As I was reading Corvino’s article, I could not help but relate the issue of the golem as grammar to students and teachers. “That is, the creator of the golem is obliged to ensure its obedience and restrict its development, and this is exemplified specifically as the management of language and writing” (360). Does that remind anyone else of earlier discussions in this class about the teaching of rhetoric? The readings from Plato and Isocrates and their ideas about the way rhetoric needs to be efficiently taught in order to create productive members of society immediately came to mind for me. When Corvino discussed the golem as being a silent creature, I was reminded of the way Isocrates argued that students should be discouraged from speaking until their training was more complete because they were not ready to compete in discourse at higher levels. In addition, the whole concept of the destruction or creation of the golem through the presence of one letter made me think of grades. The way students have to be rated by A,B,C,D or F has such an impact on their lives in many ways. A grade can direct their path in academia. More importantly, a grade can kill their path in academia as well. We are the creators who have the power to carve those letters in these golems, deciding whether they live or die.