Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 121 posts

Re: How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

#111

Post by gremloni »

nindalf wrote: post #28
emodendroket wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Ramayana sounded like fun though it's hard to figure out which version you're supposed to read.

Ive read, listened and watched many versions of both the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. Of the two, the latter is the superior story in every way. Most importantly for me, the characters. I hope I won’t offend anyone’s religious sensibilities when I say the main character of the Ramayana is a bit dull, one dimensional and treats his wife terribly. The Mahabharata has its share of misogyny, but it has a couple of fanta…

The misogyny makes the stories better. It actually feels authentic.

Re: How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

#113

Post by lappet »

emodendroket wrote: post #15
handrous wrote: post #8

I'm not an expert but I've probably read a whole lot more Near East literature than, considered over a population of billions, nearly everyone. In English translation, but still. A half dozen volumes, I think, cover to cover? Maybe seven? Gilgamesh is the only work out of all of that, that I'd recommend to pretty much anyone who likes literature. Egypt has a couple promising, if relatively late, tales, but both are o…

The Ramayana sounded like fun though it's hard to figure out which version you're supposed to read.

That is a very interesting observation because there is no one definitive version. For the modern reader in English, you could try Devdutt Pattanaik's versions - I really liked his Mahabharata, but haven't read his version of Ramayana. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Hundred_Ramayanas:_Five_... can give you some insight into why there are so many different versions of these epics.

Re: How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

#114

Post by vishnugupta »

randoglando wrote: post #43
nindalf wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ive read, listened and watched many versions of both the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. Of the two, the latter is the superior story in every way. Most importantly for me, the characters. I hope I won’t offend anyone’s religious sensibilities when I say the main character of the Ramayana is a bit dull, one dimensional and treats his wife terribly. The Mahabharata has its share of misogyny, but it has a couple of fanta…

> when I say the main character of the Ramayana is a bit dull, one dimensional and treats his wife terribly. On the mark there. What about the character of Krishna (an amalgamation of 3 tribal gods)? Especially the little child Krishna? From the perspective of the story Mahabharata is superior, but the Ramayana has some great characters (Hanuman, Lakshmana, Sita, Ravana). The Mahabharata's heroes are weaker character…

IMO Mahabharatha's heroes (and all its characters in general) are closer to people who you may come across on a day-to-day basis; they all have various degrees of all the human traits. The story is also intimately human so it makes it easy to relate to say someone like Arjuna than to Rama.

It's all my take though so subjective.

Re: How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

#115

Post by emodendroket »

gremloni wrote: post #109
emodendroket wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Ramayana sounded like fun though it's hard to figure out which version you're supposed to read.

He said near East. The Mahabharata be ramayanan are only the best know stories out of India. There are hundreds of prominent works and millions of stories.

I've been laboring under the incorrect impression that India was part of the "Near East" since it's excluded from the "Far East." Whoops.

Re: How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

#116

Post by mosiuerbarso »

I'd recommend also check out John David Ebert's Youtube series on the 4 gospels of Gilgamesh: https://www.youtube.com/user/johndavidebert/search?query=gil...

If you like this sort of stuff then I recommend his channel as he has some excellent lectures on history, important history/religious books, and other stuff.

His video series on "The Evolution of Death & Burial" is very interesting.

Re: How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

#117

Post by pempem »

screye wrote: post #90
emodendroket wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Ramayana sounded like fun though it's hard to figure out which version you're supposed to read.

Figuring out what Ramayana and Mahabharata versions to read is irritatingly difficult. The popular English translation written by white people are often a bastardization of the classics from a Woke lens. Others are outright further-fictionalizing accounts to suit a narrative flow as if this was a Steve Jobs biography. The more faithful english translations are written by scholars who won't consider English to be thei…

Sincere question...what does it mean that the translation is written from a Woke lens? What should I be looking out for as different/hallmarks of propaganda or a viewpoint?

Also is anyone else influencing interpretations outside of the british that would be notable?

Re: How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

#118

Post by pepoluan »

JoeDaDude wrote: post #70
handrous wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK there's no reason to favor English translations of the Old Testament (or anything else) that use now-archaic English, except maybe for passages which are themselves written, in the original, in a kind of archaic or very formal mode, relative to the rest. It can be accurate enough (for whatever purpose—poetic, literal accuracy, et c.) without being stuffy or outdated. Another factor in my naming it the probably…

I remember Michael Wood's TV series about the Iliad and he mentioned the repetition in it. He then showed a modern day Armenian troubadour (for lack of a better word) singing a story with instrumental accompaniment to a rapt audience [1]. Is the repetition a clue that maybe these poems were meant to be sung, and not read? [1] https://youtu.be/64QPz2t5T3A?t=1027

That reminds me of Sabaton.

In a way, Sabaton can be considered to the modern-day bard, singing in Metal.

Re: How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

#119

Post by soco »

Amezarak wrote: post #100
handrous wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, that's absolutely a big part of it. There was no "reading public". Very few people could read and write. I assume all the repetition has to do with making the stories better-suited to memorization and oral retelling. I don't mean any of that as some kind of put-down of the ancients, it's just a fact that a modern reader is going to find the material difficult, and, even once acclimated to the difficulty, of limit…

I think the main issue is simply that most modern readers have a relatively small vocabulary and are markedly acclimatized to shorter, simpler sentences. 21st century readers often struggle with works written for the reading publics of a mere one or two centuries ago. And even 100 years ago, the KJV (for example) was not regarded as a difficult read. Indeed, it's been my observation that the written register has almo…

The public changed a lot as well. You aren't writing for a small(ish) gathering of literate noblemen anymore, but aiming for an entire nation with so-and-so levels of understanding.

Re: How to Read “Gilgamesh” (2019)

#120

Post by handrous »

Amezarak wrote: post #100
handrous wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, that's absolutely a big part of it. There was no "reading public". Very few people could read and write. I assume all the repetition has to do with making the stories better-suited to memorization and oral retelling. I don't mean any of that as some kind of put-down of the ancients, it's just a fact that a modern reader is going to find the material difficult, and, even once acclimated to the difficulty, of limit…

I think the main issue is simply that most modern readers have a relatively small vocabulary and are markedly acclimatized to shorter, simpler sentences. 21st century readers often struggle with works written for the reading publics of a mere one or two centuries ago. And even 100 years ago, the KJV (for example) was not regarded as a difficult read. Indeed, it's been my observation that the written register has almo…

What gets me is letters written by normal people, from the 19th and early 20th century US. Not authors, not statesmen, not business tycoons, not military officers—workers, minor bureaucrats, enlisted soldiers. They tend to read as very "high" language, to modern eyes. Working vocabulary, as you note, seems to be larger as well, even though it's easier than ever to remind oneself of the correct word, with modern tools.

> Indeed, it's been my observation that the written register has almost entirely disappeared

I think that's a lot of it. Then again, maybe people in the 19th century US spoke like that, too? I haven't looked into it. Surely there's a book about this....

Post reply on HN