Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
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!
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.
To Donald Baker on being Rankean.Without doubt Ranke's attempt to elevate HISTORY from literature to discipline akin to a science was a wonderful goal and he should be remembered and lauded. There is just one problem that continues to vexlovers of Clio. The historian who strives to be objective and disciplines himself to adhere to the mostrigid standards cannot help but be biased as his selection of the sources, his picking through the documentsand his conclusions are all subjective--perhaps without his being aware of it. In my opinion Rake'ssterile objectivity is a myth. Please feel free to destroy me for this heresy.
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!
I am forewarned. I am not quite sure what the Conservative ideological view is nor am I convinced thata balanced view is not an historical chimera. I am to old and to scarred to abandon my worship of Clioin whose service I have willingly laboured all these many years. I agree with your contention that at the end of the day one must take a side and defend it regardless of the consequences. Your views may differand I trust that if I am allowed to stay in this august company that we will both find worthy adversaries.Mark me down as inclined toward the left and delighted to become involved in historiographicaldebates. Let us rush to the list armed with honour, knowledge and the realization that in a free societyideas compete--sometimes bloodlessly. Thank you for the warning--I am sharpening my quills.So what about old von Ranke and David Irving-objective and balanced or self deluded?
Zinn–propaganda–surely you jest! Would you say that Paul Johnson's works are Rankean, without biasand provide a balanced view of history? How do you feel about David Irving?
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!
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.
I have read this book and found it enlightening. Mr. Zinn, an avowed LIBERAL, letsus see through a different lens than most mainline history books. There is danger here.If you let your children read this book they may well ask questions that you are unprepared or reluctant to discuss such as race, class and the true meaning of liberty. Mr. Zinndropped bombs on people in WWII and then got his doctorate in History. He recently died--most unfortunate for his fans. You may remember him being alluded to in the move "Good Will Hunting".
I would opine that in addition to all the other reasons mentioned we also have to consider geography andSwiss preparations for war. All adult hale males had had military training and their weapons were excellent--mostly German--and the troops were familiar with the territory. All the passes were ready tobe blown up making armoured thrusts difficult in the extreme. Switzerland is mountains and with fewexceptions attackers are at a distinct disadvantage--it is all uphill! Think of the Turks in Montenegro, the Americans in Italy in WWII and the Italians on the Austrian front in WWI. The Germans made many mistakes in WWII. The invasion of Switzerland was not one of them.
I think that Herodotus wrote a good story for his audience and some of what he wrote of has been shown tobe true. Thucidides did not include the "gods" because he recognized that the fables he was taught had very little to do with the outcome of human interactions. He wrote what we would call a fact based objective account of a terrible time in Greek History. His prose is magnificent--check Melian Dialogue--everyone else does--and one gets the distinct impression that he was trying to be fair to all sides. His account of the Expedition to Syracuse is an example of this point. His Funeral Oration of Pericles is,in my opinion, one of the most glorious speeches in Western literature; Herodotus has nothing to comparewith this. He and his lifelong companion--the hetarai, Aspasia-- enjoyed an intellectual relationship for many years. They were the salon- going intellectuals of the time and the "gods" of the time were much more welcomed by the hoi polloi than people like Thucidides, Pericles, Alcibiades and Socrates.
