[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 89 KB, 500x560, tumblr_mumj9hEZkA1rehlapo1_500.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6968715 No.6968715 [Reply] [Original]

Greeks thread.

Homer, tragedies, comedies welcome. Plato-, Aristotle-fags not welcome. Pre-socratics welcome.

>> No.6968719

You're not Nietzsche no matter how badly you wish you were.

>> No.6968724

>>6968719
nobody wants to be a sick loser you dingus, they just like his ideas

>> No.6968728

>>6968719
Who said anything about Nietzsche?

>> No.6968740

>>6968715
>Pre-socratics welcome
me negro

this is now a Heraclitus thread

>> No.6968746

>>6968719
Nietzsche knew fuck all about the Greeks, he just twisted the words of a select few to suit his agenda.

>> No.6968754

>>6968746
He was a Professor of Philology you dork.

>> No.6968775

>>6968754
Yes, he was, and he published The Birth of Tragedy, a piece which does rxactly what I described.

>> No.6968966
File: 73 KB, 350x500, Rancière, Kierkegaard, Heraclitus and Godard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6968966

Who /DUDEFIRELMAO/ here?

>> No.6968996
File: 49 KB, 624x434, 11267756_823005121127181_4565622598001873219_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6968996

What do you guys think about the Homeric question?

Personally I think that there was an original Homer but the succession of bards that came after him "refined" the works as they each told them, adjusting them to certain audiences or personal customs. As a whole though, I definitely think there was a Homer who deserves the vast majority of the credit for the Epics.

>> No.6969117
File: 20 KB, 300x300, dfwed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6969117

>>6968996
>yfw Homer was actually Lao Tzu and Shakespeare

>> No.6969161

>>6968775

What the fuck do you have against the Birth of Tragedy? It's one of the most intelligent and groundbreaking works of artistic theory in history.

>> No.6970258

>>6968715
Holy shit what a classic myspace angle

>> No.6970280

Αστερεσ μέν ἀμφι kάλαν σελάνναν
ἆιψ ἀπυkρύπτοισι φάεννον εἶδοσ,
ὄπποτα πλήθοισα μάλιστα λάμπησ
ἀργυρια γᾶν.

>> No.6970288

>>6968996
tbh the Homeric question was pretty satisfactorily resolved in the 19th century, when they found that epic poetry was still being produced across the Balkans and saw how it was made: versification of a prose to make it easier to remember and transmit, then endless retellings with modifications here and there, gradually growing a small realistic original story into a vast semi-mythologized poem

>> No.6970678

>when dikaiopolis is imitating lamachus in the archarnians

Lamachus: Bring me the stand for my shield.
Dikaiopolis: Bring me the rolls for my stomach.

>> No.6970686

Why didn't Zeus save Sarpedon?

>> No.6970708

>>6970686
Would have been disobeying fate, which is cheeky as fuck

>> No.6970709

>>6970708
Isn't the whole point of fate that it's inevitable?

>> No.6970725

>>6970709
Sort of, atleast in the Greek world. It was more of a 'this is what is supposed to happen' rather than some sort of hard determinism. Zeus could have saved Sarpedon, but it would have been very naughty.

>> No.6971418

>>6970686
Homer explains it literally in the ring composition segment before his death -- Zeus, like all immortals who intermarried with mortals, has to deal with the mortal off-spring to eventually die, it's just part of life; if he saves him there, the other Gods -- who also have mortal children -- will get bootyblasted at him for saving him when he has stopped them in the past for the same reasons. Pretty much all of the Trojan War was about that -- his lesser-peer Gods trying to save their own children or try to edge one side to victory for their own interest that ulimately prolongs the war long due past it's fate.

From a functionalist interpretation, it potentially served as an excuse of why some of the most devoted and religious followers of the Gods -- even their proclaimed offspring -- can't always be saved by them, to answer any questions from sceptics back then of if there were 'just' gods (or some 'just' gods), then why don't they make those who are the most devoted to them with protection against various tragedies. The answer, in this case, is that the Gods themselves are restricted by unstoppable fate, and although they can edge their followers and favored subjects to prolong them from experiencing it, or making them experience as less severe, they ultimately can't prevent all disasters from them.