Week 12 Reading Diary A: Gambling Problems

So, we hear about Yudhishthira's gambling problems again. Stupid. I mean, at what point do you learn man? Smh...

And man, Draupadi's story is just even more brutal. Poor woman. She's pretty awesome though.

So anyway, then we get the story of King Nala from Vyasa.

Is it weird that a swan is spreading love advice? That's just not weird to you, you take the swan at his word?

And is it normal for gods to be at a swayamvara? And what's so special about Damayanti that all the gods are fighting over her? And why would she want Nala over any one of the gods? Because a swan told her so??? So many questions.

Hmm, so Nala loses because a demon possessed him. Yudhishthira just loses because he sucks.

Wow, Nala's kind of a jerk. And how does that work. each wearing half a robe? I mean, that could probably cover up Nala, but I doubt half a robe is doing much for Damayanti. Where was Krishna to give her a robe? These women really have it rough.

So Indra gets a naga to help Nala... by biting him and horribly disfiguring him? Some help. I mean, it ends up helping, eventually, but I feel like there could have been a better way. And there's so much focus on gambling. I mean, wouldn't the best advice about gambling be to just not gamble? Obviously it doesn't work out well for these people.

Wasn't Nala supposed to be unrecognizable?

So it's a happy ending... except for all the suffering and abandonment and wandering half-naked in the forest and the fact that a woman can be gambled among men. Yeah.

And more sketchy gambling advice. Just say no man, just say no.

Week 11 Reading Diary B: Trouble Brewing

Same basic story about the booby trap house..

Thought: who were the people they put in the house to make it look like they had died? I mean, that's not very cool. And did no one notice their loved ones's corpses disappeared? Did the Pandavas just walk unnoticed through the streets carting away these corpses?

Bhima fights another evil rakshasa demon king. Are these guys just always running around?

Another weird inanimate object conception story with Draupadi and the butter. There wasn't even any semen involved this time. Reminds me of Dasaratha's thing with the rice. Butter and rice. Yum.

Same story with Draupadi's swayamvara, Arjuna wins, she has to marry all five of the brothers.. Krishna shows up a little more in this version, talks to Arjuna, but isn't really an important character yet.

Dhritarashtra's a good guy. Duryodhana's a jerk.

Ha ha Krishna's like a spoiled lazy bro. A magical bro.

More butter, what's with the butter? Mysterious woodsman. Troubling story about burning down the forest and all its creatures again. Poor Bambi.

Yud. has a gambling problem. Seriously dude, know your limits.

And, that's where the section ends. Stuff's about to go down, though. Wasn't much new material in this section, as compared to Narayan, but the action is also picking up now.

Week 11 Reading Diary A: Buck's Mahabharata

Well, this one starts with an invocation again. I like how it sets the scene and gives it a real mystical, storytelling feel, but at the same time, Narayan's telling gets into the action much sooner.

I do like the story of Vyasa and Ganesha composing the Mahabharata. Ganesha seems to be one of the more well-known Hindu gods in Western society, and so I've heard this story before. It's nice to see a familiar story in its original context.

Oh, and now the churning of the ocean! I've heard this one too, but I don't think I knew it came from the Mahabharata. I like how these fuller versions of the epics include so many stories about gods and such that aren't directly related to the narrative. Like I said above, it kind of slows down the action of the story, but at the same time it's interesting to see all this mythology gathered together. It's nice that there are new things to learn in this version too.

Oh okay, now it comes back around to the snake sacrifice.. the time frame there is kind of confusing, it's like they start with a frame narrative and then loop around to the past and then back to it.. I don't know.

And here's the Ganga story again. Wait, was this in the Narayan version, or did I read this on my own? I don't remember. I think it was in Narayan. Yeah. Anyway.. that's pretty messed up.

Wtf?? Okay, well, the already strange and messed up story of Satyavati's birth gets even more strange and messed up. Like, who came up with this stuff? There's some new stuff here, but basically the same narrative.

Women are shuffled around... god sex... deer god sex... pretty much the same, but somehow I'd forgotten how much weird stuff there is in the beginning here.

Gandhari giving birth -- W T F??????????????? I just... no. I don't even wanna ... no.

More god sex. It's weird how it's not considered cheating having all kinds of children by gods.

What's with ejaculating into inanimate objects and magically making children? Like, what?

Arjuna the jock. Drona the wildly irresponsible teacher. Ooh, new stuff with Karna. That's interesting.

Week 10 Reading Diary B: Downer Ending

Man, Duryo is really a jerk. Here Dhrita wants to throw Krishna a freakin party, and Duryo's just like, mwa ha ha, let's kidnap him! Take a day off man. Oh, wait, he's a crazy powerful god. Okay, plan over, bye bye Krishna have a safe trip.

Oh, Karna, you're only going to attack ONE of my sons? Oh wow, thanks, you're such a dear.

Ah, and here's the Bhagavad Gita!

That was weird how Karna wouldn't fight as long as Bhishma was fighting. Like, cuz he was mad at him? Wouldn't that be all the more reason to fight him?

Man, this battle is crazy. Krishna's running around, demon sons and reincarnated women warriors, Bhishma gets distracted, oops! You dead.

Aww. poor Abhimanyu. Arjuna mad now.

Wow, that's gotta be a pretty big discus.

Okay - so Karna, you have a weapon that CANNOT  fail. You were smart, and said hey, I'm gonna save this for Arjuna, the baddest warrior they've got. Then, you were stupid, and wasted it on someone else. Stick to your goals, man.


WOOOWWW, really not cool. Like, if you're gonna lie anyway, what was the point of killing the elephant named Ashwatthaman? That just seems really.. childish. And then, like, whispering under your breath "the elephant" so you're not technically lying - come on bro, you're lying. I mean, you are intentionally lying your ass off in order to, oh yeah, kill the guy point blank unarmed whammo dead. But seriously though, that's how little kids lie - whisper the untold bit under your breath. I expected better. Bad form.

Ooookayyy, and it gets more effed up... This is like, prison rules. I mean it's a war, but still...

Kinda convenient to blame it all on karma. I don't know, I kinda feel for Duryodhana at the end there...

Okay, how do you mistake a metal statue for a person? I think there's a bad case of the stupid going around in this family.

Man, this is a downer ending.

Oh damn, he's still not dead? Jeez that sucks. I don't think I would give my enemy tips and tricks on ruling my kingdom as I was dying. I'd be more like, F you.


Dude, what the what??? It was already enough of a downer ending, then we get people dying in fires, cities drowning, civil wars, Krishna is killed by a hunter who thinks he's a BIRD??? This is just.. I can't.. no.

Week 10 Reading Diary A: Preparing for War

Duryodhana needs to give it up. Obsessed much? And obviously, he just can't ever do anything right. He's like the villain in a kids' cartoon - every week he comes up with a new evil plot, which we all know is going to fail, and he never seems to realize he should just give up and get a hobby.

What's with all the mysterious deer? The golden deer, the sex-having god deer, now this deer... why can't there be a mysterious lizard or a god posing as a pigeon?

Wow, that's smart. I mean, to be fair, if I heard a voice come out of a lake, I would just think someone was playing a joke on me, or at worst that I was hearing things, and I wouldn't really answer it either. But, these people are coming from a place where they deal with gods and demons and stuff, so you would think they would be a little more receptive to a magic talking lake. And then, of course, after the first brother dies, HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE??? Like, why would the others just ignore their dead brother's carcass dangling over the side of the lake? Would they not think to be a little more cautious after that?

And how did that conversation go? "Uh, hey dad? Why are my brothers dead?" "Oh, they wouldn't answer my questions." "Umm... okay, but I did." "Yes, you're a good boy. Run along now." "Umm... do you think you could bring my brothers back to life?" "Oh, very well." Poof poof!

Wow, how did Yudhishthira get that gig? I mean, he just gets to hang out and play dice (sure that's a good idea?) with the king, while his brothers are a cook, a cowherd, and a stableboy. Ouch.

And Draupadi is a hairdresser. lol. Why is this starting to feel like some sort of sitcom?

Ooh.. god, Draupadi gets a raw deal. Bhima SQUEEZES a guy to death? Like,  what?

Go go action Arjuna.

Damn, he musta thrown those dice hard to draw blood.

Oh, hey, didn't know you were awesome, sorry I assaulted you with dice. Have my daughter.


Hmm, choose Krishna or his million soldiers. Smells like a trap... bet Duryodhana's pretty pleased with himself.. for now, da da daaa!

Double agent. I mean, would you really want someone loyal to the other side to begrudgingly join your army because of a promise? That just sounds like a recipe for stupid.

Dhritarashtra needs to sack up. I don't know what Duryo's problem is, but Dhrita should really listen to, like, everyone else and not do this war. But alas, then there would not be a story.

Week 9 Reading Diary B: Mo Problems.

Pandavas are still alive. D'oh! Duryodhana got some anger issues. Like, let it go man. Dhritarashtra seems more like he's got a cool head on his shoulders. Seems he should be able to keep his sons in line.

Oh, thank you, finally somebody seems to realize that sharing a wife among five brothers could be an issue. Didn't really fix anything though. I guess it makes sense that each brother gets a year with her... still pretty weird though. And then that comes back and bites Arjuna on the butt. Can't say I didn't warn you.

More political stuff... more family problems... lots of grudge holders here. I mean, how long has it been at this point? Sheesh.

Wow. That game of dice though... moral of the story: gambling is bad kids. Don't gamble. And certainly don't gamble away all of your possessions and your kingdom and yourself and your brothers and your wife. That's some heavy stuff.

As if Draupadi didn't already have enough terrible stuff happen to her, now she's being gambled away. Just tossed around like property. And she's really friggin smart too - like, that argument that Yudhishthira had already lost his own freedom, so how could he have authority to gamble her away - I mean, that seems like it would hold up to me. And then she was devout enough for the miracle with the saris to protect her dignity. And then, she frikkin saves everyone else and their stuff with her three wishes. I mean, come on - she's basically the only productive member of this ill fated gambling party, and what thanks does she get? Man.

Oh, and then Y decides, after all that, that it's a good idea to go gamble again. What an idiot.

Exiled in the wilderness again. Apparently that's where the heroes go. And why is it always twelve years? Hmm.

Arjuna training montage.

Week 9 Reading Diary A: Mahabharata

So, we pretty much open with the story of Shantanu and Ganga. That's pretty messed up. The river Ganga seems to be a pretty messed up character in various stories - trying to flood the world, trying to kill Sita, now drowning babies... yikes.

Then Shantanu gets with Satyavati. It's pretty nice of Bhishma to give up his claim to the throne AND vow to live a celibate life just so his dad can hook up with some new girl. I mean, that's kind of a big sacrifice. There's got to be some other girls out there for Shantanu.

And then there's that weird story about Satyavati smelling like a fish - cuz she was conceived by a sperm eating fish? I mean, what? I feel like that should be a Monty Python thing - You're mother was a fish and you smell like one too! Just.., I can't. And then, like, she sleeps with this rishi and has a son by him, and that's just okay? I mean, wasn't virginity and chastity kind of a big deal here? We saw that with Sita, even though she was always faithful to Rama, so why is it just no big deal that Satyavati had a son out of wedlock?

Anyway, then there's Amba, Ambika, and Ambalika (wow, thanks dad for naming us all practically the same thing). Kinda sucks how they're just like, there for the taking. Really sucks for Amba - see, she was rejected by Shalwa for even maybe being unfaithful, yet Satyavati... oh well, moving on.

So now here's where Vyasa comes back to sleep with now-dead Vichitravirya's wives - cuz that's not weird and terrible at all. Apparently he looked so jacked up that Ambika had to close her eyes (yet she still had to sleep with him) and, because this is how science works, their son ended up blind. And the next one pale. And then a maid is thrown at him (wow, women are really just tossed about as objects here) and she's like, whatevs, and their son turns out normal.

Man, there's so much weird stuff about sex in here. Like, Pandu can't have sex or he'll die? What? That seems like it should be funny... but it's not. Though it reminds me of that Mean Girls sex ed scene, "Don't have sex or you'll get pregnant and die" (was that Mean Girls? I think it was Mean Girls, or something).

Anyway, what's up with the story - he shot a deer having sex that turned out to be some sort of spirit? Like, first of all, it just seems like bad form to shoot a deer while it's having sex. Also - was this spirit having sex with a real deer? Or were they both spirits, posing as deers, having sex? And either way, why? Why??? You know, I don't really want to think about it too much....

And then, later, the guy has sex anyway. I mean, really? Really. You KNOW you will DIE, but you just can't keep it in your pants? Smh.

And then there's Kunti, "summoning the gods" in order to have children by them - apparently adultery is okay if it's with the gods. I guess it kinda worked out though, since that's the only way Pandu could have children. Still though.

Hey, there's Arjuna! I know him!

Some bad family rivalry going on here.

Wow, good job being a teacher, getting your students to KIDNAP a guy for your own revenge. Way to be a good influence.

Man, Duryodhana's pretty dark. "House of Joy" ends up being a fiery trap of death - darkly ironic, sounds like some twisted horror movie premise.

Oh great, more effed up treatment of women. Yeah, I think the concept of sharing goes a bit too far when a woman is "shared" between five brothers as a wife. I mean, I get sharing food that you begged for, but sharing a woman whose hand you won in marriage? Like, seriously, this woman already was pawned off to some total stranger who won a contest, now she finds out she's to be passed around from brother to brother? That's just so messed up. These families definitely got some problems.

Week 8: Reading Diary Assessment

The main strategy/style I use to write my reading diary posts is to just write down my comments, observations, and feelings regarding the stories we read in that section. I tend to focus on a few major themes or stories that particularly interested me or were new. This has been helpful to me as I have looked back to find stories to write for my Storytelling and Storybook posts.

I noticed that I started off covering things more generally and covering more of what was in the reading, and as time went on I started putting more of my own thoughts and reactions in and focusing on a few key aspects of the reading. I think this is a good strategy - at least it works for me - because this lets me review what I found important or most interesting in the stories, and I can always go back to the reading guides for a straight summary of what happened.

I also find that my strategy for writing the reading diaries helps me to remember the stories. I don't "take notes" in the sense of writing down every character's name and every event in chronological order, etc - but this isn't really that kind of class. By writing about what I found most intriguing/important/troubling/etc - and not just summarizing but adding my own thoughts on the text, saying what other things from literature or real life it reminded me of, etc - I connect to the story more and so I remember it - maybe not every detail, but I remember the archetypes, the characters and events and themes.

If I had any diary tips for other students, it would be to use the space to engage with the text. Don't get worried about summarizing (since that's already available to you), or trying to talk about everything that happened all in one post. Just focus on the parts that you really connected with, and the stories will stick with you longer. And, that way you can go back later and get a custom-made recap of the stories with just the parts you liked best.

Week 7 Reading Diary B: Sucks to be Sita

So we're finally at the end of Buck's Ramayana.

Rama wins, goes back to Ayodhya and becomes king, yeah yeah everyone's happy.

Then, after ten thousand years (?), Rama decides, Hey, I'm gonna banish Sita. And I'm not just gonna tell her to leave, no, I'm gonna have my brother drop her off, pregnant, at a river and just leave her there! Ha ha! (Okay, so that's not exactly how Buck told it, but c'mon, that's basically what happened.) I feel like this is cruel and unusual punishment, and sort of just comes out of nowhere. I mean, it totally goes against the whole happy-perfect-romance-super-righteous-dude image of Rama and Sita (I can see why many versions just end after Rama wins and is crowned). Also, it seems like there wasn't really that much of a reason for Rama to do it in the first place - so yeah, people are talking, but it's not like there was an uprising on his hands. Seems a little premature to abandon your pregnant wife to the wilderness. But hey, that's just my opinion.

So, Sita's there in the wilderness. Once again, she nearly kills herself, 'cause that's always a good solution to these sorts of things. Lucky Valmiki was there to save her and then teach her sons the Ramayana song.

So then Rama finally gets around to finding her and his sons, and then Sita must once again prove her innocence. Alright, well, at least things are gonna turn out okay... Oh wait, no, she gets "swallowed up by the earth", never to be seen again (this part was kind of weird - did she die? just get 'transported' to some different plane? What?). So, yeah, that's kind of a downer ending.

Oh, and then Lakshmana dies for a really stupid reason. Sucks to be Lakshmana too.

I can say I did not really like this whole ending to the Ramayana. It seemed wrong - like, Rama's actions and the whole train of logic in the story seemed bad, immoral. Also, it definitely killed the happy ending vibes from the whole victory over Ravana thing.

On a final note, the very very ending with Rama's death was kind of strange, and anti-climactic. It reminded me of that last scene in Lord of the Rings, where Frodo just hops a boat and sails off to the afterlife with his friends while others stay behind. I snickered at that scene - it's just so cheesy - and so I guess that carried over to my feelings about this ending as well. But still, it was a very weird ending and did not seem to fit with the rest of the Ramayana, like it was just tacked on at the end.

Week 7 Reading Diary A: Rama's Victory

So, this was mostly about the big final battle between Rama and Ravana, and didn't differ too much from Narayan. There were some notable differences and additions, though.

I like the inclusion of Time as a character in this version. Time, Kala, appears once again in this section, this time warning Ravana (who, of course, doesn't listen). This part stuck out to me especially because I read a story by another student in this class from the point of view of Time. Noticing this particular story more helped fill out the picture of Ravana as a villain whose hubris brings about his downfall - no one is invincible, and eventually Time gets us all.

The letter from Ravana to Rama, brought by Shuka after Ravana is killed, was weird. It seemed confusing - why did Ravana write all this before, in a letter? It sort of made sense to me when I read in the reading guide for this section that this part was added by Buck and not in the original by Valmiki, because I thought it seemed sort of out of place. Although, that leads me to question why Buck felt the need to add it in the first place. I guess it sort of corresponds to Ravana's dying words in Narayan, when Rama talks to him and Ravana 'sees the light' so to speak just before he dies. However, the whole letter thing just didn't make much sense to me, nor did it seem like satisfying closure for Ravana's character.

Sita's trial by fire was done differently in this version too. In Narayan, Rama explicitly makes her take the trial by fire to prove her purity. In Buck, it's more like Agni (god of fire) just happens to stroll by and burst her into flames to show that, Hey, I like Sita she's all good. On the one hand, this seems to make less sense and while I didn't like it, the Narayan version seems like a more plausible course of events. On the other hand, this doesn't make Rama look like a major jerk, so I think it better fits with the triumphant tone of the story.

One last thing that was new was the whole secret treasure room Vibhishana shows to Hanuman. I thought that was kind of random, but it made me think of another student's story I read where Hanuman is combined with Abu from Disney's Aladdin. So, of course, I imagined that Cave of Wonders scene where Abu gets all drooly over that huge gemstone. Random, but it made me laugh.

Week 6 Reading Diary B: Hubris, Betrayal, Deception

In this fuller version of the battle between Ravana's and Rama's armies (as opposed to Narayan), it seemed there was a deeper narrative of the downfall of evil and the triumph of good. That is to say, as I was reading this section I noticed certain themes, qualities of Ravana, his army, and his tactics that seemed to be painting a moralistic picture, demonstrating why and in what ways Ravana was a force of evil, contrasting that to Rama's purity.

The first quality I noticed was hubris. This came up a bit in Narayan, but I noticed it more in the more detailed story in Buck. Ravana is given many chances to "walk away", so to speak, and is advised to do so by many of his own closest relatives and followers. Yet, he ignores their advice and presses on. This, despite the fact that clearly Sita will not give in to him, and he can't just rape her due to his curse, so the initial purpose of kidnapping her is moot. His ego - his need to prove himself, not be defeated, and never back down - is now what drives him to wage war against Rama.

This leads me to the second point - betrayal. When Vibhishana (wisely) counsels Ravana to surrender Sita to Rama, Ravana's egomania prevents him from hearing reason, and Ravana turns violent, accusing Vibhishana of betrayal. So, Vibhishana does then betray Ravana, fleeing from the violent force of evil and taking refuge with Rama. Despite having every reason to suspect Vibhishana, Rama does not and offers him sanctuary. Vibhishana proves invaluable, helping to revive Rama and the others when they are slain in battle. Another rakshasa, Trijata, plays a vital role in helping Sita remain faithful that Rama is alive and will triumph. These characters are portrayed as making noble and "right" decisions. This repeated theme of the few truly good individuals in Lanka betraying their loyalty to their ruler just serves to reinforce the corruption of Ravana. Ravana, and thus Lanka, is so corrupted by evil, to do right one must ultimately break from the side of evil.

Lastly, throughout the Ramayana there is a theme of using illusions and trickery. Sometimes forces of good use trickery (as I talked about in an earlier reading diary). In this main battle, though, it seems all the dirty tricks and illusions are used by Ravana's army. Again and again, Ravana uses deception to try to gain an advantage in the fight - he sends spies disguised as monkeys, pretends to kill Rama, then pretends to kill Sita - and the only time Ravana came close to triumph was when Indrajit rode out, invisible, and kills most of the major players in Rama's army (luckily, Hanuman picks up a mountain and they're all better. Pretty strong stuff). All of these tactics show "bad form", and seem to denote that the unrighteous, Ravana, must resort to dirty tricks, illusions, and sly deception in order to gain an advantage - he cannot win on strength and merit alone. In the end, even his dirty tricks cannot defeat Rama, the force of good, and when the two engage in head-on combat (though we haven't gotten there yet), good triumphs.

Week 6 Reading Diary A: Monkey Madness

 The story is starting to pick up now. This is more familiar narrative, and less of random visits to ashrams. Still, there is a lot of new material added in this version, as well as some flat out differences. At times, it's hard to tell if the narratives seem so different just because Narayan summarized so much, or if there were really two opposing versions of certain stories. For example, in Narayan, as I recall, it seemed as if Hanuman just grew to a great size and stepped across the pond to Lanka, easy-peasy. Here, even with his powers, it's a whole ordeal.

This also started off what I found to be a prevailing theme of increased violence in Buck. Hanuman is eaten by a sea monster rakshasa, and then makes a graphic escape from inside its body. This reminded me of the story I commented on from last week's reading about Agastya and Vatapi - there is a similar grisly picture of a character being eaten and then bursting out, killing his attacker. I wonder why this seems to be such a popular story.

Later on, Buck said a lot more about the trouble Hanuman caused in Lanka. He even kills a couple of people - well, rakshasas I suppose - but still, it seemed as if they weren't causing any trouble, and Hanuman just attacked them - and that's not to mention any casualties that might have resulted from the stampedes or other destruction Hanuman caused. This monkey rampage seemed pretty unprovoked - I mean sure, Ravana kidnapped Sita, but Hanuman just goes to town on the whole city. It made me see a darker, murkier picture of Hanuman in this version. In Narayan, he was just a nice little hero, swooping in to save Sita, not doing anything particularly violent (yet). Here, though, he seems unnecessarily violent. Even the whole thing with setting his tail on fire - in Narayan, this was told in an almost comical way. And, if I remember correctly, Ravana ordered that Hanuman's tail be set fire AND that Hanuman be set free. This makes the resulting destruction seem like Ravana's fault entirely for that poor bit of planning. In Buck, Hanuman escapes and then proceeds to burn the city. In general, I have been surprised by the increased amount of wanton violence displayed by the characters who are supposed to be the heroes in Buck's Ramayana. I don't know how Hindus think about this, but to me it seems a bit troubling and is definitely not what I expect from a hero character.

Week 5 Reading Diary B: Lady Troubles

I was struck, in this section of reading, by the very complex and troubling stories of women in the Ramayana. Of course, we saw this in Narayan too, but now there is just even more to add to the list.

On the one hand, there is the story of Rambha. This story actually seems to be protective of women, and obviously the moral of the story is that rape is bad. Reading this story, though, I was reminded of the story of Ahalya. For one, both women were at one point turned to stone, an interesting parallel, though Ahalya was turned to stone after her 'transgression' and Rambha was turned to stone and later raped by Ravana. But, more importantly, I saw that both these women were raped - Ahalya through elaborate trickery - yet one, Ahalya, was blamed and punished for the event, while Rambha's husband comes to her defense and curses Ravana for what he has done. I found this parallel, and the different treatment of these women, troubling. Not so much in the case of Rambha, I guess, but it only reminded me of how wrongly Ahalya was treated.

More shockingly, this section of reading contained two examples of women killing themselves when their husbands had died. First there's Savari; self-immolation was mentioned and suggested in Narayan's version, often by Sita, but here it actually happened. Just the thought of it, of dying that way and willingly stepping into a fire, is quite gruesome. And the way it's handled as something noble and, even worse, normal for a woman to do when her husband has died is just terrible. It's like the women have no purpose for living without a husband. And Savari seemed like a pretty important character - obviously, she was able to fulfill a purpose in helping Rama, even on her own. It seems like there's a mixed message there. Then, there was also Vali's wife, who stabs herself after his death. Pretty dark.

Week 5 Reading Diary A: And More Sages

Seriously, this version is so full of sages! Compared to Narayan, it seems like this version is just the story of Rama hopping about from one sage to another hearing their stories. In one way, it is very interesting, for the sages' stories sort of fill out the religious/pantheistic mythology of Hinduism, really making this a wide-reaching epic. But, to me at least, it seems to slow down the main narrative of Rama - like, by the time I'm done reading another sage's story I have to be like, oh yeah - so what is happening with Rama right now?

I thought Atri's story about the apsarases. They sort of reminded me of Greek myths, like a cross between water nymphs and sirens. I also noticed that this version tells you how Atri's wife gave Sita gifts and jewelry - I remembered in Sita Sings the Blues that the little narrator puppets talked about this, asking: If Sita left all her fancy clothes behind when she left the palace, where did she get the jewelry to throw down when she was being kidnapped? It's a minor detail, not one I would have noticed otherwise, but it does show that there are those little things that you miss out on when you read a vastly summarized version like Narayan.

Agastya's story, on the other hand, was... strange. And not quite like anything I'd read or heard before. It was quite gruesome to picture. And it didn't really make all that much sense - I mean, when any of the other sages ate Vatapi he would already have been all chopped up and partially digested, but I guess he was able to come back together - but then it seems being digested wouldn't have been a problem when Agastya did it... but then again, the whole premise is pretty wild, so I guess you just gotta take it as myth. Still, though... ick.

There seems to be a lot of trickery, too, throughout these stories. The one above, the thing with the horse, and then Garuda stealing back the amrita he paid for his mother (ha ha, it's like cliche mobster type movies where someone pays a big briefcase full of money, only to steal it back later... a very old trope, I suppose). It's interesting, too, that both "bad guys" and "good guys" use trickery in these stories. It seems like there's a large theme of power struggles and family strife, even outside of the main narrative, and that the characters use their wit to come out on top, even against stronger enemies.

Week 4 Reading Diary B: Servants and Sages and Gods, Oh My!

So, that title is a bit cheesy and, I think, merits an explanation: there are so many more characters in this version than in Narayan! To add to the difficulty, they are very unfamiliar names to an English-speaking reader. So, it is a bit difficult to keep all the names apart and remember who everyone is. It doesn't help that in this version Kooni is called Manthara - that was a bit discombobulating. Though I appreciate the greater detail in this version, it is a harder read and easy to get bogged down in all the names and characters.

The narrative seemed a bit slower in this section, though I guess it was similar in Narayan, just not as noticeable. There also seemed to be less unfamiliar material here, which helped a bit to get through the narrative. The main story of Kaikeyi and Dasaratha and Rama's leaving seemed pretty much the same, although in this version Dasaratha's death isn't as sudden or dramatic. I kind of preferred Narayan's version; it was perhaps a bit melodramatic, but I liked it.

Some new material here came in the middle of this narrative, when Rama meets some people in the forest. They meet Guha, who has his own god-story to tell, and then they meet a sage named Bharadwaja, who I'm pretty sure wasn't mentioned in Narayan.

Overall, I guess, this section was pretty similar to Narayan, but it was still pretty slow. There's just not much action in this part of the story, though, and I'm sure it'll pick up real soon. I'm hoping then there will be more detail to answer some of the questions and curiosities Narayan left me with.

Week 4 Reading Diary A: Buck's Ramayana

I like the style of this version of the Ramayana much better than Narayan. It is much more thorough and detailed, more of a story, whereas Narayan's version often read like a summary - almost like a Sparknotes version in some parts. This was more of a complete and, I'm assuming, direct translation.

I like how the story is framed as an oral narrative. The sort of chanting, invoking of the gods at the beginning reminded me of similar invocations and narrative styles in Homer. It started the story off with a very "epic" atmosphere.

I also like how this version talks about Valmiki, who composes the Ramayana, within the Ramayana. It seems unusual for the creation of a story to be part of the story, but it is an interesting way to frame it and adds to the appreciation of this story as an epic poem and oral narrative. I imagine it would be a bit confusing, though, if one had no familiarity with the Ramayana, to start with this part of the story and then backtrack.

In this section, I was really glad that a deeper backstory was given to the rakshasas and to Ravana in particular. In Narayan's version, the reader is basically just told that rakshasas are bad and evil and Ravana is really bad and evil and scary, and that's that. It was a very simplistic narrative of good and evil. Here, though, I loved reading about the history of Ravana. It also helped explain some things that were vague in Narayan: Ravana's invincibility to gods but vulnerability to humans, how he was able to defeat and enslave certain gods, even where he got the pushpaka vimana. It was certainly longer and more dense, but very fascinating.

Week 3 Reading Diary B: Battle

This last section of the reading was so full of action, yet it was all very rushed. It seemed more like a Sparknotes summary than a story. I can see the point, since the full Ramayana is very long, and this serves as a good introductory read. But, I was disappointed that this action-packed, supernatural, fascinating part of the story was so dryly given. Also, the story of Hanuman bringing back the whole mountain, which I really like, wasn't even mentioned. It makes me wonder what other gems have been left out.

I found all the supernatural weapons used in the battle interesting (though again, they were hurriedly explained). Illusions and trickery played a large role on the rakshasa side: illusions of killing Rama as well as Sita, and Ravana's use of "illusion" as a weapon. I liked how Rama used "wisdom" as a sort of physical, yet divine-powered weapon against illusion. Also, I liked the explanation that Ravana had made invincible his head and arms, but had forgotten to strengthen his heart. It sounds a little cheesy to modern ears, but in the context of the ancient and sacred epic it is very poetic.

I thought the whole testing Sita thing was a bit weird - it just didn't sit right with me. This may be due in part to the author's rushing through it, but it seemed like Rama didn't really have a good reason or explanation for why he tested Sita. I mean, she had to jump into a fire just to prove to everybody that she was pure and faithful? I mean, you're Rama - why should you have to prove it to the world? Peer pressure isn't good, guys. Nor is jumping into a fire. Even the gods sort of rebuked Rama for doing this to Sita, but then it's all just sort of swept under the rug. Kind of puts a downer on the triumphant rescue.

Week 3 Reading Diary A: Vali - A Study in Ethics

The story which took up the majority of this section of reading was the story of Rama's slaying of Vali. This story is accompanied throughout by an examination of ethics. I found the story and the ethical reasoning it contains a bit troubling at times, and I am not sure that I totally agree that Rama acted in the best way. But, mostly I was impressed with the depth, complexity, and nuanced discussion of ethics found in this ancient text. The ethical discussion is wise as well as logically intelligent, and displays an appreciation for an ethics which is not black-and-white or based on sticking to the letter of certain axioms, but has room for considering the complexities of real-life situations and looking at the bigger picture. It seemed wise ahead of its time, and could easily be discussed alongside modern philosophers in an ethical discussion today.

These passages stood out in particular:

"The perfect man takes a false step, apparently commits a moral slip, and we ordinary mortals stand puzzled... measured in Eternity, such an event might stand out differently. But until we attain that breadth of view, we are likely to feel disturbed and question the action" (Narayan 97).

This appeals to a more nuanced ethics, and gives an early "utilitarian" theory of ethics - put simply, the ends may justify the means, a moral choice is one where the good effects outweigh the bad, and thus a large-scale perspective is sometimes needed to see the morality of actions. However, this does rest on Rama's divine moral compass - he is able to discern what the best action will be in the long run - so, where does that leave us 'mere mortals' as far as being a guiding ethical theory (of course this is a problem with modern utilitarian views as well)?

Another passage I marked is when Vali first rebukes Rama for his seeming misdeed. He says,

"Is the foretaste of the yuga of Kali to be had only by us, the creatures who crawl and are called monkeys? So, Kind One, are virtues intended to be practiced only on weaker creatures? When strong men commit crimes, they become heroic deeds?" (109).

This passage struck me as being very poignant and relevant to ethics today. It seems to be incredibly applicable to racism (and all other "isms"), as well as more subtle institutionalized oppression and marginalization of the weak by the rich and powerful few in our capitalist society. All kinds of unethical acts, of varying degrees of horribleness, are carried out against marginalized or hated groups in the name of Christian morals, good business, patriotism... and often, with enough power and the right spin, these acts can be presented as heroic, or at least moral.

This consideration of how the passage reflects on today's society made me think more deeply about its use in the Ramayana. Personally, I felt like Rama got off pretty easy and Vali was persuaded to change his mind quite quickly, especially considering he was dying and all. Of course. Rama's divine-ness makes the situation considerably different than if he was merely a regular human. Still, the ethics of the story of Vali are incredibly well developed, and it is a testament to the Ramayana that they are still wise and valuable for ethical debate today.

Week 2: Reading Diary B: Exile

In this section, I was particularly struck by the level of devotion shown by the characters toward their family. Lakshmana and Sita's unwavering devotion to Rama, following him into a difficult and dangerous life; Lakshmana's and Bharata's rage at discovering what Kaikeyi had plotted; even all the townspeople, animals, and nature itself grieved at the news of Rama's exile. Also, Rama was remarkably graceful, forgiving, and accepting of his fate. Bharata, too, showed great grace, loyalty, and humility by refusing to usurp Rama's rightful throne, placing Rama's sandals on the throne as a sign of his deference.

Something I thought was interesting was how Rama and Sita affected Soorpanakha and Ravana. The rakshasas' lovesickness was very like that of Rama and Sita when they first laid eyes on each other. It was very dramatic, with each hallucinating their love's form, and Ravana was physically tormented by the mere thought and image of Sita, just as Sita was for Rama.

Week 2: Reading Diary A: Young Rama

First, a thought on the style of Narayan's Ramayana: I find it a bit strange and jolting how, while reading, the author switches from a fairly standard narrator/storytelling style to talking about "the poet" (Kamban) and how/what the poet wrote. I can certainly see how it is helpful for summing up large descriptive portions of the epic poem, but it doesn't make for a very "smooth" reading experience, in my opinion.

Anyway, about the actual story: I have learned in other classes how the epics The Ramayana and The Mahabharata make up some of the main religious texts in modern Hinduism. I didn't really understand this before, since it seemed like they were stories about a few people who were (more or less) human. But, just from reading this first bit of the Ramayana, I see how stories and myths about various gods, sages, demons, and heroes from all times are woven into the story of Rama. I like that style. It is very different from reading a modern popular fiction book - it truly does feel like I am reading a vast chronicle of cultural myths, morals, and knowledge.

I thought the part where Sita, and even Rama to a lesser extent, get all angst-y and lovelorn was sweet and a bit funny. It reminded me of Romeo and Juliet: two young people fall madly in love at a mere glance, physically impacted by the encounter, avoiding the day and vowing to die if they cannot be with their love (interestingly, Sita is the more dramatic in this situation, while Romeo is more poetically woebegone in his own story). It was cute, a tone which was unexpected and added relatability and humanity to the story.

I was also particularly struck by the tales of the various other women in the story: Thataka, who suffered being turned into a demon and ultimately death due to her husband's and sons' misbehavior; Ahalya, who was tricked into bed by one man and then rejected and cursed by her husband; Kaikeyi, who was manipulated by her advisor and in turn cruelly manipulated her own husband, banishing Rama in the process. These women's suffering, which in some cases seems to not be much considered, intrigues me - I feel there are whole stories there in themselves, full of the inner thoughts and motivations of these fascinating women. Rama may be the warrior-hero, Dasaratha the king, and Ravana the big-bad-guy-demon-king, but it seems the women of the story exert a powerful guiding influence over their men's fate.