Hailed as magisterial when it first appeared; Greek Homosexuality remains an academic milestone and continues to be of major importance for students and scholars of gender studies. Kenneth Dover explores the understanding of homosexuality in ancient Greece; examining a vast array of material and textual evidence that leads him to provocative conclusions. This new release of the 1989 second edition; for which Dover wrote an epilogue reflecting on the impact of his book; includes two specially commissioned forewords assessing the authors legacy and the place of his text within modern studies of gender in the ancient world.
#3031565 in eBooks 2016-02-19 2016-02-19File Name: B01C2IOXNM
Review
129 of 130 people found the following review helpful. Similarities and Differences; Language and MusicBy E. N. AndersonThis is the best book so far on language; the brain; and music. It is highly technical; especially the first five chapters. Nonspecialists with a serious interest can get through the last two ("Meaning" and "Evolution") but the first five are hard going unless you are fairly advanced. Patel reviews an enormous; and almost entirely very new; literature on similarities and differences at the micro level between language and music. Overall; music is clearly related to language in many ways; but equally clearly a separate realm--a different communicative modality. He also points out that music and its meanings are learned. We are not born knowing that minor key is "sad"; thats a recent west-European idea; unknown to the rest of the universe. We have to learn about the pastorality of Beethovens Pastoral Symphony; and so on. On the other hand; lullabyes sound like mothers shushing their babies; and I would add that laments in every culture sound like ordinary weeping. Still; most musical meanings appear to be culturally learned. This is an excellent book; and I am duly impressed with all of it; but I do have some modest points to raise. First; I would find music and language somewhat closer than he does. He rules out of consideration a number of intermediate forms--chant; rhythmic speech (like African-American sermons); incantation; word-music poetry (like Russian romantic lyrics); childrens play-games; and a great deal more. It seems that a huge percentage of human communication; including much of the most important religious material in every culture; is in that neglected border zone. Something very important is here and is being missed. Second; he concludes language definitely evolved; but music is a rather recent invention--not an evolved part of communication. I am usually highly allergic to "genes as destiny;" and this is surely the first time I ever argued for a genetic explanation against a learning-based one! But I cant separate music and language enough to see music as a recent invention. It depends on some of the same recursive hierarchic-nesting systems of planning as language does; it is universal among humans; it is deeply important; it seems a physical need for a lot of people. Of course I cannot be sure if this means there really is an evolved mechanism; and the question remains open. Third; he rather misses the relevance of bird song. He is aware of; but strangely downplays; recent work showing that many (most?) songbirds learn their songs and use them to recognize their mates; neighbors; local dialect sharers; and so on. Birds also use song to keep in touch with their families; show their levels of health (as pointed out by Marlene Zuk); show their reproductive status; find each other; and much else. They also use song to communicate their mood states: level of arousal; type of arousal; and more. This is important; as will appear below. Many songbirds are quite brilliant composers; mockingbirds and many others incorporate all sorts of learned noises into their songs; change the noises to fit their song patterns; work them into original phrases; and so on. Of course no bird comes close to composing even a simple song in the human sense (i.e. a single hierarchically-nested composition using phrases to carry out an overall plan). Bird song has mere "phrase structure grammar;" to be technical; they dont do sentences. (No nonhuman animal is known to.) But they are doing something more than just marking territory and finding a mate. Actually; many of the best singers mate for life and dont need to find a mate in most years. Yet they and their mates often sing to each other. Also; many birds sing all year round; not just in the breeding season. We dont know what they are saying; but obviously a lot. Very simple calls do fine for territory-and-mating. Song is incredibly dangerous (hawks and cats home in on it) and expensive (it takes a lot of brain tissue; enough to be a real cost in flying). If the simple and humble songs of birds are this complex and demanding; human music must be a really major enterprise; far more important than social scientists have allowed till now. Bird songs are important because no nonhuman primates and very few other mammals are known to have complex learned songs. Bird songs are about our only models. (Whales sing too; but dont make great lab animals.) I think music evolved; and did so to handle the management; manipulation; and communication of broad; general; but intense mood-states. Language handles the specific cognitive information; music handles the powerful but unsayable moods. Partly; the moods are directly represented in the music (as in lullabyes and laments); partly we learn our cultures rules about communicating. There is a great deal more to say about this; especially when one folds religious chants into the mix. We need more dialogue and better cross-cultural and cross-species knowledge. Is there a group out there working on this?31 of 31 people found the following review helpful. If you have to pick one book on the subject...By Christopher Lavenderthis is the book! Extremely well written and VERY thorough. Patels "Music; Language; and the Brain" represents presumably most (if not all) of the data that has been found thus far at the crossroads of music; language; and cognition. It does get technical from time to time but were dealing with a technical topic and as a musician with only cursory knowledge of linguistics and cognition I still found the technical data well presented and very understandable. There are small points here and there that I might disagree with (based on my experience as a musician) however in every case it is made clear that these points are hypotheses of the author and further research needs to be done. This book isnt for everyone but for those interested in what connections can currently be made; what connections can NOT be made and possible future research in the field of music/language cognition; this volume is complete and enjoyable!10 of 10 people found the following review helpful. A great reference bookBy CustomerI bought this book because I had seen it mentioned in a few other books I had read on the topic of music and the brain. Oliver Sacks and Daniel Levitin have both referenced this work at some time. I am; as a music teacher in public schools; always looking for ways to strengthen the argument for keeping music instruction alive in the public schools; and have always believed that the links between learning language and learning music might be one of the building blocks of this argument. I have only just started reading this dense volume; but it is chock full of rigorous research and is very accessible even to regular people. It has been written to be accessible either to musicians -which I am- or neurologists-which I am not; and in the reading I have done so far; this seems to be the case. It is a book also which is meant to be read over time; and not necessarily in the order as it is presented. Each of the sections can stand alone; and I have found even that I can dip into it for a particular bit of information and come away with something new to add to my understanding of how music; language and the brain all work together.
