| Author |
Message |
bubuna
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 12:28 pm
Post subject: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
Hello,
what is the meaning of this poem?
I need to discuss this with my friends. once I know the meaning then it
would be easier for me to write comments on it. I find it very hard to
understand.Please help. I want just the meaning in very simple english.
THE OLD STOIC
RICHES I hold in light esteem,
And Love I laugh to scorn;
And lust of fame was but a dream
That vanish'd with the morn:
And, if I pray, the only prayer
That moves my lips for me
Is, 'Leave the heart that now I bear,
And give me liberty!'
Yea, as my swift days near their goal,
'Tis all that I implore:
In life and death a chainless soul,
With courage to endure.
Thank you
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ray o'hara
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 12:56 pm
Post subject: Re: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
"bubuna" <perfectward@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125210512.163777.57920@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Hello,
what is the meaning of this poem?
I need to discuss this with my friends. once I know the meaning then it
would be easier for me to write comments on it. I find it very hard to
understand.Please help. I want just the meaning in very simple english.
THE OLD STOIC
RICHES I hold in light esteem,
And Love I laugh to scorn;
And lust of fame was but a dream
That vanish'd with the morn:
And, if I pray, the only prayer
That moves my lips for me
Is, 'Leave the heart that now I bear,
And give me liberty!'
Yea, as my swift days near their goal,
'Tis all that I implore:
In life and death a chainless soul,
With courage to endure.
Thank you
|
The voice in the poem wants only to be free of spirit and soul and to be
unencumbered by material and earthly wants. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bubuna
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 1:02 pm
Post subject: Re: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
thank you sir
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 10:46 pm
Post subject: Re: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on Sun, 28 Aug 2005 02:56:12 -0400 "ray o'hara"
<roh@comcast.net> posted:
| Quote: |
"bubuna" <perfectward@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125210512.163777.57920@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Hello,
what is the meaning of this poem?
I need to discuss this with my friends. once I know the meaning then it
would be easier for me to write comments on it. I find it very hard to
understand.Please help. I want just the meaning in very simple english.
THE OLD STOIC
RICHES I hold in light esteem,
And Love I laugh to scorn;
And lust of fame was but a dream
That vanish'd with the morn:
And, if I pray, the only prayer
That moves my lips for me
Is, 'Leave the heart that now I bear,
And give me liberty!'
Yea, as my swift days near their goal,
'Tis all that I implore:
In life and death a chainless soul,
With courage to endure.
Thank you
The voice in the poem wants only to be free of spirit and soul
|
Yes.
| Quote: | and to be
unencumbered by material and earthly wants.
|
Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something different from
what the poet said. He holds riches "in light esteem". He doesn't
say he wants to not want riches. He is describing the situation he is
in now.
This may seem like nit-picking, especially since this is just a poem,
a personal opinion. But I think it is important to form strict habits.
In other circumstances, adding to what the person actually said is an
enormous problem. In religion, in politics, in simple family matters,
if people would learn to quote accurately and to paraphrase fully but
not more "fully" than the original person spoke, innumerable problems
would be avoided.
He also, iiuc, scorns or laughs at love. I'm not sure if that is
included in earthly wants. Of course you are only summarizing a poem
that the OP has read already. He shouldn't have to be spoon fed every
word.
BTW, he doesn't say that he would avoid riches. We can only guess if
he holds them in light esteem because he has them already and sees
that they don't matter much, or if he is medium poor or very poor but
still still doesn't value riches much, for whatever reasons.
I was very impressed with Voltaire's seeming-to-me altruistic
statement, roughly "I may disagree with what you say, but I will
defend to the death your right to say it." It sounds great, but much
later I learned that Voltaire was in trouble with a lot of people for
what he had said (was he in fear of his life?), and that is, I
believe, when he made this statement. When his sentiment would
benefit him himself as clearly as anyone else, more clearly, I'm sure,
in his view.
How does that apply here? Like I say, we don't know if his dismissive
attitude towards riches is the result of not having any or having
them. Riches can get one a lot of liberty, and can promote liberty
for others if one is so inclined. It can give one courage too, if you
don't have to worry about being fired from your job or kicked out of
your apartment for saying something people disagree with.
I also liked very much in high school the poem Invictus, "...it
matters not how straight the gate... I am the master of my fate, I am
the captain of my soul." It wasnt' until many years later that it
occurred to me -- is this at all true -- that the author may have been
depressed or in another situation where he wasn't master of anything
else, and he was exaggerating -- in the case of his fate, perhaps
totally imagining -- the amount that he was in control. When one is
least in control, one wants most to feel in control. And saying "I'm
in control" is one way to feel in control, even when it isn't true.
So, maybe that peom is an expression caused by therefore of despair
and helplessness more than it is the plain sense of the words.
Maybe this poem has some of the same traits.
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage
--
My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences.
For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about.
When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.
If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years | Brooklyn 12 years
Indianapolis 7 years | Now in
Chicago 6 years | Baltimore 22 years |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Ambuhl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 11:21 pm
Post subject: Re: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
meirman wrote:
| Quote: | Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something different from
what the poet said. He holds riches "in light esteem". He doesn't
say he wants to not want riches. He is describing the situation he is
in now.
|
Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was
I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 2:45 am
Post subject: Re: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:21:10 GMT Martin Ambuhl
<mambuhl@earthlink.net> posted:
| Quote: | meirman wrote:
Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something different from
what the poet said. He holds riches "in light esteem". He doesn't
say he wants to not want riches. He is describing the situation he is
in now.
Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was
I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte?
|
I don't mind not knowing that it was written by Emily Bronte. Poetry
is by no means my strength.
Assuming that you meant that she was the author, did she have riches
or not?
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage
--
My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences.
For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about.
When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.
If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years | Brooklyn 12 years
Indianapolis 7 years | Now in
Chicago 6 years | Baltimore 22 years |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ray o'hara
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:55 am
Post subject: Re: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
"Martin Ambuhl" <mambuhl@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:aomQe.3595$FW1.690@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
| Quote: | meirman wrote:
Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something different from
what the poet said. He holds riches "in light esteem". He doesn't
say he wants to not want riches. He is describing the situation he is
in now.
|
Damned with faint praise.
| Quote: | Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was
I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte?
|
I didn't know who wrote it so I he rather than he/she/other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 30, 2005 4:07 am
Post subject: Re: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:55:57 -0400 "ray o'hara"
<roh@comcast.net> posted:
| Quote: |
"Martin Ambuhl" <mambuhl@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:aomQe.3595$FW1.690@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
meirman wrote:
Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something different from
what the poet said. He holds riches "in light esteem". He doesn't
say he wants to not want riches. He is describing the situation he is
in now.
Damned with faint praise.
|
You don't know that.
There is not enough information in this poem to know that. Did you
know who the author was?
If you had said "maybe" in your original reply, it would have been ok.
If you had said "maybe" in this reply, it would have been ok.
This is the kind of problem I was talking about. Having a suspicion
of something and portraying it as if it were certain. This practice
infects the world.
You could suspect all this without my assurances, but I can assure
that it is possible to hold riches in light esteem without damning
them. It's also possible to have money and even spend money when one
has it without being willing to do bad things, questionable things, or
even honorable things that take time or effort to get money when one
doesn't have it. That is as likely as your guess what is meant by
holding it light esteem.
| Quote: |
Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was
I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte?
I didn't know who wrote it so I he rather than he/she/other.
|
So you didn't know who the author was either. So all you had to work
with were the words of the poem.
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage
--
My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences.
For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about.
When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.
If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years | Brooklyn 12 years
Indianapolis 7 years | Now in
Chicago 6 years | Baltimore 22 years |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ray o'hara
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 30, 2005 7:01 am
Post subject: Re: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
"meirman" <meirman@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:n817h1tsac9v1dtq8paviu6ielbkiod5ci@4ax.com...
| Quote: | In alt.english.usage on Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:55:57 -0400 "ray o'hara"
roh@comcast.net> posted:
"Martin Ambuhl" <mambuhl@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:aomQe.3595$FW1.690@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
meirman wrote:
Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something different from
what the poet said. He holds riches "in light esteem". He doesn't
say he wants to not want riches. He is describing the situation he
is
in now.
Damned with faint praise.
You don't know that.
There is not enough information in this poem to know that. Did you
know who the author was?
If you had said "maybe" in your original reply, it would have been ok.
If you had said "maybe" in this reply, it would have been ok.
This is the kind of problem I was talking about. Having a suspicion
of something and portraying it as if it were certain. This practice
infects the world.
You could suspect all this without my assurances, but I can assure
that it is possible to hold riches in light esteem without damning
them. It's also possible to have money and even spend money when one
has it without being willing to do bad things, questionable things, or
even honorable things that take time or effort to get money when one
doesn't have it. That is as likely as your guess what is meant by
holding it light esteem.
Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was
I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte?
I didn't know who wrote it so I he rather than he/she/other.
So you didn't know who the author was either. So all you had to work
with were the words of the poem.
|
Which is all that is needed. I'll stand by my interpretation,your mileage
may vary.
Light esteem does not mean high esteem to me it suggests just the opposite
especially when one considers the tone of the poem. Stoics were not noted
for thier love of wealth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 4:44 am
Post subject: Re: what is the meaning of this? |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on Tue, 30 Aug 2005 00:00:27 -0400 "ray o'hara"
<roh@comcast.net> posted:
| Quote: |
"meirman" <meirman@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:n817h1tsac9v1dtq8paviu6ielbkiod5ci@4ax.com...
In alt.english.usage on Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:55:57 -0400 "ray o'hara"
roh@comcast.net> posted:
"Martin Ambuhl" <mambuhl@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:aomQe.3595$FW1.690@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
meirman wrote:
Here, I think you are going beyond or saying something different from
what the poet said. He holds riches "in light esteem". He doesn't
say he wants to not want riches. He is describing the situation he
is
in now.
Damned with faint praise.
You don't know that.
There is not enough information in this poem to know that. Did you
know who the author was?
If you had said "maybe" in your original reply, it would have been ok.
If you had said "maybe" in this reply, it would have been ok.
This is the kind of problem I was talking about. Having a suspicion
of something and portraying it as if it were certain. This practice
infects the world.
You could suspect all this without my assurances, but I can assure
that it is possible to hold riches in light esteem without damning
them. It's also possible to have money and even spend money when one
has it without being willing to do bad things, questionable things, or
even honorable things that take time or effort to get money when one
doesn't have it. That is as likely as your guess what is meant by
holding it light esteem.
Isn't this carrying the use of the non-gendered 'he' a bit far? Or was
I wrong in my picture of Emily Bronte?
I didn't know who wrote it so I he rather than he/she/other.
So you didn't know who the author was either. So all you had to work
with were the words of the poem.
Which is all that is needed. I'll stand by my interpretation,your mileage
may vary.
Light esteem does not mean high esteem to me it suggests just the opposite
|
Some people might use it that way to be polite to a person, to avoid
saying something nasty about a person or a prized individual
possession, but would people bother to use a euphemism for dislike of
money? Maybe some would, but you don't know that this one did. Here
it is more than interpretation; it's a leap.
| Quote: | especially when one considers the tone of the poem. Stoics were not noted
for thier love of wealth.
|
That you could not go further than you did in your last sentence says
it all. They are not noted for their love of wealth. But for an
individual stoic, one would be leaping to conclusions to say he was
damning wealth or wanting not to have any, just because he holds it in
light esteem. If esteem is graded from 0 to 100, light esteem is
between 1 and 25 perhaps, but it still means giving the thing some
value. Zero esteem is neither like nor dislike. Below zero, one has
to use a different word or call it, fancifully I would say, "negative
esteem". Light esteem is not negative, except for those who think
there is something wrong with not giving riches greater esteem. Is
that you?
Tell me you would only make such liberal interpretations of poetry,
and not of any other statements or written texts, and I'll drop it.
**This is not a criticism of liberalism, only interpretations that are
liberal in that they go beyond what was said.
s/ meirman
Posting from alt.english.usage
--
My English in this reply is colloquial, and may not always use full sentences.
For gosh sakes, when you ask a question, say what sort of English you are asking about.
When you give an answer, say in what part of the world you think your answer is valid.
If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Town NW of Pittsburgh Pa. 0 to 10 years | Brooklyn 12 years
Indianapolis 7 years | Now in
Chicago 6 years | Baltimore 22 years |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in