|
Author
|
Comment
|
Don
Registered User
(8/20/02 7:18:56 am)
|
Re: Me, too
There are many reasons to give up on these readings. I offer an example of one more:
In an earlier post on the dancing princesses, G writes:
"Very few of Grimms' tales can be decoded by means of the I Ching. I suspect this is because very few Grimms' tales were constructed in accordance with the I Ching. If you accept that tale of The Twelve Dancing Princesses is a work of Objective Art then it should be obvious that every aspect of the tale was the result of a conscious decision on the part of the author(s). The hexagrams were purposely woven into the narrative."
Accordingly, the details of the text become important. Consequently, relying on translations is suspect if one wishes to attribute the design to the Grimms. This is evident when G explicates the passage involving the line "you have caught it on a nail in the wall," for which G offers this reading: "The term, 'a nail in the wall' is actually code for another hexagram. The wall is probably wood, especially if it has a nail in it. So there we have the upper trigram as Wood, upper because the nail is IN the Wood. Inner is lower, outer is upper."
The wall mentioned in this translation may or may not have been wood, but in the Grimms' orginal German there is no wall at all. In fact, there's not actually a nail either. The elder sister simply says, "Du bist an einem Haken haengengeblieben." Now that can mean she's caught herself (her dress) on a hook, a peg, or just simply that she snagged it. In context, of course, there's no reason to believe that this nondescript passage has either hooks or pegs, so snag seems most likely. But that's all moot. She hasn't caught her dress on a peg, a hook, or a snag of any kind. The elder sister simply offers that as an (erroneous) explanation for what we know to be the actual fact--that the soldier stepped on her dress. So not only is there no wooden wall in the Grimms' text, there's also no no nail, hook, peg, or snag.
Where the wall comes from is even more perplexing, given that a wall is not present in Margaret Hunt's translation, which G claims to be the source of the texts he is using.
Hunt does use the word nail, which G interprets as follows: "The trigram for nail is a bit more difficult, but through a process of elimination it becomes clear that it can only be Mountain, which is especially fitting as the nail is supposedly Stopping the princess by catching on her dress."
The credibility of the interpretation is tested when G finds that the image "is a bit more difficult"--that is, does not correspond as it should. Amazingly, however, its very failure to apply becomes the proof of its applicability--"through the process of elimination it becomes clear that it can only be the Mountain." In other words, the template G is using becomes the driving force of the interpretation. If something doesn't fit, then it must correspond to the last remaining category. Abracadabra! The interpretation works because it doesn't and the template stands as its own proof.
Using an inaccurate translation, invoking Hunt's rendering as an authority while deviating from it, and recreating the words of the text so that they conform to an alien paradigm will shed no light on the Grimms' intentions or the design of the stories as they shaped them. Hammer away as they might, these readings miss the nail entirely.
Edited by: Don at: 8/20/02 11:25:12 am
|
Yellow
McMaggie
Registered User
(8/20/02 8:21:40 am)
|
Dancing Princesses- Translation
I can't believe that I looked over that. I, too, had been wondering where the nail came from, but I didn't really give it much thought.
I just read through the Grimms' 1810 and and 1857 versions of the tale, because it sparked my curiosity. Giving G. the benefit of the doubt, I decided to check the original to see if perhaps the eldest sister told the girl that she had caught her dress on a nail. However, alas, there was not even a nail in the beginning! The Grimms had made a few grammatical changes between the first and the last editions of the tale, but, in their terms, she is always "an einem Haken haengengeblieben."
I've also checked through several of my English translations of the tale (such as Zipes) and so far, I've only seen "Haken" translated as "hook", which is as it should be.
I am still a bit confused as to how the "nail" got in to the tale (as well as a wall) but I guess that it is just a bit about comparing a multitude of translations of the tales (if not the originals), as the safest bet towards accurate interpretations and analyses.
Cheers
Edited by: Yellow McMaggie at: 8/20/02 8:23:15 am
|
Gnostradamus
Registered User
(8/20/02 4:35:17 pm)
|
Good Job
Don,
This is some excellent work you have done here. Verification is a vital step and it is great to see someone make an effort to verify this information for themselves.
Don wrote:
The wall mentioned in this translation may or may not have been wood, but in
the Grimms' original German there is no wall at all. In fact, there's not actually a
nail either. The elder sister simply says, "Du bist an einem Haken
haengengeblieben." Now that can mean she's caught herself (her dress) on a
hook, a peg, or just simply that she snagged it. In context, of course, there's
no reason to believe that this nondescript passage has either hooks or pegs,
so snag seems most likely. But that's all moot. She hasn't caught her dress on
a peg, a hook, or a snag of any kind. The elder sister simply offers that as an
(erroneous) explanation for what we know to be the actual fact--that the
soldier stepped on her dress. So not only is there no wooden wall in the
Grimms' text, there's also no no nail, hook, peg, or snag.
Very true and an excellent point. Nonetheless we have nothing but the text to consult. We do not ignore the indicators which occur within the narrative regardless of their treatment within the surface layer of meaning. These terms were placed within the text to convey a specific message.
Don wrote:
Where the wall comes from is even more perplexing, given that a wall is not
present in Margaret Hunt's translation, which G claims to be the source of the
texts he is using.
Very true. My mistake. My original presentation employing this tale took place a couple of years back, when I was still using Edgar Taylor's text. As I have said, I still cull from my earlier presentations and I have cycled through several translations over the years. I'd like to use the translations from Midhnott Sol Regintroth, but I am unsure about copyright issues.
www.belinus.co.uk/fairyta...cesses.htm
Don Wrote:
Hunt does use the word nail, which G interprets as follows: "The trigram for nail
is a bit more difficult, but through a process of elimination it becomes clear that
it can only be Mountain, which is especially fitting as the nail is supposedly
Stopping the princess by catching on her dress."
The credibility of the interpretation is tested when G finds that the image "is a
bit more difficult"--that is, does not correspond as it should.
No, I did not say that it does not correspond as it should. I said that it was more difficult in that its significance was not obvious at first. It was a nail, now it's a hook, but in the end there is little difference beteen these two terms. A single metal claw of some sort. It is described by the eldest as catching hold on the youngest's dress.
Now there are eight possible trigrams:
Earth, with the qualities of receptive and docile. No, it does not fit.
Fire, attention, awareness, no.
Wind/Wood, following, penetrating. Maybe.
Water, no.
Lake, no.
Mountain, stopping, stillness. Yes, that is a fit. It catches on her dress, stopping her forward motion.
Thunder, no.
Heaven, strength, creativity, no.
Don wrote:
Amazingly,
however, its very failure to apply becomes the proof of its
applicability--"through the process of elimination it becomes clear that it can
only be the Mountain." In other words, the template G is using becomes the
driving force of the interpretation. If something doesn't fit, then it must
correspond to the last remaining category. Abracadabra! The interpretation
works because it doesn't and the template stands as its own proof.
I have displayed my method of reasoning above. The hypothesized hook is noted for the single property of catching on the dress of the youngest princess, so the trigram of mountain due to its quality of 'stopping' the princess. No better match exists.
The correlation between hook and mountain is no great leap and it can hardly be considered as disproving the system I have put forth. No, the weakness in my presentation lies not with the hook but with the wall. First I was concerned because I was unsure whether the wall was stone or wood. I reasoned that it was likely wood, because it is difficult to drive a nail into a stone wall, and a hook even more so. All of that reasoning is now moot for the very simple reason that there is no wall. Just a hook which catches in the youngest princess's dress.
That of course makes the identification even easier and less open to debate. The hook is in the dress. The dress is of cloth, plant fibers, hence wood. The dress was trailing after the princess, hence 'following' a quality of wind/wood. So once again we arrive at wood over mountain.
I want to thank you for calling me on these issues. The use of Taylor's text was definitely a mistake, though the resulting hexagram is the same. This same match occurs with another difference in translation which I did happen to catch.
Taylor's:
Then the youngest daughter said again, ‘l am sure all is not right - did not you hear that noise ? That never happened before.’ But the eldest said, ‘It is only our princes, who are shouting for joy at our approach.’
From Midhnott Sol Regintroth:
"Something is wrong, did you hear the crack?" But the eldest said: "It is a gun fired for joy, because we have got rid of our prince so quickly."
Taylor's has shouting for joy while the German has shot of a gun. The result in both case is Thunder over Lake though the wording is changed.
Also, it should be noted that even if you had managed to throw doubt on the validity of one of the many hexagrams I have identified, that would have little bearing on the system as a whole. The point is that the system does work, with the resulting hexagrams showing a direct thematic correspondence to the subject matter of the tale itself.
Don wrote:
Using an inaccurate translation, invoking Hunt's rendering as an authority while
deviating from it, and recreating the words of the text so that they conform to
an alien paradigm will shed no light on the Grimms' intentions or the design of
the stories as they shaped them. Hammer away as they might, these readings
miss the nail entirely.
I hope that have made it clear that I had mistakenly claimed to be using Hunt's text and that I did not deviate from the text which I did use, which was Taylor's. Also that I did not recreate words, and that I allowed the terms to assume the snuggest possible fit among the available catagories. There was no hammering to make the terms fit as none was needed. And most importantly, that the resulting hexagrams have opened up the tale, allowing its solution to be determined.
G.
Edited by: Gnostradamus at: 8/20/02 4:51:11 pm
|
Heidi
Unregistered User
(8/20/02 6:56:43 pm)
|
Problem with Taylor
Be careful! It is dangerous to use Taylor's translations to represent the German. The problem with Taylor is that he is well known for deviating from the Grimms' text to suit his own interpretations and his perceived desires of his audience. He is the one who changed The Frog Prince/King from the frog being thrown against a wall to the now famous kiss that breaks the spell.
Heidi
|
Don
Registered User
(8/20/02 8:23:02 pm)
|
Not Only a Problem with Taylor
G writes: ". . . it should be noted that even if you had managed to throw doubt on the validity of one of the many hexagrams I have identified, that would have little bearing on the system as a whole. The point is that the system does work . . ."
Well, there you have it. The system is not open to refutation because it's simply true, even when it's not.
My concern, however, is not to engage the I Ching, but to expose a significant flaw in what G's reading purports to reveal--namely, the Grimms' conscious design. The texts used in these readings are consistently suspect. Again, for example:
In his most recent post, G turns from Edgar Taylor's adaptation of Grimm to the rendering by another translator. This, however, does nothing to solve the fundamental problem. In fact, we go from bad to worse. From the translation by Midhnott Sol Regintroth, G quotes the following line: "'Something is wrong, did you hear the crack?' But the eldest said: 'It is a gun fired for joy, because we have got rid of our prince so quickly.'"
Unlike Taylor, who intentionally deviated from the Grimms by creatively adapting tales from their second edition of 1819, Midhnott Sol Regintroth simply gives us a defective translation, which consequently cannot be relied on to tell us much about Grimms' conscious design. The final phrase in an accurate translation should not read "because we have got rid of our prince so quickly"; rather it should read "because we'll be setting our princes free soon."
Now this may not affect the specific reading of that particular line or an I-Chingian response to that tale. What this does do, however, and what I have thought it useful to spend time trying to convey, is that a reading that purports to tell us something about the author's (i.e., Grimms'--or better: Grimm's) "conscious design" by attending to "every aspect of the tale" must--if it cannot rely on the actual text of the author--at minimum be confident of the translation's accuracy in "every aspect of the tale." In short, there is no basis at all to assert that the readings presented here tell us much about the Grimm tale.
|
Gnostradamus
Registered User
(8/21/02 12:26:03 am)
|
Not a Problem
Don wrote:
Well, there you have it. The system is not open to refutation because it's simply true, even when it's not.
Don, you have not challenged any results, only methodology. You have not demonstrated the ineffectiveness of the resulting hexagrams when applied to determine the tale's hidden significance. You have done nothing to refute the system except to note some errors in methodology. As I have demonstrated, the errors you identified made no actual difference, after correction of the errors the results were unchanged. It was good of you to point out those mistakes, but the fact remains that the resulting hexagrams and the solution to which they lead have not been directly challenged.
Don wrote:
Now this may not affect the specific reading of that particular line or an
I-Chingian response to that tale. What this does do, however, and what I have
thought it useful to spend time trying to convey, is that a reading that
purports to tell us something about the author's (i.e., Grimms'--or better:
Grimm's) "conscious design" by attending to "every aspect of the tale" must--if
it cannot rely on the actual text of the author--at minimum be confident of the
translation's accuracy in "every aspect of the tale." In short, there is no basis at
all to assert that the readings presented here tell us much about the Grimm
tale.
Again you raise an excellent point. There remains one additional strand of significance within the tale, that of the twelve princes and their fate. This strand of significance operates on a different level from the rest of the tale. I admit that the solution to this specific strand has eluded me, but it is undoubtedly a piece in the tale's greater design.
There are two elusive sections. Concerning the one you have identified above, I noticed it before as there were differences between translations. It is good that now we have an opportunity to nail down its meaning. You are sure, right? You speak German? Good. So the other is the last line:
But the princes were bewitched for as many days as they had danced nights with the twelve.
and your translation from above:
It is a gun fired for joy, because we'll be setting our princes free soon.
So these are two pieces of extraneous data, which would, no doubt, deepen our understanding of the tale if their significance were known. To be honest, I was trying to sweep these two clues under the carpet, but you once again called me out. Good show!
Be that as it may, the existence of these two clues does not invalidate all that has gone before. The I Ching symbols exist within the text on a completely different level than the clues concerning the princes cited above. So, while the solution derived from the I Ching may not be complete, it is still the most complete to have been yet put forward.
Still, I must say that this discussion is proving most valuable. Do keep up the good work.
G.
Edited by: Gnostradamus at: 8/21/02 12:22:57 pm
|
Lotti
Unregistered User
(8/21/02 1:15:00 pm)
|
No offence meant, but...
Sorry people,
but I have to say that this discussion is getting on my nerves... I have to agree with Midori, Don, Jane etc.
I think Gnostradamus has found a nice and interesting idea, very creative and - obviously! - thought out in great detail. I strongly doubt, though, that it can be applied. As Jane pointed out so well, the Brothers Grimm might (!) have had access to the I ching but I doubt as well if they actually had and even if they had, if they would have used it. The brothers Grimm were interested in all German literature and folk tales. If they edited the tales they collected, then because they wanted them to conform to their moral standards and to "Germanize" them, as Jane called it. They were - out of political reasons - interested in collecting all things German, in conserving them and making Germans aware of their cultural background and of the unity of all German-speaking people. This is not the horrid nationalism of the 20th century Nazis but the "Romantic Nationalism" of the 19th century with the Napoleonic Wars in the past, a huge number of German states in the present and the Prussian Empire looming in the future. An Asian Oracle does not fit into the picture.
Sorry, but no, I don't think so.
Regards, and no offence meant!
Lotti
|
Gnostradamus
Registered User
(8/21/02 3:31:42 pm)
|
Leibniz, the I Ching, and the Brothers Grimm
Dear Jane,
You wrote:
G--I, too, had given up on these discussions because of the very points that Midori and Heidi have raised.
I understand.
You wrote:
Now you bring in history on a slant and that makes me interested anew in these discussions.
Do you have proof--besides the fact that some Jesuits knew the I Ching--that the Grimms used it? Now THAT would be interesting. There has been much written lately about the methodology used by the Grimms (see Zipes et al) and I don't recall mention of the I Ching. And given their strong desire to Germanize everything, I wonder if they would have considered any such "foreign" influence.
G writes:
Proof? No. I have only the texts themselves. Well that's not exactly true. Here is what I have.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1642-1716) was a German philosopher, mathematician, historian and linguist. He founded the Bradendurg Scientific Society in 1700 which would later be renamed Berlin Academy. The Grimm brothers became members of the academy in 1840.
Leibniz lived a century before the Grimm brothers, yet his work on language, such as Collectanea Etymologica, served as the basis of their own work in linguistics. In 1710 Leibniz's first Academy publication was titled, "Brevis designatio meditationum de originibus gentium ductis potissimum ex indicio linguarum" (Brief description of ideas on the origin of nations, best derived from what languages tell us). In 1851, Jacob Grimm's "Über den Ursprung der Sprache" (On the Origin of Language), was published by the Academy as well. So we have considerable overlap between the linguistic interests of both Leibniz and the Grimms.
As you no doubt are aware, Leibniz was not famous just for his work in languages. In 1675 he discovered differential and integral calculus, though there was some controversy as to whether he or Newton was the inventor. Leibniz also discovered binary notation. He wrote about his discovery to Father Bouvet, a jesuit missionary in China. Bouvet sent back a copy of the I Ching. Leibniz was quite shocked. The Chinese had beat him by thousands of years. In 1705 he wrote "Explication de l'arithmétique binaire" where he identified binary numbers with the I Ching.
Leibniz practically introduced the I Ching to the learned in Europe. He also formed Germany's first scientific academy, based on the English Royal Society. He was interested in the roots of language with an eye towards a universal language.
As the Grimms were the first modern linguists in methodology, together with Franz Bopp, they worked in Leibniz's shadow. There can be no doubt that they were more than familiar with his work on language. As to the I Ching, it must be noted that Leibniz was also interested in the work of Raymond Lull. Lull created a system of knowledge based on concentric disks of card mounted on a central axis. Words or symbols would be written on these disks so that by turning the disks one can arrive at a combination of results.
By turning the disks you can arrive at one story, spin the wheels and the elements have been shuffled, giving you a whole new story, the old familiar elements rearranged.
It was thought that with such wheels all knowledge could be laid open. In actual fact such wheels could be used to decode only those texts which were written utilizing identical wheels. If the receiving party doesn't have access to such a wheel then the text cannot be decoded. So if such a code were employed it would require that the key be widely available yet not conspicuous. One has to hide the key somewhere people will not think to look. At the same time one has to ensure that the key will not disappear before it has been used to decode the text. So the key must be durable, must have staying power. Something with classic status. Something already ancient.
The Grimms had the opportunity, they had the required skill, as to motive, there was that as well. They were scholars, folklorists, and teachers to the end. But their lessons are perhaps deeper than you are willing to give them credit for.
G.
Edited by: Gnostradamus at: 8/21/02 3:37:02 pm
|
Jane Yolen
Unregistered User
(8/21/02 10:54:12 pm)
|
Hmmmm
The Grimms may have known about the I Ching--that's a pretty interesting nargument--but I think it a big mistake to leap from there to saying they used it directly in their formal work.
I know a bit about the I Ching and Tarot and Divination by Intestines. I also know a bit about Seances, Morris Dances,
Kabbalah and the Bible. Fascinating stuff all. But it does not drive my writing, though I may borrow bits or even write stories in which the stuff actually works.
I think you are confusing an interest in a fad with methodology.
Jane
|
|
