You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
[–]bill.lee[S]0 points
1 point
1 point
(+1|-0)
ago
Hey /u/novictim...very thorough analysis :) Overall, I enjoy Hedges writing even though I'm not always agree with his ultimate conclusions. Although, I did like he worked in his viewpoints on knowledge v. wisdom. But I may have less of a materialist outlook. The portion of his historical interpretation that lost me was the distinction between the Renaissance and the Dark Ages. It's more a pet peeve but when these periods are brought up, I mean, no one in 1402 thought: "Hm, I really feel like I'm in the Renaissance now...doesn't feel anything like the Dark Ages".
I may not be enunciating that quite clearly--but I find it absurd. This goes toward one of my biases: after hunter-gatherers, history is dominated by people seeking wealth and then killing a bunch of other people. Certainly, that's a generalization but it's part of the reason I'm woe to romanticize periods or individuals. Do I need to have some declarative set of facts on Suleiman and Richard the Lionheart to reach a conclusion that vilifies one and celebrates the other...or perhaps some variation? In either case, I'd argue, having any kind of opinion on these long-dead people doesn't advance me at all.
I did like his point toward the end on the only certainties being birth and death. It reminds me of the line from Dylan "All the money you've made will never buy back your soul". A personal favorite.
Oh, I agree with you and so do most historians today: The middle ages are a period of growth and reason, and all but a very short period following the collapse of the Roman empire in the West are worthy of the title "dark ages". Myths and misconceptions from the past sure do hang on when people don't bother to update the assumptions and knowledge. (Hedges needs this)
"doesn't advance me at all." I'm with that side of the historic view. I don't find the great man view of history very compelling or useful except when truly unique characters are identified (eg Martin Luther). A systems/underlying-trends/forces approach usually gives up the take home message and the deeper understanding.
"When your soul wears out, buy new shoes" - Unidentified Stride Rite Shoes executive
view the rest of the comments →
[–] bill.lee [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Hey /u/novictim...very thorough analysis :) Overall, I enjoy Hedges writing even though I'm not always agree with his ultimate conclusions. Although, I did like he worked in his viewpoints on knowledge v. wisdom. But I may have less of a materialist outlook. The portion of his historical interpretation that lost me was the distinction between the Renaissance and the Dark Ages. It's more a pet peeve but when these periods are brought up, I mean, no one in 1402 thought: "Hm, I really feel like I'm in the Renaissance now...doesn't feel anything like the Dark Ages".
I may not be enunciating that quite clearly--but I find it absurd. This goes toward one of my biases: after hunter-gatherers, history is dominated by people seeking wealth and then killing a bunch of other people. Certainly, that's a generalization but it's part of the reason I'm woe to romanticize periods or individuals. Do I need to have some declarative set of facts on Suleiman and Richard the Lionheart to reach a conclusion that vilifies one and celebrates the other...or perhaps some variation? In either case, I'd argue, having any kind of opinion on these long-dead people doesn't advance me at all.
I did like his point toward the end on the only certainties being birth and death. It reminds me of the line from Dylan "All the money you've made will never buy back your soul". A personal favorite.
[–] novictim 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Oh, I agree with you and so do most historians today: The middle ages are a period of growth and reason, and all but a very short period following the collapse of the Roman empire in the West are worthy of the title "dark ages". Myths and misconceptions from the past sure do hang on when people don't bother to update the assumptions and knowledge. (Hedges needs this)
"doesn't advance me at all." I'm with that side of the historic view. I don't find the great man view of history very compelling or useful except when truly unique characters are identified (eg Martin Luther). A systems/underlying-trends/forces approach usually gives up the take home message and the deeper understanding.
"When your soul wears out, buy new shoes" - Unidentified Stride Rite Shoes executive