KAKOS, Badness and Anti-Value in Classical Antiquity PDF
Preview KAKOS, Badness and Anti-Value in Classical Antiquity
KAKOS Mnemosyne Supplements Monographs on Greek and Roman Language and Literature EditorialBoard G.J. Boter A. Chaniotis K. Coleman I.J.F. de Jong P.H. Schrijvers VOLUME307 KAKOS Badness and Anti-Value in Classical Antiquity Editedby Ineke Sluiter and Ralph M. Rosen LEIDEN•BOSTON 2008 Thisbookisprintedonacid-freepaper. ISSN: 0169-8958 ISBN:9789004166240 Copyright2008byKoninklijkeBrillNV,Leiden,TheNetherlands. KoninklijkeBrillNVincorporatestheimprintsBrill,HoteiPublishing, IDCPublishers,MartinusNijhoffPublishersandVSP. Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,translated,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical, photocopying,recordingorotherwise,withoutpriorwrittenpermissionfromthepublisher. AuthorizationtophotocopyitemsforinternalorpersonaluseisgrantedbyKoninklijkeBrillNV providedthattheappropriatefeesarepaiddirectlytoTheCopyrightClearanceCenter, 222RosewoodDrive,Suite910,Danvers,MA01923,USA. Feesaresubjecttochange. printedinthenetherlands CONTENTS ListofContributors.................................................... vii Chapter1.GeneralIntroduction ..................................... 1 InekeSluiter Chapter2.GenericEthicsandtheProblemofBadnessinPindar.. 29 KathrynMorgan Chapter3.UglinessandValue intheLifeofAesop.................... 59 JeremyB.Lefkowitz Chapter4.BeetleTracks:Entomology,Scatologyandthe DiscourseofAbuse ................................................. 83 Deborah Steiner Chapter5.‘Bad’Language inAristophanes .........................119 IanC.Storey Chapter6.BadnessandIntentionalityinAristophanes’Frogs.......143 RalphM.Rosen Chapter7.Imagining BadCitizenshipinClassicalAthens: Aristophanes’Ecclesiazusae730–876 ................................169 MatthewR.Christ Chapter8.TheBadBoyfriend,theFlattererandtheSykophant: RelatedFormsofthekakos inDemocraticAthens.................185 NickFisher Chapter9.KAKIAinAristotle.........................................233 J.J.Mulhern Chapter10.PathosPhaulon:AristotleandtheRhetoricofPhthonos...255 EdSanders Chapter11.TheDisgraceofMatterinAncientAesthetics..........283 James I.Porter vi contents Chapter12.WithMaliceAforethought:TheEthicsofmalitia on StageandatLaw ...................................................319 ElaineFantham Chapter13.‘TheMindofanAssandtheImpudence ofaDog’: AScholarGoneBad................................................335 CynthiaDamon Chapter14.FromVicetoVirtue: theDenigrationand Rehabilitation ofsuperbia inAncientRome........................365 YelenaBaraz Chapter15.OmnisMalignitasestVirtutiContraria:Malignitas asa TermofAestheticEvaluation fromHoracetoTacitus’Dialogus deOratoribus..........................................................399 ChristopherS.Van DenBerg Chapter16.TheRepresentation andRoleofBadnessinSeneca’s MoralTeaching:ACaseFromtheNaturalesQuaestiones (NQ 1.16)..................................................................433 FlorenceLimburg Chapter17.Nature’s Monster:CaligulaasexempluminSeneca’s Dialogues .............................................................451 AmandaWilcox Chapter18.Heliogabalus,aMonsterontheRomanThrone:The LiteraryConstructionofa‘Bad’Emperor ........................477 MartijnIcks Index ofGreekTerms.................................................489 Index ofLatinTerms..................................................493 Index Locorum ........................................................495 GeneralIndex .........................................................509 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS Yelena BarazisAssistantProfessorofClassicsatPrincetonUniversity. Christopher S. van den Berg is a Lecturer of Classics at Dartmouth College. He previously held the APA/NEH Postdoctoral Fellowship to theThesaurusLinguae LatinaeinMunich. Matthew R. Christ is Professor of Classical Studies at Indiana Uni- versity,Bloomington. Cynthia Damon is Professor of Classical Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. Elaine Fantham is Giger Professor of Latin Emerita, Princeton Uni- versity;currentlyteachingatUniversityofTorontoCanada. NickFisherisProfessorofAncientHistoryatCardiff University. Martijn Icks is writing a Ph.D.thesis on Heliogabalus at the Radboud UniversityNijmegen. Jeremy B. Lefkowitz is a doctoral candidate in the department of ClassicalStudiesattheUniversityofPennsylvania. Florence Limburg has written a Ph.D. thesis on Seneca’s Naturales Quaestiones atLeidenUniversity. Kathryn A. Morgan is Professor of Classics at the University of Cali- fornia,LosAngeles. J.J. Mulhern is Adjunct Associate Professor of Classical Studies and GovernmentAdministration,andDirectorofProfessionalEducationin theFelsInstituteofGovernment,attheUniversityofPennsylvania. viii listofcontributors James I. Porter is Professor of Classics and Comparative Literature at the University of California, Irvine, and author of The Origins of Aes- thetic Inquiry in Ancient Greece: Matter, Sensation and Experience. Cambridge UniversityPress[forthcoming]. Ralph M. Rosen is Rose Family Endowed Term Professor of Classical Studies at the University of Pennsylvania, and Associate Dean for graduate studiesintheschoolofArtsandSciences. Ed Sanders is a Ph.D. student in Classics at University College Lon- don. InekeSluiter isProfessorofGreekatLeidenUniversity. DeborahSteiner isProfessorofGreekatColumbiaUniversity. Ian C. Storey is Professor of Ancient History & Classics at Trent UniversityinOntario,andalsoPrincipalofOtonabeeCollege,Trent. Amanda WilcoxisAssistantProfessorofClassicsatWilliamsCollege. chapter one GENERAL INTRODUCTION Ineke Sluiter 1. Introduction Living together in any society entails a constant mutual apportioning of credit and blame, and equally constant attempts to claim credit and reject blame for ourselves. In discussing actions, people and even sto- ries, we negotiate to align our values to such an extent that meaningful joint action becomes possible.1 Thevolume before youlooksat the way the ‘blame’ part of this story works out in different domains in classi- cal antiquity. It concentrates primarily on the discourse of badness and evil in social interactions of different kinds, rather than on the way the ancient Greeks and Romans dealt with ‘the problem of Evil’, conve- nientlydividedinmodernstudiesintonatural,moral,andmetaphysical evil.2 A few words about that choice may be in order. In her recent and excellent study of evil in modern thought, Susan Neiman demonstrates how major historical events have influenced the philosophical debate on ‘evil’, and have in part made certain conceptions ‘impossible to think’. The devastating natural disaster at Lisbon created an invinci- ble obstacle for those trying to reconcile natural evil with notions of a theodicy. Auschwitz silenced philosophers through the sheer incompre- hensibility and incommensurability with verbal accounts of the events 1 SeeTilly2008;on‘alignment’,Appiah2006,29. 2 E.g., Burton Russell 1988, 1ff. In the modern period, the prototype of natural evilwasthe1755Lisbonearthquake,followedbyterriblefiresandfloods,whichkilled innumerablepeople(seeNeiman2002,1ff.and passim).Fororientationonrecentwork on evil, see also Ricoeur 1986 and Safranski 1997. Moral evil is defined by Burton Russell(1988,1)astakingplace‘whenanintelligentbeingknowinglyanddeliberately inflictssufferinguponanothersentientbeing’.Metaphysicalevilisconceptualizedasa characteristicofaflawedcreatedworld(theproblemoftheodicy).
Description:The list of books you might like
