January 30, 2005

Mike May's Journal

Mike May's Journal, which is posted online, has some very interesting factors. Seeing for the first time seems to be such a beautiful thing. It was as though he was reborn and seeing the light was such a wonderful experience for him. Seeing the dust flying around boggles him, seeing the snowflakes confuses him, and seeing everything is just amazing to him.

After three years, Mike May is still astonished by what he sees. He can not see everything, sometimes things are blurry, but he can see. Because of using his hearing his whole life, he did not know how to connect his vision and hearing to one another. He had new experiences everyday.

This story is so amazing that I just couldn't believe someone who was blind for 43 years could finally see again. Technology now-a-days is advancing so quick. If I were to guess, I would say that in a couple more years, deaf people may be able to hear. I would think that the decision for Mike May to go through with the transplant to gain vision was an easy one. After 43 years, he finally realized once again that seeing is a beautiful thing!

After reading Dr. Jerz's comment, I realize that I have not look at the perspective of Mike actually being blind. I'm sure that he had many experiences while being blind that I could never have had before.

I actually know a man who gets into the YMCA Olympic size swimming pool, which is where I work, and swims laps. He swims backstroke, freestyle, with a kickboard, etc. He does it all. You would never be able to tell that he was blind by watching him swim. He told me that he loves to swim and said he wanted to come more often. What my point is, is that it doesn't matter whether you are blind or can see, we are all capable of completing the same tasks or taking part in and enjoying the same activity.

Even though Mike May may have needed assistance while he was blind, he was still capable of doing anything else a seeing person could. In his journal, he was just so appreciative about being able to see his wife's face and dust particles, that I was more focus about how it is a beautiful thing to be able to see. Now I can say that even if a person is blind, they could still have wonderful experiences of beauty, even if they can't see it.

Posted by Anne Stadler at 10:22 PM | Comments (2)

January 26, 2005


Gosh...So many different versions of this anthology, yet different in their own ways. There is the 17th century version, many 20th century versions, and the feminist version. The pictures by Burne-Jones and Gerome can tell this story in different ways as well. If I had not read this story and just looked at the pictures, I would have to say that Burne-Jones pictures bring the story alive. Don't get me wrong, Gerome's picture was great, but if I had not known about this story beforehand, I may have come up with other conclusions.

The Burne-Jone pictures (there are four of them) bring this story alive. The first photo of Pygmalion ignoring women that are alive or real lets the person viewing it that he wants nothing to do with women. Well, I have a question--if he wanted nothing to do with women, and according to Bulfinch's Mythology, says he has came to abhor them, then what would bring him to carve a woman from ivory. Wouldn't you think from reading this mythology that he hates women so bad that he would never think of carving one? I have to admit that this translation was not my favorite. Just a little thought while I was reading--back to the photo gallery...

I would like to reconsider my thoughts about Germone's photo. It is amazing how he fits almost a whole story into one photo. The statue turns into a human and Pygmalion kissing her right away explains how deeply in love he is with her.

The feminist version of Pygmalion made me furious. In a way, I thought he was a sick, sick man as well. But if you would look at the first picture by Burne-Jones, the contemporary statues are naked. The feminist calls Pygmalion a pervert, but a naked woman's body in those days was considered beautiful. I don't agree with this feminist on those behalfs. It seems like after she read the real story of Pygmalion, she was upset because of him sculpting a naked woman, but I think it was more along the lines of a compliment. There was a time for men's naked bodies to be beautiful, there was a time for women's naked bodies to be beautiful, and during this time, being naked is not considered a work of art or beauty. I can understand why this woman feels upset about Pygmalion's work of art after reading this, but to read a piece of work like this, you have to know how life was in those certain time periods. Obviously, this woman had no idea.

Posted by Anne Stadler at 09:24 PM | Comments (1)