I KNOW!!! I KNOW!!! No post tonight because I totally forgot that I had to read Sallust's The Jugurthine War over spring break. Oops. Don't you hate it when you forget about Sallust? I know I do. [sighs] Page 1...
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!!!
Monday, March 23, 2009
Friday, March 20, 2009
Special!--"Though Philomela"
Well, I was thinking about what to do today, when I realized that something ELSE I could do for this blog was music based on classical stuff, as well. It might be considered a "modern adaptation" sometimes, but what do you do for genuinely OLD music?? Therefore, I've decided to make Friday a sort of hodge-podge between Pic of the Week and Music of the week. That way, I have more material, and I'm not always scrounging around for stuff, all the time.
Anyway, today we're going to look at a madrigal written by a man named Thomas Morley entitled "Though Philomela." For more information about the actual myth, read here. What I'm going to do today is link to three renditions of this song from Youtube and give you what I think about their performances.
Here are the lyrics:
Version 1:
Yes. That IS a male soprano. I actually thought this was a really good version of the song, but then, I'm biased towards choirs that make use of male sopranos. I don't have much to say about this version, except that it's an all around good rendition. I'd give it an A.
Version 2:
Uhm... what? Seriously, they took a LOT of liberties with this song. Like, what was up with the tempo during the "falala" part?? (and yes, I've performed this song, so I know how it's supposed to sound) And WHAT IS UP WITH THE BOUNCING GIRL?! Seriously, stand still during a choral performance! She'd be great if this was a solo competition, but it's not. Also, I felt their vowels were a little spread, though I think only choral fanatics would notice that. I understand that they're German and not native English speakers, but that doesn't give them the excuse to go spread. This was the worst version that I found, though I only looked at these three versions. Seriously guys, don't perform like this. I'll give this performance a C.
Version 3:
I think I like this version the best, mainly because you can hear the alto part best of all in this version, haha. They have great pronunciation, too! The one major downside I see in this particular version is the bouncing. I'm particularly harsh on bouncing because I've been repremaned for doing it about 20 million times. Yet, at least the bouncing in this version seems controlled and on beat... the bouncing in version 2 seemed out of left field. Also in this version, you have another song right after it, so keep listening! They do a good job on that one, too. This version gets an A.
~~~
Alright, so maybe this one wasn't the most educational blog post I've ever had, but eh... you got to listen to (mostly) pretty music, right? If you like this song, here's a link to the choral wiki. There you can find midis and the sheet music.
And I know, it seems pretty mean of me to rip on other people's performances, but that's what choir people do. We're all generally mean like that. =P
You guys okay? Alright then. I'm going to go... do something else. Yes.
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Anyway, today we're going to look at a madrigal written by a man named Thomas Morley entitled "Though Philomela." For more information about the actual myth, read here. What I'm going to do today is link to three renditions of this song from Youtube and give you what I think about their performances.
Here are the lyrics:
Though Philomela lost her love,
fresh note she warbleth yes! again;
Fa la la la.
He is a fool that lovers prove:
and leaves to sing, to live in pain.
Fa la la la
Version 1:
Yes. That IS a male soprano. I actually thought this was a really good version of the song, but then, I'm biased towards choirs that make use of male sopranos. I don't have much to say about this version, except that it's an all around good rendition. I'd give it an A.
Version 2:
Uhm... what? Seriously, they took a LOT of liberties with this song. Like, what was up with the tempo during the "falala" part?? (and yes, I've performed this song, so I know how it's supposed to sound) And WHAT IS UP WITH THE BOUNCING GIRL?! Seriously, stand still during a choral performance! She'd be great if this was a solo competition, but it's not. Also, I felt their vowels were a little spread, though I think only choral fanatics would notice that. I understand that they're German and not native English speakers, but that doesn't give them the excuse to go spread. This was the worst version that I found, though I only looked at these three versions. Seriously guys, don't perform like this. I'll give this performance a C.
Version 3:
I think I like this version the best, mainly because you can hear the alto part best of all in this version, haha. They have great pronunciation, too! The one major downside I see in this particular version is the bouncing. I'm particularly harsh on bouncing because I've been repremaned for doing it about 20 million times. Yet, at least the bouncing in this version seems controlled and on beat... the bouncing in version 2 seemed out of left field. Also in this version, you have another song right after it, so keep listening! They do a good job on that one, too. This version gets an A.
~~~
Alright, so maybe this one wasn't the most educational blog post I've ever had, but eh... you got to listen to (mostly) pretty music, right? If you like this song, here's a link to the choral wiki. There you can find midis and the sheet music.
And I know, it seems pretty mean of me to rip on other people's performances, but that's what choir people do. We're all generally mean like that. =P
You guys okay? Alright then. I'm going to go... do something else. Yes.
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Modern Adaptation of the Week-- The Sea of Monsters
Well, I'm actually getting this done fairly early today. HOORAH!!! I think this has something to do with the fact that I don't want to get back to reading Herland by Charlotte Perkins Gilman. Interesting book, but ehh... "homework" always makes things more boring.
At any rate, today I'm going to review my favorite of all the Percy Jackson and the Olympans books, The Sea of Monsters. I'll try to be FAIR AND BALANCED, but since this one is my favorite, that might be sort of hard. Come to think of it, perhaps I shouldn't be aspiring to write like Fox News.
Anyway, prepare for
SPOILERS!!!
Pros:
+LUKE!!!: NOW I may finally discuss the character of Luke! In the first book, we meet Luke, the son of Hermes who helped Annabeth get to Camp Half-blood when they were all much younger. Oh, and also Thalia, but she got turned into a tree that protects the camp. However, by the end of the first book, we find out that LUKE HAS BEEN TRYING TO RESURRECT THE TITANS!!! OH NOES!!! WHATEVER IS A YOUNG WARRIOR LIKE PERCY GOING TO DO?! He's going to have a little duel with Luke at the end of the first book and then limp away like a wounded puppy as Luke gets off scott free. By the way, did I mention that Luke has a huge scar running down his face? Man, this guy has anime potential! Then, the second book. So somehow, this seventeen year old gets his hands on a boat, which is pretty awesome, as well as a crew of monsters. Which is also pretty awesome. Here's this description of Luke from book 2:
With the first paragraph, I can't help but to think of Yagami Raito from Death Note (screw you new fans; it's RAITO!!! DX ). With the second paragraph, you're reminded of just how cool this guy is, and you begin to wonder why an anime hasn't been dedicated to him. A battle with a dragon? A magical sword that can kill men and monster alike? (The other swords in this series can only kill monsters) TOO COOL!!! Not to mention that it takes freaking CENTAURS to defeat this kid in the end! You know... CENTAURS. A BUNCH OF THEM. This is why Luke is my favorite character... for the first two books. (I'll complain about him in the next two books! D: )
+Working with the source material: I feel that of all the books, this one has the greatest cohesion, primarily because this book mostly takes from The Odyssey. The first one is just a hodge-podge of myths, the third one has mostly do to with myths of the titans, and the fourth one has to do with myths about Crete. While the third and the fourth have a certain cohesion, this one wins for taking mostly from one source. While I've never been the biggest fan of The Odyssey, despite my collection, it gives this book a sense of direction that I think all the other ones lack.
+Chapter Titles: I think I just have to do this every week, since the chapter titles for these books are always so interesting. Here's a taste of the best:
1. My Best Friend Shops for a Wedding Dress
2. I play Dodgeball with Cannibals
3. We Hail the Taxi of Eternal Torment
6. Demon Pigeons Attack
11. Clarisse Blows Up Everything
14. We Meet the Sheep of Doom
I swear, I want to take a course from Mr. Riordan about how to write titles. I need to learn!
+George and Martha: Hermes' snakes on his cadeuceus, which has been replaced by a cellphone. They're a great source of humor, as evidenced by this scene:
Yeah, this is a pretty funny line, but I think it's also proof that these books were also written with adults in mind as well as kids. For those unfamiliar, this line is a parody off of the famous exchange that was supposedly used in the Burns and Allen show: "Say 'goodnight,' Gracie!" "'Goodnight, Gracie!'" This line never actually made it into the show, but it's pretty famous, nonetheless, and all the parents reading this book with their kids would probably know the line. It's a nice, small gesture towards the adults.
But that really wasn't my point. I just like George and Martha because they're silly. Also, it's sort of relieving to have a god other than Poseidon like Percy. All of the other ones are put off by him, but Hermes is cool (so is Apollo, but he comes in later).
+Tyson: Upon finding out that Percy is the son of Poseidon, my roommate asked, "PLEASE let him have a cyclops as a brother!" Of course, she was referencing the part of the Odyssey when Odysseus meets up with Polyphemus, the cyclops, who is also a son of Poseidon. I was able to say with a certian amount of glee that he does--Tyson. You really can't hate Tyson. Hes a pretty cute character, despite his physical looks and the fact that he's not all up there with brain smarts. How does he live in the human world? Well... I'll let you read to find out!
Cons:
-Lack of Character Development Pre-story: This problem comes up over and over again in this series. While this one isn't so bad, it starts off what I consider to be a very big letdown in what is otherwise a very good series. What I mean is that we're introduced to a character at the beginning of the story that we're just somehow supposed to believe that Percy met and became quite close friends with all in a very short amount of time. It was ok to do that in the first book with Grover, because we knew nothing of this world to begin with. Now that we know the world, sometimes it's hard to believe some of these relationships. In this book, I'm talking about Tyson. He's sort of a plus and a minus at the same time. I wish this book would go into how they met and what Percy thought of Tyson and the nitty gritty and all that, but it just says, "AAAAAND now we're friends!" Granted, it's not the worst mistake that Mr. Riordan could make, but it's more of an irritation that sort of refuses to die in this series.
-Thalia: I'm not a big fan of her. When we're first introduced to her via dream sequence, she's dressed like a little goth/punk girl. I'll give him credit that he actually uses both terms as if they are different terms; many people don't know the difference between "goth" and "punk," which irritates me. I tend to find that authors who go this route are simply looking to fill a demographic. Maybe I'm being a little unfair; I had no qualms about her in THIS book; it's next book that I take issue with her. A lot. That being said, I myself have used this technique before; however, it was in a teen vampire romance novel. Yeah... and in my defense, THAT'S where the money is, right now!
~~~
Well... that's all for now, folks! Perhaps I could have written more, but there is a banana split in the kitchen with my name on it! Bye, guys!
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Riordan, Rick. The Sea of Monsters. Hyperion: New York, 2006.
At any rate, today I'm going to review my favorite of all the Percy Jackson and the Olympans books, The Sea of Monsters. I'll try to be FAIR AND BALANCED, but since this one is my favorite, that might be sort of hard. Come to think of it, perhaps I shouldn't be aspiring to write like Fox News.
Anyway, prepare for
SPOILERS!!!
Pros:
+LUKE!!!: NOW I may finally discuss the character of Luke! In the first book, we meet Luke, the son of Hermes who helped Annabeth get to Camp Half-blood when they were all much younger. Oh, and also Thalia, but she got turned into a tree that protects the camp. However, by the end of the first book, we find out that LUKE HAS BEEN TRYING TO RESURRECT THE TITANS!!! OH NOES!!! WHATEVER IS A YOUNG WARRIOR LIKE PERCY GOING TO DO?! He's going to have a little duel with Luke at the end of the first book and then limp away like a wounded puppy as Luke gets off scott free. By the way, did I mention that Luke has a huge scar running down his face? Man, this guy has anime potential! Then, the second book. So somehow, this seventeen year old gets his hands on a boat, which is pretty awesome, as well as a crew of monsters. Which is also pretty awesome. Here's this description of Luke from book 2:
He'd changed since the last summer. Instead of Bermuda shorts and a T-shirt, he wore a button-down shirt, khaki pants, and leather loafers. His sandy hair, which used to be so unruly, was now clipped short. He looked like an evil male model, showing off what the fashionable college-age villain was wearing to Harvard this year.
He still had the scar under his eye--a jagged white line from his battle with a dragon. And propped against the sofa was his magical sword, Backbiter, glinting strangely with its half-steel, half-Celestial bronze blade that could kill both mortals and monsters. (125)
With the first paragraph, I can't help but to think of Yagami Raito from Death Note (screw you new fans; it's RAITO!!! DX ). With the second paragraph, you're reminded of just how cool this guy is, and you begin to wonder why an anime hasn't been dedicated to him. A battle with a dragon? A magical sword that can kill men and monster alike? (The other swords in this series can only kill monsters) TOO COOL!!! Not to mention that it takes freaking CENTAURS to defeat this kid in the end! You know... CENTAURS. A BUNCH OF THEM. This is why Luke is my favorite character... for the first two books. (I'll complain about him in the next two books! D: )
+Working with the source material: I feel that of all the books, this one has the greatest cohesion, primarily because this book mostly takes from The Odyssey. The first one is just a hodge-podge of myths, the third one has mostly do to with myths of the titans, and the fourth one has to do with myths about Crete. While the third and the fourth have a certain cohesion, this one wins for taking mostly from one source. While I've never been the biggest fan of The Odyssey, despite my collection, it gives this book a sense of direction that I think all the other ones lack.
+Chapter Titles: I think I just have to do this every week, since the chapter titles for these books are always so interesting. Here's a taste of the best:
1. My Best Friend Shops for a Wedding Dress
2. I play Dodgeball with Cannibals
3. We Hail the Taxi of Eternal Torment
6. Demon Pigeons Attack
11. Clarisse Blows Up Everything
14. We Meet the Sheep of Doom
I swear, I want to take a course from Mr. Riordan about how to write titles. I need to learn!
+George and Martha: Hermes' snakes on his cadeuceus, which has been replaced by a cellphone. They're a great source of humor, as evidenced by this scene:
[Hermes] hung up. "Sorry. the overnight express business is just booming. Now, as I was saying--"
"You have snakes on your phone."
"What? Oh, they don't bite. Say hello, George and Martha."
Hello, George and Martha, a raspy male voice said inside my head. (99)
Yeah, this is a pretty funny line, but I think it's also proof that these books were also written with adults in mind as well as kids. For those unfamiliar, this line is a parody off of the famous exchange that was supposedly used in the Burns and Allen show: "Say 'goodnight,' Gracie!" "'Goodnight, Gracie!'" This line never actually made it into the show, but it's pretty famous, nonetheless, and all the parents reading this book with their kids would probably know the line. It's a nice, small gesture towards the adults.
But that really wasn't my point. I just like George and Martha because they're silly. Also, it's sort of relieving to have a god other than Poseidon like Percy. All of the other ones are put off by him, but Hermes is cool (so is Apollo, but he comes in later).
+Tyson: Upon finding out that Percy is the son of Poseidon, my roommate asked, "PLEASE let him have a cyclops as a brother!" Of course, she was referencing the part of the Odyssey when Odysseus meets up with Polyphemus, the cyclops, who is also a son of Poseidon. I was able to say with a certian amount of glee that he does--Tyson. You really can't hate Tyson. Hes a pretty cute character, despite his physical looks and the fact that he's not all up there with brain smarts. How does he live in the human world? Well... I'll let you read to find out!
Cons:
-Lack of Character Development Pre-story: This problem comes up over and over again in this series. While this one isn't so bad, it starts off what I consider to be a very big letdown in what is otherwise a very good series. What I mean is that we're introduced to a character at the beginning of the story that we're just somehow supposed to believe that Percy met and became quite close friends with all in a very short amount of time. It was ok to do that in the first book with Grover, because we knew nothing of this world to begin with. Now that we know the world, sometimes it's hard to believe some of these relationships. In this book, I'm talking about Tyson. He's sort of a plus and a minus at the same time. I wish this book would go into how they met and what Percy thought of Tyson and the nitty gritty and all that, but it just says, "AAAAAND now we're friends!" Granted, it's not the worst mistake that Mr. Riordan could make, but it's more of an irritation that sort of refuses to die in this series.
-Thalia: I'm not a big fan of her. When we're first introduced to her via dream sequence, she's dressed like a little goth/punk girl. I'll give him credit that he actually uses both terms as if they are different terms; many people don't know the difference between "goth" and "punk," which irritates me. I tend to find that authors who go this route are simply looking to fill a demographic. Maybe I'm being a little unfair; I had no qualms about her in THIS book; it's next book that I take issue with her. A lot. That being said, I myself have used this technique before; however, it was in a teen vampire romance novel. Yeah... and in my defense, THAT'S where the money is, right now!
~~~
Well... that's all for now, folks! Perhaps I could have written more, but there is a banana split in the kitchen with my name on it! Bye, guys!
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Riordan, Rick. The Sea of Monsters. Hyperion: New York, 2006.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Text of the Week--The Agamemnon
Sorry I'm doing this last minute. I actually forgot about writing this blog, today. I WAS SO ENGROSSED IN READING DOWN AND OUT IN THE MAGIC KINGDOM THAT I TOTALLY FORGOT!!! (Did you believe that? Well, at any rate, it WAS a really freaking good book. Click on the link; you can download the book for free.)
Well, today, son, we need to have the talk. I'm quite sure your mother's been itching to have this talk with you, but I knew I had to talk to you first.
We need to talk to you about carpets, and walking on them.
... you know, I actually DIDN'T mean for that to sound sexual. But it does. It really, REALLY does.
ANYWAY. Walking on carpets is VERY, VERY BAD, because the gods will SMITE YOU like they did the main character of today's text-- The Agamemnon. It's the first play in the Oresteia, so we'll be covering that group of plays for the entire month of March.
As a little bit of background: All Greek tragic performances were actually performed as a group of three tragic plays, all sort of related to each other, and a satyr play as the last one. (remember that pic of the satyr I had not too long ago? Now, try to imagine what a satyr play is like...) The ONLY fully surviving group of plays that we have, minus the satyr play, is The Oresteia written by Aeschylus. Someone who knows their stuff a little more might argue with me on Sophocles' Oedipus plays, but no, he wrote those three for three different competitions (and for the record, Sophocles is my favorite of all the tragic writers).
With that in mind, let us plunge into the waters of...
SPOILERS!!! (how very Greek of me, what with the "waters" bit...)
Pros:
+DEEP: Nowadays, we consider writers like Ernest Hemmingway and Ayn Rand to be DEEP. All those ancient people? Pah! They just talked about guys creaming themselves all over womens and then the handkercheif from that creaming creates a species of snake people that eventually become an ancient civilization. Actually, that's true, but there was also some DEPTH in them thar hills of Greece. I wish I could take a picture of a few pages of my copy of The Agamemnon and show it to you. I have writing and highlighter marks EVERYWHERE, because there's a lot of DEPTH all over this play! I feel like this is primarily accomplished by the use of symbolism and ambiguity. When you're reading The Agamemnon, watch out for images of light/dark, lions, and nets, to name only a few. As far as the ambiguity goes, pay close attention to the use of the term "justice" or ANYTHING having to do with legal terms, for that matter. It's sort of funny how EVERYONE in this play has a claim to justice. Who will win? Only time (and reading the other two plays) will tell...
+Cassandra: WOW. Just... WOW. The professor who initially taught me the Oresteia said that if he were to go back in time and witness one thing, he would go and watch the Cassandra portion of the Agamemnon. When he first said that, I was a little skeptical, but after reading it nearly forty billion times, I see his point. She's... something. When she's first wheeled into the play, she doesn't say ANYTHING, but watches in despair as Agamemnon, the man who captured her, is led off to his doom (I feel like there's a bit of Stockholm Syndrome here...). Then, once it looks like everything is going to calm down... WHAMMO!!! THERE SHE IS, GO GO GO!!! Yeah, I'm purposefully being vague. I want you to read it and see what I mean. Now. I'll provide a link to an etext online at the end of this post, how about that?? :D
+Cassandra/Clytemnestra Dynamic: For being so mysoginistic, those Greeks had some dynamo women. I put this as its own point because I'm not just talking about Cassandra here; I'm talking about the way these two interact. It's amazing, because it's all silence on Cassandra's part. While the evil Clytemnestra, who was NOT the original "main" villain of the story but is in this play, lures her husband Agamemnon to his doom, Cassandra refuses to submit to Clytemnestra's will. Funny how only a woman can defy Clytemnestra's ALL POWERFUL EVILNESS. Even in the next play, Orestes is duped by her at some point. Neither of the other two main men in this story, Agamemnon nor Aegisthus, can even compare to the strength of these two women. Best of all, she doesn't get all bitchy at Clytemnestra and go off the handle in front of her; Cassandra is silent for the entire exchange, as I suggested earlier. Seriously, it's a wonderfully handled scene. I wish ALL of the scenes in the Oresteia were handled this well, but alas... I'll complain about that next week. =P
+Emotion: Of course, it's not a good tragedy if it doesn't make you feel anything for the characters. (Was I being opinionated again? Whoops, silly me...) Truthfully, I didn't feel much for Agamemnon, except "GOD YOU'RE STUPID!!! GET OFF THAT DAMN CARPET!!!" With Cassandra... if you can't tell, she's my favorite character in this play. You really do feel bad for her at the end as she's dragged off to her doom, KNOWING she's going to die (that's part of her curse. Read more on her here.) You also learn to hate and fear Clytemnestra. I swear, my mental image of her is always Maleficent. I know, I know... the Greeks would have totally hated the kick ass female villain, even more than the kick ass male villain, but eh... you got to admit, someone THAT cunning is pretty scary business. At the very least, I like her as a villain.
Cons:
-... MAAAAAYBE a little too DEEP: Our professor had us read this play first of all the tragic plays for a reason; it's really fracking hard to read. This is mostly caused by the chorus, since they're so dense and chalk full of symbolism. And no, you can't just skip over the chorus. They provide BACKSTORY. At the very least, you've got to read over this play a couple of times. If you're like me, you've read it forty billion times, and can probably quote it by heart. (Actually... I can't.)
-Stupidest way of dying... ALMOST EVER: Actually, that award would go to the dwarf who got swollwed by a hippo. At any rate, it was a Clytemnestra/Aegisthus team up, in the bathroom, with a net. Seriously, Agamemnon and Cassandra die while taking a bubble bath or some stupid shit like that. I suppose I can't fault Aeschylus TOO much for that; that's a detail of the actual story. Still, it's a great tabloid headline: FAMOUS WAR GENERAL KILLED IN TUB BY WIFE.
-The "GODDAMMIT AGAMEMNON!!!" moments: FFFFFFF--!!! One of the aggravating things about this play is the sheer stupidity of Agamemnon. The reason why it was so bad for him to walk on that tapestry is that it would have made him seem like he was acting like a god, and thus giving Clytemnestra and Aegisthus the justification needed for killing him. Now, son, we have had the talk.
~~~
I tried to make this one FAIR AND BALANCED, but seriously, of all three plays, this one is my favorite. I have more negative to say about The Libation Bearers and the Eumenides, but The Agamemnon is actually a pretty damn good play.
E-text version of The Agamemnon
Well, what are you waiting for? Go read it! :D
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Well, today, son, we need to have the talk. I'm quite sure your mother's been itching to have this talk with you, but I knew I had to talk to you first.
We need to talk to you about carpets, and walking on them.
... you know, I actually DIDN'T mean for that to sound sexual. But it does. It really, REALLY does.
ANYWAY. Walking on carpets is VERY, VERY BAD, because the gods will SMITE YOU like they did the main character of today's text-- The Agamemnon. It's the first play in the Oresteia, so we'll be covering that group of plays for the entire month of March.
As a little bit of background: All Greek tragic performances were actually performed as a group of three tragic plays, all sort of related to each other, and a satyr play as the last one. (remember that pic of the satyr I had not too long ago? Now, try to imagine what a satyr play is like...) The ONLY fully surviving group of plays that we have, minus the satyr play, is The Oresteia written by Aeschylus. Someone who knows their stuff a little more might argue with me on Sophocles' Oedipus plays, but no, he wrote those three for three different competitions (and for the record, Sophocles is my favorite of all the tragic writers).
With that in mind, let us plunge into the waters of...
SPOILERS!!! (how very Greek of me, what with the "waters" bit...)
Pros:
+DEEP: Nowadays, we consider writers like Ernest Hemmingway and Ayn Rand to be DEEP. All those ancient people? Pah! They just talked about guys creaming themselves all over womens and then the handkercheif from that creaming creates a species of snake people that eventually become an ancient civilization. Actually, that's true, but there was also some DEPTH in them thar hills of Greece. I wish I could take a picture of a few pages of my copy of The Agamemnon and show it to you. I have writing and highlighter marks EVERYWHERE, because there's a lot of DEPTH all over this play! I feel like this is primarily accomplished by the use of symbolism and ambiguity. When you're reading The Agamemnon, watch out for images of light/dark, lions, and nets, to name only a few. As far as the ambiguity goes, pay close attention to the use of the term "justice" or ANYTHING having to do with legal terms, for that matter. It's sort of funny how EVERYONE in this play has a claim to justice. Who will win? Only time (and reading the other two plays) will tell...
+Cassandra: WOW. Just... WOW. The professor who initially taught me the Oresteia said that if he were to go back in time and witness one thing, he would go and watch the Cassandra portion of the Agamemnon. When he first said that, I was a little skeptical, but after reading it nearly forty billion times, I see his point. She's... something. When she's first wheeled into the play, she doesn't say ANYTHING, but watches in despair as Agamemnon, the man who captured her, is led off to his doom (I feel like there's a bit of Stockholm Syndrome here...). Then, once it looks like everything is going to calm down... WHAMMO!!! THERE SHE IS, GO GO GO!!! Yeah, I'm purposefully being vague. I want you to read it and see what I mean. Now. I'll provide a link to an etext online at the end of this post, how about that?? :D
+Cassandra/Clytemnestra Dynamic: For being so mysoginistic, those Greeks had some dynamo women. I put this as its own point because I'm not just talking about Cassandra here; I'm talking about the way these two interact. It's amazing, because it's all silence on Cassandra's part. While the evil Clytemnestra, who was NOT the original "main" villain of the story but is in this play, lures her husband Agamemnon to his doom, Cassandra refuses to submit to Clytemnestra's will. Funny how only a woman can defy Clytemnestra's ALL POWERFUL EVILNESS. Even in the next play, Orestes is duped by her at some point. Neither of the other two main men in this story, Agamemnon nor Aegisthus, can even compare to the strength of these two women. Best of all, she doesn't get all bitchy at Clytemnestra and go off the handle in front of her; Cassandra is silent for the entire exchange, as I suggested earlier. Seriously, it's a wonderfully handled scene. I wish ALL of the scenes in the Oresteia were handled this well, but alas... I'll complain about that next week. =P
+Emotion: Of course, it's not a good tragedy if it doesn't make you feel anything for the characters. (Was I being opinionated again? Whoops, silly me...) Truthfully, I didn't feel much for Agamemnon, except "GOD YOU'RE STUPID!!! GET OFF THAT DAMN CARPET!!!" With Cassandra... if you can't tell, she's my favorite character in this play. You really do feel bad for her at the end as she's dragged off to her doom, KNOWING she's going to die (that's part of her curse. Read more on her here.) You also learn to hate and fear Clytemnestra. I swear, my mental image of her is always Maleficent. I know, I know... the Greeks would have totally hated the kick ass female villain, even more than the kick ass male villain, but eh... you got to admit, someone THAT cunning is pretty scary business. At the very least, I like her as a villain.
Cons:
-... MAAAAAYBE a little too DEEP: Our professor had us read this play first of all the tragic plays for a reason; it's really fracking hard to read. This is mostly caused by the chorus, since they're so dense and chalk full of symbolism. And no, you can't just skip over the chorus. They provide BACKSTORY. At the very least, you've got to read over this play a couple of times. If you're like me, you've read it forty billion times, and can probably quote it by heart. (Actually... I can't.)
-Stupidest way of dying... ALMOST EVER: Actually, that award would go to the dwarf who got swollwed by a hippo. At any rate, it was a Clytemnestra/Aegisthus team up, in the bathroom, with a net. Seriously, Agamemnon and Cassandra die while taking a bubble bath or some stupid shit like that. I suppose I can't fault Aeschylus TOO much for that; that's a detail of the actual story. Still, it's a great tabloid headline: FAMOUS WAR GENERAL KILLED IN TUB BY WIFE.
-The "GODDAMMIT AGAMEMNON!!!" moments: FFFFFFF--!!! One of the aggravating things about this play is the sheer stupidity of Agamemnon. The reason why it was so bad for him to walk on that tapestry is that it would have made him seem like he was acting like a god, and thus giving Clytemnestra and Aegisthus the justification needed for killing him. Now, son, we have had the talk.
~~~
I tried to make this one FAIR AND BALANCED, but seriously, of all three plays, this one is my favorite. I have more negative to say about The Libation Bearers and the Eumenides, but The Agamemnon is actually a pretty damn good play.
E-text version of The Agamemnon
Well, what are you waiting for? Go read it! :D
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Friday, March 13, 2009
Pic of the Week--SNAKES ON MY PLANE?!
Whoo-hoo! At least ONE entry gets done on time this week!
Sorry for scaring you guys with the satyr. I was going to scare you guys with WHORES WHORES WHORES, but I can't find that pic on my compy. So... you get this, instead.
Those are snakes attacking those guys. Who are those guys? Why, they're Laocoon and his boys, of course, in all their naked glory! So... I guess I have to tell story time, now?? I guess so.
SO. One day, the Greeks were like, "HEY, LET'S TRICK THE TROJANS!!! WIIIIIIITH... A HERRING!!!" Okay, actually, it was a horse. We all know THAT story. What less of us know is that poor little Laocoon was like, "GUYS. Beware the gift-bearing Greeks!" Which Minerva (that's Athena to you Greekies!) didn't like, so she sent some snakes to attack Laocoon and his sons. Of course, the Trojans took that as a sign of, "OH SHI--!!! WE GOTTA TAKE THE HORSE!!!"
And of course, Troy was lost because Minerva killed off their smartest, nakedest man. With snakes.
And now, you know.
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Sorry for scaring you guys with the satyr. I was going to scare you guys with WHORES WHORES WHORES, but I can't find that pic on my compy. So... you get this, instead.
Those are snakes attacking those guys. Who are those guys? Why, they're Laocoon and his boys, of course, in all their naked glory! So... I guess I have to tell story time, now?? I guess so.SO. One day, the Greeks were like, "HEY, LET'S TRICK THE TROJANS!!! WIIIIIIITH... A HERRING!!!" Okay, actually, it was a horse. We all know THAT story. What less of us know is that poor little Laocoon was like, "GUYS. Beware the gift-bearing Greeks!" Which Minerva (that's Athena to you Greekies!) didn't like, so she sent some snakes to attack Laocoon and his sons. Of course, the Trojans took that as a sign of, "OH SHI--!!! WE GOTTA TAKE THE HORSE!!!"
And of course, Troy was lost because Minerva killed off their smartest, nakedest man. With snakes.
And now, you know.
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Modern Adaptation of the Week (late)--The Lightning Thief
In our continuation of PERCY JACKSON MONTH, I'm going to review the first book of the series, The Lightning Thief. Truthfully, this is my second favorite book of the series... even IF my little brother spoiled it for me by telling me EVERY SINGLE FREAKING PLOT DETAIL before I ever sat down to read the book (in his defense, though, he said that he didn't expect that I'd ever read it at all. Then, I was like, "YOU MENTIONED GREEKS!!! OF COURSE I'M GOING TO READ IT!!!"). Nevertheless, it's a great book, and a great way to kick off a great series!
Ready to begin? [Y/N]
SPOILERS!!! (Yeah... I'm gettin' tired of the "ahoy" part... the ninja in me doesn't like it)
Pros:
+Characterization: This is something I'm going to complain about in later books, so I'll go ahead and say that the characterization in this first book is excellent, especially on the part of our hero, Percy. At the beginning of the book, we're introduced to this kid who's not always got everything going his way, like at his school field trips:
[GASP!]
Of all the dynamics in this book, I think the relationship between Percy and his mother is the most touching. It's obvious Percy loves his mother, and like most little boys with an abusive father, wants to protect his mother at all costs. After she dies and he's sent to summer camp, he does everything in his power not only to look for the one who took Zeus' master bolt (thus the title of the story), but to save his mom from Hades.
From all of this, I think we can deduce that Percy is not a bad kid; he may do bad things, but he is not a bad kid himself. He's fallable, just like the rest of us, which is why I really like him.
Did I mention I like Percy as a character? Yes.
+The handling of religion: In a book about Greek gods, the subject of religion is BOUND to come up, especially with the backlash of the church against Harry Potter. I think that this book handles the issue of religion VERY well.
I think this is a genius move. He neither acknowledges nor denies the existence of God, leaving it open to the religion of ANY family. The one backlash I can see is if someone took the bit from Paradise Lost too seriously about the Catalogue of Demons, and how they're actually all foreign gods. Those people will never be happy, I think.
+Chapter Titles: I forgot to mention this in the last blog post, but MAN, these titles are a riot! Here's a few of the better ones:
1. I Accidentally Vaporize My Pre-algebra Teacher
2. Three Old Ladies Knit the Socks of Death
3. Grover Unexpectedly Loses His Pants
6. I Become Supreme Lord of the Bathroom
12. We Get Advice from a Poodle
16. We Take a Zebra to Vegas
There's more, of course, but these ones are my faves. I think they also get better as the series goes on, too.
+Introducing us to the world: I think this book does a really good job of introducing us to Percy's world. I suppose I can't give any examples, but I'll just say that the pacing is really good.
+Luke: LUKE GETS HIS OWN SECTION BECAUSE HE'S TOO SEXY FOR ANYTHING ELSE!!! For those wondering who Luke is, Luke is the son of Hermes who, by the end of book 1... nah, I'll let you read it. I don't want to spoil it for you. :) Luke will be discussed in more detail in later books.
Cons:
-Innaccuracies: It's not really enough to make me go "OMG YOU HEATHEN!!!" It's little stuff, like, "Ooh, the Eta looks like an 'H'! Therefore, it's Hephaestus' symbol!" ACTUALLY, for those who don't know Greek, what would make the 'h' noise in Hephaestus' name is a little apostrophe looking thing at the beginning of the word called a "breathing mark." I'm not too mad about little stuff like this because really, that would be too hard to explain to kids.
... yeah, I really don't mean to make my posts SOOOO obviously one-sided. If it makes you guys feel any better, I have some complaints about future books, so =P
~~~
Yep, that's all I have time for today, kiddies! Sorry for the late post, but here ya go!
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!!!
Riordan, Rick. The Lightning Thief. Hyperion: New York, 2005.
Ready to begin? [Y/N]
SPOILERS!!! (Yeah... I'm gettin' tired of the "ahoy" part... the ninja in me doesn't like it)
Pros:
+Characterization: This is something I'm going to complain about in later books, so I'll go ahead and say that the characterization in this first book is excellent, especially on the part of our hero, Percy. At the beginning of the book, we're introduced to this kid who's not always got everything going his way, like at his school field trips:
Like at my fifth-grade school, when w went to the Saratoga battlefield, I had this accident with a Revolutionary War cannon. I wasn't aiming for the school bus, but of course I got expelled anyway. And before that, at my fourth-grade school, when we took a behind-the-scenes tour of the Marine World shark pool, I sort of hit the wrong lever on the catwalk and our class took an unplanned swim. And the time before that... Well, you get the idea.Of course, it never is for poor little Perseus. After having fights with the school bully and getting called out for it, he has a creepy run-in with a teacher who happens to be a monster! Once Percy kills her... everyone acts like that teacher never existed. However, the rest of the semester still sucks, and he's eventually kicked out of school. When he gets home, we see what his home life is like; his step-dad, Smelly Gabe, is a real creep! He treats Percy and his mom like they're not even worth his time! Percy's mom is awesome, though. It sucks when she dies.
This trip, I was determined to be good. (2-3)
[GASP!]
Of all the dynamics in this book, I think the relationship between Percy and his mother is the most touching. It's obvious Percy loves his mother, and like most little boys with an abusive father, wants to protect his mother at all costs. After she dies and he's sent to summer camp, he does everything in his power not only to look for the one who took Zeus' master bolt (thus the title of the story), but to save his mom from Hades.
From all of this, I think we can deduce that Percy is not a bad kid; he may do bad things, but he is not a bad kid himself. He's fallable, just like the rest of us, which is why I really like him.
Did I mention I like Percy as a character? Yes.
+The handling of religion: In a book about Greek gods, the subject of religion is BOUND to come up, especially with the backlash of the church against Harry Potter. I think that this book handles the issue of religion VERY well.
"Wait," I told Chiron. "You're telling me there's such a thing as God."
"Well, now," Chiron said. "God--capital G, God. That's a different matter altogether. We shan't deal with the metaphysical."
"Metaphysical? But you were just talking about--"
"Ah, gods, plural, as in, great beings that control the forces of nature and human endevors: the immortal gods of Olympus. That's a smaller matter."
"Smaller?"
"Yes, quite. The gods we discussed in Latin class." (67)
I think this is a genius move. He neither acknowledges nor denies the existence of God, leaving it open to the religion of ANY family. The one backlash I can see is if someone took the bit from Paradise Lost too seriously about the Catalogue of Demons, and how they're actually all foreign gods. Those people will never be happy, I think.
+Chapter Titles: I forgot to mention this in the last blog post, but MAN, these titles are a riot! Here's a few of the better ones:
1. I Accidentally Vaporize My Pre-algebra Teacher
2. Three Old Ladies Knit the Socks of Death
3. Grover Unexpectedly Loses His Pants
6. I Become Supreme Lord of the Bathroom
12. We Get Advice from a Poodle
16. We Take a Zebra to Vegas
There's more, of course, but these ones are my faves. I think they also get better as the series goes on, too.
+Introducing us to the world: I think this book does a really good job of introducing us to Percy's world. I suppose I can't give any examples, but I'll just say that the pacing is really good.
+Luke: LUKE GETS HIS OWN SECTION BECAUSE HE'S TOO SEXY FOR ANYTHING ELSE!!! For those wondering who Luke is, Luke is the son of Hermes who, by the end of book 1... nah, I'll let you read it. I don't want to spoil it for you. :) Luke will be discussed in more detail in later books.
Cons:
-Innaccuracies: It's not really enough to make me go "OMG YOU HEATHEN!!!" It's little stuff, like, "Ooh, the Eta looks like an 'H'! Therefore, it's Hephaestus' symbol!" ACTUALLY, for those who don't know Greek, what would make the 'h' noise in Hephaestus' name is a little apostrophe looking thing at the beginning of the word called a "breathing mark." I'm not too mad about little stuff like this because really, that would be too hard to explain to kids.
... yeah, I really don't mean to make my posts SOOOO obviously one-sided. If it makes you guys feel any better, I have some complaints about future books, so =P
~~~
Yep, that's all I have time for today, kiddies! Sorry for the late post, but here ya go!
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!!!
Riordan, Rick. The Lightning Thief. Hyperion: New York, 2005.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Text of the Week (late)-- The Satyricon
I feel as though I've been unfair to the Romans. You know, it's not like everything they wrote was a bomb. I just... have bad feelings towards Vergil. But that's not to say that other Romans were bad writers. So today, I'm going to review a very special Roman friend: Petronius.
Of course, there's a problem we already have, because while we have this name, "Petronius," that's it... that's all we know of this guy. Oh sure, there's a couple of dudes that the historians think may fit the bill, but we don't REALLY know who Petronius IS. If I had my text, I would cite that, but since I don't... maybe I could cite it next week...
Anyway, why do I like this text so much?
SPOILERS AHOY!!!
(That really IS dumb sounding. I think I was in a medicine-induced haze when I thought of that one. Anyone got anything better??)
Pros:
+REALLY stinkin funny: Okay guys, the name of this is "Satyricon," from which we get the word "Satire." This isn't just some text with a few funny parts. This is frickin' hilarious! The main story involves a guy named Enclopius, our narrator, who has this little boy that he likes, Giton. Okay, I say "little boy," but he was probably in his later teenage years. And yes, I KNOW what you're saying! "But we do not understand! The Romans thought that the oily Greeks and their pederasty was disgusting!" Yes, well... I'm not so convinced that the Romans TRULY hated the Greeks THAT much. Anyway, along with Enclopius and Giton is Ascyltus, who also has a thing for poor little Giton. Hilarity ensues from there, including being tortured by crazy women who have a thing for them, and going to a ridiculously overblown party thrown by a guy named Trimalchio. Perhaps my favorite part of this story is the bit at Trimalchio's party where someone tells a story about werewolves. Yes. You read that correctly. Romans had werewolves. Perhaps it may seem surprising, considering the fact that we tend to associate Hollywood with so many of these beasties. Yet, the idea of people turning into animals is a pretty ancient one.
+GAY: Okay... so maybe this one is a negative for some people. However, I just find it HILARIOUS. As a good straight, Christian girl, I probably shouldn't. Nevertheless, I just find the entire thing to be amusing. I'm quite sure that Alan More likes the gay, as well.
+The Format: As a Latin student, you have no idea how pleased I am that the Satyricon is NOT poetry, which is surprising, considering the fact that most stories back then were told in poem format. This is probably a plus for most moderns in general, since we're used to reading prose, anyway. None of this silly "Alexander-Pope-Turning-Everything-Into-Heroic-Couplets" business.
+Werewolves: I just... and they piss on the ground... around their clothes and I just... have such awe for them! *A*
Cons:
-Fragments: As great as this story is, it's only in fragments. Imagine my sorrow when I got to the last page and realized that I had no idea what was going to happen next. It was very sad sorrow, indeed.
... yep, that's all I got! An otherwise excellent story!
~~~
I know, this one felt a little short. I apologize, but frankly, the humor is the best part of this thing. I'm serious; go drop whatever you're doing and read the Satyricon NOW. I won't talk to you until you do.
...
Okay, never mind. I will. But still, go read it!
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Of course, there's a problem we already have, because while we have this name, "Petronius," that's it... that's all we know of this guy. Oh sure, there's a couple of dudes that the historians think may fit the bill, but we don't REALLY know who Petronius IS. If I had my text, I would cite that, but since I don't... maybe I could cite it next week...
Anyway, why do I like this text so much?
SPOILERS AHOY!!!
(That really IS dumb sounding. I think I was in a medicine-induced haze when I thought of that one. Anyone got anything better??)
Pros:
+REALLY stinkin funny: Okay guys, the name of this is "Satyricon," from which we get the word "Satire." This isn't just some text with a few funny parts. This is frickin' hilarious! The main story involves a guy named Enclopius, our narrator, who has this little boy that he likes, Giton. Okay, I say "little boy," but he was probably in his later teenage years. And yes, I KNOW what you're saying! "But we do not understand! The Romans thought that the oily Greeks and their pederasty was disgusting!" Yes, well... I'm not so convinced that the Romans TRULY hated the Greeks THAT much. Anyway, along with Enclopius and Giton is Ascyltus, who also has a thing for poor little Giton. Hilarity ensues from there, including being tortured by crazy women who have a thing for them, and going to a ridiculously overblown party thrown by a guy named Trimalchio. Perhaps my favorite part of this story is the bit at Trimalchio's party where someone tells a story about werewolves. Yes. You read that correctly. Romans had werewolves. Perhaps it may seem surprising, considering the fact that we tend to associate Hollywood with so many of these beasties. Yet, the idea of people turning into animals is a pretty ancient one.
+GAY: Okay... so maybe this one is a negative for some people. However, I just find it HILARIOUS. As a good straight, Christian girl, I probably shouldn't. Nevertheless, I just find the entire thing to be amusing. I'm quite sure that Alan More likes the gay, as well.
+The Format: As a Latin student, you have no idea how pleased I am that the Satyricon is NOT poetry, which is surprising, considering the fact that most stories back then were told in poem format. This is probably a plus for most moderns in general, since we're used to reading prose, anyway. None of this silly "Alexander-Pope-Turning-Everything-Into-Heroic-Couplets" business.
+Werewolves: I just... and they piss on the ground... around their clothes and I just... have such awe for them! *A*
Cons:
-Fragments: As great as this story is, it's only in fragments. Imagine my sorrow when I got to the last page and realized that I had no idea what was going to happen next. It was very sad sorrow, indeed.
... yep, that's all I got! An otherwise excellent story!
~~~
I know, this one felt a little short. I apologize, but frankly, the humor is the best part of this thing. I'm serious; go drop whatever you're doing and read the Satyricon NOW. I won't talk to you until you do.
...
Okay, never mind. I will. But still, go read it!
CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)