Classics and the Western Canon discussion

I thought that Goodreads ate my first Book 8 post, but I found it in the General folder. No idea why. But here it is.

Am I the only one surprised that a human could defeat a god and get away with it? Even take the woman he wants away from him?

I'm curious how this was interpreted. Was it taken to say that in fact it is occasionally possible for humans to overcome gods? Or was it taken as just showing how extraordinarily special Hercules was?

Another interesting thing. Thomas mentioned in the Book 7 thread how little attention was given to Medea's killing her children, which was of course a major aspect of Euripides's play Medea, and I always understood was a considered a very significant mythical event. Now in Book 8 we have another myth which for us and I believe the Greeks was of great importance, the myth of Theseus defeating the Minotaur, yet it is given only a few casual lines, and there is no mention of his failing to change sails on his return, leading to his father's death.

Here are two myths that I think most modern scholars consider very significant myths, but they are given almost no attention by Ovid, while other much less well known myths, which as far as I know never were the subject of tragedies, get much more attention.

Why, I wonder? Any ideas? Or am I wrong about the importance of these myths?

Do myths occur only once in Ovid, or do they repeat and get wound around one another? I'm listening to Hamilton's Mythology at the same time, so I'm not keeping everything assigned to its source, but even so I have a sense of tales twining about themselves, e.g., Jupiter and Semele, birth of Bacchus, break, then the rites of Bacchus with repeats from his origins, ....

I also notice allusions to stories that do not seem to get developed, as in Book IV where the sisters Minyas tell their tales; in particular, Alcithoë seems to reject several stories before selecting the tale of Salmacis and Hermaphroditus. (Lines 380 - 392 in Mandelbaum for her indecision; her story follows.)

Perhaps Ovid thought his readers should already know the most common stories.

I agree with Laurele. Ovid seems to take for granted that his readers know who he is talking about and skims over the most well-known stories. He barely touches some of the big name heroes like Heracles and Theseus but spends forever talking about small time myths.

The story of Baucis and Philemon is a refreshing change. Instead of mortals challenging or rebelling aginst the gods, followed by their swift punishment, we have a humble couple who show hospitality to some strangers (who happen to be Zeus and Mercury in disguise.) And they are rewarded with jobs in the temple, long lives, and simultaneous deaths, so that one should not live to see the other's tomb. Finally they are transformed into two trees "standing side by side, sprung from a single trunk." A lovely story.

And then it's on to Erysichthon and his axe... Oh well. It was nice while it lasted.

Thomas wrote: "And then it's on to Erysichthon and his axe... Oh well. It was nice while it lasted.
"

LOL! But I do agree that the story of Baucis and Philemon was an enjoyable interlude to all the nastiness which are more common.

Which leads one to wonder, why are most myths so negative? Is it for the same reason that newspapers print mostly "bad" news rather than feel good stories?

Everyman wrote: "Thomas wrote: "And then it's on to Erysichthon and his axe... Oh well. It was nice while it lasted." LOL! But I do agree that the story of Baucis and Philemon was an enjoyable interlude to all t..."

Newspapers in dictatorships do specialise in feel good. Plus traffic accidents. Company newspapers tend to suppress even these. The somewhat saccharine Philemon & Baucus story functions well as a counterpoint, but imagine a succession of episodes like it.

Most of us like our reading, like our food, spiced up. Quite different from our own day to day experiences. That being said, I admit that Ovid seems to enjoy gruesome descriptions of traffic accidents. In a joyful way somehow.

Thomas wrote: "Finally they are transformed into two trees "standing side by side, sprung from a single trunk." A lovely story.

And then it's on to Erysichthon and his axe... Oh well. It was nice while it lasted. ..."

Funny when you put the two together. It gives new/old meaning to "vegetative state", and pulling the plug/laying the axe on life support..

Is it merely coincidence that Ovid tells a story of piety in which the characters are turned into trees and then follows it with a story of impious tree chopping?

It seems to me that Ovid often juxtaposes two conflicting elements in his poem to achieve a sort of balance. Fire and water in the creation myth, gore and humor in the battle scenes, impiety and piety, etc. The most prominent example is Jove and Juno, one lusty and creative, the other judgmental and destructive. One is constantly sowing seeds, while the other ruthlessly threshing them, so that the race of heroes is neither extinct nor overpopulated.

"inharmonious harmony is fitted to the growth of life"
Book I:433

Nemo wrote: "...The most prominent example is Jove and Juno, one lusty and creative, the other judgmental and destructive...."

Nemo -- forgive me, but that seems a rather judgmental assignment of attributes -- sort of like liberal and conservative when used pejoratively. Hera/Juno is more kindly described as the keeper of the hearth (home, vital fire, tamed energy,...), sustainer of order, whereas Jove/Jupiter/Zeus is not without cause sometimes referred to as a philanderer or worse.

Now, Nemo, I'm willing to bet you may have written what you did just to provoke such a reaction as above! [g]

Nemo wrote: "It seems to me that Ovid often juxtaposes two conflicting elements in his poem to achieve a sort of balance. Fire and water in the creation myth, gore and humor in the battle scenes, impiety and pi..."

Nice observation, and it seems right to me, even if overall the work seems to be a bit skewed toward the gory and humorous side of things.

Lily wrote: "Nemo -- forgive me, but that seems a rather judgmental assignment of attributes -- sort of like liberal and conservative when used pejoratively...."

I had no idea that my comment would raise feminist ire, :) since I wasn't thinking along gender lines, but allegorically.

None of those attributes I assigned to Jove and Juno are negative or pejorative per se. Both are necessary in the course of nature/life, and in the creative process, one being the creative impulse and the other rational judgment/appraisal.

Having said that, I do get the impression that Juno is portrayed as a jealous accuser and destroyer in the Metamorphoses. There is not one myth about her, AFAICR, in which she is a "keeper" or "sustainer" of anything.

Nemo wrote: "I had no idea that my comment would raise feminist ire, :) since I wasn't thinking along gender lines, but allegorically...."

Since the characters involved are given male and female attributes, I understand your reaction. I was more intending to raise the difficulties and appropriateness of comparing these attributes of the two entities. I will agree in Ovid's stories so far it may be difficult to cull comparable attributes to "lusty and creative" for Juno. But certainly "judgmental and destructive" could be as applicable to Jove as Juno -- just perhaps in response to differing actions.

It is part of the fun of these myths that they do explore rather deeply both the emotional and rational, with perhaps the emphasis on the former. But every now and again I marvel at a comparison with the practical, like with the action of a sailor in the face of an impending storm.

Lily wrote: "But certainly "judgmental and destructive" could be as applicable to Jove as Juno -- just perhaps in response to differing actions."

Even so, when Jove is judgmental and destructive, as when he destroyed the human race with the flood or struck down Phaeton with the thunderbolt, his intent and purpose were to create or preserve. He flooded the wicked generation so there might be "another race of wondrous origin far different from the first"(Miller), and he killed Phaeton to keep the earth from being consumed by fire. In contrast, Juno seemed to be bent on destruction alone.

Perhaps Patrice is right. Man who writes about woman doesn't really understand his subject, which is why female characters in Metamorphoses are less layered or complex than male. :)

Patrice wrote: "But that's ok, while men were busy writing women were raising men (and women) and keeping life going!"

Are you saying that men have no share in raising children (men and women)? Now now let's be fair. :)

Patrice wrote: "My conjecture is that men are born hunters and love to watch "the chase" and then "the kill".
"

And women go to movies primarily to weep. (Sorry. Couldn't resist.)

Literature is part of our upbringing. We are or become what we read. Sadly, garbage in, garbage out.

The story of Iphis is certainly interesting from a gender perspective... but it's in Book 9, so I won't give it away here.

I am rather fascinated by the number of women in M that would seem to prefer avoiding male relationships and child bearing in order to continue to enjoy hunting and the great outdoors, at least in the periods depicted of their lives.

Nemo wrote: "Even so, when Jove is judgmental and destructive, as when he destroyed the human race with the flood or struck down Phaeton with the thunderbolt, his intent and purpose were to create or preserve...."

I was impressed that Ovid gave Phoebus/Sol the audacity to question whether Jove needed to destroy Phaethon to save the earth. Seems to me that is usually or at least often an appropriate challenge to violence -- and is the kind of complexity and subtlety that I appreciate in M, especially in tales that may seem at first reading straight-forward parables -- but then, the wisdom embedded in parables is seldom so simple as may first appear.

(I like that in the Biblical story of the flood, God basically sends the rainbow to say, well, I won't solve that problem that way again. Oops, that reminds me of David Foster Wallace, ASFTINDA.)

Patrice wrote: "Doing a quick search about the Icarus myth, Wiki mentions that Homer was the first to tell the story. Does anyone know where? It also mentioned that it was obviouis that Homer knew that his audie..."

If you find out where, I'd be interested to know. I think Wiki might be wrong on this one.

Patrice wrote: "Doesn't the Icarus story seem personal for Ovid? "Homesick for homeland" it begins. "Daedalus hated Crete and his long exile there". This feels as though Ovid is writing from his own heart. Ra..."

Patrice, Ovid's exile is generally dated at 8 AD - at that time the Metamorphoses was/were already in circulation. I would think though that for our author the story of Arachne may have had a personal meaning.

Interesting btw that the greatest artist in the book is a woman (Pygmalion's masterpiece needed divine intervention and was by that same intervention changed from art into nature - so it does not count).

Lily wrote: "I was impressed that Ovid gave Phoebus/Sol the audacity to question whether Jove needed to destroy Phaethon to save the earth. Seems to me that is usually or at least often an appropriate challenge to violence..."

Abuse of power is a constant theme in the Metamorphoses. But in the case of Phaeton, Jove was constrained by necessity. Phaeton "did not deserve death", true perhaps, but neither did all the inhabitants of the earth. In all likelihood Phaeton would have perished anyway. Jove only kept him from burning up the whole earth along with him.

Phoebus' reaction was understandable as a grieving father, who was going through "the anger phase", blaming everybody else, Jove, the horses and the whole world, for his loss, or rather the mess he himself had made. There is a theory that when people grieve, they actually grieve for themselves more than the departed. Phoebus seems to be a proof of that, who took Jove's action as an slight on his own person and his office, "my endless and unrequited toils"(Miller), more than anything else.

Lily wrote: "I like that in the Biblical story of the flood, God basically sends the rainbow to say, well, I won't solve that problem that way again. Oops, that reminds me of David Foster Wallace, ASFTINDA.)"

There does seem to be a parallel between the Biblical story and the Greek myth: a destruction by flood in the past and one by fire in the future.

I haven't read anything by DFW yet, but the title "A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again" seems oddly relevant to the theme of death and destruction. Obviously DFW will never commit suicide again. Similarly, the world cannot be destroyed in the same way again, the destruction being irreversible.

Nemo wrote: "I haven't read anything by DFW yet, but the title "A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again" seems oddly relevant to the theme of death and destruction. Obviously DFW will never commit suicide again."

The title essay actually refers to his experience on a luxury cruise through the Carribean. To hear him tell it, suicide might be preferable. Ironically, the original title of the piece was "Shipping Out: on the (nearly lethal) comforts of a luxury cruise."

Thomas wrote: "...The title essay actually refers to his experience on a luxury cruise through the Caribbean. To hear him tell it, suicide might be preferable...."

But I've not gotten the sense suicide sat on DFW's list of "supposedly fun things." Especially when one knows the ending, one can recognize ominous foreshadowing in his writings, including during that Caribbean luxury cruise. I found the same true for Carolyn G. Heilbrun when I returned to some of her writings after her death.

So, we recall the mulberry's ripe dark fruit and Pyramus and Thisbe, or Amphion after Niobe draws down the vengeance of Latona, or.... It does continue to fascinate, the human conditions, albeit many extreme, commented upon by these myths.

Yikes! I'll have to rethink my plan for an European cruise. The desire to "escape" does bear a resemblance to suicide.

It took DFW eleven years before finally "shipping out". Either the medication worked or he battled really hard.

Nemo wrote: "Yikes! I'll have to rethink my plan for an European cruise. The desire to "escape" does bear a resemblance to suicide.

A Supposedly Fun Thing.. , like many collections of short stories, can be read in different orders. It is a good place to start on DFW. I think the first stories show his brilliance perhaps more than the final set piece, but you might want to peruse it.

It took DFW eleven years before finally 'shipping out'. Either the medication worked or he battled really hard."

I have not read his biography, but from tidbits here and there, I gather it was both. Also, family and friends did apparently try to support him. Someday I'll try to get to D.T. Max and see if lessons are there worth knowing.

It wasn't pretty: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/...

Nemo wrote: "Yikes! I'll have to rethink my plan for an European cruise. The desire to "escape" does bear a resemblance to suicide.

Getting way OT here, but I have to mention Walker Percy's Lost in the Cosmos: The Last Self-Help Book, in which he writes brilliantly (IMO) on the subject of escape, with regard to writers in particular.

Nemo wrote: "Similarly, the world cannot be destroyed in the same way again, the destruction being irreversible...."

The fossil and geological evidence seems to be accumulating that life has been a pretty tenacious aspect of this planet, despite periodic major shifts in its forms, probably most of them not precipitated by floods.

I think Ovid is intentionally vague here. I think the fact that he is vague here, somehow highlights these parts of the stories. Ovid is an incredible writer, and his ability to do this exemplifies his talent.

Lily wrote: "The fossil and geological evidence seems to be accumulating that life has been a pretty tenacious aspect of this planet, "

But the existent evidence only shows what is left, not what had existed before but was completely lost and destroyed. This is the interpretation of Phaeton in Plato's Timaeus, i.e., there had been ancient worlds that were destroyed in a major solar event and therefore left no trace on earth.

Thomas wrote: "The story of Baucis and Philemon is a refreshing change. Instead of mortals challenging or rebelling aginst the gods, followed by their swift punishment, we have a humble couple who show hospitalit..."

Hospitality to strangers (who not infrequently turn out to be beneficent gods) is certainly another one of those themes we find running through ancient stories. Trying to think how such hospitality appears in contemporary stories, and a good example escapes me at the moment. Perhaps one is the inscription on the Statue of Liberty. But perhaps we need to revive such stories.