Powerfully told from an all-female perspective, A Thousand Ships gives voices to the women, girls and goddesses who...

As with 95% of these posts I have never heard of this, and I never would have if you hadn't intentionally seeked out such bullshit to whinge about it

...what

Nigger I saw it on the best sellers list on booksdepository

>Sing, Muse, he says, and the edge in his voice makes it clear that this is not a request. If I were minded to accede to his wish, I might say that he sharpens his tone on my name, like a warrior drawing his dagger across a whetstone, preparing for the morning’s battle. But I am not in the mood to be a muse today. Perhaps he hasn’t thought of what it is like to be me. Certainly he hasn’t: like all poets, he thinks only of himself. But it is surprising that he hasn’t considered how many other men there are like him, every day, all demanding my unwavering attention and support. How much epic poetry does the world really need?

hearty kek, i love being a man

Attached: 1509953481990.jpg (866x960, 125K)

>Like all poets, he thinks only of himself
She tried to shit on Homer but accidentally outted the narcissistic navel-gazing that led her to write this bullshit

Attached: 1506919957754.jpg (345x336, 214K)

this can't be real

lmao

> feminine gods are women

Clearly they are bitches.

this cannot be real

Euripides play Helen tells her story as well.

Yeah, but he's Euripides. Not exactly someone loved by feminists.

I hate these sort of things thanks for posting them so I won't go through life not hearing about them

I have never been this butthurt in my entire life.

>Certainly he hasn’t: like all poets, he thinks only of himself.
Holy shit.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trojan_Women

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hecuba_(play)

Euripides literally already did it twenty-four centuries ago, and far better than anything that worthless cunt is ever going to vomit up even if she had a hundred lifetimes to polish her work.

w*men were a mistake

>goddesses who, for so long, have been silent.
I seem to recall more than a few goddesses actively involved in the fighting.

Vulvic asphyxiation is a horrible way to die, barely less grisly than scaphism or stoning, largely due to the uniquely edgy sadism exclusive to harems of captive women yoked to sexual servitude. When their masters and esteemed guests are away, the harem’s dynamics can quickly become macabre and sinister as scores are settled, power is challenged and loyalties tested. Hashish and opium long ago choking any fresh air, the women will know suddenly as an epiphany that it is time, clearing a floor of cushions, pillows and mattresses, daubing with rouge and violet cosmetics a ring for their sport and starting the discrete and duplicitous gossiping about matchmaking, colluding to sponsor or wager on women combatants. Of the most prestigious and high-status harems, the diversity of their cast of women often means few share a language and so communicate the lewd and depraved needs of their customers with gestural and simple guttural idiomatic pantomimes, and as the women stream into their sapphic arena, the din can be deafening as jewelry, religious amulets, precious stones and ampules of medicine are wagered on specific outcomes, some women expecting tribadistic trouncings, a cervical fracture and a mouthful of muff or even side bets on emictions and defecations. More hashish and grain alcohol circulate the now densely packed crowd of women slowly listing into a wildness, their skin perspiring a dew of eroticized fear about the proximity of doom. Most women knew they would not have to fight, and many volunteered or sought combat by challenge, knowing the women were often honor bound to step into their crude arena, if not for personal dignities then for that of any clique or peer group’s reputation that might suffer should they decline and face the harem’s indignities as an untouchable wench, a fate most see as worse than a death in the harem’s ring.

But sometimes secrets and intrigues plot to propel surprised women into the fight for their lives, thinking themselves devilish voyeurs now made into a spectacle, and it does happen that some of these women truly cannot or will not, due to religious conviction or cultural and familial upbringing, put up any sort of fight, any sort of violence besides desperate protective blocking of their face, some begging for mysterious mercies in languages unspoken in the harem, sometimes chanting or praying for their female opponent to finally end it, to do what they must and not prolong the torture any longer, tearfully moaning mantras whether it’s torrents of diarrhea expelled onto their fearful grimace, of breast bashing or of flurried strikes to their ribs, face and perineum, almost saintly and angelic right up until their dominant victorious adversary pinches their nose and puts minge to mouth, usually loosing a final kick of adrenaline and struggle from the losing woman, bucking her hips and driving with her legs and all that she could muster some fraction of movement that might permit some air, howling a most unsettling shriek into the gaping vagina slowly extinguishing their life. Their last moments would be a soundtrack of catty jokes, petty remarks, critical quips about the loser’s body, sexual skills, skills as a slave, worthiness as a woman, comparisons to other whores, to other animals, her weird birth marks, the weird shapes her terror splayed toes make, the pool of flop sweat beneath her writhing end, every statement or aside met with performed gasps, whispers, demure chortles and wicked, cruel laughter, striking cumulatively upon the withering psyche of the vulvically asphyxiated woman, like drips of water torture or the pelting with bricks and large stones.

this is pretty well known mate

A lack of empathy and a feeling of inferiority. I suppose.

pretty good

you lot know natalie haynes is a comedian, no?

yeah that was pretty funny

pretty typical of americans, i suppose, not to pick up on british humour

Why should I care? Its not like I have to buy it.

nobody knows when a woman is being funny

what?

Really? I get he is a dude, but his play Helen and Medea can honestly be considered proto-feminist works.

Feminism at its most arrogant. They are injecting modern values in myths that are thousands of years old. How do they know women then held modern feminist values and not the virtues of ancient Greek patriarchal society? How can academics expect anyone to take this rendering seriously?

Intersectional studies of ancient feminist cults and peerage reflect shared cultural and aesthetic values centered around esoteric foot fetishism and foot worship, focusing on the female foot as an avenue for religious praxis, iconography as well as a medium for cultural exchange between Egyptian, Grecian and Parthian feminists. Ancient Persia’s feminist poetry is rife with celebration of the feet of Greek women, marveling at their striking pale complexions and shapely toes. Bathing and hygiene being foremost among the precepts of ancient feminists who worshiped all femininity, especially eachother’s female bodies, each clique of feminists performed characteristic songs and poetry during their highly orchestrated and ritualized cleansings. Ancient Athenian graffiti laments outside a popular bath that was hosting a feminist bathing ceremony, “Bathing closed, but we’re selling pork water” pork being slang for vaginas during the pre-gynophilic past. The increasingly legalistic and sex-shame laden bathing rules recorded across fourteen centuries of Egyptian feminist bathing also reflect an unease in the broader society about women obsessively and meticulously cleaning, pruning, pumicing, rubbing with oil, massaging with dried herbs, painting, tattooing or donning with honorific jewelry the feet of their fellow feminist cultists. Families would lose prized daughters, grooms families forfeiting dowries, lineages and dynasties disrupted, all because a girl fell prey to the narcotic eroticism of lengthy hydrotherapy, and therein was persuaded by the convert-hungry feminists who recruited almost exclusively from baths to depart from her life’s trajectory and indulge in the heady hedonism of fastidiously cleaned, lavishly nurtured and luxuriously ornamented feminist feet. Some have speculated that with the ingestion of certain psychoactive substances, the female foot would appear to the ancient mind as cinematic and hyperreal, nails of bright indigo or dark crimson, fractals of henna, to say nothing of the dramatic effect of remarkable cleanliness due to the noted daily ritualistic hygiene that conditioned Greek, Persian and Egyptian feminists to not only view their feet with pride but as religious instruments, conditioned by their devotion a visual feast and a lure to both laiety and the aspirational feminist foot worshippers.

Writers steal stories from others all the time. Who gives a flying fuck? Only the end result matters.

lol woman role in the iliad is to be prizes of war

but that's not what they really like teehee

Holy fuck, any goddess would command the slaughter of all women after hearing this.

Hook em up

Attached: 1550036418416m.jpg (1024x569, 132K)

This is pretty clearly not an attempt at comedy on her part though, and every review I can find lauds it as a super important progressive masterpiece without a single hint of it being tongue-in-cheek

it is pretty clearly is.
anyone who thinks she's writing this passage with a straight face has no right being that stupid

Attached: ats.jpg (577x294, 51K)

Scholars have been debating whether his Medea is feminist or misogynistic for a very long time, and the latter seems to be the most popular position.

Are there any good Greek mythology novels that AREN'T feminist retellings? Other than Percy Jackson and other kid's stuff, I mean

Latro in the Mist

"The beautiful ones" I didn't realize population density in ancient Egypt was so high.

Why not? Remember that the Illiad was written when women were treated like shit in society and had no voices. There's absolutely nothing wrong with providing a female perspective on these things.

Read his Cyclops. its not very kind to Helen.

Attached: 1529123454167.jpg (471x312, 22K)

Ransom by Malouf

>Why not?
Because the ego, narcissism, and self-importance that is built-in to such a thing is poison.
It isn't. It's just so absurd on it's face that it seems like it must be. What does that tell you?

because that's rewriting history user
when a man does a similar thing it's ok though because it's not written by woms
when a translation literally rewrites the text it's ok too because there is no agenda there amirite

>>There's absolutely nothing wrong
But there’s plenty wrong. The book is actively promoting a narrative that’s harmful to society in general and to women in particular.

>It isn't. It's just so absurd on it's face that it seems like it must be. What does that tell you?
do you ever listen to yourself?

oh you read it?

Do you only answer questions with questions?

do you think instead of a comedian writer (who studied classics at cambridge) being cheeky in her narrative from calliope's point of view is less likely than a boldfaced attack on homer & epic poetry?
really?

do you think a comedian writer (who studied classics at cambridge) being cheeky in her narrative from calliope's point of view is less likely than a boldfaced attack on homer & epic poetry?
really?

But if it is in fact cheeky, then it defeats the purpose of her enterprise. Why give voice to a "silenced woman" just to mock her? Where or to whom is the cheekiness directed? Not only that, but just as the other user assumes that because she is a woman she must be writing it with a straight face, so you assume that because she is a comedian she must be cheeky in that chapter, otherwise it wouldn't make sense to either of you.

In any case, while the golden brooch passage might pass as cheeky and not alter the overall intention of giving silenced woman a voice, the first paragraph in fact contradicts it with that "like all poets, he thinks only of himself". Yes, it is "cheeky", it is "comedic", it mocks men and such and such, but it also mocks any writer, including herself.

Yes, I believe feminists are fully capable of exactly that, and that exactly that has happened enough times already to be unsurprising.

Thanks

For example, browse the reviews here:
goodreads.com/book/show/42595255-a-thousand-ships
(complete with trigger warnings)
No one here is taking this to be anything other than what appears to be at face value. If it's a feminist retelling, well, like I said before, it's colossal hubris. If it's tongue-in-cheek then no one seems to be able to read it as such (and it would mean the author is essentially mocking feminists).

>the other user assumes that because she is a woman she must be writing it with a straight face, so you assume that because she is a comedian she must be cheeky
... one of these makes sense

and it's not an assumption. everyone basically picked up on the humour element but thought it was her shortcoming. i quite like american culture but i'm willing to concede that some americans may be unsuited to this british sort of humour. that's really all i can think how you can read that (if you know anything about the goddesses at all) and not think it quite good. it's not mocking, the author was smiling when she wrote it, similar to how the author of the odyssey was nearly always smiling, and often quotes the iliad very naughtily: using homer's tragic lines about the water that achilles heated for washing patroclus' corpse to describe odysseus' comfortable warm bath when he got safe home to ithaca - they weren't mocking homer.

>mocks any writer, including herself
any poet you mean? besides, she is writing as a character (obviously).

your answer to my question is yes?
seen anybody about it yet?

if you go to goodreads for your reviews you get what you pay for. i should say i didn't look at yr link by the way

>your answer to my question is yes?
>seen anybody about it yet?
The "classicist does a po-faced retelling of ancient mythology" isn't a new phenomenon.
But you believe what you want, you're going to anyway.

>But you believe what you want, you're going to anyway.
that's rich. can you name a book (preferably that you've read) that does that? no?

>muh British humor
Ah yes, of course.