3 ms·
I was shocked at how bad Cicero’s spittle-flecked rants against Catiline were when I first read them. If I needed any more confidence that he made most of the c
by thom 3y ago
I was shocked at how bad Cicero’s spittle-flecked rants against Catiline were when I first read them. If I needed any more confidence that he made most of the conspiracy up, him raging about deep-state pedophiles in the manner of modern Tea Party firebrands would be it. I guess it worked for a time.
Demosthenes’ speeches seem rather dull in translation (I’m sure I’d appreciate them more if I had any talent for Attic Greek), and if we’re honest they had little effect on Athenian fortunes until the Lamian War finally exhausted Macedon’s patience. But it’s definitely worth reading him alongside Aeschines for their lifelong rap battle.
- zozbot234 3y agoYes, these techniques in persuasion are quite primitive all things considered. They had nothing comparable to the modern effectiveness of PowerPoint slides.
- simplegeek 3y agoThey were meant to be heard, not read :) Also, some effect is lost in the translation as well. Cicero's letters were meant to be read, I suggest you try them. They kind of feel monotonous at times, but it's hard to ignore how good a writer he was.
- thom 3y agoOh I've read all of Cicero, I find him fascinating. He's the most online person I've come across in antiquity - the exact combination of haughtiness and crippling anxiety you see daily on Twitter. I find him equal parts contemptible and pitiable, similar to Pompey in some ways. But however effective some of his speeches were, a lot of the content was unhinged invective. Obviously we're missing a lot of Demosthenes and Aeschines too - the former's physical gestures, the latter's actorly delivery. You can kind of feel the way Demosthenes hammers his point home, the monotony has a point. It's just surprising when you first come across it - this is the purported height of oratory, and instead of soaring, it's incredibly functional.