From ev23@umail.umd.edu Fri Jun 1 07:47:38 2001 Received: from mxu4.u.washington.edu (mxu4.u.washington.edu [140.142.33.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.11.2+UW01.01/8.11.2+UW01.04) with ESMTP id f51Elb062782 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 07:47:37 -0700 Received: from umailsrv2.umd.edu (umailsrv2.umd.edu [128.8.10.76]) by mxu4.u.washington.edu (8.11.2+UW01.01/8.11.2+UW01.04) with ESMTP id f51Elas30705 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 07:47:36 -0700 Received: from umail.umd.edu (253a-38.umd.edu [128.8.146.38]) by umailsrv2.umd.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f51ElaA32462 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 10:47:36 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3B17AB01.74304300@umail.umd.edu> Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 10:47:29 -0400 From: Elizabeth Vandiver X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: classics@u.washington.edu Subject: Bill Clinton as Ovid?? References: <20010601131608.61CE311F71B@volcano.planet.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear List, In yesterday's *Washington Post*, a column by Richard Cohen said that Bill Clinton's enemies saw him as "some oversexed, overliberal, overbearing latter-day Ovid." What interests me, and surprises me, is Cohen's choice of *Ovid*. I suppose "oversexed" could apply well enough to Ovid, and perhaps even "over-liberal"; but the use of "overbearing," with the apparent implication that Ovid was in a position of some power, would surely strike the author of *Tristia* as rather wide of the mark. (Not to mention the further implication that Bill Clinton is a poet!!) I'm curious to know if Cohen's words read equally oddly to other list members. Was he just carried away with the repetition of those "Ov-" sounds, perhaps assuming that few of his readers would have any notion of who Ovid was, anyway? Or has the praeceptor amoris made his way into popular culture as some sort of symbol of middle-aged excess, and I just hadn't noticed before now? Elizabeth Vandiver .