At the Provost Forum presentation Thursday morning, I heard many things that interested me, including the idea of intertextual relationships whether it be at Stowe or in other things. I had never thought that a garden could have been so thought out besides just the landscape. I also had never realized that some of the relationships that Professor Tatter brought up in his lecture could have been made. One that I found extremely interesting was concerning the half circle of busts. The right half were figures of action if I remember correctly. One of the other monuments faced these particular figures as befitting of to whom the monument was for. I hate to say that I don't exactly remember this detail, but it was one thing that stuck in my mind after leaving the lecture. I liked the idea that certain aspects of the garden "looked" upon other places connecting them because of their similar relationships. I would have never have thought that there was more to the placement of such monuments other than what looks good.
Another thing that I found interesting in Professor Tatter's lecture was one of the pictures of a tall monument to a general. I of course was interested to hear that Dr. Tatter discovered its relationship to the rest of the garden first, but I was most interested in its appearance. When I first glanced at it, it made me think of the Washington monument. After hearing the Professor say something about the fact that he was a general, I connected the two men as generals, but I do not completely understand why they have tall, slender, pointed monuments. Now, I can think of a number of things that this could obviously represent, but I was wondering why they truly made the monuments like this. Is it symbolic of power? I looked up the Washington Monument, and it said, "The shaft was based on Egyptian obelisks." Now I have the problem of what this means. I found a website that said, "The obelisk, called TEJEN in the sacred language of the ancient Egyptians, was a term which was synonymous with "protection" or "defense."" I know that this was not the topic that we were to discuss, but it was because of the lecture that I wanted to know of this. If anyone knows of anything else that the monument represents, please respond.

I was also very impressed with the amount of time it must have taken to create the gardens at Stowe. Stowe is very large and to think that every intertextual structure was created knowing it would look down on another. I really enjoyed Dr. Tatter's lecture on how each monument was related to another. You have to truly love something to be able to look past what you are focusing your attention on. At times during the lecture I would find myself only focusing on one point on the screen until Dr. Tatter would direct my attention to the things around it. I also really enjoyed listening to Dr. Tatter talk about the royalty in England at the time that Stowe was created. The one picture of King Charles with the symbolic objects in his hands was quite funny. I guess that explained the reason why he had so many impotent children.
My favorite intertextual relationship at the gardens had to be the one with Captain Cook and the other Captain that had died on land. Captain Cook grabbed my attention when Dr. Tatter was discussing him was because he had a horrible death. His body was not buried the proper way, his bones where buried at sea. This is what explains this monument being placed on an island in the gardens. There is also a globe with a gold ring around it that symbolizes how Captain Cook went around the world twice. On his third journey he went to the Hawiian Islands and that is where he was killed. There is also lettering around the globe which you can't read until you wonder around the globe from different angles. This represents Captain Cook because he will roam the earth forever because he did not have a proper burial. I am one of those people who will buy a jacket just because of all the extra bells and whistles. Dr. Tatter explained Captain Cook with such detail, his monument had so much though put into it. A lot of other monuments had thought, but this Captain Cook's seemed to just have more and more. Also, I liked the fact that it was probably the smallest monument in the gardens but yet it had some of the most meaning to it. Just like small people can be just a strong as larger people. There was also a monument right across the way from Captain Cook's which was another Captain who had been buried on land. Even though Captain Cook's monument was much smaller, I liked it better because it had more meaning behind it.

I was very impressed by Dr. tatter's presentation of intertextuality of the Garden's at Stowe. I was not aware that the gardening was all very intentional, planned our, and detailed. A part of the garden I thought to be most interesting was the part where one statue was looking out across the pond at another statue. It was as if the statue staring at the other one was really alive and it represented an entire story behind it's placement. One thing I noticed that was stated in the lecture was that nothing at Stowe garden was placed at random, everything had a meaning to it, but in order to understand that meaning, one would have to be familiar with the background of the stories representing the statues. This was the first I had ever thought about intertextual relationships, or even heard of the term, so I found it so very surprising and interesting as opposed to just assuming that someone placed a pile of stones beautifuly next to this pond, and oh, would ya look at that over there, it is a man standing with his head facing south. The lecture made me less ignorant to how gardens or even stories relate with one another, I see it is all intentional and not just done, to be done.

The thing that first captured my attention was how artistic influence has been borrowed and re-created by various countries again and again. It is so interesting how, for instance, the concept of obelisks was taken from Egypt during the expansion of the Roman Empire. Many of them were later built in Italy and France, specifically. The English, then, took the idea from the French and placed them in gardens. America even has them in Washington, D.C. in the form of powerful monuments and tributes. The same happened with gardening.

I remember walking through the gardens of Versailles in France and being so impressed by its grandeur and magnificence. It was no doubt a way for the Lord of the estate (or the king of the country) to display his wealth, power and taste. Versailles is a far cry from the humble Zen gardens of Japan, the quietly reflective gardens at Stowe in England, and the experimental tropical garden in my own back yard. It is amazing how gardening fits so differently to reflect the needs, desires, and preferences of various cultures and countries.

It is almost as if the art, gardens, and other exchanged ideas of cultures have a global intertextuality in and of themselves. When one has explored gardens in various parts of the world, and developed a deep appreciation for them, one strolls through each new garden with an ideal and appreciation of intertexuality, historically and culturally. Personally, I have seen many types of gardens and worked in a few as well. I have a deep respect and love for them and all their many functions. However, I have not yet visited any traditionally English gardens. So, apart from a bit of reading I had done on the topic, I had little to no experience with English gardens prior to Dr. Tatter's lecture.

I really enjoyed learning the stories behind the statues at Stowe. I imagine that strolling through this English garden would be much like reading a phenomenal piece of English literature. It is a private garden, and must thus be explored by foot. A person walks through it, quietly and personally discovering quaint twists and turns. One encounters objects, perspectives, and settings that make one question one's self and one's society at large. The garden's design encourages an individual to explore various levels of self which inevitably prompts laughter, tears, anger, and contemplation. It seems to me that the gardens display physically what a good piece of English literature constructs mentally. I can only imagine what it would be like to sit under a tree at Stowe reading a novel by Charles Dickens.

Although I found the busts of famous British citizens facing the Greeks to be quite funny (i.e. last great society looking to the first great society), my favorite was, too, the monument built to Captain Cook. If memory serves me correctly, he led the English discovery of Australia and New Zealand. My fascination with Captain Cook could be based purely upon the fact that I greatly enjoyed my visits to those countries (despite learning of the animals that his exhibition introduced that still plague the nations to this day). His bravery, or reckless abandon, whatever the case, honestly intrigue me. As great a man as he was, I feel almost certain that he might feel let down by the size of his monument until an English scholar like Dr. Tatter explained its jam-packed intertextuality to him. Its placement on the "River Styx" was simply genius, as was having to cross over the bridge to read the inscription, if one can even know how to read the language. I also appreciated the meaning behind the globe and its placement on the river.

I can only imagine what it would be like to create an English garden like the one at Stowe. The planning that would be involved must be intense. More than that, a person must truly have to know and understand what they stand for and what they want the world at large to see; this is not like creating Versailles because it is more a showcase of intellect and thoughtfulness than wealthy promenading. It may be no where near the grander of a French garden, but Stowe seems to be much more respectable and adult in nature. The creators had to be well-versed in Greek mythology, English history, and personal tradition and beliefs. It is quaint, but highly thoughtful, a combination of meditation and enlightenment.

One of my favorite things about art and literature is analyzing the symbolism involved in the work. This is why I especially liked the lecture on intertextuality. I’ve always enjoyed looking through the layers and finding its significance, yet it never occurred to me that this “intertextuality” could be found in the areas around us, like the Stowe Gardens. I’ve always taken gardens jus for their presented beauty, never as something that could represent layer upon layer of symbolism and history. First off, I thought that the English gardens, like Stowe, were in response to the French Gardens. The Gardens of Versailles have always been among my favorites but I never bothered to analyze the gardens. I realized how Versailles was truly a symbol for wealth of the nation and total rule of a nation, rather than just boasting beauty for the king. I also learned how mathematical the Gardens of Versailles are. Rectangles, recurrent geometry, axial symmetries. Everything was based on a mathematical formula. DaVinci would be so proud. The English gardens seem more aesthetic since they wanted one to feel as if walking through the gardens was like reading a poem. I think my favorite intertextualness of the Garden was the relationship between General Wolfe’s monument and the Pastoral Poetry monument. At first I was a bit confused about what links a great historical figure to something related to literature. However, when a knowledgeable historian and a lover of pastoral poetry see the two monuments, they can immediately make the correlation. Also, it shows the humbling of a great military leader- who probably knew the Western world would remember his contributions in Quebec- because he would rather be remembered for writing a poem. The Pastoral Poetry monument frames General Wolfe’s monument elegantly, yet one must dig deep to find the correlation. This kind of reminded me of the Earnest Hemingway’s story “Sea Change” we read in class because one had to have literary knowledge to pick up on his references to other writers like Pope. Overall, I really enjoyed the lecture and really wanted to finish the presentation because I wanted to see if all the monuments were associated with at least one other monument. I’ll never look at gardens the same way again.

Dr.Tatter’s provost forum was really surprising. I never knew a garden could be so interesting and complex. Also, I never knew intertextuality is so common in our lives today. I enjoyed all the intertextual relationships at Stowe, but I most enjoyed the two semicircles with busts in them. One semicircle held the busts of Roman leaders while the other held the busts of famous Europeans such as Locke. Their unique positions symbolize many things. From the European semicircle, one can look up to the Roman semicircle on an adjacent hill. This represents who the Europeans learned from and who they “looked up” to. Also, the sun rose on the Roman semicircle which represents the dawning of an age, and it set on the European semicircle which represents the ending of an age and future times.
This is significant because it shows the leaders of one age and where they learned their ideas instead of places such as Mount Rushmore where the statue is only of the individuals. I like how someone can see a history as they look at the semicircles. Too often statues are just statues with no auxiliary meaning; they are just a stone image or still shot of a person, while at Stowe they are more of a creative portrait that an intelligent artist carved. Someone has to look from all angles at different parts of the day to fully appreciate the beauty and depth of the semicircles where regular statues usually bore people within a couple of minutes.
The sights of the garden at Stowe really impressed and intrigued me. I would like to see more intertextual relationships between the figures there.

I'm not saying this just because Dr. Tatter is my grade giver, but I was really quite fascinated by his interpretation of the Gardens at Stowe. I liked how he started with the poem "Absalom and Achitophel." Twenty minutes had passed, and although I had become very familiar with the history and parody of the poem, I was really starting to wonder what any of this had to do with gardens. But then he made the comment, "Walking through the Gardens at Stowe is like reading a poem." Haha, maybe that should be put on a golden plaque at one of the entrances to the gardens. I started to think about times when I had walked through the garden at Versailles and other French and English gardens. I remember thinking they were fascinating and beautiful, but I don't remember feeling like I was reading a poem. Honestly, I would have had to agree with Dr. Tatter's wife on I didn't really see what the big deal was. Now, after hearing Dr. Tatter's lecture, I wish I could go back to those gardens and look at them with this new perspective.

As Gloria Fite noticed, I also noticed that one of the monuments at Stowe to a general looked like the Washington monument. This also started me thinking on why these two monuments were shaped this way. As Gloria researched, the shape comes from Egyptian architechture termed obelisk, which means "protection" and "defense." I wonder if there are other monuments in the world with this shape, and if they, too, are placed there for generals or some other kind of "protector."

Like few have stated already, I found the intertextuality in Captain Cook's monument an interesting and quite humorous one. The monument is so small, and most probably don't even take the time to go across the "River Styx" to see it. However, what fun it must be if you know Cook's history to see the intertextuality in it. It's like one of those jokes that only smart people get.

I am still in awe at how Dr. Tatter's curiosity led him to this study. I am always amazed at how much he can see in a short story or a poem, but now he has conquered gardens as well. This concept of intertextuality has put a new spin on how I look at literature and even architecture and landscaping. I also think it is incredible how the landscaper of these gardens placed everything in a certain way. It's like a big riddle or inside joke that he could sit around and laugh about while watching other people try to figure out. But I guess that was the way of amusing oneself before T.V. and Playstation.

I was very impressed by the presentation and work that Dr. Tatter put into his studies of the gardens at Stowe. Before I attended his presentation, I thought of a garden as being a boring place with an abundance of flowers. I guess you could say that now, my horizons have been expanded. Oh, I also got a good laugh when Dr. Tatter made that reference to Michael Jackson making hip thrusts in the poem.

The part of the gardens at Stowe that I found the most interesting was the Temple of British Worthies. I found it unique that each one of the characters were important in that they each contributed to society in some way. I also thought it was interesting that only one woman, Queen Elizabeth, was featured. Being an independent young woman, I really admire her and think that her place in the temple was well deserved. Whoever designed the thing was brilliant. Another picture in the presentation that caught my eye was The Water Avenue and Dragon Fountain at Versailles. It was very beautiful.

All of the unique photographs of the gardens seem to suggest that if one simple thing was taken away, then the gardens would not be the same. I guess that is just how intertextuality works but I am really fascinated by how much thought someone must have put into the landscape and design. Also, exposing myself to these types of presentations makes me want to learn more about places like Stowe. You really never know what you are missing out on until you open your eyes to something like this.

It was also pretty cool how Dr. Tatter showed us how buildings are made to look like each other. I never thought about the front of Munger looking like a house at Stowe.

I really enjoyed your cultural event - honestly it is the only one that hasn't bored me to sleep within the first ten minutes. I really enjoyed the pictures and the poem and stories. I am really interested in mythology so I found that part fasicinating. I think I enjoyed the poem of the king vs. the bible story the most. I was a good message either way. I thought it was cool how the two times periods intertwined like that. I am a huge history buff so I am interested in kings and stuff like that anyway. But, I really did enjoy your presentation and wish that more were that interesting.

I really enjoyed listening to your lecture on the intertextuality in the landscape garden at Stowe. I was overwhelmed by the beauty of the different landscapes in the garden. The various landscapes throughout the garden must have taken years to complete. I can only imagine the upkeep of such a vast garden such as Stowe. The poem that went along with your presentation was also very interesting. One thing that I was interested in was how certain buildings resembled many other historic buildings. The similarities between the White House, Munger Hall, and the Parthenon amazed me. I never realized how architechs use historic buildings as a foundation for today's buildings. I also noticed how one of the monuments resembled the Washington Monument.

Another portion of the lecture that I enjoyed was the flamboyant flowers throughout the garden. Each garden in Stowe was equally beautiful. The pictures shown made me want to visit Stowe at some point. I am amazed at how a garden at this stature can exist for so many years.

I enjoyed listening to the different stories and seeing the amazing sites at the gardens at Stowe. The gardens related to the "Absalom and Achitophel" story. I really liked how Dr. Tatter referenced the story to that of King David in the bible and then we were able to get visual images of it through the pictures of the gardens. The gardens showed me how peaceful life can be and to just slow down and enjoy life. The story of Absalom and Achitophel was very interesting to me, and it showed me how everything relates to something else. Especially how that story also related to the people in England. It really amazed me how everything is connnected in some way or another. All-in-all, I think that this is one of the best Provist-forums I have been to yet!

The intertextual relationship that I found most interesting was the monument to Captain James Cook. At first glance, one would just notice the globe on top of the monument and assume it symbolizes the explorer in James Cook. And unless one knew about Captian Cook's life, the fact that the monument is on an island--among other things--would have no meaning. I thought it was really neat how the exact placement of the monument told a great deal about his actual life. The fact that the monument was not on either side of the river symbolized the reality of Captain Cook's burial. He never had a proper burial so according to Greek myth he would not have a way to pay for the ferry across the river Sticks to make it into the Elysian fields. His soul would continually wander the shore trying to find a way across. Thus his monument is not on either side of the river in the garden and to read the inscription surrounding the globe one must wander the bank on the opposite side to see all the writing. I find it fascinating that someone would take all that history, philosophy and knowledge and take the effort to put it in the landscape of their garden. That way of creating a beautiful space never would have occured to me. It would be ideal for relaxing the body while stimulating the brain.

I personally enjoyed this cultural event because I have toured gardens, castles, palaces, etc. overseas. Although I have toured many of these places, I had no idea the time that was put into them. I appreciated the work that was done because it was still in tact and very elegant after so many years. I am fascinated by these things. This lecture made me sit back and think about everything I missed on my first time through. I guess when I go back over to Europe in 2006 I can tour these places for what they actually are--that is the ones with intertextuality. It will be like reading a story or a book for the second or third time when you see so much more. I can't wait to go back and hopefully I will get to tour the Gardens at Stowe while I'm there.

To tell you the truth, I knew very little about the gardens at stowe before going to this cultural event. I may have seen pictures or read about them at one time, but I had never really researched them. So, needless to say, I knew nothing of the intertextuality that could be found there either. It was very fascinating for me to hear Dr. Tatter tell about how each monument and statue in the gardens is intertwined in a sense with the others. It was quite intriguing to hear how someone had taken so many aspects of mythology and history and so many other things and put them all together in such an eloquent and beautiful way.

Like many of my classmates, it seems, i found the monument to Captain James Cook to be one of the most fascinating things in the gardens. I thought the symbolism of the ring around the globe meaning that he travelled the world twice before his eventual death, and the placement of the monument on neither side of the river was quite intriguing. However, my favorite part of the monument to the captain was how a person would have to walk all the way around to realize what the insciption read, this meant that the captain would have to wonder the river styx forever because he did not have fare to cross. This was because after his death, he was never properly buried.

The thought and planning that obviously went into the gardens was absolutely mind-boggling to me. It still amazes me that anyone would have such utter genius to juxtapose so many aspects of life and fantasy in such an amazingly beautiful place.

I never thought a landscape could hold so much meaning. Intertextuality seems to be an interesting subject, whether it be about a garden, a landscape, or anything. It is interesting to see how one thing can allude to another. I found many of the intertextual relations in the gardens to be interesting. The first I can recall is the semicircles containing the busts. I was intrigued by how so many aspects of the landscape were built in relation to other parts of the garden. The example that sticks out in my mind is the monument to the person that wished he could be remembered for a certain poetic piece that he enjoyed. I also thought it was very creative to have the writing written around the globe of Captain Cook so that the observer would have to walk completely around to read the entire inscription. I'm not sure why the subject was so interesting to me; I guess I just enjoy finding hidden meanings within landscape structure, poetry, or anything else.