# Reading > Poems, Poets, and Poetry >  Poetry Discussion Group: Ovid's Metamorposes

## stlukesguild

It seems to make sense to establish a separate thread to begin our discussion of Ovid's _Metamorphoses_. Such would certainly be far more likely to attract others who might like to participate. Anyway... I have just begun reading as the last few weeks have involved wrapping up the school year.

Anyway...

Let the discussion begin.

----------


## YesNo

Does anyone have any particular lines they like?

One I'm trying to find in the Latin is where Envy says the following:

When Athens she beheld, for arts renown'd,
With peace made happy, and with plenty crown'd,
Scarce could the hideous fiend from tears forbear,
To find out nothing that deserv'd a tear.
This is from Book 2, where Aglauros is turned into a statue. Garth, Dryden translators: http://classics.mit.edu/Ovid/metam.2.second.html

It looks like there are spoken versions of the Latin text on YouTube. I would like to hear what this sounds like in the original.

----------


## LitNetIsGreat

I don't know about particular lines (especially with it being in translation). I'm more interested in the overall concept/ideas/intentions etc, etc of it at this stage, re-investigating the overall feel of it. 

However, I've not really touched it for a couple of days, I'll be picking it up again toward the end of the week.

----------


## stlukesguild

Let us get this discussion off the ground here. One of the reasons that I was for reading Ovid's Metamorphoses is that the book was perhaps the single most influential text in the Renaissance (and well beyond) with the exception of the Bible. Just a cursory look at the table of contents and the various narratives contained within reveals a wealth of tales long familiar in poetry, opera, painting, and sculpture. 

The narratives of Orpheus and Euridice is perhaps one of the most oft repeated in Western art. In the realm of music we have Claudio Monteverdi's _L'Orfeo_, the first true opera... and one still performed today:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxBT1pfVAKQ

We also have Christoph Willibald Gluck's _Orfeo ed Euridice_, one of the ground-breaking operas that would set the stage for Mozart:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFjzf...eature=related

and we cannot forget Jacques Offenbach's _Orpheus in the Underworld_:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4hs7vW8SV0

And these are but a few examples. Stravinsky, Ernst Krenek, and many others composed music to this famous narrative.

In literature, we have numerous poetic re-tellings of the myth... especially in the Renaissance and Baroque eras. We also have Rilke's Sonnets to Orpheus, Tennessee Williams' _Orpheus Descending_, among others. 

And in the visual arts:



-Peter Paul Rubens



-Auguste Rodin



-Gutave Moreau



-Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot



-Odilon Redon

But the Orpheus and Eurydice tale just scratches the surface of all the marvelous myths contained within Ovid's book... and all the narratives that served artists as a source of inspiration for centuries:

Venus and Mars by Tintoretto:



Mount Parnassus by Andrea Mantegna:



Venus and Adonis by Peter Paul Rubens



The Fall of Icarus by Pieter Bruegel the Elder: 



I've always loved how Bruegel imagined the fall of Icarus, his legs barely seen flailing away in the sea just beneath the ship. The rise and fall of the high and mighty is all but unseen by the common man as he goes about his daily labors.

Perseus and Andromeda by Paolo Veronese:



And Pygmalion:

Two paintings from a series of four by Edward Burne-Jones





Jean-Léon Gérôme:



FRANÇOIS LE MOYNE:



Etienne Maurice Falconet:



Paul Delvaux:



(And you don't want to know how the British satirist, John Rowlandson, imagined a "new Pygmalion")

Perhaps just a brief exploration of the narratives contained within Ovid's poem will help to get this discussion off the ground. I am especially looking forward to the comments by JBI (who voted for this poem) and MortalTerror... our resident Classicist/Roman-lover who has continually championed Ovid... even over the work of Virgil.

----------


## JBI

I will try, but I must admit, the timing is rough on me, if you could choose a section, it would be most helpful, as I am caught between being on the road 4/7 days a week, and writing exams the rest

In general, I would like to discuss something on the idea of "metamorphosis" and the representation of it, within the context of romance and tragedy.

----------


## Pierre Menard

What translation are you guys reading, out of curiosity?

----------


## stlukesguild

I've read Mandelbaum in the past, and I'm reading Humphries this time.

----------


## G L Wilson

Everything changes, not least of all, art.

----------


## Buh4Bee

I am also reading Humphries.

----------


## YesNo

> And in the visual arts:


Who painted that piece?

I found the Orpheus and Eurydice story at the beginning of Book 10. I'm reading Mandelbaum's translation.

It makes me wonder if Eurydice didn't have a pretty good time in the underworld based on her smile as she looked back, but then she might have just been glad to leave. Apparently Orpheus was not permitted to look back himself.

----------


## stlukesguild

The painting in question is by Sir Peter Paul Rubens. I've gone back and added the names for all the artists for anyone else interested.

----------


## YesNo

I just read the section in Book 3 about Narcissus. I guess he becomes a Narcissus flower after he wastes away and dies.

After looking up Narcissus, I find it is the common Daffodil:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissus_%28plant%29

----------


## LitNetIsGreat

You can always rely upon Stlukes for top art postings. (I've always enjoyed Bruegel one also.)

I wonder what the best approach to tackling Ovid's _Metamorphoses_ is? I was leafing through it earlier and wondered if to just start again from the beginning or pick through it? A bit of both I suppose (I opted to go through some of the first book and some of the more famous pieces). 

I have read most of it previously but there are a lot of references to people and places which puts one off picking in favour of the A to Z approach. Of course, many of the pieces are deeply familiar but others are less drawn upon. 

It is the sort of work that for me really needs about six months reading. (I spent a year reading _Paradise Lost_ and don't even think that I have touched much of the surface of that.) It's that sort of work. Of course, it doesn't mean to say you can't read it lighter than that but I am always a little phased with such epic work in that I often feel I can't fully give it the respect it deserves. However, something is clearly better than nothing and I fully welcome this opportunity.

Out of interest I am reading the Oxford Melville translation but I'm not getting hung up about the translation on this one. I'm quite happy to get a feel for the thing again.

----------


## qimissung

I'm reading Mandelbaum. I just finished Book II. I enjoyed the art, too, especially the Rodin, Corot, Redon, Tintoretto, Veronese, Burne-Jones, Delvaux. The last one I've never seen before. Kind of refreshing after all that over-heated beauty.

*I think what has most jumped out* at me is the terror they often experienced as they were transformed. In particular Io: "she stared at her strange horns reflected in the waves, and at her muzzle; and she fled, dismayed and terrified;" and Phaethon's loving, grief-stricken sisters as they were turned into Poplars, and their mother: "What is she to do? She's driven here and there, as panic strikes, bestowing kisses while there's still time...she tries to wrench her daughters' bodies from the trunk." Her daughters cry," I pray you, mother, save me! When you rip this tree, it is my body that you tear. Farewell." The Raven and the crow who were banished and they along with Aglauros, turned black. Most heartrending is Callisto who was banished from Diana's company for having lost her virginity, then turned into a bear and almost murdered by her son. But it's the banishment that hurts.
*
I'm especially struck,* since reading these the stories, which come one after the other, by the ravishment or rape by Jove of Io, Callisto, Daphne. Their fear, as depicted by Ovid, is quite palpable. Io, as she experiences herself turned into a white heifer : "and when she tried to utter some lament, nothing but lowings issued from her lips, a sound that she was frightened to emit-her own voice frightened her...;" Callisto, banished: "the other nymphs snatch off her robe-she's naked now, her shame is plain to see. "Be off!"-the goddess cries-"Do not defile this sacred spring!" Their outward transformation mirrors that which takes place internally, I think, when one has experienced a life-changing event.
*
It's also interesting* to note that the heifer, Io, and the bull, Jove when he tricked Europa, are white; the birds though,the crow and the raven, are changed from white to black, as is the girl, Aglauros, when she's changed into a statue by Mercury. Why though, white cows and bulls, and why black birds? I'm assuming the white meant innocence, and I think they prized cows; it just seems an unlikely animal to link with innocence.

In addition to their understanding of geography, I find their psychological astuteness amazing. Centuries later and it's all still here and still the same, the envy, the lust, the power and powerlessness, the fixation with innocence and virginity, the dark desire to incorporate or expel or own something that is not theirs to own, whether human or god. The people that we elevate, and the ones that are so casually destroyed.
*
This image of Jove,* who had the blackest heart of them all, and could, because he was a god present himself to the all the fair maidens he beheld and fell in love with as this magnificent creature all in white: "his horns it's true are small, but so well wrought one would have thought a craftsman had made them; they were more translucent than pure gems. His brow has nothing menacing; his gaze inspires no fear. He seems so calm." He's sort of the ultimate corrupt politician, is he not? I think of Kennedy, Clinton, Edwards.

----------


## mortalterror

> Perhaps just a brief exploration of the narratives contained within Ovid's poem will help to get this discussion off the ground. I am especially looking forward to the comments by JBI (who voted for this poem) and MortalTerror... our resident Classicist/Roman-lover who has continually championed Ovid... even over the work of Virgil.


My favorite parts are the story of Ceyx and Alcyone at the end of book 11, and then old Nestor's storytelling in book 12. My least favorite part is book 5 where Perseus battles everything. I could go into more detail, but I'm not sure everyone has gotten to those parts yet and I don't want to spoil anything.

----------


## Pierre Menard

The Fall of Icarus by Pieter Bruegel on the previous page is a fantastic painting. Would love to have that hanging on my wall.

I read Metamorphoses earlier this year so I probably won't read it again at the moment. But I do remember being very fond of Narcissus' story as well as Orpheus and Eurydice's. It's effect on art I really love. It's inspired some fantastic paintings.

----------


## YesNo

I just read the story of Pyramus and Thisbe from Book 4 and I guess this is where Shakespeare got some of his material for Romeo and Juliet.

----------


## LitNetIsGreat

Yes, it is also the play used within A Midsummer Night's Dream as well of course.

----------


## YesNo

> *
> This image of Jove,* who had the blackest heart of them all


At the moment I think the worst behaving Gods are either Diana or Juno, but I'm on the lookout for others. Perhaps that is just a male perspective.

Diana gets the honor of being on the list for her behavior to Callisto (Book 2) and to Actaeon (Book 3). In the case of Actaeon, he sort of gets what he deserves. He is out hunting with his friends and then Diana turns him into the prey they are after. He gets a taste of what it is like to be hunted, but Diana's punishment of him was uncalled for.

Did Juno have any children with Jove?

----------


## Kafka's Crow

I am struck by the metamorphoses of the narrative. How the tales begin and end and transform into new tales seamlessly though there is not much continuity among the tales. Form becomes content, content form as in the great works by Joyce and Beckett.

stlukesguild wrote:



> (And you don't want to know how the British satirist, John Rowlandson, imagined a "new Pygmalion")


SLG, I think you mean Thomas Rowlandson. I am sure I know which painting you are talking about!!!

----------


## stlukesguild

Yes... Thomas Rowlandson... and if you have Googled his name in concert with "Pygmalion" I'm certain you have gotten an eyeful.

----------


## YesNo

> Yes... Thomas Rowlandson... and if you have *Googled his name in concert with "Pygmalion"* I'm certain you have gotten an eyeful.


I did. Got the eyeful.

But after reading the Pygmalion story in Book 10, I think Rowlandson's image is rather accurate of what Ovid described. Rowlandson was just a bit more explicit.

Initially Venus turned the Propoetides into prostitutes because they refused to recognize her as a goddess. After they "could blush no more", she turned them into statues. Then Pygmalion, disgusted with the prostitutes, refused to marry but instead carved a statue of a girl out of ivory with which he fell in love. At the festival of Venus he asked Venus to give him a wife like his statue and when he got home he found the statue was alive.

So this circle of metamorphoses completed itself.

----------


## Kafka's Crow

I am reading (listening to) Book 10 now. Pygmalion just kissed the statue and I stopped the iPhone for a coffee break. I think I should go back to it as the above post shows that it is going to get more 'interesting' if Rowlandson's painting is anything to go by!!!

I have changed my avatar in anticipation of Galatea's tale in Bk XIII.

I remember I read a book by Christoph Ransmayr back in 1998, it was called _The Last World_. I was much impressed by the magic realism in this story where a character is shown searching for 'Naso' in a landscape populated with characters from _Metamorphoses_. Very, very clever book. Do read it if you find it somewhere.

----------


## qimissung

> At the moment I think the worst behaving Gods are either Diana or Juno, but I'm on the lookout for others. Perhaps that is just a male perspective.
> 
> Diana gets the honor of being on the list for her behavior to Callisto (Book 2) and to Actaeon (Book 3). In the case of Actaeon, he sort of gets what he deserves. He is out hunting with his friends and then Diana turns him into the prey they are after. He gets a taste of what it is like to be hunted, but Diana's punishment of him was uncalled for.
> 
> Did Juno have any children with Jove?



A bit of hyperbole on my part, I guess, lol. I've just finished Book II, and on reviewing the stories I'd read, there were so many about his atrocities-but can we compare? Humans were just playthings to them.

According to Wikipedia, the Hera entry, her children with Zeus were Ares, Hebe, Eris, and Eileithyia. I looked at the entry for Juno but it didn't seem to have anything about her children.

----------


## JBI

Pygmalion has always troubled me since it seems to obvious a proof of art as objectifying subject, as well as male obsession with wanting to construct a partner dominated by their own obsessions. The dismissal of women as unworthy seems troubling in a modern context. I am away from my computer and books right now, but if we are going to discuss this, I would raise the question as to what does this episode signify about art and by extension, ideals and idolatry.

----------


## YesNo

> I've just finished Book II, and on reviewing the stories I'd read, there were so many about his atrocities-but can we compare? Humans were just playthings to them.


I agree. For the most part these Gods are all awful. So I guess I'm on the look out for a God (or Goddess) that I sort of like. 

After skipping ahead and reading about Venus and Pygmalion, I'm tempted to like Venus although she does seem a little demanding. I wonder why the Propoetides got her so angry? And why would they not acknowledge her as a Goddess?

----------


## stlukesguild

Pygmalion has always troubled me since it seems to obvious a proof of art as objectifying subject, as well as male obsession with wanting to construct a partner dominated by their own obsessions. The dismissal of women as unworthy seems troubling in a modern context. I am away from my computer and books right now, but if we are going to discuss this, I would raise the question as to what does this episode signify about art and by extension, ideals and idolatry.

JBI... no need to prove your PC credentials. We all know you learned your Feminist criticism well. Now perhaps you might try to think for yourself. Tell me how art can possibly avoid "objectifying" any subject matter. Especially in visual art, the artist responds to the subject... the nude, the landscape, the pear on the table... in abstract visual terms: relationships of forms, values, line, color, proportions, etc... The artist looks and responds to what he or she sees. Many artists focus obsessively upon a single subject matter (landscape, nudes, still life, etc...). This is as true of female artists as it is of male artists. Certainly, there are artists who are capable of suggesting the unique individual. Rembrandt immediately comes to mind. But just as rich character development is not common or necessary to all good writing, so it is with visual art. Sometimes the focus is primarily upon the visual splendor. Obviously, any artist is aware of the fact that certain subjects are more "loaded" than others... that they cannot help but suggest certain emotional responses. Half a decade ago, Sir Kenneth Clark, as conservative a critic as he was, argued against artistic Puritanism, and declared that there was no way to avoid the erotic content in the nude. Would you suggest that artist should deny biology and their desire? Is the subject inappropriate? 

Old school Feminists art critics took the New Puritan stance that you seem to advocate, dismissing the nude as sexist or even misogynistic. Intriguingly, many Modernist art theorists (including Marinetti and Adolf Loos) sought to banish the female nude along with any other hints of the "feminine" (images of domesticity, motherhood, bourgeois lifestyle, decoration, color, etc...) because these images inspired strong emotional responses (love, desire, lust) as opposed to a rigorous intellectual response. In other words, such art inspired those aspects of the male mind that cannot be controlled by reason and as such they were to be feared. They undermined the illusion of male control through reason and rigorous thought. Contemporary Feminist art critics (such as Wendy Steiner) have taken a reverse stance, calling for a return to the female element in art. She, among others, recognized that art is intended as an expression of the artist's feeling, thoughts, and experiences. The notion that desire, lust, or simply the admiration for the beauty of the naked body (of either sex) is something that must be repressed and is somehow unworthy of art is absurd. Unfortunately, due to the increased training of artists in universities as opposed to art schools or ateliers, and the focus upon theory as opposed to time spent in the studio actually making art, we do find an endless array of university trained "artists" who lack both the formal and technical skills needed, as well as the ability to think for themselves... and to paint what they love and what they are passionate about as opposed to thinking how the schools taught them to think and making art about what the schools taught them was relevant.

Its not surprising that we get the near pornographic art of many artists today. Such is merely an iconoclastic response to the artificial limitations imposed on art by academia.

----------


## JBI

meh, you misappropriate my response. My question was more toward the idea of art, and its purpose. Take Death in Venice, for example, or even Shakespeare's Sonnets, they all have the same idea. The real idea though, is Pygmalion is working from an imaginary ideal, rather than a realistic model, as well as a rejection of the real as inferior - to what extent could that be said of art, and what does that place art as?

I would argue it speaks a lot about Roman culture in general - Romans seem to be more idealistic than their Roman counterparts, but when applied to the text, and the culture of the text itself - namely, It is strange that the Gods do not recognize this as Hubris, or that they sanction it. By extension, iconography throughout the middle ages, as well as mythological and Religious work in the Renaissance also seem to follow a similar ideal of artist getting beyond the inferior reality of this world - Neoplatonic thought also delves deeply into this connections of the transcendent experience - my only problem is, in the end, the poem represents.

----------


## stlukesguild

Pygmalion is working from an imaginary ideal, rather than a realistic model, as well as a rejection of the real as inferior - to what extent could that be said of art, and what does that place art as?

This idealism is far more prevalent in earlier art. The Renaissance artists saw themselves as "creators"... as opposed to the later concept of art as a mirror held up to reality. Raphael, for example, stated: "In order to paint one "fair" one I should need to see several "fair" ones." Leonardo Da Vinci echoes him: "Be on the watch to take the best parts of many faces." The artist was to create an image of the ideal... the perfect world as it should be, not the world as it is. The Romantic, later, take quite a different stance as Byron exclaims: 

_I've seen more splendid women, ripe and real
Than all the nonsense of their stone ideal._

With Romanticism, the emotional response to experience... to the real world... is the goal of art... not the creation of an ideal. 

Oddly enough, Modernism swings back away from the "real". It is the abstraction... the formal invention created by the artist... not the subject matter that counts. A painting is, as one artist famously argued, just an organization of colors on a flat surface. 

There's a telling bit of dialog involving Matisse:

_Visitor: "That woman's arm is too long."
Matisse: "That is not a woman, sir, it's a painting."- Matisse_ 

My favorite Modernist, Pierre Bonnard, never falls into the realm of the ideal. He always begins with a visual stimulus... the image etched on his brain of his mistress or his wife bathing. He may transform or transmute these... idealize them, if you will... but he always begins with the "real". But an artist like Picasso or Matisse may begin with concept and the images (whether they be of women or anything else) are essentially inventions... and a means to an end... a means to convey a given idea.

In other words... there is a clear difference between what Will Cotton is doing in this portrait:



in which the woman in not so much an individual human being... let alone a partner in the act of creation, but rather a means by which the artist might reach his intended end...

And this painting...



in which, for all the abstractions, the artist is responding to the very "real" woman who was sitting before him. 

While I vastly prefer the Modigliani over the Cotton, this doesn't mean I question the value of art based upon the ideal... the artist's preconceived concept. Clearly, in a painting like this...



the nudes involved are a means to an end... not real, individual human beings. And yet this painting is far more iconic than the Modigliani.

There is also an obvious limitation in art rooted in the "real". If an artist might only paint a nude if "she/he" is a real individual whom he/she (the artist) knows, then the artist is quite limited to the rather mundane world of domestic existence. Where does that leave the heroic, fantastic, magical, unrealistic, supernatural, etc...?

----------


## YesNo

In rereading the section about Pygmalion in search of Hubris, I think one might be able to find Hubris as the reason why Venus turned the Propoetides into statues. They didn't think they needed Venus enough to worship her as a goddess. That led to their downfall. That Pygmalion created a statue that was "more exquisite than a woman who was born could ever match" just added to the Propoetides punishment. I don't think there is anything more to it.

In reconsidering Rowlandson's image, it does look like there is a difference. In Ovid, Pygmalion is having sex with the statue when she wakes up. Pygmalion is on top. In Rowlandson's image, it looks like it is Pygmalion who is waking up under the girl.

I was walking under a mulberry tree where some of the fruit had ripened from white through pink to dark purple and was crushed underfoot on the cement. It reminded me of Pyramus and Thisbe (Book 4).

----------


## ftil

Oh, it is synchronicity as I have found this tread. Several moths ago, I started reading mythology and I begun to connect mythology with paintings. Actually, paintings guided me to read Homer or Ovid as well as the Bible I have never read. I was curious why so many master painters chose the same themes. I have asked a question if art is an expression of thoughts, feelings, or experience or perhaps not in many instances. The more I have explored the themes in art, the more I have started to read paintings symbolically and metaphorically. I have discovered that paintings contain the esoteric meaning and have its own language. It is a matter and challenge of decoding the hidden meaning.

----------


## stlukesguild

Obviously the artists chose Biblical subjects... or rather the artists had Biblical subjects chosen for them for the simple reason that until the Enlightenment, the Church was the single largest patron of the arts, and the primary purpose of art was to reinforce the Biblical narratives to a largely illiterate audience. 

Beginning with the Renaissance we find a rediscovery of Greco-Roman culture (literature, art, philosophy, science, etc...). Many recognized that in some ways the Greco-Roman culture was more advanced than the medieval Christian culture they had inherited... but to simply absorb or borrow from a Pagan culture was a clear no-no. Efforts were thus made, by various scholars to paint the Greco-Roman culture as the precursor to the Christian culture. It didn't take much effort to suggest that the Roman Empire was the precursor of the Holy Roman Empire... and that Greece... through the Trojan War and through its influence upon the culture of Rome was ultimately a precursor of both the Roman and the Holy Roman Empire. The challenge was to present individual narratives as precursors to Christianity.

In Virgil's _Aeneid_ the author speaks in prophetic form of an individual to come who shall be the greatest of rulers... an king of kings... who will unify the world. Neo-Platonism (or the philosophy of merging Greco-Roman and Christian thought) suggested that Virgil was prophesizing the coming of Christ, rather than sucking up to Augustus Caesar. The tale of Aeneid was interpreted by many as akin to that of Christ and Moses... leading his people to the promised land, entering into hell and returning, etc...

In many instances, the Greco-Roman themes were suggested because they mirrored and reinforced Christian narrative. Ultimately, however, the Neo-Platonic philosophy simply provided a justification for the real subject... especially the nude. Artists frequently employed the Adam and Eve narrative, or the Last Judgement, Bathsheba, or Susanna and the Elders as an excuse for painting the beautiful nude female (or male... in the case of Adam) body. Greco-Roman mythology brought so many more narratives: Venus and Adonis, Venus and Mars, Diana at her Bath, the Rape of Prosperpine, Apollo and Daphne, the Rape of Europa, etc... etc...

----------


## ftil

> stlukesguild wrote:
> 
> In many instances, the Greco-Roman themes were suggested because they mirrored and reinforced Christian narrative. Ultimately, however, the Neo-Platonic philosophy simply provided a justification for the real subject... especially the nude. Artists frequently employed the Adam and Eve narrative, or the Last Judgement, Bathsheba, or Susanna and the Elders as an excuse for painting the beautiful nude female (or male... in the case of Adam) body. Greco-Roman mythology brought so many more narratives: Venus and Adonis, Venus and Mars, Diana at her Bath, the Rape of Prosperpine, Apollo and Daphne, the Rape of Europa, etc... etc...


Hm. We have been told that..... :Brow:  Is it the only explanation of the themes painted by many painters through centuries? 
Why do the same themes from mythology are painted by contemporary artists? We can't say that they choose those themes as an excuse to paint naked body. We are bombarded with nudity whenever we turn our heads. :Biggrin: 
Perhaps, there is another reason and explanation. We can only see what we have learned.

----------


## stlukesguild

Hm. We have been told that..... Is it the only explanation of the themes painted by many painters through centuries? 

Obviously, there is no simple single explanation for what artists over the course of history have done, because we are speaking of thousands of unique individuals with different goals, experiences, motivations, etc...

Why (are) the same themes from mythology... painted by contemporary artists?

Again... that would depend upon the individual artist. Quite often the artist work within a given tradition or employ a given theme as a means of looking at that theme in a new light. If we take this painting by Max Beckmann entitled _Departure_:



You will find in the central panel an image of a mother and child that suggests the Madonna and Child. This is reinforced by the artist's use of the triptych format that was commonly reserved for altarpieces. Looking at the two flanking panels we see cramped and enclosed spaces filled with noise (the drum), violence (the naked man whose hands have been cut off, the woman tied up, and the ax-wielding executioner), and captivity (the tied woman again, and the man and woman tied together. 

Knowing the period in which Beckmann painted this painting we may surmise that the two side panels represent the horrors of fascism that he sought to escape. We might point out the uniformed figure ala the storm-troopers accompanied by the drums of war. We might interpret the man whose hands have been cut off as perhaps representing the artist banned from creating and placed within the dustbin like so much garbage. 

Looking then to the central panel we see the figures in a boat on the open seas. No longer locked up, they look toward the horizon. As such, the mother and child/Madonna and Child might be seen as refugees. As we think on the subject and ponder just what the Madonna and Child represent we recognize that one thing they represent is Hope... the Future. 

Looking toward the left panel we notice the ponderous classical columns and the still life of fruit. Might the artist also be suggesting a departure from the confines of the stagnant traditions as he looks forward to an escape to America? (Unfortunately, Beckmann could not acquire the needed paperwork to gain admission to the US and so he sat out the entire war in Holland).

Looking at the right panel we might interpret the couple tied together as a comment upon sexual relations and the manner in which men and women are bound that can become rather like a form of captivity.

Looking again to the center panel, we see two major flanking male figures which appear as if protectors. The figure on the left in his Greek mask immediately calls to mind Odysseus and Aeneas and their great voyages... especially Aeneas voyage with the refugees of Troy destined for a new world to establish a new nation. The figure on the right bears a crown (a king) and holds a net laden with fish. What is immediately suggested is Jesus, the "fisher of men" and the King. The manner in which this king figure raises his right hand as if in blessing or to reveal his wounds (a common pose of Jesus in Renaissance painting) reinforces the Madonna and Child theme further. 

We can't say that they choose those themes as an excuse to paint naked body. We are bombarded with nudity whenever we turn our heads.

Of course... and some artists will simply elect to paint the nude without any thought to anything beyond what they see before them. Others will fell the need to "justify" a subject that is still taboo in many circles by placing it within a classical garb. Others will recognize, as Renoir did, that "some subjects are eternal. The naked woman rising from her bath is Venus rising from the sea..."

We can only see what we have learned.

No... there is always room to question what we have been taught. In my five years of life drawing I was repeatedly told that the artist merely looked upon the nude in formal terms... seeking out the relationships of form and line and shadow and space. There was no emotional and certainly no sexual thoughts involved in this process. From the very start I recognized this to be nonsense.

----------


## YesNo

> Oh, it is synchronicity as I have found this tread. Several moths ago, I started reading mythology and I begun to connect mythology with paintings. Actually, paintings guided me to read Homer or Ovid as well as the Bible I have never read. I was curious why so many master painters chose the same themes. I have asked a question if art is an expression of thoughts, feelings, or experience or perhaps not in many instances. The more I have explored the themes in art, the more I have started to read paintings symbolically and metaphorically. I have discovered that paintings contain the esoteric meaning and have its own language. It is a matter and challenge of decoding the hidden meaning.


Do you have a link to a particular painting with a subject from Ovid that you find interesting from the metaphorical perspective? It might give us a focus in reading this large work.

----------


## Buh4Bee

I'm still in book 3, but I am astounded at how cruel Juno is and how her jealous fuels her satisfaction. I understand that she feels her throne is threatened, but it still seems so harsh.

----------


## ftil

> *stlukesguild* wrote:
> 
> We can only see what we have learned.
> 
> No... there is always room to question what we have been taught. In my five years of life drawing I was repeatedly told that the artist merely looked upon the nude in formal terms... seeking out the relationships of form and line and shadow and space. There was no emotional and certainly no sexual thoughts involved in this process. From the very start I recognized this to be nonsense.


Yes, but you can only speak for yourself. I try avoiding making assumptions what others think because I am most of the time wrong. Secondly, you said, “I was repeatedly told”. When we were told and accepted it ….there is no space to arrive to own conclusions and to engage own perception. Those people can’t stay in other artists head and they can only make assumptions what artists think and feel.  :Biggrin5: I wouldn’t take it seriously if somebody has tried to make assumption what I think or feel. 
You said, “ this to be nonsense” but you don’t know what I mean. How can you say that it is nonsense, then.  :Wink5: 




> Do you have a link to a particular painting with a subject from Ovid that you find interesting from the metaphorical perspective? It might give us a focus in reading this large work.


I don't have a link because I move from Ovid to Homer to paintings or artifacts.
But I can show you how I work with it. 

Let's look at Psyche myth.




> PSYCHE was the goddess of the soul, wife of Eros the god of love.
> 
> She was once a mortal princess whose astounding beauty earned the ire of Aphrodite when men turned their worship from goddess to girl. Aphrodite commanded Eros make Psyche fall in love with the most hideous of men, but the god himself fell in love with her and carried her away to his secret palace. However Eros hid his true identity, and commanded her never to look upon his face. Psyche was eventually tricked by her jealous sisters into gazing upon the face of god, and he abandoned her. In her despair, she searched throughout the world for her lost love, and eventually came into the service of Aphrodite. The goddess commanded her perform a series of difficult labours which culminated in a journey to the Underworld. In the end Psyche was reunited with Eros and the couple wed in a ceremony attended by the gods.
> 
> *Psyche was depicted in ancient mosaics as a butterfly winged goddess* in the company of her husband Eros. Sometimes a pair of Psyche are portrayed, the second perhaps being their daughter Hedone (Pleasure.)
> http://www.theoi.com/Ouranios/Psykhe.html







*EROS & PSYCHE*

Antakya Museum, Antakya, Turkey Date: C3rd AD
Period: Imperial Roman

SUMMARY

Butterfly-winged Psyche (Soul) steals the bow and arrows of the sleeping dove-winged god Eros (Love).






EROS & PSYCHE

Antakya Museum, Antakya, Turkey,Date: C3rd AD


SUMMARY

The winged god Eros (love personified) stands on the butterfly wings of two Psykhai (Souls) flitting across the sea, driving them with a whip. The two Psykhai of myth were named Psykhe and Hedone.

Psyche in Greek mean soul.


*The Abduction of Psyche Adolphe William Bouguereau*



*Pan and Psyche, Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones*

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...and_Psyche.jpg


*Angelica Kauffmann, The Legend of Cupid and Psyche*



*Michael Parkes*



Let's look at paintings of other artists.

*Soul in Bondage, Elihu Vedder* We see a butterfly again.




Let's look at Morgan art.

*The Kingdom of Heaven Suffereth Violence and the Violent Take it by Force, Evelyn De Morgan*




*Queen Katherine's Dream 2 William Blake*





*Jacob's Ladder, William Blake*




*Edward Burne-Jones, The Golden Stairs*




*The Captives, Evelyn de Morgan*



Let's look at Parkes art.

We have a butterfly again and a man with horn. There is a frog on the top of his head. In Egyptian religion the eight deities were arranged in four female-male pairs, the females were associated with snakes and the males were associated with frogs: Naunet and Nu, Amaunet and Amun, Kauket and Kuk, Hauhet and Huh.





Look at butterfly, and a girl with a chain. Who is keeping the key?

















*Good and Evil Angels Struggling for the Possession of a Child, William Blake
*






*An Angel and a Devil Fighting for the Soul of a Child, Giacinto Gimignani*







*The Snake Charmer, Jean Léone Gérôme*






*The Nude Snake Charmer, Paul Desire Trouillebert*



So who is the person with a flute?

Let's look at mythology at god Pan and Satyr.







> THE SATYROI (or Satyrs) were rustic fertility daimones (spirits) of the wilderness and countryside. They were close companions of the gods Dionysos, Rheia, Gaia, Hermes and Hephaistos; and mated with the tribes of Nymphai in the mountain wilds.
> 
> Satyroi were depicted as animal-like men with the tail of a horse, assine ears, upturned pug noses, reclining hair-lines, and erect members. As companions of Dionysos *they were usually shown drinking, dancing, playing tambourines and flutes (the instruments of the Bacchic orgy)* and sporting with Nymphai. Men dressed up as Satyroi formed the choruses of the so-called Satyr-plays which were performed at the festivals of the god Dionysos.
> 
> Some other closely related rustic spirits include the Panes (goat-legged satyrs), Seilenoi (elderly satyrs), Satyriskoi (child satyrs), and Tityroi (flute-playing satyrs).
> http://www.theoi.com/Georgikos/Satyroi.html







*DIONYSOS & SATYR*
Date: ca 500 - 480 BC 

SUMMARY

Dionysos reclines beside a flute playing Satyros. The god holds a drinking cup in his hands and is crowned with a wreath of ivy. The Satyros has the usual features of his kind: horse's tail and ears, pug nose, balding head.






> *PAN* was the god of shepherds and flocks, of mountain wilds, hunting and rustic music. He wandered the hills and mountains of Arkadia *playing his pan-pipes and chasing Nymphs*. His unseen presence aroused feelings of panic in men passing through the remote, lonely places of the wilds.
> 
> The god was a lover of nymphs, who commonly fled from his advances. Syrinx ran and was transformed into a clump of reeds, out of which the god crafted *his famous pan-pipes*. Pitys escaped and was turned into a mountain fir, the god's sacred tree. Ekho spurned his advances and fading away left behind only her voice to repeat forever the mountain cries of the god.
> 
> Pan was depicted as a man with the horns, legs and tail of a goat, and with thick beard, snub nose and pointed ears. He was often appears in the retinue of Dionysos alongside the other rustic gods. Greeks in the classical age associated his name with the word pan meaning "all". However, it true origin lies in an old Arkadian word for rustic.
> 
> Pan was frequently identified with other similar rustic gods such as Aristaios, the shepherd-god of northern Greece, who like Pan was titled both Agreus (the hunter) and Nomios (the shepherd); as well as with the pipe-playing Phrygian satyr Marsyas; and Aigipan, the goat-fish god of the constellation Capricorn. Sometimes Pan was multiplied into a host of Panes, or a triad named Agreus, Nomios, and Phorbas.
> http://www.theoi.com/Georgikos/Pan.html






*PAN & PITYS*

Museum Collection: Antakya Museum, Antakya, Turkey 
Period: Imperial Roman

SUMMARY

The goat-legged god Pan sneaks up on a sleeping Nymph, probably either Ekho or Pitys. Above her flits a winged Eros (love god).


God pan has changed his appearance, hasn't he ?



SUMMARY

Detail of Pan picking grapes from a vase depiction of Dionysos and his retinue.


PAN
Date: C1st AD
Period: Imperial Roman

SUMMARY

The rustic god Pan sits on a mountain rock, playing a set of his namesake pan-pipes. The god is shown with the horns of a goat, but is otherwise human in form. He has an animal skin cloak draped over one arm





*James Pradier : Satyr and Bacchante*






Satyr also looks differently. 

*Apollo And Marsyas Satyr, Pietro Vannucci*




modern art 

*Micheal Cheval, Magic flute*








Let's look at god Pan

Alexander Pope (21 May 1688 – 30 May 1744) was an 18th-century English poet, best known for his satirical verse and for his translation of Homer.


Alexander Pope

Windsor-Forest

Not proud Olympus yields a nobler sight,
Tho' gods assembled grace his tow'ring height,
Than what more humble mountains offer here,
Where, in their blessings, all those Gods appear.
*See Pan with flocks*, with fruits Pomona crown'd,
Here blushing Flora paints th' enamel'd ground,
Here Ceres' gifts in waving prospect stand,
And nodding tempt the joyful reaper's hand;
Rich Industry sits smiling on the plains,
And peace and plenty tell, a STUART reigns.


*Arnold Böcklin, Nymph on Pan's Shoulders 1874*








*Peter Paul Rubens, Pan and Syrinx, 1617-1619*








*Julio Romano*









*Nicolas Poussin, Pan and Syrinx 1637-38*







I don't know the name of the artist but it comes from http://witchcraft-supplies.com/Statues_Gods.html 

*Pan Dancing with Nymphs*



So , let's look at transition of god Pan, Satyr and Cupid.

So, Cupid became a dark angel. 

*Cupid and Psyche, by Jean Baptiste Regnault, (1828)*




*Cupid and Psyche by ORAZIO GENTILESCHI*




*Cupid and Psyche by ORAZIO GENTILESCHI* 


*Cupid and Psyche, by Benjamin West*




*Cupid and Psyche by ORAZIO GENTILESCHI* 





Pan has transformed into a little angel. :FRlol: 

*Whoever you are, here is your master (or Love the Conquerer)* So, Pan/Satyr has become our master????






Sir Burne was more open. Satyr and Pan were was depicted with flute. So, Satyr and Pan became dark angel with red hairs.


*Angel, Sir Edward Burne-Jones*







*Venus and Cupid, Evelyn de Morgan*







*Angel of Death, Evelyn de Morgan*





*Love, the Misleader Evelyn De Morgan*




So, we may ask about dark angel.

I can post for hours but let's look at Zeus as another example.





> *ZEUS* was the king of the gods, the god of sky and weather, law, order and fate. He was depicted as a regal man, mature with sturdy figure and dark beard. His usual attributes were a lightning bolt, royal sceptre and eagle.
> http://www.theoi.com/Olympios/Zeus.html




1.10 EUROPA & THE BULL

Museum Collection: The J Paul Getty Museum, Malibu, Date: ca 340 BC
Period: Late Classical

SUMMARY

Side A: Detail of Europa riding across the sea on the back of the bull-shaped god Zeus. 







EUROPA & THE BULL

Museum Collection: Musée de L'Arles Antique, Arles, France 
Period: Imperial Roman

SUMMARY

Europa is carried across the sea by the bull-shaped god Zeus.



*Rembrandt: THE ABDUCTION OF EUROPA* 




*Titian The Rape of Europa (1562)*





*Giovanni Battista Palumba 

1500-1510
The rape of Europa, who lies along the back of the bull who charges through the sea with a landscape behind*





*René Boyvin, 1545-1555
The rape of Europa: Europa on the back of the bull which is taking her away; both are seen from behind. c.1545/55
Engraving*




Huge marble statue of Europe and the bull from the 19th century in the midst of Hyde Park, London. She represents one of the four continents on the base of the Albert Memorial erected in the Hyde Park in 1876. The sculptor is by P. MacDowell





*Karl Hänny (1879-1972): Skulptur "Europa auf dem Stier" (1915-1918), Rosengarten, Bern, Schweiz.
*



*Hannes Grobe*
Europa carried away by a bull (bronze sculpture by Lilli Finzelberg). Present given by American citizens to captain Johnssen after completing the maiden voyage of the express-steamer EUROPA in 1930. Deutsches Schiffahrtsmuseum, Bremerhaven, Germany









Whats about the Bankers & there Wall-street cable with there bull & Horn Symbolics?




California




*Ringling Museum of Art in Sarasota, Florida*

*St. Luke.The Four Evangelists. 1464/65. Fresco. Vault of Apsidal Chapel of Sant' Agostino, San Gimignano, Italy*

----------


## YesNo

> I'm still in book 3, but I am astounded at how cruel Juno is and how her jealous fuels her satisfaction. I understand that she feels her throne is threatened, but it still seems so harsh.


I was thinking the same thing about Juno. 

Also she doesn't stop with Jove's lover or rape victim, but goes after the entire family. This morning I was thinking that something similar happened with Adam and Eve. They ate the fruit Yahweh told them not to eat and so Yahweh removed them from paradise. All their descendents were punished with them. I've never understood why eating the fruit was such a problem, but I can sort of see why being involved, even unwillingly, in a marital dispute between two chief Gods might cause some problems.

I wonder if part of the story is to explain why unfortunate things happen.




> I can post for hours but let's look at Zeus as another example.


Thanks, ftil! I'll get back with a comment when I have digested this. I think I'll start with Europa and the Bull. 

I hadn't thought of the Wall Street bull statue as being related to this before.




> We have a butterfly again and a man with horn. There is a frog on the top of his head. In Egyptian religion the eight deities were arranged in four female-male pairs, the females were associated with snakes and the males were associated with frogs: Naunet and Nu, Amaunet and Amun, Kauket and Kuk, Hauhet and Huh.


The only thing that makes me think the Wall Street bull has nothing to do with the Europa legend is the absence of Europa in the figure, but I do wonder why a bull and bear are chosen for the rising and falling trends of the market.

I found it interesting that the butterfly represents the soul, and that males are associated with frogs and females with snakes in Egyptian religion. The frog idea reminds me of the princess kissing the frog in the fairy tale.

I liked the following image, but I didn't even realize there was a key in it until you asked the question of who was holding it.




> Look at butterfly, and a girl with a chain. Who is keeping the key?

----------


## stlukesguild

Titian's Rape of Europa may be the finest interpretation of this myth... indeed it may just be the finest Italian Renaissance painting in America... but really!! It must be seen in all it's glorious color! This is what makes the painting... the contrast of the opulent sensuality of color and brushwork in contrast to the violence of the scene:

 

My personal favorite interpretation, however, must be that of Titian's slightly later Venetian compatriot, Paolo Veronese:



Rather than suggesting the fear of Europa and the violence of the drama, Veronese transforms the scene into a celebration... an Epithalimion... as the "bride" of Jove is decked in flowers and rich, glowing satin gowns by attending handmaidens, while cupids crown her with wreaths of roses and laurels and more flowers are strewn before her path. The painting suggests elements of a rich tapestry... not unlike Botticelli's _Primavera_... and tapestries would have been well-known in Venice where the flood-waters and humidity had long made large paintings an impossibility until the recent development of oil on canvas.

Among the more Modern interpretations, I quite like the German Expressionist, Max Beckmann's:



Beckmann was continually fascinated with the sexual relationship between men and women. Europa's face suggests her fear, but as usual with Beckmann, her muscular body suggests anything but a helpless damsel. The bull thrusts his phallic head forward at us while Europa's body is wrapped naked around him. 

In looking at the bull imagery one must remember that there are multiple bull narratives in Greco-Roman mythology, including the Minotaur and Io. The tale of Io, seduced by Zeus, is very similar to that of Europa... although it is poor Io who is turned into the bull (or heifer) and driven half-mad by the gadflies set upon her by the ever jealous Hera. Intriguingly, both Europa's and Io's names have been assigned to moons of Jupiter.

I always thought the bull was chosen in connection with the old adage "a bull in a china shop" suggesting the reckless behavior of "Buy! Buy! Buy!"

----------


## ftil

> *stlukesguild* wrote:
> 
> In looking at the bull imagery one must remember that there are multiple bull narratives in Greco-Roman mythology, including the Minotaur and Io. The tale of Io, seduced by Zeus, is very similar to that of Europa... although it is poor Io who is turned into the bull (or heifer) and driven half-mad by the gadflies set upon her by the ever jealous Hera. Intriguingly, both Europa's and Io's names have been assigned to moons of Jupiter.


Hm......as a female I question using a word "seduce"  :Biggrin:  Zeus transformed himself into a bull or a swan, for example. I think that many painters were correct when they tilted their paintings The rape of Europa. He was a quite promiscuous god. The same applies when we look at Bathsheba and king David. The Bible use the same word that king David saw Bathsheba and seduced her. No, he raped her. I think that it is a very important distinction and we need to ask why so many painters were fascinated with the myth of Leda, Europa, Bathsheba, Susanna and elderly, or Lot and his daughters, Lot who raped his daughters. 

Let's look at Zeus mortal lovers.




> *MORTAL LOVES (WOMEN)*
> ALKMENE A Lady of Thebes in Boiotia (Central Greece) who was seduced by Zeus in the form of her own husband. She bore twins: Herakles by Zeus and Likymnios by her husband Amphitryon.
> 
> ANTIOPE A Lady of Thebes in Boiotia (Central Greece) who was seduced by Zeus in the shape of Satyros. She bore him twin sons Amphion and Zethos which were exposed at birth.
> 
> DANAE A Princess of Argos (in Central Greece) who was imprisoned by her father in a bronze tower. Zeus seduced her in the form of a golden shower, and she gave birth to a son, the hero Perseus.
> 
> DIA A Queen of the Lapith tribe of Thessalia (in Northern Greece), wife of King Ixion. According to some, she was seduced by Zeus, and bore him a son Peirithoos (but others say, the father was her husband Ixion). [see Family]
> 
> ...



But has a long list of SEMI-DIVINE LOVES (NYMPHAI)




> I always thought the bull was chosen in connection with the old adage "a bull in a china shop" suggesting the reckless behavior of "Buy! Buy! Buy!"


The bull or the cow theme is quite interesting. It is present is many cultures, for example in Egyptian religion, Hindu, or ancient world. 




*Sculpture of Hathor as a cow.*





> The worship of the Sacred Bull throughout the ancient world is most familiar to the Western world in the biblical episode of the idol of the Golden Calf made by people left behind by Moses during visit to mountain peak and worshipped by the Hebrews in the wilderness of Sinai (Exodus). Marduk is the "bull of Utu". Shiva's steed is Nandi, the Bull. The sacred bull survives in the constellation Taurus. The bull, whether lunar as in Mesopotamia and Egypt or solar as in India, is the subject of various other cultural and religious incarnations, as well as modern mentions in new age cultures.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bull_(mythology)


Hm......I have noticed that Europa is depicted as a mermaid. I have never seen that in other paintings.







> In Greek mythology, Pasiphaë (English: /pəˈsɪfə.iː/; Greek: Πασιφάη Pasipháē), "wide-shining" was the daughter of Helios, the Sun, by the eldest of the Oceanids, Perse;
> 
> She was also the mother of "starlike" Asterion, called by the Greeks the Minotaur, after a curse from Poseidon caused her to experience lust for and mate with a white bull sent by Poseidon.[4] "*The Bull was the old pre-Olympian Poseidon,"*
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasipha%C3%AB



I think about Jupiter And Olympia painting by Giulio Romano. Olympia doesn't exist in mythology as a woman. Zeus is not human, either. I am wondering if the same theme was painted by other artists.

I let my associations fly free.  :Wink5: 


A very strange paintings.


*Arnold BöcklinSwiss, 1827 - 1901
Naiads at Play*




*Arnold BöcklinSwiss, 1827 - 1901
Idyll of the Sea*




*Arnold BöcklinSwiss, 1827 - 1901
Playing in the Waves*







*Nereid riding a sea-bull (latter 2nd century BC)*






*Sea thiasos Nerid*






*Sea thiasos Nereid*





*Sea thiasos Neried*






*Hippocamp Art Deco fountain, Kansas City, Missouri, (1937)*

----------


## stlukesguild

No... she is wearing a gown or robe on her lower body, but her toes are visible beneath the bull's neck. What might be mistaken for her fish tail is the bull's tail.

What I see when looking at her is something akin to the engraving by René Boyvin. There is a similar muscularity of both the bull and the girl. She has the same gold armband... and there is a similar forshortening... in Beckmann's case the bull thrusts forward in space, in the Boyvin he moves away from us. In both instances there is a sense of powerful sexuality in both Europa and the Bull.

----------


## ftil

> No... she is wearing a gown or robe on her lower body, but her toes are visible beneath the bull's neck. What might be mistaken for her fish tail is the bull's tail.
> 
> What I see when looking at her is something akin to the engraving by René Boyvin. There is a similar muscularity of both the bull and the girl. She has the same gold armband... and there is a similar forshortening... in Beckmann's case the bull thrusts forward in space, in the Boyvin he moves away from us. In both instances there is a sense of powerful sexuality in both Europa and the Bull.


LOL! Toes ? Like in The Sirens Arnold BöcklinSwiss, 1827 - 1901





It is interesting that you have mentioned bull's tail. I don't see powerful sexuality but I see that she was violated and abducted against her will.

I am trying to find René Boyvin work. But to be honest, I think that you fell a victim of programming by seeing women as a sex object. Yes, women have powerful sexuality but it doesn't mean that it is available to all men. It is a violation of women's will. I feel very uncomfortable that you can't see it.




> Thanks, ftil! I'll get back with a comment when I have digested this. I think I'll start with Europa and the Bull. 
> 
> I hadn't thought of the Wall Street bull statue as being related to this before.


I have moved my posts to my tread as I have a very different approach to art than OP. Paintings have own language and it is more than we have been told. :Brow: 
I will add more paintings to the old posts.
http://www.online-literature.com/for...=1#post1049351

----------


## OrphanPip

Human beings have been obsessed with cows likely since the domestication of the animal, it's understandable that the animal would become associated with prosperity and fertility. The cow is odd in one sense that it stuck around within a lot of cultures as an important symbol as animistic worship declined. Likely because it played such a prominent economic role in the lives of many people.

----------


## Buh4Bee

When I was a resident in the city of NY, there were life size cows all over the city. Once they were displayed for a time, they were then auctioned off for charity. You can read about the organization that hosts this event through the link below. In the link there is an explanation telling why the cow is used as the painters' canvas (life size cows are painted by different artists). Mainly, they summarize that the cow is universally recognized and loved across the planet.

www.cowparade.com/AboutUs.php

----------


## YesNo

> When I was a resident in the city of NY, there were life size cows all over the city. Once they were displayed for a time, they were then auctioned off for charity. You can read about the organization that hosts this event through the link below. In the link there is an explanation telling why the cow is used as the painters' canvas (life size cows are painted by different artists). Mainly, they summarize that the cow is universally recognized and loved across the planet.
> 
> www.cowparade.com/AboutUs.php


I remember seeing these cows in Chicago as well. I don't understand why they were made but they were interesting.

----------


## Ecurb

King Minos of Crete was supposed to sacrifice a bull to Aphrodite. However, the bull was such a magnificent animal that Minos spared it. The slighted Aphrodite got her revenge by causing Minos' wife Pasiphae to fall in love with the bull. Pasiphae had a hollow bronze cow built. She could fit inside the cow and copulate with the magnificent white bull. The offspring of their union was the Minotaur, which Theseus later slew in the Labyrinth. (Ecurb, coming to the discussion half way through)

----------


## Buh4Bee

I just jumped in too. 

@ y/n I think the cows were for charity. They were auctioned off.

What do people think about the idea that once the god makes a promise, it has to be honored? Why can't they just take it back? I just finished book 3- The Story of Semele. This is the part when Semele, under Juno's influence, asks Jove to show his full glory. Jove has to keep his promise, since he swore by the river Styx.

"He groans in pity: she cannot take back
What she had wished, nor what he had sworn."

What does this say about the morality of the Roman time period when Ovid wrote?

----------


## YesNo

> What do people think about the idea that once the god makes a promise, it has to be honored? Why can't they just take it back? I just finished book 3- The Story of Semele. This is the part when Semele, under Juno's influence, asks Jove to show his full glory. Jove has to keep his promise, since he swore by the river Styx.
> 
> "He groans in pity: she cannot take back
> What she had wished, nor what he had sworn."
> 
> What does this say about the morality of the Roman time period when Ovid wrote?


The same thing occurs with Phoebus and his son Phaethon (book 2). Phoebus promised, on the river Styx, to grant Phaethon anything he wanted. Unfortunately Phaethon wanted to ride the chariot of the sun across the sky which led to his death.

There is something about this river Styx that seems to have control over these gods.

----------


## Alexander III

Hey guys I am terribly sorry that I could not join the club I initiated; but I was called away from litnet for a period, due to various family affairs. Once again terribly sorry, but am glad to see you guys got it started and going strong without me. I hope to catch up and join in soon.

----------


## Buh4Bee

Welcome back A3! Hope you can join the conversation soon.

Yesno- I know, that section (Book 2) is a part when you see the same thing occur. I'm just wondering what these stories or myths say about the morality of the time they were written in. Roman was known for being morally corrupt, yet it produces great poetry with some kind of moral code. Yet, woman are constantly abducted, raped, or punished for their rape by parents or Juno.

----------


## Drkshadow03

> Hm......as a female I question using a word "seduce"  Zeus transformed himself into a bull or a swan, for example. I think that many painters were correct when they tilted their paintings The rape of Europa. He was a quite promiscuous god. The same applies when we look at Bathsheba and king David. The Bible use the same word that king David saw Bathsheba and seduced her. No, he raped her. I think that it is a very important distinction and we need to ask why so many painters were fascinated with the myth of Leda, Europa, Bathsheba, Susanna and elderly, or Lot and his daughters, Lot who raped his daughters.


While I would agree that Zeus rapes many of his victims against their will, I'm not so convinced about those other stories. I wouldn't call the David and Bathsheba episode a rape. Also, Lot's daughters rape him, not the other way around.




> What do people think about the idea that once the god makes a promise, it has to be honored? Why can't they just take it back? I just finished book 3- The Story of Semele. This is the part when Semele, under Juno's influence, asks Jove to show his full glory. Jove has to keep his promise, since he swore by the river Styx.
> 
> "He groans in pity: she cannot take back
> What she had wished, nor what he had sworn."
> 
> What does this say about the morality of the Roman time period when Ovid wrote?


I'm not sure it says anything about the morality of the times, but rather it might just be a narrative technique or a genuine part of the belief system of the Ancient Greeks, which the stories originated. The problem, of course, too, is we are seeing these stories filtered through Ovid.

----------


## YesNo

> Yet, woman are constantly abducted, raped, or punished for their rape by parents or Juno.


I don't know what all the rape stories are about nor the excessive punishments. It might be a way to portray nature as somewhat hostile or at least unpredictable. 




> I wouldn't call the David and Bathsheba episode a rape.


I also don't see the David and Bathsheba story as one of rape, but rather as adultery, if it happened at all. In the back of my mind, I keep recalling Baruch Halpern retelling this story in _David's Secret Demons_ as something made up by Bathsheba and the court historian to justify, in a convoluted way, that Solomon was indeed David's legitimate son rather than Uriah's. I look at the books of _Samuel_ and _Kings_ as political documents justifying those who were in power at the time.

----------


## Buh4Bee

Yes, I agree that nature plays a very important role in the stories. I will remember that as I continue to read. Also the basic human emotions such as love, jealousy and revenge.

I know people are talking about the prevalence of the theme of rape in art as well as the stories. As a connection to this conversation, one can return to the text and find the Story of Salmacis. She is a woman who tries to rape Hermaphrodites (15 year old boy). He is able to keep her off him. 

"He refused her
The joy she wanted most, but still she held him
Body to body."

Here is seems the woman does not succeed. It is a matter of difference in biological make-up between the sexes? Men are stronger and have a key, while woman are...
Well, we all know how the old argument goes. Here is an example of a woman trying to take what she wants when motivated by the lust to have beauty. Rape is never acceptable, but it is important to acknowledge that women can have the same drive for lust as men. This shows a twisted side of equality between the sexes, if you can follow my logic. LOL!

----------


## ftil

> *Drkshadow03* wrote:
> 
> While I would agree that Zeus rapes many of his victims against their will, I'm not so convinced about those other stories. I wouldn't call the David and Bathsheba episode a rape. Also, Lot's daughters rape him, not the other way around.


Well, I looked at paintings before I read mythology or the Bible. The Bible says that Lot's daughters made him drunk to the point that he couldn't remember having sex with them. I am a female so that I can't speak on behalf of men but is it possible for a man to have sex when he is so intoxicated to the point that he has a black·out? 

Paintings depict a different story.  :Brow: 




*Lot and his daughters.*






*Robert von Stutterheim, Lot and his daughters (after Jacopo Amigoni)*






*Frans, the elder Floris, Lot and his daughters.*






*Albrecht Altdorfer: Lot and his daughters.*






*Lot and His Daughters by Gustave Courbet, 1844*







*Wtewael Joachim, Lot and his daughters*




> *YesNo* wrote:
> I also don't see the David and Bathsheba story as one of rape, but rather as adultery, if it happened at all. In the back of my mind, I keep recalling Baruch Halpern retelling this story in David's Secret Demons as something made up by Bathsheba and the court historian to justify, in a convoluted way, that Solomon was indeed David's legitimate son rather than Uriah's. I look at the books of Samuel and Kings as political documents justifying those who were in power at the time.



We may question if it happened or not. The same is with mythology and we don’t know if it happened but the themes of rapes and abduction of women are prevalent. Secondly, Bathsheba was naked after having a bath and King David immediately desired her. If they met in a different circumstance, I wouldn’t argue that he could seduce her or she seduced him. I have started looking closely at those themes as I have noticed that the themes "after bath" or "the bathers" are one of the most painted themes. I have been asking why? Then, I connected it with Bathsheba , Susana and the Elders, and Lot and his daughters. I need to find where in the Bible is written about Bathsheba.

----------


## Drkshadow03

Well, if you read the Bible not only does Lot's daughters get him drunk, but it specifically shows Lot's daughter's conspiring with each other to get him drunk for the purpose of raping their father and taking his seed. I'm not really sure paintings at least a thousand years after the story constitutes evidence to the contrary.

'Lot went up from Zoar and settled in the hill country with his two daughters, for he was afraid to dwell in Zoar; and he and his two daughters lived in a cave. And the older one said to the younger, "Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to consort with us in the way of all the world. Come, let us make our father drink wine, and let us lie with him, that we may maintain life through our father." That night they made their father drink wine, and the older one went in and lay with her father; he did not know when she lay down or when she rose.' (Genesis 19:30-19:33 JPS Translation)

----------


## ftil

> Well, if you read the Bible not only does Lot's daughters get him drunk, but it specifically shows Lot's daughter's conspiring with each other to get him drunk for the purpose of raping their father and taking his seed. I'm not really sure paintings at least a thousand years after the story constitutes evidence to the contrary.
> 
> 'Lot went up from Zoar and settled in the hill country with his two daughters, for he was afraid to dwell in Zoar; and he and his two daughters lived in a cave. And the older one said to the younger, "Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to consort with us in the way of all the world. Come, let us make our father drink wine, and let us lie with him, that we may maintain life through our father." That night they made their father drink wine, and the older one went in and lay with her father; he did not know when she lay down or when she rose.' (Genesis 19:30-19:33 JPS Translation)



Well, you have just accepted the story of Lot without questioning. I was asking a very different question. Sorry, but I dont believe that the old father was quite intoxicated and the daughter could rape him. If it is not possible in a real life, I dont believe that it was possible in the Bible. Perhaps, we have not been told the truth.

----------


## Ecurb

Does seducing someone who is drunk constitute rape? I suppose it depends on whether they are so drunk as to be incapable of saying "No". I don't think Lot's daughters are guilty of rape, although they were very naughty girls.

----------


## Drkshadow03

> Well, you have just accepted the story of Lot without questioning. I was asking a very different question. Sorry, but I don’t believe that the old father was quite intoxicated and the daughter could rape him. If it is not possible in a real life, I don’t believe that it was possible in the Bible. Perhaps, we have not been told the truth.


Why would I question the story details and plot of a made-up myth or any type of fictional story for that matter? You wouldn't read a scene in a contemporary novel in which the author tells us the main character entered his ferrari (car) and then claim, "No, the story is lying! You just accepted it without questioning it! He was really driving a motorcycle. A Motorcycle! I mean a train . . . " That would just be you making stuff up and adding events that never happened in the story. 

Also, given the Bible is about a supernatural deity that splits apart seas so people can cross it, communicates through a burning bush, turns water to blood, and many other fantastical things that never seem to happen in real life it is rather strange for you to write "If it is not possible in a real life, I don't believe that it was possible in the Bible." Many stuff that isn't possible in real life or which doesn't occur in the natural world without supernatural intervention (I'll throw a bone to believers here) happen in the Bible.

You seem to also be implying that women can never rape men in real life. While men certainly have a much higher rate of being the perpetrator, I hate to burst your bubble, but it does happen.




> Does seducing someone who is drunk constitute rape? I suppose it depends on whether they are so drunk as to be incapable of saying "No". I don't think Lot's daughters are guilty of rape, although they were very naughty girls.


Except the text actually says, "he did not know when she lay down or when she rose." He wasn't cognizant of what was happening; I would say that's a clear indication that he was so drunk he couldn't say "no."

----------


## ftil

> *Drkshadow03* wrote:
> 
> Also, given the Bible is about a supernatural deity that splits apart seas so people can cross it, communicates through a burning bush, turns water to blood, and many other fantastical things that never seem to happen in real life it is rather strange for you to write "If it is not possible in a real life, I don't believe that it was possible in the Bible." Many stuff that isn't possible in real life or which doesn't occur in the natural world without supernatural intervention (I'll throw a bone to believers here) happen in the Bible.



Yes, but we have to blindly believe without questioning, havent we? We were not raised to question, particularly, the Bible. Well, the more I study artifacts and different religions, the more I see that we have not been told the truth.




> You seem to also be implying that women can never rape men in real life. While men certainly have a much higher rate of being the perpetrator, I hate to burst your bubble, but it does happen.


No, I dont imply. It is your assumption and you are wrong. I was talking about rape and abduction of women first. I may address it when I am done with this subject.

----------


## Ecurb

> Except the text actually says, "he did not know when she lay down or when she rose." He wasn't cognizant of what was happening; I would say that's a clear indication that he was so drunk he couldn't say "no."


That's ambiguous. Lot was obviously drunk and confused, but not knowing exactly when someone lies down or arises doesn't in and of itself constitute a complete lack of awareness. 

I'm not sure where ftil is coming from. The "truth" (as Drkshadow suggests) and the "story" are identical. Of course we don't know if a real Lot existed (how could we?) but we don't know if a real Zeus existed either, and I don't see anyong complaining that his abduction of Europa may not be the "truth".

----------


## ftil

> That's ambiguous. Lot was obviously drunk and confused, but not knowing exactly when someone lies down or arises doesn't in and of itself constitute a complete lack of awareness. 
> 
> I'm not sure where ftil is coming from. The "truth" (as Drkshadow suggests) and the "story" are identical. Of course we don't know if a real Lot existed (how could we?) but we don't know if a real Zeus existed either, and I don't see anyong complaining that his abduction of Europa may not be the "truth".


Well, my search for truth was as a result of asking questions why as a society we have stopped functioning. I have asked why 20 million people in US suffer from a major depression, similar number of people suffer from anxiety. If we add all forms of addiction, we see the seriousness of the problem. Then I asked the question, why they promote pornography and a female whore archetype. I moved to study mind control and then I moved to all religions and mythology. I have tons of questions and I want to understand what went wrong and what has happed to us. I am not satisfied any more with answers we were led to believe as the truth.  :Nono:

----------


## Drkshadow03

> That's ambiguous. Lot was obviously drunk and confused, but not knowing exactly when someone lies down or arises doesn't in and of itself constitute a complete lack of awareness. 
> 
> I'm not sure where ftil is coming from. The "truth" (as Drkshadow suggests) and the "story" are identical. Of course we don't know if a real Lot existed (how could we?) but we don't know if a real Zeus existed either, and I don't see anyong complaining that his abduction of Europa may not be the "truth".


Not really. If we were supposed to take the phrase literally as Lot didn't know when his daughter slept with him and when she left, it would be a rather pointless line to add. The point is what the lines imply. The lines imply he was so drunk that he lost his sense of time and his surroundings (and what was happening), that he was basically completely unaware of his daughter coming in and sleeping with him and then leaving after the deed was done.

Really, though, this is getting off-topic from the thread, which is supposed to be about Ovid's work.

----------


## Ecurb

> Well, my search for truth was as a result of asking questions why as a society we have stopped functioning. I have asked why 20 million people in US suffer from a major depression, similar number of people suffer from anxiety. If we add all forms of addiction, we see the seriousness of the problem. Then I asked the question, why they promote pornography and a female whore archetype. I moved to study mind control and then I moved to all religions and mythology. I have tons of questions and I want to understand what went wrong and what has happed to us. I am not satisfied any more with answers we were led to believe as the truth.


Since when is "the truth" a matter of functionality. I'll grant that the modern scientific worldview sometimes suggests as much -- but philosophers would disagree. Also, who is the "they" who are promoting pornography and the "female whore archetype"? I'm guessing that depression rates were often similar to what they are now -- they just weren't diagnosed in the same way. As for anxiety -- I'm guessing that back when half of the children didn't live to be five, parents suffered a lot more anxiety than they do now. 

(You're probably right Drkshadow, although I'm not enough of a biblical scholar to know for certain.)

----------


## YesNo

> As a connection to this conversation, one can return to the text and find the Story of Salmacis. She is a woman who tries to rape Hermaphrodites (15 year old boy).


By some strange coincidence, I had left off at the story of Salmacis and Hermaphrodites (book 4). 

It seems that they ultimately merged together somehow at Salmacis request like a graft on a tree. As a reasonable response, I would have thought Hermaphrodites would have requested that they be separated again, but no. Instead he asks that a curse be placed on the pool. Why blame the pool or cause others to have a transformation who swim in it?

Things don't seem _just_ in these stories, which is perhaps what makes them interesting.

----------


## ftil

> Since when is "the truth" a matter of functionality. I'll grant that the modern scientific worldview sometimes suggests as much -- but philosophers would disagree. Also, who is the "they" who are promoting pornography and the "female whore archetype"? I'm guessing that depression rates were often similar to what they are now -- they just weren't diagnosed in the same way. As for anxiety -- I'm guessing that back when half of the children didn't live to be five, parents suffered a lot more anxiety than they do now. 
> 
> (You're probably right Drkshadow, although I'm not enough of a biblical scholar to know for certain.)


Sorry, if you cant see that something is very wrong with our world, you will find many explanations for society problems. For example, about depression or anxiety. I am just wondering on what base you built your assumptions? Secondly, if you dont see that music videos and movie promote a female whore archetype, you will not look for the answer who they are. I am not going to provide the answer. I would rather ask questions. Hey, we got minds for a reason.  :Brow:

----------


## Ecurb

Of course I see something is very wrong with our world. I’m not Candide. What I don’t see is that we have degenerated from some ideal past. Are you suggesting that no negative stereotypes about women existed in the past? If you are, I dispute it. Women have more freedom today than they have in most of the known past (men, too, for that matter). Although stereotypes exist, they are less prevalent and pernicious than they have been in centuries. 

I don’t doubt that some people are anxious and others are depressed. But hasn’t that always been the case? Wasn’t Lady Bertram, sitting endlessly on her couch stroking Pug “clinically depressed”? Don’t you think women who stood a good chance of dying in childbirth, and whose children were likely to die before they turned five, were just as anxious as modern women, whose children generally survive, and who usually complete more than their three score and ten?

Why is it that people always see the problems with the present, and idealize the past? I hear constantly about the high stress of fast paced modern life. But isn’t this ridiculous? Wouldn’t a life where one’s children often die, when one is subject to countless diseases and plagues, and when one might starve if the hunt is unsuccessful be a lot more stressful than modern life? We live in the most stress-free, least anxious time in the history of the world.

In fact, the hustle and bustle of modern life is a mere illusion. We look out our window and see cars and trucks driving by. But the people inside them are sitting still. If there were more activity, there would be less hustle and bustle. 

Of course diagnosis of ‘depression’ and ‘anxiety’ has increased – the medical profession is treating more and more things. But that’s no reason to assume that there is actually more depression or anxiety. It seems likely that there was more anxiety in the past – and for better reason.

----------


## ftil

> *Ecurb* wrote:
> 
> Of course I see something is very wrong with our world. Im not Candide. What I dont see is that we have degenerated from some ideal past. Are you suggesting that no negative stereotypes about women existed in the past? If you are, I dispute it. Women have more freedom today than they have in most of the known past (men, too, for that matter). Although stereotypes exist, they are less prevalent and pernicious than they have been in centuries. 
> 
> I dont doubt that some people are anxious and others are depressed. But hasnt that always been the case? Wasnt Lady Bertram, sitting endlessly on her couch stroking Pug clinically depressed? Dont you think women who stood a good chance of dying in childbirth, and whose children were likely to die before they turned five, were just as anxious as modern women, whose children generally survive, and who usually complete more than their three score and ten?
> 
> Why is it that people always see the problems with the present, and idealize the past? I hear constantly about the high stress of fast paced modern life. But isnt this ridiculous? Wouldnt a life where ones children often die, when one is subject to countless diseases and plagues, and when one might starve if the hunt is unsuccessful be a lot more stressful than modern life? We live in the most stress-free, least anxious time in the history of the world.
> 
> In fact, the hustle and bustle of modern life is a mere illusion. We look out our window and see cars and trucks driving by. But the people inside them are sitting still. If there were more activity, there would be less hustle and bustle. 
> ...




I would never suggest that male or female stereotypes didnt exist in the past. There were always there but streotypes have changed over times. I dont know if you have seen the Century of the Self, BBC 4 parts documentary movie that shows how psychology and psychiatry was used to program us. This movie has shown many layers of how we were programmed and it takes time to uncover all layesrs. 

Your assumption about depression and anxiety is wrong. I dont have time to provide research that shows it.

----------


## Ecurb

I haven't seen "Century of Self". Depression and anxiety are such nebulous conditions that it seems unlikely to me that research could "show" that my assumption is wrong (although I'm willing to look at anything). I don't necessarily assume that people are less anxious or depressed today than they have been in the past -- instead I assume that people are people, and they are much the same now as they were then. I was simply pointing out that there was more REASON for anxiety in the past, so, lacking definitive evidence to the contrary, it would be reasonable to assume that there was MORE anxiety, stress, etc. in the past. Mr Woodhouse seems to have suffered from it, for one, at some time around 1815. 

(Of course to the extent that physical exercise is a good treatment for anxiety, stress or depression it is possible that in less sedentary times these conditions were less prevalent. I doubt it, though.)

----------


## ftil

If you choose to base your assumption that is not based on research, it is your choice. If you are not interested to find by yourself that your beliefs are falsewhy dont we go back to Ovid. LOL!

----------


## Buh4Bee

> By some strange coincidence, I had left off at the story of Salmacis and Hermaphrodites (book 4). 
> 
> It seems that they ultimately merged together somehow at Salmacis request like a graft on a tree. As a reasonable response, I would have thought Hermaphrodites would have requested that they be separated again, but no. Instead he asks that a curse be placed on the pool. Why blame the pool or cause others to have a transformation who swim in it?
> 
> Things don't seem _just_ in these stories, which is perhaps what makes them interesting.


I agree and I thin we can consider the role of fate, destiny, or just bad luck to add to the mix of absurdity.

----------


## Ecurb

> If you choose to base your assumption that is not based on research, it is your choice. If you are not interested to find by yourself that your beliefs are falsewhy dont we go back to Ovid. LOL!


You're the one who is "too busy" to bother with research. I said (in plain English) that I'd be glad to look at the research, but that I doubt it would be pesrsuasive (because definitions and diagnoses of anxiety and depression have changed so much). I suppose it might be possible on a micro-level ("more people are anxious and depressed now than in 1950," for example). But I don't see how scientists could compare people today with those in 
1600. Please enlighten me. I'd love to see the research.

----------


## ftil

> You're the one who is "too busy" to bother with research. I said (in plain English) that I'd be glad to look at the research, but that I doubt it would be pesrsuasive (because definitions and diagnoses of anxiety and depression have changed so much). I suppose it might be possible on a micro-level ("more people are anxious and depressed now than in 1950," for example). But I don't see how scientists could compare people today with those in 
> 1600. Please enlighten me. I'd love to see the research.


Hey, you don't expect me to do homework for you, do you?  :Brow:  I have done mine. But I suggested that you watch the Century of the Self and you should have hundreds of questions. Then, I could share more links depending on your questions.

----------


## Ecurb

> Hey, you don't expect me to do homework for you, do you?  I have done mine. But I suggested that you watch the Century of the Self and you should have hundreds of questions. Then, I could share more links depending on your questions.


Of course you need not cite any research -- and I probably won't bother doing the 'homework' (I hate that word) for myself. I do appreciate all the mythological artworks you posted, though. Thanks.

----------


## ftil

> Of course you need not cite any research -- and I probably won't bother doing the 'homework' (I hate that word) for myself. I do appreciate all the mythological artworks you posted, though. Thanks.


I understand it. Psychology is my passion but I understand that not everybody loves it. LOL! I am glad that you like artwork. Art takes us to a different place as it bypasses a left brain activity, allowing us to see what we didnt see before. I hope that you will continue reading and quoting Ovid so that I will get constant stimulation.and respond with art.  :Yesnod:

----------


## Buh4Bee

I think that this was already mentioned earlier in the thread, but I'll ask again as memory as dwindled to almost nothing- Is the myth of Pyramus and Thisbe the same myth that Romeo and Juliet is based on?

This thread should also get more focused on the Metamorphoses. I think we have lost some readers here.

----------


## Buh4Bee

This is a quote from Wikipedia about the River Styx:
"The gods were bound by the Styx and swore oaths on it.[1] Zeus swore to give Semele whatever she wanted and was then obliged to follow through when he realized to his horror that her request would lead to her death. Helios similarly promised his son Phaëton whatever he desired, also resulting in the boy's death."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styx

It exactly summarizes what we have already concluded previously on the thread. I suppose I would be interested in understanding the origin of the River Styx pre-Grecian times.

----------


## ftil

> This is a quote from Wikipedia about the River Styx:
> "The gods were bound by the Styx and swore oaths on it.[1] Zeus swore to give Semele whatever she wanted and was then obliged to follow through when he realized to his horror that her request would lead to her death. Helios similarly promised his son Phaëton whatever he desired, also resulting in the boy's death."
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styx
> 
> It exactly summarizes what we have already concluded previously on the thread. I suppose I would be interested in understanding the origin of the River Styx pre-Grecian times.


That's a really good question. I am thinking where to go to look and find the origin.

----------


## stlukesguild

There is the same concept of the inviolability of the oaths of gods in Wagner's _Ring of the Nibelungens_. The movement toward the inevitable Gotterdammerung or Twilight of the Gods begins when Wotan makes an attempt to renege upon his promise of his wife's sister, Freia, the goddess of youth, beauty, and love, to the giants for building a new home for the gods in Valhalla. The giants point out that Wotan's authority is sustained by the treaties carved into his spear, including his contract with the giants, which Wotan therefore cannot violate. He must even intervene when Freia's brothers, Donne arrive to defend their sister. As ruler of the Gods, he cannot permit the use of force to break the agreement.

Considering how the theme repeatedly shows up in the Metamorphoses... as well as in other Greco-Roman literature (and even Biblical literature if we consider the covenant made by God with Abraham, or the various other oaths made between God and man) it leads one to wonder just how important was one's word or promise as a leader. It also leads one to wonder as to just how this changed... not even in our time, but even in the Renaissance if we consider Machiavelli.

----------


## Drkshadow03

> This is a quote from Wikipedia about the River Styx:
> "The gods were bound by the Styx and swore oaths on it.[1] Zeus swore to give Semele whatever she wanted and was then obliged to follow through when he realized to his horror that her request would lead to her death. Helios similarly promised his son Phaëton whatever he desired, also resulting in the boy's death."
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styx
> 
> It exactly summarizes what we have already concluded previously on the thread. I suppose I would be interested in understanding the origin of the River Styx pre-Grecian times.


Does there need to be a deeper origin? It seems to me the idea of being bound to an oath on the River Styx as a Greek deity tells us a great deal about the centrality of oaths and social honor in these cultures, especially the Greeks. This idea is related to why Menelaus and the rest of the Greeks need to go fight the Trojan War after Paris steals Helen. Honor and oaths (which include things like honoring one's promises and displaying certain behavior towards guests and family) were serious matters in the Ancient world. So when the gods do make a promise it's not something they take lightly or something they can take back without losing face. Why the River Styx specifically? Well, the Wikipedia entry explains the mythological reason for why the Styx gains that honor.

But if we were to dig deeper, I personally don't think it's a coincidence that the River Styx is the boundary between the mortal world and the living one (and by extension, the boundary between the immortal one that cannot die and the mortal one). It's literally the boundary between what separates the humans from the gods.

----------


## Buh4Bee

No, I don't think we need to over-complicate things, but the responses provided where helpful. It is true that as one reads these stories, it is important to not over think them. They are creations stories afterall. LOL!

----------


## YesNo

I also find it hard to accept that an oath must be kept even when doing so will cause damage, but that does seem to be the case in these stories. I suspect today we would ignore the oath, but that doesn't seem to be an option in the these cultures which is a good reason not to make an oath in the first place. 

Oaths seem to be replaced today by contracts, which specify how the contract would be ended if it can no longer be met. Current contracts are very specific (mortgages, stock options, etc) and they are not open ended like promising to do whatever someone asks without knowing in advance what that might be.

It looks like the River Styx is the institution (courts, bank, brokerage firm, police) that guarantees that the contract will be honored. It is just hard for me to imagine that a river, even one separating the living from the dead, can have such power.

----------


## Buh4Bee

> I also find it hard to accept that an oath must be kept even when doing so will cause damage, but that does seem to be the case in these stories. I suspect today we would ignore the oath, but that doesn't seem to be an option in the these cultures which is a good reason not to make an oath in the first place.



I guess that is why these are just myths and not real. They serve a purpose to illustrate the ideal moral code or moral standard. Ovid was also poking fun at the gods by showing how ridiculous they could be in certain circumstances.

----------


## ftil

> *Drkshadow03* wrote:
> Does there need to be a deeper origin?


 LOL! It depends how we look at that problem. I have found quite fascinating to find connection with all religions and spiritual beliefs all over the world. The more I can find connections, the more I have questions........they we have not been told the truth.  :Brow:

----------


## Drkshadow03

> LOL! It depends how we look at that problem. I have found quite fascinating to find connection with all religions and spiritual beliefs all over the world. The more I can find connections, the more I have questions........they we have not been told the truth.


Not told the truth about what exactly? And by whom?

----------


## ftil

> *Drkshadow03* wrote:
> 
> Not told the truth about what exactly? And by whom?


About all religions. I am not going to tell what I think because I don’t like influencing people. I can only encourage people to ask questions because when we ask we search, and when we search we learn, and when we learn we grow.
Secondly, I believe that our natural way of how mind works is holotropic but we lost that ability in our educational system. Universities teach us to master linear thinking. But I need to do more research about it. However, there are scientists who study mind control are quite aware of it.

----------


## Drkshadow03

> About all religions. I am not going to tell what I think because I dont like influencing people. I can only encourage people to ask questions because when we ask we search, and when we search we learn, and when we learn we grow.
> Secondly, I believe that our natural way of how mind works is holotropic but we lost that ability in our educational system. Universities teach us to master linear thinking. But I need to do more research about it. However, there are scientists who study mind control are quite aware of it.


Read some Stanislav Grof have we? 

Asking questions is great, but people need to learn to ask the right questions. And unfortunately that's not a skill a lot of people have or ever bother to learn. A lot of whacky behavior, dubious ideological positions, paranoia, conspiracy theories, and oddball world-views get defended by people with the excuse that, "they're just asking questions" and therefore, anything they choose to think is a-ok.

----------


## YesNo

> I guess that is why these are just myths and not real. They serve a purpose to illustrate the ideal moral code or moral standard. Ovid was also poking fun at the gods by showing how ridiculous they could be in certain circumstances.


Yeah, they are just stories. Perhaps Ovid even made up a few of them himself.

He should have let one of the gods decide to take back his oath when he realized it was counterproductive so we could see what would happened to him.

On another topic, I found Bacchus rather interesting. If you didn't believe in him, he would just transform you into something unpleasant.

----------


## Buh4Bee

I haven't formed an opinion on Bacchus yet. I thought the fact that Bacchus is a new god and/or young god may having something to do with his quick reaction to take revenge if not worshipped, but most of the gods react quickly when brought to anger. Ceres turned the boy into a newt when he was starring at her and being naughty:

"And while the goddess drank, a hard faced youngerster
A loutish country boy, stood by and watched her,
And mocked her for her greediness."

The next part of the text describes how she then get angry and turns him into a newt.

Seems to me that the gods can demonstrate the power of raw emotions in humanity.

----------


## Buh4Bee

:/

Achilles was the boy whose mother dipped him in the River Stinx until he was intolerable.

----------


## YesNo

> :/
> 
> Achilles was the boy whose mother dipped him in the River Stinx until he was intolerable.


 :Smile:  I hadn't thought of it like that before.

----------


## ftil

> Read some Stanislav Grof have we? 
> 
> Asking questions is great, but people need to learn to ask the right questions. And unfortunately that's not a skill a lot of people have or ever bother to learn. A lot of whacky behavior, dubious ideological positions, paranoia, conspiracy theories, and oddball world-views get defended by people with the excuse that, "they're just asking questions" and therefore, anything they choose to think is a-ok.


I read a few and threw it to the garbage.  :Biggrin:  Well, I think that people need to sharpen critical thinking that involves asking questions. I have noticed that there is more and more mental paralysis. I can see it being on forums. It is scary as we got minds for a reason.  :Brow:

----------


## Buh4Bee

To reason with...  :Smile: 

What do people think of Bacchus? What was the need for a hedonist among the gods?

----------


## ftil

> To reason with... 
> 
> What do people think of Bacchus? What was the need for a hedonist among the gods?


I love that question and I will answer on the mythology and religion tread. Some art work is provoking and I hope that I will not put myself into trouble but they were master painters.  :FRlol:

----------


## Drkshadow03

> To reason with... 
> 
> What do people think of Bacchus? What was the need for a hedonist among the gods?


Well, some scholars believe Dionysus (and by extension his Roman counterpart Bacchus) was a transplant into the pantheon from the East. Since he is the god of wine, naturally he is going to be associate with hedonism and frenzied psychotic behavior.

----------


## YesNo

Jove seemed to be a hedonist as well at least when it came to sex. 

What god from the East did Bacchus come from?

----------


## Buh4Bee

It seems there are two different versions of the birth of Bacchus. We read the myth in which Bacchus is the offspring of a mortal, Semele and Zeus. With this lineages, one can consider him a semi-deity as his mother is mortal. The second version proclaims Bacchus to be the son of Persephone and Zeus, elevating him to an immortal. However, the second version is extremely similar to the myth a god named Zagreus. It is suggested that the second version of Bacchus' origin is confused with the latter god. 

You can see different examples of the myth from ancient texts here:
//ancienthistory.about.com/od/dionysusmyth/qt/081609DionysusBirth.htm

----------


## hanzklein

I tried Mandelbaum's translation of this poem and gave up. It was in a horrible monotone voice with no rhythm whatsoever for 300 pages.

----------


## libernaut

In nova fert animus mutatas dicere formas
corpora; di, coeptis (nam vos mutastis et illas)
adspirate meis primaque ab origine mundi
ad mea perpetuum deducite tempora carmen!

(it is so much sweeter in Latin)

http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/ovid/ovid.met1.shtml

----------


## YesNo

From what I've heard on YouTube the Latin sounds nice, but I don't know it although I can guess at some of the words. I also liked the iambic pentameter in Mandelbaum's translation.

----------


## Buh4Bee

Wait, I thought you are supposed to only read Latin and not speak it. Isn't it a dead language?

----------


## YesNo

I didn't think anyone really knew what Latin sounded like. But these videos sound as if some people think they have a good idea what it must have sounded like. 

How would one know without some kind of audio recording?

----------


## Buh4Bee

I was just messing around YesNo.

----------


## JBI

I believe wine as a digestible grape alcohol comes originally from Persia, Beer from Egypt, and I am sure there was a Greek variant of fermented beverage, but still, the idea of Grape wine perhaps is imported, a long with a cultural tradition that isn't written, so perhaps is harder to pin down.

----------


## mortalterror

> I didn't think anyone really knew what Latin sounded like. But these videos sound as if some people think they have a good idea what it must have sounded like. 
> 
> How would one know without some kind of audio recording?


Not only has Latin been spoken in an unbroken line since antiquity by the Roman Catholic Church, it was also the language of scholars for centuries, throughout the middle ages and the Renaissance. Besides that, Romans were real sticklers for pronouncing their language and wrote numerous guidebooks about the subject.

----------


## YesNo

It's interesting that they wrote pronunciation guides for speaking Latin. I guess that would be useful in determining how it sounded back then.

----------


## Loganm

> It's interesting that they wrote pronunciation guides for speaking Latin. I guess that would be useful in determining how it sounded back then.


Maybe less interesting than it originally seems, we still write "pronunciation guides" in English, only we call them phonology text books.

----------


## YesNo

So how good are these pronunciation guides? 

Getting back to Metamorphoses, I was reading about Pythagoras in the last book and was surprised to find he was a vegetarian. All I actually knew about him previously was the Pythagorean Theorem and something about how his school found irrational numbers so I guess I had no basis for any surprise one way or the other.

----------


## garrysandison

Hi, this is my first post, and it's a brief response to the Veronese image of Perseus and Andromeda.

I would like to suggest the following link:
http://www.oup.com/us/companion.webs...le_Chapter.pdf

This is freely (and fully legally) available 'Perseus' Chapter from an excellent textbook, Classical Mythology. The chapter is available as a sample PDF direct from the publisher.

One point it makes is that Perseus was unusual in having received the help of two deities, Athena and Hermes. One of the special attributes he obtained was the scimitar, the curved sword with which he defeats the monster.

----------


## garrysandison

Also, there's Latin via Ovid. I find the books extremely helpful, and I would also like to try the CDs.
http://wsupress.wayne.edu/books/378/...id---Audio-CDs

----------


## ftil

> One point it makes is that Perseus was unusual in having received the help of two deities, Athena and Hermes. One of the special attributes he obtained was the scimitar, the curved sword with which he defeats the monster.


Hm....mythology is full of unusual things.  :FRlol:  Perseus first obtained an invisible helm, magical sword, and winged sandals. He was lucky. :Biggrinjester: 
But he was a son of Zeus.

----------


## YesNo

> Also, there's Latin via Ovid. I find the books extremely helpful, and I would also like to try the CDs.
> http://wsupress.wayne.edu/books/378/...id---Audio-CDs


That looks like an interesting way to learn Latin. I wonder if there is a Sanskrit Via The Bhagavad Gita.

----------


## garrysandison

> Hm....mythology is full of unusual things.  Perseus first obtained an invisible helm, magical sword, and winged sandals. He was lucky.
> But he was a son of Zeus.


To work with this thread, I'd like to keep responding to other people. So here are three more images of Perseus.

The first is a gouache by Edward Burne-Jones, _The Birth of Pegasus and Chrysaor_. Ovid has Perseus recounts this event at the end of Book IV. 


The remaining two images are of the great bronze statue of Perseus bearing Medusa's head, in Florence.

----------


## garrysandison

> Hm....mythology is full of unusual things.  Perseus first obtained an invisible helm, magical sword, and winged sandals. He was lucky.
> But he was a son of Zeus.


I'm posting another reply because of something I just noticed on the second picture of the Cellini statue. 

The angle the photo was taken from makes it possible to look at the detail of the helmet Perseus is wearing.

Cellini has sculpted the helmet with an animal crest. Apparently, the animal is a lion - but, curiously, it is decapitated. The headless body of the lion is sitting there upright, but its head is placed quite separately in front of the body, on the same level as its feet.

This ironic image of decapitation, within the helmet of Perseus himself, reinforces the impression created by the similarity in the faces of Perseus and his victim Medusa: it's as if the distance between the victor and the vanquished is alarmingly short.

----------


## ftil

> I'm posting another reply because of something I just noticed on the second picture of the Cellini statue. 
> 
> The angle the photo was taken from makes it possible to look at the detail of the helmet Perseus is wearing.
> 
> Cellini has sculpted the helmet with an animal crest. Apparently, the animal is a lion - but, curiously, it is decapitated. The headless body of the lion is sitting there upright, but its head is placed quite separately in front of the body, on the same level as its feet.
> 
> This ironic image of decapitation, within the helmet of Perseus himself, reinforces the impression created by the similarity in the faces of Perseus and his victim Medusa: it's as if the distance between the victor and the vanquished is alarmingly short.


Thanks. I didn’t notice it. I have noticed that when I look at paintings and artifacts again and again I can see details I have missed before. It is amazing how our mind works.
Lion is present in religions and in many forms. For example, Mithra had a lion head as well as Egyptian Goddess Isis and Sechmet. But the lion motive is also present in depictions of monsters or beasts like chimera or sphinx.

----------


## YesNo

> This ironic image of decapitation, within the helmet of Perseus himself, reinforces the impression created by the similarity in the faces of Perseus and his victim Medusa: it's as if the distance between the victor and the vanquished is alarmingly short.


Now that you mention it the noses and mouths of Medusa and Perseus do look alike.

----------


## ftil

> Now that you mention it the noses and mouths of Medusa and Perseus do look alike.


I didnt pay attention to their faces. It is true. Medusa was a female monster but she doesn't look like a female. I have noticed the theme of hermaphrodite in mythology and religion. I have also notice a ram.

----------


## cacian

This is just a question regarding NUDITY in these subjects.
I wonder why for example Adam and Yve are portrayed without clothes.
Most of the the Greek mythology is also portrayed in the nude.
Cupid/ Angels are all depicted to be clothless as well Jesus on the Cross is topless.
Is there some kind of similarity do you think between an Adam and Jesus in the sense that they are both topless and even in the nude .
Does nudity indicate that they have that in common, that they are similar?
Is there a particular reason why?
My assumptions would be that these figures, important enouhg, would want to be depicted in ''decency' way if we are to revere them.
Or not?
Thanks for reading.

----------


## JuniperWoolf

> I wonder why for example Adam and Yve are portrayed without clothes.


You do know the story, right?

----------


## YesNo

> This is just a question regarding NUDITY in these subjects.
> I wonder why for example Adam and Yve are portrayed without clothes.
> Most of the the Greek mythology is also portrayed in the nude.
> Cupid/ Angels are all depicted to be clothless as well Jesus on the Cross is topless.
> Is there some kind of similarity do you think between an Adam and Jesus in the sense that they are both topless and even in the nude .
> Does nudity indicate that they have that in common, that they are similar?
> Is there a particular reason why?
> My assumptions would be that these figures, important enouhg, would want to be depicted in ''decency' way if we are to revere them.
> Or not?
> Thanks for reading.


I suspect much of the nudity is for the erotic appeal of the art object. 

Regarding Jesus, however, that he is portrayed with a loin cloth is likely done out of respect. I suspect he was crucified nude. This would increase the humiliation not only in having the genitals of the condemned on display but in the public display of defecation and urination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion

----------


## cacian

> You do know the story, right?


Just about yes.
why do you ask?

----------


## cacian

> I suspect much of the nudity is for the erotic appeal of the art object. 
> 
> Regarding Jesus, however, that he is portrayed with a loin cloth is likely done out of respect. I suspect he was crucified nude. This would increase the humiliation not only in having the genitals of the condemned on display but in the public display of defecation and urination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion


Thanks YesNo. That does make sense.
It never crossed my mind that the idea behind nudity is to make us attracted to them. That is something it never crossed my mind.
I personally do not find nudity attractive in any way.
I much prefer to look at people with their clothes on hence fashions and colours.
This kind of 'eroticism and appeal'' makes me wonder wether then thess gods and godesses could also be refered to as relics because on one's attachements to them.
Just an idea.
Thanks for reading. :Smile5:

----------


## stlukesguild

YesNo-I suspect much of the nudity is for the erotic appeal of the art object.

Cacian- Thanks YesNo. That does make sense.
It never crossed my mind that the idea behind nudity is to make us attracted to them. That is something it never crossed my mind.
I personally do not find nudity attractive in any way.
I much prefer to look at people with their clothes on hence fashions and colours.

There is a somewhat in-depth look at the evolution of the "Nude" in Western art to be found here:

http://www.online-literature.com/for...ad.php?t=64250

----------


## YesNo

I must have missed the art thread. Thanks for the link, stlukesguild!

----------


## JuniperWoolf

> Just about yes.
> why do you ask?


Well because the nudity of Adam and Eve is the fulcrum of the entire story. Their sudden shame of their nakedness is how God knew that they had eaten from the tree of knowledge, after which he ejected them from the garden, so in art depictions of them _in_ the garden they would have to still be nude. It wouldn't make sense if they were clothed.

----------


## cacian

> Well because the nudity of Adam and Eve is the fulcrum of the entire story.Their sudden shame of their nakedness is how God knew that they had eaten from the tree of knowledge , after which he ejected them from the garden, so in art depictions of them _in_ the garden they would have to still be nude. It wouldn't make sense if they were clothed.


Thank you for drawing my attention to this I obviousy was not aware of it.
I have dubeously missed it.
They were already naked before they sinned how could they suddenly become aware of their nakedeness?
supposidely if one was, as it were already without clothes, then isn't it logical that one would be used to it?
It does not make sense that GOD, a powerful being needs them to be naked in order read body language which will confimr to him that they have sinned.

In my world, my logical thinking tells me that GOD sees everything and knows everything . God does not, according to what I have been told, needs no proofs to find out those two had sinned. 
so this bit here:



> Their sudden shame of their nakedness is how God knew that they had eaten from the tree of knowledge


does not quite enter my equation. :Wink5:

----------


## JuniperWoolf

> They were already naked before they sinned how could they suddenly become aware of their nakedeness?
> supposidely if one was, as it were already without clothes, then isn't it logical that one would be used to it?


Well, the way the story goes, they ate from the tree and gained the knowledge that they were naked and that they should be ashamed of it. 




> God does not, according to what I have been told, needs no proofs to find out those two had sinned.


Yeah, it's an inconsistancy. Anyway, that's why they're always portrayed as nude.

----------


## JBI

> Thank you for drawing my attention to this I obviousy was not aware of it.
> I have dubeously missed it.
> They were already naked before they sinned how could they suddenly become aware of their nakedeness?
> supposidely if one was, as it were already without clothes, then isn't it logical that one would be used to it?
> It does not make sense that GOD, a powerful being needs them to be naked in order read body language which will confimr to him that they have sinned.
> 
> In my world, my logical thinking tells me that GOD sees everything and knows everything . God does not, according to what I have been told, needs no proofs to find out those two had sinned. 
> so this bit here:
> 
> does not quite enter my equation.


The whole idea is they develop a sense of shame. The book isn't meant to be logical.

----------


## cacian

> Well, the way the story goes, they ate from the tree and gained the knowledge that they were naked and that they should be ashamed of it. 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, it's an inconsistancy. Anyway, that's why they're always portrayed as nude.


I get it now.
So you mean to say they were not aware of their nudity being an issue till they ate from the tree of knowledge!!
Now. This. Makes. Sense.
Thank you for clearing that up for me JuniperWoolf.

----------


## cacian

> The whole idea is they develop a sense of shame. The book isn't meant to be logical.


I see exactly what you mean.
well to be fair it really naive to assume that one needs knowledge to realise nudity is not such a good idea especially if it is out in a garden.
Human instincts obliges that one is better off with some clothes on because of being outdoors and the cold it generates on ones body.
I fail to see how such a story in a bible warns me of nudity being shameful.
I think the element of weather conditions over nudity takes over any sense of shame or knowledge for that matter.
That is my view on this. :Wink5:

----------


## ftil

> I get it now.
> So you mean to say they were not aware of their nudity being an issue till they ate from the tree of knowledge!!
> Now. This. Makes. Sense.
> Thank you for clearing that up for me JuniperWoolf.


So, gods of ancient Greece and Rome are still not aware of their nudity and blind as many of them have been depicted naked. Goddesses in Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic period were fully dressed. 
They lost clothing in Imperial Rome period. I guess...... to be blind like gods.  :Banana: 

I am wondering if Ovid arrived to the same conclusion.  :Smilewinkgrin:

----------


## YesNo

> I fail to see how such a story in a bible warns me of nudity being shameful.


I don't know whether nudity should be considered shameful or not. The fact that the story, present in J's original contribution according to Bloom and Rosenberg _The Book of J_, mentions shame around nudity makes me think that the culture around Jerusalem prior to 900 BCE did consider it shameful.

----------


## cacian

> I don't know whether nudity should be considered shameful or not. The fact that the story, present in J's original contribution according to Bloom and Rosenberg _The Book of J_, mentions shame around nudity makes me think that the culture around Jerusalem prior to 900 BCE did consider it shameful.


About nudity I think there is the element of decency.
I for example do not feel comfortable in nude and consider offensive if someone say went in the nude in front of me without asking if it was Ok to do so.
I am not including communal single sex saunas/turkish baths where it is Okish, half nude is better for me, because the environmnent requires that you go in the nude to bathe.
Other then that I would not conisder it the norme for me.
Obviousy everyone is different.
I would not call it shamefull as such but more of uncomfortable for me.

I am not aware of the* Book of J*.
I have to look it up.

----------


## ftil

HmI am curious what is so important about nudity. We had a tread about public nudity with strong proponents for it. Here we go again.  :Biggrinjester: 

I havent finish Ovid but I havent found Ovid talking about nudity. He was more busy to report abductions, rape, or murders. Dont you think that it is more interesting to discuss how and why religions were modified? It involves changing the concept of nudity too. Or, why many myths were in contradiction.
Or even discuss gods affairs........some of them were quite busy. :Ihih:

----------


## YesNo

There was one story of Diana whom Acteon accidentally found bathing naked and for that offense turned him into a stag who was hunted by his own dogs.

----------


## cacian

> There was one story of Diana whom Acteon accidentally found bathing naked and for that offense turned him into a stag who was hunted by his own dogs.


one is supposed to bathe without clothes, nudity does not enter into it.
bathing is private and one can do what they please in one's private environment.
Is one expected to bathe and shower with clothe on?!!
That would be very silly indeed. :Leaving:

----------


## cacian

> Hm……I am curious what is so important about nudity. We had a tread about public nudity with strong proponents for it. Here we go again. 
> 
> I haven’t finish Ovid but I haven’t found Ovid talking about nudity. He was more busy to report abductions, rape, or murders. Don’t you think that it is more interesting to discuss how and why religions were modified? It involves changing the concept of nudity too. Or, why many myths were in contradiction.
> Or even discuss gods affairs........some of them were quite busy.


there is no importance in nudity.
what I was trying to say is that one can do what they wish but one must always ask wether it is OK to go nude in front of others.
It is not everybody's cup of tea and it is not mine.
I would not go nude in front of others and so would expect people to do the same towards me.
We are not all the same and we do not all share the same enthusiasm about anything and everything.

----------


## ftil

> there is no importance in nudity.
> what I was trying to say is that one can do what they wish but one must always ask wether it is OK to go nude in front of others.
> It is not everybody's cup of tea and it is not mine.
> I would not go nude in front of others and so would expect people to do the same towards me.
> We are not all the same and we do not all share the same enthusiasm about anything and everything.



It must have importance for you. since it is another tread that you brought this up.  :Rofl: 

I think that public nudity tread will satisfy your curiosity as you will have 235 posts to read.....Then, you may be happy to read Ovid.  :Biggrin5: 
http://www.online-literature.com/for...ad.php?t=62958

----------


## cacian

> It must have importance for you. since it is another tread that you brought this up. 
> 
> I think that public nudity tread will satisfy your curiosity as you will have 235 posts to read.....Then, you may be happy to read Ovid. 
> http://www.online-literature.com/for...ad.php?t=62958


Haha..no not really, I had to move to here because the other thread was not appropriate.
Hey thank you about the post.
I did read it and posted in it... :Biggrin5:

----------


## ftil

> Haha..no not really, I had to move to here because the other thread was not appropriate.
> Hey thank you about the post.
> I did read it and posted in it...


You are welcome. Stluke have also posted for you his tread about nudity. So, you have 2 treads to discuss it. Hopefully you will read Ovid and discus it here. Ancients gods had, let say, busy life. As a female, I have found shocking that the old war between men and women started with gods as myths tell about endless abductions and rapes of goddesses and women.  :Reddevil:

----------


## cacian

> You are welcome. Stluke have also posted for you his tread about nudity. So, you have 2 treads to discuss it. Hopefully you will read Ovid and discus it here. Ancients gods had, let say, busy life. As a female, I have found shocking that the old war between men and women started with gods as myths tell about endless abductions and rapes of goddesses and women.


Thank you.
I can't see Stluke thread.
Which section is it in?
I must get on to Ovid as soon as I can and see what I can draw out of it.
Indeed it is reckless to think there is/was a war between a man and a woman let alone a war at all. :Frown:

----------


## ftil

> Thank you.
> I can't see Stluke thread.
> Which section is it in?
> I must get on to Ovid as soon as I can and see what I can draw out of it.
> Indeed it is reckless to think there is/was a war between a man and a woman let alone a war at all.


He posted a link on a previous page. Post # 122. It is an art tread where Stluke presents his interpretation of nudity in art. 
I have a different interpretation....but we are free to disagree.  :Wink5: 

I read about Zeus again. It is hard to catch with his all affairs.  :Biggrinjester: 




> *Ovid, Metamorphoses 6. 114* ff (trans. Melville) (Roman epic C1st B.C. to C1st A.D.) :
> "As a spotted serpent [Zeus seduced] Deois [Persephone]."
> 
> *Ovid, Metamorphoses 6. 113* ff :
> "In a golden shower [Zeus] fooled Danae."
> 
> *Ovid, Metamorphoses 6. 111* ff (trans. Melville) (Roman epic C1st B.C. to C1st A.D.) :
> "Jupiter [Zeus] once in a Satyr' guise had got Nycteis [Antipope daughter of Nykteus] with twins."
> http://www.theoi.com/Olympios/ZeusLoves3.html

----------

