”We will bury you” – what if that’s NOT what he said?
“Let them eat cake” – what if that’s NOT what she said?
Or the trickier part – what if that’s what they said, and you heard, but what you thought they meant wasn’t what they meant.
FIRST LAW OF COMMUNICATION: ASSUME YOU’VE BEEN MISUNDERSTOOD
These quotations are famous in Western history and quite possibly they’re all “wrong.” Let’s take a look at this from the standpoint of multiculturalism, communication, nuances, the limitations of the left-brain and it’s “words,” the neuro-skills it takes to translate, the EQ skills it takes to interpret, the decline in the emu market, and Chaos theory. j.k. But let’s take a look at them! It’s what we do at EQ Central.
Communicating is harder than we know, or would like to believe. Especially when we have to use words. Concrete actions and nonverbal behaviors are more universally understood, like a handshake, for instance. And why do we have the handshake?
It started with men, who met one another when out doing what men did – hunting and killing things. They extended their hand palm outward to show they weren’t harboring a weapon and meant the other man no harm. Clear meaning: “I have no weapon. I will not harm you.” At least physically; the mouth was still available, but that’s a lower level of harm – the neocortex.
Note also the right hand, the weapon-hand, is extended and the right hand receives it. Just so we both know.
When we meet one another, we must always soothe the beast – the reptilian brain that’s telling us to defend our territory and be wary of strangers. So we use handshakes, hugs, bows and other civilities to show we are not on the prowl. What could put you in a more vulnerable position than to put your hands at your side, palms inward, and bow your head? Yikes!!
This is analogous to when your beta dog meets the alpha dog, flips on her back and puts her legs up in the air, exposing her “soft underbelly.” Pretty graphic.
ET TU BRUTE
“Et tu Brute,” “You, too, Brutus,” or “And also you, Brutus,” is the famous line in Shakespeare’s play “Julius Caesar.”
When Brutus is stabbed to death in a political mishap by Brutus, his protégé, Shakespeare has him say, “Et tu Brute?” We use this phrase when we’re talking of the ultimate betrayal. “After all I did for you you turned against me? You of all people?”
Now I chose one word to describe Brutus’ relationship to Caesar. I said he was his “protégé,” and this is a French word coming from the word “protected.” It has all sorts of connotations, is as close as I can come, and, if you’ve nurtured and mentored a younger colleague with all your heart (or raised a child), only to have them jump ship, or sabotage you, you know how Brutus felt.
In fact the last level of Dante’s hell was reserved for those who betrayed those with whom they had a love relationship. Brutus? Yes, Brutus was there. Dante had a statement to make; the same one Shakespeare did. From whence cometh our phrases such as, “Why don’t you just stab me with a knife?” or “He stuck it in and then turned it.”
Now according to scholars, Caesar was using Plutarch’s translation of the story, which had that Latin phrase, while Caesar’s last words were actually in Greek – “kai su teknon.” This means, “And also you, child.”
Why did Shakespeare change it? That’s the EQ question. Maybe it wasn’t “manly” enough. Maybe because “Et tu Brute” has a better ring to it (Shakespeare was a poet!). It just sounded better to Shakespeare! (It’s not what we say, it’s how we say it, and that’s why we love Shakespeare so. He paid attention to all aspects of communication.)
Even more pragmatically, the play is written. If Shakespeare hadn’t put in there “Brute,” would we know for sure to whom Caesar was speaking?
Perhaps Shakespeare was thinking – my readers will wonder why a Roman used Greek for his dying words. One reason the Roman Empire prevailed as long as it did, is because it incorporated other civilizations without cramming Romanism down their throats. The Romans were superlative at establishing order and running countries. They left the “conquered” to enjoy their own religions, languages and cultures. It was the taxes they were after – “Render unto Caesar…” Just as importantly, they subsumed anything they found attractive or helpful in a conquered country, and the Greek civilization had much to offer at the time.
Which brings up the question, why would a Roman emperor use Greek for his dying words? Greek was the language of intellect and culture, deep thoughts and serious meanings. Languages that are not our mother tongue have a mystery to them and sometimes carry more weight. When I end a formal argument with “res ipse loquitur” (the thing speaks for itself), I consider the case to be closed.
Shakespeare had his reasons. But look what we learn when we go back to the original translation.
WE WILL BURY YOU
This Nikita Khrushchev said at the height of the Russian-US cold war. Taken literally it’s quite threatening. However, it’s an idiomatic expression, difficult to maneuver from one language to another. This is like saying in the US, “I’m going to catch a train.” Well, we don’t literally “catch” a train. In the US we say we “play” the piano. In Spanish, we “touch” a piano, tocar.
What did Khrushchev mean? The phrase in Russian means something closer to “Hey, fella, we’ll be around long after you’re gone.” More like we endure, not conquer; assertive, not aggressive.
When I wrote this, my spell check told me” Krushchev” was wrong. You can’t seem to add enough Hs to those Russian words. Our attempt in the US to portray what sounds like a bear clearing its throat, and what also sounds more ominous to us than say, the rightly-named Romance languages. It doesn’t matter what you say in Spanish, it sounds romantic. A term of endearment the French use is “mon petit chou.” I wish you could hear it, ending in “shooo,” how soothing, and we end with our lips pursed, as if to kiss. And what does it mean? “Little cabbage.” What does it mean? “I love you.”
LET THEM EAT CAKE
I study Marie Antoinette. I feel her story is yet to be told. She was also called “Madame Deficit.” “Let them eat cake,” is what she allegedly said when the peasants in France were preparing to revolt (the French Revolution) because the country was in political and economic disarray and there wasn’t enough food.
The closer translation is “Let them eat bread.”
“Cake” is one of those words you know about if you’re a polygot. It has no translation! Well, you also know this if you’re a gourmand and/or world traveler. This thing that appears for “dessert” in different countries is very different in each place. What in fact IS a cake or dessert? They look different and taste different everywhere. Some aren’t even sweet. There are also “cakes” of saltpeter and yeast.
If you’ve learned a second language you know all about cookie, little cake, sweet bread, petit four, pan dulce, pastry, pie, tart, and so forth. The Mexicans put chocolate on their tamales. The French have a cake with no leavening. Shepherd’s pie is not sweet. The German “cookie” Pfeffernusen is a hard little rock of a thing flavored with Anise, which the Greeks use for liquor, and the French have a dessert called “a nun’s fart.”
Cake, when not referring to the packaging of an item, is a sweet luxury and, more importantly not nourishing. Further, it’s an insult to tell someone to get a luxury when they don’t have a necessity. “Yours car’s broken down again? Well, just bring the Porsche.”
Bread is the staff of life, very symbolic, and “let” is “hortatory”, what we call urging or demanding, as when the ringmaster at the Barnum & Bailey circus says (what a thrill we get) “Let the circus begin!” Marie Antoinette might have meant “Then they must have bread!” (I’m still researching, but I doubt her statement was as flippant and uncaring as it sounds, having worked with the homeless myself.)
But here’s yet another twist. Supposedly she used the word “brioche,” which is now a divine sort of bun, but was originally a flour-and-water paste that was “caked” onto the interior of ovens of the professional boulangers of the era. (Somewhat like the oil and flour we put in non-teflon cake pans). At the end of the day, the baker would scrape the leavings from his pans and ovens and set them out back for beggars.
This is not unlike “hush puppies” – the unneeded portion of dough being tossed into the oil the meat was fried in to make a tasty treat for the dogs.
If she meant this, does that make it any better? This might be equivalent to saying the unpopular, but quite practical, “They’re starving. Well, tell them about the Soup Kitchen at 4th and Vine.”
We’ll never know what she actually said, it seems, nor what she meant.
I guess the only way to know for sure is to ask someone at the time. Not a bad a idea.
eTrust EZ Antivirus
from
Computer Associates
Quick download, EZ to
use, affordable prices!
Financial analysis and investment software that combines technical analysis with neural network and genetic algorithms.
