moved

OH I WILL TELL YOU MORE. THANKS FOR ASKING!!

Alright, friends, stick with me, because we’re in it for the long haul. I’ll even properly capitalize things, just for you, since this is A Proper Analysis™. Also all quotes are from the Raeburn translation of Metamorphoses and the UK copy of The Secret History.

So first things first, I study Classics (and drama but Classics is what’s important here). I focus on the Roman side of things, rather than the Greek (don’t shoot me!), mostly the Julio-Claudians, so this is going to be coming from the Roman version of the myth. This term I’m in a class on Ovid’s Metamorphoses. I had read the Metamorphoses a few times before, but this is way more in depth since the class is devoted purely to that poem. I recently wrote a paper on “extreme people” in the poem, and focused on Echo and Narcissus, specifically how Echo is not what she seems on the surface. NOW LET’S GET STARTED, SHALL WE?

The thing about Echo and Narcissus is that people have an image in their head already, a preconceived idea of what these two characters are like, when in actuality, they’re very different (at least Echo is) than what people think when they hear the names. Echo wasn’t just a passive nymph who was super cautious and very timid like people make her out to be. And Narcissus wasn’t completely heartless in his choices, although he definitely could have been kinder to Echo. Echo covered up for one of her fellow nymphs when she thought Juno was going to catch the nymph with Jupiter. She protected her friend and the consequence was that she lost her own voice, she was doomed only to repeat the ends of what she heard. And even though her autonomy is seemingly taken away from her, she still tries to take what she wants. She sees Narcissus, this god-like boy, and she wants him, so she puts herself out there. And then we have Narcissus. He was doomed since his birth to be his own downfall if he “knows himself” (we’ll talk a bit about how this means different things in different versions later). He knew he was handsome, and he scorned all of his suitors, men and women alike. Yes, he was a little shit, but you would be too if you had

“rippling curls like the locks of a god, Apollo or Bacchus, cheeks as smooth as silk, an ivory neck and a glorious face with a mixture of blushing red and creamy whiteness”

I mean, WOW. Basically what we have is a nymph who knows what she wants and is never apologetic for it, and a boy who is too handsome for his own good.

After Echo sees Narcissus, who refuses to be with anyone at all, she follows him, repeating his words. He eventually asks her to come forward so that he can see who she is, he literally says “we must come together!” kind of deceiving knowing what’s coming right? And when she bursts forward, ready to give Narcissus her entire being he actually scorns her, saying she’ll never “enjoy his body” which sadly she has to repeat which makes things pretty awkward. Echo leaves Narcissus, but still harbors this bitter love for him that ultimately makes her waste away until she is only a voice. And yet she still cares about him. She watches him fall in love with his own reflection, sees him trying desperately to kiss and touch the reflection. Narcissus stays in front of his reflection in the water, slowly wasting away as well, destroying himself because of his own selfishness, and Echo watches, she watches and she is moved to pity, because she still cares so deeply about this selfish, beautiful boy. And yet she knows she can’t help him. Even though he was horrible to her, it doesn’t matter, she still feels sorrow for him, she even mourns him when he finally dies.

“Echo had watched his decline, still filled with angry resentment but moved to pity. Whenever the poor unhappy youth uttered a pitiful sigh, her own voice uttered a pitiful sigh in return.”

She was the only one to say goodbye to him as he was dying, she was the only one who actually cared, even though, until his very last breath, he cared about no one but himself.

Do you see where I’m going with this? So then we take Francis and Charles.

Francis, our Echo, bound to follow and love our Narcissus, despite how selfish and careless he is. Francis, our Echo, being bold with his love, taking whatever attention he can have from Charles, giving himself up readily for him, even though they both know that our Narcissus would never really give anything in return. Francis, our Echo, still loving Charles, always loving Charles, bitterly, coldly, but no matter what, because

“Just when I’ve managed to harden my heart, he’ll turn around and be so sweet. I always fall for it. I don’t know why.”

Francis, our Echo, believing that, despite the selfishness, there must be something good in Narcissus, because how can someone so beautiful be rotten?

“I tend to equate physical beauty with qualities with which it has absolutely nothing to do with. I see a pretty mouth or a moody pair of eyes and imagine all sorts of deep affinities, private kinships.”

And Charles, our Narcissus, in love with the reflection of himself, “he was her brother and they did look an awful lot alike.” Narcissus who, in some versions of the myth, is actually in love with his twin sister and not merely his own reflection. In some versions, incest is the crime, not just narcissism, to use the word directly from his name. Knowing himself means knowing the one who looks strikingly like him, seeing his reflection in someone else and becoming obsessed, loving his twin. Charles, our Narcissus, who is his own ultimate downfall, his own worst enemy, whose passion wrecks his life. Our Narcissus who only cares about himself, who leads people on with his beauty, hiding the selfishness with golden hair and a charming smile. Charles, our Narcissus, who acts as if he cares about our Echo, in private, only to scorn him and develop sudden bouts of amnesia when the apparent affection is brought up again.

Francis and Charles, our Echo and Narcissus, who watch each other waste away, bitterly, angrily, never really able to let the other one have what they want.

I sort of like to imagine that years later, after the end of the book, Charles has left that older woman he was with and Francis maybe realized that he can get by on his own and divorced Priscilla. Maybe they’re both struggling with money and having trouble getting by, but it’s better than being trapped with someone you don’t really love, isn’t it? And Charles finds his way to Francis again. Maybe he tries to apologize to him, finally, and maybe they sleep together one last time, but Francis doesn’t need Charles anymore, he has himself, and now Charles doesn’t even have his reflection. So they say their final goodbyes, their roles being reversed.

“[Our new Narcissus’s] final words, as he gazed once more in the pool, rang back from the rocks: ’Oh marvelous boy, I have loved you in vain!’ Then he said, ‘Farewell.’ ‘Farewell,’ said [our new] Echo.”

no you don’t understand shakespeare literally writes to the beat of your heart

that’s why shakespearean actors will sometimes pound their chests in time to the words during readings

that’s why you use fluctuations in the rhythm to track your character’s emotional state - any irregularities in the scansion are like the character’s heart stuttering or jumping or skipping a beat

that’s why when characters share the rhythm - switching off in the middle of a foot - those characters inevitably have an extraordinarily intimate connection

shakespeare fucking writes viscerally, he is literally in your body, and that, my friend, that is why the best shakespearean actors don’t posture and emote

you have to be fucking alive and passionate and electric - it can’t be intellectual, in the end, it has to be about connection and the sweating, cheering, jeering, bleeding masses you’re performing to, because make no mistake, shakespeare may go to lofty heights, but he only works if you’re just as grounded in the earth. he has to be in your body. he has to be in your body.

artemis and aphrodite are the classic madonna (virgin) and the whore

athena is deliberately stripped of her femininity in order to be goddess of wisdom, springing fully formed from zeus’ head instead of being born from a woman

hera is the jealous, vindictive ball and chain, etc etc.

and the kicker? pandora was a revamped character from an older myth, in which she created every single thing in the universe, good and bad. she didn’t just open a box and ruin everything by not being able to follow orders. pandora literally means “all-giving”. and in the greek mythology we know today, she’s the first woman on earth and manages to fuck things up for everyone. sound familiar? like eve, maybe?

Things that this post gets entirely right:

Greek mythology is deliberately patriarchal (which should be obvious, because it was written by people living in a patriarchal culture, so of course it reflects their values)

myths changed with time

Pandora had another, more positive role

Ancient Greece is given more attention than other, equally deserving cultures

the OP doesn’t have sources

That’s it. That’s literally it. As for the things that this post gets wrong, let’s take it step by step:

1. Pre-Greek matriarchal religion, “nearly all traces of which were systematically erased”

This pre-Greek matriarchy is usually identified with the Minoans of Crete, who depicted many women in prominent positions in their art. Unfortunately, as I’ve outlined before, this isn’t enough to prove that the Minoans had a matriarchal society and religion. What’s more, the Minoan script (Linear A) remains undeciphered to this day. So until the Minoans can tell us about their myths, beliefs, and social hierarchy in their own voices, I’ll be very skeptical about anyone who claims they were definitely matriarchal (or patriarchal, for that matter).

As for their traces being “systematically erased”, I can only laugh. The Minoans (like the Pelasgians, i.e. the pre-Greek people of the Greek mainland) weren’t erased. The Mycenaean Greeks eventually took over Crete, but Minoan civilisation continued to exist, and many cultural and religious elements were incorporated into Mycenaean society - including writing. From an article about an early Mycenaean tomb:

The griffin warrior’s grave at Pylos offers a radical new perspective on the relationship between the two societies and thus on Europe’s cultural origins. As in previously discovered shaft graves, the objects themselves are a cross-cultural mix. For instance, the boar tusk helmet is typically Mycenaean, but the gold rings, which are rich with Minoan religious imagery and are on their own a hugely significant find for scholars, says Davis, reflect artifacts previously found on Crete.

(…) This has led Davis and Stocker to favor the idea that the two cultures became entwined at a very early stage. It’s a conclusion that fits recent suggestions that regime change on Crete around the time the mainland palaces went up, which traditionally corresponds to the decline of Minoan civilization, may not have resulted from the aggressive invasion that historians have assumed. The later period on Knossos might represent something more like “an EU in the Aegean,” says Bennet, of the British School at Athens. Minoans and Mycenaean Greeks would surely have spoken each other’s languages, may have intermarried and likely adopted and refashioned one another’s customs. And they may not have seen themselves with the rigid identities we moderns have tended to impose on them.

TL;DR: The Mycenaeans didn’t erase Minoan religion. They liked it, and syncretised it with their own.

The only reason many of these Minoan beliefs vanished was due to the Late Bronze Age collapse, which saw the end of Mycenaean Greece and Minoan-Mycenaean Crete. Many elements of early Greek civilisation were lost, or preserved in fragments thanks to mythology and epic poetry. This collapse was obviously not a systematic erasure, but a widespread destruction of civilisations, caused by foreign invasion, drought and famine, internal revolts, earthquakes, or a combination of the above. Eric Cline’s book 1177 BC: The Year Civilisation Collapsed (2014) is an excellent discussion of the topic.

2. Earlier versions of Greek myths

Any time someone mentions the “pre-patriarchal” or “original” version of a myth, be skeptical. Be very skeptical.

The problem with these “original” myths is that we have little to nothing to base them on. Their reconstruction is a theory - often a modern feminist theory - not a certainty. I should also point out, as @rembrandtswife​ did, that Lost Goddesses of Ancient Greece is “basically AU fanfic of the Greek mythology we have”. It’s retellings and speculation, not earlier myths that we can confirm existed.

You know what are earlier myths that we can confirm existed? Mesopotamian and Anatolian myths. These have been extensively studied, and it’s been shown time and time again that they influenced Greek mythology - especially Homer and Hesiod. Martin West’s The East Face of Helicon (1997) and Mary Bachvarova’s From Hittite to Homer (2016) are good introductions to the topic. Here’s a recording I made which shows obvious parallels between the Babylonian Enuma Elish, the Hurrian-Hittite Song of Kumarbi, and Hesiod’s Theogony. Looks pretty different from the modern speculative retellings, doesn’t it?

This isn’t to say that there weren’t earlier myths in which women had different, more influential and positive roles. Pandora does in fact fit into this category: her names (Pandora, “all-giving”, and Anesidora, “sending up gifts”), as well as ancient sources (scholia on Aristophanes’ Birds being one example), attest to her originally being an earth deity. Hesiod is well-known for his misogyny, so him transforming her into a mortal woman and giving her a negative role makes sense. However, I would advise against applying this theory more broadly, and taking it as proof that there was a widespread revamping of female deities to make them fit patriarchal ideals. I would especially advise against taking any of this as confirmed fact, when the “original” myths themselves are lost.

3. The Gods as archetypes

I am personally very against interpreting the Gods as archetypes (i.e. Artemis as madonna, Aphrodite as whore, etc). There are far, far more aspects to them than these, and reducing them to single-word descriptions erases the complex reality of Greek mythology (and religion, while we’re at it).

What’s more, these archetypal interpretations are incredibly modern and don’t reflect Ancient Greek perceptions. The idea that Athena is “deliberately stripped of her femininity” because she is not born from a woman, for one, sounds very much like late 20th century radical feminism. (I’d also love to know if Typhon, who was born from Hera alone (see the Homeric Hymn to Apollon), was “stripped of his masculinity” for the same reason.) But more broadly, these Jungian-like archetypes correspond perfectly to 19th century views, which liked to fit the Gods into neat categories. Most notoriously, Apollon, who represented order and enlightenment, was opposed to Dionysos, who represented chaos and madness. Thanks Nietzsche.

I’ve said this before, but to interpret Greek mythology, we need to look for Greek sources. Not the theories of a 19th century philosopher. Not the speculation of a 20th century feminist. If the Gods were viewed as complex figures in Ancient Greece, then we need to study them as complex figures. Simple as that.

4. Why we are taught Greek mythology, aka “the reason the modern West is so obsessed with Greek mythology specifically is that it aligns so closely with our own patriarchal values”

Actually, no. If you think Greek mythology aligns closely with our own values, then you’ve been reading retellings and Mythology 101 books, not the original texts. (Or, alternatively, you’re very confused about what modern society’s values are.) Here is an abridged list of gender-related values from Ancient Greece that we don’t share:

female identity is tied to weaving

rape can only happen in the countryside or in deserted places

men who cry openly are still manly

marriage is between a 15-year-old girl and a 30-year-old man

funerals are women’s business

it’s okay to have gay sex if you’re a top

wearing boots and being a shopkeeper is unmanly

and more

The more you study Ancient Greece and read the texts themselves (preferably in the original language, so as to avoid as much modern bias as possible), the more you realise how different the Ancient Greeks were from us. This is a foreign culture with foreign values. Yes, a lot of it is familiar, too - much of European civilisation has its roots in Ancient Greece, hence why it aligns with a certain number of our values. But claiming that the ideas promoted in Greek mythology are virtually identical to our own is doing a disservice to the rich, unique culture that was Ancient Greece.

So why do we focus on it so much, as opposed to other cultures? Unfortunately, this is because of how history played out. Ancient Greece highly influenced Rome, which went on to conquer most of Europe; many countries went on to claim it as their ancestor, from the Ottoman Empire to the Napoleonic Empire to Nazi Germany. Meanwhile, other cultures which had influenced Ancient Greece itself (and therefore modern Western culture) disappeared: the Hittites of Anatolia had been virtually forgotten since the Late Bronze Age, Mesopotamia was on its way out by the first century AD, and Ancient Egypt by the beginning of the Middle Ages.

As a result, a lot of emphasis is put on Ancient Greek (and Roman) culture when in reality, we don’t owe much more to it than to the Sumerians. I absolutely think that we should study other cultures more. I also absolutely think that the fact we don’t has nothing to with patriarchal values.

5. Sources, aka “I don’t have sources because I learned this in a college class like 3 years ago”

Okay, so I have nothing against people taking electives in college and posting about what they learnt. By all means, do so. But it becomes a problem when people start reblogging without fact-checking or thinking twice about information that is presented without sources, by someone with very little experience in the field, and lathered in rhetoric.

Speaking of rhetoric, other people have pointed it out in the comments, but the person who shared the Lost Goddesses of Ancient Greece book is a TERF. This obviously doesn’t mean OP is a TERF as well (I had a look through their blog and they seem not to be), but you may want to think about what ideas the LGoAG person is encouraging here, as well as what could appeal to a TERF in this post, and consider whether that’s something you want to align yourself with.

You’ve sat down at your desk. You have everything you need on your table or somewhere around you. You start to work. You think, “this is going well,” until a notification pops up on your laptop screen. And then another notification pops up on your phone. And during that period when your eyes were off of your study material, you also noticed a bag of chips, a magazine, your unfinished journal spread, your roommate bobbing their leg up and down and up and down, the pattern of the wood on your bookshelf, a text message, your bed … suddenly you can’t remember what you were supposed to be doing but instead think about how much you want to sleep. Or how hungry you are. Or how much you want to go hang out with your friends. Or your entire life choices.

I’m sure we’ve all been there. Sometimes it’s really difficult to stay focused while studying, and with all the distractions that surround us, it really isn’t surprising. However, there are ways that you can minimize the chances that you’ll give in to those distractions and focus on your work instead. Here are some that have worked for me:

Prepare for the session

The first thing you should do is clear your space. Don’t have things lying around that could make you distracted - put all your food where you can’t see them, your phone inside your bag, etc. However, there also comes a time when you have a thought that’s super important, but you can’t extend that thought or you’ll get sucked into a chain of other distracting thoughts. I like to have a notebook or piece of paper nearby where I can jot down these compulsive thoughts that I’ll get back to later - this is usually my bullet journal.

You could also find a study space where you’re the least prone to distraction. For me it’d be a cafe, since I would only have the things I brought with me. My dorm is where a lot of the distractions are: my books, all my journals and stationery, and my bed. Some people like studying in the library, but personally I find it distracting when other people around me are studying as well (especially when it’s super quiet and you can hear every pen click and page turn).

In addition, you might also want to do things like have a snack, go to the bathroom, and check your phone before you start your study session, so you won’t have the urge to do those things during your study session.

Block out your time and assign specific tasks

I’ve found that whenever I have a very vague schedule - like “I’ll study [ subject ] from 3 to 5 or something” or “I’ll complete these 5 tasks in 4 hours” or even worse “I’ll learn the whole syllabus in the next 2 months” - I don’t get as much done as I could. It’s hard to focus when you don’t really have a specific thing to focus on. You know how on the weekends especially, you have a whole list of things to do but every time you do one thing you get distracted by the thought of another? That can be solved by time blocking. Set aside a specific period of time to do a specific task, and eventually, those will accumulate into more productive hours.

It’s even more efficient to block smaller periods of time - 5 or 10 minutes or so. For example, even though I use the pomodoro technique of doing a task for 25 minutes then taking a 5-minute break, I break up those 25 minutes. If I were studying my flashcards, I might set a goal of finishing one stack - usually one topic - in 10 minutes (depending on the thickness of the stack). If I simply assigned 4 pomodoro sessions to review all my cards, this would make me prone to stretching out the amount of time I spend on a single stack, and in that stretching of time comes a loss of focus. It is a lot easier to focus for 10 minutes on one thing than 25 minutes on 3 things.

Note: What has helped me study for exams is scheduling out my time in months, and then weeks, then days, then hours, then minutes, so I’ll know the direction I’m going in, but I also won’t be overwhelmed by the amount of tasks I have to complete since I can do one small task at a time.

Practice, practice, practice

Like everything else in life, in order to be good at something, you have to practice. Learning to maintain focus is the same. At first, focusing for 25 minutes might feel hard and maybe even painful, but as you complete more pomodoro sessions, you’ll find that focusing for 25 minutes is effortless (or whatever period of time you usually work/study for).

Another way to practice focusing is by meditating. Meditating is part of my morning routine, and it’s definitely helped me stay focused in other activities, so you might wanna give that a try. 

Work alone

I can tell you that of all the group study sessions I’ve had with my friends, most of them are much less efficient than if I had chosen to work alone. (The exception was when I was stuck with a bug in my code and my friend helped me figure it out.) Friends are very distracting, and even when you promise yourselves you’ll work on assignment or that you’ll only discuss the topic you’re studying, your conversation will inevitably stray from that.

Take breaks

When you’re tired, you’re sure to be distracted, so one way of combating that is to take breaks. It refreshes you so that you have more energy to focus during your next study session.

Aside from that, you should schedule your distractions during your breaks - go to the bathroom, grab a snack, go on your phone, or during longer breaks you can talk to your friends, take a nap, etc - so that you won’t give into those compulsions during your study sessions. Because you’ve already done those distracting things, when you’re studying, you’ll end up thinking something along the lines of, “Oh, I’ve already checked Instagram five minutes ago; my phone can wait,” or “I just had a snack, I can go get another one once I’m finished.”

That’s all the tips I have for you right now about how to maintain focus while studying. I hope this has been helpful, but as usual, if you have any questions, or some of your problems aren’t covered in this post, feel free to reach out to me by dropping an ask or sending me a message. Also, linked below are several of my posts that you mind find helpful. Have an awesome day!

Relevant posts

How to Beat Procrastination

The Mandatory Midday Break

4 Secrets to Efficiency

Been wanting to do a list in this vein for sometime given my fondness for aus and have been spurred to get this in motion. This list is by no means fully comprehensive to all the aus out there. They are very much fics and au’s I’m reccing due to my own personal enjoyment from reading them so in that regard take these with a grain of salt. Search deep! There are lots of gems far out in the tags of ao3 and livejournal.

25 July 1938                                              20 Northmoor Road, Oxford

Dear Sirs,

Thank you for your letter. … I regret that I am not clear as to what you intend by arisch. I am not of Aryan extraction: that is Indo-iranian; as far as I am aware none of my ancestors spoke Hindustani, Persian, Gypsy, or any related dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people. My great-great-grandfather came to England in the eighteenth century from Germany: the main part of my descent is therefore purely English, and I am an English subject - which should be sufficient. I have been accustomed, nonetheless, to regard my German name with pride, and continued to do so throughout the period of the late regrettable war, in which I served in the English army. I cannot, however, forbear to comment that if impertinent and irrelevant inquiries of this sort are to become the rule in matters of literature, then the time is not far distant when a German name will no longer be a source of pride.

Your enquiry is doubtless made in order to comply with the laws of your own country, but that this should be held to apply to the subjects of another state would be improper, even if it had (as it has not) any bearings whatsoever on the merits of my work or its suitability for publication, of which you appear to have satisfied yourselves without reference to my Abstammung.

I trust you will find this reply satisfactory, and remain yours faithfully

J.R.R. Tolkien.

(Letter 30)

“You clap for us now.”

— Britain’s immigrants and children of immigrants who are key workers 

Je ne peux parler de français, anon. I studied French for four years in and stopped around 8th grade, so it’s been well over 7 years since I’ve learned the language. I wish I had spent some time in Quebec but I’m from Western Canada and never had the opportunity to so I just learned the basics while I was a student. 

I’ve only seen a handful of French films so I can recommend the ones I’ve seen and loved, here are a few

Jeux D’Enfants (this made me cry out of joy and love)

Amour

Amelie 

La Vie En Rose

The Artist 

Blue is the Warmest Colour 

Les Parapluies de Cherbourg (haven’t actually seen this one but the score is beautiful, I assume the film is as well)

Inglorious Basterds (has a bit of French in it with German, English and Italian)

Allied (has some French)

Paris J’taime (not all French, but mostly)

Un long dimanche de fiançailles (this is very sweet, I loved this one)

Adieu a la Reine 

Jeune & Jolie (approach with caution, can be quite graphic)

Coco Avant Chanel