03.04.07
Posted in Philosophy at 12:31 am by Rosepixie
Many of the footnotes in this book are extremely odd. A lot of them are very useful – translations of Latin quotations or brief explanations of stories Bacon references (often myths or fables) – but there are also a lot of rather superfluous footnotes. There are notes for words like “witty” (speeches) that say simply “ingenious”. Now, why interrupt the flow of my reading to define a word like that that is clearly still part of common language? Other examples would be “fame” and “popular”, which both have the same type of one-word definition footnote. Other footnotes simply change the ending of a word, “commend” to “commended”, for example. What’s the point? Anyone who is going to bother picking up and actually reading Francis Bacon’s Essays is going to be able to deal with everyday words and the slightly unusual writing convention of educated Elizabethan writers! They aren’t that complicated! I’d rather they defined no words at all and I had to pick up a dictionary if I didn’t know something than this! Translating Latin, summarizing stories, and giving the dates of historical figures and events is plenty, thank you very much!
Permalink
02.24.07
Posted in Philosophy at 1:13 am by Rosepixie
I really have to wonder why Bacon ever got married at all. He can think of no great men who ever fell in love. This makes me wonder who he considers great, since I can think of a great number of great men, both political and otherwise, who fell in love and some point or other in the course of their lives.
How anyone could ever think this heartless, misogynist could have written The Merchant of Venice or A Winter’s Tale or any of Shakespeare’s other masterpieces is beyond me! (These examples were chosen for their strong female characters and noteworthy love stories, by the way, not because I have any particular preference for them or think they are Shakespeare’s best, although I do hold both in very high regard.)
Permalink
02.21.07
Posted in Philosophy at 1:23 am by Rosepixie
This book is really odd sometimes. Bacon obsesses over the strangest things. His statements about envy struck me as particularly odd because he himself seems to have done all of the things he says are bad to do in this essay. So was he blind to his own feelings and actions or learning (slowly) from his mistakes?
Permalink
02.16.07
Posted in Philosophy at 1:17 am by Rosepixie
I kept wondering all through the essay on marriage why Bacon ever got married at all! He says no great man ever had a wife or children. As far as Bacon was concerned, wives pretty much make one’s life difficult and he mentions few benefits. Really he seems very distrustful and disdainful of marriage in general. I found it quite strange and quite annoying. Why did he ever get married?
Permalink
02.14.07
Posted in Philosophy at 1:16 am by Rosepixie
Bacon has little respect for mothers, which isn’t all that surprising since he doesn’t think real highly of parents in general. He also has little regard for letting people choose their own professions, either by interest or talent, in favor of letting their parents (read: father) choose their professions for them. This even after he points out that ignored middle children may very well be the ones destined for greatness! It was a strange essay from a clearly childless man.
Permalink
02.12.07
Posted in Philosophy at 1:47 am by Rosepixie
Bacon can see more uses for secrecy and lying, but has no patience for those who don’t do it well. He disapproves of useless lying, but is somewhat fuzzy on what that is exactly. I found his comment about great leaders and heroes always being blameless funny since it was so clearly a kiss-up kind of thing to say!
Permalink
02.05.07
Posted in Philosophy at 12:14 am by Rosepixie
Bacon’s essay on adversity is strange. He makes one very odd reference that threw me off for the rest of the essay (which only comprised a page or so total). The reference was about Hercules traveling in a pitcher to rescue Prometheus, which is not part of the myth. At least, it’s not part of any classical telling of the story. It’s a weird later addition. It just seemed a really strange thing to mention. I was weirded out by it!
Permalink
02.01.07
Posted in Philosophy at 3:18 am by Rosepixie
Bacon’s position on revenge is very obvious for a lawyer. He believes it is bad and should be stamped out. His short tirade about having to forgive friends as well as enemies was almost funny in its way. It made sense in context, but I almost wondered if there was a story there or something!
Permalink
01.31.07
Posted in Philosophy at 1:45 am by Rosepixie
The essay on unity in religion was an odd one. It’s been the longest so far, but also the least focused. It began quite logically and seemed to be going somewhere, but it’s like Bacon got lost in trivial things that were largely unrelated to the stated focus of the essay. The long tangent on blasphemy by pretending to be Satan or God was perhaps the strangest, but the many-colored robe one was more interesting and almost on topic (in a way). It was a strange essay.
Permalink
01.30.07
Posted in Philosophy at 12:03 am by Rosepixie
In general Bacon’s outlook on death was surprisingly reasonable and philosophical. He basically stated that death just was and that it, in and of itself, need not be feared. He pointed out that we fear it because we tell stories to enhance that fear, like a child tells stories to enhance their fear of the dark. This was a somewhat long-winded piece in parts, but overall it was a good essay.
Permalink
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »