Juvenile Morals for a Society in Decay

Juvenal, that famous Roman satirist, talked about a variety of social ills the Rome was falling victim to. We face problems of our own in these United States. Let's take a look at five modern problems, and see what someone so Juvenal might say about them.

First off, there is the issue of sexual immorality. This unchastity before marriage and unfaithfulness during marriage is a problem for many reasons. Beyond the dangers of ruining family relationships, sexual diseases, scandal, and the double-edged results of fatherless children or abortion, at the core sexual immorality is a lie where two people claim through their actions to love each other to the greatest degree possible, yet through their very actions are showing their utter disrespect for each other. It is an imitation of true love, robbed of the commitment to make it real. It makes sense that this ill is often accompanied by lies, lack of self-control, and selfishness, since they are its originators and enablers. Juvenal shares a nearly endless list of sexual crimes common throughout Rome. In one example, after explaining just how disgusted he is with the Roman desire to imitate Greeks, he says "there is nothing sacred to (a Greek's) lusts: not the matron of the family, nor the maiden daughter, not the as yet unbearded son-in-law to be, not even the as yet unpolluted son; if none of these be there, he will debauch his friend's grandmother (Juvenal, Satire 3)." Throughout the Satires you can find all too many examples of the Romans imitating the Greeks all too well. Juvenal seems to think that, other than the perverseness of the issue itself, some of the main reasons that immorality is a problem is that it destroys love and makes everyone untrustworthy. Sounds good, er, bad enough for me.

Another issue is corruption, where lying and theft become the norm. Again this destroys trust and makes it hard for society to function. Secondarily, this destroys the rule of law, selflessness, and any sense of the common good. Thirdly, it turns the honest people into victims who have much more difficulty in succeeding, if they can at all. Juvenal in his day complained "there is no room...for honest callings in this city, no reward for labour (Juvenal, Satire 3)," clearly in agreement with this last issue caused by corruption. Later he says, "No man will get my help in robbery, and therefore no governor will take me on his staff: I am treated as a maimed and useless trunk that has lost the power of its hands. What man wins favour nowadays unless he be an accomplice-one whose soul seethes and burns with secrets that must never be disclosed? No one who has imparted to you an innocent secret thinks he owes you anything, or will ever bestow on you a favour; the man whom Verres loves is the man who can impeach Verres at any moment that he chooses. Ah! Let not all the sands of the shaded Tagus, and the gold which it rolls into the sea, be so precious in your eyes that you should lose your sleep, and accept gifts, to your sorrow, which you must one day lay down, and be for ever a terror to your mighty friend (Juvenal, Satire 3)!" Not only does Juvenal continue his comment about how difficult it is for honest people, but he points out the constant fear and distrust these conspirators share, which is why they try to eternally buy each other off with gifts and favors. As another story Juvenal shares about a man who sold out his conspirators shows, corruption allows for only tenuous relationships. Trust lasts no longer than the money, and often not even that long.

Entitlement is another issue we face today, where people think they deserve to have whatever they want, regardless of whether they've worked for it. This breeds laziness and greed, and ultimately financial ruin. Juvenal talks a lot about laziness and indulgence and greed, yet the closest I could find to him discussing entitlement was when he described "someone who’s lavished his wealth on the horses, blown the family fortune, thinks he’s the right to expect a command, just for racing his speeding chariot down the Flaminian Way, like some puny Automedon? (Juvenal, Satire 1).” This is clearly the case of some numbskull wasting his money and yet expecting to be rewarded for it, as though his birth somehow made him entitled to military rank and power. From this example, we can see how entitlement can easily lead to completely unqualified people being given positions of responsibility (an easy path to ruin), and to people believing that wasting money has no consequences (an even easier path to ruin).

Drugs and addiction are problems we face today that not only temporarily rob us of judgement, but which can hamstring our ability to make wise choices in the future. Addiction takes our focus from important matters and demands that we think only on how to satisfy the endless itch. Again, Juvenal is somewhat less clear on this topic. He does say "all vice pours into Rome (Juvenal, Satire 6),” and references the lack of judgement of people while drunk saying "Does Venus care about anything when she’s drunk? (Juvenal, Satire 6)," yet he also complains that when invited to dinner the guests do not get wine as fine as that enjoyed by the host, suggesting that he doesn't have a problem with drinking in general. Perhaps the lack of tobacco or chemically derived drugs made this less of an issue, but considering the fact that opioids were found as far back as Homer's Odyssey, and the Romans clearly had enough alcohol to get alcoholics, this seems unlikely. My guess is that Juvenal just lumped in drugs and addictions with the other excesses and vices he bemoaned as ruining his society, not recognizing them as a separate problem.

If you think Juvenal was clear about drugs, he's even less so on the idea of relativism. Relativism is a philosophy that there is no absolute truth or morals, that everything changes based on perspective and situation. It's a very handy way of justifying all sorts of behavior, and once you have a decent justification, everything is set for morals and society to spiral downhill even faster than before. Juvenal mentions once that "what’s normal in a Crispinus is criminal in another (Juvenal, Satire 4)” suggesting that certain people could get away with murder without being charged simply because of their status. This and other charges of hypocrisy don't quite match the idea of relativism, however, because nobody is actually trying to make the case that what "Crispinus" is doing is actually moral; they merely seem to believe that he can get away with doing immoral actions. Again, this could have been an issue that Juvenal considered too minor to discuss specifically, or that he lumped in with other social ills. It's also possible that this level of self-delusion had not yet been reached by philosophers, and thus Juvenal did not have to deal with it. After all, Juvenal clearly sees it as a problem that Greeks don't live up to the moral standards he feels that Romans should live up to.

Problems, problems, everywhere. So juvenile, don't you think?

So…What’s the Outcome of an Old-School, Big, Fat, Greek Wedding?

               As much as people like to geek out about the ancient Greeks, to faun, er, fawn over their architecture and government, or to satyrize (so to speak) their mythology, how much would we truly approve of an ancient Greek marriage and the roles and rules it gives to men and women? I mean, if the Illiad was your only view of how the Greeks treat women, you’d probably get yourself a shotgun so you could shoot any crazy person in bronze armor who might come to cart off your mother, sisters, daughters, and/or self (if female) as sex slaves, and a bazooka in case the shotgun wasn’t enough to do the job. Listening to Achilles and Agamemnon argue about who gets to rape one of the women they’ve captured is enough to make just about anyone sound like a feminist in comparison. Are these seriously the people we’ve idolized as being so incredibly civilized? About five hundred plus years of history say yes, so I suppose the ancient Greeks are worth a second look, despite the bad first impression. Let’s see how their views stack up against a truly civilized view of marriage, such as “The Family: A Proclamation to the World.”

              Well to start with, the Proclamation says that “gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” Considering how the different genders seem to act and be treated in the myths, I guess it’s safe to say the Greeks figured out that men and women are different. I’m probably going to argue with them about the specifics of those differences and how they affect gender roles and such, but at least they got the general idea.

              Next, it says “We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force.” The ancient Greeks seem to be onboard with this idea. Thucydides quotes Pericles as saying “you who are still of an age to beget children must bear up in the hope of having others (272),” suggesting that the Greeks felt it was the duty of women to have children. Of course, the reasoning behind this differs from the Proclamation to the Greeks. The Proclamation says “the family is ordained of God” and “marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan,” suggesting that the need to have children stems from the importance of having a family. Pericles claims children are important as “a reinforcement and a security (272)” to “the state (272),” suggesting that the main reason to have kids is so the Greeks have people for their army/to build up their city.

              The Proclamation says “the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.” If the previous example of Achilles and Agamemnon arguing over who gets to rape Briseis is any indication, the Greeks didn’t fully get this concept, at least when it applied to the men. Women, on the other hand, were supposed to stay virtuous and faithful. Whereas men could get away with sleeping with women they weren’t married to, women were severely punished for choosing to sleep with men they weren’t married to (except for when they slept with gods/goddesses, in which case apparently both genders got a free pass). The Odyssey has lines like “Women can’t be trusted anymore (345),” “I’ll list for you all the women in the house, those who dishonor you (by sleeping with the suitors) and those who are true (418),” and “bring those women who have acted so disgracefully…(and) slash them with swords until they have forgotten their secret love-making with the suitors. Then finish them off (451).” Quite the double-standard the Greeks had.

              The Proclamation also says “parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness.” The Illiad actually has a good example of this (amazingly enough) in the characters of Hector and Andromache. Hector “kissed his dear son…and said a prayer to Zeus…’grant that this my son become as I am…and may men say he is far better than his father (80).” From the way Hector kisses and prays for his son and the way Andromache begs Hector to stay alive for the sake of their son shows that both of them love and care for their children. At least the ancient Greeks got that right.

              The Greeks also got right that “fathers are to…provide…protection for their families.” There’s a reason that Athena tells Telemachus “you need Odysseus back (248)” to deal with the suitors and defend his house. The Greeks agree with the Proclamation that men should defend their family.

              Lastly, the Proclamation says that “in these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are to help one another as equal partners.” This one is a bit more questionable for the ancient Greeks since, as mentioned, there is a double standard on sexuality, and yet they also believe that parents should love their children. In the Odyssey, the Phaeacian princess tells Odysseus “pass (my father) by and throw your arms around my mother’s knees, if you want to see your homeland soon (293),” suggesting that her mother can sway her father to doing what she wants. And yet, though Oedipus says “I respect you, my wife (35),” he repeatedly refuses to listen to her, and she says subserviently that “I would do nothing but that it is your wish (40).” It appears that for the Greeks as for others different family dynamics exist, some in which the marriages are more equal and some in which one spouse is submissive to the other. This equality and the need to care for the children are probably the two most important aspects of marriage, and yet it is unclear how the ancient Greeks felt about it. That lack of clarity is in itself troubling, since something so important should be clear if the Greeks expected everyone to follow it.

              As far as the Proclamation goes, the Greeks didn’t do as poorly as one might expect, considering the aspects of Greek myths many tend to emphasize. Still, they clearly were off-base in some of their morals, such as the double standard for sexuality. Other areas they did fairly well in, such as in loving your kids and men defending their family. Some areas, we just don’t know, such as whether the Greeks understood the need for husbands and wives to view each other and treat each other as equals. The whole practice of capturing women in war as sex-slaves probably doesn’t help with that last one. I guess it’s good that the ancient Greeks are all dead, because I don’t have a shotgun handy.

P.S. The reference numbers are the page numbers used in “The Essential Homer,” “The Portable Greek Historians,” and “Oedipus Rex” (the Prestwick House Literary Touchstone Classics edition), in case you feel like checking the quotes out.

Epithets

Well, it certainly has been a few years since I was a freshman in college. It seems that as time has passed I have changed quite a lot (hopefully in good ways). Bob the Logger lives again, but it has been so long that it seems only logical to reintroduce myself. I'll try to keep it simple with a few epic epithets.

The Merry Mormon

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, otherwise known as a Mormon, and I am very happy about it. For one thing, I know God is my loving Heavenly Father, and also because I know that I'll get to be married to my wife forever, even after death. What's not to like about that? I also got married just a half-year ago, increasing both my merriment and my "marry-ment." I'm also a terrible punster, (in case the blog name didn't give it away), which (along with my faith) helps my to stay generally happy and optimistic about life (I used to consider myself somewhere between an optimist and a pragmatist, but my wife assures me that I'm far more of an optimist than anything else).

Latin Loving

I love ballroom dance, and especially the Latin dancing side of it. I started learning steps at church activities and EFY and found that the more I learned the more fun I had. After taking at least 1 ballroom class a semester since starting BYU (though I tend to average about 2), I can honestly say that I am a dance fanatic (favorite dances include Paso Doble, Jive, Samba, West Coast Swing, Viennese Waltz, Cha Cha,...). Some people get their energy from being alone, and they're called introverts; others get their energy from being around people, and they're called extroverts. I get my energy from dancing, so I am a dance-overt. I also went on a Spanish-speaking mission, and love almost all the Latin American food I have tried (mole being one of the few exceptions, since it tastes similar to chocolate, which my taste buds seem to be morally opposed to).

Seeker of the Fantastic

Since my youth, I have devoured fantasy books and have sought to write my own novels about fantastic things. This can get me in trouble, because my schedule tends to be too full to do either, and yet I'm still trying to do both. As I got older, this love of fantastic literature has grown to include a fascination with superhero stories. This epithet also has a double meaning in my personal desires to continually improve and to become as fantastic as I can be in my various fields of interest, including dancing, writing, and teaching.

Lover of Logic

I have always liked logic puzzles, the chance to pit my will and cleverness against that of a puzzle master. I also grew up playing board games with my family and learning to figure out the strategies to that kind of logic puzzle. I enjoy that math is essentially a whole bunch of logic puzzles to solve, and want to share both how fun and how useful this logic (and the math itself) can be with my future students. One of the best things I like about logic is that it is a skill that can be practiced and improved, so the more I struggle to solve problems, the better I can get at figuring them out! Besides, with my blogging persona being what it is, I have to like math. After all, whoever heard of a logger who didn't like logs?

BYU Show of Snow

I’m dreaming of a White Christmas.  Actually, I’m not, but it’s still fun to say.  And with a wonderful play like Irving Berlin’s “White Christmas” in town, who doesn’t want to look outside come Christmas morning and see the landscape draped in white?  “White Christmas” is a holiday classic (I’ll let you guess which one) that may be rooted in the post-WWII era, but has a timeless quality all its own. 

With the original movie starring smash-hits Bing Crosby and Danny Kaye, it is hard not to compare the play to the movie.  All the same, the BYU production shows that you don’t have to imitate the movie to still have a great show.  All the same, I will confess that there were aspects of the movie that I wished had not been changed. 

I wasn’t terribly fond of the move to make Phil a womanizer who still continued to be even after falling in love with Betty.  Putting the landlady (Mrs. Allen) in the show was rather weird, and I personally wish that “Oh Gee, I Wish I was back in the Army” had been more than a reprise.  Ah well.  Say la vee. 

Other moves worked out alright, such as the change to the General’s character, the change in what it is that Bob has supposedly done, and the addition of Bob’s and Phil’s “Million Dollar Deal” friend from the army. 

Overall, the production was very entertaining, with great dancing and singing.  The actors pressed on in spite of a few technical glitches, and it worked.  At the end of the night, they got the girl, so what else matters?

Spectacular

Singing.  Dancing.  Awesomeness.  Brian Stokes Mitchell.  Would it be too corny to say that the BYU Spectacular was spectacular?  Well, corny or not, it was.  The show was incredible from start to finish, and the only thing I would change would be to make it longer.  The show started off with the orchestra, which played beautifully.  Next the Men’s Chorus joined in with songs from the musical “Paint Your Wagon.”  I haven’t seen that musical yet, but I must say that this performance of the music was a hearty recommendation.  The Men’s Chorus, which already sounded good, was then joined by Mr. Mitchell and they sounded amazing.  The Young Ambassadors joined in with some fantastic numbers, including the favorite “Just Haven’t Met You Yet,” leaving the audience wishing for more.  The brief visit by the Living Legends brought quite a stir.  Before the show I have never seen them perform, and I have to say that they were great.   Possessing a unique style, wonderful skill, and a whole lot of enthusiasm, the Living Legends were phenomenal.   Young Ambassadors came back on and once again raised the roof.  This was rather useful, since Brian David Mitchell came back to bring down the house (an especially impressive feat, since we were in the Marriott Center).  The combined performance of Mitchell and the Men’s Chorus sang “The Impossible Dream” beautifully.  I’ve heard that song many times, and it still stirs the soul.  What a wonderful end to a marvelous evening.  The only pity is that the evening had to end.

Let's Dance!

Wow. Let me say it again. WOW! The dance festival was amazing. The dancing and dancers were incredible. The costumes look fabulous, the lighting was surprisingly artistic, and the dancing was both highly skilled and very entertaining. I am very glad that I went to see it. I'm not sure I'll be able to remember everything, but what I do remember was spectacular.

The night started off with some Celtic/Scottish folk dancers. I noticed that they, and the majority of the non-modern, non-ballroom dancers dancer almost exclusively on their toes/the balls of their feet. The tap dancers only put their heels down to make noise, and the ballet dancers only stood normally (if you could call it that) when planted. The only exception to this were the Indian dancers, who danced flat-footed and seemed to focus more on dancing with their hands than on dancing with their feet.

The social dance numbers were really cool. The first of these dances was a single pair of dancers dancing the Foxtrot. The dancers flowed gracefully, gliding from move to move with elegance and ease, the light glittering off of their elaborate costumes. There were parts where the dancers danced separately, which would be difficult to do normally without practice. They flowed so well, I was almost uncertain as to whether they were dancing Foxtrot. The music proclaimed it in its pulsing beat, but I could not pick out an obvious “slow-slow-quick-quick” pattern in the dancing. It all just blended together into one fluid motion.

It was during this time that I realized what the lead's job truly is. He provides the dance moves and leads his dance partner through them, but his job as a performer is to show off how beautiful and talented his partner is. Occasionally you might notice the man, but the start of the show should be the woman. If you notice the man more often or even as often, the lead is either messing up or showing off.

Another factoid I learned was that anything can be a dance move as long as you do it to music, you perform it in a stylized manner, and you have complete confidence as you perform. Conversely, even the best dance move in the world will fail if missing two or more of those guidelines. So, have fun, and dance confidently. Be bold! Go dance!

Reflections on Tacos and Refracted Language Skills

                Tacos are delicious.  Unfortunately, they have several downsides caused by their thin brittle shells.  Fortunately for taco-lovers everywhere, there are now soft-tacos that have all of the tasty goodness of tacos without the disadvantages of a shell. 

Tacos have always had a problem with the limited amount of space that the shells provide for vegetables, salsa, sour cream, and other necessary additions to the meat.  While the open-endedness of the shell would seem to allow for an unlimited amount of such necessities, such is not the case.  The shell is simply too thin for a reasonable amount of toppings to be added.  Additionally, the only way to include even this limited amount of vegetable matter is to stack them on until your taco is the height of the Empire State Building.  While some might say that this is a good thing, it only succeeds in separating your meat from the rest of the taco.  When you want to take a bite that includes the crunch of the vegetables, the spice of the salsa, and the flavor of the meat, you find yourself unable to because no human mouth is wide enough to include it all.  You are forced to eat the vegetables and salsa off the top, and then eat your meat without toppings, effectively destroying the reason to get toppings in the first place. But this is not the worst part. 

Taco shells are so brittle that you have barely taken your first meat-less bite when the entire shell cracks down the bottom, releasing your meat and toppings to fall to the cold, dirty ground.  In a split second, all your hopes for a delicious taco experience are ruined. 

Soft tacos can end this tragedy.  With soft tacos, the meat and the toppings are combined in a tortilla wrapped to just the right size to fit in your mouth.  The tortilla is also flexible, and will not crack when you bite it.  With the right vegetables inside, your soft taco can have all of the crunch of a crispy taco without all of the additional problems inherent in this flawed design.  Spread the word.  Your day does not have to be ruined by a defective crispy taco.  Soft tacos are here to help.

P.S. English is a fun curse.  How else would I have learned how to affectedly communicate about the dreadsome probléma?