Art History - symbolism
John Dean
repelled by the style of most presenters.
Just watched a show about Velasquez. The talking head is showing one of
Velasquez' portraits of the King of Spain and says something like:-
''In his right hand, the King holds a piece of paper to symbolise the
administration that is his responsibility. His left hand is resting on his
sword as a symbol of his military power''.
You get similar stuff about the symbolism of skulls stuck on shelves behind
the subject of a portrait, or a pair of compasses etc.
Now where does this 'symbolism' come from?
Did Velasquez et al leave diaries where they write 'Almost finished the
portrait of the Big Guy. Think I'll add a piece paper - symbol of admin &
stuff'
Or did they mention in passing to someone who wrote it down 'See where I
painted him holding the sword? That's so folks will know he was a big wheel
in the military'
Or is it an assumption that everything in a painting *must* mean something
so the only argument is about *what* it means?
Or is it the TV guy doing his own interpretation of what the painting's
about?
Or what?
I mean, how's this for a scenario:
Velasquez (for it is he) - Hey, King, could ya lose the filofax? I'm a
*portrait* painter. Ya know? People? You want someone to draw writing, get a
scribe.
King (for it is he) You wish! I'm busy here, bubba. Paint the paper or step
down.
V - OK
K - And don't forget to get this big-ass sword in the picture. My kids gave
it me for Christmas and I love this carved hand-grip
V - Um, I'm not good at weapons. Ya think ya could, like, rest yer hand on
it so most of it is covered & I'll just paint the bits that stick out.
Or Holbein presents his portrait to his latest sitter who moans ''Well, gee,
those shelves behind me look bare''
Holbein - Because that's how they were. I do realism. Picasso isn't born for
another 300 years
Sitter - Yabbut, couldn't ya stick something there? - people are gonna think
we can't afford stuff
H - <sigh> OK. What should I put there?
S - How should I know? I'm not the <draws quotes in air with fingers>
'creative genius'. The kids have got a dressing up box with stuff they used
in that Pirate Pantomime - dig that out & pile it on
So when critics & commentators bang on about 'symbolism' - are they relating
or inventing?
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
Boron Elgar
<john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>I'm always attracted to TV programmes about Art & then simultaneously
>repelled by the style of most presenters.
>Just watched a show about Velasquez. The talking head is showing one of
>Velasquez' portraits of the King of Spain and says something like:-
>
>''In his right hand, the King holds a piece of paper to symbolise the
>administration that is his responsibility. His left hand is resting on his
>sword as a symbol of his military power''.
>You get similar stuff about the symbolism of skulls stuck on shelves behind
>the subject of a portrait, or a pair of compasses etc.
>Now where does this 'symbolism' come from?
Some of it is "traditional," sort of like the lion skin & John the
Baptist. Jesus, even as an infant, is often depicted carrying an orb.
There are many, many books written about all of it and it can be
great fun. Here's an ad for one:
http://www.ont.com/users/swanjones/virginmary.htm
One recognizes saints in paintings by the symbols in them...a small
wheel is Catherine, etc...one of my favorites is of a saint whose
breasts were lopped off. In one painting I saw, she carries them on a
platter.
Many of the religious symbols have been around for hundreds of years
or more and were more likely to be recognized in times past than now,
I'm afraid. There are some paintings and altar pieces that are so
heavily laden with the symbols that it is practically a treasure hunt
to find & identify them all.
The Virtues had symbols, the Seven Deadly Sins, oh, all sorts of
goodies did. Yes...I am getting to it...not all were of religious
nature, as you can see from the Philip IV painting (ugly brute, eh?).
Trying to track down the symbology is not always easy...the ex did a
book on it, I think, and the origins are not always distinct.
>Did Velasquez et al leave diaries where they write 'Almost finished the
>portrait of the Big Guy. Think I'll add a piece paper - symbol of admin &
>stuff'
No.
>Or did they mention in passing to someone who wrote it down 'See where I
>painted him holding the sword? That's so folks will know he was a big wheel
>in the military'
No.
>Or is it an assumption that everything in a painting *must* mean something
>so the only argument is about *what* it means?
Not that it "must", but that it often did. Remember...there was a
population that was mostly illiterate & what better way to let them
know that the guy on the wall was king than to have a common symbol or
two that showed it.
>So when critics & commentators bang on about 'symbolism' - are they relating
>or inventing?
Sister Wendy! Paging Sister Wendy!
boron
StarChaser Tyger
<boron...@hoopmail.com> !
>Not that it "must", but that it often did. Remember...there was a
>population that was mostly illiterate & what better way to let them
>know that the guy on the wall was king than to have a common symbol or
>two that showed it.
One would think the crown would be a broad hint...
--
Visit the Furry Artist InFURmation Page! Contact information, which artists
do and don't want their work posted. http://web.tampabay.rr.com/starchsr/
Address no longer munged for the inconvienence of spammers.
(Yes, this really is me.)
John Dean
> On Thu, 5 Sep 2002 20:27:14 +0100, "John Dean"
> <john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>
>> I'm always attracted to TV programmes about Art & then simultaneously
>> repelled by the style of most presenters.
>
> great fun. Here's an ad for one:
> http://www.ont.com/users/swanjones/virginmary.htm
All righty. here's a couple of quotes from that link :
''Motifs such as the Virgin nursing the infant Jesus, lilies, rays of light,
and books each have specific symbolic meanings. ''
''Producers meticulously explain the meanings associated with the Virgins'
downcast eyes, the colors of her clothing, the architecture, flowers, fruit
and animals featured in depictions of her''
I want to know *who decides* what these meanings are. If the artist knew
what a pomegranate or a meerkat meant, how do *we* know what the artist
knew? Or is it critics who say later - 'Well, clearly, the pomegranate must
represent ..... bla '
Did all the artists mean the same thing by the same symbol? Do all the
critics?
>
> One recognizes saints in paintings by the symbols in them...a small
> wheel is Catherine, etc...
Does that mean *every* painting of Catherine has a small wheel in it? Or no
wheels appear *except* in paintings of Catherine. Or what?
> one of my favorites is of a saint whose
> breasts were lopped off. In one painting I saw, she carries them on a
> platter.
I admit you can spell but you're weird. Apart from the platter painting, how
do you know this isn't an early Gwyneth Paltrow?
>
>
> Not that it "must", but that it often did. Remember...there was a
> population that was mostly illiterate & what better way to let them
> know that the guy on the wall was king than to have a common symbol or
> two that showed it.
Yebbut - how'd they understand the symbolism? Who told them 'See the sword -
that signifies he's commander-in-chief' and did the illiterates ever answer
back 'We knew that - we're illiterate, not stupid'
How did they know what the nasturtiums meant? When they finally spotted the
gecko on the font, did they all suddenly go 'Oh! THAT'S what it's about'?
>
>> So when critics & commentators bang on about 'symbolism' - are they
>> relating or inventing?
>
> Sister Wendy! Paging Sister Wendy!
If Sister Wendy is on your side of the pond I'd be obliged if y'all could
keep her there a while longer.
--
John 'like till hell freezes over' Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
Boron Elgar
<john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>Boron Elgar wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Sep 2002 20:27:14 +0100, "John Dean"
>> <john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>>
>
>I want to know *who decides* what these meanings are. If the artist knew
>what a pomegranate or a meerkat meant, how do *we* know what the artist
>knew? Or is it critics who say later - 'Well, clearly, the pomegranate must
>represent ..... bla '
>Did all the artists mean the same thing by the same symbol? Do all the
>critics?
By now the symbols are pretty much researched and decided upon. How
some of them came to be is lost to history...some, were leftover from
pagan times and were borrowed into the iconography, others evolved
over the years. Again, I cannot say to you who decided upon these
symbols. Not the critics...at least not the modern ones.
>
>>
>> One recognizes saints in paintings by the symbols in them...a small
>> wheel is Catherine, etc...
>
>Does that mean *every* painting of Catherine has a small wheel in it? Or no
>wheels appear *except* in paintings of Catherine. Or what?
I am not sure if anyone else bit the dust & proceeded to martyrdom on
a wheel, but off the top of my head (how's that for a symbol), I'd say
that when the artist wanted to be sure his audience knew it was Saint
(actually ex-saint now, I believe) Catherine, the wheel was likely to
be there. She also had other "attributes" which identified her...hold
on...let me check...ok...Attributes: sword, crown, palm, wheel, and
book.
>
>> one of my favorites is of a saint whose
>> breasts were lopped off. In one painting I saw, she carries them on a
>> platter.
>
>I admit you can spell but you're weird. Apart from the platter painting, how
>do you know this isn't an early Gwyneth Paltrow?
Nope...mine is Agatha. Gwyneth won't be identified with *her*
booblessness until after her beatification, I think. And she needs
three miracles. I mean, have you actually seen "Possession"?
>
>Yebbut - how'd they understand the symbolism? Who told them 'See the sword -
>that signifies he's commander-in-chief' and did the illiterates ever answer
>back 'We knew that - we're illiterate, not stupid'
>How did they know what the nasturtiums meant? When they finally spotted the
>gecko on the font, did they all suddenly go 'Oh! THAT'S what it's about'?
Prolly because most guys had nothing more butch than a stick....or
rake. A guy with a sword was two rungs up automatically. I am really
guessing here, but the saint symbols are easiest to explain and much
less abstract. There must be some info on this, but I do not have it
in any of my books & the ex is out buying school supplies so I cannot
verify anything right now. I will, tho & get back if I can give any
more insight. I know he has had a few European treks devoted very
specifically to hunting down some of these symbols.
Some symbols were related to broad geography, flora or fauna or events
in the life. So & So came from Such & Such & look over in the
corner...there is a itty-bitty Such & Such cathedral. Someone who was
said to have been poisoned had the ruinous plantling somewhere in the
painting. Bozo II took an axe (first one seen in those parts), gave
his father (Bozo I) 40 whacks, and voila!. Bozo II gets painted with
an axe, which then comes to stand for a mean & nasty sonovabitch who
killed his pa.
Some can hit you over the head with their obviousness, such as a lamb
and Jesus but others are much more subtle, such as the color of the
Virgin's robes being blue.
>>
>>> So when critics & commentators bang on about 'symbolism' - are they
>>> relating or inventing?
>>
>> Sister Wendy! Paging Sister Wendy!
>
>If Sister Wendy is on your side of the pond I'd be obliged if y'all could
>keep her there a while longer.
I have been trying to interest the kids' orthodontist in taking her on
for free. For a wimpled lady who lives in a trailer, she sure likes to
talk about the sex stuff in art.
Boron
Deborah
<john...@frag.lineone.net> writes:
>
>So when critics & commentators bang on about 'symbolism' - are they relating
>or inventing?
Welcome to the wonderful world of "iconography."
The best introduction that I can think of is Robertson Davies' novel, "What's
Bred In the Bone." Granted, it's fiction, but if you read you'll (*ahem*) get
the picture.
Best regards from Debo "And what kind of name is 'Wendy' for a nun, anyway?
It's not a saint's name - it was made up by J.M. Barrie" rah
--
FAQ file: http://members.aol.com/SJF1959/index.html
Found in the in-box: send a blank email to
Found_in_the_i...@yahoogroups.com
Deborah
<boron...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>I admit you can spell but you're weird. Apart from the platter painting, how
>>do you know this isn't an early Gwyneth Paltrow?
>
>Nope...mine is Agatha. Gwyneth won't be identified with *her*
>booblessness until after her beatification, I think. And she needs
>three miracles. I mean, have you actually seen "Possession"?
I've seen "Possession"! I loved, loved, loved the novel and have been eagerly
awaiting the film version for about ten years. Actually, I probably would have
loved the film if it hadn't been based on the novel. They totally
misunderstood the Victorian period, the characters, and the plot. But I
digress.
What I really meant to ask was what you mean about three miracles. I assume
that the first two would be a matched set of breasts, but what's the third?
Best regards from Deborah
Boron Elgar
>In article <mdufnuohgrjuc5a9i...@4ax.com>, Boron Elgar
><boron...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>>I admit you can spell but you're weird. Apart from the platter painting, how
>>>do you know this isn't an early Gwyneth Paltrow?
>>
>>Nope...mine is Agatha. Gwyneth won't be identified with *her*
>>booblessness until after her beatification, I think. And she needs
>>three miracles. I mean, have you actually seen "Possession"?
>
>I've seen "Possession"! I loved, loved, loved the novel and have been eagerly
>awaiting the film version for about ten years. Actually, I probably would have
>loved the film if it hadn't been based on the novel. They totally
>misunderstood the Victorian period, the characters, and the plot. But I
>digress.
>
>What I really meant to ask was what you mean about three miracles. I assume
>that the first two would be a matched set of breasts, but what's the third?
>
>Best regards from Deborah
Actually, the "3" reference was stricly the sainthood requirement &
all references to Paltrow beyond that were poor jokes.
(Though I would think that a matched set of breasts would be a
blessing by anyone's accounting)
Boron
Boron
Lalbert1
<boron...@hotmail.com> writes:
>On 06 Sep 2002 02:05:07 GMT, sjf...@aol.com.net.org (Deborah) wrote:
>
>>In article <mdufnuohgrjuc5a9i...@4ax.com>, Boron Elgar
>><boron...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>>I admit you can spell but you're weird. Apart from the platter painting,
>how
>>>>do you know this isn't an early Gwyneth Paltrow?
>>>
>>>Nope...mine is Agatha. Gwyneth won't be identified with *her*
>>>booblessness until after her beatification, I think. And she needs
>>>three miracles. I mean, have you actually seen "Possession"?
>>I've seen "Possession"! I loved, loved, loved the novel and have been
eagerly
>>awaiting the film version for about ten years. Actually, I probably would
have
>>loved the film if it hadn't been based on the novel. They totally
>>misunderstood the Victorian period, the characters, and the plot. But I
>>digress.
>>What I really meant to ask was what you mean about three miracles. I assume
>>that the first two would be a matched set of breasts, but what's the third?
>>
>>Best regards from Deborah
>Actually, the "3" reference was stricly the sainthood requirement &
>all references to Paltrow beyond that were poor jokes.
Drat! I thought you meant three breasts. I really wanted to see that.
Les
GrapeApe
Drat! I thought you meant three breasts. I really wanted to see that.
Total Recall. Not Paltrow however.
Emanuel Brown
>or inventing?
>--
makes them look deep. "The red in this painting symbolizes the
bloodshed of Apartheid..."
In other cases, you ferret things out by delving into his life. The
guy draws a gargoyle in a painting, and his biographer runs across a
picture of his dad and notes a resemblance, or the babe lovingly
painted in another turns out to be a cousin he secretly pined for all
his life.
Besides, few artists live in a vacuum - they write friends about
their political views, talk to other artists, their models, lovers,
patrons, etc. The more you know about them, the more you can see in
their work.
When the expert or critic is just projecting or theorizing, it's
usually pretty obvious - there's typically no backup whatsoever. I had
a teacher in junior high school that claimed writers like Hemingway
and Chandler were proto-feminists, for instance.
Emanuel
Portable Computing FAQ - http://home.att.net/~epbrown01
Sony VAIO 505 info - http://home.att.net/~epbrown01/sony505.html
Join the 505 Mailing List - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sony505/
Blinky the Shark
Boron Elgar wrote:
> One recognizes saints in paintings by the symbols in them...a small
> wheel is Catherine, etc...one of my favorites is of a saint whose
> breasts were lopped off. In one painting I saw, she carries them on a
> platter.
I've never, like *been* to one[1], but that sounds kinda like pictures
I've seen of someone having a mammogram.
And I'm glad the same guy wasn't moved to invent a testeogram.
[1] It's surprisingly hard to get tickets at the last minute.
--
Blinky
Emanuel Brown
>In article <al8b2o$cid$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>, "John Dean"
><john...@frag.lineone.net> writes:
>
>>
>>So when critics & commentators bang on about 'symbolism' - are they relating
>>or inventing?
>
>Welcome to the wonderful world of "iconography."
>
>The best introduction that I can think of is Robertson Davies' novel, "What's
>Bred In the Bone." Granted, it's fiction, but if you read you'll (*ahem*) get
>the picture.
>
has characters emulating Renaissance painting styles complete with
symbolism.
Speaking of which - everyone seems to be discussing Renaissance
artwork with religious symbolism. Granted, this is the most documented
and recognized, as well as sensible since churches financed lots of
art at the time. Is this what Mr. Dean was talking about originally,
or was it more about modern work?
John Dean
> On Fri, 6 Sep 2002 00:19:05 +0100, "John Dean"
> <john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>
>> Boron Elgar wrote:
>>> On Thu, 5 Sep 2002 20:27:14 +0100, "John Dean"
>>> <john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>>>
>>
>
> By now the symbols are pretty much researched and decided upon.
Mom...?
>>
> I will, tho & get back if I can give any
> more insight.
OK - thanks for all this anyway
>
>>
>> If Sister Wendy is on your side of the pond I'd be obliged if y'all
>> could keep her there a while longer.
>
> I have been trying to interest the kids' orthodontist in taking her on
> for free. For a wimpled lady who lives in a trailer, she sure likes to
> talk about the sex stuff in art.
>
You want to kill her party trick? - eating an apple through a tennis racket?
Shame on you.
Ya knew she isn't 'entitled' to wear the costume, right?
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
John Dean
And 'Hitchhiker's Guide' ... ''triple-breasted whore of <somewhere>
John Dean
> On 06 Sep 2002 01:21:24 GMT, sjf...@aol.com.net.org (Deborah) wrote:
>> In article <al8b2o$cid$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>, "John Dean"
>> <john...@frag.lineone.net> writes:
>>
>>>
>>> So when critics & commentators bang on about 'symbolism' - are they
>>> relating or inventing?
>>
>> Welcome to the wonderful world of "iconography."
>>
>> The best introduction that I can think of is Robertson Davies'
>> novel, "What's Bred In the Bone." Granted, it's fiction, but if you
>> read you'll (*ahem*) get the picture.
>>
> This was the first book I thought of as well, since it explains and
> has characters emulating Renaissance painting styles complete with
> symbolism.
> Speaking of which - everyone seems to be discussing Renaissance
> artwork with religious symbolism. Granted, this is the most documented
> and recognized, as well as sensible since churches financed lots of
> art at the time. Is this what Mr. Dean was talking about originally,
> or was it more about modern work?
> Emanuel
Mr? MR? Am I under surveillance?
I'm talking about any work where commentators ''explain'' the symbolism as
if there was a set of cigarette cards available to summarise it.
Boron Elgar
wrote:
> Speaking of which - everyone seems to be discussing Renaissance
>artwork with religious symbolism. Granted, this is the most documented
>and recognized, as well as sensible since churches financed lots of
>art at the time. Is this what Mr. Dean was talking about originally,
>or was it more about modern work?
> Emanuel
The Velasquez that John specifically referred is from around the
1620's, I believe, but John wanted to know the origins of such
attributes or iconography. Nothing modern was discussed until you
happened to bring it up (nicely, too).
Mush of what I referred to in reply was much earlier & the origins
(which I discussed with The PRofessor last night) vary. Some are from
the ancient world (Justice & scales sort of thing) and some religious
symbols are pagan, mythic or folkoric, some arose specifically from
four churches that Constantine had built upon his conversion & some
arose from a 13th century book about the saints, "The Golden Legend"
by Jacobus de Voraigne which, in turn, draws on some earlier works.
The icons & their associations have varied over time...some remained
steady, of course, but other spend centuries meaning one thing & then
appear to change meaning and become re-associated.
Boron
Boron Elgar
<john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>Boron Elgar wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Sep 2002 00:19:05 +0100, "John Dean"
>> <john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Boron Elgar wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 5 Sep 2002 20:27:14 +0100, "John Dean"
>>>> <john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> By now the symbols are pretty much researched and decided upon.
>
>Mom...?
No one knows the "why" most of it, John. I replied to Emanuel earlier
this morning with a bit of origin, but a lot is "cause without a
cause"...the tracking can be taken to an early use and maybe tied to
legend or myth, but I am afraid you're not going to get your good
night's sleep from this stuff.
>
>>>
>> I will, tho & get back if I can give any
>> more insight.
>
>OK - thanks for all this anyway
>>
>>>
>>> If Sister Wendy is on your side of the pond I'd be obliged if y'all
>>> could keep her there a while longer.
>>
>> I have been trying to interest the kids' orthodontist in taking her on
>> for free. For a wimpled lady who lives in a trailer, she sure likes to
>> talk about the sex stuff in art.
>>
>You want to kill her party trick? - eating an apple through a tennis racket?
>Shame on you.
>Ya knew she isn't 'entitled' to wear the costume, right?
Is she in one of those.."defrocked" orders? Surely most women like to
be seen in basic black on occasions that call for some
sophistication..I think of her in a somewhat similar vein to the guy
that heads up "Iron Chef."
Boron
Margaret Kane
"Boron Elgar" <boron...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:86vgnukkkkt4l0irf...@4ax.com...
And also bear in mind that much of the portraiture of the period John was
discussing was not intended simply as a decorative art, but also as
political art. Here's a picture of our king, and look at all the gold and
jewels he's wearing, and see that big armada in the background? It's not
just a portrait, it's propaganda.
A more modern example: the map scene in "The King and I" where the king of
Siam is big and strong, and the king of Burma is tiny and weak.
Linking this to the Protestant art thread, if you look at a series of
portraits of Henry VIII's wives, you can pick up some info on the religious
situation going on by how the women are dressed. That was intentional.
Margaret
Boron Elgar
Yup...back to Holbein...
Boron
>
StarChaser Tyger
<john...@frag.lineone.net> !
>GrapeApe wrote:
>> <<
>> Drat! I thought you meant three breasts. I really wanted to see
>> that. >><BR><BR>
>>
>>
>> Total Recall. Not Paltrow however.
>
>And 'Hitchhiker's Guide' ... ''triple-breasted whore of <somewhere>
Eroticon Six.
Greg Goss
>Best regards from Debo "And what kind of name is 'Wendy' for a nun, anyway?
>It's not a saint's name - it was made up by J.M. Barrie" rah
I claim that it's derived from Gwendolyn. I get hit each time I make
the claim, but I'm remarkably hard to convince of some things.
--
Pfft! Like Deuteronomy applies anymore! (C. Hammacher)
Greg Goss
>> Sister Wendy! Paging Sister Wendy!
>
>If Sister Wendy is on your side of the pond I'd be obliged if y'all could
>keep her there a while longer.
I'm not sure who Sister Wendy is (well, Google gives me a surfeit, but
not enough to internalize what is clearly an archetype), but to me,
Nancy is the sister. Wendy is the spouse.
("American Gothic ... Sister Wendy sees in the curl, however, a sign
that she is not as repressed as her buttoned-up exterior might
indicate.")
Bill Kinkaid
<starc...@mindless.com> wrote
>We get signal. What you say? It's "John Dean"
><john...@frag.lineone.net> !
>
>>GrapeApe wrote:
>>> <<
>>> Drat! I thought you meant three breasts. I really wanted to see
>>> that. >><BR><BR>
>>>
>>> Total Recall. Not Paltrow however.
>>
>>And 'Hitchhiker's Guide' ... ''triple-breasted whore of <somewhere>
>
>Eroticon Six.
Her name was Eccentrica Galumbits (no relation to Incontinentia
Buttocks). She herself described Zaphod Beeblebrox as "the best bang
since the big one".
Bill in Vancouver
Mother ant to her children:
"quit chewing with your mandibles open, or the woodpecker will come"
- Ben Gadd, Handbook of the Canadian Rockies
kay w
the top half is just fine, spaced out with separate quotes, just like it
usually is, like normal, and then
everything from "Total Recall" to "Canadian Rockies" is one non-stop no breaks
run-on paragraph with the multiple pointy things scattered all through..
If it was already explained, I guess I need another explanation in still
smaller words, 'cause I don't understand. Just tell me if I can fix it, and if
so, how? *Little* words, please.
--
kay w
Address munged. AOL isn't necessarily comatose, evidence to the contrary not
withstanding.
The AFCA Kid
>sjf...@aol.com.net.org (Deborah) wrote:
>
>>Best regards from Debo "And what kind of name is 'Wendy' for a nun, anyway?
I think they've been allowed to keep their own names for some time, now.
>>It's not a saint's name - it was made up by J.M. Barrie" rah
No, in fact it wasn't, and really, the fact his comes on the same list with
the "duck's quack doesn't echo" ought to get your spidersense tingling.
"
Groups
Advanced Groups Search Preferences Groups Help
Groups search result 1 for barrie wendy group:alt.folklore.urban
Search Result 1
From: Tsunami (tsu...@khazad-dum.ccsi.com)
Subject: Re: Whole new crop of UL's
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.urban
View: Complete Thread (185 articles) | Original Format
Date: 2000/07/26
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:08:48 +0100, Nancy Boston
<nan...@bostons3.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <8lkn5e$1hk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, gthor...@my-deja.com writes
>
>>(37) The name Wendy was made up for the book Peter Pan. There was never
>>a recorded Wendy before.
>
>True. Apparently J.M. Barrie coined it as a shortening of friendy-wendy.
>
>Nancy-Wancy B
False False False False FALSE (Don't care what Snopes says, its
false).
In order to prove it false, all I had to do was check through various
records before 1904 for ANYONE with the name Wendy. I found a BUNCH.
Here's one example from "www.ancestry.com":
Name of Spouse 1: Mark Harris
Name of Spouse 2: Wendy Hill
Bond Date: 06 Aug 1851
Place: Currituck County, North Carolina
A Wendy was married to Mr. Harris _9 YEARS BEFORE_ J.M. Barrie was
even born.
On top of this I found:
* 11 references to people with the first name "Wendy" in Minnesota
newspapers between 1850-1899.
* 9 people with the first name "Wendy" BURIED in the Woodland Cemetery
in Kitchner, Ontario between 1850-1899.
* 5 people with the first name "Wendy" in Merced County, California
DIED between 1852-1899
* 31 people with the first name "Wendy" in various Minnesota
cemeteries DIED between 1850-1899.
* 16 people with the first name "Wendy" in the Biography & Genealogy
Master Index (BGMI) between 1800-1859.
* 2 people with the first name "Wendy" in the U.S. and U.K.
Directories and Lists, 1680-1830.
For there not being a record of anyone with the first name of Wendy
before 1904, there sure seems to be a lot of them.
In short, J.M. Barrie did NOT "invent" the name, nor was there no
record of a Wendy before 1904. The claim is simply false.
However, in my research of this of issue, I discovered an alternative
explanation for the name Wendy:
According to one source (cited below), Wendy was named after Wendy
Davies, a neighbor child who had died at a young age. I quote from
that source:
James Barrie never had any children of his own, but he spent a lot
of time playing with the children of two friends of his. His
friends were killed in the same year and he adopted their children,
then five boys, as the girl in the family, Wendy, had died herself
at a very early age. In order to keep these boys happy and to
create a new family unit, he wrote down and further developed
characters that he and the boys had played together. Barrie himself
had always been Captain Hook when they played for hours in the
Kensington Gardens as photographs reveal.
Most of the above is confirmed and strengthened by another source
which says:
Barrie's marriage ended in divorce and he never had any children.
However, he was friends with Arthur and Sylvia Llewellyn Davies, and
when they died, became the legal guardian to their five sons: Peter,
John, Michael, Nicholas, and Arthur.
Its also strengthed by another site at Harvard which talks about
Barrie's romps in the park with the children.
To me, this is a bit more solid than Snopes's source (A dictionary of
first names). Sorry, guys.
http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/wendy.htm
http://www.depaul.edu/~sleigh1/study.html
http://www.kirriemuir.co.uk/JMBarrie.htm
http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~art/peter1.html
- Tsunami "I know which way the Wend(y) is blowing"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Google Home - Advertise with Us - Search Solutions - News and Resources -
Language Tools - Jobs, Press, Cool Stuff...
©2002 Google"
>
>I claim that it's derived from Gwendolyn. I get hit each time I make
>the claim, but I'm remarkably hard to convince of some things.
>--
>Pfft! Like Deuteronomy applies anymore! (C. Hammacher)
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
"Impeach duh-be-yuh"
Deborah
<epbr...@att.net> writes:
> In some cases, the artists themselves say what the symbolism is -
>makes them look deep. "The red in this painting symbolizes the
>bloodshed of Apartheid..."
> In other cases, you ferret things out by delving into his life. The
>guy draws a gargoyle in a painting, and his biographer runs across a
>picture of his dad and notes a resemblance, or the babe lovingly
>painted in another turns out to be a cousin he secretly pined for all
>his life.
These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea that
Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any symbolic significance
until somebody pointed it out to him.
Best regards from Deborah
* It isn't often that I have a chance to use the word "ilk" correctly.
danny burstein
[ snip ]
>These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea that
>Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any symbolic significance
>until somebody pointed it out to him.
And Cindy Lauper didn't recognize the significance to the lyrics in "she
bop".
danny " oops, that belongs in AFU. I'll slink back there now " burstein
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
John Dean
> In article <kngfnu07vktspa1ge...@4ax.com>, Emanuel Brown
> <epbr...@att.net> writes:
>
>> In some cases, the artists themselves say what the symbolism is -
>> makes them look deep. "The red in this painting symbolizes the
>> bloodshed of Apartheid..."
>> In other cases, you ferret things out by delving into his life. The
>> guy draws a gargoyle in a painting, and his biographer runs across a
>> picture of his dad and notes a resemblance, or the babe lovingly
>> painted in another turns out to be a cousin he secretly pined for all
>> his life.
>
> These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea
> that Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any symbolic
> significance until somebody pointed it out to him.
>
> Best regards from Deborah
>
> * It isn't often that I have a chance to use the word "ilk"
> correctly.
And this wasn't it. As OED says :-
3. of that ilk, of the same place, territorial designation, or name:
chiefly in names of landed families, as Guthrie of that ilk, Wemyss of that
ilk = Guthrie of Guthrie, Wemyss of Wemyss. Sc.
1473 in Acc. Ld. High Treasurer Scotl. I. 68 Gevin to the Justice Schire
Dauid Guthere of that Ilk, knycht. 1536 Bellenden Cron. Scot. xvii. vii.
(1821) II. 509 Alexander Elphinstoun of that ilk. 1542 Lyndesay Heraldic
Notes Wks. (E.E.T.S.) V. 609 Scot of Balwery.—Wemyss of that ilk.—Lwndy of
that ilk. 1596 Dalrymple tr. Leslie's Hist. Scot. i. 126 King James, the
fyfte of that ilke. 1816 Scott Antiq. xxiv, Then they were Knockwinnocks of
that Ilk. 1860 Gen. P. Thompson Audi Alt. III. civ. 12 A canon and two
choristers sent from St. George's to the hospital of that ilk.
¶Erroneously, that ilk: That family, class, set, or ‘lot’. Also, by
further extension, = kind, sort.
Deborah
<john...@frag.lineone.net> writes:
>> These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea
>> that Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any symbolic
>> significance until somebody pointed it out to him.
>>
>> Best regards from Deborah
>>
>> * It isn't often that I have a chance to use the word "ilk"
>> correctly.
>
>And this wasn't it. As OED says :-
>
>
> 3. of that ilk, of the same place, territorial designation, or name:
>chiefly in names of landed families, as Guthrie of that ilk, Wemyss of that
>ilk = Guthrie of Guthrie, Wemyss of Wemyss. Sc.
Hmm. I construe this definition to include "of that name" as correct usage. Am
I misreading it?
Best regards from Deborah
John Hatpin
M-W Online only has "SORT, KIND <the rejection of these books or
others of like ilk -- Kathleen Molz>", so Deborah's almost right. Yet
"ilk" doesn't fit that sentence, even if one allows the "sort, kind"
usage. "The novel of that sort"? Nah.
--
John Hatpin
John Hatpin
>In article <alcv4p$hun$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>, "John Dean"
><john...@frag.lineone.net> writes:
>
>>> These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea
>>> that Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any symbolic
>>> significance until somebody pointed it out to him.
>>>
>>> Best regards from Deborah
>>>
>>> * It isn't often that I have a chance to use the word "ilk"
>>> correctly.
>>
>>And this wasn't it. As OED says :-
>>
>>
>> 3. of that ilk, of the same place, territorial designation, or name:
>>chiefly in names of landed families, as Guthrie of that ilk, Wemyss of that
>>ilk = Guthrie of Guthrie, Wemyss of Wemyss. Sc.
>
>Hmm. I construe this definition to include "of that name" as correct usage. Am
>I misreading it?
I know I've posted on this in another thread, but I didn't realise
there was a thread break.
Anyway, good call, but I'd say that a novel doesn't have a name as
such, it has a title. Certainly the implication of that OED
definition is that the name is a family name, although that's not
clear from the quoted text.
Sometimes our language defies logical approaches.
--
John Hatpin
Nick Spalding
And although the OED quoted doesn't explicitly say so a Scottish
family name at that. All the examples given are Scottish except
possibly the St George's Hospital one which could be anywhere.
> Sometimes our language defies logical approaches.
Indeed.
--
Nick Spalding
Jerry Bauer
(in message <r9cknukdd77a94458...@4ax.com>):
<<<...>>>
>
> Sometimes our language defies logical approaches.
>
This indicates deficiencies in the applied logical approaches, and
not flaws in language. Just as the old bumblebee canard doesn't
echo, neither does our knowlege nor our ability to completely
understand things limit those things. Our limitations limit
ourselves; what we see is only what we can see.
As this applies to symbolism in art (or any communication medium), it
means that, in that context, _everything is symbolic_. The
expression"of that ilk" is of that ilk. All language, all
communication, is metaphor; the overloading of sounds and glyphs with
meaning, the use of one thing to carry information about another.
This | is ~|.
--
Jerry Randal Bauer
John Dean
> In article <alcv4p$hun$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>, "John Dean"
> <john...@frag.lineone.net> writes:
>
>>> These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea
>>> that Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any
>>> symbolic significance until somebody pointed it out to him.
>>>
>>> Best regards from Deborah
>>>
>>> * It isn't often that I have a chance to use the word "ilk"
>>> correctly.
>>
>> And this wasn't it. As OED says :-
>>
>>
>> 3. of that ilk, of the same place, territorial designation, or
>> name: chiefly in names of landed families, as Guthrie of that ilk,
>> Wemyss of that ilk = Guthrie of Guthrie, Wemyss of Wemyss. Sc.
>
> Hmm. I construe this definition to include "of that name" as correct
> usage. Am I misreading it?
>
ilk'.
I think you're saddled with 'eponymous' for the foreseeable future.
Andrew Gore
>In article <alcv4p$hun$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>, "John Dean"
><john...@frag.lineone.net> writes:
>
>>> These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea
>>> that Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any symbolic
>>> significance until somebody pointed it out to him.
>>>
>>> Best regards from Deborah
>>>
>>> * It isn't often that I have a chance to use the word "ilk"
>>> correctly.
>>
>>And this wasn't it. As OED says :-
>>
<snip>
Far be it from me to argue with the OED (or especially
Deborah) but "ilk" just doesn't sound right, there. I would use "ilk"
in something like:
"The small Western town was historically known for harboring
the likes of Jesse James and others of his ilk."
In Deborah's case, I would have written the sentence as
"Herman Melville had no idea that Moby-Dick (the whale of the
eponymous novel*)
That way you get to use another nifty, arely seen word that
makes you feel smart and important.
The OED doesnt say so, but I cannot think of the phrase "...of
that ilk" without it having a negative, nefarious connotation. Can
you, really? I can see "John Gotti and others of his ilk", but not
"Mother Teresa and others of her ilk..." Naaah.
Nick Spalding
And when I see those I think "another eejit who doesn't know what ilk
means". Those are all examples of what the OED correctly defines as
erroneous. See also "cohort", "beg the question" etc.
--
Nick Spalding
Greg Goss
>Greg Goss go...@gossg.org
Actually, everything I said got lost on the cutting room floor. Or
rather into the out-takes under the credits at the end. But this
subthread is a reply to it anyways.
I really appreciate this. Other than skepticism at W's claims, I
never thought to research this, and googling graveyards would have
never occured to me.
And I've never learned to think of AFU as a source of useful
information.
John Hatpin
> "Herman Melville had no idea that Moby-Dick (the whale of the
>eponymous novel*)
Surely the whale is eponymous, not the novel?
--
John Hatpin
The AFCA Kid
>These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea that
>Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any symbolic significance
>until somebody pointed it out to him.
I am astonishingly skeptical of this statement, especially coming as it does
from Deb.
--
"Impeach duh-be-yuh"
The AFCA Kid
>> "Mother Teresa and others of her ilk..." Naaah.
>
>And when I see those I think "another eejit who doesn't know what ilk
>means". Those are all examples of what the OED correctly defines as
>erroneous. See also "cohort", "beg the question" etc.
Thhh...when I see that sort of thing, I think "here's another stodgy old codger
who thinks he's a step smarter than someone else, but actually the joke's on
him." see also "Welsh Rabbit," and "The Hoi Polloi."
--
"Impeach duh-be-yuh"
Blinky the Shark
> And I've never learned to think of AFU as a source of useful
> information.
Sure it is. Between that and Snopes, you can get a feel for stuff you
don't have to concern yourself with: you can go to a film safely
without having to worry about needles in the seat, you can get your
change out of a pay phone, you can go to the mall without having your
ankles slashed, and so on. It's not just about car-door-hooks, stolen
organs, and toothbrushes.
Not that I'd worry about those things *anyway*, but those two sources
still serve the purpose of keeping some *fact* out there.
--
Blinky
Andrew Gore
Huh? The novel is named after the whale.ather I said, "The
novel about the eponymous whale"? Go argue with John Dean.
Andrew Gore
wrote:
>Andrew Gore wrote, in <fvmlnuo0qf9sf28cv...@4ax.com>:
>
>>
>> The OED doesnt say so, but I cannot think of the phrase "...of
>> that ilk" without it having a negative, nefarious connotation. Can
>> you, really? I can see "John Gotti and others of his ilk", but not
>> "Mother Teresa and others of her ilk..." Naaah.
>
>And when I see those I think "another eejit who doesn't know what ilk
>means". Those are all examples of what the OED correctly defines as
>erroneous. See also "cohort", "beg the question" etc.
What i said was,"The OED doesn't say so", meaning "this is not
per the definition..." I was talking about general usage.
Dictionary.com uses "...can't trust people of that ilk"as the example
sentence. Would you want a local reporter, writing about your family,
to write about "Nick Spalding and those of his ilk..."? Yet that's
exactly correct usage, per the OED.
Andrew Gore
<boron...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I am not sure if anyone else bit the dust & proceeded to martyrdom on
>a wheel, but off the top of my head (how's that for a symbol), I'd say
>that when the artist wanted to be sure his audience knew it was Saint
>(actually ex-saint now, I believe) Catherine, the wheel was likely to
>be there.
Never having attented a religion class, Bible study, or fer
christ's sake even a church service, I am woefully ignorant about much
religious ... stuff. I have occasionally heard about a saint being
un-sainted. De-sainted? The only one I know of is St Christopher.
Which bummed me out cuz I thought the St Chris medals worn by the
California surfer crowd were very cool-looking. Why are saints
de-sainted?
- Is it similar to being de-frocked or excommunicated?
- Do saints sort of fall in and out of favor?
- Does it mean they were discovered to have done something wrong? That
they were'nt so saintly after all?
- Is the church admitting they made a mistake in beauty-shopping them
in the first place? (whatever the hell that term is)
- What if you prayed to that saint? Are you doomed to hell? Is your
ticket to Heaven not punched?
Blinky the Shark
> religious ... stuff. I have occasionally heard about a saint being
> un-sainted. De-sainted? The only one I know of is St Christopher.
> Which bummed me out cuz I thought the St Chris medals worn by the
> California surfer crowd were very cool-looking. Why are saints
One can still wear one's Mr. Christopher medal. Mine's in my wallet.
--
Blinky
Bob Ward
<no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>-:Andrew Gore wrote:
>-:
>-:> religious ... stuff. I have occasionally heard about a saint being
>-:> un-sainted. De-sainted? The only one I know of is St Christopher.
>-:> Which bummed me out cuz I thought the St Chris medals worn by the
>-:> California surfer crowd were very cool-looking. Why are saints
>-:
>-:One can still wear one's Mr. Christopher medal. Mine's in my wallet.
I guess he's an ok decorator, but he seems to flounce a bit too much
for my taste.
--
The time for action is past! NOW is the time for the senseless bickering
Blinky the Shark
> On Sun, 08 Sep 2002 22:12:57 -0700, Blinky the Shark
> <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>
>>-:Andrew Gore wrote:
>>-:
>>-:> religious ... stuff. I have occasionally heard about a saint being
>>-:> un-sainted. De-sainted? The only one I know of is St Christopher.
>>-:> Which bummed me out cuz I thought the St Chris medals worn by the
>>-:> California surfer crowd were very cool-looking. Why are saints
>>-:
>>-:One can still wear one's Mr. Christopher medal. Mine's in my
>>wallet.
>
> I guess he's an ok decorator, but he seems to flounce a bit too much
> for my taste.
> The time for action is past! NOW is the time for the senseless
> bickering
What, we weren't talking about William Christopher? He was *good* for
those boys, dammit -- whether they thought they needed him or not. I
mean, way off in that Strange Land, nothing but talk, talk, talk going
on at the peace...er...talks. Never enough supplies, like alcohol.
Not enough rotation to Japan. Oh, the humanity! The horror.
--
Blinky
Nick Spalding
No it isn't; it falls squarely into:
> ¶Erroneously, that ilk: That family, class, set, or ‘lot’. Also, by
^^^^^^
> further extension, = kind, sort.
My understanding is that the nub of the correct usage of 'ilk' is the
association of a family name with a place name.
Although there is a place in Lincolnshire named Spalding and many
present day Spaldings originated there I am from the quite independent
Scottish branch, and ilk (in its proper usage) is predominantly
Scottish.
--
Nick Spalding
Bob Moissonnier
> sjf...@aol.com.net.org (Deborah) writes:
>
> >These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea that
> >Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any symbolic significance
> >until somebody pointed it out to him.
>
> I am astonishingly skeptical of this statement,
Yeah, me too, having studied Melville (albeit 20 years ago). He sure
used plenty of clear symbolism in, say, Billy Budd.
Boron Elgar
wrote:
>On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 21:14:04 -0400, Boron Elgar
><boron...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I am not sure if anyone else bit the dust & proceeded to martyrdom on
>>a wheel, but off the top of my head (how's that for a symbol), I'd say
>>that when the artist wanted to be sure his audience knew it was Saint
>>(actually ex-saint now, I believe) Catherine, the wheel was likely to
>>be there.
> Never having attented a religion class, Bible study, or fer
>christ's sake even a church service, I am woefully ignorant about much
>religious ... stuff. I have occasionally heard about a saint being
>un-sainted. De-sainted? The only one I know of is St Christopher.
>Which bummed me out cuz I thought the St Chris medals worn by the
>California surfer crowd were very cool-looking. Why are saints
>de-sainted?
>- Is it similar to being de-frocked or excommunicated?
Some is historical accuracy...and I was also being glib...a saint can
be removed from the calendar and have its feast day taken away, or it
can be removed from the martyrology altogether.
>
The intricacies of this should be left to someone who has a better
command of Catholic theology & tradition than this Jewish kid.
Boron
Mark Brader
> I really appreciate this. Other than skepticism at W's claims, I
> never thought to research this, and googling graveyards would have
> never occured to me.
Yeah, well, there wasn't any Kitchner, or even Kitchener, in Ontario
during the years mentioned. It was still called Berlin then. But I
suppose that doesn't invalidate the data.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | I still remember the first time his reality check
m...@vex.net | bounced. -- Darlene Richards
John Hatpin
No, Andrew, I'll argue with *you*. Hey, this is Usenet, after all.
M-W has "eponym" as "one for whom or which something is or is believed
to be named". So, the whale is the eponym, unless you believe that
the whale was named after the book.
Chambers Online has this entry:
eponymous /adj/ said of a character in
a story, etc: having the name which is
used as the title
I doubt if the redoubtable Dean would find anything wrong with that,
so he'd be on my side, so you'd be arguing with him as well as me, and
that's a lot of arguing, and that's the kind of thing that would give
AFCA a bad name.
Why was the whale white? (Try saying that in a hurry) Did Melville
delve into the biological reason? I've heard of whales beaching
themselves, but never bleaching themselves. Was it an albino? Did it
have pink eyes? Is albinoism known in the whale family?
--
John Hatpin
John Hatpin
>I have occasionally heard about a saint being un-sainted. De-sainted?
Desanctified was my guess. However, extensive research shows that the
correct word is "unsanctified".
It might not be in any dictionaries, but MS Word 2000's spillchucker
allows it, so the dictionaries must be all wrong.
--
John Hatpin
Bob Ward
<ag...@brooREMOVEMEkview.karoo.co.uk> wrote:
>-:Andrew Gore wrote:
>-:
>-:>On Sun, 08 Sep 2002 11:16:02 +0100, John Hatpin
>-:><ag...@brooREMOVEMEkview.karoo.co.uk> wrote:
>-:>
>-:>>Andrew Gore wrote (in small part):
>-:>>
>-:>>> "Herman Melville had no idea that Moby-Dick (the whale of the
>-:>>>eponymous novel*)
>-:>>
>-:>>Surely the whale is eponymous, not the novel?
>-:>
>-:> Huh? The novel is named after the whale.ather I said, "The
>-:>novel about the eponymous whale"? Go argue with John Dean.
>-:
>-:No, Andrew, I'll argue with *you*. Hey, this is Usenet, after all.
>-:
>-:M-W has "eponym" as "one for whom or which something is or is believed
>-:to be named". So, the whale is the eponym, unless you believe that
>-:the whale was named after the book.
Had anyone ever heard of him BEFORE the book?
--
John Dean
Yuh-huh
http://www.whalingmuseum.org/moby2.htm - '' Mocha Dick: Melville was also
influenced by stories whalemen told about a ferocious white whale. Twelve
years before Moby-Dick, a U.S. naval officer wrote an article, "Mocha Dick:
The White Whale of the Pacific," in which he described a great whale that
was "white as wool." When the Mocha Dick of this tale was captured, the crew
found twenty harpoons in his body from previous attempts to kill him.''
Surprised Ben & Jerry haven't produced a Mocha Dick Lollipop?
BTW - The 'real-life' Pequod as researched by Herman was the Essex
http://www.pbs.org/odyssey/class/mobydick.html
--
John ' Only the name was changed to protect the blubber' Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
John Dean
> Andrew Gore wrote:
>
>>
>> Huh? The novel is named after the whale.ather I said, "The
>> novel about the eponymous whale"? Go argue with John Dean.
>
> No, Andrew, I'll argue with *you*. Hey, this is Usenet, after all.
Boys, BOYS! There's enough of me to go round.
>
>
> I doubt if the redoubtable Dean would find anything wrong with that,
> so he'd be on my side, so you'd be arguing with him as well as me, and
> that's a lot of arguing, and that's the kind of thing that would give
> AFCA a bad name.
YEAH! And that goes double for my cat (Pssst - what are we arguing about?)
>
> Why was the whale white? (Try saying that in a hurry) Did Melville
> delve into the biological reason? I've heard of whales beaching
> themselves, but never bleaching themselves. Was it an albino? Did it
> have pink eyes? Is albinoism known in the whale family?
http://www.hervey.com.au/whales/thewhite.htm
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
Alex
> Greg Goss go...@gossg.org
> Date: 9/6/02 8:27 PM Eastern writes:
>
> >sjf...@aol.com.net.org (Deborah) wrote:
> >
> >>Best regards from Debo "And what kind of name is 'Wendy' for a nun, anyway?
>
> I think they've been allowed to keep their own names for some time, now.
>
>
> >>It's not a saint's name - it was made up by J.M. Barrie" rah
>
> No, in fact it wasn't, and really, the fact his comes on the same list with
> the "duck's quack doesn't echo" ought to get your spidersense tingling.
>
> "
> Groups
> Advanced Groups Search Preferences Groups Help
>
>
> Groups search result 1 for barrie wendy group:alt.folklore.urban
>
>
> Search Result 1
> Subject: Re: Whole new crop of UL's
> Newsgroups: alt.folklore.urban
> View: Complete Thread (185 articles) | Original Format
> Date: 2000/07/26
>
>
> <nan...@bostons3.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >In article <8lkn5e$1hk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, gthor...@my-deja.com writes
> >
> >>(37) The name Wendy was made up for the book Peter Pan. There was never
> >>a recorded Wendy before.
> >
> >True. Apparently J.M. Barrie coined it as a shortening of friendy-wendy.
> >
> >Nancy-Wancy B
>
> False False False False FALSE (Don't care what Snopes says, its
> false).
>
> In order to prove it false, all I had to do was check through various
> records before 1904 for ANYONE with the name Wendy. I found a BUNCH.
>
> Here's one example from "www.ancestry.com":
>
> Name of Spouse 1: Mark Harris
> Name of Spouse 2: Wendy Hill
> Bond Date: 06 Aug 1851
> Place: Currituck County, North Carolina
>
> A Wendy was married to Mr. Harris _9 YEARS BEFORE_ J.M. Barrie was
> even born.
>
> On top of this I found:
>
> * 11 references to people with the first name "Wendy" in Minnesota
> newspapers between 1850-1899.
>
> * 9 people with the first name "Wendy" BURIED in the Woodland Cemetery
>
> in Kitchner, Ontario between 1850-1899.
>
> * 5 people with the first name "Wendy" in Merced County, California
> DIED between 1852-1899
>
> * 31 people with the first name "Wendy" in various Minnesota
> cemeteries DIED between 1850-1899.
>
> * 16 people with the first name "Wendy" in the Biography & Genealogy
> Master Index (BGMI) between 1800-1859.
>
> * 2 people with the first name "Wendy" in the U.S. and U.K.
> Directories and Lists, 1680-1830.
>
> For there not being a record of anyone with the first name of Wendy
> before 1904, there sure seems to be a lot of them.
>
> In short, J.M. Barrie did NOT "invent" the name, nor was there no
> record of a Wendy before 1904. The claim is simply false.
>
> However, in my research of this of issue, I discovered an alternative
> explanation for the name Wendy:
>
> According to one source (cited below), Wendy was named after Wendy
> Davies, a neighbor child who had died at a young age. I quote from
> that source:
>
> James Barrie never had any children of his own, but he spent a lot
> of time playing with the children of two friends of his. His
> friends were killed in the same year and he adopted their children,
> then five boys, as the girl in the family, Wendy, had died herself
> at a very early age. In order to keep these boys happy and to
> create a new family unit, he wrote down and further developed
> characters that he and the boys had played together. Barrie himself
>
> had always been Captain Hook when they played for hours in the
> Kensington Gardens as photographs reveal.
>
> Most of the above is confirmed and strengthened by another source
> which says:
>
> Barrie's marriage ended in divorce and he never had any children.
> However, he was friends with Arthur and Sylvia Llewellyn Davies, and
>
> when they died, became the legal guardian to their five sons: Peter,
>
> John, Michael, Nicholas, and Arthur.
>
> Its also strengthed by another site at Harvard which talks about
> Barrie's romps in the park with the children.
>
> To me, this is a bit more solid than Snopes's source (A dictionary of
> first names). Sorry, guys.
>
> http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/wendy.htm
> http://www.depaul.edu/~sleigh1/study.html
> http://www.kirriemuir.co.uk/JMBarrie.htm
> http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~art/peter1.html
>
> - Tsunami "I know which way the Wend(y) is blowing"
>
>
However be careful what you take from "googling". There was NO child
named Wendy Davies. Barrie did play with the children of the Llewelyn
Davies family of which there were five - all boys: George, Jack,
Peter, Michael and Nicholas (or Nico as he was called). Arthur was
the name of their father. Both Arthur and Sylvia Llewelyn Davies
would have loved a daughter but they never had one. Barrie apparently
derived his Wendy from being called "My Fweindy" by little Margeret
Henley who did die young. As you show it was a name already, but it
is possible that Barrie did not know this - might not have been too
common in the UK.
Check out the book- J.M Barrie and the Lost Boys by Andrew Birkin
published in 1979 - it's a fascinating story.
Bill Diamond
alt.fan.cecil-adams back on Mon, 09 Sep 2002 16:06:52 +0100 that ...
While my memories of Catechism are faint and distant, I seem to recall
that the Pope generally doesn't de-consecrate a saint, even those
occasional embarrassments that turn out to be pagan gods. The more
official statements have been that they were simply removed for lack
of records. St. Christopher and St. Barbara were removed this way
after Vatican II.
In some cases, they're removed because they're quite frankly a blood
libel. One of the more notorious was Simon of Trent, allegedly a
christian child killed by Jews in Trento, Italy at Easter in 1475 out
of hatred of Christ and to use his blood for the making of matzoh.
Seventeen Jews were tortured into confessions and all manner of
anti-semitic "miracles" were attributed to this Saint. He was
removed from the Calendar in 1965 and veneration explicitly prohibited
by the Vatican.
Others that I can dredge up were Saints Acacius, Dorothy of Caesaria,
Saint Martina, Wilgefortis, Boniface of Tarsus, Saint Faustinus, and
Saint Jovita. The formal statement by their calendar entry states
that they were "removed from the calendar and cultus suppressed"
Bill
N Jill Marsh
<john...@frag.lineone.net>wrote:
>http://www.whalingmuseum.org/moby2.htm - '' Mocha Dick: Melville was also
>influenced by stories whalemen told about a ferocious white whale. Twelve
>years before Moby-Dick, a U.S. naval officer wrote an article, "Mocha Dick:
>The White Whale of the Pacific," in which he described a great whale that
>was "white as wool." When the Mocha Dick of this tale was captured, the crew
>found twenty harpoons in his body from previous attempts to kill him.''
>
>BTW - The 'real-life' Pequod as researched by Herman was the Essex
>http://www.pbs.org/odyssey/class/mobydick.html
I'd like to add to this excellent post slightly by making a book
recommendation:
_In the Heart of the Sea: The Tragedy of the Whaleship Essex_, by
Nathaniel Philbrick, ISBN: 0-14-100182-8, is an excellent account of
the Essex wreck. It's an easy and interesting read, astoundly easy
considering the 19th Century whaling industry wasn't particularly on
my list of things to learn more about.
nj"argh, matey"m
"Ah! Like a David Mamet movie! Smokin'!"
- Mr. Dean succinctly describes my life.
Estron
> Others that I can dredge up were Saints Acacius, Dorothy of
> Caesaria, Saint Martina, Wilgefortis, Boniface of Tarsus,
> Saint Faustinus, and Saint Jovita. The formal statement by
> their calendar entry states that they were "removed from
> the calendar and cultus suppressed"
Is St. Cyril of Alexandria still in good standing? The one who
reportedly oversaw the destruction of the Great Library and the
flaying alive of the last living librarian because it and she
were pagan?
--
All opinions expressed are only that.
Pax vobiscum
est...@tfs.net
Kansas City, Missouri
The AFCA Kid
>
>Previously in alt.fan.cecil-adams, Bill Diamond wrote:
>
>> Others that I can dredge up were Saints Acacius, Dorothy of
>> Caesaria, Saint Martina, Wilgefortis, Boniface of Tarsus,
>> Saint Faustinus, and Saint Jovita. The formal statement by
>> their calendar entry states that they were "removed from
>> the calendar and cultus suppressed"
>
>Is St. Cyril of Alexandria still in good standing?
Yes.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04592b.htm
> The one who
>reportedly oversaw the destruction of the Great Library and the
>flaying alive of the last living librarian because it and she
>were pagan?
One of your "pagan" friends told you that, didn't they?
http://www.bede.org.uk/library.htm
Please note not only is the christian associated with the burning of
Alexandria, not only not St. Cyril, but not even a saint, nor even the most
likely canidate to have performed this event, which probably never took place.
Now, is that ironic, or not?
--
"Impeach duh-be-yuh"
Bill Diamond
on Mon, 09 Sep 2002 21:44:12 -0000 that ...
>Previously in alt.fan.cecil-adams, Bill Diamond wrote:
>
>> Others that I can dredge up were Saints Acacius, Dorothy of
>> Caesaria, Saint Martina, Wilgefortis, Boniface of Tarsus,
>> Saint Faustinus, and Saint Jovita. The formal statement by
>> their calendar entry states that they were "removed from
>> the calendar and cultus suppressed"
>
>Is St. Cyril of Alexandria still in good standing? The one who
>reportedly oversaw the destruction of the Great Library and the
>flaying alive of the last living librarian because it and she
>were pagan?
You betcha. His feastday is June 27th.
Bill
GrapeApe
Ooh! Ooh!
I always wanted to know this one, and a pparently it was just asked, but in
case it wasn't here it is again.
Everytime I've asked someone about a St. Christopher medal , and what he might
be the patron saint of, I get some story along the lines of "Isn't a Saint,
anymore" or even "Never was a saint".
Whats the straight dope on this?
And whats the knights of columbus about anyway?
Estron
> One of your "pagan" friends told you that, didn't they?
Actually, a Sagan told me that. I first heard the story on an episode
of "Cosmos."
The story is still apparently being told, at places like
http://www.digital-brilliance.com/kab/alex.htm.
The author, Ellen Brundige, wrote:
In 412 Theophilus' nephew Cyril succeeded him. . . . Cyril's army of
monks murdered the prefect and were canonized by him for this deed;
marauding through the city they came across Hypatia, daughter of the
Museum's last great mathematician Theon. She was a Neoplatonist
philosopher and astronomer whose teachings are partially recorded by
one of her admirers and pupils, the Christian Synesius, and she was
also supposedly an advisor to Orestes and one of the last members of
the Museum. Driving home from her own lectures without attendant, this
independent woman and scholar epitomized the suspect nature of
Paganism and its heretical scientific teachings. She was dragged from
her chariot by the mob, stripped, flayed, and finally burned alive in
the library of the Caesareum as a witch. Cyril was made a saint.[58]
A 1912 Catholic encyclopedia, online at
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04592b.htm, carries a story by
John Chapman that relates the story but disputes it:
Theophilus died 15 Oct., 412, and on the 18th Cyril was consecrated
his uncle's successor, but only after a riot between his supporters
and those of his rival Timotheus. . . . The Alexandians were always
riotous as we learn from Socrates (VII, vii) and from St. Cyril
himself (Hom. for Easter, 419). In one of these riots, in 422, the
prefect Callistus was killed, and in another was committed the murder
of a female philosopher Hypatia, a highly-respected teacher of neo-
Platoism, of advanced age and (it is said) many virtues. She was a
friend of Orestes, and many believed that she prevented a
reconciliation between the prefect and patriarch. A mob led by a
lector, named Peter, dragged her to a church and tore her flesh with
potsherds till she died. This brought great disgrace, says Socrates,
on the Church of Alexandria and on its bishop; but a lector at
Alexandria was not a cleric (Scr., V, xxii), and Socrates does not
suggest that Cyril himself was to blame. Damascius, indeed, accuses
him, but he is a late authority and a hater of Christians.
And this Web site, http://www.astr.ua.edu/4000WS/HYPATIA.html,
contains a notation of a 1995 book on the subject:
A review of a relatively new book about Hypatia has just surfaced. The
book is Hypatia of Alexandria by Maria Dzielska, 1995 (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press). The review can be found in Free Inquiry,
1996, Vol 16, No. 4. The book describes Hypatia's death as more of a
political assassination than just at the hands of a very angry mob. It
suggests that Hypatia got in the middle of a rivalry between Cyril,
the bishop of Alexandria, and Orestes, the civil authority of the city
who arrived sometime after Cyril had been in position. Hypatia sided
with Orestes. Her influence was so great that this undermined Cyril
and he moved against her, eventually having her killed (so says this
book).
So there are some that say that Cyril was behind, and some that say
not, though he did not lower himself to kill the librarian himself.
> Now, is that ironic, or not?
Not. In no instance did I, for humorous or satiric purpose, set forth
the opposite of what I intended to convey. I may have been wrong, but
it appears there is a dispute about the underlying facts.
--
All opinions expressed are only that.
Pax vobiscum.
est...@tfs.net
Kansas City, Missouri
The AFCA Kid
>Not. In no instance did I, for humorous or satiric purpose, set forth
>the opposite of what I intended to convey. I may have been wrong, but
>it appears there is a dispute about the underlying facts.
Well, but that suggests to me this library place never was burned, at least not
all at once one day, or even over a relatively short period of time.
--
"Impeach duh-be-yuh"
Estron
> Everytime I've asked someone about a St. Christopher medal,
> and what he might be the patron saint of, I get some
> story along the lines of "Isn't a Saint, anymore" or even
> "Never was a saint".
>
> Whats the straight dope on this?
This comes from a Web site called "Catholic Online," from an
author named Terry Katz:
"Before the 1969 reform of the Roman calendar, Christopher was
listed as a martyr who died under Decius. Nothing else is known
about him. There are several legends about him including the one
in which he was crossing a river when a child asked to be
carried across. When Christopher put the child on his shoulders
he found the child was unbelievably heavy. The child, according
to the legend, was Christ carrying the weight of the whole
world. This was what made Christopher patron saint of travelers
and is invoked against storms, plagues, etc. His former feast
day is July 25.
"Before the formal canonization process began in the fifteenth
century, many saints were proclaimed by popular approval. This
was a much faster process but unfortunately many of the saints
so named were based on legends, pagan mythology, or even other
religions -- for example, the story of the Buddha traveled west
to Europe and he was "converted" into a Catholic saint! In 1969,
the Church took a long look at all the saints on its calendar to
see if there was historical evidence that that saint existed and
lived a life of holiness. In taking that long look, the Church
discovered that there was little proof that many "saints",
including some very popular ones, ever lived. Christopher was
one of the names that was determined to have a basis mostly in
legend. Therefore Christopher (and others) were dropped from the
universal calendar.
"Some saints were considered so legendary that their cult was
completely repressed (including St. Ursula). Christopher's cult
was not suppressed but it is confined to local calendars (those
for a diocese, country, or so forth). His name Christopher,
means Christ-bearer. He died a martyr during the reign of Decius
in the third century."
As for your other question, the Knights of Columbus is just a
Catholic lodge.
--
All opinions expressed are only that.
GrapeApe
>many Christians.
It burned several times, not necessarily at the hands of those you might call
arsonists.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01303a.htm
The site above doesn't nail down the final burning, but most other dates
showing up in a google give at least a century AD.
Ian Munro
> sjf...@aol.com.net.org (Deborah) writes:
>
>>These things are notoriously variable. Herman Melville had no idea that
>>Moby-Dick (the whale in the novel of that ilk*) had any symbolic
>>significance until somebody pointed it out to him.
>
> does from Deb.
Good eye. In a letter to Hawthorne, to whom he dedicated _Mody Dick_,
Meville wrote:
Shall I send you a fin of the Whale by way of a specimen mouthful?
The tail is not yet cooked -- though the hell-fire in which the
whole book is broiled might not unreasonably have cooked it all ere
this. This is the book's motto (the secret one), -- Ego non baptiso
te in nomine -- but make out the rest yourself.
The ending of the Latin phrase that Hawthorne has to work out for himself
would be "...Patris et Filli et Spiritus Sancti -- sed in nomine
Diaboli." That is, "I baptize you not in the name of the Father, Son and
Holy Ghost but in the name of the Devil," a phrase Melville had jotted
down in his set of Shakespeare.[1] Sounds like someone with some pretty
clear ideas about what the whale might signify.
Incidentally, there is a whole genre of these stories in which authors
refute the interpretive claims other people (especially shallow and
conceited literary critcs) have made about their work. Robertson Davies
tells one in the first person (about _World of Wonders_) in an interview
I have somewhere, but I suspect he's pulling someone's leg.
Ian Munro
1. See <http://www.angelfire.com/me2/artgirl/trimpi.html> for more
details, as well as <www.melville.com>.
--
"I resent the implication that my job is not pretty."
--Christine Malcom-Dept.
GrapeApe
>Meville wrote:
That was the one he wrote about the Tidy Bowl man wasn't it?
Blinky the Shark
> religions -- for example, the story of the Buddha traveled west
> to Europe and he was "converted" into a Catholic saint! In 1969,
Damn! Saint Buddha shoud've stood right out -- I musta been sleeping
through his sainthood.
Or I wasn't Catholic.
--
Blinky T. "or all of the above" Shark
Andrew Gore
>Previously on alt.fan.cecil-adams, The AFCA Kid wrote:
>
>> One of your "pagan" friends told you that, didn't they?
>
>Actually, a Sagan told me that. I first heard the story on an episode
>of "Cosmos."
>
>The story is still apparently being told, at places like
I'm sure you'll agree that the loss of the ancient Library of
Alexandia was a terrible event... all that accumulated knowledge
going up in smoke at the hands of brutes who wanted to keep the world
ignorant and easy to dominate. But I've always wondered- What do we
know of what was lost? I know that's the point, that we'll never know
what was there, specifically. But there must be some general idea of
what the library contained. Whose knowledge did it store? What kind of
thing- religious studies, scientific work? History books? Cook books?
Trashy novels? Pharoah Imahotep's collection of National Geographics,
and "Jokes for the John?" What culture(s) stored their library books
there?
GrapeApe
>Alexandia was a terrible event... all that accumulated knowledge
>going up in smoke at the hands of brutes who wanted to keep the world
>ignorant and easy to dominate. But I've always wondered- What do we
>know of what was lost? I know that's the point, that we'll never know
>what was there, specifically. But there must be some general idea of
>what the library contained. Whose knowledge did it store? What kind of
>thing- religious studies, scientific work? History books? Cook books?
>Trashy novels? Pharoah Imahotep's collection of National Geographics,
>and "Jokes for the John?" What culture(s) stored their library books
>there?
Filth. Pron.
Actually that might make an interesting survey for someones college paper-
seeing how many histories of the burnings of alexandria mention the sex
manuals, and which ones do not. But most of the knowledge I think was lost,
outside of histories, and perhaps some business records, were Maps. Those were
even of use to those that could not read text. Well, and of course, the sex
manuals.
The famous bit about its last and final burning was some local religious leader
being asked if it should stand, and saying something like
If these writings of the Greeks agree with the book of God, they are useless,
and need not be preserved; if they disagree, they are pernicious, and ought to
be destroyed.
On his retirement, this same leader, through various mediums, acted as
consultant on the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch Hunt, and the McCarthy
hearings.
The AFCA Kid
>On Mon, 9 Sep 2002 21:33:03 -0500, Estron <est...@tfs.net> wrote:
>
>>Previously on alt.fan.cecil-adams, The AFCA Kid wrote:
>>
>>> One of your "pagan" friends told you that, didn't they?
>>
>>Actually, a Sagan told me that. I first heard the story on an episode
>>of "Cosmos."
>>
>>The story is still apparently being told, at places like
>
> I'm sure you'll agree that the loss of the ancient Library of
>Alexandia was a terrible event.
I'm not even sure it was an event
>.. all that accumulated knowledge
>going up in smoke at the hands of brutes who wanted to keep the world
>ignorant and easy to dominate.
And again, I'm not at all sure this is why it happened, assuming there was a
burning of the library at Alexandria in the way there was, oh, say, the Great
Chicago Fire.
> But I've always wondered- What do we
>know of what was lost?
Well, you know, it wasn't the only place people stored information, and we
know from contemporaneous accounts at least some of what was there.
> I know that's the point, that we'll never know
>what was there, specifically. But there must be some general idea of
>what the library contained. Whose knowledge did it store? What kind of
>thing- religious studies, scientific work? History books? Cook books?
>Trashy novels? Pharoah Imahotep's collection of National Geographics,
>and "Jokes for the John?" What culture(s) stored their library books
>there?
Apparently the major loss was Sappho's poetry.
--
"Impeach duh-be-yuh"
Jason Quick
> I'm sure you'll agree that the loss of the ancient Library of
> Alexandia was a terrible event... all that accumulated knowledge
> going up in smoke at the hands of brutes who wanted to keep the world
> ignorant and easy to dominate.
Ya know, I've heard it said that -
- The destruction of the Library of Alexandria wasn't a particular event,
but rather a series of raids, pillages, thefts, etc. over a period of many
years that effectively robbed the Library of its stores of knowledge.
- Also, that the destruction of said Library probably set human endeavour
back like 500-1000 years, particularly WRT the Renaissance.
Anyone wanna bite on this hook?
Dutch wrote:
> Apparently the major loss was Sappho's poetry.
I dunno. Seem to remember reading that considerably more knowledge was
stored there - figure the accumulated knowledge of mathematics, physics,
astronomy, medicine, art (7 of 123 of Sophocles' plays survived from what
Sagan sez). Sounds like a helluva loss.
Jason (didn't really read the other thread)
GrapeApe
>we
>know from contemporaneous accounts at least some of what was there.
But its the one everyone bemoans the loss of, apparently the library of
congress of its day or whatever. Big Rich modern culture on top of old learned
culture, with a ton of info all saved up.
I think what bothers me is, there is this impression that they may have known a
lot more than we give them credit for according to other sources and guesswork,
and all that info is lost. Of course, maybe all the scrolls sucked.
partly_warmer
main three problems are:
1) Nobody knows what exactly was in it.
2) It's been a political/religious football for years, with various groups
using it as "evidence" to prove what barbarians their foes were. (Carl
Sagan's broadcast, as I recall, seemed to be a little on the fanatical
side.)
3) As Jason pointed out, it wasn't one event, but several.
There are scholarly Internet sites that wrap up the major issues. I don't
still have the URLs.
Other factoids:
- Until the advent of the printing press, the spoken word had a pivotal role
in conveying information from one generation to another. Much of what was
written, would also have been known by word of mouth.
- For some important books, either other copies would exist, or at least
paraphrased works would exist.
- When scholars started being able to read the charred scrolls at Pompeii
libraries a few years ago there was great excitement, because it was assumed
all of our popular favorites would be there. Big disappointment. Much of the
material was from a not-very-known-or-respected school of thought, which
happened to be popular among the rich folk at Pompeii.
- Many ancient records aren't much more exciting than "David sold me three
sheep for two ounces of spice." Useful for a historian or archeologist,
pretty dry for everyone else.
I don't know about you, but even as a historian, after I've read a couple
hundred pages of Plato, Caesar, Plutarch, I've had as much as I can usefully
assimilate (not being an ancient historian). If we were talking about lost
books of the Bible, or pivotal works of Socrates, that would be different.
The new Library of Alexandria has just been opened. Very spiffy
archetecture. Placed right at the edge of the water. Can you say "raising
sea level"? Just brilliant.
"Jason Quick" <jsq...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aluoll$15p5u$1...@ID-57673.news.dfncis.de...