Faustus

[quote name='Julia C

In the spirit of the thread: Gerard Baker's Barak Obama: The Child - The Messiah - The Obamessiah <Click Here> And going back to humor, does anyone find this funny, compared to the New Yorker cover for instance?

"Banquets were occasions for the private man to savor his accomplishments and show off to his peers. The banquet was as important to the Romans as the salon to the eighteenth-century French aristocracy, as important even as the court of Versailles to the seventeenth-century nobility. The emperors kept no court. They lived in their "palace," on the Palatine Hill, much as the nobles of Rome lived in their private villas, with only slaves and freedmen for company (which of course meant that the palace housed the various ministries of government). When night came, however, the emperor dined with his guests, senators and others whose company he relished. The time of public "honors" and "government" of the Patrimony was over. The moment Horace arrived at his country retreat he invited a woman friend to join him for dinner, most likely a freedwoman, a well-known singer or actress. The banquet was more than just a meal. Guests were expected to express their views on general topics and noble subjects or to give summaries of their lives. If the host had a domestic philosopher or tutor on his staff, he would be asked to speak. Between dishes there might be music (with dancing and singing), by professional musicians hired for the occasion. At least as much a social manifestation as an occasion for eating and drinking, the classical banquet gave rise to a literary genre, the "symposium," in which men of culture, philosophers, and scholars (grammatid) held elevated discussions. Now the private man could relax at table. Even the poor people (hoi penetes), nine-tenths of the population, had their nights of revelry. During a banquet the private man forgot everything but his "profession," if he had one. Those who had vowed to devote their lives to the pursuit of wisdom celebrated not as the profane did but as philosophers. Ideally the banquet hall was supposed to resemble not a dining room but a literary salon; when this happened, confusion with popular merrymaking was no longer possible. [A banquet] then, meant the pleasures of good company, culture, and in some cases the charms of friendship. Thinkers and poets found it perfectly possible to philosophize about wine. The trickiest part of the evening, and the longest, was that set aside for drinking. Early in the dinner people ate without drinking. Later they drank without eating: this was the banquet in the strict sense of the word.....More than a feast, the banquet was a festival, and each man was expected to hold his own. As a token of festivity guests wore hats with flowers, or "wreaths," and were perfumed, that is, anointed with fragrant oil (alcohol was unknown, so oil was used as a solvent for perfumes). Banquets were unctuous and brilliant, as were nights of love." A History of Private Life - Paul Veyne

Roman Banquet Before the Comissatio (the drinking party) was the cena (banquet). While reclining on the necessary couch, the guests had to have a way of disposing of their food scraps; a way which wouldn

The actual topic started out as a cheap joke - see the first post on this thread! Thanks NN, I know that, and I've been there. This may not have all turned out the way you intended at the start, which is interesting in itself, but it has been worthwhile and valuable. Hats off to you! Faustus

"Kyoto is, in many ways, unrealistic. Many countries cannot meet their Kyoto targets. The targets themselves were arbitrary and not based upon science". GW Bush; June 11, 2001 Salve A, we are slipping sideways here from the topic, but I'd like for terms used here to mean something: Rancorous: Bitter and sharp in language or tone; rancorous: an acrimonious debate between the two [candidates]. Rancor: Bitter, long-lasting resentment; deep-seated ill will. SYNONYMS: enmity , hostility , antagonism , animosity , animus (These nouns refer to the feeling or expression of deep-seated ill will. Enmity is hatred such as might be felt for an enemy: the wartime enmity of two nations, [for example].) Is any opposition to beliefs held by one, when opposed by another, or not held by another for any reason, whether "reasonable" or not to be defined by the word(s) rancor, resentment, ill will or enmity hostliy, antogonism, animosity......? Does that definition not then bar any (reasonable) debate, and in so doing render debate moot? was there any unreasonablness in the President's words? At the time of Kyoto, the US Senate voted, July 21 1997, 95 to 0 against "Kyoto". This, treaty vote, was taken under a Democrat President (Clinton) and a Democrat Senate. It seems that all the comments made by Bush in the example above were still actually true at the time, and would not fit the definition of "acrimonious". One can easily accept a terminology that said: "spirited debate", or "debate seemingly based on narrow national interests" etc. The terms used by the president were not rancorous. Terms used by others might well be termed in that way. Faustus

The use of the word is revealing in itself. Can you give one example of a statement or quote that would fit that definition? I watch the "political" side of this issue closely, and I'm aware of none that could be fairly attributed. Caldrail speaks eloquently to the "other" side of the issue without my adding more there. Faustus

On this date in history 39 years ago man first stepped onto the moon. Neil Armstrong, stepped from a ladder to the lunar surface with the statement "That's one small step for a man; one giant leap for mankind. ... That

Thanks L, and I for one did read your links to the degree they are pertinent Do we know how many inches sea levels have risen to create this phenomenon, and how much of that is human caused? Since the retreat of the continental ice sheets about 15,000 bp, the earth's climate has been warming with alternating cool periods as one would expect. Mountains subside through erosion; even Sea-Mounts are worn away and are reduced to lower levels. If their land areas were so close to sea level in recent times, and only a foot or two of sea level rise causes catastrophe for the inhabitants, then the compassionate thing to do would be to remove those people affected to safer conditions, including some representative wild life if it poses no exotic dangers elsewhere. Once again I invite you to take a look at some interesting information on solar activity which doesn

Salve FVC, That title is unknown to me but is apt. The character Trimalchio, in the Satyricon was a freedman of enormous wealth, and today would be called a "millionaire". Cena Trimalchionis (Trimalchio's dinner) occupies chapters 26-78 of Satyricon by Gaius Petronius. The original title is P.A. Satiricon libri. The initials correspond to the author, Petronius Arbiter. The text was copied throughout the Middle Ages, and In 1664 the first critical edition, which included Trimalchio

<THE LAWNMOWER MEN> Get ready for the lawnmower inspector near you.... In a huge document released last Friday, the EPA lays out the thousands of carbon controls with which they'd like to shackle the whole economy. Central planning is too artful a term for the EPA's nanomanagement..... Thankfully none of it has the force of law -- yet. However, the Bush Administration has done a public service by opening this window on new-wave green thinking

(When a Banquet turns into a

Some More On The VILLA In the the Roman villa rustica "it is not certain where the slaves lived. We know, however, that there were their bedrooms (cellae familiares), the ergastulum, a kind d prison where recalcitrant slaves were punished with hard labor and the valetudinarium for sick slaves. When there was no villa urbana, the better rooms were reserved for the owner. An example of the Roman villa rustica is found in the (detailed "Floor Plan" of the) Villa of Boscoreale (If won't enlarge, "refresh") near Pompeii, famous not only for the importance of its ruins but also for the silverware found there (now in the Louvre. Its plan deserves attention. The villa urbana stood where a wide view of the countryside or sea could be enjoyed; it was a purely luxurious building, having no practical purpose or function like the farm; this villa in the complexity and richness of its rooms reflected the tastes, and bore witness to the wealth, of its owner. Some villas had no farmland attached, but stood in their own grounds surrounded by woods, parks and gardens. Such villas, sometimes called praetoria, increased in number during the Empire. Remains of them are found in Italy, France, Switzerland, southern Germany, England and North Africa. The practical spirit of the Romans, who fully appreciated the pleasures of life, introduced these large commodious villas, well cooled in summer, well heated in winter, wherever their armies and civilization penetrated. Many different types of this villa are to be found. Classical authors describe as a characteristic of the villa urbana that its peristyle was entered directly from the vestibulum and not, as in city houses, the atrium. But there seem to be exceptions even to this. In Pliny's Laurentine villa, for example, there was an atrium through the vestibulum; cuius in prima parte atrium frugi nec tamen sordidum. The rooms were variously grouped in separate buildings (conclavia, diaetae) connected by covered corridors cryptoporticus often fitted with windows." THE ROOMS OF A ROMAN VILLA The most important parts of the villa were: (1) The dining rooms (triclinia, cenationes).

Many people in that link said that you can not make fun of Obama because he is black and their audiences will see their jokes as racist. This is how the democrats are using this cartoon, by showing that making fun of Obama it's racist and full of prejudice, by vilifying his opponents while they also victimize him. They make a media show and make harsh comments bringing the issue to spotlight and many people will think "poor Obama the nasty Republicans are making tasteless racist jokes about him" I don't believe that liberals and democrats are pissed off over the cover. They made it. Salve K, I have to agree with you, the Democrats are not P'd off. But Ob did denounce it, finally saying it was "offensive to Muslims" I don't know any Republicans who are P'd off either, not at all. To them it's as I said earlier; "typical", but amused at the dubious strategy. This just seems to be the accumulating detritus of a candidate's campaign which is beginning to appear a little chaotic. It's almost as if Ob needs things to renounce, or denounce, or to set straight to keep his thin resume from being discussed, ever..... BTW his wife is now out of the campaign, so we should let her alone. And his two little girls; he displayed them as JFK displayed Caroline John-John, and it seems a little of the same image. He later, expressed regrets for having done that, but didn't explain just why. There's plenty of raw material for political cartoons based on Mr. Obama, but we'll only see them in the Washington Times. During Clinton's 8 years, virtually all the political cartoons with him as the subject were based on his "weaker moments" which were shown as his being just "cute", endearing, sometimes knavish (but not too much so) or a "bubba", but an endearing bubba. Faustus

We agree. Personally, I think the "muslim", "terrorist", "racist" and related adjectives on Senator Obama are so dumb that they can't benefit his opponents at all. In fact, such arguments can backfire on their authors, as implying they have no better argument for not voting for him. Salve A, your comment here might on first glance seem to depart from your earlier statement ("we agree") so let's be straight who the "authors" are, at lieast in this New Yorker cartoon. The authors are allies of Obama, imputing certain opinions about Obama as if they lay in the minds of most or just Republicans, and the laugh is on them. Almost all Republicans look at this cartoon (Altough few read the New Yorker, but they will now see this), realize they are being lampooned, and just say "typical...". They know at the same time these concepts do not comprise their opinions, and they very likely knock those ideas down when then hear them espoused, and are not the "authors" in the larger sense. Now try your best to turn the whole process around and apply it to your own groups and situations. Might it cause you to become more interested in the whole process, if you had allowed yourself to become complacent, or disintrerested? Don't forget, too, Nephele's calibration of "average" intelligence. Those below the 50% measure, or even lower comprise members of both parties. That is another problem for Obama. It probably had something to do with his speaking out in spite of probably sharing the opinion about Republicans. He has to realize: it's all a mixed bag. The constant bringing up of his differences, and things he would actually like to put to bed, make people think again,......and again, rather than settling down. And this once again puts him at the center of controversy. On the Racist mention; it all seems to come out of the Obama campaign, now as it did in the primary with HRC. It was he that said "They'll say I'm a muslim, and oh, by the way did you know he,s black?" recently. Almost everyone, below 50% and above that line know when they are being fed a line by a politician with a problem. One last comment. If you have to explain a "joke" it has lost it's value. If You have to explain it or justify it to those it was intended to serve, it's even worse. Humor is a "two edged sword". Faustus

On his upcoming trip to Iraq, the Middle East, and Europe - three count

Salve, A. I think Athenian intellectual deeds speak for themselves. With all its limitations, their democratic model was unsurpassed along all Antiquity. Most of the time, they were hardly peaceful. Salve Amici Is there any reason for the advanced thought of the Greeks in scientific knowledge and political thought as expressed by their experiments in democracy? I have an undeveloped theory, which hinges on the island nature of their environment, the difficult conditions which prevailed, and a paucity of natural resources. All of these limited the exploiting of their environment so that trade and travel combined with exporting new experiments in self governing along with colonization and competition provided outlets for their creativity. These were tried and improved upon repeatedly providing feedback for successful models. I have nothing to back this up except high-blown theory, and I would be hard pressed to explain it; any thoughts on that? Faustus

The Romans used the "inverted siphon" to do that. HERE'S A LINK describing a system of several Roman inverted siphons at Aspendos, Turkey. An inverted siphon will not deliver water to a higher elevation than the source of the pressure at the top of the header tank, but it will deliver water across a valley without an elevated gravity flow aqueduct serving as the "pipe". Today similar systems are used for sewage systems, which could be either sanitary or storm sewers. Inverted siphons by the Romans are probably more common than observation would indicate since some were entirely buried earthworks and not visible to the perception of the untrained eye. Faustus

Exactly right Nephele. And in part, that's what the cartoonist relied on. Every cartoon will be seen in at least two different ways. Faustus

But a cartoon still can sparkle rage and debate http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/15/america/15humor.php That cartoon was put up by Ob's own side to innoculate the candidate, so your interpretation seems to be "right" on. They likely took their cue from Ob, when he said in a public appearance that the Mc's side would point out that he "looks Muslim, and by the way...."he's black". If the other side doesn't act as they are expected to act in a timely fashion, don't lose hope, it can be imputed. Faustus

This NEWS ITEM will get very little play in the news, but everyone should be gravely concerned about the twin agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This speaks to the Congress' role in a mess that has building for more than a decade. Compared to the possibilities in this item, the failure of one or two large banks is peanuts. By not properly overseeing these two huge GSE (Government Sponsored Enterprise) Corporations, all private entities have left the marketplace to them, creating a monopoly, but worse yet an implied guarantee by the US government to back them to the hilt regardless of the cost to taxpayers, if, but more to the point, when they fail. .....Yet there is little evidence the real lessons have sunk in. Just as the grave risks Fannie and Freddie create for taxpayers are finally being recognized, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson were asking a seemingly compliant Congress to involve the Fed in supervising the largest investment banks -- which will only create similar risks elsewhere in the economy.....has led the capital markets to believe, correctly, that the U.S. government will never allow Fannie and Freddie to fail. ..... The result has been a complete loss of market discipline, uncontrolled growth, and the development of two giant companies whose deteriorated financial condition now threatens the stability of both the U.S. and the world economy. The story of Fannie and Freddie is a cautionary tale about the moral hazard created by government support for private institutions -- a tale we saw played out in the S&L debacle less than 20 years ago, and one we may be about to inflict on ourselves again. The paradox in this situation, will not be the realization for people that government fails, and as little as possible should be left up to government, but instead that there be more government involvement in our lives to make certain that institutions don't fail. Their main patrons in Congress

The US it's the only country still upholding the free speech. In all Europe and Canada broad definitions of hate speech make even true allegations to be open to persecution. You are right, I think, and we are very protective of that. Sham tests are thrown up, especially to protect "pornographic speech

The Romans usually had two buildings on their country estates, the villa rustica, to house the slaves engaged in agricultural labour under the superintendence of the vilicus (a trusted slave in charge of the familia rustica, rather like a bailiff), and the villa urbana or pseudourbana, where the owner stayed when visiting the country. In building the first, the only consideration was the practical needs of an agricultural community; the latter, in a picturesque and airy site, offered all the amenities to which city life had made men accustomed. Not every estate had a villa urbana; when the owner was not particularly wealthy, he occupied a corner of the villa rustica, or at the most built a small easily-run house. Cicero and Pliny had splendid villae urbanae, unlike Horace who lived on his Sabine farm together with his bailiff and his slaves. The villa rustica had two courts (cortes), an inner and an outer one, each with its own tank (piscina). In the inner court the tank was used for watering animals, in the outer one for different agricultural purposes, such as softening leather and soaking lupin seeds. Brick buildings surrounded the first court, forming the villa rustica in its most limited sense, the part of the farm occupied by the slaves. A large kitchen stood at the centre; on the farm the kitchen was not, as it was in the city, only used for the preparation of food, but was a meeting place and workshop as well. Near the kitchen, so as to make full use of the heat it produced, were the slaves' bathrooms, the cellars and the stables for cattle (bubilia) and horses (equilia). If possible, the henhouse was also near the kitchen, because smoke was thought good for chickens. Far from the kitchen, and if possible facing north, were the buildings which required a dry situation, such as the granary (granaria), the barn (horrea) and the fruit stores (oporothecae). The store-houses, most exposed to the danger of fire might also form a building (villa fructuaria), completely separate from the villa rustica. Close to the villa rustica was the threshing-floor, with sheds nearby, such as the barn for agricultural implements or wagons (plaustra)and the nubilarium where the grain was temporarily stored in case of sudden storms. From Rome Its People and Customs by Ugo Enrico Paoli

Amsterdam The Perils of Free Speech (What goes around, comes around.) "On a sunny May morning, six plainclothes police officers, two uniformed policemen and a trio of functionaries from the state prosecutor's office closed in on a small apartment in Amsterdam. Their quarry: a skinny Dutch cartoonist with a rude sense of humor. Informed that he was suspected of sketching offensive drawings of Muslims and other minorities, the Dutchman surrendered without a struggle. "I never expected the Spanish Inquisition," recalls the cartoonist, who goes by the nom de plume Gregorius Nekschot, quoting the British comedy team Monty Python. A fan of ribald gags, he's a caustic foe of religion, particularly Islam. The Quran, crucifixion, sexual organs and goats are among his favorite motifs. Mr. Nekschot, whose cartoons had appeared mainly on his own Web site, spent the night in a jail cell. Police grabbed his computer, a hard drive and sketch pads. He's been summoned for further questioning later this month by prosecutors. He hasn't been charged with a crime, but the prosecutor's office says he's been under investigation for three years on suspicion that he violated a Dutch law that forbids discrimination on the basis of race, religion or sexual orientation. The cartoon affair has come as a shock to a country that sees itself as a bastion of tolerance