Final Reflections

1. Class Discussion/ Facilitation/ Conversation
I think that I learned a lot from class discussion. I often had questions about the readings or something that a speaker had talked about. Being about to discuss and also learn from my classmates questions and insight was really beneficial. I knew very little about this subject matter coming into the class and there was so much to learn. Sometimes I felt overwhelmed in class discussion because I felt like I didn't know enough to contribute. I found that it was really helpful when Dr. Horowitz would put things that we read into perspective, especially going through Armstrong's book.

2. Video Conferencing
Video conferencing was one of my favorite parts of this class. I really liked that we did it a little later in the quarter, not because the camera scares me, but by then I felt like we were knowledgeable enough to ask them questions. I thought it was so interesting to get to hear people talk about their lives and how they are affected daily by what is going on. These conferences were so beneficial for gaining a tangible view of different people's perspective. One challenge about video conferencing for me is that it is hard to disagree with them. There is a fear of being disrespectful or ignorant that often keeps me from asking a controversial question.

3. Readings and the topics
Armstrong's book was very helpful to understanding the context of Jerusalem and its past. Parts of this book were hard to get through but the in class discussion as well as reading other people's thoughts on these chapters was helpful. I really enjoyed the other reading that we were assigned outside of Armstrong's book. A lot of these readings really helped me to understand the current conflict in Jerusalem. It was good to read articles or pieces from different sides of the issue. Even if they were bias, it was helpful to see how people living in the situation actually feel.

4. Lecturers and Speakers
I enjoyed our in class guests very much because I felt like it was easier to have a dialogue with these people. It was easier for me to ask them questions than in the video conference. I'm not sure why. This might be because I feel like technology makes it hard to question something a speaker said. Regardless, Dr. Hermann's visit was really challenging and beneficial. He made me think about a lot of issues. These class periods often inspired me to pursue knowledge. The more I learn the more I see I don't know. It was really nice to just be taught for the entire class.

5. Blogging
I really enjoyed reading other peoples posts on the class blog but was often hesitant to put things of my own up there. I often struggled in deciding whether or not to put something in the class blog or just in my own blog. I think in the future it would be beneficial to clarify what should be placed in the class blog vs. individual blogs. I enjoyed getting to post my own thoughts in my blog but often wondered if my thoughts were on the right track. I think it would be beneficial if commenting on other people's blogs was required. I think that receiving feedback made me more excited to post the next time. Feedback on my posts would also be helpful. Often I didn't know if the way I was interpreting information was clear, accurate, fair...Also I think I learned a lot from reading my classmates blogs. Either I saw that someone had a similar question that I had or I was challenged to look at something from a completely different angle. With that said, it was hard to read all the material and post on it every week and still get to reading other people's thoughts.

6. Syllabus and its clarity
I thought the syllabus was fairly clear and enjoyed the open format of the class. Sometimes it was challenging for me because I would question what I was suppose to write about. This course definitely taught me how to reflect on the information I was taking in. I feel like it was a lot of information and I am still reflecting. I have found myself asking, "What does all this information mean to me now? After the class is over, now what?" This is something that I will probably be reflecting on and figuring out for a while. I would be interested to hear how my classmates would answer these questions.

7. Final Project
The idea of the a final project was really stimulating to me. To take one thing that interests you, that stirred you up, that made you think and develop that thing into a project. I was really hoping to do a multimedia project because I love them but the pieces just didn't fall into place. I began ask myself, "What has intrigued you most? What issues surrounding Jerusalem do you continue to think about even after class is over?" In answering this question I landed on Israeli Settlements. I knew I would find a lot of information but I had no idea it would as much as I did. This issue is current, very current, which placed it in multiple articles and all over the news. I decided to look at the issue through current issues. I wanted it to be as relevant and personal as possible. I tried to use as many personal accounts from all perspectives as I could. In the end I wanted my paper to paint a picture of the issue from all sides and the main concerns with it in general. The more I researched the more I found I didn't know. This seems to be a theme with this class. I learned an unbelievable amount through this project. I felt like I couldn't even articulate a lot of what I learned into my paper. In the end I think that this project was successful in challenging me to really dive into an issue that surrounds Jerusalem and the on going conflict. I barely scratched the surface but my eyes were opened greatly. It was really cool getting to see my classmates projects. I feel like I learned from seeing their final projects. It was also really neat to see how much they learned about what they studied. Throughout presentations you could see how excited people were about their project. I think these projects were successful in giving each of us a little bit better of a perspective on Jerusalem. In the end it seems very successful.

8. Personal Reflection
My personal reflection is probably the hardest section to answer because I have learned so much, I walked into this class with very little background on the conflict or the information that surrounds it. I am a Christian, love Jesus, and follow the Bible so seeing other people's perspectives was definitely interesting. Being in this class has challenged how I think and how to speak about issues that affect so many different sub-cultures of a society. I felt very quiet in this class because I was often unsure if I had anything insightful to add to the conversation. I think I grew a lot from learning about Jerusalem and have found myself in multiple conversations outside of class where I have been able to talk about what I have recently learned. Initially I was nervous because of my ignorance but as I realized that we all have a lot to learn about this issue it became easier. The final project was probably one of my favorite parts of the class because it forced me to really dive into a particular issue. I had to engage with it. I had to deal with it. I had to figure out what it meant for this conflict but also for me personally. The final project would not have been as successful without all the information and class discussion that came before it though. This class challenged me to think, take in a lot of information, and then process it really quickly. Ultimately, I think it gave me a great base of information to continue thinking about this issue.

one tribe.

there isn't really a great video of this song but have you guys heard it?

Final Project...again

I think I want to write my final paper on settlements. I have been unsettled (no pun intended) between the Dome of the Rock and Israeli settlements. I have found some interesting opinions from both sides about these settlements. Its so interesting to me. I think I am going to write about that...in fact, I am. I would like to spend most of the paper looking at these settlements from different people's views. Ultimately, I want to discuss how they are affecting present day Jerusalem. What divisions are they causing for peace negotiations in the future? I know it seems late to change my topic, but I've been thinking about it for a little while now. Our conference call last week pushed me over. It was crazy to hear him talk about the wall and these settlements as they impacted his life. The impacts they are having on real people's lives. Let me know if you have any thoughts on this...
Also, it's 2am? When did it get to be so late...?

Crater Lake

This has nothing to do with anything but since Amy brought it up today I wanted to show you guys a picture of Crater Lake. It's beautiful and also really cool. I love Crater Lake (in the "I have never been there and probably will never go" kind of way). Regardless, here it is...

That little guy in the middle is Wizard Island. Know nothing about it except I think it sits on a lava dome. It has a pretty cool name though.

Reflection on Professor Herrmann

Having professor Hermann come in was great. I feel like I learned a lot from hearing him talk. One thing that really stuck with me was about the two state solution. I guess I didn't realize fully how close they were to making an agreement in the nineties and how it crumbled. It was really interesting to talk about the peace conflict in relation to our government. We don't understand. "You don't understand. Too much has happened. Too much has happened over the past ten years and it cannot be forgotten." Maybe this sounds foolish but I never considered the severity of 9/11 on this issue. It made so much sense when he was talking about how Palestinians are able to bomb Israel but then they have to deal with all the terrorist publicity from the US. They don't really have many other options outside of that. Anyways, I am interested to see what our government tries to do now that the administration has changed...guess I need to pay more attention to the news.
Another thing that has really stuck with me was about the western wall. We have been talking about the wall recently but seeing those pictures was crazy. The image of that Palestinian city that is completely surrounded like a prison. We saw pictures of kids leaving through the gates to go to school, does anyone get to leave the city or are they trapped there? It looked like they lost a lot of their farm land when the wall went in, are they still able to use this land or not? How has the loss of these farms affected the ability for people to support themselves?

Reading Responses Week 8

I found the first article about unifying Israel through architecture to be difficult. It did not keep my attention. Was the architectural design of the city and infrastructure really that big of a deal? Why did it matter so much? I understand the idea of unifying a city through distinct cultural practices and traditions but why all the controversy about how buildings, neighborhoods, and city blocks were going to look?
The other article or book rather was really interesting. I found myself constantly checking the page numbers to validate that these documents were in fact in the same text and that I didn't skip a few pages. The way the text is set up kept me interested but I wonder why the author chose to do this? Besides that, I really enjoyed the the poems and narrative in the beginning. Maybe I liked them because it was so different than the first article. I liked the picture that Oleibo paints as he talks about his experience with the city. Every little detail reminds him that this is his home and he knows that this city is also the home of other people. He isn't concerned at all with his specific culture, race, or religion. He cares about Jerusalem. He was born their and it is his home, just like plenty of other people.
I also really like his poem. I feel like I can relate to how he takes in his surroundings. He feels a unique tie to his home, his culture, his Jerusalem because he knows it so well. He talks about waking up in the morning and recognizing where the dome is above his pillow and how the walls look. He notices details. I do this all the time. I can't help but keep track of details. Numbers, sounds, the way the sky looked, or the color of someones T-shirt. I know the room I live in. I know where the wall is cracked and dented. I know where the floor creeks. I know that there is a black spot on my ceiling that looks like a bug...but isn't. I am constantly taking in information that makes me feel tied to my surroundings. I feel like I have claim on it and I appreciate it more. I am not saying that this is the same to Oleibo's thoughts about Jerusalem but simply that I understand the way he is thinking. I understand that our surroundings are complex. These "silent witnesses" have plenty of stories to tell.

Walls, Walls, and More Walls Week 8

I think it was professor Hermann who was telling us about the wall in detail. Remember when he told us that they call it a fence? That is not a fence. I guess call it what you want but you can't deny that it is a barrier. Whether it's for the protection of it's people, land, or culture...it's a barrier. The article talks about how this wall and the settlers that have moved in are creating a giant obstacle for future political discussions. These settlements are so intriguing to me. I guess it's because I can't fathom what is going on. It seems so shady. It seems like Israeli forces are pushing people further and further into "Palestinian land". It seems sneaky...manipulative. Am I wrong? Am I misunderstanding what is going on here?
"Israel is trying to contain both the territory and the population and to develop levers of control over them, instead of sharing rule with the Palestinians." This article clearly does not disagree with my thoughts. They are intentionally trying to cut Palestinian Arab's off from social, political, economic, and cultural ties. A quarter of a million people will be trapped? Trapped physically but also in all these other ways. Trapped from their families and jobs?

"The World Bank estimates that in addition to the 220 000 residents of East Jerusalem, about 60 000 Palestinians will be trapped between the border system separating them from the West Bank and the walls separating them from East and West Jerusalem. Israel does not intend to grant them residency or the status and rights possessed by East Jerusalemites. It certainly does not intend to offer them the Israeli citizenship that was rejected by almost all the residents of East Jerusalem."
Who are these people then? What do they do now that they are physically trapped? How do they view themselves? This is more than confining Palestinian's into the West Bank...it's saying "you can't be in Jerusalem, you can't be in the West Bank, and you can't have citizenship to anywhere." They are trapping people...physically, culturally, personally...
The article claims, "It has to do with the Israeli vision of destroying East Jerusalem metropolitan functions in order to assure Israeli domination."
What do you guys think? Is this Israel's vision or is this a massive overstatement?

Final Project

I had previously thought about interviewing some of my friends from Jordan and Syria about the unrest in Jerusalem. I was hoping to receive an outside perspective on the city but I don't think I will have enough information to give a clear picture. Needless to say, I did have some pretty interesting conversations. I began to rethink the final project and realized how interested I am in the Dome of the Rock. As we read through Armstrong's book I was amazed to see this holy site transform. First, I want to understand and explain the significance of this "holy site" for all three religions. Second, I would like to examine the changes that this site has undergone, specifically during the Crusades, and define the role of the Dome of the Rock today. Lastly, I would like to discuss the impact the Dome of the Rock has on society, varying cultures, and politics in Jerusalem. I hope that in this paper I will gain more perspective on the significance of the city by examining a space that is very sacred to Muslims, Jews, and Christians.

A look back at Armstrong Week 4

Hasan-Rokem's article about Jerusalem as a mother, daughter, sister, helpless woman, etc. has made me think back on Armstrong's concluding thoughts of her book. I don't think that I ever posted on these thoughts, so here it is...
I love when she says, "Women of flesh and blood also deserve to be loved with less possessiveness and more equality. However, Jerusalem is not a women. It is a city, with a long, long history..." The article mentions that whoever is in charge of Jerusalem should see themselves as a small piece of the puzzle. She uses the word continuum, which I think is fitting in describing the circular and constant battle for claim over Jerusalem. This statement has made me think a lot about present day Jerusalem.
The battle for Jerusalem has been constant and power has shifted between cultures and religions. It makes me wonder, is another cultural or religious shift coming? I find it hard to believe that Jerusalem could be taken over and ruled again as a Muslim city--or even harder to fathom as a Christian city--but then I am reminded of Jerusalem's past. I would be a fool to dismiss this as possibility. But how? There seems so be so much inequality and oppression. How could it happen yet again?
The issue of present day Jerusalem seems more difficult than the past (maybe it's just because I am here and this is what I know) because now people are talking about peace. The question is no longer, "Who will take over Jerusalem next?" or "How can so and so reclaim power over their holy city?" The question has become, "How do we pursue peace in this area of great division?" Obviously peace and tolerance among people is harder to execute than just a complete power shift. Peace is much harder.
Armstrong talks about how quickly Jerusalem went from a predominant Islamic city to the capital of the Jewish state of Israel. I am reminded yet again how quickly power-shifts can happen. How did/do the Arab people feel? So quickly removed and detached from what they knew to be theirs for so long. For many people I'm sure the battle is still about complete control of Jerusalem, but the idea of peace (or at least tolerance) between peoples, cultures, and religions is a growing discussion. Armstrong states at the end of the book, "the prospect of peace looks bleak. But the history of Jerusalem reminds us that astonishing reversals are always possible and that nothing--not even mortal hatred--is permanent. There are still many Israelis and Palestinians, many Arabs and Jews, who long for peace and are prepared to make the sacrifices that peace requires..." (pg. 430) This brings hope. Hasan-Rokem and Armstrong seem to agree that things are never permanent in Jerusalem. The city is constantly turning and changing. My question is, what is on the horizon? What will the next change be? Will it be another reversal of power or could peace become a reality? I think Jerusalem's past will remind us that it is nearly impossible for any of us to predict Jerusalem's future.

Hasan-Rokem Reading Response Week 7

"There is room here for many loves. There is no room here for coveting."
This sentence caught my attention. I feel like this is contrary to almost everything I have heard about Jerusalem. I have heard multiple groups of people--ethnic, religious, and cultural--say, "There is only room for one love and it is mine. This city, this land, it is mine." I have heard the oppressed long for a city that they believe to be theirs and cannot obtain. I have seen Jerusalem be fought over by people who are clinging to their culture, god, and homeland. Needless to say, Hasan-Rokem's perspective was refreshing to read. She loves Jerusalem deeply and seems to see a bigger picture. It was interesting to hear her say, "Maybe the most important is recognition that the population of Jerusalem has real, concrete needs to be taken care of..." She then goes on to suggest things like education and human rights. Isn't it obvious that these things are more important than the imagery that surrounds Jerusalem? She doesn't say that there is no place for this imagery and that people should all together stop "dreaming of Jerusalem" but maybe if people could set aside this romanticized image of Jerusalem in order to address the cities basic needs. This article is bold because it challenges many people's emotions. It asks people to change the way they think about their home and holy land. I think it is wise that she does not ask people to completely dismiss their views or emotional ties. She knows that there is a place for all of this and she challenges people to see beyond their emotions and romanticized imagery.

Channels of Rage

The Channels of Rage film was interesting. It put this conflict of peace and rights into different terms. (I was confused who Kobi was. Is he Subliminal or someone else?)
There was a conversation that happened in the very beginning of the film that I cannot stop thinking about. They said something like, "The problem isn't between Tamar and Kobi, because if it was then they would just battle it out and then it would be fine." And someone else replied, "That's just the thing, the problem IS between Tamar and Kobi."
I think that this scene was profound. These two guys are friends. They are friends from very different backgrounds, with different political and religious views, and they are actively pursuing change through rap. They have similar interests but are also very different. In this scene one of the guys, who I think was Tamar, is stating that there is no problem between him and Kobi; they are fine. Someone else states that the problem is between him and Kobi. It is between them because of all that they stand for. There is baggage behind this friendship and it cannot be fixed by simply rap-battling. This scene reinstated how deep political, cultural, and religious views run. They are sometimes impossible to look past. These are not just two rappers but rather men that stand as icons for their cultures. While the problem might not be directly between these two men, the problem IS between these two men because of all that they stand for and represent. Peace is hard...

Settlements

Thought these were interesting and helpful. They may be a bias selection but there are a lot of news stories on this settlement issue. Check it out.

Thoughts Following Salim Tamari

Watch CBS News Videos Online

Former deputy leader of Israel speaks negatively about the possibility of a two-state solution. In this interview he states, "The geo-political con that have been create in 67 is irreversible. You cannot unscramble that egg."
In the end of the clip they are speaking to a settler lady about how long they plan to remain on the land, with passion she states, "this is the mission to hold strong to the soil of the holy land."

I thought it was really interesting that Salim was trying to provoke a debate today about a two-state vs. one-state (uni-state?) plan. I felt like he wanted us to disagree with him. I was sitting there thinking, "I know that you want someone in here to disagree with you, to fight against what you're saying, but I just don't know enough." I have been interested to see what other people think. What is the best solution? What is the likelihood of ever being able to implement this solution? I found this story 60 minutes did on the two-state solution. I thought it was interesting. While it answered some questions I had it also raised more questions about Israeli settlements. It is a vicious cycle. (More to come on these settlements...)

Pre-thoughts and info for this week.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june04/tamari_ex.html
I don't know if a lot of you have already looked at this but it is an interview with Salim Tamari. He is explaining his opposition to the wall in Israel.
He believed that the main problem with the wall is that it is not between Jews and Arabs but between Arabs and Arabs.
When asked about the wall in relation to human safety and preventing further suicide bombers, Tamari responded, "instead of preventing violence, I think Israel is contributing to this desperation by creating a very strong atmosphere for violence of suicide bombers and for other kinds of desperate acts, some of which we haven't seen yet."

"A musical hope for coexistence"
Here are some things I found on the Channels of Rage...
I found a lot of summaries and movie reviews but they all seem to be pretty cliche. I wonder how much these writers know about the conflict in general? Does being informed change the way you critique the movie? I am excited to see the movie for myself on Thursday.

http://www.culturewars.org.uk/2004-01/channels.htm
This article summarized the film and states negative thoughts about the film's ability to reflect cooperation of peace between these two rappers. She states that they have different views on how to reach their peace goals. She also suggests that they are equally tainted by the government they seem to hate. I wonder if her analysis here is accurate?

http://www.ruthfilms.com/films/docs/art/channels-of-rage.html
this website didn't talk about the film in very much detail but it gives a list of the awards it has received, the festivals where it has been shown, and the Universities using it for educational purposes. I thought this was interesting.

Everything from Al-Quds to Ottomans Week 3

I want to apologize for being away from the blogging world for so long. Some illness attacked my body early last week not to mention the overwhelming stack of responsibilities that demanded my attention. My brain has been trying to take in the overwhelming amount of information that Karen has thrown at us in the past six chapters. Time is moving fast now and a lot has happened. Reflecting on chapters 12-16 makes my head hurt. I can't keep it all straight. Going into this book we were told that at some point we would be lost in the midst of all the conflicts, conquerors, and opinions that surround Jerusalem's past. I have found myself in this place. Part of me is overwhelmed by how crazy it is but I am comforted by the consistency of the craziness. (I'm not sure if that makes sense. I am lost in all the conflict, it's always something new, but at the same time it's all the same.) The conflict in Jerusalem seems to be unending. A different ruler, a different faith, a different society, but the same conflict.
The first line of Chapter 12 was really interesting to me. "The Muslims had established a system that enabled Jews, Christians, and Muslims to live in Jerusalem together for the first time." This made me think. How were they possibly going to pull this off? What inspired them to be so tolerant of these other people? How could they maintain control of Jerusalem with this kind of tolerance? Armstrong went on to say, "It seemed as though Islam and Christianity were about to enter a new era of friendship and peace."(pg.258) This proved to be difficult. Conflict, intolerance, starvation, and destitution rose up again in the city of Jerusalem.
The Crusades seem to reflect the same battle only now from the Christian perspective. The outcome was as you would expect..."The Crusades in the East and the reconquista in Europe had made a new and permanent rift between the three religions of Abraham."(pg. 306) This period of time baffles me. Did these Christian people actually believe that this was what God wanted? Who told them this was a good idea? I have a very hard time believing that the God they served was actually pleased by this act of violence. Maybe this is a question to ask the scholars tomorrow...
Here's a question, was the Ottoman rule a period of relief for everyone? It seems like the city began to prosper and experience much needed peace during this time. Is this true? Was there really that much peace?

sacred space week 3

Looking back at chapters eight and nine I was intrigued by the idea of God dwelling in one distinct place. Armstrong touches on this idea frequently as she discusses the destruction of the Temple and the events that followed. She states,
"The Temple had represented the heart of the world's meaning, the core of the faith. Now life had neither value or significance, and it seems that in these dark days many Jews lost their faith. It is not true, as often been asserted, that the Jews had fully outgrown their Temple. Even those Jews who had begun to evolve other ways of experiencing the divine believed that Jerusalem and its sanctuary were central to their religion. Jews would need all their creativity to survive this devastating loss." (pg. 155)

After the Temple had been destroyed people worshiped and observed Shabbat not in a "sacred space" but rather in "consecrated time". The destruction of the temple seemed to redefine in some sense what it meant to interact with the divine. Armstrong then brought up what I think is a very interesting question...
"What had it meant to say that God dwelt in a man-made building? Had he been present nowhere else?"
Did the destruction of the Temple change the way these people thought about the presence of their God? Are the convictions they felt during that time still felt today?

Origen, the Christian scholar states, "It was only pagans who sought God in a shrine and thought that the gods dwelt "in a particular place." (pg. 171)
From a Christian standpoint God no longer dwells in a Temple but in the man of Jesus Christ. But the Jews did not recognize Jesus as the Messiah. They do not believe that he is God. Therefore, from a Jewish standpoint, does the presence of God still dwell in the Temple, in a sacred space, as it did in the Old Testament?
I would be interested to know what the class thought about this. Could you worship a God who only dwells in one "sacred" space? Does it make a difference if that space is man-made or not? Does this idea seem foolish or "pagan"?

Barenboim Interview.

"This is the most important thing I do. No question."--Daniel Barenboiem

This is a three part interview that BBC did with Daniel Barenboim. I encourage you to watch the full interview. He is the conductor for the West-Eastern Divan orchestra. This orchestra has brought together people from Egypt, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, and Syria. If you missed the movie this past weekend check out this interview. They talk about Barenboim's motives and goals in bringing this orchestra together.
I thought that it was really interesting that the interviewer stops Barenboim from reflecting on past Israel. He insists that they start the interview talking about the present state of Israel but Barenboim can't neglect the past. This reminds me of our class as we struggle through Armstrong's book. Past events and trends seem to be an important aspect of looking critically at Jerusalem's present, even for Israelis.

one love week 2

We were talking about different translations of the Bible in class on Thursday. Originally written in the Hebrew and Greek our English translations sometimes fall short of capturing the full meaning of a verse. Many words do not translate exactly. For example, in English we have one word for love. We love our car, we love our parents, and we love burritos. Surely we do not love a pair of pants in the same way that we would love a spouse. In the Hebrew there are three different words for love that carry very different meanings.
Raya is a picture of companionship. It is the love that flows out of knowing someone deeply. This type of love is the foundation of a relationship. Raya has to be present to experience the Hebrew word Ahava.
Ahava is the choice to love. Ahava bears a commitment. It is more than just "I love you" it is, "I am choosing you forever no matter what." This love is not conditional and is not dependent on emotion. This is a love of the will. In the Hebrew, it is implied that Raya would lead to Ahava and that these two types of love would lead to Dod.
Dod is described as the mingling of souls. It is two souls coming together. This word does not merely describe sex but is the idea of two people coming together fully. These types of "love" are building blocks of intimacy. It seems that if you don't have Raya then Ahava cannot take place and where these first two are not present, Dod is impossible. The word love that we understand in English does not brush the surface of what is being spoken of in the Hebrew text.

seven things.

This assignment is interesting because it allows me to be who ever I want to be. Not having met any of you before this class I will assume that your perspective of who I am, for at least the next few weeks, will be dependent on this post. So the question remains, how do I want to be defined?
I like lists. My brain organizes everything into lists. So here it is, seven things...
1) I am a Christian. This doesn't mean that I grew up in the Church and have proceeded to take on my parents religious views. Rather, I heard the gospel of Jesus Christ in high school and I heard it differently than I ever had growing up. The message of grace and forgiveness through Jesus changed me; it is continually changing me.
2) I am apart of a non-profit ministry directed at high school students and have loved getting to be apart of the crazy things God is doing.
3) I am getting married this summer. I know that my life as a college student will soon become the life of a married woman and I am both excited and nervous for this next stage. I fear change, I fear what I don't know, but change must happen eventually.
4) I have coached high school girls lacrosse for the past four years and really enjoy it.
5) I bought a kayak last summer on a whim. I'm not sure who buys a boat on a whim, but I did. It was one of the best purchases I have made.
6) When it comes to literature, food, movies and music I will pretty much read, eat, watch, or listen to anything.
7) I think that the new student union is awesome, but I hate that it closes at midnight.

The articles for this week set an interesting backdrop for this second assignment. My faith is very important to all aspect of my life and to read about the tension of Jerusalem as the holy city for three different faiths is interesting. Personal convictions about faith and religion don't change the way I view historical events involving Jerusalem, but it does impact how I think about its future. I spent this past weekend celebrating Easter with my family and friends and I could not help but wonder what was going on in the restless city of Jerusalem. Does there seem to be more tension between people of different faiths during the holiday time? It is interesting to me that one city could be a holy site to three distinctly different faiths. Khalidi concluded his article by talking about instilling a "religious freedom for everyone at the holy sites sacred to the three Abrahamic faiths." Likewise Rubin speaks about a "united city where Jews and Muslims, some secular and others religious, could live side by side". How do you successfully intermingle three different groups of people into the same city when the distinction is not merely cultural but religious? I guess this is what we are going to being studying and discussing this quarter...

As far as an open or closed blog, I don't care. I think it would be interesting to leave it open and see what happens but I don't want it to be an issue for anyone else in the class. Either option is fine with me.

excitement and fear

Hello musicians, dancers, stone carvers, candle makers, palm frond weavers, storytellers, Muslim sheikhs, Christian priests, and Arabic calligraphers...
I am excited for this class. Excited to learn and excited to have my eyes opened to a culture that I fear I am ignorant of. As I read through other people's first posts I have found that my fears seem quite the opposite. Technology does not scare me. I can do technology. I hold no reservations toward the blogging world or the idea of seeing myself on camera. My fear is that I do not know enough. I fear that this space as well as the classroom will become a stage. That we will all attempt to perform in how knowledgeable we are and that I will fall short. I have stumbled into this class with very few preconceived notions and I am ready to learn. I am encouraged hear Amiry speak about the layers of the city. To hear her say that "behind the doors there are more discoveries" and there are aspects of culture and life she still does not understand. I understand this statement and I'm ready to learn. Bring on the doors and all their discoveries...