Cantousent

Why is it, Commissar, that I always find our little digressions more interesting than the original topic? Your post deserves a reply, but I'm afraid I can't contribute to derailing this thread any more than I have already. If someone creates "yet another" America and it's place in the world thread, I'll participate. In the meantime, I think your post is remarkably well written and so I'll just ask that you get the last word on the subject and we return to the world of twisted towers and McDonalds.

It's a gateway to the west arch, doofi!

I've always been fond of the arch in St. Louis. I was looking for it and found a picture so good I had to make it my desktop.

Ahh, too true, Steve. These threads always seem to transform over time. All's I can say about the tower is that it looks kind of scary. I know it's probably just as safe as any other building, but it's just too funky for my tastes.

Oh, I'm sorry, the citations don't come across. However, I will provide what endnotes I have prepared so far. Remember, this is still a work in progress. Iliad, book 3, lines 200-202. Parry, Milman, The Making of Homeric Verse. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971), 21. Parry, page 22. Combellack, Frederick M.,

lol betrayed by your subconscious? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> hahaha. Swine-hearted wretch! A simple mistake, I assure you. :D ROFL I was still laughing at omglol's post when I read mkreku's. The Finnish get it to, huh?

The people fleeing to the US from Mexico do tend to find a better life. Hell, they find a better enough life to send money back home to people who need it more. I disagree with a completely open border. ...Or, I disagree with turning a blind eye to illegal immigration while there are folks trying to enter the country legally. Personally, I would be willing to have a completely free border with some substantial reforms in regards to services so we don't bankrupt the southwestern states. Mexico has the equivalent of a peasant class. I'm not talking about poor folks, or inner cities, or other things associated with industrialized countries. Mexicon has a huge class of people upon whom the feet of the ruling class rests. If I were in such a state, I'd want something better, and it is to be found in the United States. Sure, the living conditions suck, but these poople often come here and work hard so they can try to do something for their families back in Mexico. They don't want to be American, for the most part, they are proud of Mexico. What they want is a little opportunity. Unfortunately, that's exactly what they find: a little opportunity. ...But that little is a little more than what they had. Fortunately, Mexicans start working through American society and, after a few generations, are as American as anybody whose family came here on the Mayflower. For example, I'll be damned if I'm any less American than anyone I know, and my grandmother was a Mexican citizen from birth to death. Aside from that, American bashing is so pervasive and hyperbolic that it's usually not even worth answering. I mean, there are people who say that the United States does nothing right. Any action we take is, by definition, either wrong, stupid, or wrong and stupid. Fair enough. I'll let folks believe what they will. For my part, I've been around and I can make a couple of observations. First, my fellow citizens have every right to scorn the United States. That freedom is assured to them. They usually don't know know how good they have it, but neither knowledge nor wisdom are required for the exercise of free speech. Second, folks in other countries can deride us. I think everyone should be free to speak, not just here, but in every country. ...But some of us have been to your countries. We've been guests, driven your roads, loved your people, shared something of America with you, and brought something of your country back with us when we returned. We are not the evil people you seem to think we are.

What do you mean? I don't understand you! :D

Epithets are the subject of heated and lively debate even now. For some scholars, it is a sin to suggest that epithets have any meaning at all other than versification. I feel I've sufficiently dealt with that view. Yes, Drabek, you must keep in mind the target audience. They didn't expect, or even desire, someone who could come up with something new or novel. They wanted someone who could tell the story they expected to hear. It's unlikely that Homer's audience wanted him to be "original." My favorite book in the Iliad is 18, the Shield of Achilles. It is a break from the fighting and it shows something of life outside of warfare.

I know what you mean. The Iliad has a couple of thing that tend to drive away readers. For one thing, a lot of students are disgusted by the graphic violence. That's probably not a problem for you, since you're a fellow RPG/wargamer. On the other hand, the work is so rife with violence it becomes monotonous. To be honest, I would suggest the Odyssey or, since I'm being completely candid, The Aeneid. Still, epics aren't for everyone. I find epics fascinating, but they're certainly not engaging in the same way as, say, a novel.

The question, then, comes down to the impact pre-Homeric folktales, combined with post-Homeric literature, have on the overall argument concerning epithets. The answer is that epithets came from an ancient oral tradition, as Parry asserts, in which the most valued heroes of the culture were well defined. If W. Headlam is correct in writing,

*Shrug* If you find the Iliad and Odyssey boring or offensive, this thread isn't for you. Still, when folks talk about derivative, this would be an example of something from which other works are derived. Some folks don't like Shakespeare, Tolkien, or Rowling. I don't begrudge you the fact that you don't find Homer interesting if you don't begrudge me discussing it with folks who do.

Very cool, Craig. Very nice.

We didn't start the fire -- Billy Joel

I'm just worried about what the day after today will bring!

hahaha. My wife had the same problem, Calax.

In the strictest sense, the reader must do nothing but enjoy any of the epithets. Regardless of the manner of their use, epithets in both epics serve only to further the end of this endeavor: enjoyment. However, as it regards Odysseus and his intelligence, it is imperative to put epithets in their proper place. For this reason, Nagy has more the right of it than Parry.

Yes, I remember that disussion. First of all, meta had a good point concerning the adjectival use of epithets. Epithets are used as a device for quick versification. They present a way to form verse on the fly, if you will. The thing is, epithets don't tend to outright lie. Why would Odysseus be the only person who sports the epithet of Polymetis? The epithet isn't attributed to others at random. The Greek term of Metis, which is both a proper name of a goddess and a term denoting resourceful or wise, carries more than one connotation, and so the reader must put the epithet in context with other evidence, such as how other characters view Odysseus and what Odysseus does in the epic. There is a school of thought that sees Odysseus as nothing more than a good liar. I respect that view, but I disagree with it. I'm going to bring in some more excerpts. Hopefully we can continue the discussion.

Isn't Eastwood getting a bit old for playing dirty Harry?

Doofus! :cool:

Finally, I can comment on homosexuality without derailing poor pixies thread. Homosexuality was a complex topic, even in ancient Greece. The rule of thumb is that it didn't draw shame to act as the penetrator, but that the penetrated was held in scorn. Of course, there are some significant examples to the contrary, such as Thebes, etc.

Parry

This particular section, dealing with epithets, argues that Homer's Odysseus is the embodiment of human Metis. It argues that Homer conveys the breadth of Odyseus' briliance partly by use of epithet. Then, the paper goes to great lengths to argue that, while epithets usually don't have much meaning in terms of actual action, they are significant in regards to innate characteristics.

You really should read both works. I think Lattimore's translation is probably the best at the moment for the language, but Fagles' probably captures the poetry of the work better. Ummm, the ISBN numbers Lattimore: 0-06-093195-7 Fagles: 0-14-026886-3

For what does TOMBS stand, anyhow?