site banner
KulakRevolt  1yr ago (anarchonomicon.substack.com)   3382 thread views

Crowned Masterpieces of Eloquence: We used to be a Civilization

anarchonomicon.substack.com

A piece I wrote on one of the most fascinating and incredible thriftstore finds I've ever stumbled upon.

The Edwardians and Victorians were not like us, they believed in a nobility of their political class that's almost impossible to understand or relate to, and that believe, that attribution of nobility is tied up with something even more mysterious: their belief in the fundamental nobility of rhetoric.

Still not sure entirely how I feel about this, or how sure I am of my conclusions but this has had me spellbound in fascination and so I wrote about it.

31
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I didn't read all that, but if your claim is that it doesn't matter what the actual meaning is and just vibes are enough, good news - there is no ability to understand Shakespeare that we can lose, because we don't actually care about understanding him.

Did you deliberately do the exact thing you are bemoaning for the irony? Your post doesn't read as irony, but it feels too rich to be accidental, it's a 200 word post.

I'm not bemoaning anything. Doesn't really matter to me if people actually understand Shakespeare or just read him for the vibes (and this guy is no Shakespeare).

The post I responded to was deliberately overwrought purple prose and was certainly not speaking clearly.

I'm flattered that you initially responded with a brief insult, thought better of it and blocked me, then couldn't stop thinking about me for two days so you unblocked me and came back with this long insult.

Perhaps one day you will learn that brevity is the soul of wit.

People are able to know what words mean by looking at the words around them. This is how people learn new words.

It is doubtful that a reader would learn that "censure" had the additional meaning of "to judge" from reading this.

He probably meant it to mean both.

And modern audiences won't pick up on this because they only know one meaning.

What he is actually saying means nothing in this scene.

Agree to disagree that the words Shakespeare chose have no significance.

I'm flattered that you initially responded with a brief insult, thought better of it and blocked me, then couldn't stop thinking about me for two days so you unblocked me and came back with this long insult.

The OP has already been banned (and apparently deleted all his posts). There is no need to continue this interpersonal bickering.

Fwiw, the post was still up when I responded, and I didn't see that he had been banned.

I'll respond to you with a lot of simple words, then, to meet you at your reading level.

This post reads like someone who is more interested in getting as many condescending digs in as possible, buried in a lot of words, than someone actually interested in the discussion. This post and this one are both you trying to call the other poster stupid as many different ways as you think you can slip by the mods.

My reading level may not be at your lofty level, but I can still see what you're doing.

Keep posting like this, and next time I won't bother letting your posts out of the new user filter. In the meantime, banned for three days for antagonism.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats