Qimmik wrote:Paul, you must already have paid a visit to the site of the Iliad.
Qimmik wrote:There's also a modern statue of Leonidas in Sparti, with the inscription μολὼν λαβέ.
The problem with believing is, as I say, my mind won't let my heart. I think there is a generic connection, that some places and some names have came down to us. Beyond that...I see little to no evidence. For me, studying this stuff at a graduate level, was in some ways one of my first slaps in the face: The civilisation really was alien. It was interesting, but alien. I felt a lot of work being done was facile and often specious too. The other major slap in the face, what really disillusioned me with academic praxis, was being asked....seriously asked...at an interview at one of the biggest universities in the world...why I bothered with learning non classical ancient languages and why did I think x ancient culture could tell us anything about the Greeks? who were magical and unique basically. This from a big name. It's just...sad.
Paul Derouda wrote:I tried to read the Aeneid in English translation earlier this year (translated by David West). It was so boring, I abandoned after reading a little more than the half. I guess I'll force myself to read the rest some day. But how can anyone compare that to Homer? It was just blaa blaa blaa to me.
Scribo wrote:Actually it's hard to get away from the Harvard school readings in the UK where it's been pretty much the dominant model, I mean in Oxford probably largely due to the influence of scholars like Lyne but it seems to be pretty popular. I myself....I don't know I think it's quite praise wielding but I think the major problems are the way we view the praise. We're always a bit...suspicious or snobbish about the way Horace or Virgil seem to us whereas I think the nature of such a thing was markedly different in Roman society. More acceptable, more typical and expected.
I started to read Putnam's Interpretation and Influence and just really disliked it by the way. I doubt I'll ever finish it, I don't think I even bothered taking notes.
See, quite a lot of the major criticism of the Augustan era is quite alien to me. In general the modus of Latinists also is quite different: they ask different questions and are interested in different social phenomena, if they go beyond the texts at all (ooo naughty ). I recently read Tarrant's commentary on Aeneid XII and really liked it. I believe he is, aptly, Clausen's successor in the pope chair as well.
For my money the single most interesting Virgilian scholar is, of all people, Horsfall. Partially because in his discussion of mythography, cult, quellen etc he's quite Hellenist in his manner.
Victor wrote:Maybe I am out of my depth in the midst of all this discussion of Vergilian criticism, or maybe I simply feel less dependence on what others have said in order to be able to arrive at some appreciation of Vergil's art. Either way, it would be interesting to see more in the way of personal responses to Vergil's poetry, and less in the way of criticism of criticism.
Scribo wrote:Are you suggesting that we use books because somehow we're not as clever as you are for simply giving your opinion?
Scribo wrote:It couldn't be, could it, then when dealing with a long dead poet and their civilisation we simply recognise that our viewpoints and responses are somehow not theirs? hm?
Scribo wrote:This thread is, as the title suggests, for the discussion of books pertaining to the subject and whilst I'm sure it will become littered with personal readings and opinions as it progresses (since such things are necessary) they certainly shan't take main stage here.
Victor wrote:No offence was intended. It would be nice if the same could be said of your reply, though your pugilistic stance makes that difficult.
Users browsing this forum: emperorfry and 4 guests