tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20782819.post7937352965477933588..comments2023-11-12T13:22:30.358+01:00Comments on andrewjshields: TacitusAndrew Shieldshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02804655739574694901noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20782819.post-23786747064400480812007-05-09T21:33:00.000+02:002007-05-09T21:33:00.000+02:00I'm interested in why people appeal to the authori...I'm interested in why people appeal to the authorities they appeal to. If there are several possible sources of a saying, then why does Rich choose JFK? For that matter, why does Rich need a saying at all? Why cannot he stand on his own authority, without appealing to JFK's?<BR/><BR/>I might be misremembering some of the details this, but here goes: in his inaugural lecture at the College de France (I forget what it's called), Foucault talked about the problem of beginning, and how one needs a way to enter discourse. He himself used Samuel Beckett to "enter discourse": once you have cited someone, you have begun.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps that's why a standard rhetorical tactic is to begin by citing something. And here I am, appealing to Foucault to justify my comments on Rich's appeal to JFK.Andrew Shieldshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02804655739574694901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20782819.post-66820184144691234942007-05-09T17:43:00.000+02:002007-05-09T17:43:00.000+02:00re: Mussolini:"He was one of us only, pure prose."...re: Mussolini:<BR/><BR/>"He was one of us only, pure prose."<BR/>--Robert Lowell, "Crossing the Alps"<BR/><BR/>He did write extremely well, unlike, well, never mind.<BR/><BR/>But then is the point that we tend not to attribute correctly quotations from people when we agree with the quotation but not with the politics or other general orientation of the person?<BR/><BR/>Why would anyone say, "As Mussolini's son-in-law once said ..."?Donald Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06391024449222256377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20782819.post-58472717474621517882007-05-08T17:10:00.000+02:002007-05-08T17:10:00.000+02:00Rich certainly has reasons (as JFK did) for not wa...Rich certainly has reasons (as JFK did) for not wanting to attribute the precise phrasing of the 100 fathers / orphan version to Mussolini's son-in-law!Andrew Shieldshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02804655739574694901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20782819.post-82378115763354827442007-05-08T16:55:00.000+02:002007-05-08T16:55:00.000+02:00Something about your comments seem misdirected, to...Something about your comments seem misdirected, to me.<BR/><BR/>1st of all JFK said, "It has been said..." or something to that effect when introducing the quotation; he did not claim it as a coinage. Rich I'm sure knows this and so says "as JFK had it" which indicates that it's a received opinion that JFK expressed, more contemporaneously and, arguably, famously than your sources.<BR/><BR/>It's nice to show that JFK may have been trading upon some classics course at Harvard or, given the military occasion of the original, that he got it from some general's memoirs who said it while knowing it was from a classic but not sure from where.<BR/><BR/>So, is the point that we all borrow, or that google makes it easy to be a scholar, or...<BR/><BR/>as to Rich, I believe he has reasons for saying "JFK" and not "Tacitus" in making his point.Donald Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06391024449222256377noreply@blogger.com