LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for OLD-IRISH-L Archives


OLD-IRISH-L Archives

OLD-IRISH-L Archives


OLD-IRISH-L@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

OLD-IRISH-L Home

OLD-IRISH-L Home

OLD-IRISH-L  December 2001

OLD-IRISH-L December 2001

Subject:

Re: Pangur Bán

From:

Onoma <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Scholars and students of Old Irish <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 1 Dec 2001 21:31:35 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (153 lines)

With regard to the question of Pangur Ban:
I have a few thoughts on the poem, one I have regularly taught in an introduction to
"world lyric":

Sometimes a hostile audience is just a hostile audience.
There are people who don't like Greek lyric, or Latin lyric. Are these readers of
"English language literature of later periods" readers of poetry at all? Or are they
readers of novels exclusively?
Frankly, I suspect these are not readers of poetry--many of my students have claimed
simply not to like poetry.
As to Pangur Ban, I'm not sure why it needs defense. It is an example of a lyric, perhaps

epigrammatic in its force, one that makes a parallel between two kinds of activities,
that of the scholar and his cat. Such analogies are typical of lyric in world literature,

cf. Homeric similes, and the "conceit" in European lyric. (I suspect your spoil-sports
might simply not like such poetic moves.) Ultimately the lyric gesture is philosophical,
and not really novelistic at all--this is irritating to the reader of "later
literatures," I have found. In the case of Pangur Ban, the gesture is delicate, but
serves the higher purpose of giving the scholar a chance to contemplate his or her own
activity: the focus is on the difference in their abilities and the distinctiveness of
their tasks. One can claim that the writer attempts to understand his work as a scholar
through an analogy with "hunting," in the typical lyrical manner of selecting the "small"

thing over the large. Just a kitty hunting the mice, going about business.

It should be emphasized to those who think such gestures are doggerel, that this motif,
comparing the poetic craft to "small things," is found widely in the literature of the
world. Cf., for example, Callimachus' aesthetic in Hellenistic Greece (3rd c. b.c.),
Sappho's contrasting of lyric with epic in archaic Greece (6th c. b.c.), and Catullus
lyric voice in Rome in the 1st c. b.c.--one can intelligently compare Pangur Ban, with
Catullus programmatic first poem (carmen 1.1), where he, consciously, like Sappho before
him, contrasts his task with that of the epic-historian. Love poets, e.g., the
troubadours, often have as their task the justification of a non-political, non-economic,

activity (essentially, of play), and proceed to do so by admitting the contrast between
work and play in order to show the propriety of play in certain (including *this*)
context, or by comparing their poetic activity to *play* in an appropriate context quite
different from poetry itself.

Here the scholar, engaged in non-profitable activity (not warfare, not money-making),
notes that his cat (engaged in a kind of war, for a kind of profit--mouse-hunting) is not

unlike himself, in many ways, each point gone over stanza by stanza, in the manner of,
e.g., archaic Greek monodic lyric.

Pangur Ban is delicate and perfect, like the best of lyrics. It also has an indentifiable

opening and a generalizing close in the last stanza.

I have hesitated to characterize the dismissive comments that prompted the question in
the first place, since I, too, am perplexed that anyone could dislike this piece, even
absent a full-blown analysis, which the above only sketches out. It is also all too easy
for scholars to blast those dismissive of our work. But let me say that I suspect these
readers of later English literature wouldn't have been dismissive of Catullus or Sappho,
even though the lyric motifs are common. (Lyric can be an easy target, sometimes shielded

by membership in the canon, as are the Greeks and Romans.) Early lyric--of many
cultures--is the least welcomed genre by moderns, so wrapped up are we in extensive
narrative (the novel) or in visual drek (film doggerel of various sorts). Indeed, the
resistance to lyric might account for why we have so little of early lyric, Greek, Irish,

etc. etc.: poetry is philosophical in part, as Aristotle knew (Poetics, Chapter 9), and
we live in an age hostile to the kind of thinking required to engage in such activity.
Unfortunately readers of literature are as prone as anyone to such resistance.

Tom Walsh
Senior Faculty
Occidental College

Stiof wrote:

> People,
>
> I've recently begun a reading of the above poem (also known as The Scholar & His Cat,
> and several other names) on the Irish Literature discussion group. It was, to be
> honest, a dangerous move in that the focus of almost all group members is the English
> language literature of later periods, especially of the 18th, 19th and 20th
> centuries. Now, I've no problems with discussing the issues raised by the
> translations, the context of the poem on the 9th century, etc., but... well, perhaps
> examples of the type of comments the (translations) have provoked will make my point:
>
> "Just because it's old and it has survived for centuries doesn't mean it's worth
> anything!  I feel that way about many supposedly "great" authors . . . On the other
> hand, I think it's possible that the poem was written for a child."
>
> "I look forward to other posts which will explain to me why 'Pangur Ban' is more than
> the doggerel it appears to be to this reader upon first reading . . . the poem--at
> least in TRANSLATION--seems utterly uninteresting"
>
> Now, PB is not exactly the finest example of the poetic arts ever produced on this
> planet, but there are things which translation cannot reproduce, use of words with
> second or allusive meanings which can't be carried over, metric patterns which only
> the original can support, and which require an understanding of the pronunciation of
> the original Old Irish to discern... Is it doggerel? Is it subtle? Why has it caught
> the attention of translators such as Flower and O'Connor?
>
> I'd be interested in any comments, suggestions etc. which will help open up these
> things for our English-language-oriented, written-poetry-oriented membership. I've
> attached a transcript of
> the poem below to make access easier for anyone interested in responding.
>
> Before I sign off, I should, perhaps, explain that the original purpose of using PB
> in this way was to show the problems that arise (and have arisen) for English
> language poets attempting to reproduce or emulate styles from the Irish, and
> especially the Old Irish; explore why this poem has received the attention of several
> translators; and to show something of the richness of style which lies within what is
> to most students and scholars of 'Irish Literature' the 'other' language...
>
> MAQQI
>
> _________________________
>
> Messe ocus Pangur Bán,
> cechtar nathar fria saindan;
> bíth a menma-sam fri seilgg,
> mu menma céin im saincheirdd.
>
> Caraim-se fos, ferr cach clú,
> oc mu lebran leir ingnu.
> Ni foirmtech frimm Pangur Bán,
> caraid cesin a maccdán.
>
> O ru·biam (scél cen scís)
> innar tegdais ar n-oendís,
> taithiunn (dichrichide clius)
> ni fris·tarddam ar n-áthius.
>
> Gnáth huaraib ar gressaib gal
> glenaid luch inna lín-sam;
> os mé, du·fuit im lín chéin
> dliged ndoraid cu ndronchéill.
>
> Fuachaid-sem fri frega fál
> a rosc anglése comlán.
> Fuachaimm chein fri fegi fis
> mu rosc reil, cesu imdis.
>
> Faelid-sem cu ndene dul,
> hi·nglen luch inna gerchrub;
> hi·tucu cheist ndoraid ndil,
> os me chene am faelid.
>
> Cia beimmi amin nach ré,
> ni·derban cách a chele.
> maith la cechtar nár a dán,
> subaigthius a óenurán.
>
> He fesin as choimsid dáu
> in muid du·ngní cach oenláu.
> Du thabairt doraid du glé
> for mu mud cein am messe.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2019
June 2019
April 2019
March 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.HEANET.IE

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager