4 ms·

When you go see renaissance cultural stuff romanticizing the ancient romans and greeks do you crap all over it on the basis that the societies they're romantici

When you go see renaissance cultural stuff romanticizing the ancient romans and greeks do you crap all over it on the basis that the societies they're romanticizing had spicy takes on women or that their economies were comparatively primitive? Are you going to complain that they didn't have running water and electricity in the old west while you're at it? The past was generally rife with problems that hadn't yet been solved. Some of those were technical and some of them social. But dismissing it all as racism or whatever is misleading at best. People (generally, I'm sure there's a few exceptions) aren't romanticizing the racism or the violence or the outhouses or the lack of antibiotics or any other negatives that have since been solved or improved upon, when they romanticize these periods of history.

analog31 2y ago
Texas is a little bit closer to home, if you will. There are still people alive today who believe that aspects of it -- mythical or real -- are fundamental to our culture, or a model for contemporary society.
cratermoon 2y ago
I will push back on people who romanticize and emulate those societies, and in the US in the 21st century there are plenty of folks who would like to see the country return to when times were supposedly "great".
- noworriesnate 2y ago
  I’m glad that the status quo works for you, but it doesn’t work for most people which is why there is so much upheaval right now. It’s screwed up that our society makes raising children so hard. It’s screwed up that our society is so low trust. Those are two things that were much better when we were setting the west and it’s worth exploring how we can return somewhat to those times. By the way, I don’t think anyone wants to return fully to those times. The question is, on what ways can we return and get the maximum benefit for our people? That is a conversation worth having.
  - giardini 2y ago
    Yeah, I wouldn't have made it this far w/o modern antibiotics!
  - kasey_junk 2y ago
    You are engaging in romanticism right now. You’ve made a bunch of qualitative statements that are based on a history that likely isn’t real. In what ways do you think it was easier to raise children when the west was settled, why do you believe that trust levels were higher? Why do you think the status quo is worse for more people now? You need to make some of that quantitative to even have a reasonable discussion about it or we are just talking about mental images, whether that be little house on the prairie or the artful dodger.
    - noworriesnate 2y ago
      No, this discussion doesn't have to be qualitative. You dismiss Little House on the Prairie, which is ironic because Laura Wilder quite literally wrote an exact biography that had some details (like the death of her brother) that were left out in the child-friendly books. I'm so thankful that she wrote both kinds of books so that folks can't honestly dismiss the "bad old days" as objectively worse than the present. Your chronological snobbery reminds me of a similar blindness that modernity has for the "women and children first" policy when the Titanic was sinking. When they made the movie, the director deliberately altered the story because he believed nobody would believe the truth. Yet the truth is, women and children were a whole lot more likely to survive than men, indicating that policy must have taken place[1]. The reality is, if you read first-hand accounts of the west, you see an incredible optimism, an incredible amount of sacrifice and an incredible amount of shared community on the west. That is so alien to our modern culture, where most people know a prophet of doom and gloom, people think that "community" is something you can purchase with a membership or find online, and conspiracy theories (real and imagined!) are a constant hot topic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_children_first#20th_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_children_first#20th_...
      - kasey_junk 2y ago
davidw 2y ago
The Romans are 'ancient history' and not directly connected to current events in the US. Sure, we have some cultural inheritance from them, but they're many, many generations removed from us, whereas some of this 'western lore' stuff is not, really. I have a photo of my own great grandfather on a horse with a rifle in Montana. He was a ranger with the Forest Service.
- the_af 2y ago
  The Fascists did romanticize (a distorted version of) the Roman Empire. There's a similar and misplaced admiration of Sparta, which is wrong headed since Sparta wasn't even all that good at military matters, and, compared to other city states of the time, a failure at everything else.
  - davidw 2y ago
    Don't get the downvotes for that - it was very much true for fascist Italy - they had a thing for the Roman empire. Still, a bit of a different situation though.
    - the_af 2y ago
      Don't worry about the downvotes, they seem to be drive-by style. I agree with your comment, and also agree it's not exactly the same situation. The romanticization of the Old West is much closer to the current political climate in the US. There's also the baggage of the "Lost Cause" that still permeates their politics, sadly. It was mostly a nitpick, I just wanted to point out this kind of misguided fascination for old history has also impacted the Roman Empire, Sparta (which I mentioned because there's a kind of rightwing admiration for "Spartan values", which is hogwash), etc.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
    What. Sparta, in its heyday, had one of the mightiest infantries in Greece, and that's saying something. One does not simply defeat Athens in a thirty years war without having serious military capabilities. They were fascist assholes who murdered slaves as a rite of passage, but they were also good soldiers. No reason to deny that.
otikik 2y ago
I'll accept all romantizatizicing of the ancient roman empire as long as it's The Life of Brian.
IAmBroom 2y ago
> When you go see renaissance cultural stuff romanticizing the ancient romans and greeks do you crap all over it on the basis that the societies they're romanticizing had spicy takes on women or that their economies were comparatively primitive? So, pointing out ethical failures accurately is "crapping all over it"? > Are you going to complain that they didn't have running water and electricity in the old west while you're at it? I'm going to suggest that objecting to enslavement, and objecting to having a well with a bucket, are not anywhere on the same spectrum. You seem to be arguing from a truly dishonest, and fundamentally immoral, basis.
the_af 2y ago
It's not crapping all over history. If it was engaged with in a rigorous manner, nobody would have a problem with it. The problem is that they romanticize it, paint an inaccurate picture of it, and also try to draw conclusions about modern life based on these misconceptions. It's not about mocking them because of the outhouses.

analog31 2y ago

Texas is a little bit closer to home, if you will. There are still people alive today who believe that aspects of it -- mythical or real -- are fundamental to our culture, or a model for contemporary society.

cratermoon 2y ago

I will push back on people who romanticize and emulate those societies, and in the US in the 21st century there are plenty of folks who would like to see the country return to when times were supposedly "great".

noworriesnate 2y ago
I’m glad that the status quo works for you, but it doesn’t work for most people which is why there is so much upheaval right now. It’s screwed up that our society makes raising children so hard. It’s screwed up that our society is so low trust. Those are two things that were much better when we were setting the west and it’s worth exploring how we can return somewhat to those times. By the way, I don’t think anyone wants to return fully to those times. The question is, on what ways can we return and get the maximum benefit for our people? That is a conversation worth having.
- giardini 2y ago
  Yeah, I wouldn't have made it this far w/o modern antibiotics!
- kasey_junk 2y ago
  You are engaging in romanticism right now. You’ve made a bunch of qualitative statements that are based on a history that likely isn’t real. In what ways do you think it was easier to raise children when the west was settled, why do you believe that trust levels were higher? Why do you think the status quo is worse for more people now? You need to make some of that quantitative to even have a reasonable discussion about it or we are just talking about mental images, whether that be little house on the prairie or the artful dodger.
  - noworriesnate 2y ago
    No, this discussion doesn't have to be qualitative. You dismiss Little House on the Prairie, which is ironic because Laura Wilder quite literally wrote an exact biography that had some details (like the death of her brother) that were left out in the child-friendly books. I'm so thankful that she wrote both kinds of books so that folks can't honestly dismiss the "bad old days" as objectively worse than the present. Your chronological snobbery reminds me of a similar blindness that modernity has for the "women and children first" policy when the Titanic was sinking. When they made the movie, the director deliberately altered the story because he believed nobody would believe the truth. Yet the truth is, women and children were a whole lot more likely to survive than men, indicating that policy must have taken place[1]. The reality is, if you read first-hand accounts of the west, you see an incredible optimism, an incredible amount of sacrifice and an incredible amount of shared community on the west. That is so alien to our modern culture, where most people know a prophet of doom and gloom, people think that "community" is something you can purchase with a membership or find online, and conspiracy theories (real and imagined!) are a constant hot topic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_children_first#20th_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_children_first#20th_...
    - kasey_junk 2y ago

davidw 2y ago

The Romans are 'ancient history' and not directly connected to current events in the US. Sure, we have some cultural inheritance from them, but they're many, many generations removed from us, whereas some of this 'western lore' stuff is not, really. I have a photo of my own great grandfather on a horse with a rifle in Montana. He was a ranger with the Forest Service.

the_af 2y ago
The Fascists did romanticize (a distorted version of) the Roman Empire. There's a similar and misplaced admiration of Sparta, which is wrong headed since Sparta wasn't even all that good at military matters, and, compared to other city states of the time, a failure at everything else.
- davidw 2y ago
  Don't get the downvotes for that - it was very much true for fascist Italy - they had a thing for the Roman empire. Still, a bit of a different situation though.
  - the_af 2y ago
    Don't worry about the downvotes, they seem to be drive-by style. I agree with your comment, and also agree it's not exactly the same situation. The romanticization of the Old West is much closer to the current political climate in the US. There's also the baggage of the "Lost Cause" that still permeates their politics, sadly. It was mostly a nitpick, I just wanted to point out this kind of misguided fascination for old history has also impacted the Roman Empire, Sparta (which I mentioned because there's a kind of rightwing admiration for "Spartan values", which is hogwash), etc.
- YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
  What. Sparta, in its heyday, had one of the mightiest infantries in Greece, and that's saying something. One does not simply defeat Athens in a thirty years war without having serious military capabilities. They were fascist assholes who murdered slaves as a rite of passage, but they were also good soldiers. No reason to deny that.

otikik 2y ago

I'll accept all romantizatizicing of the ancient roman empire as long as it's The Life of Brian.

IAmBroom 2y ago

> When you go see renaissance cultural stuff romanticizing the ancient romans and greeks do you crap all over it on the basis that the societies they're romanticizing had spicy takes on women or that their economies were comparatively primitive? So, pointing out ethical failures accurately is "crapping all over it"? > Are you going to complain that they didn't have running water and electricity in the old west while you're at it? I'm going to suggest that objecting to enslavement, and objecting to having a well with a bucket, are not anywhere on the same spectrum. You seem to be arguing from a truly dishonest, and fundamentally immoral, basis.

the_af 2y ago

It's not crapping all over history. If it was engaged with in a rigorous manner, nobody would have a problem with it. The problem is that they romanticize it, paint an inaccurate picture of it, and also try to draw conclusions about modern life based on these misconceptions. It's not about mocking them because of the outhouses.