No sexual component is implied in their relationship, but go find me a more loving relationship in sacred literature. Highly instructive is the treatment of a strong love between men as perfectly boringly ordinary. I had no faith for it to rock, but it might rock a religious person's sacred book fantasy pretty hard. It's a slog to read, like the Bible, but it's fascinating if kept to smaller doses. My Review: A whole bunch of the Old Testament is lifted from this book. Well, whatever, not me writin' the story, so off goes Gilgamesh to have more adventures. Grief, in my extensive experience, makes one want oblivion, not eternity. Which, frankly, makes not one whit of sense. Gilgamesh's grief, to his peoples' relief, sends him on a quest for immortality. She gets her knickers in a twist and decides that, if he's gonna be *that* way about it, he's not gonna have his boy-toy either! THEN the boys do the colossally stupid thing of stealing Ishtar's bull, and it's lights out for Enkidu. It is **NEVER** a good idea to turn down nookie from a goddess. Gilgamesh learns this when he royally screws up by refusing to screw goddess Ishtar because he's busy having fun with Enkidu. No one is allowed to be too happy for too long. (Yes, that's right, a man.) Gilgamesh falls so in love with Enkidu, and has such big fun playing around and exploring the world and generally raising hell with Enkidu that his people are left alone to get on with.whatever it was that they weren't allowed to do before. The gods, hearing the cries of his oppressed people, send Gilgamesh a companion, Enkidu. The Book Report: Evil King Gilgamesh is hatefully cruel to the citizens of Uruk, his kingdom. I’d love to see how others have investigated his role in the story.BkC2) THE EPIC OF GILGAMESH: Not sorry I read it, but what a slog. To me, it also adds further weight to the moment when Utnapishtim tells his wife “man is deceitful, he will deceive you” - it takes one to know one.
For Gilgamesh, the folly with the plant is what finally drives home acceptance of mortality.
For the shipwright, it might have made his final day a good one before the flood. In both cases Utnapishtim seems to give another person false hope.
Hopefully the local university has Pryke’s book too!Ī further question: do you know of any analysis over the character of Utnapishtim you can point me to? It strikes me that Utnapishtim is a master deceiver: he grants his shipwright his palace knowing he will drown in it later he points Gilgamesh to the plant in Ea’s domain, likely knowing that a path to immortality in the trickster god’s realm will end poorly (granted, it is a bit more ambiguous if this is a deception). Do you feel that Foster’s supersedes Andrew George’s edition, or is it worthwhile to hold onto both? (I ask because I’m within the returns period for George’s book, buying two translations weeks apart might be a bit excessive). So is there anything more recent than Andrew George’s translation (which turns 20 this year!) incorporating the more recently discovered pieces of the story?Īlternatively, what are the best journal articles to read about developments on the story for a layperson/non-assyriologist like myself? The modern versions make clear that new pieces of the story are being discovered all the time, and the In Our Time Gilgamesh episode from 2016 makes mention of recent new finds (without actually expanding on what they are though). Of them, I know the first is outdated (although some parts of the translation are still superb), the second is of high scholarly quality and the third is very much a version and not a translation (the author even positions himself as a new Sin-leqi-unninni) and should be enjoyed as its own piece of literature. I’m slightly obsessed with the Epic of Gilgamesh and own it in 3 translations already, including the 1960 Nancy Sandars translation, the 2003 (republished) Andrew George edition and the 2004 Stephen Mitchell version.
0 kommentar(er)
