![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
August and authors
Aug. 14th, 2005 04:37 pmWe are having a great deal of fun in the sheltered sanctum of think.com, talking about books and writing and reading and the Middle Ages. Because I am a nice person (I am! ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
threemonkeys says so) I thought you all might like to share the fun. If anyone wants their comments relayed to the think.com people, just say so.
I have told people I am blogging them and asked for thoughts and comments about books and writing and reading and the Middle Ages (can't escape the Middle Ages!!). Those comments are what you will get to hear about over the next couple of weeks.
So far, in our "message to the world" page, Wendy Orr and I have taken a very quick look at things Arthurian. She says that myth and legend is "the basis to all story telling" and that it is good to be reminded of it. She reminds herself as a writer that myths and legends are "something we authors (story tellers) need to return to now and then". I agree, but I have to admit my fascination is with versions of stories that are told by particular groups for particular groups. Same tales - very different idea of what's important and why.
Sally Odgers is focussing on something quite different: the alterity of the Middle Ages. Yes, I was just hanging out for an excuse to use 'alterity'. It is a good word.
I thought I might give all her comments. They open some interesting trains of thought.
"I enjoy the colour and pageantry of the middle ages, although I realise it wouldn't have been like that in reality. It intrigues me that we can never get a feeling of what it would be live then. The contemporary people accepted things that we would not, but they had certainties that we miss. The idea of rare hair washing makes us cringe - but to them it was normal. It's a bit like those "reality" shows like Colonial House. These can never be accurate depictions of colonial life, because the people who take part know life is not like that now. So, round we go again."
My question to her (watch this space anxiously for an answer) is how many times her characters wash their hair in a given book. If just one of her books became the only evidence of hair-washing for historians in 700 years time, how clean would we be seen to be?
My interest is, quite obviously, what writers do that creates evidence for historians. (Imagine what the vision of the 1970s wouuld be if the only surviving texts were set in a far place called Gor!!)
threemonkeys says so) I thought you all might like to share the fun. If anyone wants their comments relayed to the think.com people, just say so.I have told people I am blogging them and asked for thoughts and comments about books and writing and reading and the Middle Ages (can't escape the Middle Ages!!). Those comments are what you will get to hear about over the next couple of weeks.
So far, in our "message to the world" page, Wendy Orr and I have taken a very quick look at things Arthurian. She says that myth and legend is "the basis to all story telling" and that it is good to be reminded of it. She reminds herself as a writer that myths and legends are "something we authors (story tellers) need to return to now and then". I agree, but I have to admit my fascination is with versions of stories that are told by particular groups for particular groups. Same tales - very different idea of what's important and why.
Sally Odgers is focussing on something quite different: the alterity of the Middle Ages. Yes, I was just hanging out for an excuse to use 'alterity'. It is a good word.
I thought I might give all her comments. They open some interesting trains of thought.
"I enjoy the colour and pageantry of the middle ages, although I realise it wouldn't have been like that in reality. It intrigues me that we can never get a feeling of what it would be live then. The contemporary people accepted things that we would not, but they had certainties that we miss. The idea of rare hair washing makes us cringe - but to them it was normal. It's a bit like those "reality" shows like Colonial House. These can never be accurate depictions of colonial life, because the people who take part know life is not like that now. So, round we go again."
My question to her (watch this space anxiously for an answer) is how many times her characters wash their hair in a given book. If just one of her books became the only evidence of hair-washing for historians in 700 years time, how clean would we be seen to be?
My interest is, quite obviously, what writers do that creates evidence for historians. (Imagine what the vision of the 1970s wouuld be if the only surviving texts were set in a far place called Gor!!)