I first read Pindar in a rather unsatisfactory university reading class with an elderly academic. We sat around a table in a side room of the library, drearily reading out our prepared translations one after another. The main thing I recall was the frustration engendered by the teacher’s significant deafness, to which he didn’t want to admit. I prepared very carefully for these classes, but he obviously found the higher pitch of my voice (and that of the one other girl) difficult to hear and would regularly ask one of the boys in the small group to “have another go” at the passage I had just translated, regardless of what I had said. This was particularly irritating because one of my fellow students, with a nice resounding bass voice, was just reading out the Loeb translation which he had under the desk: our teacher, who could at least hear what was said in his manly tones, would then praise it extravagantly. Annoying!
Am embarrassed to say that although I have in fact read the Rig Veda, when I tried to do a course in Pindar I had to drop out after the third session. I simply couldn't make sense of the text. (This was decades ago).
At the time. I thought that it was because I had only read Homeric and wasn't up to this somewhat later language.
Now, reading this, I realize that if I had thought to try to read it as if it were early Sanskrit or Homeric it might have worked. That was decades ago, but I suddenly feel a mild sense of loss 😊
Somehow missed that article by SJ, and will take a look. But I remember the same sense of joy and delight on reading CW's How to Kill a Dragon in Indo-European a few years before. Is that still being read —?
Oh yes it's wonderful isn't it? I'm not a professional Indo-Europeanist obviously, but as far as I know it's still being read yes, and is quite often mentioned. My copy like so many other things is stuck in London but I hope to be reunited with the rest of my library before the end of the year so will have a happy time rediscovering many favourites.
Right - How to Kill a Dragon became a book later on! I completely forgot; was thinking of the article. Nice to know that either book or article is still part of the conversation, and that this Draupadj piece is now perhaps playing a similar role to what the Dragon article once did. The respective writers (collectively) were in many ways who I wanted to be when I grew up, so to speak. I'm long out of the field now, but your essays are reminding me of why it was such a wonderful place to be. Will be reading the backlist, with pleasure.
Yes! One of those that make you really believe in the power of comparative Indo-European analysis. And re: the title -- so many academics *attempt* to title their work memorably; surely this is a masterpiece of the form?
'I can’t think of a single British poet from the last couple of centuries who writes anything convincingly Pindaric in this mystical sense.' Not even Geoffrey Hill?
No I don't think so. Hill is obviously serious about religion and also seriously interested in the Pindaric tradition, most obviously in the "Pindarics" (though perhaps, at least in that sequence, more with the Anglophone Pindaric tradition deriving from Cowley than Pindar himself). He also of course embraces difficulty, density and surprising juxtapositions in a way that we might think of as broadly Pindaric (though again, English poets like Hopkins perhaps more directly relevant here). But I don't think he ever strikes that note of wholehearted celebratory joy which I was trying to get at here. Do say though if you can think of counter-examples.
I certainly agree that 'joy' isn't something one generally associates with Hill (as much as I love him)... When I think of him at his most mystical I suppose I think of him at his most lyrical e.g. 'The Pentecost Castle', but that probably has little in common with Pindar...
There actually doesn't seem to be much criticism at all on what Pindar might have to do with Hill's Pindarics, surprisingly. Do you know of any? At one point I thought I might say more about them for this piece so had a quick look but didn't come up with much.
Yes he definitely has mystical passages, but I agree with you, his most mystical is often his most "simply" lyric (which is interesting in itself). It's not a Pindaric mode I don't think.
Am embarrassed to say that although I have in fact read the Rig Veda, when I tried to do a course in Pindar I had to drop out after the third session. I simply couldn't make sense of the text. (This was decades ago).
At the time. I thought that it was because I had only read Homeric and wasn't up to this somewhat later language.
Now, reading this, I realize that if I had thought to try to read it as if it were early Sanskrit or Homeric it might have worked. That was decades ago, but I suddenly feel a mild sense of loss 😊
Somehow missed that article by SJ, and will take a look. But I remember the same sense of joy and delight on reading CW's How to Kill a Dragon in Indo-European a few years before. Is that still being read —?
Oh yes it's wonderful isn't it? I'm not a professional Indo-Europeanist obviously, but as far as I know it's still being read yes, and is quite often mentioned. My copy like so many other things is stuck in London but I hope to be reunited with the rest of my library before the end of the year so will have a happy time rediscovering many favourites.
Right - How to Kill a Dragon became a book later on! I completely forgot; was thinking of the article. Nice to know that either book or article is still part of the conversation, and that this Draupadj piece is now perhaps playing a similar role to what the Dragon article once did. The respective writers (collectively) were in many ways who I wanted to be when I grew up, so to speak. I'm long out of the field now, but your essays are reminding me of why it was such a wonderful place to be. Will be reading the backlist, with pleasure.
Delighted to see Jamison's "Draupadi on the Walls of Troy" receive an endorsement
Yes isn't it wonderful? One of the very few (maybe only?) academic articles for which I remember exactly where I was when I read it the first time.
Yes! One of those that make you really believe in the power of comparative Indo-European analysis. And re: the title -- so many academics *attempt* to title their work memorably; surely this is a masterpiece of the form?
'I can’t think of a single British poet from the last couple of centuries who writes anything convincingly Pindaric in this mystical sense.' Not even Geoffrey Hill?
No I don't think so. Hill is obviously serious about religion and also seriously interested in the Pindaric tradition, most obviously in the "Pindarics" (though perhaps, at least in that sequence, more with the Anglophone Pindaric tradition deriving from Cowley than Pindar himself). He also of course embraces difficulty, density and surprising juxtapositions in a way that we might think of as broadly Pindaric (though again, English poets like Hopkins perhaps more directly relevant here). But I don't think he ever strikes that note of wholehearted celebratory joy which I was trying to get at here. Do say though if you can think of counter-examples.
I certainly agree that 'joy' isn't something one generally associates with Hill (as much as I love him)... When I think of him at his most mystical I suppose I think of him at his most lyrical e.g. 'The Pentecost Castle', but that probably has little in common with Pindar...
Thanks for the book rec btw, it's on the wishlist
There actually doesn't seem to be much criticism at all on what Pindar might have to do with Hill's Pindarics, surprisingly. Do you know of any? At one point I thought I might say more about them for this piece so had a quick look but didn't come up with much.
Can't say I do; but could be a rich seam if it exists!
Yes he definitely has mystical passages, but I agree with you, his most mystical is often his most "simply" lyric (which is interesting in itself). It's not a Pindaric mode I don't think.