Of a Happy Life

Jeeeeeez, what a blooowhard. I liked De Brevitate Vitae (On the shortness of life) well enough, and I'm still charmed and stunned by how clear and immediate Seneca's advice can be, given he lived 2000 years ago. I didn't love this one, though, since - okay - this is not Seneca's fault - but the Italian audiobook producers of this WAAAY over-produced it, and had constant (CONSTANT) background music a la massage therapy studio style. So if you like your Stoic philosophy with some Buddha Bar beats, you will enjoy this. I was like, ARGH ARRRRGHHHH

Interesting tidbits: So Seneca's guide to finding happiness is: (1) let nature be your guide (NATURE), and (2) destroy desire and seek moderation. (2) is JUST PLAIN BUDDHIST, and I was interested in what (if any) influence Buddhist thought could have had on, ehhh, when was Seneca alive? OK, Wiki says 4BC - 65AD. Perfect! So Buddhism had been around for ~500 years by that point, and hmmmm the Romans probably traded spices and silks (???) and PHILOSOPHICAL/LIFESTYLE IDEAS via the Silk Road (hollaaa). So that's very interesting!

I mean, we speak a lot about the Greeks' influence on the Romans (and the Romans spend a lot of time talking about Greeks, jeez), but I wonder... I guess Seneca wouldn't have known who to attribute the great idea of non-desire/non-attachment (except HIMSELF).

On (1) (follow nature), I was curious because WHAT, exactly, does Seneca mean by nature? “Nature” and “unnatural” are words usually invoked by people who are actually VERY IGN'ANT about biology and are making conservative/hegemony points - e.g. Jordan Peterson saying we must be “natural” in our gender relations, like the lobster (or something). Fool, don't you know that dolphins have sex with EVERY HOLE?! And lesbian albatrosses have long, monogamous pairings complete with sperm donor-ed offspring? I mean, I find it very funny with ignorant social conservatives use their thin knowledge of the natural world to make points about when men were men, etc. It's funny because they're dumb. Was Seneca being dumb? I dunno, it was unclear to me WHAT we were supposed to follow in nature. Be like the tree and stand firm? Be like the wind and fart? I dunno.

HENYWAY. Stoics are great. But they suffer with muzak (as we all do).

This review is purely personal, as I don't know if it's the translation or truly Seneca's writing, but I had a really hard trouble getting into this book. I took some small lessons from it, but it was really hard for me to even finish it, hence the 3 stars.