We had our first group conversation yesterday!
Firstly, itâs a lot easier to tolerate Hesiod when you realize heâs a republican. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps? Be good to your neighbor? Dislikes brother for going to government to redo inheritance? Thinks âhe who trusts womankind trusts deceiversâ but feels entitled to a sweet wife?
Iâm also going to go on a tangent about the actual texts in English. First of all, the book makes zero effort to keep the line breaks of poetry. Given that these were poems, I feel like weâre losing something there, but itâs something that is perhaps impossible to translate so why bother?
Iâm thinking about the girl who commented on reading the Iliad in Spanish and how much easier it was to read. And I feel like thatâs part of our issue. Why did they put womankind instead of âwomenâ? Because it sounds cooler? Is this equivalent to the formality the poem was written in or were these more casual things, like what youâd read in a newspaper? Like how Jane Eyre is tedious to read but in the past that was how people spoke. Except thatâs inexcusable here because Iâm not convinced itâs representative of the poetry. After all, they donât bother to keep the line breaks and Iâm to think they stick with the formality?
The other thing Iâve been thinking about is what books Iâd give someone in 500 years to learn about today. The âHow to talk to anyone: 93 tips and tricksâ is a) idealized and b) already a bit outdated in its anecdotes. Now, we have the ready defense that the world is more globalized and itâs the age of information. But if so, shouldnât there be something we can point to?
To continue on my tangent: a few weeks ago I did some editing for someone online. What I read was science fiction, so perhaps not applicable. But it was bad. It was cliche`. It was sexist (see, something for Hesiod in there!). What if someone took that and thought that attitude was representative of us? Worse, what if it is and I donât realize?Â
Anyway, moving on. Homer writing about the theoretical Mycenean heroes through the modern lens! Imposing todayâs social structure with ancient stories and assuming thatâs how it always is!Â
HELLO GRRM. Probably one of the easiest comparisons. Iâd be curious about the word count different. (For reference, the Illiad+Odyssey are a little shy of 300k words, about the length of A Game of Thrones, the shortest of his) (but also when I was looking up something about learning Greek, the first thing you find is always ancient Greek. (Even at tufts, we have a âGreekâ major and fun fact I would not have applied if Tufts had, like EVERY OTHER SCHOOL I APPLIED TO, posted their entire course catalog so I could see they donât offer MODERN Greek) and they were talking about how much more efficient words were in ancient Greek).
Anyway. This is my real world connection. The metric ton of sexism, rape, and childrape is defended as being historically accurate. TLDR is itâs not, itâs just assuming since we had feminism in the 1900s which made things better for women (and were fought every step of the way, because at every point itâs âdonât you have enoughâ) that things must have been linearly bad in the past. But the actual evidence doesnât support that.
But Homer can get a pass I guess. He may not have even been a person so meh.Â
Thinking about the philanthropy and how LV + other billionaires donated how many hundred million for notre dame when it and people still be dying from hunger and exposure. But theyâre really unaccountable. After all, back in the day, you KNEW who was who, right? But today, it wouldnât even occur to me to be specifically irritated with some nameless billionaire who donates for PR.