Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
On the other hand, and in no way defending Singer here, what’s wrong with approaching a text from a different viewpoint? I am not a fan of this reading because to me the GA is about slavery. But it is pretty striking in its casual cruelty to animals as well.
Of course one may read the work however they want; the author is very much dead. But may I suggest that the book is, in fact, about Isis? Lucius opens the main story frame looking for supernatural power and in the end by a wholly unexpected route, finds it.
The repeated motifs of transformation and deception set up the truth-behind-reality reveal of Isis (at once many goddesses in the text) and the repeated corruption and abuses of power likewise set of the perfection of Isis' blessing.
And it's hard not to notice that all of the post-donkey-ification insert tales involve troubled marriages - suspicious, jealous and faithlessly spouses. That motif doesn't seem accidental and of course it neatly sets up the narrative's perfect couple, Isis and Osiris.
Yes, you’re absolutely right, and that’s how I read the GA when I studied with K. Bradley. That’s why I said “to me” - I just find the text more interesting in thinking about what it reveals about marginalized beings, animal and human.
I use bits of it that way in my teaching - 'here is a slice of life narrative focused on regular workers, enslaved people, women, etc. in the Roman world rather than just elites.'
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
