Ph.D's out of their depth..and will not admit it.
To: Dr Julia Houston
http://scifi.about.com(no longer accomodates Ms Houston..Why?I don't know)
Drag pointer slowly OVER images for maximum effectiveness agendums?(with Left Hand Mouse button down))...
Your review of the latest "King Arthur" Movie is to say the least,miserably interesting...see Review here
"It's fashionable as well that Bruckheimer is seeking a return to the “original” legend, as authenticity is in great demand and short supply these days"
A statement likely to cause grief and wide-eye stares for years to come...and the ""original"" qualification is duly noted.
".....is working on yet another King Arthur movie, this one “faithfully” based on Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur, the earliest of the written Arthurian legends.
"The earliest"...Where do your 'written' historical timeline begin..Suggest that you kick Goggle into first gear and perform real layer by layer research....Moreover,alert yourself to the possibility that the Cymru/Kymri (Welsh/Britons) writings in Arthur's era are still in existence...
With your fascination with all that is "The Renaissance" ..maybe the word that you were looking for is "published' ...and not "written"..That would be a little more closer to the truth...still not the truth however..The French beat him to it...
Mallory based his 'published works' on the writing of the Welshman ,.....Geoffrey of Monmouth ,whose efforts were regarded as the most informative for many centuries ...until the English Gentry through the pen of Mallory decided to 'amend' areas of historical relevance....He(Mallory) distorted names with accepted historian facts and changed dates to accommodate present times.
This was, and I am sure you would agree ,is precisely the scenario that manufactures developed factual events into myths and legends...It is called 'Historical and Cultural Marginalisation'
Your reference to 'England' and then associating the name with Arthur(6th.c) is indicative of those professional people who for rationale only they may understand:-)) ,deem it necessary,indeed,wantingly ,indeed wantonly assert their Ph.D's into other specialized areas with a randomness of intellect that brings disgrace on their chosen target.
The general acceptance by Professional and knowledgeable Historians of'Dark and Middle Ages' in the first usage of the term similiar to 'England' is derived from the detailed writings of Bede during the early 8th c...Then it would have a similarity to "Englaland/Engloland "(Old English). but Arthur probably called it "Lloegr"...from the days of the Trojans of Brutusif HE were ever to recognised such a land....His Cornish(West Wales) friends would have called it Pow Sows
The predominant German tribe that invaded Prydain(Britain-Bryttys in the Welsh chronicle). ) as you may already know,were the Angles (German: Angeln, Old English: Englas, and Anglii(used by Tacitus..)...It is extremely likely that Bede, himself an Angle/Saxon Christian(not Frisian or Jute) decided to refer to the country as "England"(in old English of course) to counteract and slant the detailed writings of a Welsh monk called Gildas who lived during the time of Arthur...Bede was the original plagiarizer using Gildas's works as a basis to write pleasingly for thee then current "English" Princes and Kings.
King Arthur fought many battles against the 'Angles' and the Northern Picti, also the Scotti tribe (from Ireland)....but NEVER against the "English" from "England".
While you are scanning the Net,pay special attention to anything that provides ANY data as to the when(5th.c) and why the Romans left Britain(Prydain)...then relate that to the timeline of Arthur.>>>>>>Then go back and amend your review. :-)
Teaching English Literature and specialising in 'Renaissance Drama' is really commendable.. However,when dedicated Scholars of Historical Ages(I am an Engineer,not an Historian) spend their whole life trying to push the truth to the surface and challenge the status quo acceptance of all things "already proven, they become very annoyed when others stir the puddled water for those that are very susceptible to persuasion and direction...the young student.
By all means show the student the correct way to "read textbooks"..but do not tell them what books to read...Provide alternatives so that they can decide for themselves what may be myth and what can be regarded as the truth...e.g.
The Black Book of Carmathen,The Triads,The Mobinogion Tales,The Llandaff Charters ,especially The Llandaff Charters and the collections and genealogies at the "Oxbridge" and the Welsh Universities.
Your specific interest in Willy Shakespeare leads me to "Cymbeline"(Cunobelinus)...Here again,historical fact seems destined for the back-burner, Old Will being a staunch Englishman of some repute and a fave of Royalty,completely distorts the character ofCymbeline, the King of the Catuvellauni tribe...So why would he not provide an accurate account of the life and times of Cymbeline...'Belinius' and the kidnapping of Cymbeline's sons ,living in the wilderness of Wales indicates really the sustain effort of the times(and present) to marginalise the History of the Welsh(Britons)....For "The Dark Ages" were to remain as such.
Cymbeline's characters personalities are most certainly extracted from "his" other plays, King Lear,Romeo and Juliet and possibly Othello.
If indeed Shakespeare did actually write all that is attributed to him(maybe the 7th Earl of Oxford (1550-1604 ??), one would be tempted to believe that Old Will rented a couple of out of work local English writers whose deceptional historical strength lay to the other side of the Kings Lud/Lear /Bran/Caradoc genetic branch...i.e the Kings Lud/Tenuantius/Cymbeline/ Arviragus/Meric family tree.
Living in the Elizabethan era ,why did he not take the opportunity(write into script)and include Cymbeline's son Aviragus first cousin ,The King of the few references of their family in the New Testament..Here,it appears, we have the typical political and religious aspects of ensuring that the English, gentry in particular, are and are seen to be the original Christian Brits with any religious attribution to the 1st and 2nd century Welsh Kings(Lud/Bran-Cymbeline/Caradoc-Arviragus and King Lucius-2nd c) being hidden from the primarily English audience.
After the Welsh Tudors had bid farewell to the Roman church,why would Shakespeare ignore the religious attributes of whom were, Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia..................Linus is Caractacus-Aviragus-Caradoc's son and Claudia(Gladys..Welsh)his daughter ..Puden a Roman Soldier/Senator is married to Claudia....Gladys whilst living in the Emporia Court in Rome adopted Caesar's household name,hence Claudia...Pudens and Claudia's home still stands today....I have seen it.
and from the KJV Bible Old Testament (1611AD ...-four years before Willie's death)
"... And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles. (Isaiah 66:19)
I stand corrected if Will included Caradoc's family in the scripting of course it is entirely possible that Shakespeare was entirely unaware that these relationships existed, as he may not have been in the loop and learned on a "need to know" basis?..He was just another English writer afterall.
The most likely scenario is what drives business today...Competition...The publication of the King James Bible was a direct threat on Old Will's pocket... and maybe he just thought "What the Hell:-))
For a detailed analysis and a break with conventional accepted textual images and a complete departure from tenure teaching,I highly recommend hitting Goggle with Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett...and buy one of their books...Being an American,you may be in for a pleasant surprise when you read their book/websites...They also provides an clear insight into what the tenured Historians call "The Dark Ages"....Its quite 'enlightening'
For any professional establishment,to admit that there may be an hole in their thinking patterns which may have been generated over many centuries,it is understandable that there be resistance to change..However,under normal conditions, errors that occur through either genuine mistake and/or devious undertakings are corrected in camera over a period that does the least personal damaged to reputations and confidence...When these 'errors' are left to fester, the profession becomes paranoid and corruptive..The young student becomes the 'corruptee'..... and that leads to a sadness that cannot be measured.
Maybe Shakespeare was destine to die on the day he was born afterall.....23rd April.
The question I always ask of the Ph.D's is... "Why did the victorious English take the name of the vanquished "the Kymmri/Britons('Welsh' from the German tongue)", and call it Britain..the Greatest Empire the World has ever seen."(notwithstanding the Agreement of 1535)
What indeed can I say in response to your eventual reply.
Telling it as it is...:-))0 with malice or intent to injure,totally not intended.
As brief as it was with an inglorious signing-off technique, your c&p and placement of a non experienced email user and would be extremely confusing to 'cc' party contacts....I kid you not....That is somewhat excusable as "my grammar" ain't 'two' good anyway:-))
It is just as well that you never 'cc' anyone on the email..Hope you did not hit the 'bcc' icon :-), as that would be slightly embarrassing.
However(always one of these..eh) ,as cryptic as your replies were,they further exemplify that with what I was alluding to..Take for example.
"But I maintain that they aren't nearly as recognizable as THE LEGEND, particularly to American audiences, as Malory's version."
Teach the kids that history is always written by the victor and never by the conquered...As an educator it is your responsibility to ensure that they look at both sides of the equation...'Maintaining' an approach that follows the 15th/16th century 'Renaissance Writers' and 'Hollywood' commercial scenarios is to say the least ,quite saddening....The very same public acceptance of heroes akin to "Robin Hood" and "Harry Potter" is the perpetuation of this "Maintenance Engineering".
Here you had the opportunity to perform a second layer(no more) Goggle and piece together(call it research ?),say 3 to 4 different 'theories' ,simultaneously teaching yourself that which may be the classical yet contemporary argument on the never ending 'legend' debate(read- bar-room wrestling)
Your "Arthur' article was wringing with "English" political correctness,which of course I am not in a position to critiche'...Some would argue as to whether a 'hard comma' was more appropriate and others would contend that the 'comma' is not needed or maybe an optional :-))...I am an Engineer and for that, using four words(instead of one) to convey the idea is mandatory(must do:-)) ..Peoples lives may depend on communication without interpretation.
What I am saying is....Forget you are Doctor in "English" when researching,for it hinders your ability to think in a constructive objective manner and could normalise the nuance of other author's intentions,be they subversive or God willing...even truthfull.
Writing and rationale thought provocation..I find...with many "PhD's" ,do not necessary complement each other...The abundance of word-script from many of these professionals, seemingly intentional at times, and only furthers the extent of the readers frustration in trying to understand "What is hell is really being said here".
Impressing fellow colleague's, do not necessarily satisfy the greater public....
The screwing of sentence construction and passive awareness of critical events(current or historical) should be left to Bush and Blair's "spin Doctors"
If I were to say to you.."Bet y March, not April or Semptember, also bet y Guythur and not forgetting bet y Gugaun Cledyfrut while anoeth bid bet y Arthur."..... you would be very confused..You would wonder if it were a foreign language or ask yourself, is this bloke a terrible 'speller', yet you recognise a little English dispersed within this poem..a verse extracted from the "Stanza of Carmarthen"
Indeed, many thousands of American PhD's would scratch their collective heads(or bottoms:-) ,but how many would try to find out what it "really means"....very..very few.
Yet three quarters of a million people in the United Kingdom would have no problem whatsoever in understanding...Hope you get my point.
I will not leave you in the 'lurch' :-))
Removing all English words
"A grave for March,
a grave for Gwythur,
a grave for Gwgawn Red-sword,
the world's wonder a grave for Arthur."
" 'England' and then associating the name with Arthur(6th.c) is indicative
of those professional people who for rationale only they may
understand:-)) ,deem it necessary,indeed,wantingly ,indeed wantonly
assert their Ph.D's into other specialized areas with a randomness of intellect that brings disgrace on their chosen target..."
"Ack! What's with the hostility, man? I was enjoying your email until I
got to this. :-( "
What really irritated you here(smiley noted)..Is it the "Ph'D" reference ,or possibly the thought that you had made an obvious "datable and relationship error"...You see the 'wrong' that I was illustrating yet you choose to terminate your reply abruptly.......Alas,to a 7th grader it would be totally forgivable... in today's rush to an 'education'.
Below(very bottom),please find emails back and forth with "another" Doctor,who as it happens is an Historian,yet he chooses to post to LlewRockwell.com without informing readers that he is actually a Historian on the "US Constitution" but nevertheless "spins" his opinion on the "Arthur" movie...I believe he has financial interests tied in with the film's backers....or who has a friend who has a ...etc..etc..etc.
Please be aware that my initial email to him was a "flattering feeler"(extraction technique) and caution is recommended in interpretation.
Again,without malice or intent to injure...truly :-)