Beowulf
Darryl
"Beowulf" manuscript was composed prior to 1000 A.D. However, I
recently read an intriguing article by Kevin Kiernan, who is a
paleographic and codicologic expert. He proposes that "Beowulf" (the
extant MS) was produced during the reign of King Cnut. He theorizes
that "like Cnut, Beowulf created a synthesis of Anglo-Saxon and Danish
culture." He further states that "Beowulf" is a literary synthesis of
English and Danish cultures, which emphasises the commonality between
the races. Has anyone ever heard this argument before?
Darryl
John Briggs
The manuscript has always been dated to c.1000, but most people think the
poem is about two centuries older.
--
John Briggs
Apple
> poem is about two centuries older.
Yes, the poem is definitely older, but not necessarily the extant
manuscript found in Wessex. And I think the 1000 AD date really means
"between 950 AD to 1026 AD."
Peter Jason
"Darryl" <darrylnic...@hotmail.com>
wrote in message
news:4f94d7f8-e0e5-4871...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
See
http://www.allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=1:334172
kerryscott
Ooo...can't wait to see Beowulf in a movie! But Angelina Jolie as
Grendel's mother? Hmm...maybe I need to re-read my dusty copy of
Beowulf.
John Briggs
The film hasn't gone down well - they changed the plot in ways that seem
inexplicable. (The real explanation being that the various movie
adaptations have developed and built upon each other, rather than using the
original epic.)
--
John Briggs
erilar
<2af29c0b-cb38-4a2a...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
kerryscott <kerry...@yahoo.com> wrote:
That kept me from going to see it when I had the chance 8-)
--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka Erilar)
You can't reason with someone whose first line of argument is
that reason doesn't count. --Isaac Asimov
Erilar's Cave Annex: http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo
Peter Jason
"kerryscott" <kerry...@yahoo.com> wrote in
message
news:2af29c0b-cb38-4a2a...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Does your book have pictures? Ms Jolie, in a
CG transmogrification, had these Mick-Jagger
lips, and bubbies straight from silicon
valley.
All tastefully done, of course, and to top it
off she was *nude* except for a light
covering of gold dust. She postured
constantly in Nightclub Mode (lowered brow,
upturned eyes) and spoke in a rich smokey
voice, which may have been hers.
During the movie there was a lot of Medieval
nonsense constantly interrupting the Jolie
Apparition - to my great chagrin!
At the very end of this movie she appeared
like the 'Lady of The Lake' in the bay all
dripping wet and rather luscious.
Ed Stasiak
> > kerryscott wrote
> >
> > Ooo...can't wait to see Beowulf in a movie! But Angelina Jolie as
> > Grendel's mother? Hmm...maybe I need to re-read my dusty copy
> > of Beowulf.
>
> The film hasn't gone down well - they changed the plot in ways that
> seem inexplicable.
I didn't have a problem with the plot changes in the latest Beowulf
flick, (I really liked Michael Crichton's book; "Eaters of the Dead")
it was the horrible CGI effects in the new movie that killed it for
me.
I could understand using CGI for the monsters and such but the whole
movie is "overlaid" with CGI (even the actors) and it ends up looking
like a crappy Saturday morning cartoon.
Nadine
> movie is "overlaid" with CGI (even the actors) and it ends up looking
> like a crappy Saturday morning cartoon.
I totally agree. Robin Wright & the other women looked hypnotized or
something. The movie wasn't bad, but it certainly took a lot of
liberties. And I don't know if I want my Beowulf to be flawed. :-)
Paul J Gans
If you are going tosee the movie, don't bother. The two
have almost nothing in common other than their title.
--
--- Paul J. Gans
Felix Reuthner
> http://www.allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=1:334172
I prefer
http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi3770220825/
Granted, there is no naked Angelina Jolie, but at least the actors look
like people.
David Rorer
"Felix Reuthner" <sp...@reuthner.net> wrote in message
news:g06inj$9el$1...@online.de...
This was a great version - as far as I could tell it was fairly historically
accurate.
BTW I was able to download it from a file sharing site - probably
piratebay.org
There is also an animated version, which is also very good, that can be
downloaded from thebox.bz
thebox.bz is a file sharing site that specializes in British TV only!
Larry Swain
Yes. The manuscript itself has always been dated to about 1000, and so
dating it betweem 1016-1035 isn't stretching it too much. On the other
hand, few agree with Kiernan on the specifics and while recognizing that
1016 is a possible date, give or take, tend to date the manuscript
earlier. In part this is based on the accompanying Judith text that
doesn't match Cnut's reign, but would fit better the period of Viking
raids in the late 10th and pre-1016 period.
Where Kiernan really differs however is not in his dating of the
manuscript so much as he dates the poem itself to being roughly
simultaneous with the manuscript: according to Kiernan the poem was
composed in the reign of Cnut, and here is where the real disagreement
lies, most dating the poem itself much earlier, to the 8th century usually.
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
> <2af29c0b-cb38-4a2a-8795-31fc093b6...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> kerryscott <kerrysco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Seehttp://www.allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=1:334172-Hide quoted text -
>
> > Ooo...can't wait to see Beowulf in a movie! But Angelina Jolie as
> > Grendel's mother?
Hmmmmm, I don't remember off the top of my head if original says
something definite on the size of Grendel Mom's bust (would this
qualify as 'sizism'?).... :-)
> Hmm...maybe I need to re-read my dusty copy of
> > Beowulf.
>
> That kept me from going to see it when I had the chance 8-)
>
Do you dislike her THAT much? :-)
Nadine
> culture." He further states that "Beowulf" is a literary synthesis of
> English and Danish cultures, which emphasises the commonality between
> the races. Has anyone ever heard this argument before?
I have heard this argument before. It does make sense if Beowulf (in
the extant MS) was crafted during Cnut's reign. More than the melding
of Danish & English cultures, I see the melding of paganism &
Christianity. Cnut was the prime example of a pagan posing as a
Christian (or vice versa).
erilar
<3b2e8de7-b842-407d...@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
As Grendel's Mom? Better believe it!!
erilar
Larry Swain <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
He claims someone made it up out of whole cloth and immediately wrote it
down? Shudder 8-( Is he one of the oral tradition deniers then?
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
>
>
>
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On May 7, 8:40 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <2af29c0b-cb38-4a2a-8795-31fc093b6...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > kerryscott <kerrysco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > Seehttp://www.allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=1:334172-Hidequoted
> > > > > text -
>
> > > > Ooo...can't wait to see Beowulf in a movie! But Angelina Jolie as
> > > > Grendel's mother?
>
> > Hmmmmm, I don't remember off the top of my head if original says
> > something definite on the size of Grendel Mom's bust (would this
> > qualify as 'sizism'?).... :-)
>
> > > Hmm...maybe I need to re-read my dusty copy of
> > > > Beowulf.
>
> > > That kept me from going to see it when I had the chance 8-)
>
> > Do you dislike her THAT much? :-)
>
> As Grendel's Mom?
Are you saying that she was less absurd as :Alexander's Mom? At least
in the case of Grendel we are dealing with the supernatural issues so
the questions about relative ages do not arise. BTW, with this
specific mother Grendel could claim a genetic stupidity as an excuse
for his behavior. BTW, IIRC (which may not be the case because I read
this poem looooong ago) Grendel used to live under the swamp, aka, was
capable of breathing under water. Which probably makes him a byproduct
of a secret affair of Angelina Jolie and Kevin Costner (who, as
everybody knows, grew quills while making 'Waterworld').
To think about it, the whole affair starts looking like a chain of the
anti-environmental (and not only) crimes commited by Beowulf: dragon,
Grendel and his Mom would all qualify as the endangered species and,
while there is no clear evidience that Beowulf killed the
_last_dragon, we can safely assume that Grendel and his Mom were the
last aquatic humanoids (I'm not sure if Lady of the Lake REALLY
counts). And they had been killed for what? Just for eating few Anglo-
Saxons? :-)
>Better believe it!!
>
As you (and not only you) said time and again, we can't make value
judgements about the history. AND the movies. :-)
erilar
<5a2de303-5634-4049...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 12, 6:36 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
about the >monster" Jolie
> > > Do you dislike her THAT much? :-)
> >
> > As Grendel's Mom?
>
> Are you saying that she was less absurd as :Alexander's Mom?
In another film I avoided, obviously.
> At least
> in the case of Grendel we are dealing with the supernatural issues so
> the questions about relative ages do not arise. BTW, with this
> specific mother Grendel could claim a genetic stupidity as an excuse
> for his behavior. BTW, IIRC (which may not be the case because I read
> this poem looooong ago) Grendel used to live under the swamp, aka, was
> capable of breathing under water. Which probably makes him a byproduct
> of a secret affair of Angelina Jolie and Kevin Costner (who, as
> everybody knows, grew quills while making 'Waterworld').
I hadn't considered that possibility. You always find
interesting connections I seem to miss.
> To think about it, the whole affair starts looking like a chain of the
> anti-environmental (and not only) crimes commited by Beowulf: dragon,
> Grendel and his Mom would all qualify as the endangered species and,
> while there is no clear evidience that Beowulf killed the
> _last_dragon, we can safely assume that Grendel and his Mom were the
> last aquatic humanoids (I'm not sure if Lady of the Lake REALLY
> counts). And they had been killed for what? Just for eating few Anglo-
> Saxons? :-)
Good point. Beowulf/Alexander/Siegfried*/etc.-type heroes are much
less likely to disappear from the face of the earth, after all.
>
> As you (and not only you) said time and again, we can't make value
> judgements about the history. AND the movies. :-)
You are right, of course, but it's even LESS likely to mean anything
when a movie is involved.
*footnote(I love footnotes): I included Siegfried because he turned up
in a presentation I attended last week in Kzoo.
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
Thanks for pointing my attention to what looks like a persistent
pattern of environmental terrorism:
Activities of Beowulf, Siegfried, Ivan the Idiot (their counterpart in
the Russian folklore) and other of their ilk resulted in a total
extinction of a number of endangered spieces, including but not
limited to the dragons (including 3-headed ones), animated skeletons,
aquatic humanoids, dwarfs, etc. In most cases they did not even had a
good reason for their action (except Siegfried who, at least, did this
for money).
Freeing a princess, what a pathetic excuse! Besides the fact that, by
definition, a released princess was a social parasite and immidiately
after getting back her freedom proceeded with oppressing the masses
(and probably doing some environmental mischief of her own), she,
unlike 3-headed or even single-headed dragon, was quite easily
replaceable. It is also an open question if hero in question did not
have second thoughts AFTER the marriage (alas, too late.....).
As I already mentioned, killing Grendel simply because he needed Anglo-
Saxons in his diet also does not look as a reasonable motivation: 1st,
he was not planning to eat ALL of them (and it is arguable if THIS
would be such a bad thing in a historic perspective....), 2nd, having
Grendel around was conductive to the survival of the fittest and the
Anglo-Saxons would not be conquered by a pathetic bunch of the
continentals led by a bastard, 3rd, using brutal force instead of
sitting together (without any preconditions) and discussing the
differences could result in a mutually-acceptable compromise with
Grendel switching to vegetarian or, say, Celtic diet (AFAIK, this
option was recently proposed by one of the modern politicians).
>
>
> > As you (and not only you) said time and again, we can't make value
> > judgements about the history. AND the movies. :-)
>
> You are right, of course, but it's even LESS likely to mean anything
> when a movie is involved.
>
Well, one can make an objective judgement about ...er... 'parameters'
of the actress involved. OK, with all this computer graphics and
silicon, one actually, can't.... :-(
> *footnote(I love footnotes): I included Siegfried because he turned up
> in a presentation I attended last week in Kzoo.
You mean in person? I was under impression that he was more or less
dead for quite a while but, not being a scholar, I can easily be
mistaken (after all, with a Small Green Orc With No Brain being
present, undead human should not be considered as something
extraordinary).
John Briggs
>
> As I already mentioned, killing Grendel simply because he needed
> Anglo- Saxons in his diet also does not look as a reasonable
> motivation:
Danes in his diet. And Beowulf was a Geat.
--
John Briggs
Paul J Gans
He was eating Danes, not Anglo-Saxons. Hrothgar, the King
of the Shield-Danes, calls for help because Grendal is
terrorizing his lands.
Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
Anyway, eating Danes and terrorizing lands is generally considered
anti-social behavior. Beowulf and his men respond to the calls
for help and Grendal is taught a serious lesson.
erilar
<47d66f68-2e8e-4e9e...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
after I said
> > I included Siegfried because he turned up
> > in a presentation I attended last week in Kzoo.
>
> You mean in person? I was under impression that he was more or less
> dead for quite a while but, not being a scholar, I can easily be
> mistaken (after all, with a Small Green Orc With No Brain being
> present, undead human should not be considered as something
> extraordinary).
No, he and Sigurd were being discussed, partly in terms of their
mistreatment of Brynhild. They deserved what they got, in my opinion,
but the latter was warped some years ago by a book sent me by a German
friend featuring Hagen as hero and Siegfried as arrogant, rather stupid
jock hero, _Hagen von Tronje_. After that, my sympathy for Siegfried
decreased considerably, even though I still rather like the
Nibelungenlied as a whole.
erilar
"John Briggs" <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Ah, but you and Paul are trying to spoil the fun! Besides, this began
with a reference to that ridiculous movie, which is far further from the
original poem 8-)
am...@hotmail.com
Are you trying to say that Danes (except Soren, of course) are somehow
better than the Anglo-Saxons in the plain terms of a meat quality?
> Hrothgar, the King
> of the Shield-Danes, calls for help because Grendal is
> terrorizing his lands.
Typical excuse for the ruling classes...
>
> Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
> Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
>
You mean that somebody may become a historical character just by the
virtue of other people's thinking?
> Anyway, eating Danes
You keep stressing "Danes". Would it be different if he was eating
innuites?
>and terrorizing lands is generally considered
> anti-social behavior.
Sight..... "Generally" in this case means one side, namely Danes.
Typically, opinion of a minority (Grendel, his Mom, etc.) is ignored.
Kind of strange, taking into an account your rather liberal views.
> Beowulf and his men respond to the calls
> for help and Grendal is taught a serious lesson.
Sure. A bunch of the mercenaries called by a local oppressive (by
virtue of being a King) ruler exterminated endangered species.
Probably contributed to global <whatever> as well.....
:-)
am...@hotmail.com
Which means that not only the modern but the reasonably ancient rulers
were rather lax in their attitude toward illegal immigration (from
Sweden, in this case). We do not know if ALL necessary paperwork was
done properly or it was just a 'verbal invitation' from a local king
(who, as Paul remarked, may or may not even exist). Then, taking into
an account that the alledged (AFAIK, Grendel was not convicted by any
court) crimes happened in "mead hall", it is quite possible in Grendel
we just have an early activist of a temperance movement (and, judging
by her actions, his Mom could easily be an active feminist).
In other words, it is quite possible that what we are talking about
amounts not only to an environmental crime (committed by Beofulf and
his gang) but a forceful oppression of the progressive movements by
the local reactionaries with the help of the foreign mercenaries (if
you are looking from a liberal position). Or, if you are choosing a
conservative one, as a crime wave created by the illegal immigrants.
:-)
am...@hotmail.com
> In article <vUmWj.191$WO3....@newsfe15.ams2>,
> "John Briggs" <john.brig...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > a...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > As I already mentioned, killing Grendel simply because he needed
> > > Anglo- Saxons in his diet also does not look as a reasonable
> > > motivation:
>
> > Danes in his diet. And Beowulf was a Geat.
>
> Ah, but you and Paul are trying to spoil the fun!
Don't be too hard on Paul: even his geriatric (by his own definition)
age aside, what can you expect from a creature whose brain had been
eaten years ago? Of course, he is trying to spoil other people's fun:
this is what the orcs are suppossed to do.
:-)
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
> after I said
>
> > > I included Siegfried because he turned up
> > > in a presentation I attended last week in Kzoo.
>
> > You mean in person? I was under impression that he was more or less
> > dead for quite a while but, not being a scholar, I can easily be
> > mistaken (after all, with a Small Green Orc With No Brain being
> > present, undead human should not be considered as something
> > extraordinary).
>
> No, he and Sigurd were being discussed, partly in terms of their
> mistreatment of Brynhild.
Hmmmmmmmm...... Isn't it just a possibility that she got a King as a
husband AND the best macho man available as a lover? Of course, there
was an issue of the lover's wife but in more advanced societies issues
like that were quite often settled to everybody's satisfaction.....
>They deserved what they got, in my opinion,
Well, was Brynhild better off with BOTH of them dead?
> but the latter was warped some years ago by a book sent me by a German
> friend featuring Hagen as hero and Siegfried as arrogant, rather stupid
Well, an ability to kick the s--t out of your opponents quite often
serves as an useful substitute to a brain power...
> jock hero, _Hagen von Tronje_. After that, my sympathy for Siegfried
> decreased considerably, even though I still rather like the
> Nibelungenlied as a whole.
IMO, the only reasonably nice guy in this poem is Atilla. :-)
Larry Swain
Yes, and what's more, not participating in society (i. e. its not just
deaths of his men that is the issue, but that Grendel doesn't fight them
in battle, doesn't pay wergild, doesn't offer opportunity for vengeance,
and refuses to acknowledge anyone as his lord).
> Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
> Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
No real question about it. Gregory of Tours mentions him. Gregory also
mentions Hygelac and talks about his death, as does the Liber Francorum,
the Liber Monstrorum, and a couple other references.
> Anyway, eating Danes and terrorizing lands is generally considered
> anti-social behavior. Beowulf and his men respond to the calls
> for help and Grendal is taught a serious lesson.
And a costly one.....
Paul J Gans
Seems to be true, at least as far as Grendel is concerned. Of
course he might be one of those monsters who gets easily sea-sick,
so that he could not get to the better tasting Anglo-Saxons.
>> Hrothgar, the King
>> of the Shield-Danes, calls for help because Grendal is
>> terrorizing his lands.
>Typical excuse for the ruling classes...
Of course. Anything that keeps the tax money from coming
in is terrorism.
>>
>> Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
>> Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
>>
>You mean that somebody may become a historical character just by the
>virtue of other people's thinking?
Of course. No facts in history, only more or less credible evidence.
>> Anyway, eating Danes
>You keep stressing "Danes". Would it be different if he was eating
>innuites?
Yes. In that case Hrothgar would not have called for help.
>>and terrorizing lands is generally considered
>> anti-social behavior.
>Sight..... "Generally" in this case means one side, namely Danes.
>Typically, opinion of a minority (Grendel, his Mom, etc.) is ignored.
>Kind of strange, taking into an account your rather liberal views.
Monsters are not a protected species.
>> Beowulf and his men respond to the calls
>> for help and Grendal is taught a serious lesson.
>Sure. A bunch of the mercenaries called by a local oppressive (by
>virtue of being a King) ruler exterminated endangered species.
>Probably contributed to global <whatever> as well.....
Of course.
>:-)
Leticia Cluff
<gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>Paul J Gans wrote:
>
>> Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
>> Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
>
>No real question about it. Gregory of Tours mentions him. Gregory also
>mentions Hygelac and talks about his death, as does the Liber Francorum,
> the Liber Monstrorum, and a couple other references.
What is the form of Hrothgar's name in Gregory?
Tish
am...@hotmail.com
Well, a responsible and environmental-/socially-conscious ruler would
at least try to divertisify Grendel's diet by importing few Anglo-
Saxons and some other foreign nationals to figure out an optimal diet
(to think about it, it is quite possible that the whole episode with
Beowulf was a SNAFU'ed attempt to do just that).
Of course, if he really wanted to get rid of Grendel (I can't figure
why, because he could get a lot of money from UN and other sources for
saving endangered species and just for showing him in a zoo), he could
simply import some Grendel's food made in China (if you wish, I can
send you some pictures of how 'Charcoal Fried Chicken packed in
Canada' made, I think I still have them). This would solve problem in
a cheap and reasonably bloodless way.
>
> >> Hrothgar, the King
> >> of the Shield-Danes, calls for help because Grendal is
> >> terrorizing his lands.
> >Typical excuse for the ruling classes...
>
> Of course. Anything that keeps the tax money from coming
> in is terrorism.
>
I'm not sure about the _tax_ money because Grendel was raiding a local
drinking establishment. OTOH, if this was a state monopoly, loss of
the clients would definitely amount to a loss of a revenue. In XVII
century Russia punishment for trying to get a family member out of a
similar establishment was cutting arm AND leg.
>
>
> >> Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
> >> Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
>
> >You mean that somebody may become a historical character just by the
> >virtue of other people's thinking?
>
> Of course. No facts in history,
The more I'm getting sucked into this way of thinking (thanks to you
and Mary), the more I like it. Using it as a framework for 'The Most
Modern View...' saves a lot of time on (a totally unnecessary)
research....
>only more or less credible evidence.
Credibility of the evidence being a highly subjective issue, this is
not a problem at all.
>
> >> Anyway, eating Danes
> >You keep stressing "Danes". Would it be different if he was eating
> >innuites?
>
> Yes. In that case Hrothgar would not have called for help.
You see. We are talking about a selfish bastard with no long-term
vision at all: he did not care about the _future_ subjects, only about
the present ones. And out of those, only about the drunken ones. And
you expect any ...er... 'progressively-minded' person to side with
such an individual against endangered minority members?
Speaking of the endangered minorities, are there any insights on how
Grendel and his species were suppossed to breed? My (perhaps wrong)
impression was that he was too big for using the ordinary humans and,
anyway, who was his mom's partner?
>
> >>and terrorizing lands is generally considered
> >> anti-social behavior.
> >Sight..... "Generally" in this case means one side, namely Danes.
> >Typically, opinion of a minority (Grendel, his Mom, etc.) is ignored.
> >Kind of strange, taking into an account your rather liberal views.
>
> Monsters are not a protected species.
Only if you are applying this term to your right-wingish political
opponents.
>
> >> Beowulf and his men respond to the calls
> >> for help and Grendal is taught a serious lesson.
> >Sure. A bunch of the mercenaries called by a local oppressive (by
> >virtue of being a King) ruler exterminated endangered species.
> >Probably contributed to global <whatever> as well.....
>
> Of course.
I'm glad that you finally started seeing things in a proper
perspective...
John Briggs
I don't think Hrothgar is in Gregory of Tours. Hygelac's name is
Chlochilaichus.
--
John Briggs
John Briggs
>
> Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
> Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
It's not curious, but for the moment he's 'legendary' (Hrothgar, that is,
not Larry Swain...)
--
John Briggs
Leticia Cluff
That would explain why I couldn't find Hrothgar in the index to
my translation of Gregory.
I guess the occurrence of Hrothgar's Scandinavian equivalent in
Gesta Danorum doesn't make him a "historical character."
Tish
John Briggs
I think "Gesta" makes it 'legendary' almost by definition.
--
John Briggs
Soren Larsen
A diet primarily consisting of danish is simply bad for your health.
Grendl should have known this or his mother should have told him.
--
History is not what it used to be.
Soren Larsen
> Leticia Cluff wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:25 +0100, "John Briggs"
>> <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Leticia Cluff wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 10:06:58 -0500, Larry Swain
>>>> <gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>>>>> Paul J Gans wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
>>>>>> Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
>>>>>
>>>>> No real question about it. Gregory of Tours mentions him. Gregory
>>>>> also mentions Hygelac and talks about his death, as does
>>>>> the Liber Francorum, the Liber Monstrorum, and a couple other
>>>>> references.
>>>>
>>>> What is the form of Hrothgar's name in Gregory?
>>>
>>> I don't think Hrothgar is in Gregory of Tours. Hygelac's name is
>>> Chlochilaichus.
>>
>> That would explain why I couldn't find Hrothgar in the index to
>> my translation of Gregory.
>>
>> I guess the occurrence of Hrothgar's Scandinavian equivalent in
>> Gesta Danorum doesn't make him a "historical character."
>
> I think "Gesta" makes it 'legendary' almost by definition.
Nah.
The first half is mythology and legend, the second half is the medieval
variety of history.
am...@hotmail.com
If you are talking about the danishes, then, of course, he had a good
chance to end up with a severe case of a diabetis. OTOH, it is
possible that he was eating other Danish products as well including,
but not limited to Danska, Fris, Havarti, Fontina, Danish Blue Cheese
and, to have enough protein (or whatever), the Danes. Unfortunately,
thanks to the activities of certain Swedes and totally unscientific
attitude of the Anglo-Saxon (hopefully, I remember the source
correctly) writers, we'll never know for sure.
erilar
<b02a1b48-30ee-423a...@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 13, 11:27 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
> > <47d66f68-2e8e-4e9e-b00a-9a8de6484...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, a...@ho
> > tmail.com wrote:
> >
> > after I said
> >
> > > > I included Siegfried because he turned up
> > > > in a presentation I attended last week in Kzoo.
> >
> > > You mean in person? I was under impression that he was more or less
> > > dead for quite a while but, not being a scholar, I can easily be
> > > mistaken (after all, with a Small Green Orc With No Brain being
> > > present, undead human should not be considered as something
> > > extraordinary).
> >
> > No, he and Sigurd were being discussed, partly in terms of their
> > mistreatment of Brynhild.
>
> Hmmmmmmmm...... Isn't it just a possibility that she got a King as a
> husband AND the best macho man available as a lover? Of course, there
> was an issue of the lover's wife but in more advanced societies issues
> like that were quite often settled to everybody's satisfaction.....
>
> >They deserved what they got, in my opinion,
>
> Well, was Brynhild better off with BOTH of them dead?
We'd have to ask her, I suppose, but Gunther was a loser and Siggi
a two-timer. She and Atilla/Etzel would have made an interesting pair.
. .
>
> > but the latter was warped some years ago by a book sent me by a German
> > friend featuring Hagen as hero and Siegfried as arrogant, rather stupid
>
> Well, an ability to kick the s--t out of your opponents quite often
> serves as an useful substitute to a brain power...
Just because it happens all the time doesn't mean I have to admire
it!
>
> > jock hero, _Hagen von Tronje_. After that, my sympathy for Siegfried
> > decreased considerably, even though I still rather like the
> > Nibelungenlied as a whole.
>
>
> IMO, the only reasonably nice guy in this poem is Atilla. :-)
He never should have messed around with Kriemhild, though. Bad move.
Paul J Gans
>> >> Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
>> >> Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
>>
>> >You mean that somebody may become a historical character just by the
>> >virtue of other people's thinking?
>>
>> Of course. No facts in history,
>The more I'm getting sucked into this way of thinking (thanks to you
>and Mary), the more I like it. Using it as a framework for 'The Most
>Modern View...' saves a lot of time on (a totally unnecessary)
>research....
>>only more or less credible evidence.
>Credibility of the evidence being a highly subjective issue, this is
>not a problem at all.
I know you are being humorous, but, seriously, you seem to
begin to appreciate the reality of what I said.
Paul J Gans
Quite possibly. But he is mentioned in a fair number of
different manuscripts, sagas, etc. and family history is
given as well.
am...@hotmail.com
Paul, dear, I started appreciating it ages ago, after I read
Delbruck's analysis of Herodotus' description of the Greco-Persian
Wars and other 'established facts' (add to this that the Motherland of
the Elephants always was a country with unpredictable past were the
historical facts had been changing on a regular basis). Since then the
further I go, the worse (or the better) things are because even
'credibility' of the evidence is often a huge question mark.
I think that few years ago I told you how, based on few crossbow bolts
found on a battlefield (where numerous Genovese had been present) some
'patriotic' Soviet writers managed to build the whole theory of
crossbow being (a) a Slavic invention and (b) a miracle weapon in the
fight against the Mongols. Another person, based on what superficially
looks like a credible evidence declared few years ago that there were
no Mongolian conquests at all and that 'Western Campaign' was actually
an attempt of the Russian princes to help Frederic II against the
Pope. In both cases authors had been totally serious. :-)
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
>
>
>
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On May 13, 11:27 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <47d66f68-2e8e-4e9e-b00a-9a8de6484...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, a...@ho
> > > tmail.com wrote:
>
> > > after I said
>
> > > > > I included Siegfried because he turned up
> > > > > in a presentation I attended last week in Kzoo.
>
> > > > You mean in person? I was under impression that he was more or less
> > > > dead for quite a while but, not being a scholar, I can easily be
> > > > mistaken (after all, with a Small Green Orc With No Brain being
> > > > present, undead human should not be considered as something
> > > > extraordinary).
>
> > > No, he and Sigurd were being discussed, partly in terms of their
> > > mistreatment of Brynhild.
>
> > Hmmmmmmmm...... Isn't it just a possibility that she got a King as a
> > husband AND the best macho man available as a lover? Of course, there
> > was an issue of the lover's wife but in more advanced societies issues
> > like that were quite often settled to everybody's satisfaction.....
>
> > >They deserved what they got, in my opinion,
>
> > Well, was Brynhild better off with BOTH of them dead?
>
> We'd have to ask her, I suppose,
She does not strike me as excessively intelligent person (look at her
criteria for selecting a husband) so why would her opinion matter?
>but Gunther was a loser
Yeah, killing Siggi was a good thing (who needed him around?) but not
making proper use of his money tells something about _his_ brainpower.
>and Siggi
> a two-timer. She and Atilla/Etzel would have made an interesting pair.
> . .
He already married a deranged bitch. I don't think that marrying
another who would also had a lot of muscles all over her anatomy would
make things better in any imaginable aspect. :-)
>
> > > but the latter was warped some years ago by a book sent me by a German
> > > friend featuring Hagen as hero and Siegfried as arrogant, rather stupid
>
> > Well, an ability to kick the s--t out of your opponents quite often
> > serves as an useful substitute to a brain power...
>
> Just because it happens all the time doesn't mean I have to admire
> it!
How could you possibly avoid admiring such a specimen? :-)
[BTW, why would you like him to have brains?]
>
> > > jock hero, _Hagen von Tronje_. After that, my sympathy for Siegfried
> > > decreased considerably, even though I still rather like the
> > > Nibelungenlied as a whole.
>
> > IMO, the only reasonably nice guy in this poem is Atilla. :-)
>
> He never should have messed around with Kriemhild, though. Bad move.
But she was blond and ..... well, and blond. A typical dream-girl for
any self-respecting Asiatic conqueror.
Larry Swain
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:25 +0100, "John Briggs"
> <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Leticia Cluff wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 14 May 2008 10:06:58 -0500, Larry Swain
>>><gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Paul J Gans wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
>>>>>Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
>>>>
>>>>No real question about it. Gregory of Tours mentions him. Gregory
>>>>also mentions Hygelac and talks about his death, as does the Liber
>>>> Francorum, the Liber Monstrorum, and a couple other references.
>>>
>>>What is the form of Hrothgar's name in Gregory?
>>
>>I don't think Hrothgar is in Gregory of Tours. Hygelac's name is
>>Chlochilaichus.
>
>
> That would explain why I couldn't find Hrothgar in the index to
> my translation of Gregory.
But you won't find Hygelac there either, I'd suspect.
It isn't an explicit mention: the text mentions a Danish king and high
lord who allied with the Franks against the Frisians at the same
approximate period that Hygelac attacked the period, description, and
location often taken to indicate Hrothgar.
>
> I guess the occurrence of Hrothgar's Scandinavian equivalent in
> Gesta Danorum doesn't make him a "historical character."
All the references taken together do indicate a historical personage
behind the character.
Leticia Cluff
<gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>Leticia Cluff wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:25 +0100, "John Briggs"
>> <john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Leticia Cluff wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 14 May 2008 10:06:58 -0500, Larry Swain
>>>><gi...@poetic.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Paul J Gans wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Curiously, Hrothgar may even be a historical character. Larry
>>>>>>Swain likely knows the current thinking on this.
>>>>>
>>>>>No real question about it. Gregory of Tours mentions him. Gregory
>>>>>also mentions Hygelac and talks about his death, as does the Liber
>>>>> Francorum, the Liber Monstrorum, and a couple other references.
>>>>
>>>>What is the form of Hrothgar's name in Gregory?
>>>
>>>I don't think Hrothgar is in Gregory of Tours. Hygelac's name is
>>>Chlochilaichus.
>>
>>
>> That would explain why I couldn't find Hrothgar in the index to
>> my translation of Gregory.
>
>But you won't find Hygelac there either, I'd suspect.
Well, I knew to look at names beginning with Ch.
>It isn't an explicit mention: the text mentions a Danish king and high
>lord who allied with the Franks against the Frisians at the same
>approximate period that Hygelac attacked the period, description, and
>location often taken to indicate Hrothgar.
Can you give me chapter and verse on that one? I still can't find
anything but the account of the raid by the Danish fleet
commanded by King Chlochilaich (III.3).
Tish
erilar
> > > Well, an ability to kick the s--t out of your opponents quite often
> > > serves as an useful substitute to a brain power...
> >
> > Just because it happens all the time doesn't mean I have to admire
> > it!
>
> How could you possibly avoid admiring such a specimen? :-)
>
> [BTW, why would you like him to have brains?]
longer (B) not married Kriemhild (C) would never have starred in an
epic, so (D) no one would remember him.
> > > IMO, the only reasonably nice guy in this poem is Atilla. :-)
> >
> > He never should have messed around with Kriemhild, though. Bad move.
>
> But she was blond and ..... well, and blond. A typical dream-girl for
> any self-respecting Asiatic conqueror.
He obviously had muscles in some of his brain space, too 8-)
erilar
<c55c32cf-4bfb-409d...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >but Gunther was a loser
>
> Yeah, killing Siggi was a good thing (who needed him around?) but not
> making proper use of his money tells something about _his_ brainpower.
I intended to comment on this part, too. You're quite right here.
>
> >and Siggi
> > a two-timer. She and Atilla/Etzel would have made an interesting pair.
> > . .
>
> He already married a deranged bitch. I don't think that marrying
> another who would also had a lot of muscles all over her anatomy would
> make things better in any imaginable aspect. :-)
I said "interesting", you'll note 8-)
am...@hotmail.com
> Yes, I've chopped it up a bit> > > Well, an ability to kick the s--t out of your opponents quite often
> > > > serves as an useful substitute to a brain power...
>
> > > Just because it happens all the time doesn't mean I have to admire
> > > it!
>
> > How could you possibly avoid admiring such a specimen? :-)
>
> > [BTW, why would you like him to have brains?]
>
> If he had had brains, he (A) would probably have lived
> longer
This was not a certainty in the environment in question. Having
reputation of a smart-ass in a muscle-oriented society may cause a lot
of irritation and bad feelings. As it was, he was a lovable figure and
a subject of admiration because he was tall, blond and had well-
developed muscles protrubing from various parts of his anatomy. Of
course, it can be argued that these assests resulted in his death
which could be avoided if he had enough brainpower to arrange of 'love
triangle': Brunhild's type females quite often could be
rather ...er... 'open-minded' in their sexual preferences (I'm not
even sure that he would need more than an average brain to try this
option). Or if he was smart enough to arrange for an early demise of
the male members of a royal family and their most loyal followers.
OTOH, we can't exclude a possibility that presense of a brain-power in
some part of his anatomy unoccupied by the muscles would irritate
people to such a degree that soon enough he would face a really big
coalition of the dedicated enemies ready to kill him regardless the
losses.
>(B) not married Kriemhild
With the proper arrangements (see above) this would not necessarily
end up as bad as it did and perhaps the future generations would be
spared Wagnerian operas. Instead it would be something along the lines
"Siggi and his merry wives".
>(C) would never have starred in an
> epic,
Taking into an account that he did not know what to do with the money
he already had, the only motivation can be plain vanity.
> so (D) no one would remember him.
I'm not sure if anybody benefited (in the practical terms) of being
remembered after his/her/its death but, to be fair, I can't say
otherwise as well.
>
> > > > IMO, the only reasonably nice guy in this poem is Atilla. :-)
>
> > > He never should have messed around with Kriemhild, though. Bad move.
>
> > But she was blond and ..... well, and blond. A typical dream-girl for
> > any self-respecting Asiatic conqueror.
>
> He obviously had muscles in some of his brain space, too 8-)
>
No, this space was occupied by a solid bone (typical anatomy of a
legendary hero).
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >but Gunther was a loser
>
> > Yeah, killing Siggi was a good thing (who needed him around?) but not
> > making proper use of his money tells something about _his_ brainpower.
>
> I intended to comment on this part, too. You're quite right here.
>
>
>
> > >and Siggi
> > > a two-timer. She and Atilla/Etzel would have made an interesting pair.
> > > . .
>
> > He already married a deranged bitch. I don't think that marrying
> > another who would also had a lot of muscles all over her anatomy would
> > make things better in any imaginable aspect. :-)
>
> I said "interesting", you'll note 8-)
Ah yes, as in the 'interesting times'.... :-)
Arthur_C...@yahoo.com
the historical character Elfhere appears in one source as a free-
lancer briefly in Roman service
his father is called Ecgdjof [Ecgtheow], son of Ecgwela, an early
Danish king;
and Valdar The Dane is called Beowulf's son
---------------------------
as for Grendel, his father is not named but his mother was Scullda,
the nat. dau of Helgi, a Danish king, by his 3rd wife or mistress,
Tron[a]
-------------------
Helgi is the older brother and predecessor of Hrothgar [Hroar II]
Hrothgar and his wife, Wealtheow, give their daughter, Freawaru, in
marriage to Beowulf following the death of her 1st husband Ingeld II,
by Beowulf's hand, and Beowulf promises to support their son Rorek
(Hrethric) as Hrothgar's successor
----------------------
Rolf "Krake" was the son of Helgi by his 2nd wife Yrsa
he slew his cousin, Hjorvard [son of Hjorir, the older brother and
predecessor of Helgi] who was king for a day who goes by an alias in
the poem
-----------------------
the poem was written by clerics in the court of Redwald of East
Anglia, the 4th Bretwalda, and later copied by the clerics in Canute's
court
erilar
<d1508201-7cd7-4f45...@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
Arthur_C...@yahoo.com wrote:
> the poem was written by clerics in the court of Redwald of East
> Anglia, the 4th Bretwalda, and later copied by the clerics in Canute's
> court
No, it was not. It was the result of an oral tradition extending
further back and only written down by whoever wrote it down, not
invented out of whole cloth.
erilar
<4cb659f4-bc83-4806...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 15, 4:16 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > If he had had brains, he (A) would probably have lived
> > longer
>
> This was not a certainty in the environment in question. Having
> reputation of a smart-ass in a muscle-oriented society may cause a lot
> of irritation and bad feelings. As it was, he was a lovable figure and
> a subject of admiration because he was tall, blond and had well-
> developed muscles protrubing from various parts of his anatomy. Of
> course, it can be argued that these assests resulted in his death
> which could be avoided if he had enough brainpower to arrange of 'love
> triangle': Brunhild's type females quite often could be
> rather ...er... 'open-minded' in their sexual preferences (I'm not
> even sure that he would need more than an average brain to try this
> option). Or if he was smart enough to arrange for an early demise of
> the male members of a royal family and their most loyal followers.
> OTOH, we can't exclude a possibility that presense of a brain-power in
> some part of his anatomy unoccupied by the muscles would irritate
> people to such a degree that soon enough he would face a really big
> coalition of the dedicated enemies ready to kill him regardless the
> losses.
Drat! there went that point. You're probably right.
>
> >(B) not married Kriemhild
>
> With the proper arrangements (see above) this would not necessarily
> end up as bad as it did and perhaps the future generations would be
> spared Wagnerian operas. Instead it would be something along the lines
> "Siggi and his merry wives".
Interesting speculation 8-)
>
>
> >(C) would never have starred in an
> > epic,
>
> Taking into an account that he did not know what to do with the money
> he already had, the only motivation can be plain vanity.
Well, the lack of brains was a major factor here, I suspect.
>
>
> > so (D) no one would remember him.
>
> I'm not sure if anybody benefited (in the practical terms) of being
> remembered after his/her/its death but, to be fair, I can't say
> otherwise as well.
Being remembered as movie makers do it could well make even the
dead come back to complain, though.
>
> >
> > > > > IMO, the only reasonably nice guy in this poem is Atilla. :-)
> >
> > > > He never should have messed around with Kriemhild, though. Bad move.
> >
> > > But she was blond and ..... well, and blond. A typical dream-girl for
> > > any self-respecting Asiatic conqueror.
> >
> > He obviously had muscles in some of his brain space, too 8-)
> >
>
> No, this space was occupied by a solid bone (typical anatomy of a
> legendary hero).
Oh, but of course!
Did you notice the odd interruption in our thread? Beowulf written by
a cleric out of his imagination? Funnier than anything either of us
has offered!
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
>
>
>
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On May 15, 4:16 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > > If he had had brains, he (A) would probably have lived
> > > longer
>
> > This was not a certainty in the environment in question. Having
> > reputation of a smart-ass in a muscle-oriented society may cause a lot
> > of irritation and bad feelings. As it was, he was a lovable figure and
> > a subject of admiration because he was tall, blond and had well-
> > developed muscles protrubing from various parts of his anatomy. Of
> > course, it can be argued that these assests resulted in his death
> > which could be avoided if he had enough brainpower to arrange of 'love
> > triangle': Brunhild's type females quite often could be
> > rather ...er... 'open-minded' in their sexual preferences (I'm not
> > even sure that he would need more than an average brain to try this
> > option). Or if he was smart enough to arrange for an early demise of
> > the male members of a royal family and their most loyal followers.
> > OTOH, we can't exclude a possibility that presense of a brain-power in
> > some part of his anatomy unoccupied by the muscles would irritate
> > people to such a degree that soon enough he would face a really big
> > coalition of the dedicated enemies ready to kill him regardless the
> > losses.
>
> Drat! there went that point. You're probably right.
Did you ever hear about an intelligent Spartan? A totally militarized
society and not a single innovative general. Actually, not a big
surprise because Napoleon, Suvorov. Prince Eugene and Moltke would be
killed at childhood as unfit for military service.
Who were the 'objects of adoration' during the MA? Richard Lion Heart
(why not 'Chicken Brain'), St. Louis ('General Mega Disaster') and
other of the same ilk all the way to Francis I. Who are, usually, the
bad guys? People like Louis XI and Frederich II.
>
> > >(B) not married Kriemhild
>
> > With the proper arrangements (see above) this would not necessarily
> > end up as bad as it did and perhaps the future generations would be
> > spared Wagnerian operas. Instead it would be something along the lines
> > "Siggi and his merry wives".
>
> Interesting speculation 8-)
Well, cancan performed by Brunhilda and Krimhilda could be quite
entertaining. Not to mention even greater 'entertaining' opportunities
for a movie industry... :-)
>
> > >(C) would never have starred in an
> > > epic,
>
> > Taking into an account that he did not know what to do with the money
> > he already had, the only motivation can be plain vanity.
>
> Well, the lack of brains was a major factor here, I suspect.
>
This was across the board phenomena: people who got his money did not
know what to do with them either.
> > > so (D) no one would remember him.
>
> > I'm not sure if anybody benefited (in the practical terms) of being
> > remembered after his/her/its death but, to be fair, I can't say
> > otherwise as well.
>
> Being remembered as movie makers do it could well make even the
> dead come back to complain, though.
You definitely got a point.
>
>
>
> > > > > > IMO, the only reasonably nice guy in this poem is Atilla. :-)
>
> > > > > He never should have messed around with Kriemhild, though. Bad move.
>
> > > > But she was blond and ..... well, and blond. A typical dream-girl for
> > > > any self-respecting Asiatic conqueror.
>
> > > He obviously had muscles in some of his brain space, too 8-)
>
> > No, this space was occupied by a solid bone (typical anatomy of a
> > legendary hero).
>
> Oh, but of course!
>
> Did you notice the odd interruption in our thread?
I wonder why was it necessary to attach this specific post to this
specific thread?
> Beowulf written by
> a cleric out of his imagination?
How 'imagination' crept into this? Everybody (hopefully) knows that,
from the beginning to end, Beowulf (and Niebelungs) contains solid
facts and nothing but the facts (well, of course there are no facts
but this is rather irrelevant). Who can imagine anything of this
magnitude of absurdity? :-)
> Funnier than anything either of us
> has offered!
>
This is a typical problem with the serious people.... :-)
erilar
<17709c58-aee7-4efe...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Who were the 'objects of adoration' during the MA? Richard Lion Heart
> (why not 'Chicken Brain'), St. Louis ('General Mega Disaster') and
> other of the same ilk all the way to Francis I. Who are, usually, the
> bad guys? People like Louis XI and Frederich II.
I'm not really clear on Louis XI(French and too many of that
name to keep them straight), but Fred II was MUCH too intelligent for
the mindless to adore!
> > > With the proper arrangements (see above) this would not necessarily
> > > end up as bad as it did and perhaps the future generations would be
> > > spared Wagnerian operas. Instead it would be something along the lines
> > > "Siggi and his merry wives".
> >
> > Interesting speculation 8-)
>
> Well, cancan performed by Brunhilda and Krimhilda could be quite
> entertaining. Not to mention even greater 'entertaining' opportunities
> for a movie industry... :-)
I can just see the musical. . . shudder. . >
> > > >(C) would never have starred in an
> > > > epic,
> >
> > > Taking into an account that he did not know what to do with the money
> > > he already had, the only motivation can be plain vanity.
> >
> > Well, the lack of brains was a major factor here, I suspect.
> >
>
> This was across the board phenomena: people who got his money did not
> know what to do with them either.
Money often has this effect, it seems to me. I've never had
enough to get stupid 8-)
> >
> > Did you notice the odd interruption in our thread?
>
> I wonder why was it necessary to attach this specific post to this
> specific thread?
Well, at least not as bad as when the Swedish loon got upset about
our discussion of the Maltese.
Which reminds me: I never saw a single example of the purebred
version when I was there. It seems not only the people have a mixed
heritage of blood (and language) from the assorted waves of invaders;
none of the 4-legged inhabitants(including cats all over the place) I
saw seemed to be anything but mixed.
>
> > Beowulf written by
> > a cleric out of his imagination?
>
> How 'imagination' crept into this? Everybody (hopefully) knows that,
> from the beginning to end, Beowulf (and Niebelungs) contains solid
> facts and nothing but the facts (well, of course there are no facts
> but this is rather irrelevant). Who can imagine anything of this
> magnitude of absurdity? :-)
>
> > Funnier than anything either of us
> > has offered!
> >
>
> This is a typical problem with the serious people.... :-)
Serious is fine in a serious medieval thread, but we're closer to
medieval than any I've noticed last over a day or two here since I got
back.
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Who were the 'objects of adoration' during the MA? Richard Lion Heart
> > (why not 'Chicken Brain'), St. Louis ('General Mega Disaster') and
> > other of the same ilk all the way to Francis I. Who are, usually, the
> > bad guys? People like Louis XI and Frederich II.
>
> I'm not really clear on Louis XI(French and too many of that
> name to keep them straight), but Fred II was MUCH too intelligent for
> the mindless to adore!
>
> > > > With the proper arrangements (see above) this would not necessarily
> > > > end up as bad as it did and perhaps the future generations would be
> > > > spared Wagnerian operas. Instead it would be something along the lines
> > > > "Siggi and his merry wives".
>
> > > Interesting speculation 8-)
>
> > Well, cancan performed by Brunhilda and Krimhilda could be quite
> > entertaining. Not to mention even greater 'entertaining' opportunities
> > for a movie industry... :-)
>
> I can just see the musical. . . shudder. .
Well, in this particular case I was thinking more along "Calligula"'s
lines. :-)
>> > > >(C) would never have starred in an
> > > > > epic,
>
> > > > Taking into an account that he did not know what to do with the money
> > > > he already had, the only motivation can be plain vanity.
>
> > > Well, the lack of brains was a major factor here, I suspect.
>
> > This was across the board phenomena: people who got his money did not
> > know what to do with them either.
>
> Money often has this effect, it seems to me. I've never had
> enough to get stupid 8-)
>
Neither did I. However, these guys did not even try to get 'stupid'
like smearing caviar on waiter's face, throwing champaigne bottles in
the mirrors, building mansions in Newport (and pretending to be
'artistocratic'). They just hoarded treasure and did not even try to
spend it. Thinking along musical's lines, scene of a monumental
drinking with Siggi throwing gold pieces to his buddies and Brunni and
Krimmi dancing clad only in the ostrich feathers (there MUST be some
regardles of time and place) and golden jewelry could be a centerpiece
of any operetta.
IIRC, Siggi and his in-laws had been simply sitting on a hoard of gold
without getting any pleasure our of it (OK, I'm not sure that playing
'aristocratic' Newport-style had anything to do with pleasure or
entertainment but big-scale drinking combined with a massive damage to
furniture and providing financial help to the big numbers of ...er....
'unfortunate girls' was considered a bona fide entertainment over a
big span of time, geography and cultures.
> > > Did you notice the odd interruption in our thread?
>
> > I wonder why was it necessary to attach this specific post to this
> > specific thread?
>
> Well, at least not as bad as when the Swedish loon got upset about
> our discussion of the Maltese.
> Which reminds me: I never saw a single example of the purebred
> version when I was there. It seems not only the people have a mixed
> heritage of blood (and language) from the assorted waves of invaders;
> none of the 4-legged inhabitants(including cats all over the place) I
> saw seemed to be anything but mixed.
Now, THIS comes as a big an unpleasant surprise! Do you think that
they also mixed with the Ottomans and otehr invaders? :-)
>
> > > Beowulf written by
> > > a cleric out of his imagination?
>
> > How 'imagination' crept into this? Everybody (hopefully) knows that,
> > from the beginning to end, Beowulf (and Niebelungs) contains solid
> > facts and nothing but the facts (well, of course there are no facts
> > but this is rather irrelevant). Who can imagine anything of this
> > magnitude of absurdity? :-)
>
> > > Funnier than anything either of us
> > > has offered!
>
> > This is a typical problem with the serious people.... :-)
>
> Serious is fine in a serious medieval thread, but we're closer to
> medieval than any I've noticed last over a day or two here since I got
> back.
People's tendency to pollute this site with the issues of a moden
politics is quite upsetting and, personally, I consider these
discussions quite useless: in 99 cases out of 100 you are not going to
convince your opponent in anything unless he/she/it can see a personal
advantage in adopting your point of view. So why get all excited over
these issues?
erilar
<f1c98d2f-3331-42d9...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 17, 10:30 am, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
> > <17709c58-aee7-4efe-a7f3-acfd6018e...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
> > I can just see the musical. . . shudder. .
>
> Well, in this particular case I was thinking more along "Calligula"'s
> lines. :-)
>
> > > This was across the board phenomena: people who got his money did not
> > > know what to do with them either.
> >
> > Money often has this effect, it seems to me. I've never had
> > enough to get stupid 8-)
> >
>
>
> Neither did I. However, these guys did not even try to get 'stupid'
> like smearing caviar on waiter's face, throwing champaigne bottles in
> the mirrors, building mansions in Newport (and pretending to be
> 'artistocratic'). They just hoarded treasure and did not even try to
> spend it. Thinking along musical's lines, scene of a monumental
> drinking with Siggi throwing gold pieces to his buddies and Brunni and
> Krimmi dancing clad only in the ostrich feathers (there MUST be some
> regardles of time and place) and golden jewelry could be a centerpiece
> of any operetta.
Oh, absolutely required!
>
> IIRC, Siggi and his in-laws had been simply sitting on a hoard of gold
> without getting any pleasure our of it (OK, I'm not sure that playing
> 'aristocratic' Newport-style had anything to do with pleasure or
> entertainment but big-scale drinking combined with a massive damage to
> furniture and providing financial help to the big numbers of ...er....
> 'unfortunate girls' was considered a bona fide entertainment over a
> big span of time, geography and cultures.
Yes, I understand that's pretty universal.
>
>
> > > > Did you notice the odd interruption in our thread?
> >
> > > I wonder why was it necessary to attach this specific post to this
> > > specific thread?
> >
> > Well, at least not as bad as when the Swedish loon got upset about
> > our discussion of the Maltese.
> > Which reminds me: I never saw a single example of the purebred
> > version when I was there. It seems not only the people have a mixed
> > heritage of blood (and language) from the assorted waves of invaders;
> > none of the 4-legged inhabitants(including cats all over the place) I
> > saw seemed to be anything but mixed.
>
> Now, THIS comes as a big an unpleasant surprise! Do you think that
> they also mixed with the Ottomans and otehr invaders? :-)
As I understand it, just about every invader who came along
made it into the heritage. Of course, they did rather discourage the
Turks who didn't make it during the Great Siege.
I learned that the people who have lived in/on Gibralter have
an interestingly mixed heritage, too. And then there are those monkeys.
. .
> > Serious is fine in a serious medieval thread, but we're closer to
> > medieval than any I've noticed last over a day or two here since I got
> > back.
>
>
> People's tendency to pollute this site with the issues of a moden
> politics is quite upsetting and, personally, I consider these
> discussions quite useless: in 99 cases out of 100 you are not going to
> convince your opponent in anything unless he/she/it can see a personal
> advantage in adopting your point of view. So why get all excited over
> these issues?
Oh, I denigrate Shrub junior to my son-in-law regularly, in large part
because he defends him. . . but that's probably at least partly due to
the fact that my daughter and I both consider its election by the
Supreme Court and re-election by the fearful stupid the worst political
disaster to hit the country in many decades. We'll never convince each
other, of course.
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
>
>
>
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On May 17, 10:30 am, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <17709c58-aee7-4efe-a7f3-acfd6018e...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
> > > I can just see the musical. . . shudder. .
>
> > Well, in this particular case I was thinking more along "Calligula"'s
> > lines. :-)
>
> > > > This was across the board phenomena: people who got his money did not
> > > > know what to do with them either.
>
> > > Money often has this effect, it seems to me. I've never had
> > > enough to get stupid 8-)
>
> > Neither did I. However, these guys did not even try to get 'stupid'
> > like smearing caviar on waiter's face, throwing champaigne bottles in
> > the mirrors, building mansions in Newport (and pretending to be
> > 'artistocratic'). They just hoarded treasure and did not even try to
> > spend it. Thinking along musical's lines, scene of a monumental
> > drinking with Siggi throwing gold pieces to his buddies and Brunni and
> > Krimmi dancing clad only in the ostrich feathers (there MUST be some
> > regardles of time and place) and golden jewelry could be a centerpiece
> > of any operetta.
>
> Oh, absolutely required!
I'm glad that we are looking eye-to-eye on the REALLY important
issues. :-)
>
> > IIRC, Siggi and his in-laws had been simply sitting on a hoard of gold
> > without getting any pleasure our of it (OK, I'm not sure that playing
> > 'aristocratic' Newport-style had anything to do with pleasure or
> > entertainment but big-scale drinking combined with a massive damage to
> > furniture and providing financial help to the big numbers of ...er....
> > 'unfortunate girls' was considered a bona fide entertainment over a
> > big span of time, geography and cultures.
>
> Yes, I understand that's pretty universal.
>
But here are are dealing with a totally different model of behavior.
Forget a monumental drinking party but, IIRC, there was no even a big-
scale distribution of the wealth among vassals/friends/allies. AFAIK,
a top honcho was supposed to reward his henchmen with the golden
trinkets as an award for their loyalty. Hagen and Gunther surely could
spend loot more productively than throwing it into the water (or
whatever Hagen did). They look more like children are stealing other
child's favorite toy and hiding it just to cause a mischief than like
grown-ups dealing with a huge wealth.
OTOH, IIRC, something of the kind could be traced in a real life
(burying person with a lot of valuables, hiding treasures, etc.) so
today's attitude is not the safest thing to apply retroactively.
>
>
>
>
> > > > > Did you notice the odd interruption in our thread?
>
> > > > I wonder why was it necessary to attach this specific post to this
> > > > specific thread?
>
> > > Well, at least not as bad as when the Swedish loon got upset about
> > > our discussion of the Maltese.
> > > Which reminds me: I never saw a single example of the purebred
> > > version when I was there. It seems not only the people have a mixed
> > > heritage of blood (and language) from the assorted waves of invaders;
> > > none of the 4-legged inhabitants(including cats all over the place) I
> > > saw seemed to be anything but mixed.
>
> > Now, THIS comes as a big an unpleasant surprise! Do you think that
> > they also mixed with the Ottomans and otehr invaders? :-)
>
> As I understand it, just about every invader who came along
> made it into the heritage.
Actually, I was talking about the dogs. While you can expect
certain ...er... excentricities from the Order's knights with their
vows, there is no (AFAIK) reason to assume that the Ottomans were
desperate enough to make love with the dogs... :-)
> Of course, they did rather discourage the
> Turks who didn't make it during the Great Siege.
Do you mean that the Maltese simply had been hiding behind the wall
and as a result were not available to the Ottomans or that they
_actively_ rejected their advances by barking and biting?
> I learned that the people who have lived in/on Gibralter have
> an interestingly mixed heritage, too. And then there are those monkeys.
Hmmmmmm.... Do you mean that they and the monkeys...? After all, there
was at least one protracted siege of Gibraltar and some of the
defenders could get really lonely....
> . .
>
> > > Serious is fine in a serious medieval thread, but we're closer to
> > > medieval than any I've noticed last over a day or two here since I got
> > > back.
>
> > People's tendency to pollute this site with the issues of a moden
> > politics is quite upsetting and, personally, I consider these
> > discussions quite useless: in 99 cases out of 100 you are not going to
> > convince your opponent in anything unless he/she/it can see a personal
> > advantage in adopting your point of view. So why get all excited over
> > these issues?
>
> Oh, I denigrate Shrub junior to my son-in-law regularly, in large part
> because he defends him. . .
A typical behavior for self-respecting mother-in-law. :-)
>but that's probably at least partly due to
> the fact that my daughter and I both consider its election by the
> Supreme Court
Errrr.... Supreme Court did not exactly 'elect' him and it was not him
who brought Judicial Branch into the picture. But look at the
situation from a different perspective: how stupid and incompetent one
has to be to loose (after being VP of an extremely popular President)
to a person whom you consider an imbecile? :-)
>and re-election by the fearful stupid
Thanks a lot. :-)
>the worst political
> disaster to hit the country in many decades.
Well, I was not there when Carter was a President so it is rather
difficult for me to tell for sure but, personally, I don't see any
serious reason to complain.
> We'll never convince each
> other, of course.
Of course. :-)
BTW, being a self-confessed reactionary, I'm not sure that giving
voting rights to the women was unquestionably good idea [running away
very fast to dig a DEEEEP bomb shelter]. :-)
Apple
I did terrible and refuse to divulge my score.
erilar
<0fb97198-f1b0-4225...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 19, 3:47 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
> > <f1c98d2f-3331-42d9-aed1-0f243ea0b...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
> > As I understand it, just about every invader who came along
> > made it into the heritage.
>
> Actually, I was talking about the dogs. While you can expect
> certain ...er... excentricities from the Order's knights with their
> vows, there is no (AFAIK) reason to assume that the Ottomans were
> desperate enough to make love with the dogs... :-)
>
Oh, I was referring to people AND dogs and cats 8-)
> > Of course, they did rather discourage the
> > Turks who didn't make it during the Great Siege.
>
> Do you mean that the Maltese simply had been hiding behind the wall
> and as a result were not available to the Ottomans or that they
> _actively_ rejected their advances by barking and biting?
The Knights of Malta protected their dogs by fighting off the
invaders. I would do the same for mine.
>
> > I learned that the people who have lived in/on Gibralter have
> > an interestingly mixed heritage, too. And then there are those monkeys.
>
> Hmmmmmm.... Do you mean that they and the monkeys...? After all, there
> was at least one protracted siege of Gibraltar and some of the
> defenders could get really lonely....
That was naturally what I was avoiding saying. . .>
>
> > . .
> >
> > > > Serious is fine in a serious medieval thread, but we're closer to
> > > > medieval than any I've noticed last over a day or two here since I got
> > > > back.
> >
> > >
>>> modern
> > > politics is quite upsetting
> > Oh, I denigrate Shrub junior to my son-in-law regularly, in large part
> > because he defends him. . .
>
> A typical behavior for self-respecting mother-in-law. :-)
Once in a while I do fall victim to a stereotype. . .>
> >but that's probably at least partly due to
> > the fact that my daughter and I both consider its election by the
> > Supreme Court
>
> Errrr.... Supreme Court did not exactly 'elect' him and it was not him
> who brought Judicial Branch into the picture. But look at the
> situation from a different perspective: how stupid and incompetent one
> has to be to loose (after being VP of an extremely popular President)
> to a person whom you consider an imbecile? :-)
to say nothing of the incredible humiliation!
>
>
>
> >and re-election by the fearful stupid
>
> Thanks a lot. :-)
You mean he even scared YOU???
>
> >the worst political
> > disaster to hit the country in many decades.
>
> Well, I was not there when Carter was a President so it is rather
> difficult for me to tell for sure but, personally, I don't see any
> serious reason to complain.
Well, Carter was just unable to get anything done; at least he
didn't get thousands of Americans killed by starting a war that seems to
have no end.
>
> > We'll never convince each
> > other, of course.
>
> Of course. :-)
Which is a very good reason to avoid political threads; no one
there is willing to be convinced. We agree on many things and disagree
here, after all.
>
> BTW, being a self-confessed reactionary, I'm not sure that giving
> voting rights to the women was unquestionably good idea [running away
> very fast to dig a DEEEEP bomb shelter]. :-)
You should now be VERY glad indeed that this is a virtual
conversation.
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On May 19, 3:47 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <f1c98d2f-3331-42d9-aed1-0f243ea0b...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
> > > As I understand it, just about every invader who came along
> > > made it into the heritage.
>
> > Actually, I was talking about the dogs. While you can expect
> > certain ...er... excentricities from the Order's knights with their
> > vows, there is no (AFAIK) reason to assume that the Ottomans were
> > desperate enough to make love with the dogs... :-)
>
> Oh, I was referring to people AND dogs and cats 8-)
Cats as well? Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. :-)
> > Of course, they did rather discourage the
> > > Turks who didn't make it during the Great Siege.
>
> > Do you mean that the Maltese simply had been hiding behind the wall
> > and as a result were not available to the Ottomans or that they
> > _actively_ rejected their advances by barking and biting?
>
> The Knights of Malta protected their dogs by fighting off the
> invaders. I would do the same for mine.
>
Indeed. I would not let my dog to get too intimate with some invading
Ottoman. To think about it, I would be careful about her getting too
close to a Maltese Knight as well...
> > > I learned that the people who have lived in/on Gibralter have
> > > an interestingly mixed heritage, too. And then there are those monkeys.
>
> > Hmmmmmm.... Do you mean that they and the monkeys...? After all, there
> > was at least one protracted siege of Gibraltar and some of the
> > defenders could get really lonely....
>
> That was naturally what I was avoiding saying. . .>
Don't be shy: we are talking history..... :-)
>
>
>
> > > . .
>
> > > > > Serious is fine in a serious medieval thread, but we're closer to
> > > > > medieval than any I've noticed last over a day or two here since I got
> > > > > back.
>
> >>> modern
> > > > politics is quite upsetting
> > > Oh, I denigrate Shrub junior to my son-in-law regularly, in large part
> > > because he defends him. . .
>
> > A typical behavior for self-respecting mother-in-law. :-)
>
> Once in a while I do fall victim to a stereotype. . .>
Aren't we all?
>
> > >but that's probably at least partly due to
> > > the fact that my daughter and I both consider its election by the
> > > Supreme Court
>
> > Errrr.... Supreme Court did not exactly 'elect' him and it was not him
> > who brought Judicial Branch into the picture. But look at the
> > situation from a different perspective: how stupid and incompetent one
> > has to be to loose (after being VP of an extremely popular President)
> > to a person whom you consider an imbecile? :-)
>
> to say nothing of the incredible humiliation!
"After skin from his ass was transplanted on his face, he became
totally shamless and calls slap on the face 'a spank'".
E.Swartz, "Shadow"
:-)
>
> > >and re-election by the fearful stupid
>
> > Thanks a lot. :-)
>
> You mean he even scared YOU???
No, thanks for considering me [see above]. :-(
>
> > >the worst political
> > > disaster to hit the country in many decades.
>
> > Well, I was not there when Carter was a President so it is rather
> > difficult for me to tell for sure but, personally, I don't see any
> > serious reason to complain.
>
> Well, Carter was just unable to get anything done;
I would not say so. He did enough to get a well-founded reputation of
an idiot even in the SU.
>at least he
> didn't get thousands of Americans killed by starting a war that seems to
> have no end.
Casulaties of a (single) D-Day were over 10K with approximately 2,500
killed. Over 40K people in the US are killed every year in the traffic
accidents and, IIRC, more than 9K had been killed last year by the
illegals driving without a license.
BTW, the _war_ is over long ago (after Saddam's goverment had been
overthrown). What you are talking about is a military occupation. I
was always saying that occupation strategy was not thought out and
implemented properly.
>
>
>
> > > We'll never convince each
> > > other, of course.
>
> > Of course. :-)
>
> Which is a very good reason to avoid political threads; no one
> there is willing to be convinced. We agree on many things and disagree
> here, after all.
Now you are talking as a smart girl you are. :-)
> > BTW, being a self-confessed reactionary, I'm not sure that giving
> > voting rights to the women was unquestionably good idea [running away
> > very fast to dig a DEEEEP bomb shelter]. :-)
>
> You should now be VERY glad indeed that this is a virtual
> conversation.
Yep, and I'm using the benefits of it. :-)
But your reaction just confirms my point: you are acting (just as you
are voting) based on pure emotions, without letting thinking and
analysis of a situation into the process. Let's assume that you killed
your opponent (me, in this case). Who would be enlightening you on the
Most Modern View at Medieval History? :-)
erilar
<e4ccc03e-1c57-41d5...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > You should now be VERY glad indeed that this is a virtual
> > conversation.
>
> Yep, and I'm using the benefits of it. :-)
>
> But your reaction just confirms my point: you are acting (just as you
> are voting) based on pure emotions, without letting thinking and
> analysis of a situation into the process.
Oh, I've done quite a bit of thinking about the situation, which
is where my daughter and I disagree about young pie-in-the-sky from
Illinois. She lives in Illinois, poor woman. . .
> Let's assume that you killed
> your opponent (me, in this case). Who would be enlightening you on the
> Most Modern View at Medieval History? :-)
Oh, I wasn't contemplating killing you. Force-feeding you soap,
however. . .
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > You should now be VERY glad indeed that this is a virtual
> > > conversation.
>
> > Yep, and I'm using the benefits of it. :-)
>
> > But your reaction just confirms my point: you are acting (just as you
> > are voting) based on pure emotions, without letting thinking and
> > analysis of a situation into the process.
>
> Oh, I've done quite a bit of thinking about the situation, which
> is where my daughter and I disagree about young pie-in-the-sky from
> Illinois. She lives in Illinois, poor woman. . .
>
My condolences... :-)
BTW, did you notice that MA, regardless of all its extreme liberalism
did not vote for this media darling during the primaries. We already
elected his buddy based on 'Together we can' slogan and so far he
proved to be almost totally incompetent (in comparison, our ultra 'Tax
and Spend' Legislature started looking as fiscally responsible).
> > Let's assume that you killed
> > your opponent (me, in this case). Who would be enlightening you on the
> > Most Modern View at Medieval History? :-)
>
> Oh, I wasn't contemplating killing you. Force-feeding you soap,
> however. . .
Now, this would be something to see... :-)
erilar
<ff44e9bd-3020-4610...@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 20, 7:19 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > Oh, I've done quite a bit of thinking about the situation, which
> > is where my daughter and I disagree about young pie-in-the-sky from
> > Illinois. She lives in Illinois, poor woman. . .
> >
>
> My condolences... :-)
>
> BTW, did you notice that MA, regardless of all its extreme liberalism
> did not vote for this media darling during the primaries. We already
> elected his buddy based on 'Together we can' slogan and so far he
> proved to be almost totally incompetent (in comparison, our ultra 'Tax
> and Spend' Legislature started looking as fiscally responsible).
Promises, promises....
Remembering Carter's problems getting things through Congress, I
keep wondering how much the kid could accomplish. . .
>
> > > Let's assume that you killed
> > > your opponent (me, in this case). Who would be enlightening you on the
> > > Most Modern View at Medieval History? :-)
> >
> > Oh, I wasn't contemplating killing you. Force-feeding you soap,
> > however. . .
>
> Now, this would be something to see... :-)
Once upon a time this was used on children who used inappropriate
language. Now I suppose one would be arrested for child abuse for
trying it. In medieval times, of course, "soap" was something else.
Let's see. . . beating them on rocks along the stream and spreading them
out on bushes to dry???
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On May 20, 7:19 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > > Oh, I've done quite a bit of thinking about the situation, which
> > > is where my daughter and I disagree about young pie-in-the-sky from
> > > Illinois. She lives in Illinois, poor woman. . .
>
> > My condolences... :-)
>
> > BTW, did you notice that MA, regardless of all its extreme liberalism
> > did not vote for this media darling during the primaries. We already
> > elected his buddy based on 'Together we can' slogan and so far he
> > proved to be almost totally incompetent (in comparison, our ultra 'Tax
> > and Spend' Legislature started looking as fiscally responsible).
>
> Promises, promises....
There is a joke which ends up with exactly these words but I'm most
definitely not going to tell it to you. :-)
> Remembering Carter's problems getting things through Congress, I
> keep wondering how much the kid could accomplish. . .
This is an open question for any President but I'm somewhat reluctant
of being a guinea pig for the big-scale social experimentations.
Especially when they involve ...er... 'social justice',
'redistribution of the wealth', etc. Somehow I'm always finding myslef
on a paying side.
Not to mention that few decades spend in the Workers Paradise made me
somewhat sceptical about the whole idea..... :-(
>
>
>
> > > > Let's assume that you killed
> > > > your opponent (me, in this case). Who would be enlightening you on the
> > > > Most Modern View at Medieval History? :-)
>
> > > Oh, I wasn't contemplating killing you. Force-feeding you soap,
> > > however. . .
>
> > Now, this would be something to see... :-)
>
> Once upon a time this was used on children who used inappropriate
> language.
I know. But I'm a grown up reactionary so this IS the language totally
appropriate for me. If I start being politically correct, what's the
purpose (and fun) of being a reactionary? :-)
>Now I suppose one would be arrested for child abuse for
> trying it.
Yep.
> In medieval times, of course, "soap" was something else.
> Let's see. . . beating them on rocks along the stream and spreading them
> out on bushes to dry???
>
This sounds as a well-thought and totally appropriate action to me
but, hey, I am a reactionary! :-)
erilar
<be36144f-f90e-4851...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 21, 9:44 am, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
> > <ff44e9bd-3020-4610-a4d5-d8b1eb308...@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> Promises, promises....
>
> There is a joke which ends up with exactly these words but I'm most
> definitely not going to tell it to you. :-)
Likely a good idea 8-)
>
>
> > Remembering Carter's problems getting things through Congress, I
> > keep wondering how much the kid could accomplish. . .
>
> This is an open question for any President but I'm somewhat reluctant
> of being a guinea pig for the big-scale social experimentations.
> Especially when they involve ...er... 'social justice',
> 'redistribution of the wealth', etc. Somehow I'm always finding myslef
> on a paying side.
Oh, I know all about that, too 8-\
>
> Not to mention that few decades spend in the Workers Paradise made me
> somewhat sceptical about the whole idea..... :-(
Oh, QUITE understandable!
>>>>soap,
> > > > however. . .
> >
> > > Now, this would be something to see... :-)
> >
> > Once upon a time this was used on children who used inappropriate
> > language.
>
> I know. But I'm a grown up reactionary so this IS the language totally
> appropriate for me. If I start being politically correct, what's the
> purpose (and fun) of being a reactionary? :-)
None whatsoever, of course. Particularly the fun part.
>
> >Now I suppose one would be arrested for child abuse for
> > trying it.
>
> Yep.
>
> > In medieval times, of course, "soap" was something else.
> > Let's see. . . beating them on rocks along the stream and spreading them
> > out on bushes to dry???
> >
>
> This sounds as a well-thought and totally appropriate action to me
> but, hey, I am a reactionary! :-)
Well, I'm old enough to remember being struck on the hand with a ruler
by a teacher. . . I have major reactionary moments myself.
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
Trust me, it's a LOT of fun:
[usual dialog after finding out that I'm a heartless unfeeling guy]
- So you are a Republican?
- No, I'm a reactionary.
- What does it mean?
- It means that I have a vomiting REACTION on ANY demagoguery...
[and so on]
:-)
>
>
> > >Now I suppose one would be arrested for child abuse for
> > > trying it.
>
> > Yep.
>
> > > In medieval times, of course, "soap" was something else.
> > > Let's see. . . beating them on rocks along the stream and spreading them
> > > out on bushes to dry???
>
> > This sounds as a well-thought and totally appropriate action to me
> > but, hey, I am a reactionary! :-)
>
> Well, I'm old enough to remember being struck on the hand with a ruler
> by a teacher. . . I have major reactionary moments myself.
Welcome to the club!
There are numerous advantages of being a reactionary (as NOT
"conservative" or "liberal" or, God forbid, "Republican" or
"Democrat"). First of all, nobody can tell for sure what exactly this
is supposed to mean so you are totally free in your picking bits and
pieces from ALL available options and ideas. 2nd, you are not supposed
to be Politically Correct (from either point of view) or 'feel deeply'
about any of the supposedly important issues. For example, my condo is
on a reasonably high hill and, being a reactionary, I don't have to
care deeply about the rich guys who have mansions lining the coast and
even less so about what will happen to the Netherlands in the case
when all Arctic ice will melt (which, AFAIK, will NOT result in any
noticeable change of a sea level but never mind). Neither do I have to
limit my food consumption just because somebody outside the US (and
Mr. Obama) may feel badly about this: I'm SUPPOSED to be insensitive
and noncompassionate person. OTOH, I'm not under any obligation to
even consider the BIG ISSUES like abortion and stem cell research from
ANY point of view: we reactionaries do not care about them one way or
another. :-)
erilar
<95728882-9500-48e7...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 21, 5:55 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >If I start being politically correct, what's the
> > > purpose (and fun) of being a reactionary? :-)
> >
> > None whatsoever, of course. Particularly the fun part.
> >
>
> Trust me, it's a LOT of fun:
>
> [usual dialog after finding out that I'm a heartless unfeeling guy]
> - So you are a Republican?
> - No, I'm a reactionary.
> - What does it mean?
> - It means that I have a vomiting REACTION on ANY demagoguery...
> [and so on]
Boy, does that wipe out the new kid on the block in a hurry
8-)
An eminently reasonable viewpoint, I must admit. I DO believe all those
seacoast dwellers will get their comeuppance one of these decades, but I
have some heretical(as opposed to "politically correct") positions of my
own. As for limiting my food, I only do that to selfishly spare my
heart, as I'm not ready to have it attack me just yet 8-)
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
worrying about <long list of the issues you are supposed to worry
about> saves your heart and nervous system so you can safely say that
being a reactionary is (among other things) healthy. :-)
erilar
<5d2ec994-35a9-4a9f...@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
Retiring from attempting to educate teenagers despite the interference
of dim-witted administrative types eliminated most of the stress my
heart used to have to put up with. Now I'm free to be as curmudgeonly
as I choose--which is often VERY 8-)
Actually, I was so reactionary in my language-teaching methods for so
long that eventually current pet-theory-of-the-say circled around and
made me avant garde. That was funny!
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On May 22, 10:22 am, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > > An eminently reasonable viewpoint, I must admit. I DO believe all those
> > > seacoast dwellers will get their comeuppance one of these decades, but I
> > > have some heretical(as opposed to "politically correct") positions of my
> > > own. As for limiting my food, I only do that to selfishly spare my
> > > heart, as I'm not ready to have it attack me just yet 8-)
>
> > It looks like you are a perfect reactionary material. BTW, not
> > worrying about <long list of the issues you are supposed to worry
> > about> saves your heart and nervous system so you can safely say that
> > being a reactionary is (among other things) healthy. :-)
>
> Retiring from attempting to educate teenagers despite the interference
> of dim-witted administrative types eliminated most of the stress my
> heart used to have to put up with. Now I'm free to be as curmudgeonly
> as I choose--which is often VERY 8-)
>
> Actually, I was so reactionary
I knew it!!!!!!!
> in my language-teaching methods
Beating on the head with something heavy could be quite
instrumental...
To be totally honest, my own teaching practice did not include
anything of the kind because I had to deal with the college students
and some of them had been in a much better physical shape than me (not
to mention that some of them had been cops so violence was not prudent
anyway). However, certain amount of a verbal abuse (within limits of
decency) and intimidation worked just fine in combination with a
straighforward explanation that those who are having fun now, may not
have it during the exam. :-)
> for so
> long that eventually current pet-theory-of-the-say circled around and
> made me avant garde. That was funny!
But makes a lot of sense...
erilar
<91d918e4-1922-4cd4...@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 22, 7:28 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
> > <5d2ec994-35a9-4a9f-9ec6-ce36d5078...@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > On May 22, 10:22 am, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > > > An eminently reasonable viewpoint, I must admit. I DO believe all those
> > > > seacoast dwellers will get their comeuppance one of these decades, but I
> > > > have some heretical(as opposed to "politically correct") positions of my
> > > > own. As for limiting my food, I only do that to selfishly spare my
> > > > heart, as I'm not ready to have it attack me just yet 8-)
> >
> > > It looks like you are a perfect reactionary material. BTW, not
> > > worrying about <long list of the issues you are supposed to worry
> > > about> saves your heart and nervous system so you can safely say that
> > > being a reactionary is (among other things) healthy. :-)
> >
> > Retiring from attempting to educate teenagers despite the interference
> > of dim-witted administrative types eliminated most of the stress my
> > heart used to have to put up with. Now I'm free to be as curmudgeonly
> > as I choose--which is often VERY 8-)
> >
> > Actually, I was so reactionary
>
> I knew it!!!!!!!
>
> > in my language-teaching methods
>
> Beating on the head with something heavy could be quite
> instrumental...
Actually, my basic approach to language learning is: learn to
communicate!! When I began, it was "memorize dialogue--no grammar" and
I inserted some grammar. Grammar came back. But then it became "master
every tiny detail even if it takes two years to cover a one-year book"
and I continued to emphasize communication--and let my students use
dictionaries(real-world language skill). Some of my students met
teachers at the college level who covered their papers with red marks
for adjective endings; others found they were the only ones who could
actually converse with their professors. Professors also vary 8-) Some
"errors" don't interfere with communication much. And then there's the
"creative mumble". . .
>
> To be totally honest, my own teaching practice did not include
> anything of the kind because I had to deal with the college students
> and some of them had been in a much better physical shape than me (not
> to mention that some of them had been cops so violence was not prudent
> anyway). However, certain amount of a verbal abuse (within limits of
> decency) and intimidation worked just fine in combination with a
> straighforward explanation that those who are having fun now, may not
> have it during the exam. :-)
>
Yes, that would tend to affect one's methods 8-)
>
>
>
>
> > for so
> > long that eventually current pet-theory-of-the-day circled around and
> > made me avant garde. That was funny!
>
> But makes a lot of sense...
--
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
> - Show quoted text -
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
Of course. We have Paul as a top of the line and then things could
vary all the way down. :-)
>Some
> "errors" don't interfere with communication much. And then there's the
> "creative mumble". . .
Fluent gibberish also can be handy in politics, science, software
development and many other areas.
>
> > To be totally honest, my own teaching practice did not include
> > anything of the kind because I had to deal with the college students
> > and some of them had been in a much better physical shape than me (not
> > to mention that some of them had been cops so violence was not prudent
> > anyway). However, certain amount of a verbal abuse (within limits of
> > decency) and intimidation worked just fine in combination with a
> > straighforward explanation that those who are having fun now, may not
> > have it during the exam. :-)
>
> Yes, that would tend to affect one's methods 8-)
Indeed. BTW, did you notice that I put a new chapter of '....'. Of
course it got lost in all these political discussions but somebody has
to place something medieval. :-)
erilar
<feae82ab-4069-4e64...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 24, 9:29 am, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
>> Some of my students met
> > teachers at the college level who covered their papers with red marks
> > for adjective endings; others found they were the only ones who could
> > actually converse with their professors. Professors also vary 8-)
>
> Of course. We have Paul as a top of the line and then things could
> vary all the way down. :-)
I once(before I had ever been in Germany) attended a summer
school program for teachers of German where we promised to speak German
the entire time. Some of them thought I was extremely fluent because I
talked fast; one of the profs pointed out that I made many mistakes,
which was true. They were the kind that do NOT interfere with
communication. Hence my mention of the "creative mumble": mumble
adjective endings and talk fast and most native listeners will hear what
OUGHT to be there. I did that a lot when I first got to Germany several
years later, too. Much easier than stopping to analyze one's grammar in
mid-conversation.
> Fluent gibberish also can be handy in politics, science, software
> development and many other areas.
Oh, there's no question there!!
>
> Indeed. BTW, did you notice that I put a new chapter of '....'. Of
> course it got lost in all these political discussions but somebody has
> to place something medieval. :-)
I should have commented. I did add it to my collection 8-)