to be more respectful of the gods in order to prevent angering the gods. The authors themselves were not writing the book in order to please the gods directly, but rather they were encouraging others to do so. While I believe that Josh presents a valid argument, I feel as though it is much more likely the authors were wise-men who wanted the people to listen to them rather than commoners who wanted to please the gods by writing a book about their glory.

Pleasing the Gods for Immortality?

In Josh’s post, he claimed that Gilgamesh and Enkidu’s main concern throughout the epic was pleasing the Gods. I have to disagree with Josh’s claim. I believe the writers of The Epic of Gilgamesh were more concerned with immortality, and Gilgamesh’s search for ever-lasting life. To counter Josh’s view, Enkidu and especially Gilgamesh do not go out of their way to upset the Gods, but they are more concerned with themselves and establishing their everlasting fame. Throughout the epic, Gilgamesh and Enkidu only pray to the Gods when they need guidance and prayers before departing on a journey that will immortalize them through fame. Before their journey to defeat the great Humbaba, Gilgamesh made it a point to go to his mother Ninsun, a minor goddess, and have her seek out Shamash, the god of wisdom. Gilgamesh wanted advice on his journey to give himself a greater name, and truly immortalize himself forever throughout history. Also, if Gilgamesh truly cared about pleasing the Gods, he would have accepted Ishtar’s love offering to be her bridegroom instead of insulting her. Once Enkidu was overcome with his sickness condemned by the Gods for murdering the Bull of Heaven, he realized he had upset the Gods, and started praying to Shamash for health. Once Enkidu dies, Gilgamesh seems to respect the God’s because he once again needs them to help him in his quest for ever-lasting life. When seeking out Utnapishtim, a man the Gods made immortal because of his incredible feat, Gilgamesh gives complete respect to the Gods in his journey. Given the textual evidence from the story I do not believe Enkidu and Gilgamesh necessarily wanted to please the Gods at all times, but use them to immortalize themselves and give them an everlasting name.

Knowledge is power

I feel that in Liz's blog she equated knowledge with evil and the lack of knowledge with a sort of strength that comes from such naivity. I myself have to disagree with this assessment, I found that in obtaining the knowledge of being man when Enkindu laid with the harlot not only made him greater but also let him know true life, rather than wallow away in primitive instinct. Is the fact that Enkindu did not do the task assigned to him by the Gods inherently evil? Or would not be living to his fullest potential as a man be the truer evil? It is a moral opinion but I find the latter much more offensive. Before Enkindu had gained his knowledge of humanity he was merely a tool, the shell of a man that perhaps had the physical gifts to be great but didn't have the mental capacity to ever achieve greatness. Though Enkidu's body became weak as Liz said, his mind strengthened and he began to live the life a man is meant to live. I believe the authors were complete and full supporters of knowledge as the were so proud of the achievements of their ancestors whom had built Uruk using such a depth of knowledge. The fact also remains that in the beginning Gilgamesh was portrayed as a jerk, for lack of a better word, but was praised as wise and great in the preface because it was written after he had obtained such a moral knowledge and appreciation for the world around him. Yes, Enkindu may have lost his innocence when he slept with the harlot but that does not necassarily mean he became guilty or evil. And Gilgamesh never had innocence until he gained his knowledge through the death of Enkindu (in my opinion) as he finally became the leader he was meant to be and gave up his selfish ways.

Really Something to Please?

Josh claims that the theme of pleasing the gods was present in the mind of the authors of Gilgamesh, but I say the exact opposite can be seen. I believe the authors were trying to down-playing the gods. These gods are anything but perfect, and NONE of them are all powerful. Each god has their own little realm of power; none of them has complete power over everything. Also, they act as petty as the humans do, fighting amongst themselves and acting for selfish game. I mean, there was no reason why they would create Gilgamesh in the first place if not for some selfish entertainment.
Another thing that is in the book that takes away from the gods’ persona is the actions of Gilgamesh and Enkidu. They are constantly doing things that incur the gods’ wrath. But if the god’s were so all powerful why wouldn’t they just create Gilgamesh the way they wanted him in the first place? It just shows that they have the inability to make things exactly the way they want them. It was said that human’s fate is up to the gods, but with all the misbehavior of Enkidu and Gilgamesh it seems that the gods are unable to completely control the world they create.
This being said, I believe the authors were attempting to show that the gods were losing their ‘all powerful’ image as man gained more knowledge, and thusly every move you make didn’t need to be totally devoted to pleasing the gods.

Perseverance of eternal life?

Cassie says that the authors are concerned with perseverance in reference to eternal life, but I am forced to disagree. While Gilgamesh searches for eternal life, he is not able to achieve it. If the authors had truly been concerned with perseverance in reference to eternal life, Gilgamesh would have gained eternal life. Throughout the text there are numerous examples of characters saying things such as “‘…everlasting life is not your destiny.’” (70) and “’Only the gods live for ever with glorious Shamash, but as for us men, our days are numbered, our occupations are a breath of wind.’” (71). This type of sentiment is expressed at various points in the text, which means that the authors understand and accept that they cannot live forever. While it’s true that once Enkidu dies Gilgamesh searches for eternal life, this is more a lesson to the reader than the authors obsession with perseverance in reference to eternal life. While on his quest Gilgamesh learns that only the gods have eternal life and comes to accept the fact that he has to die, as does everyone else. This acceptance is a major part of the meaning of the text, because accepting that you are not invincible is a humbling experience that Gilgamesh needed to counter his arrogance. So while I do agree that the authors are concerned with the idea of eternal life, it seems that they are more concerned with conveying the message that we all must die and less with the perseverance of eternal life.

The Recklessness of Gilgamesh

Rob argues that Enkidu’s love prompts Gilgamesh to become a better leader, yet I would argue the exact opposite. For example, Rob states that when “Gilgamesh develops a relationship with Enkidu…[he] is better able to fulfill the needs of his people.” However, once Gilgamesh finds a companion in Enkidu, the two together seem to have no care for the needs of the people in Uruk. Against the people’s wishes, Gilgamesh and Enkidu leave the city to kill Humbaba, simply for Gilgamesh’s satisfaction of the deed and his search for eternal glory. Gilgamesh even admits his preference to search out the world’s dangers with Enkidu, rather than stay in the city and rule the people. In response to the people’s warnings, Gilgamesh answers “..shall I say I am afraid of Humbaba, I will sit at home all the rest of my days?” (74).

Rob also mentions that “Gilgamesh cared so much about Enkidu that when he dies he then looks for immortality.” My interpretation is that Gilgamesh’s actions are much more selfish than his love for Enkidu. Rather, Gilgamesh does not want to suffer the same fate of his friend. When Enkidu first receives the dream which depicts the afterlife fated for all men, Gilgamesh mourns that “…misery comes at last to the healthy man, the end of life is sorrow” (93). Gilgamesh even asserts further that “I am afraid of death” (97). Gilgamesh’s fear then becomes his initiative to search out Utnapishtim for the secret to eternal life, rather than the loss of Enkidu.

Enkidu’s love, though it does provide Gilgamesh with companionship and saves the women of Uruk from Gilgamesh’s whims, does not make Gilgamesh into a better person. Rather, Enkidu incites further recklessness from Gilgamesh (such as the killing of Humbaba), and his subsequent abandonment of his people in search of eternal life.

Teamwork Shemework

Joel argued that the authors strove to prove that teamwork helps people to achieve what they could never have done otherwise. Although this may be a true sentiment, I do not believe that this is a message that the writers tried to convey. Although Gilgamesh and Enkindu have some marvelous adventures together, and Enkindu helps to tame the destructive impulsivity Gilgamesh constantly plagues his citizens with, I believe that the authors wanted to show that it was Gilgamesh’s love and friendship towards Enkindu that helped him strive to achieve greater feats. When Gilgamesh first encounters Enkindu and recognizes him as his equal, his tyrannical and belligerent behavior come to a quick end. He quits rape cold turkey, and stops his bad habit of ripping families apart to strengthen his military forces. Gilgamesh and Enkindu balance each other out, which helps keep Gilgamesh in line. Another point disproving teamwork as a primary theme is that after Enkindu dies, Gilgamesh’s grief propels him to go on the quest for eternal life, which in turn leads to his voyage to find Utnapishtim. Through that Enkindu-free quest Gilgamesh acquires more wisdom and enlightenment than any quest he went on with his beloved buddy. Although the dynamic duo does complete some heroic feats, it is Gilgamesh’s loyalty and friendship that propel him to greater levels.

Argument Against Love

While love does play a role in The Epic of Gilgamesh and I agree that love was important to the authors of the story, I don’t believe that love really fueled the progression of events. Gilgamesh and Enkidu obviously had a very close and respectful relationship, but Gilgamesh’s love for Enkidu doesn’t directly change how Gilgamesh rules his kingdom. Gilgamesh, after killing the Bull of Heaven and Humbaba, returns to his kingdom and nothing more is said on the subject of his lust for women or his decree of taking sons away from their fathers. We aren’t safe to assume that he treated his people more justly because of Enkidu’s advice. There is no evidence that he worked to make life better for his people.
Furthermore, when Gilgamesh and Enkidu go on their journey through the forest, it is true that they enjoyed each other’s company and worked well together in their pursuit, however the real goal of their passage was to “leave an enduring name.” Gilgamesh was more wrapped up in his quest for immortality, in actual life and in history, than in his companionship with Enkidu.
When he returns home after Enkidu dies, Gilgamesh is consumed with the thought of death. I don’t necessarily believe that Gilgamesh went out on a quest for eternal life because he lost a dear friend, but because he was afraid for his own mortality. If anything, Enkidu didn’t make Gilgamesh less selfish, but opened his eyes to more self centered things. Gilgamesh was obsessed with saving himself from death, and no more is heard of the situation of his kingdom. He seems to neglect his duties as a king when he is off in search of something unobtainable, and therefore love has more of an ironic role.

Power of the Gods?

While reflecting on Gilgamesh, Josh said that the most prominent idea in the authors mind when writing this epic was pleasing the Gods. However, Gilgamesh only seemed to be interested in pleasing himself and his own needs especially in the beginning of the story. From pleasing himself by sleeping with all the women in his town, to simply making himself so happy that his entire town was depressed Gilgamesh did not seem to have to much concern with the gods.
I agree with Josh that pleasing the Gods is a concern mentioned, I do not feel it was the most important idea discussed by the authors. Especially since in most cases concerning the Gods and pleasing them, Enkidu and Gilgamesh most commonly would find themselves doing what they wanted instead of trying to please the Gods. There are the rare exceptions where they choose actions to please the Gods but if the authors were really trying to teach the readers to act in ways to please the Gods the book would have been written much differently because many of Enkidu and Gilgamesh’s actions would be frowned upon by the Gods and should not be duplicated.
In the beginning of my reflection I said that there were more prominent messages within the text, these messages are the ideas of building relationships and developing leadership. Gilgamesh grew as a leader when he formed his relationship with Enkidu and he began to develop into a better person, which we see in the end when he would rather die than live forever without his friend.

An Argument Against Pleasing the Gods

It is said that gods are a way for humans to keep a moral conscience. In one blog, it was said that the authors of Gilgamesh cared only about pleasing the gods. I must disagree with this point of view.
If the authors of Gilgamesh only cared about not incurring the gods wrath, why did they provide several instances where the gods fury is fully brought upon Gilgamesh and Enkidu? When Enkidu and Gilgamesh go to kill Humbaba, they realize he is the guardian and protector of the cedar forest, a forest created by Shamash, an all powerful god. Thus, the protector of this forest is dear to Shamash. So when Enkidu tells Gilgamesh to kill this monster, he knows it will infuriate at least one of the gods. So why would Enkidu tell his dear companion to do this, knowing it will make the gods angry? Why would Gilgamesh follow through with it? They did it because they wanted to leave a legend, even if that meant enraging the gods.
If Gilgamesh had only wanted to appease the gods, would he have turned Ishtar away? Would he have said the nasty things he said to her, if he did not want to make her angry? No, if he had wanted to keep her anger away from him, he would have gone to her bed, no matter what she had done to her past lover’s. He would have complimented her and told her how beautiful and kind she was. He would not have pointed out how she struck every past lover, broke wings, and turned them into blind moles.
This story is not about the gods, whether it is soothing them, or angering them. It is about a man who risked everything to find who he was.

Blog Assn #2: Critical analysis of another student's post on Gilgamesh

Please post about the following topic to the blog by Tuesday, Aug. 26, 8 PM (see the syllabus for more instructions):

Pick another class member's post (either from the main blog page, or from the comments under my post, "Blog Assn #1...") and argue that what he/she said (about what's important to the Gilgamesh authors) doesn't best get the text right. For instance, your post should begin something like this: "Kelly claims that ________. But I say ________. Here are my arguments...."

Finding Eternity

The authors of The Epic of Gilgamesh wanted to create a story that would endure as not only a tale of adventure, but also with themes that are relatable to men in general.
Throughout the Gilgamesh epic, death is an inevitable, but distant thought. The goal of men, therefore, is to try to be as eternal as possible. Gilgamesh finds refuge from the haunting thought of death with the fact that he can leave behind a legacy. He strives to have his “name stamped on bricks as my destiny decreed; therefore I will go to the country where the cedar is felled. I will set up my name in the place where the names of famous men are written, and where no man’s name is written yet I will raise a monument to the gods.” As king, he builds great walls and statues that could endure through the ages. He and Enkidu go out on an expedition to kill Humbaba and the Bull of Heaven, feats which have been labeled as virtually impossible. The danger involved with such quests will leave stories for people to tell through the ages, and thus leaving permanent footprints in the sand. However much Gilgamesh understands that “only the gods live forever with glorious Shamash, but as for us men, our days are numbered, our occupations are a breath of wind,” he cannot find comfort in only having a legacy. After Enkidu dies, Gilgamesh is reminded of how fragile life is, and begins to fear for his own life. His growing obsession with death and finding eternal life, however, is the ultimate irony. Gilgamesh spends his last days searching for something that doesn’t exist, when he should have been enjoying the life and accomplishments that he had. Siduri tried to remind him that “when the gods created man they allotted him death….As for you, Gilgamesh, fill your belly with good things; day and night, night and day, dance and be merry, feast and rejoice. Let your clothes be fresh, bathe yourself in water, cherish the little child that holds your hand, and make your wife happy in your embrace; for this too is the lot of man,” but Gilgamesh wanted something more, and died in a futile attempt at immortality.

Love

Something that the authors of Gilgamesh care about is love. Throughout the story of Gilgamesh, Gilgamesh develops a "love" for his companion Enkidu. Love and companionship go hand in hand in this story as Gilgamesh asserts that, "when two go together each will protect himself and shield his companion, and if they fall they leave an enduring name" (Gilgamesh 77). When Enkidu--Gilgamesh's companion, is first introduced to Gilgamesh, he was happy to hear that Gilgamesh was a strong man who ruled many and "longed for a comrade, for one who would understand his heart" (Gilgamesh 65), as all humans want love and companionship. In the beginning of the story, Gilgamesh was a self centered jerk. In the first chapter the author talks about Gilgamesh's arrogance, how he is a poor leader because of his selfishness.
However, when Gilgamesh develops a relationship with Enkidu, that is when he finally is able to change. Gilgamesh begins to care about what his people want and is better able to fulfill the needs of his people.
Gilgamesh cared so much about Enkidu that when he dies he then looks for immortality. This is because he cared about his friend so much that he does not want to end up like his comrade. The author demonstrates that love is something that they care about because love is what helps to change Gilgamesh into a great leader. Once Gilgamesh’s love for Enkidu is introduced Gilgamesh can change and it makes him into a better person.

Perserverance ... or lack there of

While reading Gilgamesh the authors came across as being especially concerned with the idea of perseverance in reference to eternal life. Gilgamesh himself was two-thirds god and one-third man and even he was not able to continue to eternal life.
When creating Gilgamesh the gods seemed to have an idea of him being similar to them in having the “gift” of eternal life despite the fraction of human in him. However when Enkidu came into his life Gilgamesh’s behavior began to become more like a human due to his realization that he wasn’t as superior as he once thought. It is due to this transformation that the idea of eternal life began to get further and further away from both him and the Gods.
Another subject the authors seemed to have concern with was the idea of showing your arrogance. Upon completion Gilgamesh was obviously a superior being among the human race, however Gilgamesh showed that he had knowledge of this and it was his arrogance that was his great downfall. The authors were displaying somewhat of a warning to others in saying that if you are arrogant you will in the long run be punished and it is a unwanted quality.
In all epics there are hidden messages and Gilgamesh is not an exception to that. The authors wanted to show messages of perseverance, arrogance, and finally a message of developing relationships. A tale of great age Gilgamesh has proved itself a story that is a true story of heroism.

Love is an All Powerful Force

In the Epic of Gilgamesh, the authors valued love as powerful force that had many life-changing powers, and a huge impact upon people. As the book starts out, Gilgamesh is an all powerful tyrant who only has love for himself and all the women of his kingdom, Uruk. By raping the women of his nobles, Gilgamesh has more love for himself than anyone else. When the God’s realize Gilgamesh’s impact on his people, they create Enkidu as a companion hoping to cancel out some of Gilgamesh’s power. Enkidu became a civilized man with his sexual relationship with the temple harlot who notified Enkidu of Gilgamesh’s terrifying reign. Once Enkidu realizes Gilgamesh’s tyranny he challenges Gilgamesh for his kingdom, and the pair begin a great friendship between each other. However, once Gilgamesh befriends Enkidu he his love for himself vanishes, and Enkidu has a rather large impact on the love Gilgamesh started showing for his kingdom. Gilgamesh started to be able to respect his people and was able to empathize with them. Gilgamesh’s and Enkidu’s love flourished for each other on their journey to defeat the great Humbaba. On their journey Enkidu and Gilgamesh showed their love for each other by embracing each other during sleep, and holding hands as they walked through hundreds of leagues of the forest. When Gilgamesh returns from his journey, the Goddess of love, Ishtar is overcome with love and pleads with Gilgamesh to become her husband. Gilgamesh refuses, and in Ishtar’s furiousness she asks her father Anu to unleash the Bull of Heaven and kill Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh realizes how great his love for Enkidu is when the God’s condemn Enkidu to death for killing the Bull of Heaven. His sorrow in the loss of his beloved friend then caused Gilgamesh to go on his journey for the search of ever-lasting life.

What Matters in the Epic of Gilgamesh

One of the most important things that the authors of The Epic of Gilgamesh cared about was pleasing the Gods. They were obviously frightened by beliefs of what the Gods could do if they became angered. In order to do this they described the great powers of the Gods in the story. First they show the powers of creation that the Gods hold by creating Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Then they show how the Gods act when they feel wrathful when Enkidu dies a slow and inglorious death after they kill the Bull of Heaven. By showing these two opposites, life and death, the authors give the readers perspective as the range of the Gods’ powers spans from life to death and everything in between. The authors told the readers that they needed to make the Gods happy because if they did then things would go well and their problems would work themselves out. It also acted warned anybody seeking to displease the Gods by threats of an inglorious death. Another concept that the authors cared about was the future. By making Gilgamesh be such a horrible person by having him deflower the women in his kingdom and by tyrannizing his people, the authors warned about the repercussions that might happen. First Gilgamesh is given a rival in hopes that it will show him how bad he is and then after that doesn’t work, he is driven into a deep depression when Enkidu dies and he begins to fear for his own life. The authors tried to get people to realize that they need to respect other people and work to make everyone’s lives better in hopes that the future would be better. The authors probably lived in a time of war and misfortune and hoped for a better future.

(posted for Josh Henry by Kelly Sorensen)

We all fall down

The authors of the book stress that although Gilgamesh is two parts god and one part human, he is just as vulnerable to mortality as any other human being is. This clearly shows that the authors care about the universal equalizer of death, and that all who roam the earth, even heroes, are not immune to the fate we all share. After his search for Utnapishtim, the only mortal to be granted eternal life, Gilgamesh learns that he has limits as to what he can achieve, despite his unrelenting feeling of entitlement. By not being able to stay awake for a week as Utnapishtim challenges him, he is forced to recognize that his abilities do indeed have human parameters. Even though Gilgamesh possesses abilities far beyond any other mortal with unparalleled strength, wisdom, and aesthetics; he too suffers the fate of unavoidable decay.
The authors found this point prominent because in their era live wasn’t all sunshine and daisies. The Mesopotamians used the Gods as a source to answer all they found to be unknown, and assumed that all harm in their world was whiplash from the Gods which initially sprung from the actions of mortals. The Gods were the only all powerful beings, and any mortal could lose the favor of the Gods with their actions, just as Gilgamesh did when he turned down Ishtar which resulted in the death of his dear friend Enkidu. The authors wove the point of mortality and inescapable vulnerability to the Gods throughout the novel, and built all the details from this sole establishment to add a sense of security to their existence, even if this security was founded with death and the subjective actions of a higher power.

Assn. #1

Much like the video presented in class about how a city’s skyline can tell the values of a population, by dissecting the Epic of Gilgamesh you can discover a lot about what the Mesopotamian culture held in high esteem. The ancient Mesopotamian's obviously valued the art of oral tradition because the true Gilgamesh reigned hundreds of years before his tales of heroism and tragedy were first published. They also expected a lot out of their rulers enough to compare them to, and even name them, gods. I also believe the Sumerians also strongly valued their heritage and history. If you take into account that each chapter was based loosely on an event that might of occurred, such as the great flood (which also holds similar characteristics with the genesis flood). The most apparent part of the ancient’s lifestyle was their strong connection with their gods. In almost every chapter Gilgamesh interacts, sometimes physically, with these other worldly beings. The Mesopotamians’ view of the gods was sometimes not so black and white, as seen in the book Gilgamesh and Ishtar. Here Ishtar is madly in love with Gilgamesh, however Gilgamesh outright rejects her. This shows that the people at this time respected Gilgamesh’s power enough so that even if he did outright disrespect a god, there would be no repercussions. Finally the death of Enkidu explores the more human side of Gilgamesh, after his grieving period Gilgamesh undertakes a quest for eternal life. When Gilgamesh ultimately fails his quest the lesson that it is possible to reach great success is entirely possible as a mortal.

Knowledge on the Mind

Within The Epic of Gilgamesh a common theme can be observed, that of knowledge and evil. I believe this is something the authors were thinking about and sought to explain. It can universally be seen that knowledge comes with and understanding of evil, that is, the loss of innocence can be accompanied with a gain in knowledge. This can be seen after Enkidu has his sexual encounter with the woman. The story states how after he lost his innocence of mankind to her, “Enkidu [grew] weak, for wisdom was in him, and the thoughts of man were in his heart” (65).
Also, as we discussed in class, at the beginning of the book Gilgamesh is said to be very wise. This wisdom was gained through encountering evil throughout his long journey. When he started his journey, he really was not that bright at all, but as he raised hell all over the lands he gained knowledge and wisdom from his actions. Yet, Gilgamesh was not the only one affected by his actions. The people around his also gained more knowledge by being witnesses to his mischief.
This may have been on the mind of the authors of The Epic Of Gilgamesh because the ‘all knowing gods’ were losing their luster as humans gained more knowledge. I speculate that the authors of The Epic of Gilgamesh were concerned with ones gaining of knowledge and how it almost always is accompanied by an understanding or encounter with evil…because if the god were fully wise, they must then have been well versed when it comes to evil.

Our Modern Bull of Heaven

Throughout The Epic of Gilgamesh, the authors appear to concern themselves with the growing threat of human arrogance. Killing the Bull of Heaven proves the perfect example since it demonstrates how Gilgamesh and Enkidu become too self-assured. The gods never ordered Gilgamesh and Enkidu to murder the Bull of Heaven. However, because the men had just killed Humbaba, they believe that it was their right to rid the earth of beasts. This kind of arrogance raises issues with the authors because it leads to dangerous decisions based on false assumptions. As noted in the text, the pair first hesitate to kill Humbaba, because they are not sure if their strength is enough. However, once their arrogance sets in, the men feel they can take on anything and end up killing without the permission of the gods.

I believe the authors wanted to warn against the dangers of arrogance because they felt as though too many people assume they are invincible. I know that if I were to write a fiction book for today's man, I would include a similar section. The actions of corporate America mimic those made by Gilgamesh. Too many people believe they are untouchable or above the law. In many cases, this risky assumption causes us to do stupid things. We assume we can get away with it because we are special. As an author, I would want to show my readers that humans are not that special. Like the example of giving a child a new toy right before bed, I would want to give the main character something and then take it away as a repercussion of their foolish actions.

Since The Epic of Gilgamesh was originally born out of folklore and word of mouth and evolved over hundreds of years, it is safe to assume that the epic had far more than one author. It seems that each story or instance of Gilgamesh, not necessarily just the books it is broken up into, contains its own theme, which at times seems to contrast the theme of another book. For example, Gilgamesh fought and defeated Ekindu in the first book and became friends and built a relationship with him afterwards. This seems to drive home the theme of mercy and pity. However in the very next book, Gilgamesh battles and defeats Humbaba, the guardian of the forest in a very similiar situation. This time though he murders Humbaba in cold blood as he was begging for his life, which implies the theme that one should not show mercy and should look out for oneself before all others. Both these themes show two completely opposite points of view and two completely different schools of morality. Since the epic was constantly evolving over the years it seems that the values of the people who wrote it changed, perhaps from a time of peace ( a time when showing mercy to your brother would be acceptable) to a time of war or invasion (when showing the enemy mercy or the slightest weakness could cost the individual everything). After these very pracitcal extrospective views on human interaction, the final two instances (the death of Enkindu and Gilgamesh's search for immortality) become rather philosophical and psycological with an introspective point of view, which suggests its authors were probably deeper thinkers than their pedecessors. At the same time, certain traits of the culture never leave the story, such as the demonation of women and the idol worship of the would be gods. All the authors seemed to share these points of view

Blog Assn #1: What do the Gilgamesh authors care about?

Please post about the following topic to the blog by Sunday, Aug. 24, 8 PM (see the syllabus for more instructions):

Recall the clip about Joseph Campbell reading a city by its skyline, with the skyline offering some indication about what its builders care about. What's something the authors of _The Epic of Gilgamesh_ care about? Offer evidence for your view.

Welcome to the Blog!

Welcome to the class blog!

See the syllabus for instructions about when and how to post. Feel free to comment on any of these posts -- offering opposing or supporting arguments is a great way to extend your experience with the texts we discuss.