What subject could I talk on?
I'm having one of those days where I can tell I'm not going to achieve anything so I will get on with the meme.
25. If you had to teach a one-hour class with absolutely no prep time, what subject could you competently pull off?
I'm not sure I could talk for an hour on anything as speaking in front of people is my nightmare. Considering that both my parents, my aunt, my great-uncle and now my elder niece are all teachers you would think this would not horrify me quite as much as it does but my mother's stories of supervising students on teaching practice when she worked in a college of education were not exactly an advertisement for going into the teaching profession. She never understood this and both my parents remained disappointed in the fact that I hadn't become a teacher, so much so that my dad managed to mention it in his speech at their 50th wedding anniversary party. Thanks, Dad!
Having said all that there are a number of subjects I could probably talk about including recent interpretations of King Arthur on TV and in books, some of the works of J.R.R. Tolkien, and after all the recent talks I've been to I really should be able to manage the Trojan War in myth and history, but the thing I would probably feel most confident in talking for an hour is 15th century English history between 1453 and 1486. I might be a bit hazy on some of the dates of the battles of the Wars of the Roses but I think I could manage to busk my way through it without being entirely specific on dates. One of the reasons I believe I could talk about this for something approaching an hour is that I went to a very good talk by Thomas Penn on his new book The Brothers York: An English Tragedy which was fascinating, though probably not what convinced Ricardians would want to hear. I also did an adult education course on the period a few years ago so with that and my memories of the talk I could probably get by. It would take at least half an hour to explain the family tree so that would help use up some time too.
I did make some brief notes after I'd listened to Thomas Penn talk so I'll put those behind the cut in case anyone is interested.
From the Winchester History Festival 2.11.19 Sorry about the note format but I was writing it quickly just after the event.
Thomas Penn - A Triple Bond Broken: The Destruction of the House of York. The Wars of the Roses always seen as a conflict between the Houses of York and Lancaster but in reality the latter stages were much more an internal conflict of the House of York. Tried to get into the minds of the three brothers. Used very close analysis of the surviving sources to do this and questioned everything. Psychoanalysis of Edward IV as a narcissist. Very gifted but obsessive in his eating and drinking and pursuit of pleasure. Descriptions by ambassadors forced to accompany him on hunting trips which turned into drinking binges. Raised up his brothers with large grants of land but both were in a very precarious position as the land could easily be taken away and land was needed for a power base. Insecurity of George, Duke of Clarence particularly after Edward’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville with her large family. Woodville family connections with Burgundy led to switch of English alliance from France to Burgundy contrary to wishes of Warwick the Kingmaker. Rebellion of Clarence after Edward refused to let him marry Isobel Neville, which he did anyway.
Loyalty and character of Richard of Gloucester. Had grown up in a period of deep insecurity. Sought certainty in books which show his chivalric and idealist interests. Saw things in black and white and could not cope when things didn’t go his way. Doesn’t think usurpation planned but arose out of the time and events. Tried to be an ideal king but couldn’t compromise.
What matters about the mystery of the Princes is not what we think but what people believed at the time (Me: Yes, yes, yes.) and by September 1483 they were thought to be dead. Action of Edward IV’s personal servants and prominent Yorkists in turning against Richard.
Has found a document with an extraordinarily generous pension paid to the widow and child of Miles Forest. One of the people named by Thomas More as the murderer of the Princes. More exaggerated for effect but not always wrong e.g. Richard as a hunchback. Will not answer the question of whether he thinks Richard murdered the Princes.
Very interesting and informative lecture. Wanted to set Richard III in his time (Me: v. important).
The rest of the questions behind the cut.
26 What is the most embarrassing thing that has happened to you while out for a meal at a restaurant?
27 What aphorism or saying is helpful for you right now?
28 What’s your favorite meme? (Post it!)
29 What is your skin care regimen?
30 What song are you listening to a lot right now? (Post a link?)
31 What superpower best suits your personality?
25. If you had to teach a one-hour class with absolutely no prep time, what subject could you competently pull off?
I'm not sure I could talk for an hour on anything as speaking in front of people is my nightmare. Considering that both my parents, my aunt, my great-uncle and now my elder niece are all teachers you would think this would not horrify me quite as much as it does but my mother's stories of supervising students on teaching practice when she worked in a college of education were not exactly an advertisement for going into the teaching profession. She never understood this and both my parents remained disappointed in the fact that I hadn't become a teacher, so much so that my dad managed to mention it in his speech at their 50th wedding anniversary party. Thanks, Dad!
Having said all that there are a number of subjects I could probably talk about including recent interpretations of King Arthur on TV and in books, some of the works of J.R.R. Tolkien, and after all the recent talks I've been to I really should be able to manage the Trojan War in myth and history, but the thing I would probably feel most confident in talking for an hour is 15th century English history between 1453 and 1486. I might be a bit hazy on some of the dates of the battles of the Wars of the Roses but I think I could manage to busk my way through it without being entirely specific on dates. One of the reasons I believe I could talk about this for something approaching an hour is that I went to a very good talk by Thomas Penn on his new book The Brothers York: An English Tragedy which was fascinating, though probably not what convinced Ricardians would want to hear. I also did an adult education course on the period a few years ago so with that and my memories of the talk I could probably get by. It would take at least half an hour to explain the family tree so that would help use up some time too.
I did make some brief notes after I'd listened to Thomas Penn talk so I'll put those behind the cut in case anyone is interested.
From the Winchester History Festival 2.11.19 Sorry about the note format but I was writing it quickly just after the event.
Thomas Penn - A Triple Bond Broken: The Destruction of the House of York. The Wars of the Roses always seen as a conflict between the Houses of York and Lancaster but in reality the latter stages were much more an internal conflict of the House of York. Tried to get into the minds of the three brothers. Used very close analysis of the surviving sources to do this and questioned everything. Psychoanalysis of Edward IV as a narcissist. Very gifted but obsessive in his eating and drinking and pursuit of pleasure. Descriptions by ambassadors forced to accompany him on hunting trips which turned into drinking binges. Raised up his brothers with large grants of land but both were in a very precarious position as the land could easily be taken away and land was needed for a power base. Insecurity of George, Duke of Clarence particularly after Edward’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville with her large family. Woodville family connections with Burgundy led to switch of English alliance from France to Burgundy contrary to wishes of Warwick the Kingmaker. Rebellion of Clarence after Edward refused to let him marry Isobel Neville, which he did anyway.
Loyalty and character of Richard of Gloucester. Had grown up in a period of deep insecurity. Sought certainty in books which show his chivalric and idealist interests. Saw things in black and white and could not cope when things didn’t go his way. Doesn’t think usurpation planned but arose out of the time and events. Tried to be an ideal king but couldn’t compromise.
What matters about the mystery of the Princes is not what we think but what people believed at the time (Me: Yes, yes, yes.) and by September 1483 they were thought to be dead. Action of Edward IV’s personal servants and prominent Yorkists in turning against Richard.
Has found a document with an extraordinarily generous pension paid to the widow and child of Miles Forest. One of the people named by Thomas More as the murderer of the Princes. More exaggerated for effect but not always wrong e.g. Richard as a hunchback. Will not answer the question of whether he thinks Richard murdered the Princes.
Very interesting and informative lecture. Wanted to set Richard III in his time (Me: v. important).
The rest of the questions behind the cut.
26 What is the most embarrassing thing that has happened to you while out for a meal at a restaurant?
27 What aphorism or saying is helpful for you right now?
28 What’s your favorite meme? (Post it!)
29 What is your skin care regimen?
30 What song are you listening to a lot right now? (Post a link?)
31 What superpower best suits your personality?