(urth) Hunter of the East

[David Stockhoff]

On 11/13/2011 9:17 AM, James Wynn wrote:
> On 11/13/2011 7:40 AM, Gerry Quinn wrote:
>> *From:* James Wynn <mailto:crushtv at gmail.com>
>>
>>> >
>>> Gerry Quinn wrote:
>>> > Answered in my previous post.
>>> > The rising Sun *is* in a real sense visible in the poem. Unlike Orion.
>> > Just to clarify our terms. "In a real sense" means "not".
>> So you don’t agree that it’s possible to see something in a mirror, 
>> or in general by its reflection?
>
> The sky is not a reflection. You are imagining a mirror, and a 
> refection, all your own. You are creating your own poem here.
>
>>
>>> > When have I ever objected to metaphor? What I look for, though, are
>>> > metaphors that are actually present, like the noose of light, 
>>> which is
>>> > self-evidently thrown by the Sun.
>>>
>> > In classical cosmology, the Sun is the god that *rules* the day. 
>> It's doesn't
>> > cause it. That is why we can have a separate god that personifies 
>> "the Dawn"
>> > and why Khayyam can speak of Morning throwing a stone. The Sun is as
>> > incidental (given the reference to Morning) as any other celestial 
>> object.
>> <Shrug> We’re discussing Fitzgerald’s poem, not classical cosmology.
>>
>>> > Eos is not such a terrible interpretation. Unlike Orion, I think a 
>>> reasonable
>>> > case could be made. Nevertheless, the Sun imagery seems much 
>>> stronger.
>>> > If Fitzgerald had written, say, “bright fingers grasp the turret”, 
>>> I’d go with Eos.
>>> > But he’s making up his own metaphor, and it’s a better one IMO.
>>
>> > Are you saying that because the Iliad speaks of the Dawn's "rosy 
>> fingers"? Now
>> > you are using knowledge of classical literature to buttress your 
>> interpretation.
>> Yes, because the well-known association is there, unlike the case in 
>> the poem where were are talking about a noose. The noose is 
>> apparently a new metaphor dreamt up by Fitzgerald; it has no 
>> classical associations that I know of.
>> > But that is totally legitimate because YOU are doing it. I don't 
>> recall anywhere
>> > that the sun is associate with nooses, ropes, or lariats. (Sun as 
>> cowboy?)
>> It’s not – I interpret the poem on its own terms. If the poem had 
>> referred to the Huntsman’s starry sword, I’d have no hesitation in 
>> saying the Huntsman is Orion. But he’s the Huntsman of the East, and 
>> he throws a noose of sunlight, so he’s obviously the rising Sun.
>> It’s not rocket science.
>
> o...m...g.
>
> So, for literature written at any time in history, it is a legitimate 
> classical reference if Gerry knows about it. Gerry already knows every 
> classical reference that matters. The ones he knows are overridingly 
> important. The ones he doesn't know, he's not going to learn because 
> that would be pointless. AND it is a legitimate reference if it 
> suddenly occurs to Gerry at the time. All other references 
> "lesser-legitimate".
> Cool. Glad we've nailed that down at last.

Does Gerry know that the "starry sword" is about the one weapon Orion 
does NOT use? He is imagined with club, bow, staff, scythe, maybe even 
net, and so on (not that the pre-Wiki, Victorian Homo sapiens knew all 
this), but the short sword is ALWAYS at his side. So it would be pretty 
freaky for him to use it on a tower.