"The Venerable Bede Translates John" by James Doyle Penrose (1862-1932)
Inset from "The last chapter (Bede)", exhibited at the Royal Academy (1902)
I was going to do a post on the saint of the day, but El Padre has beat me to it with a wonderful post, as is often the case. He's a crafty one, he is. Anyway, he saved me some work, and I'll just send you over there to see what he's done, giving you only this illustration, courtesy of Wiki.
That is a wonderful painting of Bede, Grandmère.
ReplyDeleteI'm sending folks over here to see it.
It is a beautiful painting, for which much thanks.
ReplyDeleteI am glad to see that St. Bede retains his popularity. I've noticed that in some (rather a-historical) accounts of what is called the Celtic Church Bede as occasionally cast as a kind of Roman stooge for his account of the Synod of Whitby.
One of these days I hope to get around to Bede's History, which has been on the shelf for more than a few years glaring at me reproachfully. (I think our friend RMJ has publicly made a similar resolution, though he is apparently still entangled in Proust.) In any case I would only note that a few years back I read a history of Anglo-Saxon England by Peter Blair, and it's impossible to read such a thing without appreciating how important Bede's work is for understanding that age.
We have an Episcopal Church of St. Bede here in Santa Fe, I assume a subtle assertion of Anglo-ness in the far northern reaches of Nueva Espana. It is affectionately known locally as "St. Bedes in the Weeds."
St. Bede's in the Weeds. I love it.
ReplyDeleteI tangled with the first two of Prout's "A La Recherche..." and gave up as it seemed a lifetime's work that I was not dedicated enough to pursue.
I got through the whole thing, but I think it was through pure pig-headedness. And I stretched it out over seven years, too. By the time I got to the end I had forgotten the beginning (kind of like life....).
ReplyDeleteDon't feel bad about Proust, Mizz Mimi, except to regret time that might have been better used, spent reading the first two volumes. You're in good company. E.M. Forster's 1929 review of the Scott Moncrieff translation contains the lengthy, but pleasing single-sentence observation:
ReplyDelete"A sentence begins quite simply, then it undulates and expands, parentheses intervene like thickset hedges, the flowers of comparison bloom, and three fields off, like a wounded partridge, crouches the principal verb, making one wonder, as one picks it up, poor little thing, whether after all it was worth such a tramp, so many guns, and such expensive dogs, and what, after all, is its relation to the main subject, potted so gaily half a page back, and proving finally to have been in the accusative case."
The review is collected in "Abinger Harvest" (1936) which also, as you probably know, contains three essays on Miss Austen.
Lapinbizarre, amen to Forster on Proust. That's wonderfully put.
ReplyDeleteI did not know about "Abinger Harvest" and the essays on Jane Austen. I believe that you assume a much great knowledge of things literary on my part than I have.
I checked at Amazon, and the book is still in print. I am will order it. Thank you for the information.
V welcome. My copy is a now disintegrating 60's Penguin, so it should be inexpensive. There's some very interesting stuff in there. Roger
ReplyDelete