Calliope in the Bleachers
We forget, at our own peril, what a Muse is capable of being. Granted, the waters have gotten a little muddy, as the Oxford English Dictionary nicely illustrates. On the one hand, the OED notes that a Muse is one of those nine lovely ladies, daughters of Zeus and Mnemosyne, residents of Mount Helikon. Hesiod named them in the Theogony, heaped upon them stanzas of praise, acknowledging that “they breathed into [him]/a voice divine.” They are the sounds he makes; the very air that he breathes.
But, somewhere along the line, the job description shifted: “A person (often a female lover) or thing regarded as the source of an artist’s inspiration; the presiding spirit or force behind any person or creative act.” While it’s still a flattering position to be in, please note the shift from activity to passivity; from respiration to inspiration. The small-m muse may still be key to the creative act, but all she really has to do is sit there and look nice and/or make the artist miserable to achieve her aims. But even this is an overstatement, in that the muse has no aims to speak of. She lacks intention and autonomy, but, most importantly, she lacks a voice. As the OED tells us, the muse could be a person, a thing, or even an ephemeral spirit that is content to merely preside. Somehow, they have gone from having Hesiod by the throat to being little more than what is required to get the artist out of his comfy chair or off of his barstool. They have gone from being the prime mover to a pretty face. Read More »