tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714437334790446678.post6083492657981682453..comments2023-10-04T09:50:08.070-05:00Comments on Logismoi: The Elusive George ChapmanAaron Taylorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17775589009145031773noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714437334790446678.post-65115903536207124922012-07-07T10:52:36.471-05:002012-07-07T10:52:36.471-05:00My reply:
'Oh, you're definitely right ab...My reply:<br /><br />'Oh, you're definitely right about the centuries! Whoops. Well, sure, for the audience I imagine I'm writing for, "Chapman's Homer" will be a well known entity. But I still think that as a poet in his own right he's obscure enough. How many people who know of "Chapman's Homer" have any idea beyond the name of who "Chapman" is? And of those who do have some idea, how many of them are at all familiar with his work? Simply the fact that he's never included in anthologies and there are no current editions of his work would, I would think, warrant the description.<br /><br />'Btw, you have certainly convinced me to modify my use of the word "obscure". At the very least, I don't want it to sound like I've forgotten I've used it before, or like I can't think of any other adjectives!<br /><br />'One other point: I certainly wouldn't suggest that Chapman is obscure to specialists in 16th- and 17th-c. English lit., just to dilettantes like myself.'Aaron Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17775589009145031773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6714437334790446678.post-38841432388888184942012-07-07T10:50:50.285-05:002012-07-07T10:50:50.285-05:00A comment on Facebook from Robert Germany, a class...A comment on Facebook from Robert Germany, a classicist at Haverford College:<br /><br />'"the obscure 17th- and 18th-century poet, George Chapman (1559-1634)" - This is a strange sentence for two reasons. First, I'm not sure obscure is the right word for Chapman. You apply the same adjective to Shadow of Night and the completion of Hero and Leander, and I can see where it might fit there. But Chapman in general? I guess I take your point in titling the post after his elusiveness and calling him thrice obscure, but I don't think the shoe fits. I suppose being surrounded by people who regularly cite Chapman's Homer is something of an occupational hazard, obscuring my own view of obscurity, but even outside the classics world Keats' reference must have kept the candle lit pretty bright, no? Second, I think you may be miscounting the centuries.'Aaron Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17775589009145031773noreply@blogger.com