The Nose of Grice

-- by J. L. Speranza, of the Grice Club.
---- for the Grice Club, etc.

---

In "Grice's Nose", Kramer (and later J) refer to something called -- "the 200 U. S. Presidential election". Kramer writes:

"I think it is safe [emphasis mine. JLS] to say
that the outcome of the 2000 U.S. Presidential
election was an accident [emphasis mine. JLS]. Not that
Gore should have won but didn't, but that it was a
statistical tie and could have gone either way based on
things other than the views of the electorate. The outcome
of the election may have had profound implications, but 100
years from now, will it have mattered whether the US got
off the oil teat in 2001 or 2010 or 2040? It will
have mattered to the people alive in the interim."

Exactly. I think -- back to the example of the nose of Cleopatra, I think there are some distinction to make between:

-- the nose of Grice -- a philosopher at Oxford.
-- the nose of an important Egyptian lady involved in international affairs, as this Cleopatra lady was:

---

In Blaise Pascal scheme then -- from wiki's entry for "Carr":

"As an example of his attack on the role of accidents in
history, Carr mocked the hypothesis of "Cleopatra's nose". Pascal's
thought that,

------ but for the magnetism exerted by
------ the nose of Cleopatra on Mark Anthony there would
------ have been no affair between the two, and hence the
------ Second Triumvirate would not have broken up, and
------ therefore the Roman Republic would have continued"

The Griceian question, among others would be:

-- If psychological explanations (i.e. explanation where a desire explains a bit of action) are okay at the local history (of what happened with the daughter of the greengrocer who got pregnant by the lord of the manor, and HE married her (or something)), why aren't they no longer felt to be relevant, by readers of history (who lack that Gricean charm to them -- "I write in jest" -- ), when we study the life and times of Mark Anthony. It surely was all about the nose. In fact, I would be willing to expand Pascal's counterfactual allowing for some more sexual innuendo. "Cleopatra's nose? I guess there was more than her nose that got involved in the proceedings" -- and stuff.

As I say, the way to go here is to see that beautiful Glyndebourne rendition of Giulio Cesare, now on DVD. Cleopatra is played by some sexy beast:

---

From the amazon.com reviews:

"Cleopatra is the 25-year-old American Daniele de Niese, ravishing in person and voice, with charisma, nerve, and talent in equal proportions."

----

"Danielle de Niese is a sexy, mesmerizing Cleopatra and a
consummate singer/actress who steals the show (you can see
more of her discussing this, her debut Glyndebourne performance, in
the extra bonus features)."

----

"Cleopatra made a star of Beverly Sills. I think it may do
the same for the uncommonly beautiful Danielle de Niese whose
stunning appearance and rich soprano fill the Glyndebourne
stage with that ineffable quality called 'starpower'. Glyndebourne
and Opus Arte must agree because they showcase Ms. de Niece in
a 30 minute documentary on disc 1 called 'Danielle de Niece and
the Glyndebourne experience'!"

----

"It's no wonder that the older man falls for the
beautiful, funny, flirtatious, and phenomenally talented 26-year
old Danielle de Niese."

----

"All the singers are experts, and Cleopatra (Danielle de Niese)
outshines them all. She leads a production of not only high
artistic value, but also a great entertainment."

----

"Danielle di Niese, as Cleopatra, is absolutely sensational. Clearly, she
has the complete package and would have made Cleopatra both proud and
envious--including an outstanding voice, charming and expressive acting ability, along with beautiful looks. Note to the Metropolitan Opera: If you want to begin attracting a larger and younger audience, sign this dynamic soprano for several productions each season and turn her loose."

Etc. Next: the nose of Elizabeth Taylor.