New Stories in Ovid's Metamorphoses

[ginny]

Metamorphoses, Part II: New Stories:

Echo and Narcissus

Echo and Narcissus (1903), a Pre-Raphaelite interpretation by John William Waterhouse

Translations Online:

A. S. Kline
(This one has its own built in clickable dictionary)~~~~~ Sir Samuel Garth, John Dryden~~~~~ Brookes More
.

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

Greek gods ~~~~~Roman gods

For Your Consideration:

Bk III:339-358 Echo sees Narcissus
Bk III:359-401 How Juno altered Echo’s speech
Bk III:402-436 Narcissus sees himself and falls in love
Bk III:437-473 Narcissus laments the pain of unrequited love
Bk III:474-510 Narcissus is changed into a flower


Spring! And what a good time to talk about narcissus. We all know what a narcissus is, and what an echo is, but did we know their stories?

1. Do you know how Echo originally lost her voice?

2. How do you personally see Echo?

3. IS there a metamorphosis in this story? If so whose is it?

4. Some people have suggested Echo represents Ovid himself. Can you see any way that is possible?

5. What is your first reaction to the real  Echo/ Narcissus tale?

Echo and Narcissus click here to read:

Discussion Leaders: PatH,  Joan K

Marcie   Barbara and ginny

[ginny]

Super thoughts. On Ovid and hospitality, Homer and the ancient Greeks were the first to write about it in Western civilization, and it was handed down.

I don't know why we feel the need to put morals on everything nowadays but it's not just us, in the Medieval times, learned men turned a lot of Ovid's tales into morality tales with morals and symbolism, everything was symbolic, to explain the faith. I seem to recall specifically Daedalus as an example. There's a lot written on After Ovid and his influence on later civilizations.

In fact Milton used this "pagan poem," The Metamorphoses, in his own epic Paradise Lost, transforming and absorging Ovidian themes into  his Christian narrative, as in the direct "echo" of Metamorphoses when Milton's Eve first sees her reflection in a clear pool, " according to Genevieve Lively's book, and she also writes that it's been argued that  the Freudian narcissistic ego might be an extension of the Ovidian tradition of Narcissus.

I imagine this Echo/ Narcissus poem which to us is one of the most familiar myths, and again is possibly wholly Ovid's, can be interpreted in many ways.

Do you know how Echo originally lost her voice?

How do you personally see Echo?

IS there a metamorphosis in this story? If so whose is it?

Some people have suggested Echo represents Ovid himself. Can you see any way that is possible?

What is your first reaction to the Echo/ Narcissus tale?

Let me put these questions up and a heading and let's see what you think of this very famous story.

But today we turn our attention to the origin of the narcissist. Today we think of Narcissism as something serious, but I wonder if we have any insights more than the ancients did? Here is a pretty strong example and in the midst of the pathos, again a mocking humor.

What do you think?

[Mkaren557]

Echo is the adolescent me, and every other adolescent girl, who loves first from afar without declaring her love.  She is desperate for Narcissus, but is unable to speak to tell him so. She suffers in silence and finally, although it is very difficult, tells Narcissus how she feels, and the wretched boy, not only rejects he but berates her.  She hides in the woods but she still loves Narcissus. She grows sick from unrequited love and wastes away.  When I first heard this myth in my high school Latin class, I literally cried because I related so much to Echo's plight.  Then when I read of Narcissus fate, I cheered.  He represented every high school boy who had humiliated me by not returning my love.  Sweet revenge.  I know there is more to this myth than  this, but I still react passionately to it.  Phew!  Now I can approach this myth in a more dignified and scholarly manner. 

[BarbStAubrey]

If Liriope was the first to test the truth and the accuracy of his words - the word of Tiresias, who gave faultless answers to people who consulted him - does that then suggest this story takes place before the judgment of Persephone. Which predates the story of Echo and Narcissus to before the Eleusinian mysteries?

Or does first have a Roman legal definition since Ovid was a lawyer, who in the Metamorphoses shows the changes to the legal system under Augustus. Augustus applies public law to private morality and Tiresias is a learned wise man, who also represents a formal vote or a authoritative decree. And so by telling the stories of Tiresias, Ovid shows the legal changes under Augustus.

Augustinian law include a loss of boundaries between the gods and humans and elevates morality laws to the level of the professional law that defined the Republic.

I am not as familiar with terms of Law to make a guess here about the use of the word first - do any of you have a lawyer you can ask... It would be significant if the story of Echo and Narcissus is before the judgment of Persephone which reading up on this tells me that story goes back to the Mycenean period, a thousand years before Augustus.

[ginny]

Karen, I love that, you've caught it so well: the rejection.  Who has not been rejected in one way or another? Here the rejection seems to stem from Narcissus's limited ability, I can't decice which of the two is the more hampered by their own natures?


Tiresias, the blind seer, who recently appeared in Oh Brother Where Art Thou, a take on the Odyssey,  apparently gave a prophesy, and like most of the prophesies of the time it didn't make any sense, and could be interpreted many ways.

It seemed to be about Know Yourself. That would seem to be the philosophy of Socrates, but Tiresias seems to be saying that self knowledge will shorten Narcissus's life.  But his "knowing" seems to be based on his seeing himself in the mirror of the water. He's not got any particular deep self knowledge, if he had he  (could he?) have gotten himself out of his self absorption. Why didn't he? We have many like him today, I think, in our culture to always be and look perfect.

I loved a cartoon in the New Yorker recently. A doctor is having a consultation with a patient. He says I can't make you look young, but I can make you look as if you've had some very expensive plastic surgery. hahahaa

So in a way he's worse than she is? Because he DOES have the ability to change but she does not? I love the contrast between them. And I loved Karen's take on "got you!" when his own self absorption causes his downfall. hahahaa  Revenge!

I love  the image of his discovering himself in a mirror, that's always such a magic moment to see a dog or a child suddenly realize that's HIM or HER!  To know ourselves as others see us.

Happens to me, too. I pass a window and suddenly see this woman and suddenly I realize it's ME. I must say I can be a little critical before that happens in my thoughts. hahahaa I really must do something about my posture.

But Narcissists are always supposedly looking in a mirror. Do you think that's true? I often wonder who looks in mirrors most. Is it people who want to assure themselves they do look ok or is it people who glory in what they look like? (Obviously I'm not one of them!)

What does looking in a mirror mean?

I can't decide who is most at fault here or why? What choice did each of them have? It's pitiful, really, Echo misunderstanding what he's saying.

And so I Died For Love happens here, too.

What sort of environment produces a narcissist? Does anybody know?

[ginny]

Barbara, If Liriope was the first to test the truth and the accuracy of his words - the word of Tiresias, who gave faultless answers to people who consulted him - does that then suggest this story takes place before the judgment of Persephone.

Echo and Narcissus is in Book III, and the story of Ceres and Proserpina is in Book V, that's a good point, but the order Ovid puts the stories in really is not a significant  order of their antiquity, he's got a lot of them mixed up, we've already seen that in one of our former myths, in fact, in two.  And you are right, Ceres and Proserpina is one of the oldest myths of mankind. I saw a wonderful presentation on it at one of those conferences with somebody from Berkeley who showed it in all sorts of ancient myths from a wide variety of countries including, I think, Norway. (It's been a long time).

Interesting. Maybe we should read IT next, it's got a lot in it and after all  Ceres IS on the State Capitol Dome of Missouri!

Ovid was the "first" to say Liriope was the mother of Narcissus, he may be making some kind of point, like he does with the "seeing" verbs when Tiresias is a blind seer.

I don't think it has anything to do with Roman law.

[BarbStAubrey]

Ginny thanks but I am still trying to figure it out - not thinking of story placement in the books but rather, on the word first as being the first to address Tiresias as the wise one - so if this story is first and we know Tiresias is part of the story of Persephone than where in the history of man does this put the story of Echo and Narcissus? With that wording it would make this story as old as the Persephone story and yet, it does not have the feel of being a story that old - so then why use the word first - a conundrum - unless it is in the translation - but still then what does first refer to?

I went ahead and read the preceding bit that appears to be more about Tiresias - I find him a compelling figure in the story.

Reading the story I had a flash that I chuckle over - especially on Facebook - how often we simply pass on articles and concepts written or shown in the media - we are all being an Echo - we read something that sounds fascinating or proves a point and all we do is pass it on - is it because what we say that comes from our understanding, we consider not good enough and can be said better only by those with more scholarship so that we simply echo their thoughts?

On the news of the day we seem to put a lot of trust in the media to be unbiased and knowledgeable - and yet, when we hear all the news interpretations of what is going on in the Middle East it is from a political point of view that is supposed to be in the nations best interests until you get to read a few books written by authors from the Middle East and a different story emerges - but like a 'teenage spurned lover' Echo, we pass along anything that fits our political bent that matches our views on being a powerful nation.

In fact even more hilarious is that we act as Echo for political folks who appear to be Narcissistic - oh my have to be careful here - because it would be too easy to get into personalities and our interpretation of them that are in the news.

But then if we too often become Echo and we easily see as attractive those who are narcissistic then where does Narcissus go for information about himself - we are always improving ourselves and there are many books written to help us improve ourself suggesting we look deep to find ourselves rather than being a reflection of what others expect or tell us who we are... I guess as young adults we are an Echo of our family and education.

We are told, until we know who we are we cannot effectively create or advance our own skills and gifts. As to Narcissus seeing himself reflected in waters would make sense since his father was a river god so surely he should find aspects of himself in the water.

[BarbStAubrey]

Does looking in the water as a mirror and learning to love what we see really a bad thing?  I am wondering if the message of this story has been used by many to moralize as Ginny you point out, the moralization of stories seem to be a preoccupation of the Middle Ages - I am wondering if the message, if any is really in these lines...

Fool, why try to catch a fleeting image, in vain? What you search for is nowhere: turning away, what you love is lost!

I can grab onto that concept of a snap shot look at ourselves in water, a mirror, connecting with others is really a quick look at who we are during that time span however, we change, we grow, and what we look for is love. To dwell on reflected love, regardless observed in any so called mirror, is a 'current glimpse' and therefore, the love we think is there is fleeting, a love that changes, love as we understand it, we see it at that moment and then the moment is gone.

I am thinking of how many bask in the reflection of a sports team so that their feeling of well being is up or down based on the teams success or lack of - and yet, we see many a fan who identifies in pride that association regardless win or lose - as if the rippling water of change does not affect their feeling of love and pride.

This bit reminds me of the many lost in the forest so to speak and the many who search for their goodness as a search for God - the many who wrote of their experience and today we call them Father's of the Church or Spiritual leaders or Theologians. Lost in the forest is often young people who lived their life as an echo of their family values adding the values learned in the classroom but who have no clue who they are and like Narcissus must take time to look and find if only a fleeting view of who they are...

...holding his arms out to the woods, he asks, ‘Has anyone ever loved more cruelly than I? You must know, since you have been a chance hiding place for many people. Do you remember in your life that lasts so many centuries, in all the long ages past, anyone who pined away like this?

And then as we age and life has dealt us some blows so that we no longer view life through the eyes of a sixteen year old and yet, we want to feel the love that we remember receiving as a child - don't we say, Whoever you are come out to me! Why do you disappoint me, you extraordinary boy? Where do you vanish when I reach for you? Surely my form and years are not what you flee from, and I am one that the nymphs have loved!

In our maturity don't we all look in the mirror and ask, Where do (did) you fly to? And as we become weakened in age don't we silently call out, ‘Alas, in vain, beloved boy!’

[BarbStAubrey]

In death he gazes into the Stygian waters - his father is the river god so is he gazing on his father - and then to become in death a white petaled flower surrounding a yellow heart suggests some symbolism -

A white robe is worn in mourning in ancient Greece and Rome indicating purity, chastity the strength of the spirit over the flesh - hmm sounds like a view of Narcissus that has value

I wonder if our view of Narcissus as symbolic of the narcissistic personality comes about from the guilt placed on self adornment and self pride that was rife in Christian thought so that one aspect of this story was used to show how futile and fleeting our looks which grew into this current obsession with the narcissistic personality. hmm

Further symbolism says, in Greece white symbolized, mourning, love, life and death.   

Yellow - the light of the sun, intellect, intuition, faith and goodness and a heart is the center of a being, the central wisdom of feeling as opposed to the head-wisdom of reason. The heart is compassion, understanding, the 'secret place', love, charity, it contains the life-blood.

Flowers portray the fragile quality of childhood or the evanescence of life. Particular to Rome flowers represent Funerary, continuing life in the next world...

Flowers like the color white have many Christian meanings but we are reading of a time before Christianity therefore to pull out those meanings that would apply. 

[JoanK]

BARB: "In fact even more hilarious is that we act as Echo for political folks who appear to be Narcissistic."

Good point! This story gives us a lot to think about.

My first reaction to the story was less profound. "Boy, Ovid is really into a mood, satirizing people he knows." Everyone knows the person who talks all the time, and wont let you get a word in edgewise. We all want to turn them into echoes who will only agree with everything we say. And who doesn't know a person who sees and loves only themselves.

Is Ovid feeling a bit neglected here. Nobody is paying attention to what HE is saying. Maybe his latest book wasn't selling too well.

[JoanK]

what about Echo and Narcissus as a couple. Surely they fit together perfectly, both responding only to Narcissus. What about our own relationships? how much of Echo is in them? how much of Narcissus? how much of true interaction?

[JoanK]

Where is everyone?

[JoanK]

Know the feeling. You'll like it. it has a lot to say.

[marcie]

I too have been wondering what was so bad about Narcissus rejecting Echo (and apparently everyone else who had pursued him for his beauty). When Echo trapped him he apparently hadn't yet "discovered himself" as was warned in the prophetic vision. So he wasn't "in love with himself" when he was rebuffing or ignoring potential suitors ... but he had "intense pride."

"One year the son of Cephisus had reached sixteen and might seem both boy and youth. Many youths, and many young girls desired him. But there was such intense pride in that delicate form that none of the youths or young girls affected him."

What did the ancient Romans think of pride? Why does Ovid fault Narcissus for his pride?

Perhaps Ovid wasn't clear in his initial description of Narcissus. His original description of "intense pride" later turns into "scorning." Narcissus runs away from Echo and probably too harshly (even though she was the one who flung herself on him and put her arms around his neck) he says "Away with these encircling hands! May I die before what’s mine is yours." He'd rather die than give her what she wants?

" As Narcissus had scorned her, so he had scorned the other nymphs of the rivers and mountains, so he had scorned the companies of young men. Then one of those who had been mocked, lifting hands to the skies, said ‘So may he himself love, and so may he fail to command what he loves!’ Rhamnusia, who is the goddess Nemesis, heard this just request. "

Because he scorned everyone else, the goddess Nemesis thinks it just that Narcissus too feel the pain of unrequited love.

Is there something about beautiful people that makes others perceive them as self-centered? Is beauty used as some type of metaphor in this story??? What do you all think?

EDIT: Just so you all know, I'm sincerely asking these questions because I don't understand them. They are not just "discussion questions." :-)

[BarbStAubrey]

Wow and yes, there are many who think they know what is best for someone that they see as attractive - folks like to identify with someone attractive - not only back in High School when the Football player and Cheerleader were the attractive people but look how we even have books written about attractive people as something special - there was an expression that now I forgot about the good looking people who seemed to attract wealth and live in high fashion so that they become similar to years ago a movie star that we all had ideas of how they should live and who they should love.

I am remembering the fuss with Ingrid Bergman and there were others - so yes, marcie I can see how the story is about a young good looking boy who has not yet found himself and others including Echo think he should find someone to pair with without honoring that he needs to find himself. Older folks do this by going on retreats but teens must do it which means not hanging out with the 'gang' but reading and contemplating and day dreaming and for some lucky rural kids, go fishing.

[ginny]

The new issue of People Magazine is full of references to Narcissus, as the front page article is on Donald Trump.  I am rethinking my ideas of narcissism after reading Marcie's excellent questions:
What did the ancient Romans think of pride? Why does Ovid fault Narcissus for his pride?

What a good question! And Narcissus is not the only one faulted for pride, either. Or for rejection of a lover. Look at Orpheus! He spurned the love of other women after his wife died and for that they tore him apart. Seems most unfair!

Something is going on here, but I am not sure what it IS.

The Romans were certainly not bashful humble people.  Look at Augustus as an example. He wrote the Res Gestae, which was a sort of "Look what I did," and he had it inscribed for his tomb entrance in bronze tablets, and it was copied all over the world, in fact those are the only traces of it left. They were ancestor and heritage proud, and wanted to leave their mark on posterity. Cicero writes about that all the time. Very status conscious, even to the reviled practice of having one wine for the more important dinner guests and serving plonk to the lesser guests.  I would say personally that  pride was definitely not a sin but a virtue among the ancient Romans.

 I wonder if, as in the case of Narcissus, the real one, good looks can be a curse. Could HIS problem have been not the pride but the scorning of Echo? He was fascinated by himself, and as Barbara says we all know people like that.  I've heard that it's more difficult for a stunningly beautiful woman to find dates, etc.,  (I wouldn't know hahahaa) than others, but maybe extreme beauty can be a curse.

Joan K: My first thought was, "Boy, Ovid is really into a mood, satirizing people he knows." Everyone knows the person who talks all the time, and wont let you get a word in edgewise. We all want to turn them into echoes who will only agree with everything we say. And who doesn't know a person who sees and loves only themselves.

None of that ever occurred to me! And I bet you're not far from the truth.  It seems that several of you see Ovid's hand in this, the creator, through the things he says. I have a feeling that would please him greatly, but who knows? Who are these people, then, being satirized? Could it be Augustus and Ovid himself?

Some scholars have postulated Ovid here is represented by  Echo, and I will admit I have had a hard time seeing it. But Echo has lost the power for her voice due to punishment by the goddess Juno, for something she had no part in and no culpability with: she talked to Juno which covered up some other shenanigans Jupiter did, and that was her downfall).

If you look at Ovid, according to him, half of his problems were the "error" he did, a carmen (a poem) and an "error," he made, not of his own fault, being at the wrong place at the wrong time, and that "echos" (sorry that of Echo, exactly.  And some people think (because nobody knows) that he saw something he shouldn't have concerning Augustus. If that were true and even tho it's hard to extrapolate, if he wrote this and reversed sexes and made Augustus the Narcissus (which was an old story to start with but it sure fits), and himself the now voiceless Echo, creativity destroyed, only left to echo others, then I can see it, actually. Perhaps in losing the attention of Augustus and in his hateful banishment (tho he did write more poems) he felt he had lost his...mojo or creative spark? Or genius, and was left a poor echo of his former self in HIS mind.

Authors seem to be such odd creatures, sometimes. Arthur Conan Doyle hated  Sherlock Holmes, killed him off, and his mother made him bring him back. He wanted to be known for his other work, his serious supernatural studies. E.F. Benson wrote the Mapp and Lucia series as a lark, he was a serious scholar, and on and on.

And Barbara,  great points about the benefits of attractiveness. They have done several studies showing that the attractive children in elementary school have a real  heads up over those less attractive, why this should be I have no idea.

Do we live in a Narcissistic world  today? What is this obsession over appearance? Even the Presidential Candidates have entered the fray.  It sometimes appears in our lives attractiveness is all.  I could simply not believe the photographs of Gloria Vanderbilt with her son Anderson Cooper, there's to be a new special. The woman is 92 years old, she looks 30.  More power to HER but I'm just saying, she looks a lot better than I do.  Kim Kardashian posts new nude photos of herself, selfies again. Mother of two children, nude photos.  Her sister is shown at an Easter Egg Hunt taking selfies of her own face. Have we evolved at ALL? Or for the worse?

Marcie asks about metaphors. If poems are symbols that might be a good statement. WAS he that clever? I wonder if, thinking about Joan K's points again,  those reading this in the early years of the Empire recognized anybody, what an interesting thought. WE don't, (tho we call  Donald Trump a narcissist 2000 years later).

But echo is still with us too: my grandson was astounded when we were in Grand Central Station a year or so ago to be able to whisper, the whispering corner which some very nice  people directed us to, to whisper across this gigantic vaulted corridor full of talking people and train announcements and noise,  and the person all the way across the hall could hear it clearly if they stood just so.   

Even in our own society today, which do you think we consider to be the greatest error, to be an echo yes man or a narcissist?

[marcie]

Barbara, I think you're right that people do tend to "rate" attractive people higher, though I also think that some tend to see attractive people as aloof or proud. Ginny, you've provided a lot of helpful information and analysis that I didn't know about. I appreciate the background on Ovid.

Good question about what people in our society would condemn more... being an echo or a narcissist. I think most would see the echo as weak and the narcissist as stronger. In the U.S. we seem to admire strength.

[ginny]

Or the perception thereof (of strength).

In a way being online is a little like being an  "echo," when you think about it.

[Mkaren557]

Echo and Narcissus represent an excess of two qualities that people seem to value:  speaking and pride.  We discourage their opposites.  After all we don't want our children to grow up without a voice or without pride.  Those who are introverts or very humble are often suspect.  Society tends to look down upon those who do not "speak out," "join in the discussion," or "offer an opinion."  Also, not standing up for oneself, allowing someone to walk all over you, or not proclaiming one's accomplishments may keep you from a job, an honor, or label you as "a push over."  So, in raising out children, we encouraging speaking up and actively promote good self-esteem and pride. Ovid portrays Echo as that adolescent who "speaks up top much and too often" which draws punishment from the gods  and Narcissus as totally absorbed and passionately in love with himself, which kills him. So, in our own time and in Ovid's, it seems "drawing the line" and avoiding extremes is what society desires and we are always walking that "fine line."
         

 

[JoanK]

MCKAREN: "Echo and Narcissus represent an excess of two qualities that people seem to value:  speaking and pride.  We discourage their opposites."
My goodness, I didn't think of that -- you're absolutely right. So " in our own time and in Ovid's, it seems "drawing the line" and avoiding extremes is what society desires and we are always walking that "fine line."

And both Echo and Narcissus are punished and mocked by having to go  from one extreme to the other -- from too much  talk to too little, from too much pride to being humbled by his "beloved's" indifference (and presumably the scorn of others).

[JoanK]

GINNY:"Some scholars have postulated Ovid here is represented by  Echo, and I will admit I have had a hard time seeing it."

I had a hard time seeing it too. but now, I think I do. Perhaps Echo is not who Ovid IS but who Augustus sees him as. Augustus sees him as talking too much (and perhaps seeing to much) and needing to be reduced to a mere echo, like A's other courtiers. Now Augustus (now seen as Narcissis) is punished when Ovid (Echo) has to stand by and watch A destroy himself , instead of being able to help him see his mistake

[ginny]

My goodness, Karen and Joan K, the depth of your understanding of this thing staggers me. I could not have written in my wildest dreams any of the three of those. It's this kind of thing that makes me very grateful for our Books discussions here and makes them so worth reading.

Thank you. I think those are the ultimate coda of this story, I keep reading all three of them again.

Just LOVE it! I'm so glad we're doing this.

It's been suggested now that we turn our attention to something we've long talked about but never done, but this time it's not Vergil, it's OVID! Ovid (why?) also undertook AFTER Vergil, to tell the story of  Aeneas. What will HE stress? Let's take a few days off and reconvene on Monday,  April 11, with the Trojan War:

It's true that we're skipping around, but such great stuff we're reading, let's tackle OVID'S version of the Trojan War and the Aeneid:

Ovid, as is  his wont, has thrown us into the Trojan War with little notice and is figuring instead of Homer's account, on the side players and stories.

Let's start with the death of Achilles: (these are referenced in the heading under Kline, and each is clickable there. Hopefully in a few days we can put up clickables to these.

How much do YOU know about the Aeneid? What a story it is, what an epic! It's got everything anybody could ever want,  "to hell and back," the Golden Bough, the Trojan War, and the Founding of Rome! Let's give it a try (remember the Kline is annotated, too) and bring what you do know to the discussion about background on April 11, we're going to need it.

Hope to see you here April 11, let's try to read

Bk XII:579-628 The death of Achilles http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph12.htm#486225997

Bk XIII:1-122 The debate over the arms: Ajax speaks
http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph13.htm#486898044

Bk XIII:123-381 The debate over the arms: Ulysses speaks

http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph13.htm#486898045


and see what we make of that.

Here are the stories after that:
Bk XIII:382-398 The death of Ajax
Bk XIII:399-428 The fall of Troy
Bk XIII:429-480 The deaths of Polydorus and Polyxena
Bk XIII:481-575 Hecuba’s lament and transformation
Bk XIII:576-622 Aurora and the Memnonides
Bk XIII:623-639 Aeneas begins his wanderings
Bk XIII:640-674 The transformation of Anius’s daughters.
Bk XIII:675-704 The cup of Alcon
Bk XIII:705-737 Aeneas’s journey to Sicily.

Such excitement I can't imagine! We're finally doing "An" Aeneid but what will we think and why write another version? And who ARE all these people he's talking about?

See you on the 11th!

[JoanK]

Sounds good. how much do you want us to read for Monday?

[JoanK]

Speaking of Homer, everyone who reads him remembers his description of the "wine dark sea." Now a scientist claims that he wrote that because people of his time could not see the color "blue."

It seems many languages are late in adding a word for "blue" to their language. At first, there are only words for black and white. Then red is added. Then green and orange. Blue is added last.

A study was done in a tribe that had no word for blue in their language. They either couldn't distinguish it from green, or had great trouble.

[ginny]

These three in red in the post above, I think, will give us a great start:   (On Thursday I will be able I think to change the heading to include only them):


Bk XII:579-628 The death of Achilles http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph12.htm#486225997

Bk XIII:1-122 The debate over the arms: Ajax speaks
http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph13.htm#486898044

Bk XIII:123-381 The debate over the arms: Ulysses speaks

http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph13.htm#486898045

[ginny]

FASCINATING on the "wine dark sea!" I remember staring at the sea in Greece and trying in vain to see the wine color. At one point I convinced myself I had. hahahaa I'm blue/ green color blind so all that makes perfect sense to me!

Of course Homer was supposed to be blind.

[Mkaren557]

Perhaps Homer was writing of the intensity of the color rather than the hue.

[BarbStAubrey]

Yes, I can see the intensity being the wine dark - not many liquids that are that dark and when the sea is angry or before dark it gets almost black with little reflected blue because if the sun is not shinning brightly the sea is not blue but really dark like a cask of Burgundy or other strong red wine. Also, as the sun dips here in the south during summer it is a hot deep red that mixed with reflected deep dark blue could for a minute or two achieve a wine red appearance.

But then also what was the atmosphere Homer was attempting to relay so that as a poet just saying dark sea describes it with no romance to the adventure. I guess I'm surprised at all these scholars who are pulling apart a poem and attempting to make it realistically correct as if reading a scientific paper.   

[JoanK]

"
BARB: "I guess I'm surprised at all these scholars who are pulling apart a poem and attempting to make it realistically correct as if reading a scientific paper."

I admit, fanatic bird watcher that I am, that I do that with his descriptions of birds. Most of his descriptions of their behavior are so accurate, that when I see a howler (like sandpipers nesting in trees), I think "Homer would never have written that -- it must be the translator.

Sure enough, I followed some up when we were reading the Iliad and found that some of the bird names he uses are only found in his work, and the translator has to guess what bird he meant.
   

[ginny]

Amphora by Exekias, Achilles and Ajax engaged in a game, c.540-530 BC, Vatican Museums, Vatican City.

Ovid Story for this Week:

Part I: April 11-17:
Bk XII:579-628 The death of Achilles http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph12.htm#486225997

Bk XIII:1-122 The debate over the arms: Ajax speaks
http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph13.htm#486898044

Bk XIII:123-381 The debate over the arms: Ulysses speaks

http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph13.htm#486898045

[ginny]

Welcome back!

No, despite appearances to the contrary, we haven't fallen through the rabbit hole into Wonderland but it's hard to convince anybody of that if they've read our new selection for the week.

Perhaps it would be better to start with ONLY Part I this week, the  Death of Achilles (see heading above this post for the link).  This is the very end of Book 12.

What IS that? Why should we start here?

THIS is Ovid's take on Homer's Iliad.  Although the story of the Trojan War "officially" begins on line 80 of Book 12, it's obscured by grisly details (see below) as Ovid decides to do his own take on it, and he resumes with the Iliad story in the death of Achilles.   Once he's through with this anecdote, this  little vignette about arguing over armor, he's ready to dispense with the entire Trojan War  and take on the other literary giant, Vergil and his Aeneid. We'll need to look hard for Aeneas, however, his plot line is severely compromised by all the "stories" Ovid finds more interesting, the diverting tales and seques  he wants to expound on. We're in for a wild ride.

Do you recognize any of the characters here in "The Death of Achilles"  from the Trojan War and are the "events" spoken of here any you know?

If not, let's suss them out together and see how/if at all  Ovid's take jibes with what we know.

Ajax and Ulysses (Odysseus) are arguing over a suit of armor which Achilles owned. Here are some random questions in advance  we might want to be on the  lookout  for as we read all the sections:

---What was special about this armor of Achilles? Why do they all want it?

---As usual in any verbal argument, you find out more about the person arguing than anything else. We'll want  to be on the lookout when we begin those passages for character revelations: if  you had to tell the police about either Ajax or Ulysses's character, how would you describe either of them?

--Do you see any reverence at all for Homer's Iliad here? Why or why not?

---The story of the Trojan War actually starts back on line 80+ in Book 12,  but is immediately diverted by Achilles's  attack on Cygnus, in great detail,  and is then further  derailed by other exceedingly gruesome horrid  stories around the campfire (literally), centaurs, the metamorphosis of Cygnus into a swan, ambling stories told  sitting around a campfire, many featuring Ovid's own creations,  till the plot picks up again with the Death of Achilles.  Is THIS what Homer did in the Iliad?

---- When we think of Achilles we think of one body part in particular, what is missing here in the tale of Apollo in a cloud directing the fatal shot?

---Who ARE these people? Can we make any sense of this story? Who is:

-----the son of Peleus?
-----Hector
-----Paris
-----Priam
-----the grandson of Aeacus
-----Tartarus
-----Diomedes
-----Oilean Ajax
-----Agamemnon
-----Menelaus
-----Telamonian Ajax

In short, what's going on here?  And  why does Ovid think we know who he's talking about?

What, if anything, can you make of this?

PS: Tomorrow they are auctioning off at Christies in NYC what appear to be two hoplite helmets such as Achilles would have worn. If any of you have won the lottery, pick one up for us?

[Mkaren557]

I was browsing books on Amazon yesterday and was thinking how tired I am getting of books that are based in some way on Pride and Prejudice: prequels, sequel, focusing on another character, modernizing, simplifying, and the list goes on.  This may be because it is such a great piece of literature of the desire to draw all those who read the original novel to now buy the clever repeating of some element of text.  Ovid seems to be doing the same thing with his version.  I am needing to research to discover why he is doing this and I am fascinated to discover that some of what he writes originates with him.  I am also picking up that this is somehow related to Ovid's relationship with Augustus.  Right now, I just have impressions and question.  I need to really dig.

[BarbStAubrey]

Interesting observation about Jane Austin - as to Ovid - most of his tales are the Greek myths reworked with the Roman names - wondered about that - when and why did the Romans rename these Greek gods...

[ginny]

Karen, you're right on Augustus.

On the redoing of famous stories, there wasn't that much being published. It wasn't like Jane Austen clones in paperback,  as it was there was Homer and it was an Oral Tradition and then there was? ....Homer and Hesiod wrote in Greek so what was the Roman going to do for his (renamed) gods? He'd tell the stories over the campfire, orally. They seem to never have tired of them.

Homer was the first to write them down somewhere around 700 B.C., but he wrote in Greek. There were precious few Latin translations, I can think of one, until Ovid, so a lot of the stories were being passed down as folk tales, and then Ovid takes on the two biggest Epic Writers, Homer and Vergil.

It MAY be that our reading of the Iliad here was too long ago, the Odyssey a little more recent, for us to be able to relate to these now, we might want to read something else first, there's always Atalanta, which is not a very well known story to US.

OR, let's do Pyramis and Thisbe, it's  Babylonian?

What do you all think? Would they be more enjoyable with less need to reference? Sort of stand on their own as it were?

Meanwhile Karen mentioned elsewhere that she really liked the new Simonson book, and that Latin and the Aeneas play a big part in it, that definitely sounds like a coming book club discussion, to me.

How about Pyramus and Thisbe? It is not a myth at all. It's set in Babylon so is thought to be of that origin, nobody knows anything else, but Ovid presents it for his own purposes,  and then a well known playwright took it over, but Ovid's is the original.

[BarbStAubrey]

Ginny I like the idea of doing Pyramus and Thisbe - this one we have done many times as well as by many adventure authors and it is familiar so that I am not sure I can pull any more out of the story -

[ginny]

Great. I think there MAY be a little bit more here than we have delved into in   the past,  but we can move on to some lesser known perhaps stories. We were having a great time and discussion with those and there are plenty more out of his 250 storehouse of stories canon here.

Suits me fine. I'll need a few days to do something new here, get up the links, etc.,  how about starting Friday?

[JoanK]

OK by me, although I wouldn't mind chattering a bit about the death of Achilles and the armor argument in the meanwhile.

I was struck in the death of Achilles at how little there was of it! Homer describes the length of even the most minor soldier in great detail and gives them their moment of honor. An honorable death was important to the greeks and worth celebrating.

yet here is Achilles, one of the greatest heroes of the war, and all we get is "Paris Shot him -- end of story". And then we see the other two great heroes, Ajax And Ulysses, at their spiteful childish worst, hurling insults at each other. "You think you're so great, but you're not! Nanny Nanny Boo Boo."

Am I seeing a little jealousy on Ovid's part? "You think Homer's (Virgil's?) heroes are so great, but they're not!"

[ginny]

Oh what a good idea, Joan K! Let's do exactly that!

You all frighten me, how you see through Ovid, I don't see it myself half the time but had read about this one.


Hahaha, If you think THIS is jealous, wait till you see what he does to the Aeneid.

But you are absolutely right. In the Iliad, Achilles had had two major deaths to react to and the reaction was unreal by our standards. First his friend Patroclus, that's what got him back in the battle finally. Patroclus must be honored. Then in retailiation he drags Hector around and around the city, as you say, dishonor, and keeps it up until Hector's father pleads with him to give him the body of his son, so he can properly bury it.

Maybe because Achilles dishonored Hector Ovid decided to dishonor him?

Huge funeral games for Patroclus as I recall. I need to look that up again, that's off the cuff. . There weren't too many ways to get to be a Greek Hero and if you neglected the proper obsequies the hero would not be one, extremely important. For one thing he would not go to the realms of the blessed, where, apparently even the heroes wandered around fretfully, if Agamemnon is any example. He,  you remember, asked Aeneas, why did my wife kill me?

We might someday want to read the Aeneid, it's totally full of great stuff.

And pfft, the great Achilles is dead. Not a thing about his vulnerable body part, just gone.  The main character of Homer's Iliad, all those books, was it 24? Wiped out with no fanfare and nothing else. There are more important stories to tell.  I can't decide if Ovid is some kind of early Monty Python or what he is.

It could very well be Ovid's taking shots at Homer and the Iliad!  We skipped (and wisely I think) the part where he makes the entire Trojan War akin to a drunken brawl at a wedding.

[ginny]

And coming up on Friday the 16th:

Pyramus and Thisbe:

Thisbe by John William Waterhouse 1909

Bk IV:55-92 Arsippe tells the story of Pyramus and Thisbe

http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph4.htm#478205189

Bk IV:93-127 The death of Pyramus
http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph4.htm#478205190

Bk IV:128-166 The death of Thisbe
http://ovid.lib.virginia.edu/trans/Metamorph4.htm#478205191

Till then we can talk as we like about Achilles. Kind of fun!

[Frybabe]

I've never read Aeneid.