Greece Books

Whitmarsh writes with verve and sophistication and makes strikingly original points in this important book. This book both testifies to and will serve to enhance the recent revival in second sophistic studies.

There is an overwhelming focus in the book on Dio Chrysostom but space is found for interesting observations on other authors, particularly Philostratus. Most importantly, the exploration of how Greek writers themselves negotiated Greekness as a cultural force under Roman domination is undertaken. This, if anything, is reflective of the way contemporary scholarship is moving. Goldhill's edited collection 'Being Greek under Rome' is adequate testimony to this.

Overall, this is a must read text for anyone seeking to deepen their readings of Greek literature of the Second and Third centuries. Whitmarsh immerses his reader in the culture of the period and draws attention to the sophistication of his chosen authors' approach. Recommended highly.

Let me make this clear right from the beginning: I am not a scholar of the ancient Greek language. Although I once considered a minor in Classical Studies and took more than enough classes on Ancient Greek history, culture, religion, and literature to get me most of the way there and to give me sa strong foundation in most things Hellenistic, I never learned the Greek language itself. As such, I am not fit to comment on the matters of the accuracy of the translation. On to the review.

Sherod Santos has complied here an excellent collection of classical Greek poetry stretching from the end of the Archaic period to the first Byzantine dark age (about 700 A.D. or so). While purists may balk at the end date for his collection, it should be noted that only a handful of Byzantine poems are included and that these only refer to classical themes (such as the writer pondering the meaning of an ancient statue or the like). The language and words used by Santos are excellent and truely capture the nuanced beauty and subtle currents of the poets' thoughts and words.

Having said that, I once again doubt this will be a translation for literary purists. The language and choice of words used are fresh, vivid, and truely artistic, thus suggesting a fair amount of (dare I say it?) poetic liscence with the translation. Having read poems and epics which were translated word-for-word, line-by-line and with Biblical precision, it is not surprising that this particular collection comes as a breath of fresh air and helps capture the fact that this is meant to stir emotions and convey the poets' feelings- not dissect their exact words with razor-sharp attention. However, I feel that in a field already oversaturated with translators who feel the need to convey a poets words exactly no matter how dull and dry the end result might be, Santos is able to breath life into the works of men and women who died thousands of years ago and yet whose words still carry the weight of their emotions and humanity well into the present.

Despite the excellence of the translation, the book does contain a number of minor, if at times irritating flaws. These include...
1) At a $25.00 cover price, this is a stiff price for a slender volume.
2) Not every poet listed in the book has any biographical data included, leaving an interested reader to their own devices when it comes to learning more about individual Poets
3) Commentary is provided on a few of the poems, but not on all (or even most). All too often, this leaves the reader touched and moved by a poem, flipping to the back of the book to get more background on a particular poet and his work, only to discover that while the previous and next poems have commentaries, this particular one does not.
4) Purists may not like the liberties Santos takes with the language and translation. While I feel that Santos does an excellent job and does justice to this work of POETRY, serious, academically-minded scholars of ancient Greek might be advised to look elsewhere.

Normally, I'd rate this book a 4.5, which in this case I feel deserves to be rounded up to a 5.

These two volumes illustrated by Grahame Baker,offer a scholarly but enjoyable presentation of the Greek myths even including a discussion of the Alphabet. It is an excellent addition to any library both as a reference and for the joy of reading.

These fifteen essays show you what can happen when a bunch of first-rate minds get together and express their findings in a single volume. Dynamite. No fluff, no filler. Just hard facts about modern Greece, razor-sharp analysis, and reasonable conclusions, mostly following rigid scientific procedures and a few based on anecdotal, impressionistic material. This means that we are dealing with a publication away from which those who wax romantically ecstatic at the mention of Greece should stay.

The paradox mentioned in the title refers to the unfortunate gap between Greece’s many endowments (democratic government, strategic geographic position, economic potential) and the way the country has failed to make the most of its gifts (top-heavy bureaucracy, feckless foreign policy, economic disequilibrium).

By way of introduction to the volume, Kalypso Nicolaidis starts off on a note of controlled optimism by asking if there really is a Greek paradox, a gap between promise and performance. Viewing the present moment as a window of opportunity for Greece that calls for analysis, introspection, vision, and leadership, she briefly shows how these elements are woven into the other articles.

In an article dealing with political issues, Nikoforos Diamandouros declares that the paradox (potential in contrast to achievement) is indeed real. He suggests that a comparison between the period from the 1950s to the 1970s and that from the mid 1970s to the present is essential to grasping the “logics” that might explain the disappointment characterizing the latter period.

The article by Misha Glenny was written in 1995 when the situation in the northern Balkans was “uncertain” and “troubled”. Glenny points out the absolute importance of Greek diplomatic initiatives and bilateral treaties as a means of maintaining peace and economic growth. He discusses the ineptitude of some Greek diplomatic maneuvers and the general unpreparedness of the foreign ministry for changes in the structure of Soviet and Yugoslav power.

Dimitris Keridis writes that the Greek economy is badly in need of structural reforms that cannot be carried out unless there are parallel efforts to get rid of a pervasive “political culture based on populism and clientelism” (read, alternatively, corruption and cronyism.) His analysis is informed and his conclusions strengthened by consideration of five distinct historical developments that have contributed to Greece’s current status as an economic underperformer in the European Union. Starting off with the underlying principle that states are supposed to “tax fairly to provide their citizens with a maximum of physical and a minimum of economic security and equal opportunities,” he identifies pressures in support of reform along with three specific areas at which reformist undertakings might effectively be directed: decentralization of policymaking; encouragement of accountability, hierarchy, and meritocracy in public administration; an increase in the independence and accountability of such institutions as the courts, the central bank, the universities, public utilities, and state companies; a strengthening of the civic dimension of Greek citizenship to include separation of church and state.

Further recommendations and suggestions for improving the economy and political leadership are put forth in the article by Basilios E. Tsingos. Greece could do a lot to enhance its diplomatic capital among the nations of the West, principally by abandoning it current belief that the world owes the Greeks a living (because of their historical contributions to the development of Western culture). This requires a shift from the language of “entitlement” to the idiom of “present-day interests.” The entire thrust of Greek foreign policy should be shifted away from the East and toward the West. The nation should make stronger efforts at image-building in the West. (Endowing a few chairs of Hellenic studies at Western universities would not be a bad idea.) Reform of the electoral system is indicated to render the central government stronger and more effective. This would involve doing away with the current system of “proportional representation.” And finally, private initiative should be encouraged and government entrepreneurial involvement diminished.

Alexis Papahelas also takes up the theme of structural reform in politics and economics and mentions the deep-seated cynicism and inertia that characterize contemporary Greek society. He proposes the establishment of an independent, privately funded foundation made up of homeland Greeks as well as members of the Diaspora. This would serve as a think tank to analyze all aspects of public life and make recommendations to government and other public institutions.

In his contribution (Chapter 9), F. Stephen Larabee examines five issues touching on Greece’s potential as a leader among the nations of the Balkan Peninsula. Susan L. Woodward also considers Greece in its Balkan context and points out some lessons that have been, or should have been learned from the wars in Yugoslavia.

In the concluding essay Loukas Tsoukalis offers a “subjective interpretation” of the Greek paradox. He follows the logic of the whole undertaking by saying that prescription should follow diagnosis but tries to steer clear of writing a political manifesto. He continues with the reformist agenda and zeroes in on politics, economics and foreign relations as areas of public life that need serious attention. His “prescriptions” are well worth careful study.

This book is an indispensable work for anyone interested in modern Greece, and it could well serve as an important work of reference. Highly recommended

This book of plays by Ellen McLaughlin contains simply the most beautiful, most exciting new takes on these ancient classics to come along in YEARS. The voice is both fresh and resonant with age, gritty and transcendent. Some are better than others, of course (My complete favorite is IPHIGENEIA AND OTHER DAUGHTERS), but each play is more than worth the read, and makes you itch to mount/play them. These plays are also an important resource for young women on their acting journey. I have given it as a gift to several of these actors who are trying to find their own strengths both as women and as artists, and the plays speak vividly to each of them. If you are a serious theatre artist -- whether in the performance profession or in the educational realm -- you should own this book.

The Greek Praise Of Poverty: Origins Of Ancient Cynicism challenges common evaluations of the ancient Cynics of Greece in the fifth and fourth centuries B.C., presenting them not as cultural outcasts or marginal voices, but rather a profound movement with lasting roots entwined in what author William D. Desmond (lecturer, Dept. of Classics at Trinity College, Dublin) calls "the Greek praise of poverty." Describing at length classical attitudes that esteemed virtues thought to be inspired by poverty, such as industry, honesty, frugality, and temperance, and condemned flaws associated with wealth, such as idleness, injustice, arrogance, The Greek Praise Of Poverty casts new light on ancient perspectives. An excellent, in-depth, college-level academic study of classical views, reasoning, and thought processes, and their impact on culture from ancient times to the modern day.

Greek proverbs is a wonderful book to read and memorize a few proverbs.
Cunning Proverbs full of meaning.

This is an excellent overview of Greek Science-its main players, general ideas and overall history-why and how it arose, how it progressed, (or at times digressed), and why it declined. These matters are, like the subject matter of 'science' itself, very complex. Mr Farrington provides some very clear and intriguing ideas concerning the history and nature of Greek Science, which also impressed the astronomer Carl Sagan so much that he refers to them in his great book-Cosmos, which is how I was drawn to this book. It doesn't disappoint.

Mr Farringtons theory of the origin of Greek science is different to others I have read (eg Lloyds Early Greek Science which suggests that Greek science in Ionia arose from a troubled political climate, which led to a critical assessment of not only political ideas, but also the natural world). Here we have the idea that early Greek Science grew from a successful group of seafarers and merchants, who, finding themselves free from the constraints of mythology and politics, serving no formal political state, found that their practical cleverness and business acumen which had given them their success could be applied to a study of the natural world. It appears that this was generally so as to further increase their business successes ie it was a practical approach. Various inventions followed. There was a distinct distrust of accepted mythology. Man was seen as part of the natural world, having arisen from it. "Man became wise through his hands", rather than "he had hands because he was wise"-which was a later belief of Plato. The Ionians were 1) clever 2) successful 3) free thinkers, 4) not marred by incessant wars and politics 5) understood that religion and politics were unsatisfactory in describing the natural world as it was. 6) Being the sons of farmers, sailors, and tradespeople, they were constantly 'interacting' with their environment, and thus were able to understand `techniques' of utilising their skills with the environment, which had enabled their successes. 'Techniques' they learned from their trades, were then applied to understand the natural world. It was a very common sense approach, free from politics, mythology, and religion.

Mr Farrington traces the origins of this science through its developments into astronomy, mathematics, biology, political science, medicine, geology, etc etc. It is a far more comprehensive account than Lloyds Early Greek Science, which is also a recommended book in this genre. The thrust of Mr Farringtons analysis of the decline of ancient science however, is the widespread practice of slavery. The development and formalisation of slavery undermined, in Mr Farringtons view, the progress and maintenance of science in the ancient world. As Mr Sagan suggests "the permanence of the stars was questioned, the justice of slavery was not". It is Mr Farringtons view that slavery spelled the death knell to the continuance of ancient science, primarily because the application of practical, labour intensive techniques, being concentrated in the slave class was not synergetic to the theoretical approach of the citizen/ruling class. Ie the political distinction which developed between the use of thought, and the use of the hand, choked scientific development. It was not in the interests of the slave owners to become more practical, only to get more slaves to better the lives of themselves, not humanity. It was not in their general interests to 'better' things, only maintain the status quo. Mr Farrington explains the ramifications of slavery and the complex politics involved better than I can. Suffice to say that the practise of slavery is proposed to have had an immense influence on the decline of science in the ancient world.

I'm not sure that other factors were not involved more than Mr Farrington suggests, such as the rise of Christianity, which he does mention but not pursue in any great detail, but his analyses are nevertheless very enlightening and scholarly. Of interest to me was how much Christianity seems to have borrowed from the political ideas of the Greeks-ideas that in themselves were `anti-science'. Plato does not fare well as a crusader for science, even though his cultural and political contributions to the western world are great. Christianity seems to borrow much from the Greeks but does so selectively-Greek politics yes, Greek science no.

A cherish to read. Highly recommended for students of history and the philosophy and nature of science. See also Cosmos by Carl Sagan for a good/better summary of Mr Farringtons arguments.

I'd read this book some years ago, but found it difficult going at the time. I decided to re-read it recently, as it was on the wish list of a friend which reminded me I still had the volume. This time around I found it much more interesting and more understandable. There definitely seems to be a time for everything, and apparently this was the time for Greek Science for me. What I found of particular interest was a new perspective that I acheived in a novel way. I recently attended a Minneapolis Childrens' Theater production featuring events from the life of Galileo. It was pointed out in the playbill that what seems to us in retrospect a patent persecution of a new concept by jealous intellectuals and religious authorities was not quite so clear cut at the time. In fact the scientific thinkers of Galileo's time, as those of the Hellanistic Greek and Roman times, labored with the technological inability to test the validity of scientific observations. Much that passed for science during those times might be considered philosophy or metaphysics in our own. Without the means of externally testing opposing explanations of natural phenomenon little of definitive worth could be said about any given observation. It then became a matter of philosophical orientation, of reputation and of religious sanction. It was in fact anybody's guess. We who are used to measuring equipment as simple as a thermometer and as complex as an earth orbiting satelite often forget that these devices were not yet available to the researchers of ancient or even medieaval times. Some of the simpler devices were only just being introduced in Galileo's time and were considered untested and highly suspect themselves. Given that a number of ingeneous inventions of early times were engineered with the specific intent to mislead or impress the public, the scepticism with which something like the telescope or the microscope were greeted is not surprising. To the early critic, one could not necessarily believe ones eyes; it was better to believe what the Holy Book or a learned philosopher had to say with respect to nature than what a "conjurer" might say. Greek Science After Aristotle makes this point apparent, explaning that only in the area of mathematics and in applied physics (engineering, especially military engineering) could anything like trustworthy precision be achieved. It also points out that though modern science values observation and experiment, the neglect of these was not necessarily due to a laziness or disregard for precision, but due to a lack of technological means. In fact, much was done and some very ingeneous devices to accomplish it were invented to perform it. The researchers of the times had to be very innovative and original in their approach to problem solving; something which we with our computerized devices are rarely called upon to do a such basic levels. Rereading the book from this perspective definitely gave me a greater appreciation for the achievments of our intellectual predecessors.

When modern philosophers believe they have answered the sceptics from ancient ages simply because they have redefined "truth" in terms of modern neuro-physiology, they are wrong.

The distinction between modern definitions of "truth" rejected by modern sceptics and the "truth" which the original sceptics rejected is worth knowing.

It helps to explain the present crisis of philosophy.