5 ms·

On the Reign of Cleopatra

24 points by picture 3y ago

George83728 3y ago
So I take it the new show depicts Cleopatra as a respectable and honorable monarch? Rehabilitating royal reputations seems like a strangely right-wing take for a modern netflix show. Why would they even do this? Wouldn't the traditional telling of Cleopatra as a seducer of powerful men who tragically snakes herself in the end get more people interested? I think that's the version of Cleopatra that has captured public attention for so long.
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 3y ago
  That's funny, rewriting history is commonly seen as a left-wing past time (see 1619 project, renaming of military bases and schools, removal of statues, etc)
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - AlotOfReading 3y ago
    First off, this sort of comment is pretty clearly against the political flamebait guidelines. Secondly, shaping historical narratives isn't a "left" or "right" thing, it's something humans have been doing as long as we have records. Literally the earliest histories we have are king lists constructed to legitimize rulers by association with famous predecessors and events. Those king lists constantly changed over time to reflect new ideologies and cultural shifts. And of course, you yourself are participating in this dialogue of historical memory with your comment. Notice how all the examples you've picked reflect modern discussions and not say, medieval destructions of Catholic statues in Scotland. This is more of a technical point that may not come across well, but as an archaeologist I would argue that these sorts of dynamic reshapings of historical memory are a fundamental part of human culture. A lot of what we do in historical research revolves around what these oddly selective historical memories reveal about past societies and what they considered important.
  - pavlov 3y ago
    On the other end of the spectrum there are such perennial classics as “the American civil war was about states’ rights” and “the British Empire was good actually.” Control of the historical narrative is absolutely fundamental to most reactionary nationalist (i.e. right-wing) political projects. It can transcend left-right boundaries as in Putin’s Russia today. He has shut down organizations like Memorial which was founded already during late 1980s to document Stalinist crimes. Why would he do that? As a self-proclaimed anti-woke, anti-liberal leader, wouldn’t you expect Putin to want to keep up the memory of Communists’ crimes? But he’s a Russian imperialist first and foremost, and sees the Soviet Union primarily in that light. Anything that sullies the history of Russian supremacy must be eradicated.
- krapp 3y ago
  People nowadays are interested in more than slut-shaming archetypes. As the article mentions, that image was created by the Romans and advanced by European patriarchy, both to demean her for the social crime of having sexual agency by portraying her as an agent of sexual corruption, and to "put her in her place" relative to male rulers, who were allowed to be more than the sum of their sexual exploits. That Cleopatra alone is known primarily for the men she slept with in the context of a time when sex was a common lever of power for all rulers is problematic. Even if one wants to portray Cleopatra as a tragic figure and assuming, as the article claims, her prowess as a ruler and political strategist is a bit overblown, there's nothing wrong with adding some depth and dimension to her. That's the sort of thing that would usually be denounced as "woke."
  - George83728 3y ago
    Shaming? Anyway, whatever it is that people are looking for, the ratings say that monarchist propaganda wasn't it. I think Cleopatra as a sex-icon, like Elizabeth Taylor's version, would sell.
    - krapp 3y ago
      > Shaming? You should read the article. I know it's long but there is a lot of historical and cultural context that might enlighten you as to why Cleopatra has been portrayed the way she has over time. >Anyway, whatever it is that people are looking for, the ratings say that monarchist propaganda wasn't it. What monarchist propaganda? As far as I know, the only controversy around the series was in the portrayal of Cleopatra as black. Simply portraying monarchs is not, in and of itself, propaganda. And I don't see how you can read specific intent from ratings.
      - George83728 3y ago
        I read the article, I know she has been slut shamed throughout history, but that isn't the sort of story I said netflix should tell. It is possible to depict Cleoptra as a privileged narcissist and a powerful sex-positive person simultaneously. Sexy powerful women are popular. What isn't necessary, or evidently popular, is portraying Cleopatra as a empathetic and effective leader dedicated to the Egyptian people, which the article informs me, is what the Netflix show did. The show is, by the way the article describes it, flagrant monarchist propaganda. > As far as I know, the only controversy around the series was in the portrayal of Cleopatra as black Refer yourself to the beginning of your own comment.
throw73888 3y ago
[flagged]
boredhedgehog 3y ago
The first half about Cleopatra's ancestry seems to miss the point of the recent controversy entirely. It makes a big deal about various uncertainties, when the actual (slight) uncertainty the author admits turns out to be merely whether Cleopatra had Egyptian ancestors. But the controversy was started by casting an actress of sub-saharan ethnicity, so that would have been the possibility to be discussed.
- BlueTemplar 3y ago
  > There is, however, no evidence or even particularly useful speculation to suggest that any of Cleopatra’s ancestors at any point in the Iron Age hailed from anywhere south of Memphis, Egypt.[14] [...] > 14. As is frequently the case in history, there often are no right answers, but there are wrong answers.

24 points by picture 3y ago

So I take it the new show depicts Cleopatra as a respectable and honorable monarch? Rehabilitating royal reputations seems like a strangely right-wing take for a modern netflix show. Why would they even do this? Wouldn't the traditional telling of Cleopatra as a seducer of powerful men who tragically snakes herself in the end get more people interested? I think that's the version of Cleopatra that has captured public attention for so long.

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 3y ago
That's funny, rewriting history is commonly seen as a left-wing past time (see 1619 project, renaming of military bases and schools, removal of statues, etc)
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- AlotOfReading 3y ago
  First off, this sort of comment is pretty clearly against the political flamebait guidelines. Secondly, shaping historical narratives isn't a "left" or "right" thing, it's something humans have been doing as long as we have records. Literally the earliest histories we have are king lists constructed to legitimize rulers by association with famous predecessors and events. Those king lists constantly changed over time to reflect new ideologies and cultural shifts. And of course, you yourself are participating in this dialogue of historical memory with your comment. Notice how all the examples you've picked reflect modern discussions and not say, medieval destructions of Catholic statues in Scotland. This is more of a technical point that may not come across well, but as an archaeologist I would argue that these sorts of dynamic reshapings of historical memory are a fundamental part of human culture. A lot of what we do in historical research revolves around what these oddly selective historical memories reveal about past societies and what they considered important.
- pavlov 3y ago
  On the other end of the spectrum there are such perennial classics as “the American civil war was about states’ rights” and “the British Empire was good actually.” Control of the historical narrative is absolutely fundamental to most reactionary nationalist (i.e. right-wing) political projects. It can transcend left-right boundaries as in Putin’s Russia today. He has shut down organizations like Memorial which was founded already during late 1980s to document Stalinist crimes. Why would he do that? As a self-proclaimed anti-woke, anti-liberal leader, wouldn’t you expect Putin to want to keep up the memory of Communists’ crimes? But he’s a Russian imperialist first and foremost, and sees the Soviet Union primarily in that light. Anything that sullies the history of Russian supremacy must be eradicated.
krapp 3y ago
People nowadays are interested in more than slut-shaming archetypes. As the article mentions, that image was created by the Romans and advanced by European patriarchy, both to demean her for the social crime of having sexual agency by portraying her as an agent of sexual corruption, and to "put her in her place" relative to male rulers, who were allowed to be more than the sum of their sexual exploits. That Cleopatra alone is known primarily for the men she slept with in the context of a time when sex was a common lever of power for all rulers is problematic. Even if one wants to portray Cleopatra as a tragic figure and assuming, as the article claims, her prowess as a ruler and political strategist is a bit overblown, there's nothing wrong with adding some depth and dimension to her. That's the sort of thing that would usually be denounced as "woke."
- George83728 3y ago
  Shaming? Anyway, whatever it is that people are looking for, the ratings say that monarchist propaganda wasn't it. I think Cleopatra as a sex-icon, like Elizabeth Taylor's version, would sell.
  - krapp 3y ago
    > Shaming? You should read the article. I know it's long but there is a lot of historical and cultural context that might enlighten you as to why Cleopatra has been portrayed the way she has over time. >Anyway, whatever it is that people are looking for, the ratings say that monarchist propaganda wasn't it. What monarchist propaganda? As far as I know, the only controversy around the series was in the portrayal of Cleopatra as black. Simply portraying monarchs is not, in and of itself, propaganda. And I don't see how you can read specific intent from ratings.
    - George83728 3y ago
      I read the article, I know she has been slut shamed throughout history, but that isn't the sort of story I said netflix should tell. It is possible to depict Cleoptra as a privileged narcissist and a powerful sex-positive person simultaneously. Sexy powerful women are popular. What isn't necessary, or evidently popular, is portraying Cleopatra as a empathetic and effective leader dedicated to the Egyptian people, which the article informs me, is what the Netflix show did. The show is, by the way the article describes it, flagrant monarchist propaganda. > As far as I know, the only controversy around the series was in the portrayal of Cleopatra as black Refer yourself to the beginning of your own comment.

throw73888 3y ago

[flagged]

boredhedgehog 3y ago

The first half about Cleopatra's ancestry seems to miss the point of the recent controversy entirely. It makes a big deal about various uncertainties, when the actual (slight) uncertainty the author admits turns out to be merely whether Cleopatra had Egyptian ancestors. But the controversy was started by casting an actress of sub-saharan ethnicity, so that would have been the possibility to be discussed.

BlueTemplar 3y ago
> There is, however, no evidence or even particularly useful speculation to suggest that any of Cleopatra’s ancestors at any point in the Iron Age hailed from anywhere south of Memphis, Egypt.[14] [...] > 14. As is frequently the case in history, there often are no right answers, but there are wrong answers.