Why is Jerusalem gendered as female? Karen Armstrong depicts the city at one point as being unclean, "her garments covered in menstrual blood." Why aren't cities depicted as male figures? They are often grandiose physical structures ruled by economics and politics, typically male-dominated social activities. Therefore, I think it is significant that the comfort and safety (female qualities) a city can offer its people is of higher value than its political and economic wealth. Perhaps this is why cities are usually, if not always, depicted as female.
"People inside the family were regarded as acceptable marriage partners, while those outside were undesirable." This concept of the Torah decreeing it is better to marry within one's family unit reminds me of the public vs. private dichotomy that I studied in numerous Middle East history classes while in Egypt. In pre-colonial Middle East, for example, the public sphere was associated with being of lower status and the working class, while if someone (especially women) was mainly to be found in the private sphere, i.e. their homes or also harems, this portrayed their elevated statuses and wealth since they could afford to have others provide for them.
Within the harem specifically, only those of noble blood or relatives of the women were allowed to spatially move deeper within the palaces (harem comes from the Arabic root meaning "forbidden," i.e. the women were off-limits to anyone unrelated to them. This also has a purely visual connotation, not sexual.) Anyway, this concept of public vs. private relates to the harem in that "holiness" or "sacredness" (for lack of better words) is found when moving deeper into the private sphere. We can see this here in terms of marriage: Remaining within the smallest unit, or marrying within one's family circle, was the most desirable option for retaining one's cultural, religious, and economic heritage.
"The history of religion shows that in times of crisis and upheaval, people turn more readily to myth than to the more rational forms of faith." I find this quotation perplexing. What are the more rational forms of faith? Isn't all religion rooted in myth, even its traditional customs, practices, and stories? In my opinion, religion serves to relieve the stress of people in times of despair and to give them hope, regardless of whether they turn to myths or "rational forms" of faith to do so.
Just some thoughts I had while reading chapters 5-7. I would love to read any comments or critiques you may have.
"People inside the family were regarded as acceptable marriage partners, while those outside were undesirable." This concept of the Torah decreeing it is better to marry within one's family unit reminds me of the public vs. private dichotomy that I studied in numerous Middle East history classes while in Egypt. In pre-colonial Middle East, for example, the public sphere was associated with being of lower status and the working class, while if someone (especially women) was mainly to be found in the private sphere, i.e. their homes or also harems, this portrayed their elevated statuses and wealth since they could afford to have others provide for them.
Within the harem specifically, only those of noble blood or relatives of the women were allowed to spatially move deeper within the palaces (harem comes from the Arabic root meaning "forbidden," i.e. the women were off-limits to anyone unrelated to them. This also has a purely visual connotation, not sexual.) Anyway, this concept of public vs. private relates to the harem in that "holiness" or "sacredness" (for lack of better words) is found when moving deeper into the private sphere. We can see this here in terms of marriage: Remaining within the smallest unit, or marrying within one's family circle, was the most desirable option for retaining one's cultural, religious, and economic heritage.
"The history of religion shows that in times of crisis and upheaval, people turn more readily to myth than to the more rational forms of faith." I find this quotation perplexing. What are the more rational forms of faith? Isn't all religion rooted in myth, even its traditional customs, practices, and stories? In my opinion, religion serves to relieve the stress of people in times of despair and to give them hope, regardless of whether they turn to myths or "rational forms" of faith to do so.
Just some thoughts I had while reading chapters 5-7. I would love to read any comments or critiques you may have.
To answer your first question, we can turn to the Hebrew language. Hebrew has a great deal of gender-specific grammar. The word for city is עיר -ir (pronounced: ear). This noun is a feminine noun... the reason for which I do not know, but that is possibly why the city of Jerusalem (as well as other cities) are referred to in the feminine form- as it is in the Torah and Bible.
ReplyDeleteDespite this bit of a Hebrew lesson, I really like your interpretation. I think that the idea of a city as a home, a place where one feels welcome and comfortable, is a beautiful idea. Maybe the city should be referred to differently throughout different points in history- for example: should the Jews have referred to it in a more masculine context following the destruction of the temple when they were no longer welcome? Or is this just taking inanimate gender roles to far?
Perhaps another reason Jerusalem is referred to as a women is because people associate their home land, or mother land as a mother. Home is where people are cared for, and grow and learn, which are all actions people associate with their mother. I'm sure it has more to do with the hebrew language in Ethan's previous comment, but its another idea..?
ReplyDelete