At best anger is problematic for most of us and especially an issue for women (and other discriminated groups). True a collaborative craft project focusing on silver objects, I investigate female anger and how it is perceived. Also, how the prevention of acting it out silences our need for change. I use the aesthetics of magic to reference the judging of women acting outside of set rules, and also as a tactic of female liberation.

No description available.

This essay takes it’s approach in the role of the Serpent in the Garden story based on the Jewish and Christian tradition’s view of the Serpent in that narrative. The question the study is based on is whether the Serpent has changed character from the creation of the Garden story until about 400 years AD in Christian tradition. My conclusion in this reception-historical analysis of the Serpent is that it has different meanings in Jewish and Christian tradition. The Gnostic texts that began to emerge a couple of hundred years BC were not recognized in the Jewish tradition, while in the Christian tradition they lived with the interpretations, which is not least seen in the Book of Revelations, which is canon in the Christian tradition today. Augustine uses the Book of Revelation’s interpretations of the Serpent, where the Serpent is Satan, which the Gnostic texts write and the Book of Revelation is influenced by. Augustine is so wrapped up in the fact that the Serpent is Satan that he misses what it says in the most important and introductory sentence of Genesis 3:1.  My conclusion is that because God created the Serpent, and therefore the Serpent can not be Satan because God is not evil. The dualistic worldview that emerges from God does not appear in the text, but the Christian interpretations of the Serpent have departed from the text, while the Jewish tradition has remained in the text’s view of the Serpent. The Serpent is not Satan based on Genesis 3.

The purpose of this essay has been to examine the literary unit of Luke 10:17–24 in its literary context, and to learn what Luke might have intended to mediate about Satan’s, Jesus’ and the seventy(-two)’s power in relation to the kingdom of God. This has been done through a literary and redaction critical analysis. Special attention has been paid to Luke’s ordering of his material, his understanding of Satan in comparison with other jewish apocalyptic writings and his view on discipleship. This essay argues that Luke has constructed his literary unit from both own material and material found in “Q” to create a juxtaposition between Jesus and Satan, and to communicate that the fall of Satan and the arrival of the kingdom of God are two coincident events. Furthermore, this essay claims that there are intrinsic connections between the mission of the seventy(-two) and the mission of Jesus in Luke’s narrative.

No description available.

No description available.

John Milton has been frequently associated with rebellion, both by modern scholars and by his contemporaries. Objectively speaking, he may very well be a rebel; however, looking to his own works complicates the issue. In fact, Milton makes very clear in his writing, especially in The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates, that he abhors rebellion mainly because it is unlawful. Furthermore, he describes the uprising against King Charles I by disassociating it from any kind of rebellion, instead determining that the uprising was done lawfully. Milton writes about rebellion in the same way in many of his works leading up to and including Paradise Lost, where Satan resembles the rebel that Milton so vehemently despises. Given Milton's dislike of rebellion, his association of it with Satan complicates another commonplace scholarly argument; that Satan is sympathetic in Paradise Lost. This work will explicate Milton's definition of rebellion, especially through Tenure, and will then use that definition to demonstrate that Satan cannot be read as sympathetic. / Master of Arts

La représentation de Satan et de ses différentes dénominations a constitué un sujet majeur de l’histoire de l’art occidental chrétien des premiers siècles de notre ère jusqu’au début du vingtième siècle. Alors que nous estimions le thème définitivement abandonné suite au fort recul de la pensée religieuse – notamment de la croyance au Diable – dans les sociétés actuelles, nous relevons que l’art contemporain lui accorde une place prépondérante dans sa production et ses manifestations. Le constat de ce décalage ostensible est à l’origine de la volonté d’étudier les raisons, les expressions et les conséquences qui accompagnent la présence de Satan dans l’art d’aujourd’hui. Pour rendre compte de cette discordance, cette thèse se scinde en trois mouvements : une étude comparative de l’histoire de la figure entre son passé et son présent, puis de sa disparition relative à sa réincarnation effective ; une analyse du traitement de l’imagerie diabolique par les artistes, et des messages qu’ils transmettent à travers elle ; une réflexion sur la survie théorique de la figure, et sur le silence du monde de l’art face à l’omniprésence de sa représentation. Le «retour» du Diable s’explique par deux raisons principales : détaché de ses racines théologiques, il est devenu aisément manipulable ; héritière de son glorieux passé, son image possède une force symbolique irremplaçable. La figure de Satan dans l’art contemporain est le reflet de nos sociétés, de nos angoisses, et de nos espoirs de libération – symptôme et possible remède. Vouloir l’ignorer revient à refuser d’affronter la préoccupante situation sociopolitique du monde : un vœu pieux potentiellement dangereux. / The representation of Satan in his various denominations has constituted a major topic for Western Christian art history, from the first centuries A.D. to the beginning of the twentieth century. While, following the large decline of religious thought and of the belief in the Devil, the theme was considered as permanently obsolete in our present day societies, we notice that contemporary art provides it a leading place in its productions and expressions. The genuine will to study the reasons, the manifestations and the consequences accompanying the presence of Satan in today’s art comes from the observation of this blatant discrepancy. In order to figure out this discordance, this thesis is divided in three parts: a comparative study of the figure between its past and its present, then from its relative disappearance to its effective reincarnation; an analysis of the diabolical imagery as it is treated by artists, and of the messages they deliver through it; a reflection on the theoretical survival of the figure, and on the art world’s silence in the face of his omnipresent representation. The Devil’s “come back” can be explained by two main reasons: cut from his theological roots, this character is easily maneuverable; his image possesses an irreplaceable strength inherited from his glorious past. The figure of Satan in contemporary art mirrors our societies, our fears, our hope for liberation – a symptom and a possible remedy. To try to avoid it is to refuse to contend with the worrying socio-political situation of the world: a potentially dangerous vain wish.

Genom att undersöka Djävulens utseende och roll, har jag försökt beskriva hur Djävulen porträtteras i de serietidningar jag valt ut. Djävulen avbildas på en rad olika sätt i serietidningsform i vårt till stor del sekulariserade samhälle. Vissa av dessa avbildningar har religiösa föregångare, vissa har föregångare i annan litteratur och vissa är helt nya. De tyder på att man inte använder Djävulen alltför lättvindigt i serietidningar och att man ofta är medveten om de kulturella konnotationer han för med sig. Han är en karaktär som ofta framställs som en negativ karaktär, vilket inte är lustigt med tanke på hans roll inom religion och litteratur. Tack vare de förutfattade tankar som finns om honom är han lätt att använda för att skapa effekter inom serierna, antingen genom att spela på den negativa inställningen eller genom att ställa läsarens förväntningar på ända. Han framställs främst i tre större roller: som tragisk, skrämmande eller komisk. Det är inte ovanligt att flera av dessa roller används till samma karaktär. I de serier jag analyserat har han alltid ställts som en kontrast till seriens protagonist, även om han inte alltid är serietidningens antagonist. Djävulens utseende speglar hans roll i serierna på så sätt att han, när han ska vara skrämmande eller antagonist, har ett mer monstruöst utseende än vad han har när han har en tragisk roll. När han ska vara komisk har han ett utseende som kan ses som löjeväckande, men är inte mänsklig för den saken skull. En gemensam faktor är att samtliga djävlar hade någon form av skräckskapande element till sin karaktär. Sammanfattningsvis kan man säga att Djävulen framställs på minst sagt olika sätt i de olika serierna, vilket tyder på att det kan vara svårt att säga något klart generellt om hur denna karaktär porträtteras i serietidningsmediet.

Thesis (M.A.)--Miami University, Dept. of History, 2008. / Title from first page of PDF document. Includes bibliographical references (p. 42-46).