Talk:Calydonian boar hunt

I think the objection to the introduction ("too long") is that it violates journalistic practice by plunging too quickly into the scholarly background and history instead of highlighting briefly the most important features for the general reader.

It is, however, an excellently researched and illustrated article, and should not be over-edited or simplified.

One could just make a paragraph break in the second sentence after "all the heroes of the new age take part.." But I would add the most famous detail about Atalanta from a later paragraph. And probably something of its origin in the offense to Artemis.

Here's a suggested revision and substitute for an introductory paragraph:

"The Calydonian Boar is one of the monsters of Greek mythology that had to be overcome by heroes of the Olympian age. Sent by Artemis to ravage the region of Calydon in Aetolia because its king failed to honor her in his rites to the gods, it was killed in the Calydonian Hunt, in which many male heroes took part, but also a powerful woman, Atalanta, who won its hide by first wounding it with an arrow. This outraged some of the men, with tragic results."

If you would like me or someone else, perhaps the orignal author, to go ahead and modify the original paragraph to accomodate it, let me know.

Winslow Shea (talk) 18:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Winslow Shea (talk • contribs) 18:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

NOTE: I have on June 20 added the proposed new intro paragraph, and two section headings. The rest of the original article is in my view a bit too academic in its language, but I hesitate, at least for the time being, to make it sound less like a paper for an academic audiece. -- Winslow Shea —Preceding unsigned comment added by Winslow Shea (talk • contribs) 22:58, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Change Made. "Nevertheless, though both Homer[2] and Hesiod and their listeners were aware of the details of this myth, no surviving poet seems to have worked the pieces into a single epic, to become the classic telling"

This does not make sense. Firstly, there is no straight-forward connection between Archaic and Classical awareness and subsequent survival. Secondly, "the classic telling" is as meaningless as imputing that Brando is the authoritative Mark Anthony. Finally, the question of whether there was ever a detailed account of this episode, in either the Theban or Epic Cycle, remains unanswered (although a diversion in, for instance, the Alcmeonis is quite feasible).

Again: "Meleager's mother, sister of Meleager's slain uncles, took the fatal brand from the chest where she had kept it (see Meleager) and threw it once more on the fire; as it was consumed, Meleager died on the spot, as the Fates had foretold." What on earth is "the fatal brand"? Why the definite article? I know of no such brand. Moreover, "(see Meleager)" is offered, but I've seen "Meleager", and I am neither informed nor impressed. Making oneself understood is one of the most important things to achieve in life. It's worth working on.

Finally: "Meleager died on the spot, as the Fates had foretold." This is the first we've heard of such an omen, which is bad form. An omen should be offered, and then fulfilled. These are myths. Tell them.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.192.112.144 (talk) 23:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)