The Ass and the Grasshopper [Crickets]

AN ASS having heard some Grasshoppers [Crickets] chirping, was highly enchanted; and, desiring to possess the same charms of melody, demanded to know what sort of food they lived on to give them such beautiful voices. They replied, “The dew.” The Ass resolved that he would live only upon dew, and in a short time died of hunger.

There are times that we all want something we just cannot have and this poor Ass paid the highest toll for his wishes. There are all sorts of limitations we all must live with, we should learn to accept them. After all, if the Crickets wanted to envy something about the Ass they certainly could have admired his stubbornness, strength and endurance. So that leads us to the unstated moral:

One should not envy what one cannot be (have).

Yes, for whatever reason this particular fable does not come with a moral. We all see the obviousness of the moral, but is the lack of a moral a mistake by Aesop or is it in the translation. I certainly have to wonder about this since Aesop was very consistent in setting down the fables. Personally I think that translation may be the culprit here, and in future fables there are going to be many mistakes in translation (in my opinion.) In The Bat and the Weasel there may be a mistake in translation also, but if there is it is subtle and may not be incorrect. Here, certainly the translator could have proved his opinion of the moral, simple as it is.

Also, do grasshoppers sing as crickets do? Is this yet another mistranslation? I think we are seeing a very obvious mistake, one I am happy to correct in this modern age. As with all translations there are the literal translations and the expressed translations. The first may actually mistake meanings of word within context and the second expresses the idea and thus a more accurate, if not literal, meaning.

To make my writing more clear, I am going to institute the following standards:

[Brackets] – The word within can replace the preceding word(s).
Underline – This is a change from the original translation made by me.
Italics – This will be the text I am going to base the entry on.

If there need to be other standards I will set them down as needed. Back to the analysis…

Maybe commentary is more accurate at this point other rather than analysis. How many people do we know that want more than they can have or want to be what they just can’t. How many people go to great lengths to attain what someone else has and then find that it is not for them and it was folly from the beginning to want whatever it is. In this age of instant communication and hyped media we are exposed to any number of desires that are simply not meant for us. Why do we yearn for these things? Do we not know that we will die if we try to live only on dew?

There is a pretext of humble existence implied in this fable. The hardworking ass should be happy with what he is, a useful and productive member of the farm. Yet the ass is not happy being just a useful and productive animal, he wants to be the creator of beautiful music too and thus dies in the attempt.

We all have our strengths and should contentment with those strengths and not over-reach for something that is just not possible. I think this is a very practical principle, as are most of Aesops morals.