Author Topic: Ovid's Metamorphoses (Read 116471 times)

JoanK · « **Reply #640 on:** February 24, 2016, 05:42:35 PM »

The Fall of Phaethon by Sebastiano Ricci, 1703-04, Belluno

---http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph.htm#488381088---Translated by A.S. Kline...(This one has its own built in clickable dictionary)...

---http://classics.mit.edu /Ovid/metam.html...---Translated by Sir Samuel Garth, John Dryden, et al

---- http://www.theoi.com/Text/OvidMetamorphoses1.html----Translated by Brookes More

Family Tree of the Gods and Goddesses of Greece and Rome:

-------http://www.talesbeyondbelief.com/roman-gods/roman-gods-family-tree.htm

-------http://www.talesbeyondbelief.com/greek-gods-mythology/greek-gods-family-tree.htm

For Your Consideration:

“Week” Four: Phaethon!

Bk I:747-764 Phaethon’s parentage
Bk I:765-779 Phaethon sets out for the Palace of the Sun
Bk II:1-30 The Palace of the Sun
Bk II:31-48 Phaethon and his father

What Do You Think?

1. Are there any themes which appear in the beginning of the Phaethon story while it's still in Book I which could happen today?

2. Why is Clymene angry?

Let's discuss the end of Book I.

Former Questions, Still up for Grabs:

1. What to you is the saddest thing in the Io story?

2. This story is full of beautiful descriptions. Which lines particularly struck you? Do they interfere with the plot line?

3. What effect do the flashback elements and the interruption of the Pan and Syrinx have on the reader's feelings for Io?

4. What would you say is the tone of the Io story?

5. This is quite a story, it has two metamorphoses and two aetiological myths in it. Which one is the most important?

6. What might Io's struggles to communicate symbolize in our own time?

7. Who actually has the last word in this section?

8. What's your impression of Io's father?

9. If you had to choose between being Io or Daphne, which one would you choose? Why?

Discussion Leaders: PatH and ginny

JoanK · « **Reply #641 on:** February 24, 2016, 05:50:22 PM »

Good. Now we know. and if we only had M's translation (and didn't know Latin), we wouldn't. And if we only had M's and one other, we would be confused.

Now, of course, I wouldn't trust M's translation as far as I could throw it.

by the way, check the painting in the heading.

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #642 on:** February 24, 2016, 07:53:22 PM »

https://www.facebook.com/hellojoyus/videos/1014617685272763/

howshap · « **Reply #643 on:** February 24, 2016, 09:32:05 PM »

Two points. First, Apollo's fault was in swearing an oath on the river Styx that he could not thereafter forswear.

Second, the question of who started the "nyah, nyah" contest between Epaphus and Phaeton is answered definitively by Ginny's translation. Interestingly, Ted Hughes version of the tale does not even mention Epaphus. Hughes pares the story down to beautiful English poetry, but reduces the beginning to these lines:

When Phaethon bragged about his father, Phoebus
The sun-god,
His friends mocked him. "Your mother must be crazy,
Or you're crazy to believe her.
How could the sun be anybody's father?"

That opening is a long way from Ovid's Latin.

bellamarie · « **Reply #644 on:** February 24, 2016, 10:21:14 PM »

Ginny, I have researched numerous sites trying to find one that supports your standing that Phaethon was not the first to begin the boasting and belittling of Epaphus, and have been unable to find even one. Please let's move on. There comes a point we have to agree to disagree. Even your Latin translation FOR ME supports Phaethon was the first to boast, and insult, and his behavior from that point on shows his immaturity, boastfulness, refusal to even believe his own mother so he goes to his father who tells him, yes I am your father, but that still is not enough, he demands proof by wanting one wish, that proves to be a death wish.

You can argue Mandelbaum's translation is false, but I only typed the exact words from my book. We all agreed to use various translations when we began the discussion, so I think it's only fair we not try to discredit any of the translations. I am not trying to defend Mandelbaum's translation. It happens to be the one my library had available. I have never heard of Ovid before this discussion so I am feeling like you are attacking me for using quotes from Mandelbaum's translation. This has gone far beyond necessary. Please, let's move on.

howshap,

Quote

Second, the question of who started the "nyah, nyah" contest between Epaphus and Phaeton is answered definitively by Ginny's translation.

Then why in all the other translations we have provided has it been about Epaphus and Phaeton, and in every site I have gone to in the last week which are numerous, say it was Epaphus and Phaeton? If we are to say Ginny's translation is the ONLY one we can go by then why would we even bother reading any other translation but that one?

Regardless of who's says what......Phaethon has as I said above, showed immaturity, bad judgement, bad behavior and acted like a spoiled child. He brought his death upon himself for not standing up to whoever challenged his lineage, by not taking his mother's word, and then forcing his father to prove it by giving him his wish that would ultimately lead to his death. That is the entire point of this section, no matter who was involved in questioning his lineage. I am done discussing this. I'm beginning to feel like Epaphus and Phaethon in a ----ing contest.

bellamarie · « **Reply #645 on:** February 24, 2016, 10:36:36 PM »

JoanK.,

Quote

Now, of course, I wouldn't trust M's translation as far as I could throw it.

So do we also discredit every scholar, and every site on the internet that discusses the section of Epaphus and Phaethon by name? What about the translations PatH., provided that also mentions Epaphus and Phaethon? Do we also not trust them as far as we can throw them? I am so confused?

Ginny,

Quote

What others? Where do you see anybody BUT Mandlebaum talking about Phaethon saying he was better than Epaphus? Not in this discussion. In fact they are all saying, including mine, the same thing. Mandlebaum is the odd man out.

Here are different translations that PatH., provided to us, and I have highlighted to show indeed other than Mandelbaum uses the names Epaphus, and or Inachus' grandson who is one in the same.

PatH., Posts 8545

Ginny, my Lombardo was findable. Here's the passage:
He had a friend, well-matched in age and spirit,
Phaethon, a child of the sun, who once began boasting
Of his solar parentage and would not back down
When Inachus’ grandson rejected his claim:
“You’re crazy to believe all your mother says,
And you’re swellheaded about your imagined father.”
Phaethon turned red. He repressed his anger out of shame
But brought Epaphus’ slander to his mother, Clymene:

Martin was hiding, but I tracked him down:

He had a friend, like him in age and spirit,
named Phaethon, the sun god’s child, One day
this boy was boasting, and in vanity
would not take second place to Epaphus,
so proud he was that Phoebus was his father.
The grandson of Inachus could not bear it:
“You are a fool—to trust your mother’s lies!
You’re swollen with false notions of your father!”
Phaethon blushed, and in embarrassment,
repressed the awful anger that he felt;
he went back to his mother, Clymene,
and told her what the other boy had said.

And here's Kline:

He had a friend, Phaethon, child of the Sun, equal to him in spirit and years, who once boasted proudly that Phoebus was his father, and refused to concede the claim, which Inachus’s grandson could not accept. ‘You are mad to believe all your mother says, and you have an inflated image of your father.’ Phaethon reddened but, from shame, repressed his anger, and went to his mother Clymene with Inachus’s reproof.
________________________________

And of course here is Mandelbaum
"claimed that he was better born than Epaphus"

If you go to this link it has Ovid's Metamorphoses not only in Latin, but it has the English translation alongside it. On page 46 it too says in both languages Epaphus and Phaethon have their ----ing contest.

https://archive.org/stream/metamorphosestra00oviduoft#page/46/mode/2up

bellamarie · « **Reply #646 on:** February 24, 2016, 11:07:23 PM »

Barb, that video is beautiful!!!

bellamarie · « **Reply #647 on:** February 25, 2016, 12:22:08 AM »

Here are the pages 46 and 47 that covers this section, in Latin and in English:

https://archive.org/stream/metamorphosestra00oviduoft#page/46/mode/2up

JoanK · « **Reply #648 on:** February 25, 2016, 02:00:20 AM »

BARB: beautiful, indeed! I had no idea that all white peacocks existed.

I'm sorry if I fanned the flames in the controversy over Phaeton and Epaphus. I agree with Bellamarie: let's agree to disagree. No matter which started it, it's Phaeton we are concerned with here: Epaphus plays his part and disappears from the stage (my spellcheck doesn't even recognize his name, whereas it does recognize Phaeton}. And there's no question Phaeton acts immaturely.

JoanK · « **Reply #649 on:** February 25, 2016, 02:16:14 AM »

Acrtually, at the risk of opening the discussion all over again, I bet I have a guess as to what the source of confusion is. According to Ginny's translation, Phaeton is "not yielding to him, (Epaphus)"

What does that mean? Yielding what? I know in some societies, precedence is all important: who is seated and served at dinner before whom etc. and go by rank. Such things may seem trivial to us, but in some cultures are sources of great pride. If P would not yield pride of place to E (went before him, say, or refusing to honor a request or order) this would be the equivalent of saying "you are lower born than me."

GINNY:Does this make sense in Roman society?

PatH · « **Reply #650 on:** February 25, 2016, 10:04:24 AM »

One aspect we're shortchanging a bit is the sheer beauty of the poem. Bellamarie pointed out the beautifully crafted mourning of Clymene for her son. There's also the glorious description of the palace of the Sun, so full of splendor. And we're about to come to Phaethon's ride--that really blew me away.

bellamarie · « **Reply #651 on:** February 25, 2016, 10:06:58 AM »

JoanK., You did not fan the flames. I am just frustrated because in every translation and language it is clear from the beginning of XV There is the set up for this to take place between Epaphus and Phaeton. They are trying to show they are either on equal ground, or even better than each other. I am certain in any culture, at any time of any century this is important, but it seems to be placed in this poem to set the entire scenes to come in Book ll.

I took the text of Latin and translated it into English, and words of course are not EXACT, but shows there is no question these two are having a tit for tat, which leads to Phaeton questioning his lineage. Phaeton is furious not only with Epaphus, but he is furious with himself for not being able to stand up to Epaphus. This just escalates and from this point on Phaeton's actions are irrational, and immature, which ultimately leads to Book ll, his demise.

XV. Huic Epaphus magni genitus de semine
Tandem
Creditur esse Jovis: perque urbes juncta parenti
Templa tenet. Tuit huic animis aqualis et annis,
Sole satus Phaeton: quem quondam magna lo_
Quentem,
Nec sibi cedentem, Phoeboq: parente superbum
Nontulit Inachides: matrique, ait, omnia demens
Credis: et es tumidus genitoris imagine falsi.
Erubuit Phaeton, iramque pudore repressit: 755
Et tulit ad Clymenen Epaphi convicia matrem.
Quoque magis doleas, genitrix, ait, Ille ego liber,
Ille ferox tacui: pudet haec opprobria nobis
Et dici potuisse, et non potuisse refelli.
At tu, si modo sum coelesti stirpe creates, 760
Ede notam tanti generis: meque assere coelo.
Dixit: et implicuit materno brachia collo;
Perque suum, Meropisq; caput taedasq; sororum,
Traderet, oravit, very sibi signa parentis.

15. At last, this is believed to be Epaphus, was born of the seed of Jupiter: and throughout the cities joined temples with his mother. Of water, and it was made in the minds of this years, the sun start the Phaeton, which was formerly called Magna lo_ follows, Do not let her effect, his Phoeboq: your parents' brooked not Inachides: and his mother, and said, Do you believe that all things out of his mind, and the image of the father of what is false are so puffed up. Blushed Phaeton, and rage at a sense of shame restrained: 755 And he took the taunts of Epaphus to his mother, Clymene. And by how much sorrow, Mother of God, he said, it was me, the bold and I was silent: I am ashamed to us, And the reproaches of those who could be said to these things, and that I could not be refuted. But you, if I am the heavenly stock, 760 give proof of that kind, and that I claimed as heaven. Then he clasps his mother's arms and neck; Through his Meropisq; head taeda sq; sisters, death, and prayed, and very made signs to his father.
______________________________________________________

XV. Epaphus tandem creditor esse genitus huic de semine magni Jovis; temetque temyla juncta parenti per urbes, Phaeton satus sole fuit equalis huic animis et annisquam Inachidez non tulit, loquentem quondam magna, nec cedentem sibi, superbum que parente Phabo; uitque, demands, credits omnia matri; et es tumidus imagine false genitors. Phaeton erubuit, re-pressitque iram pudore, et tulit convicia Epaphi ad matrem Clymenen. Antique quo genitrix magis doleus; ego ille liber, ille ferox tacui. Pudet et hac opprobria potuisse dici nobis, et non potuisse refelli. At tu, si modo sum creates stirpe calesti, ede notam tanti generis; que assere me calo. Dixit; et implicuit brachia collo materno. Oravitque per suum caput, perque caput Meropis, tudesque sororum, ut traderet sibi signa very parentis.

15. Epaphus, at length, the creditor is to be begotten of the seed of this great Jupiter; temetque temyl joined his father in the cities, the Phaeton starts sun was equal to their courage and for whom Inachidez not taken, once the speaking voice, not yielding to him, arrogant parent Phabo; he moved, out of his mind, do you believe all things to his mother; and are bloated image false genitors. Phaeton chain, re-pressitque anger, shame, and took the abuse to his mother Epaphus Clymenen. And says the mother suffers; Yes, he has, the bold and I became dumb. I am ashamed of this, and the rebukes of them that could be said to be our, and that I could not be refuted. Oh, if only I was made the family of the heavenly, give proof of that kind; and board for me to heat. He said; and clasps his arms around her mother's. And the people by His own head, and by the head of Merops, tudesque sisters together, to deliver very made signs to his father.

__________________________________________

I am not a Latin expert and am in no way attempting to seem as one. I am only discussing the poem in the form I see it, with as much help from sites of scholars discussing it over the centuries, as well as graduates and undergraduates writing theses on this poem. As I stated, I have diligently searched the internet trying to show where this scene in not as it seems and can not find even one. If you even type into Google, Epaphus and Phaeton's names it will direct you to numerous sites telling of their dispute in this poem.

I thought this was a pretty accurate and cute pic to show what these two probably looked like acting like children. Just a little humor to lighten the discussion.

bellamarie · « **Reply #652 on:** February 25, 2016, 10:11:55 AM »

PatH., Yes, I was taken aback by the beauty of the scene with the mother and sisters. The chariot ride takes you through so much descriptiveness that I imagined it on a movie screen. Not knowing this poem before discussing it here, I was in total shock that Phaeton dies. But then, the Earth and everything else would have been destroyed if Jove did not put an end to it, and Phaeton.

PatH · « **Reply #653 on:** February 25, 2016, 10:37:24 AM »

That's a hoot, Bellamarie. Where did you find it?

I didn't know the poem before now--never read Ovid before--but I did know the story, so I knew what was coming.

bellamarie · « **Reply #654 on:** February 25, 2016, 11:27:18 AM »

PatH., Google, I typed in pics of Epaphus and Phaeton and this was there. I thought it was pretty funny.

https://www.google.com/search?q=pics+of+epaphus+and+phaeton&rlz=1C1RNRA_enUS507US507&espv=2&biw=1093&bih=514&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj4tN26qZPLAhWGqB4KHYW0CaUQsAQIHg#imgdii=RUzReFZsyukJsM%3A%3BRUzReFZsyukJsM%3A%3BFoFEQnx1ZvhJTM%3A&imgrc=RUzReFZsyukJsM%3A

ginny · « **Reply #655 on:** February 25, 2016, 02:01:47 PM »

Bellamarie, what is this? It's in the post beginning:

Quote

I took the text of Latin and translated it into English, and words of course are not EXACT, but shows there is no question these two are having a tit for tat, which leads to Phaeton questioning his lineage.

This post ends:

Quote

I am not a Latin expert and am in no way attempting to seem as one. I am only discussing the poem as I see it

Quote

15. Epaphus, at length, the creditor is to be begotten of the seed of this great Jupiter; temetque temyl joined his father in the cities, the Phaeton starts sun was equal to their courage and for whom Inachidez not taken, once the speaking voice, not yielding to him, arrogant parent Phabo;

I don't know what language this is. What does temetque temyl mean?

bellamarie · « **Reply #656 on:** February 25, 2016, 02:30:25 PM »

Ginny, I am done responding to this topic. I have asked respectfully to agree to disagree, I have asked that we go on. I am not a Latin scholar, I am just trying to enjoy this discussion without having to defend or explain any further. You do not agree with me or the many others, so please let it go.

I will drop out of this discussion since it is nearing the end. I can not be upset by these posts any longer. I've tried in every way to make it light and humorous to go on.

Thank you to the moderators for your time and work you put into this discussion. I have appreciated and enjoyed learning about Ovid and the Metamorphoses poem. Some parts of the poem is very beautiful and some parts I found very troubling, but the poem has lasted a lifetime and beyond and will continue to be read, analyzed, and discussed centuries from now.

Ciao for now~

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #657 on:** February 25, 2016, 04:27:55 PM »

Good grief started to add my two cents early today and forgot I had the window open so that I've finally finished my e-mail and facebook - do not even remember what I was going to add here - ah so - all is well and the sun will still rise in the morning...

ginny · « **Reply #658 on:** February 25, 2016, 07:36:10 PM »

My goodness. I am pretty sure if I had put temetque temyl in any sentence I would expect to be asked what it meant. Sorry for the upset.

Let's look at the palace of the Sun god, then.

The beginning of Book II contains some of the most glorious lines in Roman poetry, they are almost breathtaking. And Ovid takes his time with them, lingering lovingly on how dazzling this must seem to Phaethon (and to us).

This long description is called an ekphrasis (or ecphrasis) .

Quote

Initially, ekphrasis was a rhetorical term like many others taught to Greek students. Teachers of rhetoric taught ekphrasis as a way of bringing the experience of an object to a listener or reader through highly detailed descriptive writing. Ekphrasis was one of the last rhetorical exercises students were taught and the challenge was to bring the experience of a person, a place, or a thing to an audience. The true use of ekphrasis was not to simply provide astute details of an object, but to share the emotional experience and content with someone who had never encountered the work in question. The student of ekphrasis was encouraged to lend their attention not only to the qualities immediately available in an object, but to make efforts to embody qualities beyond the physical aspects of the work they were observing .http://csmt.uchicago.edu/glossary2004/ekphrasis.htm

So this label means there is more here than meets the eye. But what's here is spectacular enough. I can't think of any other passage anywhere which is so breathtaking.

Lombardo says:

The palace of the Sun soared high on its columns,
Bright with the glint of gold and fiery bronze.
The gables were capped with gleaming ivory,
And the double doors were radiant with silver.

The workmanship surpassed the material,
For Vulcan had carved there the seas that surround
The central lands, the disk of earth, and the sky
That overcharges all. The sea held dark blue gods,

Then later..

He (Phaethon) turned to move toward him, but stopped in his tracks,
Unable to bear the brightness at closer range,
Robed in purple, Phoebus sat on a throne
Brilliant with emeralds. To his right and left stood
Day and Month and Year and Century,
And the seasons stationed at equal intervals.
Young Spring was there wearing a crown of flowers;
Summer stood there nude, with a gnarled of grain;
Autumn was stained with the juice of trodden grapes
And icy Winter bristled with hair white as snow.

What a picture! What a dazzling scene. And poor Phaethon is much the outsider here.

Those symbols of the seasons, personified. Marvelous. Why is Summer nude, do you think?

And there's more, much more. Which lines in this section seemed to speak to you?

What is your impression of the world in which the Sun god lives? Does it symbolize anything?

I personally love the doors.

ginny · « **Reply #659 on:** February 25, 2016, 07:54:25 PM »

That's an astute thought, Joan K:

Actually, at the risk of opening the discussion all over again, I bet I have a guess as to what the source of confusion is. According to Ginny's translation, Phaeton is "not yielding to him, (Epaphus)"

What does that mean? Yielding what? I know in some societies, precedence is all important: who is seated and served at dinner before whom etc. and go by rank. Such things may seem trivial to us, but in some cultures are sources of great pride. If P would not yield pride of place to E (went before him, say, or refusing to honor a request or order) this would be the equivalent of saying "you are lower born than me."

Yielding (ceding: literally, cedentem) the point in this case. But you make a good point. I can't think of one society or culture anywhere which toes not have status symbols. We today can relate to that. The Romans of course were big on status, but these are children, and children everywhere in every time including 2016 brag, and children challenge each other and usually neither one will yield the point to the other.

So you have a childhood argument which escalates with verbal mud slinging, some of the things children say to each other are absolutely horrendous, but they are children and don't have control of their emotions or themselves and they usually end up scuffling on the ground.

I don't know how old Phaethon is. How old do you all think he is?

I can think of modern politicians, in fact, some quite recently, hahaha, who omit the scuffling on the ground but not the rest. It's timeless behavior; how clever of Ovid to introduce it into his myth: we can relate to it today. Other myths about this omit some of the details, some don't have Clymene in it at all, etc.

It's timeless behavior. Ovid has added all these details, and they are fascinating, especially in this episode.

ginny · « **Reply #660 on:** February 25, 2016, 11:20:31 PM »

Thank you, Howard, I just saw your comments, and I appreciate that. Esoecially coming from somebody who I'm sure could have translated it himself.

That's a very good point, also, about the River Styx. Phoebus Apollo was the god of prophecy also. Doesn't it make you wonder why he couldn't realize what was going to happen?

The reasons why he may not have might be quite interesting, I think.

One might say he was as impetuous as his son in deciding to give the gift without really thinking ahead as to what might happen if he did. Or? He was so caught up in the moment?

Of course fairytales are full of being granted wishes and not thinking of the consequences. Mythology is, too. Thinking of the Sibyl of Cumae who actually, when Apollo fell in love with her, asked her what it would take for her to be in love with him , and she said I want to live as many years as there are grains of sand where they were. But she neglected to ask for youth along with that, and as a consequence, had her sad end. Actually when you come to think of it she was a prophetess herself, wasn't she?

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #661 on:** February 26, 2016, 12:01:56 AM »

I think this site is a good one - the site explains what a translator does - the site explains not only how and why words different from the literal translation are used but also, how authors offer their different interpretations.

Here is a short excerpt followed by the link...

OH yes, a reminder, as Ginny said, she was not translating as a 'writer' but was giving a literal translation that we read in this article, Why Translation Matters.

What exactly do we literary translators do to justify the notion that the term “writer” actually applies to us? Aren’t we simply the humble, anonymous handmaids-and-men of literature, the grateful, ever-obsequious servants of the publishing industry? In the most resounding yet decorous terms I can muster, the answer is no, for the most fundamental description of what translators do is that we write—or perhaps rewrite—in language B a work of literature originally composed in language A, hoping that readers of the second language—I mean, of course, readers of the translation—will perceive the text, emotionally and artistically, in a manner that parallels and corresponds to the aesthetic experience of its first readers. This is the translator’s grand ambition. Good translations approach that purpose. Bad translations never leave the starting line.

Read more: http://www.wordswithoutborders.org/article/from-why-translation-matters#ixzz41DkpSbuU

We have read on many sites how writers cannot leave themselves and their time in history behind - thus we have different interpretations of the same stories - so again, there is no right and wrong - and to fault an authority is not a personal attack, it is simply saying that your sensibilities are closer to writer A versus writer B and all writers are offering an interpretation rather than a literal translation.

We are adding to the understanding of these stories, rather than looking for a group approval - there is evidently no definitive translation among the many available published 'writers' who translate Ovid - To acknowledge differences between us, it is really not a case of 'agreeing to disagree' because, that connotes a disagreement with some in the group rather than, a disagreement with the 'writer' we choose - we do not need to look for the groups official permission and approval - We add our thoughts and what we deduce. We offer an expert as our backup authority where needed - We do not have to prove and reprove our choice of 'writer' so that our chose prevails as 'the' authority, agreed upon by the group so that we can feel secure - we are not in question - again, what is in question is the 'writer' we choose and how closely the writer adheres to the literal translation.

I Love how the word 'agency' is being used so often today to describe our state of belief, values, behavior and action in life as operating from within, expressed as our hum, song, noise, buzz, thrum, busyness, our state of being independent yet, within the framework of society.

All to say when we disagree with an authority - our agency in not in question - in tact is our respect for each other, however we may disagree with the authority we each choose.

After reading the web link about the work of translators, I am seeing that Ovid was a 'writer' and that would explain why his sharing of some of the stories is a bit different from other ancient writers.

This is so good - right up my alley

since I have latched onto the concept that one of the values of myths is for the exploration of our inner life - delving into what we had no words to explain - or seeing a characteristic played out in a myth. The myth then offers us meaning and a greater understanding of ourselves.

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #662 on:** February 26, 2016, 01:56:36 AM »

aha - I cannot believe this - OK because of the exploration between one 'writer' and the literal translation - back and forth to show the correctness of each - I have a new appreciation for Phaeton's dilemma.

First of all, for me all the platitudes about harmony versus being right and all the junk we have been told why we should not strongly disagree - out the window - because, what I saw, there is another deeper issue that is the real issue rather than the back and forth that is the tug over what should be the 'correct' viewpoint. Therefore look for the deeper issue.

The deeper issue that I see was over literary authority. Which authority is doing the better job of telling the story. From the web site about translations, both authorities are valid. The problem is how a particular authority's views square themselves with our life experiences, skills, values, beliefs - how we hum and thrum and therefore, whom we can accept as an authority - of course, if you have years of skill translating then you really are the authority, which does not make the 'writer' wrong, only an authority that does not fit. And so, it appears there was a consensus desired, for a winning authority, that was the outcome of measuring a 'writer' to how close he came to the literal translation.

Earlier as we discussed Ovid, we would never have been imagined the question as an issue. Now we know it can make a difference - And we know, we do not have to disagree since both the writer and the literal have been given new value. As a result of this discussion, this group now knows how to look at a translation and how to measure 'writers', comparing them to each other and then to the literal translation.

The result for me of seeing the deeper issue as one of authority, opened my eyes to see Phaeton from a new perspective. I see the story not so much that he is taunted by his friend but think, if you were all of a sudden told you were adopted you would want to know more about your birth dad. Not only that but, as most teen or young boys feel unsure and questioning themselves against the man they admired from childhood and they are not yet feeling as powerful as they would like, they would think, maybe I'm made closer to my 'real' dad rather than my adopted dad. And, if not and they know their 'real' dad is a powerful guy, they would want to claim some of that. So they think, first I have to prove to myself that I have some of the greatness of my 'real' dad and I am not really just the son of this adopted dad.

So off he goes to measure himself with his 'real' dad. Still not sure if he measures up to his own idea of how he should feel he decides to take on one of the daring deeds that his dad performs with ease every day.

I can see Phaeton questioning his power - his agency - his self-knowledge - comparing it to both dads to determine for himself what is true or not because, if his mother did keep this from him than he is in the awkward position of ever trusting his mother again, and that hurts. That is not what he expected to have to face this early in his life - he still needs a mother - So, is his weakness while handling the chariot because he ruminated over how the proof he was looking for was cutting him off from the trust he had in his mother.

I think the tit for tat he had with the friend was nothing in comparison to the big question he had to be having within himself. This was bigger than childhood school yard baiting - this was about who he believed, not what he was told, but who he believed was his father based on seeing characteristics of one or the other in himself and then, having to acknowledge if the sun really was his dad then he was no longer able to trust his mom's word.

It all comes down to the word - the authority of the word - just as the authority of the word is at question as to the translation of the story.

Phaeton's loss of control suggests to me some questions are so big, an outside force keeps us from ourselves because, we cannot handle the dilemma with which we are faced - That dilemma is so great we would take others down with us if we continued. It is not so much that Phaeton dies as what he represents, the dilemma dies, the choices he would have to make was stopped. Those of us hearing, reading the story are offered no instruction - no teaching how to handle our future if we have a choice that would ravage and lay waste our heart and soul. This powerful god Zeus/Jupiter leaves us to fathom such a choice.

JoanK · « **Reply #663 on:** February 26, 2016, 04:55:34 PM »

"I don't know how old Phaethon is. How old do you all think he is?" 18?

BARB: interesting description of a translators job. I'd say my translator (Lombardo) has done a good job. Although some of Ovid's writing is so vivid, it might come through any translation.

JoanK · « **Reply #664 on:** February 26, 2016, 04:56:27 PM »

BARB: "We have read on many sites how writers cannot leave themselves and their time in history behind - thus we have different interpretations of the same stories - so again, there is no right and wrong .."

This is always an important point when dealing with material from a different culture or time. We are all prisoners of our own time and place. We Sociologists have a saying: the fish cannot see the water they swim in. In order to see it, we have to get out of it and look back.

this is one of the values of going to a different time and place, either physically, or through books. what does reading Ovid tell us about not only ancient Roman society, but, reading it and looking back, about our own?

JoanK · « **Reply #665 on:** February 26, 2016, 05:03:04 PM »

Thinking about my own question: what does reading Ovid tell us about OUR society? without judging which is better or worse?

No I cant leave the judging out of it. Our view of women IS better. But what do they do better? the sense of wonder? Have we seen too many beautiful palaces in bad movies to be able to see them any more?

The sense of wondering why things are what they are? Do we ask what amber is? We leave those question to a few who become scientists, and give answers too complicated for most of us to understand (or so we think), so we can go on taking amber for granted and not wonder if it's women's tears?

I'm babbling!

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #666 on:** February 26, 2016, 05:24:36 PM »

"what does reading Ovid tell us about OUR society? without judging which is better or worse?"

Not sure what Ovid tells me about our society but what I am learning is that hidden in a story is often a greater lesson that does not show itself easily on the surface - or maybe it is because these stories fit many situations.

I shouldn't be shocked but it is always an eye opener to read how many human events have a similar reaction although, we live thousands of years apart in different cultures with different values and traditions.

I'm thinking the action we take is where we see the differences where as an emotional reaction is from our feeling nature - although, thinking a bit, I can see how a culture would view various events through the lens of their culture and that would affect their emotional reaction -

hmm sounds more like a philosophical discussion doesn't it. Hmm maybe that is what we do here - we share from different viewpoints therefore we can learn from each other. hmm

found this link that is focused on this very question.
http://www.cyc-net.org/features/viewpoints/viewpoint-150930.html

As to the judging part - it is too easy isn't it to judge based on our view of something without resorting to our knee jerk reaction but rather to see what we are judging as an opportunity to ask questions and find the rational for what we see as different - or am I describing being judgmental which is a bit different that straight up judging - I guess there must be an agreed upon measurement for judging to take place.

ginny · « **Reply #667 on:** February 27, 2016, 10:24:30 AM »

Gee what wonderful thoughts. That's a super article, Barbara, on translations and it goes a long way to explain why there are so many, and every year a new one. I've forgotten how many translations there are of the Iliad, but there are an incredible number. You'd think that nobody would ever have anything to say, new, wouldn't you? But different cultures and times call for different idioms and different ways of communicating what's happening. That last translation by Lombardo and Fagles of the Aeneid proves this once and for all. Two learned men, two completely different takes, both accurate. That's not easy to do.

And even in a literal translation the translator can make choices. They may not be earthshaking but they do represent the translator.

I saw this the other day and thought it pertained to what we're talking about. This pertains to plays of Shakespeare on ancient themes and people:

"All plays about historical events deal both with the past and with the present. Anachronism is thus, in one form or another, the necessary condition of their being. Not even the most learned historian could avoid it, because the past is only partly knowable, because we cannot wholly detach ourselves from our own time, and because any presentation of the past in contemporary language will involve accommodations. " Shakespeare and the Uses of Antiquity: An Introductory Essay" by Michelle Martindale

And I loved your musing on the themes in the Phaethon story, they are all there and they are not strange to us in 2016 or anybody else. Sort of Universal themes.

Joan K, if that's babbling I wish I could do it, how beautifully you and Barbara write!

Have we seen too many beautiful palaces in bad movies to be able to see them any more I wonder if that's the only place most of us can see them now. What a thought!

What an interesting thought. That set me off thinking about Downton Abbey for some reason. I love the provocative ideas and musings that this group comes up with as a whole. Ovid was doing sort of a movie himself here in the opening lines of the palace description, because his introduction to the Palace of the Sun God was a stock description, the tall pillars, the gold roof, of what the ancients expected as their "movie" version of a great palace. They would have been at home and very familiar with it just as we are Downton Abbey, even if we've never actually lived that lifestyle, we can fancy ourselves doing it and Brideshead, too.

I go to Biltmore House a lot and inevitably somebody will say Oh I couldn't live here, it's too big, it's too...whatever, and you want turn around and say are you nuts? hahahaa But I do know what they mean. But a child would make plans where he'd put his toys and who would live there with him, children are so much freer, (and honest) .

ginny · « **Reply #668 on:** February 27, 2016, 10:51:32 AM »

It seems to me, and I might be wrong, that the themes running through this so far are themes we can all relate to.

A child (or 70 year old for that matter) wanting to know his ancestry. The theme of order out of chaos. At first we had the creation, order out of chaos. Then we had the 4 Ages starting with order, then disintegrating into chaos. Then we had the Flood, chaos, and a new beginning. We have Jupiter at the head of a Pantheon of gods, who seem to be fallible in their decisions and desires. So in a way is the leadership itself here causing the chaos instead of harmony and order? And what does that mean? It's widely felt this description of the Palace of the Sun God is allegorical. In what way?

Enter the Sun God, living a bit less humbly than he does in the Jimmy Dean Sausage commercials on TV in 2016.

The Palace of the Sun God. seems to me a very orderly place. Time itself, the Hours, the Days, the Weeks, the Months, the Years, the Centuries, all stand in their proper place. The Hours are personified. All these elements wait in their proper places and order around the throne for the Sun King, who sets the world in motion. Everything is in harmony as it should be.

The doors seem to represent this. The fantastically wrought doors with the signs of the zodiac on the right and the left. The gigantic doors of the Temple of Apollo were described by Propertius and Vergil (in the latter's case, imaginary temple), they are almost a trope. The modern visitor to Rome today can get an idea of the ancient idea of door splendor by looking at those of St. Peters. . And the doors of the Senate which stood in Ovid's time are now on St. John of Lateran, I believe it is. And for spectacular doors how about the East doors, or Gates of Paradise, by Lorenzo Ghiberti in Florence?

. And just in case anybody misses how dazzling these doors ARE, Ovid encases them in the Golden Line Pat mentioned earlier. And over it all the Sun God. Who has eyes that "see all."

Apparently not, however, in the case of his son. Why not? He admits his daily trek is dangerous, he admits it scares even him, so why on earth would he allow this boy to try?

All is in order, however, with this ancient divinity when enters Phaethon, who does not belong, and who, it's clear, can bring about chaos and destruction again.

I wonder what Ovid is saying here about his recurrent theme of order followed yet again by chaos and disorder. Is he saying that Augustus now has brought about order but it won't take too much to ruin it? Is he actually hinting that a descendant of Augustus could bring down the new Empire (or Principate as Augustus liked to term it) unless Augustus stops him?

Phoebus tries to take back the wish. According to Anderson this is a "folktale motif of the 'fatal gift.'" This reminds me so much of The Monkey's Paw and another wish (3 of them) granted. I always thought that was the scariest thing I ever read.

He can't take it back because he swore on the River Styx. What possessed him, do you think? Lost his head? Anderson's commentary says they are "Both Foolish." Ovid seems to dwell on Phoebus's all seeing and all knowing. Do you feel, as some commentators do, that "we may infer that Ovid is poking fun at the god's ignorance and preparing for foolish, fatal, "generosity?"

The boy asked for a sign. Give him the crown or come on down and talk to Epaphus, why couldn't he stop this when he had the chance?

Have YOU ever made a decision you regretted? IS this only hindsight? Even IF Phaethon had followed orders would this have been inevitable? And if so who is the most to blame here? And why?

What do you think about any or all of this?

Frybabe · « **Reply #669 on:** February 27, 2016, 11:05:11 AM »

I am still reading along, but behind in my reading. For some reason, although my translation (prose rather than poem) is easy to read, it does not excite me. I actually think I had more "fun" translating in Latin class than reading this one. What interests me most is reading all the very interesting "takes" on the stories in this discussion.

ginny · « **Reply #670 on:** February 27, 2016, 11:20:23 AM »

That's the joy of a book discussion.

But you'd have a wonderful time translating this buzzard. It's extremely tricky Latin, almost shape shifting. Makes you appreciate Ovid again, in a different way. Perhaps now that we know Book I we should try it someday in a future class. It was mega fun.

In fact I sort of wished for a consortium of Latin students opinions on that last one, their comments would have been invaluable. Where, for instance, to put "linen clad?" There are two choices, both accurate. That alone took quite a bit of thought. I ended up plumping for Io, either choice would have been accurate, the worshipers like the worshipers or priests of Isis or Io herself like the statues of Isis both in fine linen as befits the occasion. I went with Io, I see most don't, their own personal tribute to Ovid's fondness for a Golden Line structure and their knowledge of the priests of Isis and that Io was alive...but a little personal pat on the back from me, (albeit unnecessary) from Io's having suffered at the hands of the discussion, or Juno's, whichever.

I rather imagine in the finished polished official version I might have reverted to linen clad worshipers.

Frybabe · « **Reply #671 on:** February 27, 2016, 01:01:52 PM »

I just finished reading up to Book II: p.301-328. I may actually be ahead of you. Where are we now?

Jupiter's warnings and fears are quite palpable. The description if the chariot ride itself is amazing and leaves me with several questions and thoughts to look into.

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #672 on:** February 27, 2016, 01:21:10 PM »

Frybabe you got in here between Ginny's last post and my thoughts as a result of her post... yes, the chariot ride is amazing isn't it. I have thoughts on it but let me get to the thoughts I have with Ginny's post...

Ginny my thought is that if you know the value of linen than that is when you decide who is going to wear linen. Granted linen is one of the oldest woven fabrics, made from reeds however, knowing the rocky nature of Greece where these stories were before Rome, there would be less material to make linen and far more sheep to make wool - I am betting the average wore anything from a sheeps skin to a felted version of wool to finally a thread of wool made into cloth far more than linen. And so it makes sense than that linen would be reserved for the high ranking members of society and to the gods.

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #673 on:** February 27, 2016, 01:36:47 PM »

Frybabe never having been to Greece and only to northern Italy to see what a sunrise looks like - from reading about the work of the sun god - I'm envisioning the sunrise all golden, sparkling in yellow and oranges.

Funny to me because here where I live I've often been up to see the sun rise and I live on the edge of the top of a mesa so there is a huge drop more obvious across the street from me in the acres of school yard that is the middle school - the elementary school is adjacent but firmly on top of the Mesa then this monster hill and the track and field, softball diamonds of which there are two, running area to practice things like throwing the javelin and a swimming pool - yep, acres - anyhow because of where my house is situated the morning sun rising on the horizon is easy to see.

We do not have a lengthy morning or evening - the sun rises and sets rather quickly but the fun part is when the sun rises there is no golden anything - in winter it may be a deep burnt orange but for the rest of the year it rises red - sometimes a deeper red but a strong red - in fact I still smile and think how to write about it - because all the east facing windows on houses are blood red broken into puddles by the muntins or grilles - where as the back of the houses are still holding the night shade in blues and purples.

So any chariot riding being done was done on the other side of the curvature of the earth because the sun is a volcanic fire that the idea of any manlike god pulling is beyond belief - he would be a cinder in two seconds flat. Now to liken the sun to the fire's of hell - yep, that you can picture when we see the sunrise.

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #674 on:** February 27, 2016, 02:21:10 PM »

Ginny your posts are so filled with themes that have my head in a whirl thinking on them - two that hit me -

recurrent theme of order followed yet again by chaos and disorder.

I'm thinking it is our old thinking - before the math showing us how chaos works that has us imagine it as nothing but a mess - as if order is the preferred state - the definition of chaos helps me see chaos in the light that many of our younger adults see it -

A. Behavior so unpredictable as to appear random, owing to great sensitivity to small changes in conditions.

B. The formless matter supposed to have existed before the creation of the universe.

Now we have math explaining and using the random principle - remember, it was the big news how collage students, some 15 or so years ago using the Randomness Theory were beating the house in Vegas and picked up by the police although, in court they were exonerated. Random chain reaction is part of the math invented and discovered for the Manhattan project.

We also have the Butterfly theory coming from this as a small change because of the flap of its wings is the change in conditions that affects weather.

As to formless matter - we read now how most see new thoughts and new inventions and birth of a human as well as the birth of an idea starting from formless matter.

Albert Einstein Three Rules of Work: Out of clutter find simplicity; From discord find harmony; In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity.

Carl Jung: In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder a secret order.

Not sure if Ovid had any idea that including Chaos in his storytelling was opening the reader/listener to the theories of chaos and randomness however, I'm thinking he must have been wise enough to see how chaos seems to be the start of something. Or maybe he was just moaning in verse that things always disintegrated into chaos

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #675 on:** February 27, 2016, 02:38:01 PM »

The other that hit me from your post -
"we may infer that Ovid is poking fun at the god's ignorance and preparing for foolish, fatal, "generosity?"

The boy asked for a sign. Give him the crown or come on down and talk to Epaphus, why couldn't he stop this when he had the chance?

Not sure how poking in fun the question since so many of us still ask that question of the God we in the west believe is all powerful and all knowing. How could such a God permit the Holocaust is one that I often hear - and when there is a senseless death of a child we hear folks screaming upwards towards the heavens, imploring, shaking their fist, cursing - "Why? Why? Oh God, Why"

I guess we all have a picture of how and when someone is supposed to die - which is our picture and we just are not this all powerful God - ah so... maybe it is the theory of randomness and not God at all???!!?

Of course asking a god to stop a certain behavior gets us into the whole discussion of free will, luck and predestination. Shoot, no easy answers are there...

ginny · « **Reply #676 on:** February 27, 2016, 04:03:13 PM »

Frybabe, we are actually now discussing the Palace of the Sun God, are you reading Lombardo? If so it's lines somewhere around 60 or so in Chapter II? We've gone on so we can enjoy the Phaethon story.

But you can ask or make any point about the chariot ride you like, since some have talked about the end. We're moving slowly but nothing is off limits.

On the linen, yes, good point, Barbara, that's exactly the choice one needs to make in that translation.

Barbara, if the Palace of the Sun God is supposedly an allegory, what do you think is being symbolized there?

Great thoughts on the chaos/ order theme. More on that and Anderson's "foolish sun god foolish son of the son god and chaos/ order," later on. You've brought up lots to think about.

Jonathan · « **Reply #677 on:** February 27, 2016, 05:15:36 PM »

'It's extremely tricky Latin, almost shape shifting.' Well! Thanks for that Ginny. That confirms my suspicion. Ovid is having a wonderful time with these old myths in making them seem relevant to the times. And perhaps, as Barb has pointed out, many readers of Ovids Metamorhoses did find self-knowledge in the book, much as Freud's readers, two thousand years later find in his amazing book: The Interpretation of Dreams.

From our wonderful tale: 'Now she (Io) is a goddess of high renown, and lined-clad worshippers throng her shrines. She had a son Epaphus...

I took that to mean that it was the smart set that hung about Io's shrines. Or, as Barb put it, 'the high ranking members of society'. And Epaphus heard the talk. Some of it was about Clymene, whose reputation was taking a beating. A scandal? Ovid seems to be hinting at it. Clymene at last is not metamorphised as all nice girls are when they are ravished by the gods.

It's been suggested that Phaethon's adventure is a tragedy. And he did come to a terrible end. But I see it more as a farce following all that bragging and boasting by two young men about their heavenly fathers. That set the tone for the rest of the story.

And the stories get even better, say you? I'm off to learn some Latin, and more about these Romans.

Frybabe · « **Reply #678 on:** February 27, 2016, 05:28:49 PM »

Barb, good points about the linen.

Ginny, mine is the A. S. Kline translation. It has only just now gotten interesting. Here is why.

First off there is Lucifer, the morning star. Okay, that explains the new TV show where the main character is Lucifer Morningstar. I didn't know Lucifer was Greek/Roman myth, and I certainly never associated him with a star. So here is the scoop. Lucifer means light-bearer or morning star (so the TV character's name is actually redundant) and is associated with the planet Venus. Some interesting reading that point out that Lucifer and the Devil are two different entities entirely. Like many, I thought they were different names for the same entity. http://www.lds-mormon.com/lucifer.shtml http://www.lds-mormon.com/lucifer.shtml What I was looking for was something way before the bible, and in the second article in the last paragraphs, I see that Zoroastrian allegories included Mithras conquering Venus. I suppose the Zoroastrians had their own name for Venus. All in all, I think Lucifer would be a more appropirate name for Venus now that we know what kind of atmosphere and volcanic surface it has.

I was quite taken with the heart wrenching pleas of Jupiter to try and disquade Phaethon from taking the chariot for a spin and his advise to him when he insisted on going. When Phaethon loses control, Ovid's discription of the destruction caused to earth and the seas reminds me of what a comet might do should one hit our fair planet. Scary stuff, that.

Did anyone notice, or is translated differently in other texts, where Jupiter smeared stuff on Phaeton's face to protect him from the heat and flame? What did the ancients know of flame retardants and sun screens way back then?

JoanK · « **Reply #679 on:** February 27, 2016, 05:47:32 PM »

FRYBABE: I didn't notice that. how interesting. I'll bet such smart people in that hot climate would have found some herb that acted like sunscreen.

Random thought: I wonder how often there were thunderstorms in Rome? Given the association of thunderbolts with angry gods, the Romans must have been terrified of them.

(I've wondered about that ever since I heard that one of the philosophers (I forget who) said he only made love to his wife when there was a thunderstorm (I didn't learn why. If he lived here in LA, he'd get no joy: we only have two a year. Maybe it was Cicero, and that's why he's so scowly).

News:

Author Topic: Ovid's Metamorphoses (Read 116471 times)