- This topic has 4 voices and 18 replies.
-
Posts
-
Having been raised in a Christian (?) nation it is somewhat difficult for many of us tocontemplate without condemnation the sexual practices of Greece in the classical age.Because we find it awkward to discuss, we usually gloss over the facts we have andconstruct views that are more notable for their obfuscation than their historical reality.Books on this subject are available, but for the most part not utilized in history courseseven those dealing with classical Greece and Rome. This is a pity as knowing a bitwould explain why Socrates and Alcibiades were such good friends, why the ThebanBand were such fearsome fighters and why Homer depicted Achilles on being so fullof rage at the death of Patroclus. It would also shed some light on why Greek women were so sequestered and not considered the equal of men. I doubt very much that college students read the Symposium these days--am I wrong?
I read it in college, and it was my favorite philosophical text. It has many layers and is entertaining to read (at least if you're a philosophy major, I suppose). I think that learning about Greek sexual mores is quite enlightening and agree that it can shed light on other classical texts. I think there may be a temptation for the modern reader, however, to oversimplify such a topic and reduce it to an extension of modern behaviors.
You are too kind. I think that the modern reader, a victim of our educational system,would be at a severe disadvantage reading the Symposium or attempting to comprehend 5th Century classical sexual mores or practices.In fact, I might go so far to say that except in unusual circumstances, the modern reader would be incapable of accepting the ideathat a moral society would tolerate such practices and condemn them as horrid. Thinkof trying to explain the concept of the lover and the beloved to a person without beingbranded as constructing an apologia for perversion.
Interestingly, when I referred to the “temptation of the modern reader,” I was not actually referring to the reader who would find the behavior of the Greeks to be “horrid”, but instead the opposite kind of reader – the one who would find modern-day socio-political justifications in such a text. I'm not sure when the Symposium began widely circulating, but Greek texts have obviously been circulating for centuries. I am not aware of attempts to censor these texts based on the sexual proclivities of the actors contained in those stories. This tells me that the Western mind can read these stories and find truth in them, but at the same time accept the fact that Greek values are not always compatible with modern values.There's another thread on Greeks and gender that you may find interesting:
I'm not saying it wasn't there, but I am highly suspicious of whether or not all these claims of homosexuality were exaggerated. There is plenty of evidence that Greeks valued friendship highly.
Censorship is a tool societies use for various reasons–for decency, to prevent an awkward truth from unduly alarming the populace, to maintain the existing political/economic structure and keep ignorance enthroned. One way of censoring texts like the Symposium is to just not include it or in fact any mentionof it in secondary schools and then to "bolderize" it in college as was done with other texts. I agree withyour comment that "the Western mind" is capable of reading these texts, finding truth in them and acceptthe difference in values. But there is a problem. Today we seem content to school or train the vast majority of our students rather than educate them. Critical thinking is branded as "elitism" and we usewords such as democracy, liberty, justice and socialism in everyday parlance without reference to theiractual meaning. I suggest that it is difficult if not impossible to really comprehend the mores of anothersociety regardless of whether it is 5th Century Athens or modern Afghanistan--if the word"modern" canbe used to describe that ravaged benighted land. Most students today are ill equipped to embark upona quest of comprehension; even more are disinterested. C'est vrai, N'est pas? Does your local High School have a course on comparative cultures through the ages--of course not!
I've read just about everything Plato wrote. The Symposium is the second best work behind the Republic and perhaps the Apology or the Crito. The Timaeus goes well with the Symposium because sexual mentor-ship is mentioned in both.
Friendship is a wonderful thing and it surely existed in Greece in 400 BCE as it does today. The sexualpractices of ancient Greece were intertwined with friendship in a manner that would be anathema our society today. I know that gay people have friends that are merely friends and from what I haveread it was much the same with the ancient Greeks. One factor is different, but still echoes in our society. The Greeks believed that true love could only exist and flourish among equals. As women were necessary, but not equals, examples of friendship between the sexes was unusual. The wife of Socrates was known forseveral things, but not her amicable nature or friendship toward her rough hewn husband.Were it not for the hetarae, ( a courtesan--sort of a Geisha) who were not sequestered and free to mix with men at symposia, the feminine input would have been nil. They were even allowed to acquire an education--the horror!
However in Sparta, women were more valued. Lacedaemonian women were more than baby makers there. They were the groomers of warriors and the placeholders of society. I wonder if anyone has done a study on Spartan women? I've never looked.
I know that gay people have friends that are merely friends and from what I haveread it was much the same with the ancient Greeks.
How so? Why does the gay element have to be placed here? I think of modern athletes and teammates and how they are like brothers, and love each other as brothers. I think of modern soldiers who are willing to die for their friends and fellow soldiers. This has absolutely nothing to do with being gay. Perhaps Achilles and Patroclus were gay lovers, I do not know, there is certainly no hint of that, but I see more of a brotherhood relationship between them. Best friends, rather than gay lovers. (Similar to Jonathan and David in the Old Testament). Achilles just witnessed his best friend get killed. How do you expect him to react? There was love and respect and friendship and honor....nothing that is much different than any other heterosexual male relationship. I think modern (or post-modern) society wants to make it gay, or make it more gay than it actually was. Was every mentor/student relationship based on homosexual love? Was every athlete/trainer relationship based on homosexual love? Just because Plato suggested it, doesn't make it true. How do we know that he spoke for most of Greek society? We DON'T know that. Was every nude wrestler or pankrationist gay? I very much doubt this. And what about Aristotle? He often talks about friendship, and on the rare occasions he does speak of homosexual relationships, he condemns it for the most part.As for the Sacred Band of Thebes, name one other warrior group made up of male lovers. Why is there so much emphasis on this one thing as if it was a common occurance? Greek sexual practices have not been ignored or censored at anytime throughout history, it's just that it is being overemphasized now because modern society is attempting to make homosexuality normal and they are trying to use Greek history as part of their agenda. Besides, do we really want to teach the history of homosexuality to school age children? If so, would one also want to teach the practices of phallic cults to adolescent minds?
However in Sparta, women were more valued. Lacedaemonian women were more than baby makers there. They were the groomers of warriors and the placeholders of society. I wonder if anyone has done a study on Spartan women? I've never looked.
Spartan women also their households and society when the men were gone. They were educated and also trained in athletics (see Xenophon and Plutarch). This wasn't happening in Athens!
Yes–and to the delight of the other Greeks they trained naked, unashamed of their bodies and theirskills at what we would call gymnastics. Like many things in Sparta--they were different and did indeedinculcate a warrior spirit in their young charges. They were also supposed to be the most beautiful women in Greece. Helen was from Sparta!I know of no monograph which deals with the subject.
I believe Achilles and Patroclus were related, well Wolfgang Peterson had them cousins in Troy. Not sure though. The best example I can think of is David and Jonathan, King Saul's son.
Good heavens–I have touched a sensitive spot! If one reads beyond the minimal about Greek society itbecomes obvious that you are entering a society very different from our own. My references to sexualpractices had little to do with anything "gay" and everything to do with the sexual inversion displayedby this society. For prostitutes the chief rivals for the attention of virile men were the ephebes--the you lads of Athens. In many cities there was no stigma attached to the man-boy or Lover-beloved relationship.At the time the greatest heroes in Athens were Harmodius and Aristogeiton--tyrannicides and lovers.In the Symposium there is general agreement that a love between man and man is more noble, morespiritual than that between man and women. Read the portion of the Symposium where Socrates and Alcibiades are drunk and banter back and forth about their love interests and overall reputations of satyrs. This theme continues through the Hellenic to the Hellenistic age. Check out "The Persian Boy", a novel by Mary Renault dealing with Alexander the Great, Hephaistion and a Persian ephebe--Bagoas.To ally any conservative fears you might be harbouring--I am as straight as a ruler--educated by Jesuitsand happily married--with issue--for over 40 years and do not advocate homosexuality.A final note: just because a mature Greek male made some sort of love to a young lad did not mean he was a homosexual. To be crude--to our mature Greek male who loved beauty--an orifice was an orifice.I have a friend who is an administrator in a prison. He claims that for the Alpha male convicts sex is not a problem--they get lots of it. Not the kind we would necessarily like, but they make do with what is available. How Greek is that!
Good heavens--I have touched a sensitive spot!
Not sensitive, just think that some place too much emphasis on this
If one reads beyond the minimal about Greek society itbecomes obvious that you are entering a society very different from our own.
As is the same with any society, ancient or modern
.At the time the greatest heroes in Athens were Harmodius and Aristogeiton--tyrannicides and lovers.
That's subjective. There were many other great or greater heroes where sexuality wasn't even remotely an issue.
In the Symposium there is general agreement that a love between man and man is more noble, morespiritual than that between man and women.
According to Plato
Read the portion of the Symposium where Socrates and Alcibiades are drunk
Key point in my opinion
To ally any conservative fears you might be harbouring--I am as straight as a ruler--educated by Jesuitsand happily married--with issue--for over 40 years and do not advocate homosexuality.
Doesn't matter to me, and I'm not saying you are advocating it. Just perhaps placing too much emphasis on it
A final note: just because a mature Greek male made some sort of love to a young lad did not mean he was a homosexual. To be crude--to our mature Greek male who loved beauty--an orifice was an orifice.
Penetration was more a sign of submission rather than appreciation of beauty.
I have a friend who is an administrator in a prison. He claims that for the Alpha male convicts sex is not a problem--they get lots of it. Not the kind we would necessarily like, but they make do with what is available. How Greek is that!
First you say that Greek society was different than our own. Now you are comparing homosexual rape in prison to Greek practices?
