IN AP Euro, we are finishing the interwar period, and I use as an example of the art of the period Yeats's "The Second Coming" (1920):
"Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born? "
I pose the question: "Assume 'the falcon' is nationalism, who is the falconer, what is it that cannot hold, and what slouches towards Bethleham?"
Students can 'get" pretty quickly that the falconer is the conservatives that tried to employ nationalism before WW1 as a means of retaining support among the working class (who otherwise oposed everything the conservatives stood for) and that what fell apart were the empires (the "center" that could not hold was the concept of loyalty to the dynasty). The rest of the first stanza applies well to the whole concept of the radicals getting more power in the wake of WW1. What is eerie about the second stanza is that it appears to predict Hitler, Stalin, and the whole "rough beast" movement that will be a "revelation." This is 1920, and Stalin and Hitler are obscure types whom Yeats has not heard of.
This interpretation is not what Yeats had in mind, perhaps, but it sure makes for a fun lesson. It is one I look forward to all year, and the new English teacher hates me for it because when he got to this poem the next day the kids all told HIM what it is about! :menace:
Anybody have any thoughts about this other than the usual pooh-pooh comments?
G'Kar is the falconer.
Quote from: Neil on April 08, 2009, 09:10:19 PM
G'Kar is the falconer.
Londo is the falconer, and the Shadows are the falcon.
Yes, this works as well for B5 as for the interwar period. :kosh:
Never considered the matter before.
But Spiritus Mundi reminded me of the Hegelian Weltgeist. And isn't the lion a symbol of the British empire? So now the imperial lion -- which embodied the historical world-spirit of the 19th century world -- is seem as merely the fallible creation of man (the head), and the romantic justifications of white man's burden are now plainly revealed as ideological excuses for the exercise of hegemonic authority - all that is left is the blank and pitiless gaze of a now exhausted will to power. Its day of mastery done, but not yet supplanted, the bloated imperial lion crawls on while the "desert birds" of the envious smaller powers and restless colonial subjects circle impatiently, waiting greedily for its collapse. And the new expression of the world spirit - not yet manifested, nonetheless can be foreseen to be a "rough beast" - perhaps a reference to the crass materialism of America or the raw levelling brutality of Communism. (i dont know anything about Yeats' views on these things).
Man we need Sav here. Or Shelf. I never studied much English literture (as oppose to American). Was this writter before Wasteland or after?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 08, 2009, 09:43:29 PM
But Spiritus Mundi reminded me of the Hegelian Weltgeist; (i dont know anything about Yeats' views on these things).
I think Yeats was an Occultist, if that sheds any light relevant to his views.
I just finished three lectures covering the First World War (I hate having just 15 weeks to do 1600 to as close to the present as possible), and much to my surprise several students in discussion last Friday came to me about the impact the lectures on the warfare, how the descriptions of things like Verdun, The Somme, and Paschendaele impacted them, and how reading Dulce et Decorum est actually meant something. Perhaps grade grubbing, but this was from a range of students of differing abilities, and so it did me proud.
Not addressing the Yeats here, of course, but I could hear the pride in your description of the teaching and your students - know that I share some of that. Good man, lion of Actium.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 08, 2009, 09:43:29 PM
Never considered the matter before.
But Spiritus Mundi reminded me of the Hegelian Weltgeist. And isn't the lion a symbol of the British empire? So now the imperial lion -- which embodied the historical world-spirit of the 19th century world -- is seem as merely the fallible creation of man (the head), and the romantic justifications of white man's burden are now plainly revealed as ideological excuses for the exercise of hegemonic authority - all that is left is the blank and pitiless gaze of a now exhausted will to power. Its day of mastery done, but not yet supplanted, the bloated imperial lion crawls on while the "desert birds" of the envious smaller powers and restless colonial subjects circle impatiently, waiting greedily for its collapse. And the new expression of the world spirit - not yet manifested, nonetheless can be foreseen to be a "rough beast" - perhaps a reference to the crass materialism of America or the raw levelling brutality of Communism. (i dont know anything about Yeats' views on these things).
I didn't take the "lion" to be so literal, but rather the bestial nature of that which has the "face of a man." Agree that the "desert birds' are unsuccessful competitors, but see them more as the Anarchists, Sparticists, and other failed movements that never got out of the "desert" that resulted from the destruction (via the war) of the progressivism of the pre-WW1 era.
The "blank and pitiless gaze" would thus be the extreme nationalism of the dominant ethnic majorities in the "captive nations" (not Yeats's term) created after WW1. You know, Magyars and Poles, and their ilk.
That the "rough beast" be the materialism of the US or the Stalinism of Russia seems a stretch for 1920. No more of a stretch than Nazism, of course, but Nazism seems a better extrapolation of the tenor of the times than materialism.
Of course, as a teacher, I am more inclined to view anything as eerie prophecy than the average person, just because it makes the students pay attention for a bit. The students loved this discussion as much as I did, because they got to apply all that dry stuff they read about..
Quote from: PDH on April 08, 2009, 10:32:29 PM
I just finished three lectures covering the First World War (I hate having just 15 weeks to do 1600 to as close to the present as possible), and much to my surprise several students in discussion last Friday came to me about the impact the lectures on the warfare, how the descriptions of things like Verdun, The Somme, and Paschendaele impacted them, and how reading Dulce et Decorum est actually meant something. Perhaps grade grubbing, but this was from a range of students of differing abilities, and so it did me proud.
Not addressing the Yeats here, of course, but I could hear the pride in your description of the teaching and your students - know that I share some of that. Good man, lion of Actium.
Ironically, I did a unit on WW1 based just on Tolkien's writings about the war (from letters, mostly) and the kids, having seen the movies and read the books, could really relate. I used
Rendezvous rather than
Dulce et Decorum est because of the uncanny way in which Seeger predicts (and accepts, and even welcomes) his death, plus the useful fact that he was an American who threw himself into the war and died before the US became a combatant. No one could accuse him of nationalism or mere patriotic fervor.
Quote from: grumbler on April 08, 2009, 10:52:20 PM
Ironically, I did a unit on WW1 based just on Tolkien's writings about the war (from letters, mostly) and the kids, having seen the movies and read the books, could really relate. I used Rendezvous rather than Dulce et Decorum est because of the uncanny way in which Seeger predicts (and accepts, and even welcomes) his death, plus the useful fact that he was an American who threw himself into the war and died before the US became a combatant. No one could accuse him of nationalism or mere patriotic fervor.
I had previously outlined the psychoanalytic movement, and I assigned sources that included Freud, and thus why I chose the Owen poem - the fact that he had undergone the Talking Cure tied him in with the students as well, not to mention the fact that he returned to war as the tragic figure.
Overall, I am far more satisfied with the students this semester than ever before - I have done this enough at a state university to know these semesters are few and far between...
Quote from: PDH on April 08, 2009, 10:57:36 PM
I had previously outlined the psychoanalytic movement, and I assigned sources that included Freud, and thus why I chose the Owen poem - the fact that he had undergone the Talking Cure tied him in with the students as well, not to mention the fact that he returned to war as the tragic figure.
Yep, Owen is worth doing, if you have the time. I confess that I consider him a bit of a slacker, only getting into the war towards the end. The idealists like Seeger were dead before Owen even signed up. Seeger fought for the best of reasons (the belief that this was a war to save the civilization he loved), and Owen for the worst (fear that he would be ostracized if he didn't follow the herd).
This one is easy, the Shrike is slouching towards Bethlehem.
Wow... I think we had a topic in which European History AP came up recently but I don't recall seeing you post in it grumbles. Anyway, I had Euro AP and we never discussed poetry in it at all--it was strictly history textbooks and history books on the subject (e.g. "Modern Times" by Paul Johnson).
I do remember discussing Yeats in general and that poem in particular, but that was in English AP.
Quote from: Caliga on April 09, 2009, 06:56:39 AM
Wow... I think we had a topic in which European History AP came up recently but I don't recall seeing you post in it grumbles. Anyway, I had Euro AP and we never discussed poetry in it at all--it was strictly history textbooks and history books on the subject (e.g. "Modern Times" by Paul Johnson).
I do remember discussing Yeats in general and that poem in particular, but that was in English AP.
Pretty much every DBQ in AP Euro has a poem or painting as one of its documents, so knowing something about art as it reflects the sentiments of the time is quite valuable. Plus, the APEH syllabus explicitly states that art will be studied insofar as it reflects on history.
Plus, I think that students remember even the facts better if they see them applied in different ways.
The Second Coming isn't necessarily about the consequences of WW1, but students get a lot of utility out of figuring out the connections as if it were.
This is one of my favourite poems of all time - know it by heart.
As for the interpretation - the poem is a "matrix" of chaos. You can take its elements and apply it to various "chaotic" situations, from the origins of WW1 to the global financial crisis. It doesn't mean it was written with any of these things in mind - to think that way would be to bastardize great, symbolic and mystical art.
See, I have always seen Owen as a tragic figure - pushed into the war because it was the right thing to do (even though he was no fighter), caught in a shell-hole for three days and quite rightly breaking down, but despite all this returning to combat while damning it before dying. His perceived duties dooming him - at least this semester it struck a chord.
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 07:12:31 AM
Plus, I think that students remember even the facts better if they see them applied in different ways. The Second Coming isn't necessarily about the consequences of WW1, but students get a lot of utility out of figuring out the connections as if it were.
Oh, I don't at all disagree... I was just commenting that my class was structured differently. I wonder if that was because the structure of the course has since changed, or the teacher disregarded the structure and taught it his own way (and he'd be the type to have done that).
When I took American History AP we had to read "Battle Cry of Freedom" and the guy who wrote the book (Bruce MacPherson?) actually came to discuss it with our class. :cool:
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 07:16:57 AM
This is one of my favourite poems of all time - know it by heart.
:thumbsup:
It is one of the best poems ever written, yes.
Also, as an aside,
Things Fall Apart (title inspired by the poem) is a great book.
I don't think this is worth mentioning (as obviously everybody realized it) but the beast described in the second stanza is obviously the Sphinx. So it's about the chaos caused (or which causes) the birth of an enigma. It's like the Joker's monologue from Dark Knight - we are really afraid of the unknown - not the evil. We fear chaos more than iniquity. Which is why "strong arm" rule of totalitarian regimes is seen by most people as a preferable alternative to the chaos of anarchy or the insecurity of trying times. In that, I guess you could connect back to your idea of applying this to the rise of nationalism - after all the rise of nationalism in Europe occurred in a direct response to chaos - either direct, political one (revolutionary Spain, revolutionary Russia - if you consider Stalin's communism as a form of nationalism, which it was in a sense) or a perceived or more esoteric chaos of financial and economic crisis (as it happened in Germany or Italy).
I must say Grumbles, that would be a great lesson. I think I'd have enjoyed your class as a student. :D
As for the poem - to my mind it is pointing to the simultaneous wild hopes and dread that the millenial type movement creates out of dispair - the millenialist finds the world as it is hopelessly corrupt, and seeks to tear it down in order to create utopia which he assumes in any event is inevitable by the laws of eithe god or history (Surely some revelation is at hand!) - but in doing so, very easily becomes the worst terror of all ("hardly are those words out ...")
Often, millenialism is tinged with the religious or mystic: "Spiritus Mundi" is obviously a reference to the mystic notion that we are all connected, like the Chinese Tao.
The vision presented is of course one of terror not utopia - the "rough beast" with "gaze blank and pitiless as the sun" - which is a pretty accurate assessment of the actual effect of most active millenial movements.
In short, in my opinion the poem is eerily precient not because Yeats predicted the rise of Hitler and Stalin specifically, but because he nailed the type which they both represent.
Perhaps a good companion-piece would be Eric Hoffer's The True Believer.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 07:25:36 AM
I don't think this is worth mentioning (as obviously everybody realized it) but the beast described in the second stanza is obviously the Sphinx.
True, but the Greek concept of a sphinx, not the Egyptian one.
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 08:06:21 AM
In short, in my opinion the poem is eerily precient not because Yeats predicted the rise of Hitler and Stalin specifically, but because he nailed the type which they both represent.
Well-put. That is the approach I took, and the challenge for the student is to match the archetype to the actual.
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 08:12:44 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 07:25:36 AM
I don't think this is worth mentioning (as obviously everybody realized it) but the beast described in the second stanza is obviously the Sphinx.
True, but the Greek concept of a sphinx, not the Egyptian one.
Wouldn't "the sands of the desert" tend to indicate that the Egyptian variety was referenced? Though the Greek sphinx would make more sense - the Thebian Sphynx asks a question of Oedipus that he must answer to be king, and the answer is, in fact, himself ("A man") - the "Sphinx" being nothing more than the city itself personified, and the Oedipus myth all about the importance of knowing yourself.
Edit: this puts an interesting gloss on the identity of the "rough beast".
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 08:19:57 AM
Wouldn't "the sands of the desert" tend to indicate that the Egyptian variety was referenced? Though the Greek sphinx would make more sense - the Thebian Sphynx asks a question of Oedipus that he must answer to be king, and the answer is, in fact, himself ("A man") - the "Sphinx" being nothing more than the city itself personified, and the Oedipus myth all about the importance of knowing yourself.
I think that taking the description of the beast and the desert literally will lead one astray. The Egyptian sphinx was a positive sign, the Greek one a negative one.
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 08:29:43 AM
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 08:19:57 AM
Wouldn't "the sands of the desert" tend to indicate that the Egyptian variety was referenced? Though the Greek sphinx would make more sense - the Thebian Sphynx asks a question of Oedipus that he must answer to be king, and the answer is, in fact, himself ("A man") - the "Sphinx" being nothing more than the city itself personified, and the Oedipus myth all about the importance of knowing yourself.
I think that taking the description of the beast and the desert literally will lead one astray. The Egyptian sphinx was a positive sign, the Greek one a negative one.
Yeah I managed to convince myself that the Greek sphynx was probably what was intended. In context the Egyptian one makes less sense.
I love that poem, but I am not at all comfortable trying to "figure out what it means" beyond what it says to me.
And that is rather vague and uneasy - not at all well defined.
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 08:12:44 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 07:25:36 AM
I don't think this is worth mentioning (as obviously everybody realized it) but the beast described in the second stanza is obviously the Sphinx.
True, but the Greek concept of a sphinx, not the Egyptian one.
Well, Yeats is neither a Greek nor an Egyptian. He is a modern poet. He is going to be syncretist, and it's a mystical / symbolic poem, so he can't be expected to use the revelatory imagery in a precise manner.
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 08:06:21 AM
I must say Grumbles, that would be a great lesson. I think I'd have enjoyed your class as a student. :D
As for the poem - to my mind it is pointing to the simultaneous wild hopes and dread that the millenial type movement creates out of dispair - the millenialist finds the world as it is hopelessly corrupt, and seeks to tear it down in order to create utopia which he assumes in any event is inevitable by the laws of eithe god or history (Surely some revelation is at hand!) - but in doing so, very easily becomes the worst terror of all ("hardly are those words out ...")
Often, millenialism is tinged with the religious or mystic: "Spiritus Mundi" is obviously a reference to the mystic notion that we are all connected, like the Chinese Tao.
The vision presented is of course one of terror not utopia - the "rough beast" with "gaze blank and pitiless as the sun" - which is a pretty accurate assessment of the actual effect of most active millenial movements.
In short, in my opinion the poem is eerily precient not because Yeats predicted the rise of Hitler and Stalin specifically, but because he nailed the type which they both represent.
Perhaps a good companion-piece would be Eric Hoffer's The True Believer.
I think Spiritus Mundi here means more something like the Zeitgeist, and not some sort of a pan-human connection. Imo, a Latin name for it is also used to invoke associations with Rex Mundi - the Antichrist (and Stupor Mundo, Frederick II, considered by many to be the Antichrist).
Obviously, the beast slouching towards Betlehem is the Antichrist too.
Speaking of which, does anyone think that the beast may be interpreted as a sort of ambiguous (rather than purely evil) figure here?
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 08:36:58 AM
Well, Yeats is neither a Greek nor an Egyptian. He is a modern poet. He is going to be syncretist, and it's a mystical / symbolic poem. You seem to expect him to describe his visions with a scientific precisions.
You are the one trying to be concrete here. I am trying to retain the symbolism, and describe how his poem could be applied as a bit of prophecy,to help students understand how a guy like Hitler could come to power.
You think it worth mentioning that you think Yeats must have been referring to a sphinx. I point out that he wouldn't have been referring to the good-luck Egyptian version, and you point out (duh!) that Yeats is neither a Greek nor an Egyptian! :lmfao:
Generally speaking, Marti, you should stay out of conversations like this.
Don't poems mean only one thing?
Quote from: Berkut on April 09, 2009, 08:33:48 AM
I love that poem, but I am not at all comfortable trying to "figure out what it means" beyond what it says to me.
And that is rather vague and uneasy - not at all well defined.
I think the poem works best when applied.
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 08:50:53 AM
Don't poems mean only one thing?
That is all too often true of modern "poetry," but not of much of the classical stuff.
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 08:54:16 AM
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 08:50:53 AM
Don't poems mean only one thing?
That is all too often true of modern "poetry," but not of much of the classical stuff.
"Poetry - pfffft" (The reaction I got, along with rolled eyes, from a student when I assigned the first poem this semester)
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 08:50:53 AM
Don't poems mean only one thing?
Yeah - the most common meaning is as follows: "The chick is hott but an amateur poet. Not worth attempting to fuck. Will make me read her poetry, which I will have to fake enjoying.
Just. Cannot. Do. It." ;)
I am pretty sure poems are written now with random line stops just to piss off Ank (who has been writing such poetry for years).
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 08:49:36 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 08:36:58 AM
Well, Yeats is neither a Greek nor an Egyptian. He is a modern poet. He is going to be syncretist, and it's a mystical / symbolic poem. You seem to expect him to describe his visions with a scientific precisions.
You are the one trying to be concrete here. I am trying to retain the symbolism, and describe how his poem could be applied as a bit of prophecy,to help students understand how a guy like Hitler could come to power.
You think it worth mentioning that you think Yeats must have been referring to a sphinx. I point out that he wouldn't have been referring to the good-luck Egyptian version, and you point out (duh!) that Yeats is neither a Greek nor an Egyptian! :lmfao:
Generally speaking, Marti, you should stay out of conversations like this.
I dare say I have more background in interpreting poems like this than you, but thanks for this personal attack.
What I am saying is that Yeats could have referred to the physical characteristic of the Egyptian sphinx, but meant the symbolic characteristics (malicious, enigmatic) of the Greek sphinx. Considering it is a piece of mystical, revelatory poetry, you seem to be operating under a false assumption that this has a single, precise, non-ambiguous meaning.
It's like you are applying your very annoying, nit-picking personality trait, to the concept of poetry interpretation, which couldn't be farther from that attitude you exhibit. You must be an extremely tedious person to talk to, and a complete waste of space as a teacher.
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 08:55:20 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 08:54:16 AM
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 08:50:53 AM
Don't poems mean only one thing?
That is all too often true of modern "poetry," but not of much of the classical stuff.
"Poetry - pfffft" (The reaction I got, along with rolled eyes, from a student when I assigned the first poem this semester)
It pisses me off more than I can express that the sheer amount of crappy art out there in fact turns the kids off of art.
If I was a teacher, I'd see it as my duty to introduce kids to artistic works which would make them realize there is great stuff out there, if they only search for it.
Now kids, don't get all rough-beast-like in the thread. :lol:
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 09:02:03 AM
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 08:55:20 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 08:54:16 AM
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 08:50:53 AM
Don't poems mean only one thing?
That is all too often true of modern "poetry," but not of much of the classical stuff.
"Poetry - pfffft" (The reaction I got, along with rolled eyes, from a student when I assigned the first poem this semester)
It pisses me off more than I can express that the sheer amount of crappy art out there in fact turns the kids off of art.
If I was a teacher, I'd see it as my duty to introduce kids to artistic works which would make them realize there is great stuff out there, if they only search for it.
You and grumbler should sit down and make a long list of crappy art that the kids would be banned from reading or viewing. You could title it "Entartete Kunst".
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 08:58:17 AM
I dare say I have more background in interpreting poems like this than you,
I dare say you have no clue as to which of us has more background in poetic interpretation, but it doesn't surprise me at all that you would claim superior knowledge. :lmfao:
QuoteWhat I am saying is that Yeats could have referred to the physical characteristic of the Egyptian sphinx, but meant the symbolic characteristics (malicious, enigmatic) of the Greek sphinx.
You cannot steal my point, sorry.
QuoteConsidering it is a piece of mystical, revelatory poetry, you seem to be operating under a false assumption that this has a single, precise, non-ambiguous meaning.
You are actually describing your position, not mine. You are the one falsely assuming that Yeats is unambiguously referring to a sphinx. I am saying that
if he is referring to a sphinx, it isn't the Egyptian good-luck idea of the sphinx.
QuoteIt's like you are applying your very annoying, nit-picking personality trait, to the concept of poetry interpretation, which couldn't be farther from that attitude you exhibit. You must be an extremely tedious person to talk to, and a complete waste of space as a teacher.
Actually, what I am applying is my unfailing ability to chap your ass when you stick your nose into threads like this and show your ass with comments like the sphinx one. Your personal attacks and characterization of my work, of course, greatly amuse me (and, i suspect, the rest of the adults here) but, alas for you, I don't play that game.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 09:04:22 AM
You and grumbler should sit down and make a long list of crappy art that the kids would be banned from reading or viewing. You could title it "Entartete Kunst".
You may think banning is a great solution to the problem of "crappy art," but you should avoid projecting your attitudes to others. I oppose banning any works for any reason, so cannot serve on the banning team you propose. You will have do the work you were going to assign me yourself.
I have really enjoyed reading through this thread. One thing is certain Grumbler. It is the lucky student that has you as a teacher.
Something that struck me is the use of Christian metaphor - the second coming (usually associated with Christ) - to describe an ancient evil - the beast who's time has finally come (again). A kind of Anti-Christ who is the enemy of freedom.
Could the Sphinx be the symbol of ancient totalitarian regimes that are coming again?
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:00:16 AM
One thing is certain Grumbler. It is the lucky student that has you as a teacher.
Yeah, learn this interpretation of a poem that isn't want the poet intended. Yay!
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:00:16 AM
I have really enjoyed reading through this thread. One thing is certain Grumbler. It is the lucky student that has you as a teacher.
Something that struck me is the use of Christian metaphor - the second coming (usually associated with Christ) - to describe an ancient evil - the beast who's time has finally come (again). A kind of Anti-Christ who is the enemy of freedom.
Could the Sphinx be the symbol of ancient totalitarian regimes that are coming again?
I think that the "twenty centuries of stony sleep" line supports the concept that what is coming is very old, yes. I am not sure that the whole "body of a lion" and "beast" metaphors are meant to be taken literally as a sphinx. You could argue, for instance, that the Soviet KGB had the head of a man (Beria) and the body pf a lion (the rather faceless bureaucracy that carried out the KGB's duties), and that the KGB was savage enough to be called "bestial."
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:09:21 AM
Yeah, learn this interpretation of a poem that isn't want the poet intended. Yay!
So? The point of poetry is not to guess what the poet intended.
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:09:21 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:00:16 AM
One thing is certain Grumbler. It is the lucky student that has you as a teacher.
Yeah, learn this interpretation of a poem that isn't want the poet intended. Yay!
Too much work for you? After all in Grumbler's class you would not be able to get by with the Coles notes interpretation. :P
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:14:07 AM
Too much work for you? After all in Grumbler's class you would not be able to get by with the Coles notes interpretation. :P
Sounds like a lesson in pointlessness. I wasn't really interested in my high school teachers' pet theories.
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:09:21 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:00:16 AM
One thing is certain Grumbler. It is the lucky student that has you as a teacher.
Yeah, learn this interpretation of a poem that isn't want the poet intended. Yay!
Better than to falsely argue that the poet's intentions are actually known. :cool:
My purpose in using this poem is clearly stated. The students were not learning any interpretation, they were creating an interpretation based on the assumption that the falcon was nationalism. The poem allowed them to put a lot of what they knew about the interwar period into a single narrative, and associate that narrative with powerful images and evocative vocabulary. Sorry you don't get this, but then I am not responsible for your education or lack thereof.
The important thing is that my students got it. The fact that it was a fun class to teach (and to take) is icing on the cake.
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2009, 10:11:54 AM
So? The point of poetry is not to guess what the poet intended.
Really? So if I came up with an interpretation about how Paul Revere's Ride was about the invasion of Britain by the Chinese, I would have satisfied the point of poetry?
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:17:27 AM
Sounds like a lesson in pointlessness. I wasn't really interested in my high school teachers' pet theories.
I would note that this was an AP class. I wouldn't have expected the typical student to get it, and in fact I rather suspect that if I tried it in my regular history classes, the students there would react exactly as you have. They would be trying to figure out what the poet "meant' and my "pet theory" was, rather than using the poem as a tool to explore what they already knew.
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:19:58 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2009, 10:11:54 AM
So? The point of poetry is not to guess what the poet intended.
Really? So if I came up with an interpretation about how Paul Revere's Ride was about the invasion of Britain by the Chinese, I would have satisfied the point of poetry?
If you can argue a coherent interpretation that has meaning for you, then sure, why not?
I didn't know poetry had such a clearly defined "point" that it could result in someone missing it if in fact they interpreted it in some other manner than your own.
I am no lit guy - far from it. Like I said earlier, I am not very comfortable trying to derive meaning from this kind of thing, because I am poor at vocalizing my own interpretations.
But isn't the mark of excellent poetry is that it can in fact mean different things to different people, or even the same people under differing contexts?
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 10:19:32 AM
Sorry you don't get this, but then I am not responsible for your education or lack thereof.
:yawn:
Well power to you and your students. I stick by my statement though that I don't see this exercise as a reason that people should be lucky to have you as a teacher.
Anyway, why is the English teacher annoyed? Is he just annoyed that you've covered material that belongs in "his domain?"
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 10:23:06 AM
I would note that this was an AP class. I wouldn't have expected the typical student to get it, and in fact I rather suspect that if I tried it in my regular history classes, the students there would react exactly as you have. They would be trying to figure out what the poet "meant' and my "pet theory" was, rather than using the poem as a tool to explore what they already knew.
Yep, I never took an AP class. I was the typical student. :(
Quote from: Berkut on April 09, 2009, 10:23:20 AM
If you can argue a coherent interpretation that has meaning for you, then sure, why not?
I didn't know poetry had such a clearly defined "point" that it could result in someone missing it if in fact they interpreted it in some other manner than your own.
Hey, Valmy was the one who said the point of poetry is to not get the author's intentions.
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:25:09 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 10:23:06 AM
I would note that this was an AP class. I wouldn't have expected the typical student to get it, and in fact I rather suspect that if I tried it in my regular history classes, the students there would react exactly as you have. They would be trying to figure out what the poet "meant' and my "pet theory" was, rather than using the poem as a tool to explore what they already knew.
Yep, I never took an AP class. I was the typical student. :(
What does "AP" stand for?
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:19:58 AM
Really? So if I came up with an interpretation about how Paul Revere's Ride was about the invasion of Britain by the Chinese, I would have satisfied the point of poetry?
What if the poem Paul Revere's ride was actually about something entirely different than it appears on the surface, is it the goal of the reader to try to piece that out or to take whatever the poem says to them?
Garbon I am surprised that you would be critical of a very interesting method Grumbler has developed to teach history. I would have loved to be in his class. Learning this way is so much better then simply learning timelines by rote. His students have to understand the the material to understand the interpretive excercise. It is that understanding that makes learning fun.
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2009, 10:29:32 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:19:58 AM
Really? So if I came up with an interpretation about how Paul Revere's Ride was about the invasion of Britain by the Chinese, I would have satisfied the point of poetry?
What if the poem Paul Revere's ride was actually about something entirely different than it appears on the surface, is it the goal of the reader to try to piece that out or to take whatever the poem says to them?
Yes?
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:26:05 AM
Hey, Valmy was the one who said the point of poetry is to not get the author's intentions.
No, you were the one implying it was wrong somehow to interpret a poem other than the way the author intended which is absurd.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:27:40 AM
What does "AP" stand for?
Advanced Placement. At the end of the course you take an exam and depending how you do, you can use them to place out of basic requirements in college. So if you get a 4 or 5 on an AP chemistry exam, you can then pass out of basic chem at your university.
Where offered, AP exams and SAT IIs have become necessities for those inclined to go to our nation's top universities.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:30:00 AM
Garbon I am surprised that you would be critical of a very interesting method Grumbler has developed to teach history. I would have loved to be in his class. Learning this way is so much better then simply learning timelines by rote. His students have to understand the the material to understand the interpretive excercise. It is that understanding that makes learning fun.
:shrugs:
Reading a poem in light of the interesting history I'd already learned wouldn't excite me. Like I said, I'd find it dull.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:30:00 AM
Garbon I am surprised that you would be critical of a very interesting method Grumbler has developed to teach history. I would have loved to be in his class. Learning this way is so much better then simply learning timelines by rote. His students have to understand the the material to understand the interpretive excercise. It is that understanding that makes learning fun.
The problem is that if grumbler is to his students anything like he is on this board, it is emphatically not fun. He appears to combine his "alternative interpretation" approach with an insistence that the alternative approach he thought up is the only correct one - which is quite flummoxing and must be deeply frustrating to students.
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2009, 10:31:11 AM
No, you were the one implying it was wrong somehow to interpret a poem other than the way the author intended which is absurd.
I had at first thought that students were being required to learn the interpretation offered up by grumbler. I wouldn't support that.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:33:36 AM
The problem is that if grumbler is to his students anything like he is on this board, it is emphatically not fun. He appears to combine his "alternative interpretation" approach with an insistence that the alternative approach he thought up is the only correct one - which is quite flummoxing and must be deeply frustrating to students.
I don't think so. I think he simply gave them the poem and then sort of coaxed (not really the word I want) into exploring how what they know could be seen in the poem. I don't think there is anything wrong or confusing about that. It's not like he told them that's what Yeats meant.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:33:36 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:30:00 AM
Garbon I am surprised that you would be critical of a very interesting method Grumbler has developed to teach history. I would have loved to be in his class. Learning this way is so much better then simply learning timelines by rote. His students have to understand the the material to understand the interpretive excercise. It is that understanding that makes learning fun.
The problem is that if grumbler is to his students anything like he is on this board, it is emphatically not fun. He appears to combine his "alternative interpretation" approach with an insistence that the alternative approach he thought up is the only correct one - which is quite flummoxing and must be deeply frustrating to students.
:boggle:
I don't think you could miss what he was doing any more thoroughly if someone was paying you to do so.
And I don't know shit about poetry, and I can tell that much.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:33:36 AM
He appears to combine his "alternative interpretation" approach with an insistence that the alternative approach he thought up is the only correct one - which is quite flummoxing and must be deeply frustrating to students.
I will admit that you would have had trouble in his class given his standards.
Poetry - pffft
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:36:17 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:33:36 AM
He appears to combine his "alternative interpretation" approach with an insistence that the alternative approach he thought up is the only correct one - which is quite flummoxing and must be deeply frustrating to students.
I will admit that you would have had trouble in his class given his standards.
Well, where I come from ex-military people are not considered good poetry teachers.
We consider them uneducated scum and don't let them anywhere children.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:38:17 AM
We consider them uneducated scum and don't let them anywhere children.
Like the gays.
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 10:38:58 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:38:17 AM
We consider them uneducated scum and don't let them anywhere children.
Like the gays.
DAMMIT, I WAS TOO SLOW TO RESPOND. :weep:
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 10:38:58 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:38:17 AM
We consider them uneducated scum and don't let them anywhere children.
Like the gays.
Much better then the reply I had. I will go with yours.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:38:17 AM
Well, where I come from ex-military people are not considered good poetry teachers.
We consider them uneducated scum and don't let them anywhere children.
Way to attack the poster Marty and not the posts.
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:31:13 AM
Advanced Placement. At the end of the course you take an exam and depending how you do, you can use them to place out of basic requirements in college. So if you get a 4 or 5 on an AP chemistry exam, you can then pass out of basic chem at your university.
Where offered, AP exams and SAT IIs have become necessities for those inclined to go to our nation's top universities.
I got a 5 on every AP exam I took. :smoke:
Quote from: Caliga on April 09, 2009, 10:49:17 AMI got a 5 on every AP exam I took. :smoke:
Yeah I got all 4s and 5s. A 4 is just as good as a 5 in getting those Ps out of intro classes.
In retrospect I think I just should have taken those easy classes and gotten the As
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:38:17 AMWell, where I come from ex-military people are not considered good poetry teachers.
We consider them uneducated scum and don't let them anywhere children.
Given Poland's military history I'm not surprised the Poles consider their soldiers scum. :blush:
I wish I knew how much of a role those classes played into getting me into college. I would like to go back and do the bare minimum required!
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2009, 10:50:27 AMYeah I got all 4s and 5s. A 4 is just as good as a 5 in getting those Ps out of intro classes.
In retrospect I think I just should have taken those easy classes and gotten the As
In retrospect I should have used the 32 credits I had going into college to do a year abroad with a light schedule instead of picking up a minor. :blush:
Quote from: Caliga on April 09, 2009, 10:51:54 AM
In retrospect I should have used the 32 credits I had going into college to do a year abroad with a light schedule instead of picking up a minor. :blush:
I took a double major. What was wrong with us?
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 10:23:06 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:17:27 AM
Sounds like a lesson in pointlessness. I wasn't really interested in my high school teachers' pet theories.
I would note that this was an AP class. I wouldn't have expected the typical student to get it, and in fact I rather suspect that if I tried it in my regular history classes, the students there would react exactly as you have. They would be trying to figure out what the poet "meant' and my "pet theory" was, rather than using the poem as a tool to explore what they already knew.
Why would a student of an AP class explore what they already knew? I would rather suspect if an AP student understood the historical facts required to get an A in the class, they wouldn't waste time with a poem (unless you're a prick and put it on the test. :P)
Quote from: Fate on April 09, 2009, 10:54:56 AM
Why would a student of an AP class explore what they already knew? I would rather suspect if an AP student understood the historical facts required to get an A in the class, they wouldn't waste time with a poem (unless you're a prick and put it on the test. :P)
:D
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2009, 10:53:57 AMI took a double major. What was wrong with us?
I dunno. :lol:
CAL = I'll use the extra time to take a comp sci minor! :nerd:
CAL'S BRO = I'll use the extra time to study in London, intern in the Crown Court of England and Wales, and bang a hot Malaysian broad! :cool:
CAL'S BRO = WIN
Quote from: Caliga on April 09, 2009, 11:00:45 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2009, 10:53:57 AMI took a double major. What was wrong with us?
I dunno. :lol:
CAL = I'll use the extra time to take a comp sci minor! :nerd:
CAL'S BRO = I'll use the extra time to study in London, intern in the Crown Court of England and Wales, and bang a hot Malaysian broad! :cool:
CAL'S BRO = WIN
MONO = Who makes more money now?
I had to do that. :Embarrass:
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:33:36 AM
The problem is that if grumbler is to his students anything like he is on this board, it is emphatically not fun. He appears to combine his "alternative interpretation" approach with an insistence that the alternative approach he thought up is the only correct one - which is quite flummoxing and must be deeply frustrating to students.
Actually, this is not the way I am on this board, and not the way I am in class. You would, indeed, find my class difficult and frustrating, though, as your inability to read and comprehend English (at least) is marginal, and you lead to delusions based on the misapprehension that you understand.
I love grumbler. :)
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 09, 2009, 11:01:45 AMMONO = Who makes more money now?
I had to do that. :Embarrass:
Probably me, but I dunno for sure. He's very tight-lipped about shit like that. He's a siting consultant with a firm contracted exclusively to T-Mobile, so I imagine he does pretty well. He just bought a 2009 Accord straight-up, no loan.
Quote from: Caliga on April 09, 2009, 11:05:36 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 09, 2009, 11:01:45 AMMONO = Who makes more money now?
I had to do that. :Embarrass:
Probably me, but I dunno for sure. He's very tight-lipped about shit like that. He's a siting consultant with a firm contracted exclusively to T-Mobile, so I imagine he does pretty well. He just bought a 2009 Accord straight-up, no loan.
Not bad.
I'd never pay for a new car like that though.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 09, 2009, 11:07:37 AMNot bad.
I'd never pay for a new car like that though.
:ph34r:
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 09, 2009, 11:03:31 AM
I love grumbler. :)
He's a complicated man, and no one understands him but his woman. :yes:
Quote from: Caliga on April 09, 2009, 11:08:38 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 09, 2009, 11:07:37 AMNot bad.
I'd never pay for a new car like that though.
:ph34r:
I reserve the right to stop paying on it, and drive a lemon through the dealership's front window.
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2009, 10:50:27 AMA 4 is just as good as a 5 in getting those Ps out of intro classes.
Depends on the program. Some do require a 5 in certain subjects, and some don't accept APs at all.
Quote from: Martinus on April 09, 2009, 10:38:17 AM
Well, where I come from ex-military people are not considered good poetry teachers.
We consider them uneducated scum and don't let them anywhere children.
Well, where I come from (the US Navy) we kinda feel the same way about ex-military types, and ours aren't even Polacks to begin with, as a rule. :cool:
Since I am
not ex-military, your jibe is an EPIC FAIL.
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on April 09, 2009, 11:16:51 AM
Depends on the program. Some do require a 5 in certain subjects, and some don't accept APs at all.
Stanford does! :w00t:
Grumbler gave my grandfather an "F" back in '42.
For some reason, I haven't really remembered that poem, despite reading it when I studied English.
The lecturer mainly focused on the poem capturing the "spiritus mundi", that is the zeitgeist of the post-Great War West where the future seemed bleak and dull. And then moved on to The Wasteland and recommended Oswald Spengler. :tinfoil:
Then later, in smaller classes, the ph. d. student teacher gave us his interpretation, which basically was that Yeats was an occultist/esoteric and the sphinx (the Greek one) symbolises the female divine blah blah and also rebirth since the Greek sphinx was a flying one (like a phoenix from the ashes). And to think this was almost ten years before Dan Brown. I left the class even a bit dumber than before.
Quote from: Fate on April 09, 2009, 10:54:56 AM
Why would a student of an AP class explore what they already knew? I would rather suspect if an AP student understood the historical facts required to get an A in the class, they wouldn't waste time with a poem (unless you're a prick and put it on the test. :P)
I don't write the AP test! :lol:
AP courses are more than about learning the material; half the points on the AP test come from essays, and those essays require you to apply existing knowledge to new situations. A good way to teach this is to "make the familiar unfamiliar," which is to take something they know (like how nationalism was exploited by the conservatives in the years leading up to WW1) and make it unfamiliar (i.e. nationalism is now a falcon "turning and turning in the widening gyre" and it "cannot hear the falconer").
If your teachers do not do this where it is possible, I pity you (and them). I do test using this method as well (like my test on Gandhi placed him in the modern US as the leader of a group of Hispanics trying to force the US to give up the land it gained in the treaty of Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Students had to show they understood the career of Mohandas Gandhi by describing what the parallels would be in the case of the "American Gandhi."
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 11:24:42 AM
Grumbler gave my grandfather an "F" back in '42.
Tell him it is too late to turn in that missing homework.
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 11:30:42 AM
I don't write the AP test! :lol:
Presumably they still have tests during the course of the semester? :unsure:
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 11:30:42 AM
AP courses are more than about learning the material; half the points on the AP test come from essays, and those essays require you to apply existing knowledge to new situations. A good way to teach this is to "make the familiar unfamiliar," which is to take something they know (like how nationalism was exploited by the conservatives in the years leading up to WW1) and make it unfamiliar (i.e. nationalism is now a falcon "turning and turning in the widening gyre" and it "cannot hear the falconer").
Yeah on my test I had to interpret a Barbara Tuchman quote.
I'm amazed you remember the contents of the test (and I think you and are are basically the same age). :blink:
Damn you guys for taking an interesting thread and making it boring. :bash:
Anyway, out of curiousity Grumbles, did any of your students come up with interpretations that surprised you (in a good way)?
Quote from: Caliga on April 09, 2009, 11:42:50 AM
I'm amazed you remember the contents of the test (and I think you and are are basically the same age). :blink:
Indeed. I can't really even remember which tests I took. :blush:
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 11:46:34 AMIndeed. I can't really even remember which tests I took. :blush:
I know I took Euro History AP and American History AP. I'm pretty sure I took English AP as well. I must have taken a fourth one because I earned 32 credits for them all. Is there an Anatomy & Physiology or Biology AP exam? :huh:
Quote from: PDH on April 09, 2009, 11:24:42 AM
Grumbler gave my grandfather an "F" back in '42.
Your grandfather was alive in 1842? :huh:
Quote from: Razgovory on April 08, 2009, 09:56:31 PM
Was this writter before Wasteland or after?
The writer was way before and a major influence on Modernism. Yeats started in the 1890s. The poem itself was published a year or two before the Wasteland.
QuoteI don't think this is worth mentioning (as obviously everybody realized it) but the beast described in the second stanza is obviously the Sphinx. So it's about the chaos caused (or which causes) the birth of an enigma.
To link this back to the Joker, Yeats described the beast he described in 'The second Coming' as being associated with laughing, ecstatic destruction.
QuoteI think Spiritus Mundi here means more something like the Zeitgeist, and not some sort of a pan-human connection.
It could well be both. Yeats was, as I say, obsessed with obscurantist religious beliefs and it wouldn't surprise me.
As to interpretation I think it's ridiculous to say Grumbler's teaching something inappropriate here. One of Yeats's abiding fascinations in his poetry is the terrifying, but awe-inspiring devotion to a cause of men of action. Just 6 pages earlier, in the volume, you have him saying in 'Easter, 1916' that 'hearts with one purpose alone/ through summer and winter seem/ enchanted to a stone/ to trouble the living stream [...] too long a sacrifice/ can make a stone of the heart./ O when may it suffice?'.
This volume is one with some of most potent political poetry of the 20th century: 'a terrible beauty is born'. Now he may have literally cut politics out of the poem. It originally referenced Burke and Irish, French and Russian revolutionaries. Even without that, however, the poem directly uses, or paraphrases, sections of Shelley and Blake who are two of the greatest radical poets of all time, both of whom had a definite social and political purpose in their poetry and in the poems Yeats is referring to. So the idea that the political interpretation is somehow 'alternative' or wrong is simply preposterous.
Equally so is the exclusion of the occult and obscurantist elements of Yeat's writing. Surely the beauty and fun of reading the poem is the ambiguity between those two terribly demonstrable interpretations. Now we can argue, with referencce to the text and other things Yeats wrote, in favour of one of the other but given that they're both grounded in the text and in Yeats's work I think it's impossible to dismiss either.
And I think it's the ambiguity of meaning that is what's great about poetry (moreso than prose fiction, though, ironically I think it's easier for a poem to have a message than it is for prose fiction). Literature, unless it's bad, doesn't have a meaning. It does, however, have meaning.
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 11:30:42 AM
Quote from: Fate on April 09, 2009, 10:54:56 AM
Why would a student of an AP class explore what they already knew? I would rather suspect if an AP student understood the historical facts required to get an A in the class, they wouldn't waste time with a poem (unless you're a prick and put it on the test. :P)
I don't write the AP test! :lol:
AP courses are more than about learning the material; half the points on the AP test come from essays, and those essays require you to apply existing knowledge to new situations. A good way to teach this is to "make the familiar unfamiliar," which is to take something they know (like how nationalism was exploited by the conservatives in the years leading up to WW1) and make it unfamiliar (i.e. nationalism is now a falcon "turning and turning in the widening gyre" and it "cannot hear the falconer").
If your teachers do not do this where it is possible, I pity you (and them). I do test using this method as well (like my test on Gandhi placed him in the modern US as the leader of a group of Hispanics trying to force the US to give up the land it gained in the treaty of Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Students had to show they understood the career of Mohandas Gandhi by describing what the parallels would be in the case of the "American Gandhi."
It's been more than four years, but I don't remember the essays being nearly that involved. If English was your first language and you knew the basic historical facts, you could easily get a five.
Quote from: Valmy on April 09, 2009, 10:53:57 AM
Quote from: Caliga on April 09, 2009, 10:51:54 AM
In retrospect I should have used the 32 credits I had going into college to do a year abroad with a light schedule instead of picking up a minor. :blush:
I took a double major. What was wrong with us?
Pfft i skipped all AP and started college at 15, and look where i ended up.
:cry:
I'm go drink a bottle of whisky now
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 11:34:33 AM
Presumably they still have tests during the course of the semester? :unsure:
All of the MC and essay questions on my tests come from previous AP exams.
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:09:21 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2009, 10:00:16 AM
One thing is certain Grumbler. It is the lucky student that has you as a teacher.
Yeah, learn this interpretation of a poem that isn't want the poet intended. Yay!
and garbon signals that he has missed the last 100+ years of literary criticism and theory.
Quote from: grumbler on April 08, 2009, 10:41:44 PM
That the "rough beast" be the materialism of the US or the Stalinism of Russia seems a stretch for 1920. No more of a stretch than Nazism, of course, but Nazism seems a better extrapolation of the tenor of the times than materialism.
I think that a careful observer in 1920 would be able to see enough into the Bolshevik regime and its modus operandi to have a pretty good idea about its general tenor and possible future development. Arguably that direction would be easier to foresee than the development of Nazism from the farcicial failure of the Kapp putsch.
Re America - I am not sure to what degree the trope of America as being representative of a kind of soulness materialism had taken root by 1920, perhaps from the excesses of the Gilded Age. Certainly it had by the late 20s.
Fun to see what people choose to read into these things, and how it exposes their own mindset. Malthus for example thinks of radical spiritual movements; no doubt Spellus could tie it in some way to some obscure late medieval sufi movement.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 09, 2009, 01:15:39 PM
and garbon signals that he has missed the last 100+ years of literary criticism and theory.
:lol: Even I knew that.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 09, 2009, 01:24:57 PM
Re America - I am not sure to what degree the trope of America as being representative of a kind of soulness materialism had taken root by 1920, perhaps from the excesses of the Gilded Age. Certainly it had by the late 20s.
I think it's plausible for Yeats given that he was very much a believer in an aristocratic elite - whether artistic or landed. I mean he was a later slight fascist sympathiser. So I think that sort of conservative, nationalist view fitted quite well with anti-Americanism in the period.
Quote from: derspiess on April 09, 2009, 01:35:55 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 09, 2009, 01:15:39 PM
and garbon signals that he has missed the last 100+ years of literary criticism and theory.
:lol: Even I knew that.
:yes: There's something of a parallel between this discussion line and my thread on experimental theatre. I was trying to explain this to Princesca and she refuses to accept that:
a) the lack of a plot is not because the writer sucks, but rather because he strung together a bunch of symbols and wanted the viewer to assign meaning to them;
b) there is any possibility that a play constructed in such a manner can be good.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 09, 2009, 01:24:57 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 08, 2009, 10:41:44 PM
That the "rough beast" be the materialism of the US or the Stalinism of Russia seems a stretch for 1920. No more of a stretch than Nazism, of course, but Nazism seems a better extrapolation of the tenor of the times than materialism.
I think that a careful observer in 1920 would be able to see enough into the Bolshevik regime and its modus operandi to have a pretty good idea about its general tenor and possible future development. Arguably that direction would be easier to foresee than the development of Nazism from the farcicial failure of the Kapp putsch.
Re America - I am not sure to what degree the trope of America as being representative of a kind of soulness materialism had taken root by 1920, perhaps from the excesses of the Gilded Age. Certainly it had by the late 20s.
Fun to see what people choose to read into these things, and how it exposes their own mindset. Malthus for example thinks of radical spiritual movements; no doubt Spellus could tie it in some way to some obscure late medieval sufi movement.
It isn't a stretch to find a mystic implication to the term "spiritus mundi". It is almost certainly what the authour intended, in context.
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 02:41:49 PM
It isn't a stretch to find a mystic implication to the term "spiritus mundi". It is almost certainly what the authour intended, in context.
Spiritus Mundi comes right from Hegel. Whether that was what Yeats had in mind, I have no idea. Certainly anyone who received a serious liberal education in the last 19th century would be aware of that connection.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 09, 2009, 02:52:30 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 02:41:49 PM
It isn't a stretch to find a mystic implication to the term "spiritus mundi". It is almost certainly what the authour intended, in context.
Spiritus Mundi comes right from Hegel. Whether that was what Yeats had in mind, I have no idea. Certainly anyone who received a serious liberal education in the last 19th century would be aware of that connection.
Did Hegel also go on about visions of the antichrist derived from the impersonal forces of history?
Surely anyone reading the poem, even those with a liberal education, would realize that it has religious and mystic implications.
QuoteThe Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight:
Are you seriously contending that it is somehow
idiosyncratic to find that "Spiritus Mundi" (lit. "spirit of the world") has a mystic meaning in this context, because your educated person would realize that he was referring
only to the Hegelian world-historical notion?
FWIW, googling about seems to confirm this: http://books.google.ca/books?id=h17SuG8km1cC&pg=PA195&lpg=PA195&dq=spiritus+mundi+yeats&source=bl&ots=Zz9GcI3CXW&sig=5pwCThZ-VGaPe7oTpB46TIzOlws&hl=en&ei=EFXeSfTJDY7oMJiZjFU&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9#PPA195,M1
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 03:12:42 PM
Did Hegel also go on about visions of the antichrist derived from the impersonal forces of history?
No Hegel was not writing poetry. The question is not whether the poem inspired Hegel but whether the Hegelian concept of Weltgeist (Spiritus Mundi) has any implications for interpreting or understanding the poem. To the extent that one would read the poem as having *political* implicaiton - as grumbler does in the first post, it seems like a logical possibility.
QuoteSurely anyone reading the poem, even those with a liberal education, would realize that it has religious and mystic implications.
It makes reference to relgious tropes. The assumption that it has "mystic implications" is a reading. You are proving my point here I think.
QuoteAre you seriously contending that it is somehow idiosyncratic to find that "Spiritus Mundi" (lit. "spirit of the world") has a mystic meaning in this context
Quite sure I made no such claim.
QuoteFWIW, googling about seems to confirm this: http://books.google.ca/books?id=h17SuG8km1cC&pg=PA195&lpg=PA195&dq=spiritus+mundi+yeats&source=bl&ots=Zz9GcI3CXW&sig=5pwCThZ-VGaPe7oTpB46TIzOlws&hl=en&ei=EFXeSfTJDY7oMJiZjFU&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9#PPA195,M1
Well your link seems to confirm that some critic wants to draw parallels to Jungian concepts but there doesn't seem to be any claim that Yates was reading Jung in 1920.
EDIT: look at the top of 195! That conception seems to draw influence from the Hegelian conception of philosophy of history (though it differs in character and exposition).
To be fair the mysticism isn't necessarily a reading into the text. Yeats published a theory of history based on an ecstatic vision he had (the turning gyres). No doubt he was very well read but he was, as I say, literally obsessed with mystical, occultist stuff. He famously made all of his friends get their horoscopes drawn.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 09, 2009, 03:30:26 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 03:12:42 PM
Did Hegel also go on about visions of the antichrist derived from the impersonal forces of history?
No Hegel was not writing poetry. The question is not whether the poem inspired Hegel but whether the Hegelian concept of Weltgeist (Spiritus Mundi) has any implications for interpreting or understanding the poem. To the extent that one would read the poem as having *political* implicaiton - as grumbler does in the first post, it seems like a logical possibility.
I'm not denying it is "... a logical possibility". Indeed, it is clear that Yeats was weaving the political and religious together, and using a historical-theory term which also had a mystical meaning would have been right up his alley.
QuoteIt makes reference to relgious tropes. The assumption that it has "mystic implications" is a reading. You are proving my point here I think.
And you are splitting hairs frantically.
QuoteQuite sure I made no such claim.
That's how I read this:
QuoteFun to see what people choose to read into these things, and how it exposes their own mindset. Malthus for example thinks of radical spiritual movements; no doubt Spellus could tie it in some way to some obscure late medieval sufi movement.
I contend that anyone, even someone who is not me, could easly objectively come to the same conclusion I did. Research appears to indicate this is true. So I disagree with your argument that my reading is idiosyncratic "reading into" the poem. It's there for everyone to read.
QuoteWell your link seems to confirm that some critic wants to draw parallels to Jungian concepts but there doesn't seem to be any claim that Yates was reading Jung in 1920.
EDIT: look at the top of 195! That conception seems to draw influence from the Hegelian conception of philosophy of history (though it differs in character and exposition).
What I see is some pretty clear evidence, linked to earlier work of Yeats, that he had some typically mystic preoccupations. It is therefore to no surprise that these appear in his poem.
Good thread :)
Everyone's staying true to character, but somehow managing to actually discuss something new.
If only I had something to contribute :cry:
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 11:43:12 AM
Anyway, out of curiousity Grumbles, did any of your students come up with interpretations that surprised you (in a good way)?
I rather liked the image one student came up with of the "indignant desert birds" being all the failed radical movements (Anarchists, Sparticists, etc) that were irritated because the Fascists (the Beast) were more successful.
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 06:30:46 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 11:43:12 AM
Anyway, out of curiousity Grumbles, did any of your students come up with interpretations that surprised you (in a good way)?
I rather liked the image one student came up with of the "indignant desert birds" being all the failed radical movements (Anarchists, Sparticists, etc) that were irritated because the Fascists (the Beast) were more successful.
That's very interesting, especially if you think of the failed 'wild geese' in terms of Irish politics in contrast with the terrifying solidity of fanaticism. I did some digging and the poem was written in late 1919 and published in 1920 and 1921, so it's a poem written during the Irish civil war.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 09, 2009, 06:39:05 PM
That's very interesting, especially if you think of the failed 'wild geese' in terms of Irish politics in contrast with the terrifying solidity of fanaticism. I did some digging and the poem was written in late 1919 and published in 1920 and 1921, so it's a poem written during the Irish civil war.
If you look particularly at what Yeats deleted, you can see that the poem was originally intended as a more topical piece, which he converted to a more mystical piece. But, as I noted in my very first post, I wasn't looking at what Yeats intended. I was using the poem to examine history, as opposed to using history to examine the poem (that lies in the realm of the English department). One of the great things about this type of poetry is that you can use it as a lens to examine many things, including things that the poet never considered.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 09, 2009, 01:15:39 PM
and garbon signals that he has missed the last 100+ years of literary criticism and theory.
I don't think the part of teachers forcing their "unique" views on students in the last 100 years was a positive.
However have fun with your attempts to demean and belittle me. It's cute. :)
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 12:30:15 PM
All of the MC and essay questions on my tests come from previous AP exams.
Interesting. All of my teachers always mixed it up with their own and then stuff from previous exams. Maybe because they wanted to convince themselves that they weren't just teaching to an exam. :(
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 09, 2009, 06:39:05 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 09, 2009, 06:30:46 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 09, 2009, 11:43:12 AM
Anyway, out of curiousity Grumbles, did any of your students come up with interpretations that surprised you (in a good way)?
I rather liked the image one student came up with of the "indignant desert birds" being all the failed radical movements (Anarchists, Sparticists, etc) that were irritated because the Fascists (the Beast) were more successful.
I did some digging and the poem was written in late 1919 and published in 1920 and 1921, so it's a poem written during the Irish civil war.
No that would mean it was written during the Irish War of Independence. The Civil War didn't begin till 1922.
For those interested in Yeats, there's a very good permanent exhibition in Dublin on the life and works of Yeats. You can visit the online version here:
http://www.nli.ie/yeats/
QuoteThis complex poem has visionary qualities and was inspired in part by George Yeats' automatic writing. It is primarily an apocalyptic comment on the tide of history, a response to the populist revolutions which were changing and democratising Europe. Commentators have seen references in it to the French and Russian revolutions as well as to the Irish. 'The ceremony of innocence is drowned' is thought to refer to the execution of Marie Antoinette, for instance, while 'the judge nods before his empty dock' describes the empty official courts in Ireland after the First Dáil Éireann issued a decree setting up its own courts in June 1919. The poem contrasts strongly with 'Easter, 1916' where the poet seems to welcome the ideals and revolution; here he sees it as an entirely destructive force.
This paragraph about the poem is from the site I linked to in my last post.
Edit - 'the judge nods before his empty dock' is from an early draft of the poem.
http://books.google.ie/books?id=bl7B6djkrpUC&pg=PA100
I found this analysis of the early draft of the poem. Haven't had a chance to read it all yet.
I'd disagree with the thought that he welcomes revolution in 'Easter, 1916' he's far more ambivalent than that about it.
:(
I thought the poem was about Man's Inhumanity to Tim, and why there needs to be more of it.
Quote from: Caliga on April 09, 2009, 07:19:36 AM
When I took American History AP we had to read "Battle Cry of Freedom" and the guy who wrote the book (Bruce MacPherson?) actually came to discuss it with our class. :cool:
:o So jealous!
Oh, and it's James McPherson.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 09, 2009, 01:24:57 PM
I think that a careful observer in 1920 would be able to see enough into the Bolshevik regime and its modus operandi to have a pretty good idea about its general tenor and possible future development. Arguably that direction would be easier to foresee than the development of Nazism from the farcicial failure of the Kapp putsch.
Indeed, have you read We by Zamyatin?
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:04:01 PM
I don't think the part of teachers forcing their "unique" views on students in the last 100 years was a positive.
Wow, talk about a CLASSIC strawman! :lmfao: Absolutely
no one is arguing that "teachers forcing their "unique" views on students in the last 100 years was a positive." Your statement is a complete nonsequitur.
QuoteHowever have fun with your attempts to demean and belittle me. It's cute. :)
Hypersensitive much?
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:52:31 PM
Interesting. All of my teachers always mixed it up with their own and then stuff from previous exams. Maybe because they wanted to convince themselves that they weren't just teaching to an exam. :(
The strongest argument against the AP system is that it is, indeed, teaching to a test. I happen to agree. While I think the writing portion of the AP European History test is quite good, it is only half the exam. The multiple-choice half is rightfully referred to by many AP Euro teachers as "the trivial pursuit portion of the test."
What is more, the MC portion takes only 50 minutes of the 195-minute test, and yet counts for half of the score.
I think this is an awesome lesson Grumbler, it's really creative and will make the students think. :)
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 10, 2009, 09:27:55 AM:o So jealous!
Oh, and it's James McPherson.
Whoops. :blush: Anyway, he was totally cool... not at all arrogant which is a bit surprising given his stature. Since he is a professor at Princeton, which was like 20 minutes from where I grew up, him coming to our class wasn't as big a deal as it might sound.
Quote from: grumbler on April 10, 2009, 10:46:57 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2009, 10:52:31 PM
Interesting. All of my teachers always mixed it up with their own and then stuff from previous exams. Maybe because they wanted to convince themselves that they weren't just teaching to an exam. :(
The strongest argument against the AP system is that it is, indeed, teaching to a test. I happen to agree. While I think the writing portion of the AP European History test is quite good, it is only half the exam. The multiple-choice half is rightfully referred to by many AP Euro teachers as "the trivial pursuit portion of the test."
What is more, the MC portion takes only 50 minutes of the 195-minute test, and yet counts for half of the score.
It's funny how these things are - for example when I was at school, pretty much all tests were based on essay/written response. Now they are moving towards multiple choice since it is the "better, American method". :P
Quote from: Martinus on April 10, 2009, 11:53:25 AM
It's funny how these things are - for example when I was at school, pretty much all tests were based on essay/written response. Now they are moving towards multiple choice since it is the "better, American method". :P
The more things change, the more they change for the worse! :P
Covering WW1 in AP Euro right now. Its easy mode, and nothing needs to be studied compared to, say, the italian rennaisance, of which I remain deliberately ignorant.
What an evocative time in history- It pays, however, to remember that even while everyone laments the atrocious casualty rates, the Confederacy lost a greater portion of its men in arms than even WW1 France did.
Lost Generation indeed. The South produced some beautiful poems, by Ryan especially, but they recieve an unfortunately small amount of coverage.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 10, 2009, 12:47:13 PMitalian rennaisance, of which I remain deliberately ignorant.
Elaborate.
Quote from: Caliga on April 10, 2009, 01:01:32 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 10, 2009, 12:47:13 PMItalian Renaissance, of which I remain deliberately ignorant.
Elaborate.
Yeah, I was also confused by his antipathy to the Italian Renaissance. I don't see any direct connection to the perfidious Yankees.
There are things that interest me in history, which I study, and things I do not. I like the roman era, I like the dark ages, and I like Europe from the protestant reformation onward. But in between is a boring period that constitutes my worst subject. It doesnt help that coverage of it is oversaturated with knowledge about artists, scultpors and the like, which never made for very interesting history in my estimation.
If they were trying to make it more presentable, I'd like to see more on the mercenary armies of the small states, and the wheeling and deeling between each of them. Still, something about the whole era feels too progressive and decadent for me. It reminds me of yankees in a way I cannot explain, but recoil from.
Quote from: Caliga on April 10, 2009, 01:01:32 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 10, 2009, 12:47:13 PMitalian rennaisance, of which I remain deliberately ignorant.
Elaborate.
Greeks. Gibbon had the same bias.
It's lettow so I don't see why I even bother responding, but someone who claims he likes the Roman era, but dislikes Renaissance (which means literally the rebirth of the antic/Roman era after the dark ages) must be a retard beyond imagination.
Sadly, Lettow is right. The Renaissance is mostly about Italian painters who are fags.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 10, 2009, 01:08:46 PM
There are things that interest me in history, which I study, and things I do not. I like the roman era, I like the dark ages, and I like Europe from the protestant reformation onward. But in between is a boring period that constitutes my worst subject. It doesnt help that coverage of it is oversaturated with knowledge about artists, scultpors and the like, which never made for very interesting history in my estimation.
If they were trying to make it more presentable, I'd like to see more on the mercenary armies of the small states, and the wheeling and deeling between each of them. Still, something about the whole era feels too progressive and decadent for me. It reminds me of yankees in a way I cannot explain, but recoil from.
You would like to see more from whom? What are you babbling about? Knowledge about the wars from 1200-1500 is easily and readily available.
Your laziness reminds me of all the worthless Southerners who dragged Texas into an unwinnable war to keep their slaves. Do your own work you inbred assholes.
Dark Valmy with a goatee is cool.
Martinus, I like the roman era, but hate romans. My sympathies and interest lies very much in gaul. Vercingetorix is my bishi.
Valmy: Your absolutely right. The problem being, the most interesting part of an uninteresting period still leaves me cold. The material I have read has focused on something I dont care about, and I dont care enough to poke for what I want. I read hours of history every week, but I spend at least five hours on 1861-1865 for every hour elsewhere, and a goodly portion of those are South-centric 1820-1860. Other periods of history are a less frequent subject, and usually they focus around an event of people that has arrested my attention. (WW1, the boers, the ainu, & etc would all qualify.)
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:25:38 PM
Martinus, I like the roman era, but hate romans. My sympathies and interest lies very much in gaul. Vercingetorix is my bishi.
Jesus. What is your problem with civilisation? Every time it shows even a hint of flourishing you seem to sympathise wholeheartedly with the romantic, barbaric fringe :bleeding:
Thats an interesting point, and worth analysing. I like the high victorians, and napoleonic france. I would call the antebellum South haute culture as well, but I can see why many would not.
The answer lies in that I am suspicious and downright antagonistic of progress. I tend to swing for faith, valour tradition and moraltiy in the face of science, reason, industry and the whole progressive scene.
I really identify with agrarians, also, which 'civilisation' tends to deal roughly with.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:25:38 PM
Vercingetorix is bishi.
:huh: Vercingetorix bishonen? I think you need to look up the term, I guarantee you he wasn't.
What? He was a long-haired celt i'd certaintly let carry me away. Dreamy!
But, martinus, why do you think so little of me? I like -you-, you know. You, CdM, neil and tamas are the posters I doubt i'd go to languish without.
Well, I think the use of the word "bishi" finally puts an end to the rumor of lettow being my sockpuppet. Because I'd never pretend to be a japofag.
I even had to look it up.
P.S. Jubal Early liked cock.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:30:47 PM
Thats an interesting point, and worth analysing. I like the high victorians, and napoleonic france. I would call the antebellum South haute culture as well, but I can see why many would not.
How can you like Napoleonic France? Revolutionary fervor, human progress, the last great war of freedom? All seems like the sort of stuff you'd detest.
Same for the High Victorians. The long 19th century crisis of faith, replaced by a horrid faith in progress that led inexorably into the Somme.
QuoteThe answer lies in that I am suspicious and downright antagonistic of progress. I tend to swing for faith, valour tradition and moraltiy in the face of science, reason, industry and the whole progressive scene.
That doesn't sound wholly inimical to the Romans. In fact it sounds like just about every Roman I've ever read about and every Roman historian. I think you're associating the Romans with Greek ideas.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:33:35 PM
What? He was a long-haired celt i'd certaintly let carry me away. Dreamy!
Bishonen don't rock the facial hair.
I dont dislike freedom, you know. Im more libertarian than fascist..and fervour? I admire fanatacism no matter its source, and think suicide attacks should be more exalted than they are. That is to say, I eat up Japan's..thing in WW2, or the french in WW1.
As for the faith in progress that lead to the somme? I know, I know! I embrace the victorian era, despite its faults. Fondness for something doesnt equate to unilateral support for everything in it. The victorian faith in progress leading to the somme gives me massive GRIMDARK arousal. WW1 is probably how all wars should be fought, if not medieval conditions.
Napoleon and his regime I like a great deal. The spirit of the times, the expanding liberties and curbing of the radical left, the birth of nationalism, it all appeals to me.
Admittedly, roman attitudes arent antagonistic to mine, and in many ways paralell it. However, I dislike romans, very simply. I just automatically read them as the villains. To make things more muddling, I like the greeks. I admit it is a bit inconsistent, but I can explain all my aversions and admirations if I was called to do so.
[/quote]Bishonen don't rock the facial hair.
[/quote]
An interesting argument, but your asking me to acknowledge JEB wasnt a bishi, which requires too much of a leap of faith.
Follow-up to my Alan Seeger bit: today, our school hosted Mike Seeger, brother of Pete Seeger, a folk singer-type heavily involved in getting students interested in folk songs of Appalachia.
After he performed, there was a question-and-answer period. One of my students, remembering the poem I had read and the bio of Alan Seeger i had provided (which didn't mention Mike Seeger, whom I frankly had never heard of before this week) asked Mike how his uncle's legacy had affected his work.
Mike Seeger was astonished by the question, and said he had never before been asked about his uncle, only his brother. He said that the only thing he and his brother Pete agreed on was that they really wished they could have met their Uncle Alan, whose memory cast a shadow on the whole family. Alan Seeger had, of course, died before either Seeger brother (or their sister) was born. He then sang "Rendezvous" with a guitar accompaniment he made up on the spot.
That was quite a rewarding moment for me. I hadn't really made the Alan Seeger connection myself, but, once made, it was terribly moving.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 11, 2009, 07:37:06 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:30:47 PM
Thats an interesting point, and worth analysing. I like the high victorians, and napoleonic france. I would call the antebellum South haute culture as well, but I can see why many would not.
How can you like Napoleonic France? Revolutionary fervor, human progress, the last great war of freedom? All seems like the sort of stuff you'd detest.
Fortunately, freedom prevailed in those wars, and Napoleon was defeated.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 11, 2009, 07:33:42 PM
Well, I think the use of the word "bishi" finally puts an end to the rumor of lettow being my sockpuppet. Because I'd never pretend to be a japofag.
I even had to look it up.
P.S. Jubal Early liked cock.
I looked it up as well, and it seems he's using it incorrectly. I very much doubt that Vercingetorix (whoever that is) looked like a woman.
Neeeil, your talking about things you dont understand. Which happens infrequently- it doesnt suit you. Vercingetorix is most certaintly a bishi, and were he here he'd carry me away in his manly but conspicuously hairless arms.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 11, 2009, 07:27:32 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:25:38 PM
Martinus, I like the roman era, but hate romans. My sympathies and interest lies very much in gaul. Vercingetorix is my bishi.
Jesus. What is your problem with civilisation? Every time it shows even a hint of flourishing you seem to sympathise wholeheartedly with the romantic, barbaric fringe :bleeding:
It's part of that League of the South bullshit. They argue that Southerners are actually "Celtic" and are oppressed by the more "Germanic" northerners.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 11, 2009, 07:33:42 PM
Well, I think the use of the word "bishi" finally puts an end to the rumor of lettow being my sockpuppet. Because I'd never pretend to be a japofag.
I even had to look it up.
P.S. Jubal Early liked cock.
You are a braver man then I. I won't look that shit up.
Raz, thats perceptive of you. How many people here on languish even know what the League of the South is?
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 25, 2009, 11:35:17 AM
Raz, thats perceptive of you. How many people here on languish even know what the League of the South is?
Most. You have mentioned it several times.
Lettow is gay, now?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 25, 2009, 11:09:15 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 11, 2009, 07:33:42 PM
Well, I think the use of the word "bishi" finally puts an end to the rumor of lettow being my sockpuppet. Because I'd never pretend to be a japofag.
I even had to look it up.
P.S. Jubal Early liked cock.
You are a braver man then I. I won't look that shit up.
Research allows me to mock the lettow and Isebrand types on the internet.
Quote from: Habbaku on April 25, 2009, 11:42:14 AM
Lettow is gay, now?
Now? I thought it was a given from beginning.
Quote from: grumbler on April 08, 2009, 09:04:02 PM
I pose the question: "Assume 'the falcon' is nationalism, who is the falconer, what is it that cannot hold, and what slouches towards Bethleham?"
I'm confused
Quote from: 11B4V on April 26, 2009, 01:47:31 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 08, 2009, 09:04:02 PM
I pose the question: "Assume 'the falcon' is nationalism, who is the falconer, what is it that cannot hold, and what slouches towards Bethleham?"
I'm confused
Hello again. :)
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 25, 2009, 11:01:58 AM
Neeeil, your talking about things you dont understand. Which happens infrequently- it doesnt suit you. Vercingetorix is most certaintly a bishi, and were he here he'd carry me away in his manly but conspicuously hairless arms.
He had a mustache. That's an instant disqualification. Also, due to his warrior culture he was probably a bit overbuilt for a true bishonen.
This is a bishonen:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fweblogs.amny.com%2Fentertainment%2Fstage%2Fblog%2Fzac_efron.jpg&hash=0732c0b3035cf59a7bcd1c15bc81de6e47be94d5)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.pucp.edu.pe%2Fmedia%2F497%2F20061218-ouran22nw.jpg&hash=57c8847f725fef92ed1e599ecfa4d58fae2e0abe)
This is not:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.adinimages.com%2Fweb%2Fvercingetorix.gif&hash=8f56ee454c8f2a7b3a471aa2c2ca1280a1f3dce7)
Jesus tapdancing Christ. :lol:
Quote from: Razgovory on April 25, 2009, 11:07:31 AM
It's part of that League of the South bullshit. They argue that Southerners are actually "Celtic" and are oppressed by the more "Germanic" northerners.
But that's not true at all.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 26, 2009, 09:02:14 AM
Jesus tapdancing Christ. :lol:
You think you did your research?
I know all. I see all. I am the one, true god.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:30:47 PM
The answer lies in that I am suspicious and downright antagonistic of progress. I tend to swing for faith, valour tradition and moraltiy in the face of science, reason, industry and the whole progressive scene.
I really identify with agrarians, also, which 'civilisation' tends to deal roughly with.
Valour tradition?
What the hell is that?
Do you mean valor?
In that case, what would be a "valor tradition"?
Quote from: Neil on April 26, 2009, 09:10:54 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 26, 2009, 09:02:14 AM
Jesus tapdancing Christ. :lol:
You think you did your research?
I know all. I see all. I am the one, true god.
It's amusing the one, true god isn't much better at NCAA 2006. :contract:
Quote from: The Brain on April 26, 2009, 04:03:39 AM
Quote from: 11B4V on April 26, 2009, 01:47:31 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 08, 2009, 09:04:02 PM
I pose the question: "Assume 'the falcon' is nationalism, who is the falconer, what is it that cannot hold, and what slouches towards Bethleham?"
I'm confused
Hello again. :)
Good to see you all still around.
Quote from: Neil on April 26, 2009, 09:08:52 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 25, 2009, 11:07:31 AM
It's part of that League of the South bullshit. They argue that Southerners are actually "Celtic" and are oppressed by the more "Germanic" northerners.
But that's not true at all.
My statement or their beliefs?
Quote from: Siege on April 26, 2009, 11:40:41 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:30:47 PM
The answer lies in that I am suspicious and downright antagonistic of progress. I tend to swing for faith, valour tradition and moraltiy in the face of science, reason, industry and the whole progressive scene.
I really identify with agrarians, also, which 'civilisation' tends to deal roughly with.
Valour tradition?
What the hell is that?
Do you mean valor?
In that case, what would be a "valor tradition"?
Colour.
Valour.
etc.
Brits spelling.
Quote from: Barrister on April 26, 2009, 11:42:33 PM
Quote from: Neil on April 26, 2009, 09:10:54 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 26, 2009, 09:02:14 AM
Jesus tapdancing Christ. :lol:
You think you did your research?
I know all. I see all. I am the one, true god.
It's amusing the one, true god isn't much better at NCAA 2006. :contract:
The college game is evil. :p
Besides, wasn't I playing the Hurricanes?
Quote from: Siege on April 26, 2009, 11:40:41 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:30:47 PM
The answer lies in that I am suspicious and downright antagonistic of progress. I tend to swing for faith, valour tradition and moraltiy in the face of science, reason, industry and the whole progressive scene.
I really identify with agrarians, also, which 'civilisation' tends to deal roughly with.
Valour tradition?
What the hell is that?
Do you mean valor?
In that case, what would be a "valor tradition"?
Learn to spell, you ignorant wretch.
Quote from: Siege on April 26, 2009, 11:40:41 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 11, 2009, 07:30:47 PM
The answer lies in that I am suspicious and downright antagonistic of progress. I tend to swing for faith, valour tradition and moraltiy in the face of science, reason, industry and the whole progressive scene.
I really identify with agrarians, also, which 'civilisation' tends to deal roughly with.
Valour tradition?
What the hell is that?
Do you mean valor?
In that case, what would be a "valor tradition"?
He meant "velour traditions." Stuff like this:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nerditry.com%2Fimages%2Fjesus-elvis.jpg&hash=7d2ec43f2b117eef9099668c60bc7b68a6f86e5e)
Quote from: grumbler on April 27, 2009, 08:53:32 AM
He meant "velour traditions." Stuff like this:
(img snip)
I love that 3-D picture, I just wish I had the glasses for them so the two images could combine to make Ronald Reagan.
Its true- It is valour & tradition, minus a comma and avoiding the yankee spelling of the word in favour of the correct one.
Although, the South -does- have a tradition of valour. Some of the best soldiers in the world.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 27, 2009, 10:11:33 AM
Its true- It is valour & tradition, minus a comma and avoiding the yankee spelling of the word in favour of the correct one.
Although, the South -does- have a tradition of valour. Some of the best soldiers in the world.
Unfortunately for the South, their valour is inextricably linked to their racism. The Southern Cavalier culture wasn't born to stand up to Northerners, Europeans, or even to ride down and conquer Mexicans, but rather to ensure the subordination of blacks by any means necessary.
The military elan that was instilled in the South preceded the South itself- it is primarily a manifestation of the South's celtic origins, and is at much in evidence at Culloden as Gettysburg.
The Celtic influences which defined the South and made disunion inevitable also all but consigned the South to ineffective & reckless tactics.
There is some truth, though, that the Southern vision of civilisation saw the free man as truly a free man, and relied on an underclass to accomplish this, as every society of free men had until that point.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 27, 2009, 01:18:37 PM
The military elan that was instilled in the South preceded the South itself- it is primarily a manifestation of the South's celtic origins, and is at much in evidence at Culloden as Gettysburg.
The Celtic influences which defined the South and made disunion inevitable also all but consigned the South to ineffective & reckless tactics.
:yes:
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 27, 2009, 01:18:37 PM
The military elan that was instilled in the South preceded the South itself- it is primarily a manifestation of the South's celtic origins, and is at much in evidence at Culloden as Gettysburg.
The Celtic influences which defined the South and made disunion inevitable also all but consigned the South to ineffective & reckless tactics.
There is some truth, though, that the Southern vision of civilisation saw the free man as truly a free man, and relied on an underclass to accomplish this, as every society of free men had until that point.
The North had exactly the same degree of celtic origin as the South, as both were settled from Great Britain, in part by criminals.
Also, I don't think you can pin the South's martial spirit on warriors of the past whose connection to the South is tenuous at best. The South's martial spirit was a natural outgrowth of the American Revolution mixed with slavery, which itself is a mix of English and North American military styles.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 27, 2009, 01:18:37 PM
The military elan that was instilled in the South preceded the South itself- it is primarily a manifestation of the South's celtic origins, and is at much in evidence at Culloden as Gettysburg.
I am kind of ignorant of celtic military history - did they get their asses kicked at Culloden as well?
I had a second coming about 30 minutes ago.
Quote from: Berkut on April 27, 2009, 02:17:38 PM
I am kind of ignorant of celtic military history - did they get their asses kicked at Culloden as well?
Yup. Something like a 10-1 kill ratio in favor of the English.
I don't think I like the velour Jesus.
It makes him look like a hand-wringing, bed-wetting, Theresa Heinz-Kerry loving Hippy. :uffda:
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 27, 2009, 01:18:37 PM
The military elan that was instilled in the South preceded the South itself- it is primarily a manifestation of the South's celtic origins
:huh:
How far deep in the sack 'o stupid does one have to reach to pull out this gem?
Quote from: Berkut on April 27, 2009, 02:17:38 PM
I am kind of ignorant of celtic military history - did they get their asses kicked at Culloden as well?
They were crushed in a brilliant victory for the neo-Hittite forces.
Many a bell beaker pot was smashed that fatal day.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 27, 2009, 03:44:43 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 27, 2009, 01:18:37 PM
The military elan that was instilled in the South preceded the South itself- it is primarily a manifestation of the South's celtic origins
:huh:
How far deep in the sack 'o stupid does one have to reach to pull out this gem?
The usual confederate apologist's sack is tiny.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 26, 2009, 09:02:14 AM
Jesus tapdancing Christ. :lol:
I always thought Neil was secretly gay.
Quote from: Martinus on April 27, 2009, 04:26:36 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 26, 2009, 09:02:14 AM
Jesus tapdancing Christ. :lol:
I always thought Neil was secretly gay.
Fags often try to convince themselves that people that they look up to are gay themselves.
I guess I should be honoured.
Neil, the Celtic origin of the South was more readily apparent to antebellum northerners than it is to you.
I'd recommend the late Mcwhiney's Cracker Culture, which expounds a great deal on the point and makes the case in far greater detail and with far more statistics than I care to furbish here.
Also, martinus &etc, I feel I must dissabuse you of notions that I am homosexual, although they are justified in my unseemly fondness for prettyboy types. The Missus teases me for it- they just have a romantic dash, is all. Would that I could be one- my face is too round and halfling-esque.
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 27, 2009, 04:47:27 PM
Neil, the Celtic origin of the South was more readily apparent to antebellum northerners than it is to you.
Indeed, the tumulus burials and winged axes so prevalent in the deep South should have been a giveaway.
I didn't know that Mexicans were celtic.
Quote from: Neil on April 27, 2009, 02:08:26 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on April 27, 2009, 01:18:37 PM
The military elan that was instilled in the South preceded the South itself- it is primarily a manifestation of the South's celtic origins, and is at much in evidence at Culloden as Gettysburg.
The Celtic influences which defined the South and made disunion inevitable also all but consigned the South to ineffective & reckless tactics.
There is some truth, though, that the Southern vision of civilisation saw the free man as truly a free man, and relied on an underclass to accomplish this, as every society of free men had until that point.
The North had exactly the same degree of celtic origin as the South, as both were settled from Great Britain, in part by criminals.
Also, I don't think you can pin the South's martial spirit on warriors of the past whose connection to the South is tenuous at best. The South's martial spirit was a natural outgrowth of the American Revolution mixed with slavery, which itself is a mix of English and North American military styles.
I believe Lettow is referring to this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch-Irish_American
Amongst other things. The South had a more than fair share settlers from wales and scotland proper, as well as a leavening of huguenots and mainline french.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 27, 2009, 05:52:28 PM
I believe Lettow is referring to this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch-Irish_American
Interesting fact. They spoke a germanic languages. Scots and English. Also they settled heavily in new England and Pensylvania.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 27, 2009, 05:52:28 PM
I believe Lettow is referring to this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch-Irish_American
It would be a mistake to consider the Scotch-Irish to be Celtic.
Then again, it's very vogue to draw Celtic ancestry of late. It's probably some sort of neo-pagan thing. Personally, I don't see it. Southern culture was all about slavery and racism, and was an artifact of New World planter culture. Some Celtic hillbillies were washed out by the dominant English reign on the coast. Celtic culture didn't make a difference in the Americas until the great migrations, and those involved mostly the great industrial cities of the North.
I thought that most recent research suggests that there's no such thing as a Celt :mellow:
Quote from: Neil on April 27, 2009, 06:45:45 PM
It would be a mistake to consider the Scotch-Irish to be Celtic.
Indeed. If that's what Lettow is referring to, he's dead wrong to call Ulster protestants as "celtic". There's not a hint of celtic (or gaelic) heritage there.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 27, 2009, 06:52:47 PM
I thought that most recent research suggests that there's no such thing as a Celt :mellow:
Stop being so anti-post-modern.
I was looking for this thread. I wrote my last ever undergraduate essay on Yeats and nationalism. I discussed this poem and came across an interesting quotation from one of his letters in 1934-5 (shortly after his flirtation with fascism), I thought it may be of use next time you teach the class Grumbler:
'I am not callous, every nerve trembles with horror at what is happening in Europe, "the Ceremony of innocence is drowned"'.
And I wanted to establish to Marty that G wasn't enforcing some kooky theory on the kids :p
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 03, 2009, 09:05:54 PM
I was looking for this thread. I wrote my last ever undergraduate essay on Yeats and nationalism. I discussed this poem and came across an interesting quotation from one of his letters in 1934-5 (shortly after his flirtation with fascism), I thought it may be of use next time you teach the class Grumbler:
'I am not callous, every nerve trembles with horror at what is happening in Europe, "the Ceremony of innocence is drowned"'.
That is actually very useful. Thanks. I will look it up.
QuoteAnd I wanted to establish to Marty that G wasn't enforcing some kooky theory on the kids :p
Good luck with that! :lol:
Just did this lesson again, and was reminded of this thread, so decided to resurrect it.
Great class discussion again this year, reaching the consensus that totalitarianism (of the left or right) was the "second coming" of the kind of emotional identity politics that had occurred when church and state combined to create the monarchy of divine right.