.

"Care" is a perfectly good English word...I find no equivalent word in the Greek. μέλω (melow) is translated as care, but isn't quite right. The lexicon has it as, "to be an object of care." — tim wood

From my pocket Oxford Classical Greek Dictionary: Care as a noun ( anxious thought) - φροντίς

For my own purposes I remind myself that I have no interest in translating Greek but instead being able to read it. That means trying to "listen" and to hear/read/understand as would an ancient Greek — tim wood

Yes. I'm not interested in providing translations! As you know, to be able to read and listen requires you first to know the alphabet and its sounds. Then to see and hear the words in sentences, short passages. So, there is a need to translate if you want to understand the meaning rather than just the sounds.

The Greeks wrote - obviously - but their language is essentially an aural experience. You may remember trying to learn rules for accenting - and who cares? - and the modern approach is to ignore them. But dawned on me something no textbook ever told: that the accents govern rhythm, thus the percussive quality itself of the language conveying and signaling meaning. — tim wood

OMG. Yes. It's all coming back to me now! I remember the frustration. And then, the search for audio materials. They were few and far between. I don't know why but I hadn't realised the relationship between the dreaded 'accents' and poetic rhythms. Now I do, thank you! :sparkle:

In Homer, fate is the timing of a mortal's death. It has a role in the fortunes of the gods but not the absolute closure experienced by mortal life. I think the original idea is important to absorb before looking at how the work got broken up into parts. — Paine

OK. I'm turning to Homer for a bit. I found a new translation by Emily Wilson who was the first woman to translate The Odyssey into English.

The classicist and author Natalie Haynes talks to her about what the epic poem can tell us today.

Natalie Haynes: Your new book is a propulsive read quite separately from what an excellent translation I think it is. It is going to drag people through it, because it is an action movie, isn't it, in parts, The Iliad? Things really happen, and they happen at speed... — BBC Culture - The Iliad - How modern readers get this epic wrong

Emily's website includes her pronunciation guide. You can scroll down to hear a Greek snippet from the Iliad: https://www.emilyrcwilson.com/pronunciation-guide
Sounds scary!

Here's something a bit more sombre. Listen to and read the text at the same time:

Homer, Iliad 1.1–16 , read in Greek by Gregory Nagy
Citation: 1997. “Homer, Iliad 1.1–16 , read in Greek by Gregory Nagy.” Cambridge, MA: Department of the Classics, Harvard University. — Harvard Classics - Homer, Iliad 1.1-16 Read in Greek by Gregory Nagy

This from the OU is pretty good.

9 Listening to Homer
Knowing the sounds of ancient Greek, in addition to helping you pronounce Greek words accurately, also helps you to appreciate the rhythms of Greek poetry. Greek verse, unlike English-language poetry, does not rely on stress patterns and rarely contains rhyme.

To experience what a poetic performance might have sounded like, listen to this recreation of the opening of the Iliad, sung to the lyre. — OpenLearn - Getting started on ancient Greek Session 2: Sounds9 Listening to Homer

I asked earlier what Plato might have listened to. Well, d'oh! Homer - of course :roll:

@Paine - I look forward to hearing more. What do you consider the best translation of the Iliad?
Anyone? A free online version preferred.

In the story of Er, the diamon is chosen/assigned before birth. Its job is to make sure the individual life follows the pattern selected/assigned. If a former human decides to become a hippopotamus, the pattern will differ along with the constraints needed for that life to endure (as long as that life lasts). A different diamon will need to be brought on board to cover the action. — Paine

:smile: Interesting to imagine the different patterns in the lives of animals...wild, caged or tamed.
I thought it would be the same daimon - multilingual, able to adapt to whatever. Seems not.

The experiences of the soul are seen through a "mechanism" of life coming into being. The souls may be immortal but the work of each daimon is complete when Atropos cuts the thread. — Paine

I am puzzled by this. When did Atropos cut the thread? It seemed to me that she was part of the spinning. The daimon continued to be 'the guardian of the life who fulfils what has been chosen'.

From Horan's 620e:

“Now, once all of the souls had chosen their lives, they went up to Lachesis in the allotted order, and she sent them on their way, with the daimon that each had chosen as the guardian of the life, 620E who fulfils what has been chosen. The guardian first led the soul to Clotho to ratify the fate it had chosen, as allotted beneath her hand as she turned the revolving spindle. Once the fate had been confirmed, the guide led it on again to Atropos and her spinning, to make the web of destiny unalterable. From there it went, inexorably, beneath the throne of Necessity,

If the relationship between a soul and its daimon is over at the end of each life, that underlines a register of personal experience that does not survive death. This aspect makes the Er story differ from the other mythos Plato puts forward. This makes me wonder if Book 10 is a focus of Aristotle's criticism of Plato's view of nature. — Paine

It is not clear to me that the relationship is severed at death. Where does it say this in Book 10?

***

As a personification of fate, Atropos, along with her sisters, represents a fundamental aspect of Greek mythology. They embody the Daemones, spirits of fate who ensure the natural order of events, from the moment of birth to the finality of death. Their role is not just crucial but also revered and feared, as they hold sway over the destinies of both mortals and gods.' — Atropos - The Final Fate Who Severs the Thread of Life

[emphasis added]

So, I'm still confused. The fates are also daimons?

Continuing upon the theme of Book 10 as a kind of peace treaty with the poets after struggling against them in the earlier books, Aristophanes shows how common was the idea of visiting the land of the dead as a literary device: — Paine

Grateful for the return to poetry and the chosen passage.

he passed over option of "Plain of Oblivion" is the same Greek phrase used by Plato, suggesting he is working with an established story line and combining them with others. — Paine

Yes. I wonder if @Jamal would consider this a 'literary easter egg'?

I think care lies at the core. So, 'carelessness' seems to be negative.
— Amity
Two cents' worth here. There are times when ancient Greek words cannot be correctly understood through what seem English equivalents. (And I suppose the same can be said for any two different languages.) [...]

This doesn't solve any problems. At best it relocates the problem from to make sense of English translations to trying to understand the Greek itself. As if trying to decide which path to take at a fork in the woods. One path seeming easy and open and clear, the English translation(s); the other narrow, overgrown, somewhat hidden and difficult. The easy way eventually leading to error, the hard way being the right way. The trouble with the hard way being that it can be hard, and maybe a person doesn't make it to the end. — tim wood

Thank you, tim, for joining the discussion. I find it fascinating to read how translators decide to decode ancient works so that modern readers can understand them, as far as possible.

A long time ago, I made an attempt to learn Ancient Greek. I thought this would help me to read and evaluate the English translation(s). What I learned was that even simple words, sentences and texts are challenging and difficult.

It made me appreciate the years, if not decades, of work that it can take for professional translators to produce their best work possible. There is also collaboration with past and present authors/interpreters.
How best to approach it. There is no easy way. What matters is that the reader engages with Plato and gets the best sense, appreciation and understanding of his message. Each reader has different aims, aesthetics and will prefer one style over another, given their time, energy and intellect.

Setting out, I said I would stick with Reeve's translation. That sounded dogmatic but it was so I could focus on one, rather than be confused. However, I was open to other interpretations, as always. I have gained much by participating in this discussion. Still puzzling on...

There is nothing 'easy, open and clear' about English translation(s) - for their authors or readers.
And that, I think, is what Plato intended.

I've just finished reading the Foreword, Introduction and Beginnings of Horan's The Dialogues of Plato. The translation recommended by @Fooloso4.

Beginnings
Over the sixteen-year duration of this undertaking, the translation approach has evolved and refined. [...]
As my confidence and competence grew, I believe that I unconsciously adopted a method that Schleiermacher, another great translator of Plato, describes in his seminal essay On the Different Methods of Translating. Here he subordinates the popular designation of translations as being either ‘faithful’ translations or ‘free’ translations, to a division that is more relevant to philosophic works. He writes:

Either the translator leaves the writer in peace as much as possible and moves the reader toward him; or he leaves the reader in peace as much as possible and moves the writer toward him.[2]

If I were to attempt to capture the overall aspiration of these translations, I would say that they aim to move the reader toward Plato rather than leaving the reader in peace by adjusting the writings of Plato, and his associated language, to conform with modern expectations. A few simple examples of the translation of key words may help to explain my intention... — Platonic Foundation - Introduction by David Horan

There is more than this. I've been inspired by what I've read in the Foreword and Introduction.
I think it's time to move on and not get stuck in the mud.
To get over a sticky patch and to progress...to make it to the end. I think it most worthwhile.
Will you be joining in the fun?

Do you really expect me to wade through all of that? Not gonna happen.
Perhaps edit to make important points stand out?
As it is, I can't see anything to make me change my mind. Too much clutter.

What do you think is the purpose - at this spot - if its meaning is 'heedless' or similar?
— Amity

We can avoid being heedless by keeping to our proper measure in all things. Determining what that is has something to do with knowing who we are, which includes knowing who or what we are not. — Fooloso4

I'm returning to this. You are right. However, this purpose is at a different level. That of Plato's or Socrates' overall aim in story-telling. Through the Dialogues. It is a rhetorical context. Crafting a message.
To persuade that it is better to consume and consider wisely and carefully. And so on.

I am viewing this in its literary context. The perspective of the individual souls in the Myth of Er.
The need to drink from the river of Lethe as a way to progress, without care or anxiety, to a new life as a new-born. To blankly go where they haven't been before. Well, as far as they know...

I agree that in general, there's a need for balance - 'keeping to a proper measure' - to achieve wellbeing.
However, here at the river, there is no regulating vessel with which the souls can measure the water.

All souls (human or animal) who drink, forget. Perhaps some remember more in their next life according to the amount imbibed. But that is speculation.

Drinking from the river, in this context or circumstance, does not necessarily mean that they will avoid being heedless in the next life.

Time for a break and cuppa tea. With milk and no sugar. Thanks for the exchange of views :cool:

New beginnings. Here comes the Sun. Hope, happiness and freedom. In music. I know this is not to everyone's taste but I felt the need. :sparkle:

The lyrics of George Harrison

speak of the sun breaking through the horizon and the resulting feelings of warmth and happiness. The song’s infectious melody adds an extra layer of positivity, amplifying its overall feel-good vibe.

The Beatles - Here Comes The Sun (2019 Mix)

I wonder what Plato or Socrates listened to... :chin:
Hmmm...Hymns?

As already mentioned, I think the meaning matters as to the best fit in the context and circumstances. — Amity

I think we need to consider "context" as the entire work, "The Republic". This is what I said earlier, we look at the whole, and try to see how the part fits into the whole, and this is how we ought to understand, or interpret, that part. — Metaphysician Undercover

Yes. I understood what you said earlier and have not forgotten. There was no need to repeat. I agree that it is of benefit to read the Republic as a whole. It can also be read in context with the other Dialogues and what Plato is trying to achieve. What is his overall message. His purpose.

However, I am where I am. And persuaded to stay. Encouraged by @Fooloso4 to discuss 'ideas and issues that arise in the part of the dialogue we are reading'. Asking questions of self and others. Interacting in good faith and hope for an improved understanding.

There are contexts within contexts within contexts. That reminds me of the whorl of the spindle of necessity and its nestings. Perhaps I am on a different planet!

The context I am referring to is the literary context. It is just the situation where an event takes place, and any description or statement is given. Involving characters and views. The souls arriving at the river Lethe in the Myth of Er.

Now, in the situation described by the myth of Er, the people are dying, so the circumstance is one of unhealthiness. I believe it is better to consider them dying than dead, because Er managed to come back from this near death experience to tell the story. And, since it is a circumstance of unhealthy souls, the words are best understood to have bad connotations. So these words, "forgetfulness", "heedlessness", or "carelessness", are all best understood as the bad passions which are completely extinguishing the mind's rule over the body, and this will result in death — Metaphysician Undercover

That is an interesting perspective. The circumstance is not of people dying. The majority are souls about to return in another life. Human or animal. They have no physical body. Er's soul seems to have departed his body on the cusp between life and death. Just as the river can be seen as a border to cross. He is there in the Myth as an observer to return and tell the story, of the Myth.

It does not follow that the words are 'best understood' as having bad or negative connotations. Or as 'bad passions' which do as you suggest.

I could zoom in a bit more. However, I think I need to contemplate on 'carelessness'.
Thanks to @Paine for showing patience and persevering with this.

Earlier I asked @Fooloso4:
What is the message from either Plato or Socrates?
To be good, to care, to think, to be wise, to be just, to study and practise philosophy?
Does knowing ourselves save us from ourselves?

To which he replied: Yes, all of the above.

I think care lies at the core. So, 'carelessness' seems to be negative.

However, there are different ways to see 'carelessness'. As 'free from care' - having no worries, problems or anxieties. I can accept this as being necessary and welcome for the souls about to start a new life. They don't want to worry or about events in the past, present or future.

Drinking from the waters of the river Lethe can induce this state.
Of carelessness or forgetfulness. Of oblivion. To become a newly born with a blank slate...

Thanks to you and everyone for a most stimulating conversation :sparkle:

So who will volunteer to start one on Plato's Republic? :wink: :monkey:

It is Plato.He uses these two different words. — Fooloso4

It's late and I'm tired, so I should probably leave this.

When I asked if it was the translator, I didn't mean the English translators.
I was wondering about any of the Greek translations. How many versions are there of the 'original' Greek text? Who were the publishers?

How do we know those words weren't changed over the centuries?

think Plato intends for us to try and work though the connection. — Fooloso4

You know Plato better than I do. He certainly makes heavy work for us.
I am not convinced it is worth it, for me. I will read it on my terms. Probably away from here. Even it is different from your interpretation. I will stick with the one that makes sense to me.

Doing certain things will cause me trouble and pain. If I do them anyway I am being heedless or careless or unmindful. We often fail to learn from our mistakes. Have we forgotten what happened in the past? — Fooloso4

Trying to read Book 10 is causing me trouble and pain. As well as some degree of pleasure. I do it anyway and don't consider myself in such negative terms.

If I fail to learn from mistakes, it doesn't mean I have forgotten what has happened in the past. It means I'm pretty stupid but can still be 'just' or a good person towards others. I give myself a chance to recover and persevere, as far as I am able.

I don't believe in heaven, hell or rebirth. I am showing patience and tolerance in order to understand but there are limits. I do learn from mistakes. It is one way to grow and progress. Trial and error.

Right now, I am using a cost/benefit analysis to work out whether it is in my best interests to continue with this 'argument' or to do as Paine wisely suggested. To agree to disagree. Sure sounds good to me.

It explains why we do not remember what happened. Er remembers because he did not drink from the river. — Fooloso4

Forgetting is necessary if we are to start again. In a new form. Human or animal.
A multitude of past lives would get in the way.

We can avoid being heedless by keeping to our proper measure in all things. — Fooloso4

Can we? Can a frog avoid being heedless if it doesn't drink the 'right' amount.
Even if that were known? We are assuming a rebirth as a human.

Determining what that is has something to do with knowing who we are, which includes knowing who or what we are not. — Fooloso4

A problem for frog spawn, tadpoles or froglets.
Knowing. Forgetting. Remembering. Not always possible.
The scenario is unfair and unjust.
So much for Plato.
Good for some. For others, not so much. A matter of taste as much as intellect.

Good night :yawn:

Plato uses two different words λήθη (621c) and ἀμέλητος (621a) when referring to the same thing, the river. — Fooloso4

Is it Plato or the translator?

λήθη, forgetfulness, and ἀμέλητος, heedlessness, carelessness, or unmindfulness, do not mean the same thing but there is an overlap in meaning, — Fooloso4

Where is the overlap in meaning? I can imagine 'forgetfulness' as being separate and yet together with the others. More like being on a spectrum? With a range of values. But still that is pushing it.

We need to be clear on what is happening at the river Lethe.

This is one definition of Lethe: a river in Hades whose water when drunk made the souls of the dead forget their life on earth. Also, in Classical Greek, the word lethe (λήθη) literally means "forgetting", "forgetfulness".

What do you think is the purpose of its meaning 'forgetfulness' - in its place just before the re-birth?
What do you think is the purpose - at this spot - if its meaning is 'heedless' or similar?
A clear and simple explanation would be appreciated in relation to Book 10 and nowhere else.

Lethe and Aletheia have the same root. We might think of Lethe as having forgotten the truth, and Aletheia as remembering or recollecting the truth. There is, however, not a single truth but overlapping truths at issue. The truth of what has happened, the truth of the soul, the truth about yourself. — Fooloso4

I think I can understand and appreciate this perspective. The overlapping 'truths' of the past, present and imaginings of the future. Through the lens of life and death. Applicable to self, its narrative journey or mythology. How we experience and try to understand the world (or underworld) and our place in it. Physically and mentally. The forgetting and the remembering. The loss and recovery. The cycle.
The cosmic rhythm and change. How death shapes life. :death: :flower:

Nevertheless, the root 'lethe' means 'forgetting or forgetfulness'.
Why twist it with the addition of 'truth' to mean something else?
What is the problem with accepting the simple version?

[Something Inside] So Strong - Labi Siffre



The higher you build your barriers
The taller I become
The further you take my rights away
The faster I will run
You can deny me
You can decide to turn your face away
No matter, 'cause there's

[chorus] Something inside so strong
I know that I can make it
Though you're doing me wrong, so wrong
You thought that my pride was gone
Oh no, something inside so strong
Oh, something inside so strong

The more you refuse to hear my voice
The louder I will sing
You hide behind walls of Jericho
Your lies will come tumbling
Deny my place in time
You squander wealth that's mine
My light will shine so brightly
It will blind you, 'cause there's

[chorus]

Brothers and sisters
When they insist we're just not good enough
When we know better
Just look 'em in the eyes and say
"We're gonna do it anyway"
We're gonna do it anyway

[chorus]
Brothers and sisters
When they insist we're just not good enough
When we know better
Just look 'em in the eyes and say
"We're gonna do it anyway"
We're gonna do it anyway
We're gonna do it anyway
We're gonna do it anyway

Because there's something inside so strong (something inside so strong)
I know that I can make it (I can make it)
Though you're doing me, so wrong
You thought that my pride was gone
Oh no (oh no), something inside so strong

Something inside so strong
I know that I can make it (make it, make it)
Though you're doing me, so wrong (doing me wrong)
You thought that my pride was gone
Oh no (oh no), something inside so strong
Oh, something inside so strong
Oh, something inside so strong
Ooh-ooh, something inside so strong

Songwriters: Labi Siffre. For non-commercial use only.

I don't know if I'll be posting anything here anyway. — Jamal

That's what I thought. Our loss. Weeping uncontrollably :sad: :broken: :cry:
Novels are good for the soul :halo:

can't do everything at once, no matter how much you badger me. — Jamal

:lol: So, you will be getting back on the Book 1 horse soon, then ?
Missing ya' :groan:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15484/poets-and-tyrants-in-the-republic-book-i/p1

We will have to agree to disagree that there can only be one meaning: per you saying: "I see only one river and one meaning or understanding, given the context." — Paine

Perhaps we need a negotiator? Haven't heard anything from @Jamal or any previous participants for a while... @Benkei @Srap Tasmaner ?

I am not saying I am correct. It is my interpretation.There are clearly other interpretations of the reading, no?

My beef with the translators is that a quality of the stream is overlooked in the interest of giving it only one function. — Paine

What is the quality of the stream?

In the context of the story of Er, however, the stream is known in our lives by its effects. — Paine

What do you mean by this?
If the function of the river Lethe is to forget any previous life, then how do we know its effects?

Why would the function of drinking its water be to provide 'carelessness' or 'heedlessness' ?

What is the connection between heedlessness and forgetfulness?
— Fooloso4

I would not attach too much specific importance to these words. — Metaphysician Undercover

I think it is important to note the words used in translation and interpretation.
As already mentioned, I think the meaning matters as to the best fit in the context and circumstances. I won't rehash my view again.

These are generally emotion based concepts, and the words for feelings are used in a variety of ways... — Metaphysician Undercover

I'm not sure what you mean by 'emotion based concepts'.
Is it that one can be seen as 'bad', the other 'good'?
So, I prefer 'forgetfulness' to 'heedlessness' or 'carelessness'. Other translators or readers prefer 'carelessness' which in my view has a negative connotation.

The Lethe is a symbol in Greek mythology. Not just a word.
So, it is important to understand its meaning, in the context of Book 10.

The words 'thirst' and 'hunger' are interesting to consider.

Don't they show both a need and a desire?
They are signs or symptoms of both body and mind, arguably on the verge of unhappiness, dehydration or malnutrition should they not be properly assessed and action taken. This has nothing to do with 'virtue', rather practical wisdom.

If the hunger is for more than is necessary then I agree that can be problematic in terms of morality. Greed and Gluttony being 'vicious'.

This combines all of Plato's 3 parts of the soul: reason, spirited emotion and appetitive desire.

It seems that reason should be given the higher power but is this 'just'?
Isn't desire one of the main motivating factors. The desire to be healthy and well.
And fear - or concern - is the other. It is prudent not to die, if it can be helped.

The worry of excess is understandable. It could be argued that there can be an excess of cold, objective reason to the detriment of the spirited soul.

Passion and learning in the arts and literature are still being judged as having lower value than philosophy.

Following the discussion of Book 10, Plato's Republic: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/940663
and exploring Greek Mythology: https://mythicalencyclopedia.com/lethe/

Lethe, the River of Forgetfulness - the Chronotype project

Having fun in Book 10 of Plato's Republic. Yes, I am! :cool:

Discussing the river Lethe - and its meaning. Is it about forgetfulness or carelessness? This has led to an exploration of Greek mythology. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/940663

Embedded in a fascinating site which shows 'Lethe' in different contexts, including Art and Music:
https://mythicalencyclopedia.com/lethe/
The sound of Lethe.

Lethe, the River of Forgetfulness · Chronotope Project · Jeffrey Ericson Allen

It is two different Greek words. I meant to say that with my first comment on the passage and now realize that I did not introduce enough background to make that clear. The wiki is correct when it says: "Also known as the Amelēs potamos (river of unmindfulness)" — Paine

Thank you for the clarification. The words can be synonyms, the change of meaning is a choice of the translator. The introduction of ambiguity is not helpful. English synonyms for 'forgetfulness', depending on context: https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/forgetfulness.html

The name of a river.
— Amity

I wonder if this aspect is why the two separate meanings got collapsed into one (by some). The reference to the "plain of Lethe" is not given primacy over the "river of carelessness" in the text. The different meanings are related to their effects. Looking at how the mythology is developed; the mapping of the underworld follows the story of the origins of the quality being described. — Paine

Perhaps. But I don't see that 2 different meanings have been collapsed into one. As explained, I see only one river and one meaning or understanding, given the context.

Why would the plain of Lethe be given primacy? Isn't it only part of the journey description and a reason for the 'thirst'? A barren place of hot desolation? 'through burning and choking and terrible heat, for it was empty of trees and earthly vegetation' 621a.
Perhaps in the contrast we can see the river as some kind of oasis. A place of relief. From whence the souls can refresh and rid themselves of the hellishness they have suffered? Forgetting.

Yes. I agree it is interesting to consider the mythology and the mapping.

I wonder if the insistence of the river with a name comes from poets such as Virgil where the role of Lethe is located in the afterlife (and pre-life) and has no role amongst the living. — Paine

Why do you use the word 'insistence'?
I found an interesting site which references and describes the Lethe in different contexts. Symbolism and significance. Literature - Modern Interpretations - Art and Music. Philosophical perspectives.

Lethe: The Spirit and River of Forgetfulness

Lethe has been referenced in many classical literary works. In the Odyssey, Homer describes Lethe as a river that the dead drink from to forget their former lives. The poet Virgil also mentions Lethe in his epic poem Aeneid, where he describes the river as a way for the dead to forget their past lives before being reincarnated. Additionally, in Plato’s Phaedo, Socrates describes death as a release from the body and a return to the realm of pure thought, where the soul can be purified and drink from the river of forgetfulness. [...]

The river itself is often described as having a milky-white color and is said to be shallow enough to wade through. The water is believed to have a sweet taste, and those who drink from it are said to experience complete forgetfulness. The river is also known as the “river of unmindfulness” and is believed to wash away all memories of the past. — Mythical Encyclopedia - Lethe - The Spirit and River of Forgetfulness -

[emphasis added]

Here, 'unmindfulness' means forgetfulness - a state of being unaware. This is different from its other meaning of 'carelessness' or 'heedlessness'.
https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/unmindfulness.html

Edit: Unfortunately, there is no link to the Phaedo reference. Although, I note this:

We should not forget that in the Phaedrus there is the plain of Aletheia or truth. (248b) — Fooloso4

The two words, 'forgetting' and 'carelessness' are both clearly in the account. I fault the translations that fail to convey the difference between the two. I am curious why it is ignored by many translators. The water can have two properties at the same time. — Paine

Yes. Thanks. I know the 2 different English words are used. However, I'm not clear if there are 2 different Greek words. Or if it is one Greek word with different meanings. Grateful for further help.

By way of description, there is mention of the 'river of carelessness': τὸν Ἀμέλητα ποταμόν.

Ἀμέλητα (amelta) is defined as neglectful, heedless, etcetera. — Paine

What does 'etcetera' include?

I don't have the Ancient Greek translation. Is there only one Greek translation?
What is the Ancient Greek for 'forgetfulness'?

Heedlessness is Horan's translation. Bloom translates it as carelessness. The Greek is ἀμέλητος It means, according to Liddell and Scott. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon, not to be cared for.

See the note in the Perseus translation you linked to:
2. In later literature it is the river that is called Lethe.

The later literature calls the river of ἀμέλητος the river of Lethe (Λήθη) — Fooloso4

Thanks for clarifying the translation of the word ἀμέλητος.
Is that the single Greek word used with different English meanings.
Is it the same as the Greek word Ἀμέλητα ?

I did note the river is later called Lethe. But that didn't tell me much. Not sure whether I can rely on this from wiki:

In Greek mythology, Lethe (/ˈliːθiː/; Ancient Greek: Λήθη Lḗthē; Ancient Greek: [lɛ̌ːtʰɛː], Modern Greek: [ˈliθi]) was one of the rivers of the underworld of Hades. Also known as the Amelēs potamos (river of unmindfulness), the Lethe flowed around the cave of Hypnos and through the Underworld where all those who drank from it experienced complete forgetfulness. The river was often associated with Lethe, the personification of forgetfulness and oblivion, who was the daughter of Eris (Strife).

In Classical Greek, the word lethe (λήθη) literally means "forgetting", "forgetfulness".[1] — Wiki - Lethe

And now, I read of the Lethe as known as 'river of unmindfulness'.
How confusing :chin:

Paine:

I fault the translations that fail to convey the difference between the two. I am curious why it is ignored by many translators. The water can have two properties at the same time.

I understand that a river, or the water in a river, can have at least 2 different physical properties. However, this concerns a single Greek word and concept. The name of a river. The meaning of the name. What idea is being conveyed.

Translators will differ as to the importance of differentiation. Depending on how they interpret the sense of the word in context.
If most go with 'river of forgetfulness', then that is what makes sense to me. It fits with my initial intuition or impression.
But I've said this before. Moving on...

The question of 'drinking too much' oblivion reminds me that the mythology of Hesiod and the Orphic mysteries have the role of Lethe set over against the role of Mnemosyne (or Memory). — Paine

I wish I had your knowledge! I had to look this up:

Mnemosyne also presided over a pool in Hades, a counterpart to the river Lethe, according to a series of 4th-century BC Greek funerary inscriptions in dactylic hexameter. Dead souls drank from Lethe so they would not remember their past lives when reincarnated. In Orphism, the initiated were taught to instead drink from the Mnemosyne, the river of memory, which would stop the transmigration of the soul [...]

Mnemosyne, on the other hand, traditionally appeared in the first few lines of many oral epic poems [8]—she appears in both the Iliad and the Odyssey, among others—as the speaker called upon her aid in accurately remembering and performing the poem they were about to recite. Mnemosyne is thought to have been given the distinction of "Titan" because memory was so important and basic to the oral culture of the Greeks that they deemed her one of the essential building blocks of civilization in their creation myth. — Wiki - Mnemosyne

Sipping the water of Mnemosyne is not given as one of the options in the Er account. That is interesting considering that Plato uses the mythos of Recollection (amnemesis) or call to mind, in different discussions of learning. That suggests to me that the role of recollection is principally the activity of the living soul. — Paine

Interesting, indeed! :up:

I wonder if Plato didn't include this as an option because he was arguing against the use of poetry?
And, yes, I did have a vague memory of Plato using recollection in the ways we learn...

In Plato's theory of epistemology, anamnesis (/ ˌænæmˈniːsɪs /; Ancient Greek: ἀνάμνησις) refers to the recollection of innate knowledge acquired before birth. The concept posits the claim that learning involves the act of rediscovering knowledge from within oneself...

Plato develops the theory of anamnesis in his Socratic dialogues: Meno, Phaedo, and Phaedrus. — Wiki - Anamnesis

I do not think Plato uses words heedlessly or carelessly. — Fooloso4

I agree. Quite the opposite. Each word counts. And it is why I wonder at the change from 'Heedlessness' to 'Forgetfulness'. When it seems clear that the purpose of the drinking from the river is to forget, rather than to become 'careless'. I think it is the word choice of the translator rather than a fault of Plato.

The 'thirst' of souls can't be physical, can it? So, a spiritual need?

***

Does knowing ourselves save us from ourselves?
— Amity

If to know yourself is to know what is and is not good for you then you are saved unless you are heedless and do things that are contrary to what is good for you. — Fooloso4

Yes. Unfortunately, it is not always known what is and is not good for us. Facts are not always facts but opinion. Science changes what we know about our body, brain, the world, the universe, everything.
And since we are human, we are not always wise or have insight about our selves and behaviour.
I don't believe we can be 'saved' from either the hell or heaven in life as bodies or souls.
Perhaps, we can turn our minds from 'madness' to relative 'sanity'.
So, we can do the best we can with the knowledge we have and the wisdom gained through life experience. That usually entails moderation or keeping a sense of balance.

Just as in the Horan translation:

He will do all this so that he is able to make his choice reasonably, between the worse 618E life and the better one, by looking to the nature of the soul, and calling the life that leads soul to become more unjust, the worse life, and the one that leads it to become more just, the better life. All other studies he will set aside, for we have seen that in life and after death this is the supreme choice. 619A

“He must go then to Hades holding to this view with an unbreakable resolve, so that even there he would not be dazzled by wealth and other such bad influences, fall in with tyrannies and activities like that, inflict a whole host of incurable evils, and experience even greater evils himself. He would decide rather that he should always choose the life that is midway between such extremes, and flee the excesses from either direction as best he can in this life and in all that is to come, 619B for that is how a human being attains the utmost happiness.

It is about attaining utmost happiness by choosing a 'happy' medium.
What concerns me is the reference to 'all other studies' being set aside.
This speaks to me of a clear and understandable bias for philosophy. And the almost obsessive focus on the degree of 'justice' of the soul, or in one's life. It doesn't seem balanced and excludes other qualities, virtues or knowledge from other areas.

***

What is a 'certain measure'?
— Amity

I am not sure. Perhaps enough so that we forget what has transpired but not so much that we forget yourself. — Fooloso4

So, it is about 'forgetfulness' not 'carelessness'.

Or are some born with it?
— Amity

Some will be born with it if they did not drink too much. — Fooloso4

Hah! Wisdom in a bottle.

***

We must pay the utmost attention to how each of us will be a seeker and student who learns and finds out, from anywhere he can, who it is who will make him capable and knowledgeable enough to choose the best possible life, always and everywhere, by distinguishing between a good life and a degenerate one.
(618 b-c) — Fooloso4

[emphasis added]

This is in contrast to the previous 'all other studies' to be 'set aside'. It is assumed that philosophy is the answer as to how to distinguish between the good and the bad. We all know the different versions of the 'truth' don't we? The continual arguments, the endless Dialogues - started by Plato. Even if we seek answers, there is no certainty. Ain't that the truth?

Behaviour once judged as 'degenerate', 'bad' or 'mad' is now better understood and treated.
Some judgements pronounced against women in particular were prejudiced.
Thinking 'hysteria'. Just the tip of the iceberg of structural injustices in society.
Plato's Republic not at all helpful...given the different interpretations and meanings used to support extreme political agendas. Mentioned previously by @Metaphysician Undercover.

Reading Plato need not preclude reading other things. In part it depends on what appeals and resonates with you. — Fooloso4

Of course we can read other things. But that is not what is advised, here, is it?
There is a continual focus on 'justice' and who can best decide the what, who, how and why.
But yes, I realise that it is not all philosophical argumentation but involves poetic narrative.
Repeated patterns and themes bring home the message. Some might call that 'brainwashing'...

I have a strange and strong sense of déjà vu :chin:

Edit #2 I found Horan makes the distinction: — Paine

Yes. I think that is the translation used earlier by @Fooloso4.

From your Jones and Preddy translation:

By way of description, there is mention of the 'river of carelessness': τὸν Ἀμέλητα ποταμόν.

Ἀμέλητα (amelta) is defined as neglectful, heedless, etcetera. I will look around for a translation that expresses this distinct usage. For now, it should be noted that two different words are in play here. — Paine

Yes. Already noted. Now we can add 'carelessness' to the mix.

It doesn't make sense to me. However, 'river of forgetfulness' does.
The question is why must they drink the water. I thought it was to forget their previous lives and also the current process of re-birth.
To start again, in a new circle of life. Without memories of any lessons learned.

Why was it important to drink a certain measure, if everyone similarly forgot their previous life experience? Or were some memories retained or 'saved' by the wise who took the correct dose?

Because of the heat and harsh conditions of the Plain of Forgetfulness it is necessary for the souls to drink from the River of Heedlessness. (621a) In his closing comments Socrates refers to the river as the river of Forgetfulness rather than the river of Heedlessness. — Fooloso4

This differs from other translations. From Reeves:

They camped, since evening was coming on, beside the river of forgetfulness, whose water no vessel can hold. All of them had to drink a certain measure of this water. But those not saved by wisdom drank more than the measure.

there they camped at eventide by the River of Forgetfulness,2 whose waters no vessel can contain. They were all required to drink a measure of the water, and those who were not saved by their good sense drank more than the measure, and each one as he drank forgot all things. — Perseus Tufts - Plato's Republic, Book 10, Section 621a

No mention of a River of Heedlessness.

What is the connection between heedlessness and forgetfulness? — Fooloso4

Why does it matter if it is the same river? The same water.

Those who are prudent are not heedless. They are made prudent by the study and practice of philosophy. — Fooloso4

Are you sure about that? Doesn't it depend on the definition?

Forgetfulness is forgetting yourself. To act heedlessly is to forget yourself. — Fooloso4

Are you sure about that? Doesn't it depend on the definition?

we can come to know ourselves as we actually are. — Fooloso4

Hmmm. The word 'actually' bothers me. It can mean 'according to one's beliefs, views or feelings'.

There is no certainty that we can be so thoroughly objective.

The mythological truth lies in recollecting and heeding the message of the story. In this way we may be saved. — Fooloso4

If there is a 'mythological truth', it can vary according to person and interpretation. Not all myths or stories are heeded or recollected. Historical myths, even if remembered, will not always 'save' people.
Whatever that means? What is the message from either Plato or Socrates?
To be good, to care, to think, to be wise, to be just, to study and practise philosophy?
Does knowing ourselves save us from ourselves?

To ask silly questions about confusing texts? Like:
If no vessel can hold the river's water, then how can it be properly measured? What is a 'certain measure'? Handfuls are of different size and capacity. Some water slipping through fingers.
And what if they drink from different parts of the river. Will some become heedless rather than forgetful? Or are they already heedless?

To be 'saved by wisdom' or 'good sense' - does it take philosophy? Or are some born with it? Re-born?
How wise is it to keep reading Plato - as opposed to any other philosophical, religious, psychological texts or works of literature? Knowledge of the sciences? How to live and be as well as possible.

I think I'll stop reading and writing about politics. It gets me nowhere fast. Before I leave:

Thanks to @Wayfarer for this post: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/940092
The latest in a 7yr discussion about Trump. More dangerous than ever. Escalating threats to his political opponents calling them 'evil'.

It doesn't seem to matter that what he says or its implications. He has his believers or 'patriots'.
He also appeals to those not in the core pack.

If they vote for him, there will be no trouble. So, will people vote for 'peace' and protection by Trump.
Will they be fooled or frightened enough. This is reminiscent of Mafia tactics. Trump being the epitome of a fascist dictator. Another promise: if they vote for him, they won't need to worry about voting again.

From the same article in Wayfarer's post:

After being asked about Mr. Trump’s suggestion of turning the military against Americans, Mr. Youngkin replied that he didn’t believe that was what the president was saying. The network, he said, was “misinterpreting and misrepresenting his thoughts.”

"I’m literally reading his quotes to you,” Mr. Tapper replied. — The New York Times

People see what they want to see.

Music on my mind. The Why rather than the What.

Yesterday, I needed a counter-balance to Death and its Aftermath.
I turned to music and Classic FM where the Barcarolle was playing. It immediately brought back memories of Mum who loved it and the Vienna concerts. It will be the 8th Anniversary of her death, soon. :flower:

Why play or listen to music? It can affect our mood and behaviour.

Then, I read of the outrage of Trump's use of it at his rallies. How he swayed to his playlist for 40 minutes. Apparently, switching away from questions after 2 people fainted due to heat.

The resort to music in place of angry, provocative rhetoric was not without its ironies. A long list of musical artists – including Celine Dion, Abba, Neil Young and Bruce Springsteen – have denounced or taken legal steps to stop the Trump campaign playing their songs at rallies.

On Tuesday, Rufus Wainright responded to Trump’s use at the Philadelphia rally of Wainwight’s cover of Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah by posting on Instagram that he was “mortified”, adding: “I’ve been supremely honored over the years to be connected with this ode to tolerance.

Witnessing Trump and his supporters commune with this music last night was the height of blasphemy.” Wainwright said before the 2016 election that he would not sing the song again unless Trump lost. — Guardian - Trump 'Let's Listen to Music' during campaign rally

Later, I watched 'Waco: the Aftermath' -

Coinciding with the 30th anniversary of the tragic events at Mt. Carmel that began on February 28, 1993, WACO: THE AFTERMATH focuses on the fallout of the Waco disaster: the trials of the surviving members of the Branch Davidian sect and the rise of homegrown terrorist, Timothy McVeigh. The five-episode limited series also provides a broader context for the escalation of the American militia movement, which foreshadows the infamous attacks of the Oklahoma City bombing and the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

The images of David Koresh, Waco and its aftermath, are disturbing to say the least.

Why is it that I see Trump in the same light. Someone who has been President and hopes to be again. A cult leader using religion and encouraging hate groups - his Proud Boys and more.

The Proud Boys is a North American all-male, far-right, neo-fascist militant organization that promotes and engages in political violence.

Domestic terrorism dancing to pop music. Seen as a Saviour by some 50% of American voters.

Amongst other things, Trump should be treated as a dangerous, domestic terrorist. He is an appeaser and fan of autocratic leaders. If he wins then he will be a tyrant. If he doesn't he will be a tyrant. All hell will break loose. To the sound of 'Hallelujah!'...

You say I took the name in vain
I don't even know the name
But if I did, well, really, what's it to you?
There's a blaze of light in every word
It doesn't matter which you heard
The holy or the broken Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah

As I understand it, what is meant by philosophy here is something different. I will have more to say on this in connection to the River of Forgetfulness. — Fooloso4

OK. :up:

I read the role of 'assignment' in this passage as meaning that much more is required for our life to happen than the initial choice. Those requirements, however, do not allow us to "blame the gods" for our choice. — Paine

:up: That makes sense.

Thank you for further explanation from places other than Book10.

The relationship between the choosing and the daimon seems to be an assignment by a daughter of Necessity:

“So when all the souls had chosen their lives, according to the draw they approached Lachesis in order and she gave each the spirit (daimon) they had chosen to escort them as protector through their lives and as fulfiller of their choices.
— ibid. 620d — Paine

Thanks. Following the process has not been easy for me. I confused the 'soul' with the new life and then the choosing of a new 'spirit' (daimon). Soul and life seem to be used interchangeably.
- see underlined bolds below.

I didn't understand the daimon 's role or how the spindle of Necessity fitted in. Also, missed the prophet as intermediary.

From Reeve's translation, 617d:

When the souls arrived, they had to go straight to Lachesis. A sort of spokesman 29 first arranged them in ranks; then, taking lots and models of lives from the lap of Lachesis, he mounted a high platform, and said:
“The word of Lachesis, maiden daughter of Necessity! Ephemeral souls. The beginning of another death-bringing cycle for mortal-kind! Your daimon will not be assigned to you by lot; you will choose him.
The one who has the first lot will be the first to choose a life to which he will be bound by necessity.
Virtue has no master: as he honors or dishonors it, so shall each of you have more or less of it. Responsibility lies with the chooser; the god is blameless.”

After saying that, the spokesman threw the lots out among them all, and each picked up the one that fell next to him—except for Er, who was not allowed. And to the one who picked it up, it was clear what number he had drawn. After that again the spokesman placed the models of lives on the
ground before them—many more of them than those who were present.

Note 29: Prophêtês: a prophet. Here in the sense of someone who speaks on behalf of a god.

[emphasis added]
I don't quite understand what is being said here of Virtue. However, this might relate to my earlier confusion: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/939791

620d When all the souls had chosen lives, in the same allotted order they went forward to Lachesis. She assigned to each the daimon it had chosen, as guardian of its life and fulfiller of its choices. This daimon first led the soul under the hand of Clotho as it turned the revolving spindle, thus ratifying the allotted fate it had chosen.
After receiving her touch, he led the soul to the spinning of Atropos, to make the spun fate irreversible. Then, without turning around, it went under the throne of Necessity. When it had passed through that, and when the others had also passed through, they all traveled to the plain of Lethe, through burning and choking and terrible heat, for it was empty of trees and earthly vegetation. — As above

[emphasis added]

I need to put the theory of reading slowly and carefully into practice. Especially here.
Even then, I welcome insight, clarification and advice from those more experienced with Plato.

What we call "the laws of nature" present us with one's "lot in life", the circumstances of one's being, and this is presented by Plato as random chance, with some sort of "necessity" lurking beneath it, which drives it. That sense of "necessity" is some how comparable, or related to the "necessity" which is "the means to an end", but the relation is not really intelligible to those people involved in that discussion because they have a primitive understanding about the laws of nature and determinist forces. — Metaphysician Undercover

[emphasis added]

Thank you for your post. Interesting to consider. The understanding of the Cosmos. How it was made intelligible by Plato.
As far as possible.

In the eponymous dialogue Timaeus he identifies two kinds of cause, intelligence and necessity, that is, Nous and Ananke. Given the earlier emphasis in the Republic on the Forms, the introduction of ananke is both surprising and significant. Here at the end we must, by necessity, begin again. Forms and their imperfect images do not tell the whole of the story. — Fooloso4

Checking out the Timaeus, I think I begin to understand:

In the Timaeus Plato presents an elaborately wrought account of the formation of the universe and an explanation of its impressive order and beauty.

The universe, he proposes, is the product of rational, purposive, and beneficent agency. It is the handiwork of a divine Craftsman (“Demiurge,” dêmiourgos, 28a6) who, imitating an unchanging and eternal model, imposes mathematical order on a preexistent chaos to generate the ordered universe (kosmos).

The governing explanatory principle of the account is teleological: the universe as a whole as well as its various parts are so arranged as to produce a vast array of good effects. For Plato this arrangement is not fortuitous, but the outcome of the deliberate intent of Intellect (nous), anthropomorphically represented by the figure of the Craftsman who plans and constructs a world that is as excellent as its nature permits it to be. — SEP - Plato's Timaeus

[ emphasis added]

So, not random but deliberate. 'Necessity' driving it. We might not be convinced by the story of a divinely created universe. However, there is no doubting the force of Plato's imaginative description. How we can enter into it; admire the images and probe its concepts. The process of philosophy is well on its way. Just what he wanted or needed. Intellect and imagination working together in dialogue.
Philosophy and poetry dancing...as one.

Escaping from Ancient Greece and Plato. To Vienna, Austria and the park of Schönbrunn Palace.
A beautiful baroque setting for summer night concerts. La magie en plein air.
Vienna Philharmonic – Offenbach: Les Contes d'Hoffmann: Barcarolle (SNC 2020)


The themes of love and beauty are from Jacques Offenbach’s opera “The Tales of Hoffman”. The opening lines set the tone:

Belle nuit, ô nuit d’amour
Souris à nos ivresses
Nuit plus douce que le jour
Ô,belle nuit d’amour!

Lovely night, oh, night of love
Smile upon our joys!
Night much sweeter than the day
Oh beautiful night of love!

https://beatcrave.com/w3/the-meaning-behind-the-song-barcarolle-from-the-tales-of-hoffman-by-offenbach/

619d He was one of those who had come down from heaven, having lived his previous life in an orderly constitution, sharing in virtue through habit but without philosophy.
Generally speaking, not the least number of the people caught out in this way were souls who came from heaven, and so were untrained in sufferings. The majority of those from the earth, on the other hand, because they had suffered themselves and had seen others doing so, were in no rush to make their choices.

This does not make sense to me. If people were in heaven, then they will already have been judged as good. Even if their virtue is through habit, it is part of their character, formed and informed by life experience and doesn't mean 'without philosophy'.
There is an assumption that they are 'untrained in sufferings'.
However, Life and others within are the trainers. No academic philosophers required. In fact, arguably, they are the least qualified.

Unlike most souls who made their choice based upon the habits of the previous life, (620a) Odysseus now chooses a life of moderation. The suggestion seems to be that although he has chosen last he is an example of someone who has attained phronesis, someone who engaged in philosophy, consistently, in a sound manner. — Fooloso4

I am not sure this is correct. Choices were made by those from heaven. Of different character and ways of thinking. Odysseus' soul made its choice, not because of unthinking habit but:

Remembering its former sufferings, it rejected love of honor, and went around for a long time looking for the life of a private individual who did his own work, and with difficulty it found one lying offsomewhere neglected by the others. When it saw it, it said that it would have done the same even if it had drawn the first-place lot, and chose it gladly.

620d.

This is a set-up to enhance the virtues of philosophy. There seems to be an assumption that the ordinary individual will not be troubled by sufferings or thoughts of being honourable. What kind of love would the ordinary person have? And how would it be regulated...if necessity or rulers required...

Plato’s concept of necessity differs from ours. What is by necessity is without nous or intellect. Necessary causes can act contrary to intelligible causes. What is fixed and unchanging cannot serve as the cause of a world of change, contingency, and chance. It should be noted how often necessity occurs in this story. The various cases helps to give us a better sense of the scope of what necessity means and what it entails — Fooloso4

I don't see where Plato's concept differs from ours. What is needed or must be done by the rulers is intelligible. Human needs are only fixed in as much as nature is fixed. If such needs (biological/erotic) are seen as bad for a city, then rules of law need to be initiated. So, needs cause change.

I didn't notice the frequency of the word 'necessity' as I read Book 10. However, I searched for it in the pdf. of the Republic.
It is mentioned 18 times, including some in the Bibliography and the name of the Goddess Necessity'.

I've just read from Book 5 458d about the breeding programme: the selection of mates. Socrates suggests both females and males are driven (naturally) by 'necessity' to have sex with one another.
He asks Glaucon if he thinks the word 'necessities' is right here. G. says they are not geometric necessities but agrees they are erotic ones.

The discussion turns to how unregulated sexual intercourse would not be a 'pious' thing in a city of happy people. And how to solve this problem by breeding humans in their prime. Mating the best to the best is good. The worst to the worst is bad. The offspring of the best to be taken away and reared by special nurses in a separate part of the city. The inferior or disabled will hide in a secret, unknown place.

All of this can only be achieved by subterfuge by the rulers. The 'drugs' of lies and deception by lottery.
All to keep the race of guardians pure.

Just as MU says:

...there is really intelligence behind the scene which creates the appearance of random chance for all those being selected from, and only a distinct class of people are privy to that information. — Metaphysician Undercover

The Myth of Er.
Here comes 25 mins of a slow and clear narration with amazing illustrations each step of the way. :fire: :100:

@Paine and others. This is mesmerising. A slow and clear narration, illustrations included. :fire:
:100: Excellent.
The Myth of Er - Plato's Republic - Book 10

Just wanted to say I respect C.D.C Reeve's translations. I prefer others for different reasons, but he is very consistent in his use of phrases. — Paine

Yes, so far I find him easy on my eyes. I'm only 'sticking' with one translation to make it easier, for me.
I appreciate other interpretations. Widens the scope for improved understanding. A joint endeavour :sparkle:

The humble beginning of this elaborate image connects this process with the techne emphasized at the beginning of Book 10, where the carpenter makes usable beds and chairs.

When the souls are choosing their future habitations, Epeius selects:

After her he saw the soul of Panopeus’ son Epeius entering the nature of a female craftworker.
— ibid. 620c — Paine

Clever work. Connecting the dots. Fascinating to observe the various 'returns' in Book10.

The myth, the spiritual aspect of Socrates/Glaucon final conversation mirrors the beginning of the Republic. From Book1:

I went down to the Piraeus yesterday with Glaucon, the son of Ariston, to say a prayer to the goddess,1 and also because I wanted to see how they would manage the festival, since they were holding it for the first time.