[HN Gopher] How did the Victorians become a reference point for ... ___________________________________________________________________ How did the Victorians become a reference point for joyless prudery? Author : apollinaire Score : 50 points Date : 2022-04-03 04:10 UTC (1 days ago) (HTM) web link (www.historytoday.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.historytoday.com) | AniseAbyss wrote: | __turbobrew__ wrote: | I recommend reading "The World of Yesterday" by Stefan Zweig. | | A remarkable book for seeing the transformation from the | Victorian era into modern day. | mistrial9 wrote: | joyless prudes who ran military taxation across the entire globe. | Perhaps they ran from the excess of Rome, while emphasizing the | exhortatian to power? Military and civil administration is best | done without "joy" right, to maximize other qualities? | | A level deeper past this cynical snark - many civiliations have | embraced "joy", arts, culture, outsiders, wisdom, mystical | things.. all sorts of variations.. but somehow the public | attention is called back to the centers of military power, and | their "trouble" .. Let's call the Emporer without clothes.. the | military and economic might of the Victorians were a marvel at | the level of Rome itself, and, what cost? what human cost.. | [deleted] | jhallenworld wrote: | I think Edwardians should be grouped in with them. This is the | era when, in the USA at least, we created all the myths we teach | our kids and decided how people in our society should act. So for | example: | | How to celebrate Christmas? Just the way implied in "Night Before | Christmas". | | How should a good college look? Gothic! | | How should women act? Send them to "finishing school". | | What was George Washington like? He never told a lie. | | etc. | zabzonk wrote: | I have read "Eminent Victorians", but might I suggest that some | of the people described there are best shown in "Tom Brown's | Schooldays" and the "Flashman" novels? Novels always seem closer | to history, somehow, and it's a shame that Fraser never worked | the cardinal into his tapestry. | acabal wrote: | Doing work for Standard Ebooks has led me to read a lot of | Victorian literature, and over time I've grown to appreciate the | era in ways I hadn't thought of before. | | While it's true that, like any era in history, there were real | negative aspects - prudery, inescapable classism, imperialism, | and so on - the Victorians were also some of the most forward- | thinking and hopeful inhabitants of that foreign country of the | past, fascinated by the possibility of self-improvement and the | hopeful forward march of civilization and the fruits it can bear. | | In a long history of the world marked by bloody, distracted | despots ruling over subjugated peasants in grinding poverty, lit | with brief, individual sparks of genius that slowly advanced | civilization, the Victorians were maybe the first Western society | - maybe anywhere - that devoted itself to relentless self- | improvement as a moral imperative. | | In _Eminent Victorians_ alone, we have the biography of the woman | who almost single-handedly modernized nursing into what we can | still recognize as "nursing" today, and pioneered new uses of | statistics; and the biography of the man who invented the modern | boarding school, revolutionized "public" schooling and academic | excellence, and made school sports the centerpiece that led it to | becoming today's billion-dollar industry. That's not to mention | the _Origin of Species_ , Lister advancing antiseptics and | sanitation, Pasteur, Bell, Babbage - the list goes on. | | Maybe they were humorless prudes - though history may look back | on today's outrage-fueled society as equally censorious - but we | should at least respect them for their indelible mark as a | society interested in actually improving itself, instead of | maintaining the millenia-old status quo of boozy, gambling | aristocrats cruelly ruling over the peasantry. | | ( _Eminent Victorians_ is, by the way, an excellent read - fresh, | light, engaging, and genuinely funny: | https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/lytton-strachey/eminent-vi...) | nonrandomstring wrote: | > but we should at least respect them for their indelible mark | as a society interested in actually improving itself | | A resonance for hackers should be the origin of the | "quintessential engineer", like Brunel and Telford - stove pipe | hats, steam-punk lab, recklessly building bridges beyond all | reasonable ambition, skirting the bleeding edge of mechanics | and material science - which are still standing today. | | Move slow and build things. | | And the poverty I mention (above) was of course a catalyst for | many of the great reformers, Bentham and company... definitely | a mixed age. | zozbot234 wrote: | Were the Victorians really a classist society, though? If | anything, they probably were the first 'mass' society where a | basic worldview and perspective wrt. standards of moral and | ethical behavior was shared irrespective of social strata, | which would make them a rather "classless" society at least in | a Marxist-influenced sense. Modern societies are certainly very | different - morality and virtue tend to be regarded there as an | explicitly _upper class_ concern, and to be viewed elsewhere as | mere tiresome "virtue signaling" of some kind or another. | ggm wrote: | Peter Ackroyd's biography of Dickens discusses this, and the | wonderful dissonance we see between this (often Edwardian | influenced) view of late Victorian strictures and the torrid | reality. As long as your mistress stayed away from the bright | lights, you could dally all day long. | | The regency was wonderful. Bridgerton is fantasy but what really | happened is equally bizarre. Victorian moral rectitude Was a | reaction to a more simple, honest regency view of morals. | l5870uoo9y wrote: | Was just reading Max Weber's The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit | of Capitalism where he investigates the development of modern | capitalism and its complex relationship with different Christian | denominations (especially between the Catholics and Protestants). | On the general (mis)understanding of Protestantism (as in 1920s) | he writes: | | > ...that the spirit of hard work, of progress, or whatever else | it may be called, the awakening of which one is inclined to | ascribe to Protestantism, must not be understood, as there is a | tendency to do, as joy of living nor in any other sense as | connected with the Enlightenment. The old Protestantism of | Luther, Calvin, Knox, Voet, had precious little to do with what | to-day is called progress. | | And with regards to the English: | | > Montesquieu says (Esprit des Lois, Book XX, chap. 7) of the | English that they "had progressed the farthest of all peoples of | the world in three important things: in piety, in commerce, and | in freedom" | nonrandomstring wrote: | From an English perspective I have to say the average perception | of Victorians is more about social inequality and child abuse. | Images of workhouses and gruel, small boys being beasted up | chimneys, toothless 14 year-old "match girls" wandering the night | calling "Blow ya for a penny guv". | | Really, immodestly clothed piano legs showing too much ankle pale | in comparison to Dickensian tales of ruffians, rats and cockneys. | | But then TFA is really saying the same as I am, that both | mythologies are constructed in opposition to one another, and in | hindsight that all cultures ('Modernity' in this case) construct | themseves in relation to something else - something they are | _not_. | | Everybody's clever nowadays. And so terribly modern. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-04-04 23:00 UTC)