Will DCP Keep His Promise To BYU?

[Symmachus]

... the poor Graves translation provided by Chap

It is not a literal translation, certainly.

But as I have said above, it is clearly designed to render the soldiers' Latin words during Caesar's triumphal procession (as recorded/imagined by Suetonius) into English words with a rhyme and metre that could represent something that a bunch of celebrating soldiers might sing at a time when they were given licence to mock their general.

I think most people would say that Graves succeeded pretty well, not poorly, in achieving that aim.

Yes, I complimented the translation on that thread in my response to you before I knew it was his. I mean “poor” as in “treated in a bad way” and unfairly made to mean something it doesn’t. Poor choice to use that word on my part. The reason is that I think Lem is misreading it in a very bizarre way, but I can almost see how she is getting that from Graves’s version. So I give a more transparent version with explication for anyone interested. I am not attempting to amend Graves but rather a misreading of him. And I am trying not to assume obtuseness, faux or otherwise.

Graves is an interesting person for all the reasons Kish mentions. But he is often deeply inaccurate in phiIology and tendentious in his application of it, so I would never use him as an authority to understand something outside of his own program. But I’m not an idolater of philology, unlike many of his critics. He is just doing something different, whether he is translating for Penguin Classics or exploring the origin of poetic creation and experience, and some of his insights are a kind of discovery that would be hard to access in philology or the empirical scholarship of academia.

That is surely one reason why Hugh Nibley admired him and often cited him. Nibley is very Gravesian in his method, and I have long thought and occasionally said here that Graves is the best point of comparison for understanding what Nibley was doing, in my opinion.

[Lem]

? You don't recognize your own joke from another thread? I thought it was damn funny. Of course, I never know whether to continue participating when you boys break out these hilarious quotes, but if I've learned nothing else in my professional life, I've at least had plenty of practice learning to be a good sport.

"you boys" isn't your finest moment here.

Here's a translation that is more accurate, if not more poetic than the one you sped-read: "Men of the city, protect your wives: we bring with us here a balding adulturer [using a Greek word with associated with head-shaving as a form of public shame]. You f***ed away the gold in Gaul that you borrowed here!"

The last line is a reference to the manner by which Julius Caesar, perpetually in debt, had to fund his campaigns in Gaul. But for anyone who is interested in the actual meaning of those lines that offended Lem and to understand them in the context of that thread, the word moechus does not mean "adulterous whore" but rather "adulterer" and grammatically it refers to a man, not a woman: it's a pejorative applied to Julius Caesar. And the verb used (servate) does not mean "lock up" at all but rather "protect" (as in the English derivatives "conserve" and "preserve"). The idea that Roman men locked up wives as some kind of cultural practice is preposterous, and the implication here (and in many rumors of the time) is that Caesar was a sexual predator. I can't prove that no Roman ever called his wife a "tart" or "adulterous whore," but no one is doing so in these lines (even in Graves's translation that's clear).

That was a part of thread about a certain apologist's rather impressive hair and the not-so-subtle suggestion of Wang Chung that there might be less than meets the eye. That apologist also presents himself as well versed in languages in a scholarly way, as Wang Chung joked about in the previous post on that thread, and as I and others had discussed. So I posted this rather hard to translate lampoon of Caesar, a balding lech who was self-conscious about his lack of hair, not least because it made him the butt of jokes (the word "caesar" means "hairy") of the kind offensive to his high status though permissible in certain ritual contexts like the post-war triumph through the city: the joke of the first line relevant in this context is about the hair. It has nothing to do with "locking up" any "adulterous whores" or anybody else for that matter. There's a lot in these two lines, and Ostler’s scholarly pretensions had been part of that thread; I posted it not only for the hair but as an example of something Ostler probably wouldn't get because it's not as simple as just translating the words. One has to know something about them.

Lol. Thanks for the lecture, you talk down very nicely. I apparently try way too hard to be polite here when people don't understand math and stats. But I meant no offense with my ignorance, just trying to be a good sport!

Re your 'joke', since you were kind enough to correct me, I will kindly offer a suggestion back; leave off the line about talking to men about wives being possessions to be protected if it has nothing to do with your joke, or at least add context, like you did above. That would have made the joke so much more funny! At least to me, the one woman still participating in that thread. Just because it's historically accurate doesn't mean the line doesn't sting.

(And if you honestly think I didn't read 'lock up your wives' and interpret that as 'protect them', then you bizarrely underestimate the intelligence of your readers.)

You taking offense when others who are uncomfortable with your words try to politely carry on is not your finest moment either. Me referring to "you boys" was the most polite way for me to try to hint your joke wasn't going over that well. If it doesn't apply, let it go. It really doesn't matter at all and I take no offense at your comments.

[Chap]

My experience of listening carefully to highly intelligent and reflective women talking about sharing discursive space with men has taught me that quite a few of them have a significant accumulation of irritation (or worse) with the way us men sometimes talk and behave. I don't feel that way at all about women (in fact I tend to prefer their company to that of men), but I think that if I had to live as a woman I would probably feel the way they sometimes do about men.

Such women have usually learned, however, that it is better not to let that irritation out in the open very often - if they do that they are humorless, over sensitive, aggressive, shrill and so on. But sometimes it just overflows.

[Lem]

My experience of listening carefully to highly intelligent and reflective women talking about sharing discursive space with men has taught me that quite a few of them have a significant accumulation of irritation (or worse) with the way us men sometimes talk and behave. I don't feel that way at all about women (in fact I tend to prefer their company to that of men), but I think that if I had to live as a woman I would probably feel the way they sometimes do about men.

Such women have usually learned, however, that it is better not to let that irritation out in the open very often - if they do that they are humorless, over sensitive, aggressive, shrill and so on. But sometimes it just overflows.

thank you, chap, a good reminder. I am only ever told things like "that's not your finest moment" when I, um, 'overflow.' my only excuse is that the energy it takes to be the perennial good sport in a male-dominated arena is exhausting.

My apologies to symmachus, I learn much from you, and never miss an opportunity to read your posts.

[Morley]

My experience of listening carefully to highly intelligent and reflective women talking about sharing discursive space with men has taught me that quite a few of them have a significant accumulation of irritation (or worse) with the way us men sometimes talk and behave. I don't feel that way at all about women (in fact I tend to prefer their company to that of men), but I think that if I had to live as a woman I would probably feel the way they sometimes do about men.

Such women have usually learned, however, that it is better not to let that irritation out in the open very often - if they do that they are humorless, over sensitive, aggressive, shrill and so on. But sometimes it just overflows.

thank you, chap, a good reminder. I am only ever told things like "that's not your finest moment" when I, um, 'overflow.' my only excuse is that the energy it takes to be the perennial good sport in a male-dominated arena is exhausting.

My apologies to symmachus, I learn much from you, and never miss an opportunity to read your posts.

Don't stop speaking up, Lem. I learn from you.

.

[Lem]

thank you, chap, a good reminder. I am only ever told things like "that's not your finest moment" when I, um, 'overflow.' my only excuse is that the energy it takes to be the perennial good sport in a male-dominated arena is exhausting.

My apologies to symmachus, I learn much from you, and never miss an opportunity to read your posts.

Don't stop speaking up, Lem. I learn from you.

.

Thank you Morley! Your comment is very much appreciated. I have learned much from you as well. I think we overall have a pretty diverse and amazing group here.

[Sledge]

I don't give a flying "eff" what "Ron Gould" has to say. BYU is primarily a teaching institution. It is there, first and foremost, to educate LDS kids in an environment that comports with LDS standards. There are plenty of faculty members at BYU who are not publishing powerhouses. They are good teachers.

Speaking more generally about academia, some professors publish a deluge of material, some publish modestly (I fit in this category), and some hardly ever publish. Over time, the culture of publication has changed markedly. Once the book was seen as the product of a seasoned, experienced scholar. Now, a young person may have to publish a book BEFORE they ever land a tenure-track job. The obsession with high numbers of publications as though they were widgets--evidence of "productivity"--is not necessarily a benefit to the world. Most of what gets published is of negligible value. One would do much better to publish one article or book that makes a lasting contribution to the field than to publish a hundred things that no one cares about and effectively achieve nothing.

Honestly, I really don't understand the decade and a half of harassing DCP about non-apologetic issues and dissecting his life to pick on all of his perceived faults. He had an honorable career at BYU. He did a lot of good there. Now that it is drawing to a close, maybe people can show some decency by wishing him well. You don't have to agree with him or like his hobbies, but, really, isn't this way too much?

We can also leave aside any consideration about the particulars of DCP and his character, and I think the question of what our activities say about us is much more pressing a concern.

I apologize about what I said about you on SeN. I did not have all of the information and made a hasty judgement. I don't expect you to like me or accept this apology, but I do want you to know that I really like what you wrote above and we would all be better people if we emulate it.

[malkie]

I don't give a flying "eff" what "Ron Gould" has to say. BYU is primarily a teaching institution. It is there, first and foremost, to educate LDS kids in an environment that comports with LDS standards. There are plenty of faculty members at BYU who are not publishing powerhouses. They are good teachers.

Speaking more generally about academia, some professors publish a deluge of material, some publish modestly (I fit in this category), and some hardly ever publish. Over time, the culture of publication has changed markedly. Once the book was seen as the product of a seasoned, experienced scholar. Now, a young person may have to publish a book BEFORE they ever land a tenure-track job. The obsession with high numbers of publications as though they were widgets--evidence of "productivity"--is not necessarily a benefit to the world. Most of what gets published is of negligible value. One would do much better to publish one article or book that makes a lasting contribution to the field than to publish a hundred things that no one cares about and effectively achieve nothing.

Honestly, I really don't understand the decade and a half of harassing DCP about non-apologetic issues and dissecting his life to pick on all of his perceived faults. He had an honorable career at BYU. He did a lot of good there. Now that it is drawing to a close, maybe people can show some decency by wishing him well. You don't have to agree with him or like his hobbies, but, really, isn't this way too much?

We can also leave aside any consideration about the particulars of DCP and his character, and I think the question of what our activities say about us is much more pressing a concern.

I apologize about what I said about you on SeN. I did not have all of the information and made a hasty judgement. I don't expect you to like me or accept this apology, but I do want you to know that I really like what you wrote above and we would all be better people if we emulate it.

I agree strongly with that sentiment, and regret that I have added some less than creditable comments over the years. I greatly appreciate the measured and gentle way in which posters like Kish have sometimes had to make me rethink my comments.

As one of the more "ordinary" and less academic folks here, I sometimes forget that participation in this forum is an educational privilege, and should not be taken for granted, much less abused.

[Kishkumen]

I apologize about what I said about you on SeN. I did not have all of the information and made a hasty judgement. I don't expect you to like me or accept this apology, but I do want you to know that I really like what you wrote above and we would all be better people if we emulate it.

No worries, Sledge. DCP and I have a complicated relationship. I am sure he still has grounds to complain about things I have said here. I listen to him when he brings these things to my attention.

[Kishkumen]

I agree strongly with that sentiment, and regret that I have added some less than creditable comments over the years. I greatly appreciate the measured and gentle way in which posters like Kish have sometimes had to make me rethink my comments.

As one of the more "ordinary" and less academic folks here, I sometimes forget that participation in this forum is an educational privilege, and should not be taken for granted, much less abused.

malkie, you are a treasure. I am very grateful for your wisdom and corrections. It is an honor to learn from you.