Muses Discussion Thread [Nov 7th: Thalia]

Wednesday at 7:44 PM#1

The visualization of being in that white place and trying to feel what is happening. I have never felt so strongly from any other movie clip, but this perfectly reminds me of how it feels to try to look with my intuition. When I was younger, as I would try to use intuition to look into my past lives and try to look into my future.

But also reminds of something I do not think about much of being a very young child in school. Any time it would be mentioned something like what is your favorite number or what is your favorite color, I would never have some basic answer like the other children as if they are guessing or just picking anything randomly. I would always try my hardest to use my intuition, to look through into my mind with my psychic vision and try to pull from psychic knowledge outside of myself to see what is actually the correct answer. I decided numbers like 9, 36, 27, and 97 not as a number by itself but as the combination of 9 and 7. I felt all of these very strongly. These are not numbers related to dates in my life or anything like that, and at that age I did not even know the interesting things mathematically about these numbers like 9 is 3^2 or 36 is 9x4 or 27 is 3^3. I only knew addition and subraction then. I did not know why 9 or 7 was important. But I knew that it was true and there was something energetically powerful about these numbers because when looking with psychic sense into my intuition, I could feel it.

Around the same age, I was allowed to decide what color to paint my bedroom. I did not choose my favorite color because my favorite color is black and they said that is not allowed because they couldn't paint over it in the future. So again I looked through my mind with psychic vision into my intuition. I focused very hard. And I chose mostly green and with also some red. Red was my 2nd favorite color, and green is fine but I would not call it one of my favorites at that age. When I looked into my intuition with strong focus, I saw these electric lights like a neon sign or flashes of lightning. And what I saw was mostly this green shade, and also some red. I knew it was important. At that age I did not know. But in the future, what I feel as the strongest planetary forces within my soul is Venus energy extremely strongly, and also some Mars but not nearly as much. And these colors that my intuition showed me from the future and that I chose were the same as representations of these planetary energies that I did not know about at that age.

https://templeofzeus.org/

The visualization of being in that white place and trying to feel what is happening. I have never felt so strongly from any other movie clip, but this perfectly reminds me of how it feels to try to look with my intuition. When I was younger, as I would try to use intuition to look into my past lives and try to look into my future.

But also reminds of something I do not think about much of being a very young child in school. Any time it would be mentioned something like what is your favorite number or what is your favorite color, I would never have some basic answer like the other children as if they are guessing or just picking anything randomly. I would always try my hardest to use my intuition, to look through into my mind with my psychic vision and try to pull from psychic knowledge outside of myself to see what is actually the correct answer. I decided numbers like 9, 36, 27, and 97 not as a number by itself but as the combination of 9 and 7. I felt all of these very strongly. These are not numbers related to dates in my life or anything like that, and at that age I did not even know the interesting things mathematically about these numbers like 9 is 3^2 or 36 is 9x4 or 27 is 3^3. I only knew addition and subraction then. I did not know why 9 or 7 was important. But I knew that it was true and there was something energetically powerful about these numbers because when looking with psychic sense into my intuition, I could feel it.

Around the same age, I was allowed to decide what color to paint my bedroom. I did not choose my favorite color because my favorite color is black and they said that is not allowed because they couldn't paint over it in the future. So again I looked through my mind with psychic vision into my intuition. I focused very hard. And I chose mostly green and with also some red. Red was my 2nd favorite color, and green is fine but I would not call it one of my favorites at that age. When I looked into my intuition with strong focus, I saw these electric lights like a neon sign or flashes of lightning. And what I saw was mostly this green shade, and also some red. I knew it was important. At that age I did not know. But in the future, what I feel as the strongest planetary forces within my soul is Venus energy extremely strongly, and also some Mars but not nearly as much. And these colors that my intuition showed me from the future and that I chose were the same as representations of these planetary energies that I did not know about at that age.

Wednesday at 8:45 PM#2

Thank you NP Karnonnos and NG Astrid!

This clip feels so mysterious and alien, you don't know what to expect but we go into it, but knowing the Linguistics professor (Louise) has built a rapport with the extraterrestrial species (Heptapods) and learned to communicate with them and that's how we find out that they need help from humanity in the future... She averts a global conflict because their translated term for "tool" was misinterpreted for "weapon", and ultimately they help her unite humanity.

Her child isn't born yet, but she embraces fate, knowing the heartbreak and joy that lie ahead and chooses to walk that path anyway, accepting time as an interconnected circle...

This is such a profoundly beautiful film and I find it so fitting for learning about memory ❤️

Even the opening monologue of the film has memory in the second line:

“I used to think this was the beginning of your story. Memory is a strange thing. It doesn't work like I thought it did. We are so bound by time, by its order.”

This comes as she reflects on her previous human understanding before learning the Heptapod's language, the learning which changes her, it truly strikes a chord in me 🙏

Thank you NP Karnonnos and NG Astrid!

This clip feels so mysterious and alien, you don't know what to expect but we go into it, but knowing the Linguistics professor (Louise) has built a rapport with the extraterrestrial species (Heptapods) and learned to communicate with them and that's how we find out that they need help from humanity in the future... She averts a global conflict because their translated term for "tool" was misinterpreted for "weapon", and ultimately they help her unite humanity.

Her child isn't born yet, but she embraces fate, knowing the heartbreak and joy that lie ahead and chooses to walk that path anyway, accepting time as an interconnected circle...

This is such a profoundly beautiful film and I find it so fitting for learning about memory ❤️

Even the opening monologue of the film has memory in the second line:

“I used to think this was the beginning of your story. Memory is a strange thing. It doesn't work like I thought it did. We are so bound by time, by its order.”

This comes as she reflects on her previous human understanding before learning the Heptapod's language, the learning which changes her, it truly strikes a chord in me 🙏

Wednesday at 9:16 PM#3

I had a lot of false memories up until I was 22/23 years old. Most of them are now forgotten from my brain.

Icarus laughed as he fell. To fall means to have soared.

Wednesday at 9:18 PM#4

I also have "phonetic memory" that relates to the goetic names which is why I connected to them so deeply and passionately. I used to vouch for the goetia so hard and at some point I tried to relate people to it but I was unsuccessful.

Icarus laughed as he fell. To fall means to have soared.

Wednesday at 10:40 PM#5

Thank you for this exercise, NP Karnonnos!

This movie came to mind for me about memory very blatantly, it's about memory and how language is central as a tool or 'weapon' (which the heptapods later mistakingly (?) refer to language as in the film).

Dr Louise Banks is a linguist, one of the best that the government works with because she understands the implications that culture or other nuances may have for the entirety of an effort at communication. When the heptapods arrive on earth she is tasked with deciphering their language, which in the visual representation form I found out are called Logograms, which is used in some writing systems like the English ampersand (&), Ancient Sumerian cuneiform, Egyptian Hieroglyphs, and Chinese (Hanzi):

Logograms are single written characters, symbols, or signs that represent a whole word or a meaningful unit of language (morpheme), rather than a sound.

Their writing is visually very circular which corresponds to their circular experience of time. This turns out to be the ""weapon"" which they hoped to share with humanity, but the use of this mistranslated word causes a lot of confusion and apprehension with other world leaders. By teaching Dr Banks this language, despite all her fear and disorientation, she begins to experience time in the way that they do, fundamentally transforming how her brain processes time. Non-linear, past-future-present all happening simultaneously. There are theories of language which also suggest that our understanding of the world/experience of reality could change based on what we are able to perceive through the language lens we have.

We see through 'flashes into the future' (which an initial watch may have us falsely assuming are flashbacks, but technically this is all beginning to happen all at once) that she is able to prospectively change the future through her 'memories' and stops a foreign General from declaring war and launching an attack against the heptapods due to the 'weapon' misunderstanding, just in the nick of time. She recalls an event in the future where she meets the foreign General at an event and he thanks her for stopping him, saying that he doesn't know how she somehow knew the contact number to his private phone and was able to speak his wife's dying words to him. This confuses her, but she realises that it was all meant to happen, as he begins to tell her what these were, so she is now able to go back to the present and 'fulfil' the cycle based on her memory of this future event.

The scene in the clip above depicts her 'memories' of a future daughter who will someday die of an incurable disease (we see it before she is even born). Dr Banks is completely changed in her fuller understanding, it doesn't change her path. For her, all the hope, love, fear, and grief happens simultaneously and she proceeds, it is tragically worth it. A different choice could completely erase all the beautiful memories of Hannah's existence (her daughter, whose name is a palindrome, a reminder about circular time) just as much as the sad memories, and it would be easy to view her choice as futile from a limited understanding. In the book, 'Story of Your Life' , however, it is not so much out of her own free will and it carries more of a deterministic/fated view where she finds herself at peace with everything as a part of a wider 'forest' with all the trees in all the 'necessary' facets of her life all in view.

The shared clip is at a particularly disorienting point in the movie when her sense of time is beginning to adapt to the heptapod's non-linear language, as she remembers flashes of her future daughter as her memories become more cyclical. Her fear of the unknown, being in such proximity to the aliens, is not stronger than her determination to do what is right, I can't help but feel admiration for her character in this situation, she is contending with saving the whole world and the heptapods at the same time as confusingly coming to terms with re-experiencing/remembering her future grief for her daughter and also finding out about her daughter, the fate of her daughter, and her own new abilities.

I think the question of what would happen if humanity really had this ability/knowledge could be answered by the question Dr Banks asks of her colleague Dr Ian Donnelly, and his reflections, at the end of the movie:

Louise: If you could see your whole life from start to finish, would you change things?
Ian: Maybe I’d say what I feel more often. I… I don't know.
(He looks up at the sky)
You know, I've had my head tilted up to the stars for as long as I can remember. You know what surprised me the most? It wasn't meeting them. It was meeting you.
Louise: (Hugging him) I forgot how good it felt to be held by you.
[Her memory skips forwards through time to them being married]
Ian: You wanna make a baby?
Louise: Yes. Yeah.

This ability (to think comprehensively about time, non-linearly) highlights to me about the teachings of the reordering of the Titanic forces by Father Zeus in the myths of Prometheus, Epimetheus and Pandora, which highlights the flaws in our thinking if we maintain a limited or one dimensional view of the world. At this point of the movie, Louise and Ian have only been colleagues and Louise says she "forgot" how good it felt to be held by him although this is the first time they actually embrace, she remembers it all even as it is yet to come. This is significant because despite the couple divorcing in the future (he divorces her when Hannah is still young, for not disclosing that Hannah will pass away) and all the hard feelings that Louise is aware of which are yet to come, she will proceed with their sweet and touching love story regardless, which will also give birth to Hannah and the full cycle of her life. Her efforts will also go on to someday help the heptapods, whose own purpose in sharing these abilities with humanity, which they tell Dr Banks, is because their civilisation will come to need humanity's help in 3000 years.

In terms of memory, her own remembrance of everything all at once, through her experience of non-linearly natured time through her language comprehension, helps her to see, in totality, all the significance of her life and the events within it for what it will birth and the sacredness of all the memories she will have/has had in all her being and choices. This is a powerful way to represent the power of memory, as it reminds the average person (who is prone to self-deceit by forgetting all the complexity of what life truly is) that we oftentimes are deprived of the full picture 'forest' by fixating on the singular and incomplete tree.

"[...] ever keeping memory apart from mind-harming deception,
holding together all the mind that dwells within mortal souls,
strengthening the powerful, steadfast reasoning of mortals,
most sweet, loving wakefulness, bringing all things to remembrance,
whatever each one has entrusted as understanding within the breast,
never turning aside, awakening the mind in all [...]"
- Hymn to Mnemosyne

Thank you for this exercise, NP Karnonnos!

This movie came to mind for me about memory very blatantly, it's about memory and how language is central as a tool or 'weapon' (which the heptapods later mistakingly (?) refer to language as in the film).

Dr Louise Banks is a linguist, one of the best that the government works with because she understands the implications that culture or other nuances may have for the entirety of an effort at communication. When the heptapods arrive on earth she is tasked with deciphering their language, which in the visual representation form I found out are called Logograms, which is used in some writing systems like the English ampersand (&), Ancient Sumerian cuneiform, Egyptian Hieroglyphs, and Chinese (Hanzi):

Logograms are single written characters, symbols, or signs that represent a whole word or a meaningful unit of language (morpheme), rather than a sound.

Their writing is visually very circular which corresponds to their circular experience of time. This turns out to be the ""weapon"" which they hoped to share with humanity, but the use of this mistranslated word causes a lot of confusion and apprehension with other world leaders. By teaching Dr Banks this language, despite all her fear and disorientation, she begins to experience time in the way that they do, fundamentally transforming how her brain processes time. Non-linear, past-future-present all happening simultaneously. There are theories of language which also suggest that our understanding of the world/experience of reality could change based on what we are able to perceive through the language lens we have.

We see through 'flashes into the future' (which an initial watch may have us falsely assuming are flashbacks, but technically this is all beginning to happen all at once) that she is able to prospectively change the future through her 'memories' and stops a foreign General from declaring war and launching an attack against the heptapods due to the 'weapon' misunderstanding, just in the nick of time. She recalls an event in the future where she meets the foreign General at an event and he thanks her for stopping him, saying that he doesn't know how she somehow knew the contact number to his private phone and was able to speak his wife's dying words to him. This confuses her, but she realises that it was all meant to happen, as he begins to tell her what these were, so she is now able to go back to the present and 'fulfil' the cycle based on her memory of this future event.

The scene in the clip above depicts her 'memories' of a future daughter who will someday die of an incurable disease (we see it before she is even born). Dr Banks is completely changed in her fuller understanding, it doesn't change her path. For her, all the hope, love, fear, and grief happens simultaneously and she proceeds, it is tragically worth it. A different choice could completely erase all the beautiful memories of Hannah's existence (her daughter, whose name is a palindrome, a reminder about circular time) just as much as the sad memories, and it would be easy to view her choice as futile from a limited understanding. In the book, 'Story of Your Life' , however, it is not so much out of her own free will and it carries more of a deterministic/fated view where she finds herself at peace with everything as a part of a wider 'forest' with all the trees in all the 'necessary' facets of her life all in view.

The shared clip is at a particularly disorienting point in the movie when her sense of time is beginning to adapt to the heptapod's non-linear language, as she remembers flashes of her future daughter as her memories become more cyclical. Her fear of the unknown, being in such proximity to the aliens, is not stronger than her determination to do what is right, I can't help but feel admiration for her character in this situation, she is contending with saving the whole world and the heptapods at the same time as confusingly coming to terms with re-experiencing/remembering her future grief for her daughter and also finding out about her daughter, the fate of her daughter, and her own new abilities.

I think the question of what would happen if humanity really had this ability/knowledge could be answered by the question Dr Banks asks of her colleague Dr Ian Donnelly, and his reflections, at the end of the movie:

Louise: If you could see your whole life from start to finish, would you change things?
Ian: Maybe I’d say what I feel more often. I… I don't know.
(He looks up at the sky)
You know, I've had my head tilted up to the stars for as long as I can remember. You know what surprised me the most? It wasn't meeting them. It was meeting you.
Louise: (Hugging him) I forgot how good it felt to be held by you.
[Her memory skips forwards through time to them being married]
Ian: You wanna make a baby?
Louise: Yes. Yeah.

This ability (to think comprehensively about time, non-linearly) highlights to me about the teachings of the reordering of the Titanic forces by Father Zeus in the myths of Prometheus, Epimetheus and Pandora, which highlights the flaws in our thinking if we maintain a limited or one dimensional view of the world. At this point of the movie, Louise and Ian have only been colleagues and Louise says she "forgot" how good it felt to be held by him although this is the first time they actually embrace, she remembers it all even as it is yet to come. This is significant because despite the couple divorcing in the future (he divorces her when Hannah is still young, for not disclosing that Hannah will pass away) and all the hard feelings that Louise is aware of which are yet to come, she will proceed with their sweet and touching love story regardless, which will also give birth to Hannah and the full cycle of her life. Her efforts will also go on to someday help the heptapods, whose own purpose in sharing these abilities with humanity, which they tell Dr Banks, is because their civilisation will come to need humanity's help in 3000 years.

In terms of memory, her own remembrance of everything all at once, through her experience of non-linearly natured time through her language comprehension, helps her to see, in totality, all the significance of her life and the events within it for what it will birth and the sacredness of all the memories she will have/has had in all her being and choices. This is a powerful way to represent the power of memory, as it reminds the average person (who is prone to self-deceit by forgetting all the complexity of what life truly is) that we oftentimes are deprived of the full picture 'forest' by fixating on the singular and incomplete tree.

"[...] ever keeping memory apart from mind-harming deception,
holding together all the mind that dwells within mortal souls,
strengthening the powerful, steadfast reasoning of mortals,
most sweet, loving wakefulness, bringing all things to remembrance,
whatever each one has entrusted as understanding within the breast,
never turning aside, awakening the mind in all [...]"
- Hymn to Mnemosyne

Wednesday at 11:16 PM#6

Question: What does the clip make you feel?

Answer: The music was a little terrifying for me, also in the end i was little scared

Thursday at 5:22 AM#7

What do you think is most important to memorize?

Faith and the connection through which it becomes personal to you. A prayer, a teaching, a simple phrase whose meaning you have taken time to understand. Something you can return to when your circumstances make everything else difficult to hold onto.

The connection to your inner Daimon or to the Gods, an unwavering faith that helps you gather yourself and take the next step.

Thank you VT and Ritual Leads for today's discussions, all of them have been so interesting. I also want to link here NG Arcadia post about Memory in Media - Blade Runner. And mine Memory in Media - Interstellar.

What do you think is most important to memorize?

Faith and the connection through which it becomes personal to you. A prayer, a teaching, a simple phrase whose meaning you have taken time to understand. Something you can return to when your circumstances make everything else difficult to hold onto.

The connection to your inner Daimon or to the Gods, an unwavering faith that helps you gather yourself and take the next step.

Thank you VT and Ritual Leads for today's discussions, all of them have been so interesting. I also want to link here NG Arcadia post about Memory in Media - Blade Runner. And mine Memory in Media - Interstellar.

Thursday at 8:20 PM#8

Great discussion yesterday, everyone. I think a lot of the answers here are thought-provoking and show an ability to relate lower things to abstraction and higher concepts.

Today is Cleo's Ritual. Cleo is the muse of history, glory, remembrance of what is noble and celebration.

I will provide short extracts about the emperor Marcus Aurelius, one of our Personalities, a noted philosopher and follower of the Gods:

Fuit autem consuetudo Marco ut in circensium spectaculo legeret audiretque ac subscriberet, ex quo quidem saepe iocis popularibus dicitur lacessitus.
It was customary with Marcus to read, listen to, and sign documents at the circus-games; because of this habit he was openly ridiculed, it is said, by the people.

Historia Augusta, Life of Marcus Aurelius 15.1.

in theatro tu libros vel in convivio lectitabas
You used to read books either in the theatre or at a banquet.

Letter of Marcus's teacher Fronto to him, Correspondence, Ad Marcum Caesarem 4.12.5 (c. 145–147CE)

Μᾶρκος γε μὴν οὕτω τι φόνοις οὐκ ἔχαιρεν ὥστε καὶ τοὺς μονομάχους ἐν τῇ Ῥώμῃ ὥσπερ ἀθλητὰς ἀκινδύνως ἑώρα μαχομένους· σιδήριον γὰρ οὐδέποτε οὐδενὶ αὐτῶν ὀξὺ ἔδωκεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀμβλέσιν ὥσπερ ἐσφαιρωμένοις πάντες ἐμάχοντο.
Marcus, indeed, took so little pleasure in killing that he even watched the gladiators in Rome fighting without danger, like athletes; for he never gave any of them a sharp iron weapon, but they all fought with blunt weapons, as though fitted with rounded tips.

Cassius Dio, Roman History 72.29.3

Ὥσπερ προσίσταταί σοι τὰ ἐν τῷ ἀμφιθεάτρῳ καὶ τοῖς τοιούτοις χωρίοις ὡς ἀεὶ τὰ αὐτὰ ὁρώμενα, καὶ τὸ ὁμοειδὲς προσκορῆ τὴν θέαν ποιεῖ.
Just as the spectacles in the amphitheatre and similar places become tiresome to you, because you continually see the same things and their sameness makes the sight wearisome.

Marcus Aurelius's own words, Meditations, 6.46

What do you think it says about Marcus Aurelius that he was ready to ditch one of the easiest ways to cement popularity and transient glory as an emperor [participation in gladiatorial matters and circuses], either out of hating bloodshed or boredom at repetition?

How do these extracts make you feel?

Was the pursuit of glory to the emperor wildly different to the mobs that surrounded him, the gladiator in the arena or the actor on the stage?

How much does glory and nobility involve breaking from conventions?

How much were his beliefs futuristic for his time, and if you think he held them for good reasons, do modern people have abhorrence for the same reasons?

ΕΠΙΣΤΑΜΑΙΟΡΧΕΙΣΘΑΙ

:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_

Great discussion yesterday, everyone. I think a lot of the answers here are thought-provoking and show an ability to relate lower things to abstraction and higher concepts.

Today is Cleo's Ritual. Cleo is the muse of history, glory, remembrance of what is noble and celebration.

I will provide short extracts about the emperor Marcus Aurelius, one of our Personalities, a noted philosopher and follower of the Gods:

Fuit autem consuetudo Marco ut in circensium spectaculo legeret audiretque ac subscriberet, ex quo quidem saepe iocis popularibus dicitur lacessitus.
It was customary with Marcus to read, listen to, and sign documents at the circus-games; because of this habit he was openly ridiculed, it is said, by the people.

Historia Augusta, Life of Marcus Aurelius 15.1.

in theatro tu libros vel in convivio lectitabas
You used to read books either in the theatre or at a banquet.

Letter of Marcus's teacher Fronto to him, Correspondence, Ad Marcum Caesarem 4.12.5 (c. 145–147CE)

Μᾶρκος γε μὴν οὕτω τι φόνοις οὐκ ἔχαιρεν ὥστε καὶ τοὺς μονομάχους ἐν τῇ Ῥώμῃ ὥσπερ ἀθλητὰς ἀκινδύνως ἑώρα μαχομένους· σιδήριον γὰρ οὐδέποτε οὐδενὶ αὐτῶν ὀξὺ ἔδωκεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀμβλέσιν ὥσπερ ἐσφαιρωμένοις πάντες ἐμάχοντο.
Marcus, indeed, took so little pleasure in killing that he even watched the gladiators in Rome fighting without danger, like athletes; for he never gave any of them a sharp iron weapon, but they all fought with blunt weapons, as though fitted with rounded tips.

Cassius Dio, Roman History 72.29.3

Ὥσπερ προσίσταταί σοι τὰ ἐν τῷ ἀμφιθεάτρῳ καὶ τοῖς τοιούτοις χωρίοις ὡς ἀεὶ τὰ αὐτὰ ὁρώμενα, καὶ τὸ ὁμοειδὲς προσκορῆ τὴν θέαν ποιεῖ.
Just as the spectacles in the amphitheatre and similar places become tiresome to you, because you continually see the same things and their sameness makes the sight wearisome.

Marcus Aurelius's own words, Meditations, 6.46

What do you think it says about Marcus Aurelius that he was ready to ditch one of the easiest ways to cement popularity and transient glory as an emperor [participation in gladiatorial matters and circuses], either out of hating bloodshed or boredom at repetition?

How do these extracts make you feel?

Was the pursuit of glory to the emperor wildly different to the mobs that surrounded him, the gladiator in the arena or the actor on the stage?

How much does glory and nobility involve breaking from conventions?

How much were his beliefs futuristic for his time, and if you think he held them for good reasons, do modern people have abhorrence for the same reasons?

Astrid [NG]Yesterday at 2:59 AM

Thank you for these discussions NP Karnonnos!

I think the fact that Marcus Aurelius did not go the easy route says that he held strongly to his principles. He wouldn't sell out his philosophical ideals for popularity nor did he wish to be entertained by needless violence. His goal to rule well went above transient glory, which is seen through what he made his priorities (he was not interested in impressing others for social reasons, nor did he want to encourage mindless entertainment by validating the spectacle with a show of enthusiasm).

Reading these extracts about Marcus Aurelius' life makes me self-conscious on how someone would potentially examine the way I have lived my own life and where my own priorities were in the tangible, documentable, actions I took (versus what my intentions may have been, what did I really accomplish?). I feel more inspired to learn from him, hoping to be ethical and consciously aware about my life's impact on the world into the future (to have positive effects with what I leave behind and no significant regrets).

I believe that Marcus Aurelius' pursuit of glory was different to the average person/a gladiator/an actor. The actions he took had more weight and far-reaching impacts in the world. He believed in studying to be more ethical and in taking the time to ensure that he was making the correct decisions (this, based on the article in the Personalities section). For example, a gladiator only needed to ensure an entertaining and brute victory at any cost, while Aurelius in war would perform a civic duty to the empire, strategising and seeking help from other spiritual people of the Gods to ensure the empire's safety and success.

Glory and nobility are difficult and extraordinary attainments in a person's life so breaking from all the regular conventions is central to achieving it. Doing the same average thing can only really produce the same results. How one thinks and prioritises needs to be extraordinary, with actions to match our dedication to doing more and being smarter about it. I imagine it is mentally taxing and requires extremes of self control and governance.

I think Marcus Aurelius certainly held futuristic beliefs compared to the times he lived, since he kept himself accountable to others (like consulting the Senate when accessing the treasury) and he did not believe in excessive indulgence for himself even as an emperor. I don't think modern people necessarily have the same reasons to abhor the things Marcus Aurelius did, some people choose be 'counter culture' for the sake of it and not because they would like to truly encourage higher minded pursuits in society.

Thank you for these discussions NP Karnonnos!

I think the fact that Marcus Aurelius did not go the easy route says that he held strongly to his principles. He wouldn't sell out his philosophical ideals for popularity nor did he wish to be entertained by needless violence. His goal to rule well went above transient glory, which is seen through what he made his priorities (he was not interested in impressing others for social reasons, nor did he want to encourage mindless entertainment by validating the spectacle with a show of enthusiasm).

Reading these extracts about Marcus Aurelius' life makes me self-conscious on how someone would potentially examine the way I have lived my own life and where my own priorities were in the tangible, documentable, actions I took (versus what my intentions may have been, what did I really accomplish?). I feel more inspired to learn from him, hoping to be ethical and consciously aware about my life's impact on the world into the future (to have positive effects with what I leave behind and no significant regrets).

I believe that Marcus Aurelius' pursuit of glory was different to the average person/a gladiator/an actor. The actions he took had more weight and far-reaching impacts in the world. He believed in studying to be more ethical and in taking the time to ensure that he was making the correct decisions (this, based on the article in the Personalities section). For example, a gladiator only needed to ensure an entertaining and brute victory at any cost, while Aurelius in war would perform a civic duty to the empire, strategising and seeking help from other spiritual people of the Gods to ensure the empire's safety and success.

Glory and nobility are difficult and extraordinary attainments in a person's life so breaking from all the regular conventions is central to achieving it. Doing the same average thing can only really produce the same results. How one thinks and prioritises needs to be extraordinary, with actions to match our dedication to doing more and being smarter about it. I imagine it is mentally taxing and requires extremes of self control and governance.

I think Marcus Aurelius certainly held futuristic beliefs compared to the times he lived, since he kept himself accountable to others (like consulting the Senate when accessing the treasury) and he did not believe in excessive indulgence for himself even as an emperor. I don't think modern people necessarily have the same reasons to abhor the things Marcus Aurelius did, some people choose be 'counter culture' for the sake of it and not because they would like to truly encourage higher minded pursuits in society.

kthonexYesterday at 10:10 AM

I think the extracts speak a lot to his character. Especially how when he would be present for circus games, theaters or banquets and yet would spend his time getting work done or productively reading. It makes me think of the rare times in which I would engage in the more "popular" of "conventional" activities (like the few times I'd been to a bar or a club) and very clearly remembering how I'd wish I'd brought something more productive to do while there.

While reading these extracts, I also clearly thought of our clergy and even Lady Pythia and the thousands of books they've read, because to read at every opportune moment is how thousands of books get read.

It makes me think that nobility may not inherently require the breaking of conventions, but instead, the pursuit of nobility runs independent of their malleable standards.

Thank you for the extracts and discussion!

I think the extracts speak a lot to his character. Especially how when he would be present for circus games, theaters or banquets and yet would spend his time getting work done or productively reading. It makes me think of the rare times in which I would engage in the more "popular" of "conventional" activities (like the few times I'd been to a bar or a club) and very clearly remembering how I'd wish I'd brought something more productive to do while there.

While reading these extracts, I also clearly thought of our clergy and even Lady Pythia and the thousands of books they've read, because to read at every opportune moment is how thousands of books get read.

It makes me think that nobility may not inherently require the breaking of conventions, but instead, the pursuit of nobility runs independent of their malleable standards.

Thank you for the extracts and discussion!

Thursday at 10:29 PM#9

Thank you NP Karnonnos, for gathering these illuminating extracts for Clio's Ritual 🙏💖
Reflecting on Marcus Aurelius is always deeply moving, and I find him to be an incredibly inspirational figure - his ability to maintain absolute power while remaining fiercely committed to humility, self-reflection and inner virtue is a masterclass in what it truly means to lead.

Looking at these passages, a few thoughts come to mind regarding his relationship with the conventions of his time:

I think it highlights Marcus Aurelius's profound commitment to internal virtue over external validation... He recognized that the adoration of the masses is fleeting, superficial and outside of one's control. By choosing to work, read or blunt the weapons of the arena, he shows that he prioritized his duty to human rational fellowship and his own conscience over cheap political theater - that he viewed the mindless repetition of the games as a distraction from the cultivation of the soul.
These extracts make me feel a deep and profound sense of admiration and appreciation 🙏
Yes, I think their versions of glory were completely antithetical... For the mobs, the gladiator and the actors, glory was immediate, born from adrenaline, bloodlust, vanity and the roar of the crowd. For Marcus Aurelius, true glory was quiet, lasting and internal. It was found in fulfilling one's nature, acting justly, and maintaining equanimity regardless of whether anyone was watching or cheering.
I feel that true nobility almost always requires breaking from convention, and conventions are designed to satisfy the lowest common denominator of a society... When public custom demands the celebration of violence or mindless distraction, a noble mind must rebel to protect its integrity... Marcus Aurelius proved that true leadership means doing what's right and rational, even if it invites public mockery and misunderstanding.
His actions (especially the enforcing blunt weapons to prevent deaths in the arena) were incredibly futuristic - anticipating modern human rights and the ethical aversion to killing for sport. Modern society's abhorrence for bloodshed stems mostly from a generalized, empathetic view of human rights and bodily sanctity. Marcus Aurelius's aversion, while compassionate, was grounded in a specific Stoic cosmology, that he viewed bloodshed as a violation of the rational order of nature, and the games themselves as a tedious, repetitive illusion that lacked true substance or spiritual utility.

Thank you again for putting this thread together and letting us dive deeper into these philosophical discussions - I look forward to reading every insight in this thread! 🌟

Thank you NP Karnonnos, for gathering these illuminating extracts for Clio's Ritual 🙏💖
Reflecting on Marcus Aurelius is always deeply moving, and I find him to be an incredibly inspirational figure - his ability to maintain absolute power while remaining fiercely committed to humility, self-reflection and inner virtue is a masterclass in what it truly means to lead.

Looking at these passages, a few thoughts come to mind regarding his relationship with the conventions of his time:

I think it highlights Marcus Aurelius's profound commitment to internal virtue over external validation... He recognized that the adoration of the masses is fleeting, superficial and outside of one's control. By choosing to work, read or blunt the weapons of the arena, he shows that he prioritized his duty to human rational fellowship and his own conscience over cheap political theater - that he viewed the mindless repetition of the games as a distraction from the cultivation of the soul.
These extracts make me feel a deep and profound sense of admiration and appreciation 🙏
Yes, I think their versions of glory were completely antithetical... For the mobs, the gladiator and the actors, glory was immediate, born from adrenaline, bloodlust, vanity and the roar of the crowd. For Marcus Aurelius, true glory was quiet, lasting and internal. It was found in fulfilling one's nature, acting justly, and maintaining equanimity regardless of whether anyone was watching or cheering.
I feel that true nobility almost always requires breaking from convention, and conventions are designed to satisfy the lowest common denominator of a society... When public custom demands the celebration of violence or mindless distraction, a noble mind must rebel to protect its integrity... Marcus Aurelius proved that true leadership means doing what's right and rational, even if it invites public mockery and misunderstanding.
His actions (especially the enforcing blunt weapons to prevent deaths in the arena) were incredibly futuristic - anticipating modern human rights and the ethical aversion to killing for sport. Modern society's abhorrence for bloodshed stems mostly from a generalized, empathetic view of human rights and bodily sanctity. Marcus Aurelius's aversion, while compassionate, was grounded in a specific Stoic cosmology, that he viewed bloodshed as a violation of the rational order of nature, and the games themselves as a tedious, repetitive illusion that lacked true substance or spiritual utility.

Thank you again for putting this thread together and letting us dive deeper into these philosophical discussions - I look forward to reading every insight in this thread! 🌟

Yesterday at 10:46 PM#10

This is the targeted message.

Many of the members, including newer members or those who post less gave their thoughts quite profoundly above, which I am pleased with.

For Euterpe, I present the instrumental First Delphic Hymn to Apollo (dated from 138-128CE), originally credited to Athenaeus with a modern reconstruction by Petros Tabouris and Avlites (1992) based on a score found in 1893 at the Treasury of the Athenians at Delphi in Greece [this video is region blocked in some African, Asian countries]:

Third-party media blocked

What strikes you about the way the music is presented?
What's different about the choice of arrangement compared to classical and modern Western music?
These Hymns were designed to be used in processions to Apollo. Is the melody meant to be catchy or on the contemplative side?
The Ritual of the Muse Euterpe says every utterance receives its measure from silence. Is this used in the song?

Important considerations: The reconstructive value is somewhat high, because texts like CID III 1 described at least some of the instruments like the pipe and kithara to be used.

The sung versions of these Hymns, however, rely much on post-medieval styles of singing and assumptions about how they would be sung, when even singing from the 1700s is often fundamentally alien to modern ears.

The First Delphic Hymn also only provides vocal notation, unlike the Second, which is instrumental notation. This means above the vocal element is somewhat artificially transposed into being an instrumental interpretation with its own creative elements for the 1992 Avlites version.

Third-party media blocked

Here is a pared down version with the melody strictly used with the kithara. If you could imagine parts of the above being sung, how distinct do you think it would sound?

ΕΠΙΣΤΑΜΑΙΟΡΧΕΙΣΘΑΙ

:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_:-:_

Many of the members, including newer members or those who post less gave their thoughts quite profoundly above, which I am pleased with.

For Euterpe, I present the instrumental First Delphic Hymn to Apollo (dated from 138-128CE), originally credited to Athenaeus with a modern reconstruction by Petros Tabouris and Avlites (1992) based on a score found in 1893 at the Treasury of the Athenians at Delphi in Greece [this video is region blocked in some African, Asian countries]:

Third-party media blocked

What strikes you about the way the music is presented?
What's different about the choice of arrangement compared to classical and modern Western music?
These Hymns were designed to be used in processions to Apollo. Is the melody meant to be catchy or on the contemplative side?
The Ritual of the Muse Euterpe says every utterance receives its measure from silence. Is this used in the song?

Important considerations: The reconstructive value is somewhat high, because texts like CID III 1 described at least some of the instruments like the pipe and kithara to be used.

The sung versions of these Hymns, however, rely much on post-medieval styles of singing and assumptions about how they would be sung, when even singing from the 1700s is often fundamentally alien to modern ears.

The First Delphic Hymn also only provides vocal notation, unlike the Second, which is instrumental notation. This means above the vocal element is somewhat artificially transposed into being an instrumental interpretation with its own creative elements for the 1992 Avlites version.

Third-party media blocked

Here is a pared down version with the melody strictly used with the kithara. If you could imagine parts of the above being sung, how distinct do you think it would sound?

MalpanatwuxToday at 12:28 AM

To me, the first piece sounds definitively ancient, like something that bears its age evidently in each measure. I can't quite explain why it feels this way, but it FEELS very ancient. It seems very deliberately organized and more contemplative than catchy. One thing that caught my interest were the random points of silence in the song. The same tempo followed after the first silence, but after the second one, the tempo completely changed.

These silences are very interesting to me, because there is no apparent bridge to them. The first silence was followed by no change in tempo, whereas the second silence was followed by an increase. It feels like they serve as periods of deeper contemplation before the hymn carries on. In the grand ritual of Zeus, the single minute of silence is one of deepest actions of fellowship within the ritual. Given the piece's contemplative energy, I think that these periods of silence enhance the deeper purpose of the music itself - the silence giving measure to the utterance.

I'd love to hear the vocal aspects of both of these pieces. The mystery of this has me intrigued. Given how different the First Delphic Hymn to Apollo sounds in comparison to most modern music, the vocals were likely just as unique. Perhaps even unlike anything heard of to this day.

Thank you for these discussion opportunities, NP Karnonnos! I look forward to more.

To me, the first piece sounds definitively ancient, like something that bears its age evidently in each measure. I can't quite explain why it feels this way, but it FEELS very ancient. It seems very deliberately organized and more contemplative than catchy. One thing that caught my interest were the random points of silence in the song. The same tempo followed after the first silence, but after the second one, the tempo completely changed.

These silences are very interesting to me, because there is no apparent bridge to them. The first silence was followed by no change in tempo, whereas the second silence was followed by an increase. It feels like they serve as periods of deeper contemplation before the hymn carries on. In the grand ritual of Zeus, the single minute of silence is one of deepest actions of fellowship within the ritual. Given the piece's contemplative energy, I think that these periods of silence enhance the deeper purpose of the music itself - the silence giving measure to the utterance.

I'd love to hear the vocal aspects of both of these pieces. The mystery of this has me intrigued. Given how different the First Delphic Hymn to Apollo sounds in comparison to most modern music, the vocals were likely just as unique. Perhaps even unlike anything heard of to this day.

Thank you for these discussion opportunities, NP Karnonnos! I look forward to more.

Astrid [NG]Today at 3:16 AM

What strikes me is the pacing, that it goes up in intensity before the end while the beginning is more contemplative, almost like an induction which draws your focus in gently but firmly. The arrangement feels more organic and acoustic than classical and modern music, which I don't think is meant to be catchy, it's more following along a 'singular' line of sound which rises and rises is more appropriate for its purpose in religious processions (as opposed to something designed to generate a particular beat to be followed along with). I believe that 'every utterance receives its measure from silence' is reflected in this song because of the timing which includes some pauses in the melody. Imagining the inclusion of a voice singing would make it sound more primordial/ancient in a way, I believe.

Today at 12:08 PM#11

In honor of today's Thalia Ritual, I would like to briefly touch on comedy.

Among all the genres, I would say comedy is perhaps the most subjective. In a tragedy, most will be able to identify where the tragedy is. On the other hand, a joke may leave one person in stitches and leave another person entirely unmoved.

With this in mind, comedy is an extremely hard genre to offer recommendations in. Even going back over a thousand years, the genre was already saturated with the crass. Not to say these things cannot be funny, I myself am hardly a blank slate, but the point remains.

Let's take film. A few of the contemporary films I personally like are movies like Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, as I enjoy well-made genre satires. Could I say these movies offer anything particularly deep? Not especially. Comedy can often be a unique genre in that its goal can be considered accomplished so long as it makes you laugh.

So, instead, I would like to go back a few decades and offer what I would find to be a tasteful recommendation: the 1967 French film Playtime by Jacques Tati.

The film follows almost no traditional plot, instead following bumbling Monsieur Hulot and a group of American tourists as they navigate a sterile, futuristic, glass-and-steel Paris over the course of a single day and night.

Why I think this film is an especially remarkable comedy is the amount of work that went into it. The film's humor often relies on you paying attention. There are jokes in the foreground, background and peripheral parts of the frame. You can watch the same scene several times and discover things you missed. The camera often holds a wide shot rather than cutting between characters. This allows the viewer to decide where to look and discover the humour independently. The framing itself becomes part of the comedy. It doesn't constantly direct your attention towards the punchline. Instead, it trusts you to observe, explore and figure out what's funny. Two people watching the same scene might come away remembering completely different jokes.

In a sense, this is a comedy movie which makes its audience actually participate in its viewing. Why this is especially remarkable is that this ties into what the movie is effectively about. The first half of the film features a rigid world of right angles, where people move like robots in straight lines through labyrinthine corporate cubicles and sterile corridors. By the movie's climax, you see this isolation between people fall away. Humanity is embraced as chaotic, but soft, warm and communal. It's a testament to the human spirit. No matter how drab, grey and rigid certain structures become, humanity will always spill over and re-establish its colors. Think of the dreary medieval world and its stifling rules, contrast to the arriving beauty of the Renaissance and the flourishing of human liberty.

As a final note on comedy itself, the religions of the Yehubor have prided themselves on being utterly humorless. This should never be the way of the Zevist. When times are at their darkest, you'll often find the last thing that drives the darkness back is being able to laugh at it. For many throughout time, it was their final defiance. I would say the Greeks best of all knew that the one thing the tyrant feared most, was being made a mockery of.