Leave a comment

negothick December 17 2010, 15:21:27 UTC
Agreed about the good vs. bad guys' attitudes, but it's not a problem unique to contemporary narrative. A friend just read "Ivanhoe" for the first time, and we were noticing that very technique--though "postmodern wisdom" meant the enlightened attitudes of 1815, not 2010.

Speaking of Isaac the Jew in Ivanhoe, we inevitably moved to The Merchant of Venice. But there we see a more subtle version of the technique: The most loathsome anti-Semitic attitudes are held and expressed by the more loathsome characters, while the better characters (such as Portia) attempt to maintain an open mind. But this isn't a good parallel, because anti-Semitism was the "contemporary wisdom"--where Shakespeare got the radical idea that Shylock might actually be human, we'll never know. I guess that's what it means to transcend one's own time and circumstances of composition.

Reply

sartorias December 17 2010, 15:25:36 UTC
Very true. It's interesting to see that in the medieval tales of all the nineteenth century writers--Romola, Bulwer-Lytton's Tales, etc.

The visual version are the historical films made during various periods. My daughter used to make a game of IDing the era the film was made after I'd tell her when it was supposed to be set. (Like the heroines having blood red lipstick and triangle hairdos in something supposedly set in 1756)

Reply

deliasherman December 17 2010, 15:49:15 UTC
Costuming in historical films is a whole 'nother subject. In Seeing Through Clothes, Anne Hollander has a chapter on Hollywood's habit of giving extras and secondary characters more authentic hair and make-up and clothes than the principals, whose appearance cleaves more strictly to the prevailing standards of beauty when the film was made.

Reply

sartorias December 17 2010, 16:00:48 UTC
Yeah--the daughter studied that aspect in film school.

It's interesting how some seem more dated than others. Like Doctor Zhivago, it seems like a 1963 typical heroine walking through a fantasy Russia without touching the sides.

Reply

3rdragon December 17 2010, 18:12:45 UTC
On a similar note, you can follow women's fashion through paintings of nudes; the nude women have the figure that is the prevailing fashion, even when the fashion is such that I look at it and go, no, no, I'm pretty sure no one's chest does that on its own . . .

Reply

sartorias December 17 2010, 18:15:34 UTC
Yes! I was looking at some bad illustrations of late Victorian cheap novels, during the period when heroines were supposed to have sloping shoulders and swan necks, and the heroine seemed to have two elbows in those ever so swan-like arms.

Reply

padawansguide December 17 2010, 16:31:49 UTC
I actually wrote a little article on how movie costumes reflect the era the film was made in! http://www.costumersguide.com/design.shtml

There's also a whole book that addresses this! (Hollywood and History: Costume Design in Film)
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0500014221?tag=thecostumsgui-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0500014221&adid=077N43AV906K7R18XPX5&

Reply

sartorias December 17 2010, 16:41:00 UTC
Coolness!

Reply

negothick December 18 2010, 01:35:13 UTC
I own "Hollywood and History" and it is an excellent resource for spotting and recognizing all of those historical costuming anachronisms in films. Great illustrations, too. It might be somewhat difficult to come by, though, since it's approx. 20 years old.

It's also fascinating how pervasive the images of historical times created by films can be. For example, in my mind the heroes and heroines of Greek mythology still look the way they looked in those Italian sandal epics of the 1960s where I first encountered them as a child. I know the image is wrong, of course, but it's still the first that comes to mind. Meanwhile, someone who first encountered Greek mythology via the Xena and Hercules shows in the 1990s may well have those images in his or her head.

Cora

Reply

kalimac December 17 2010, 15:48:32 UTC
It's not so much that Shylock is human, it's that Shakespeare, as a good writer (to put it mildly), knew that villains need good reasons to do what they do. Evan the loathsome Iago and Richard III are given opportunities to explain themselves. Perhaps the only truly inexplicable villains in Shakespeare as the weird sisters, and they are, in all senses of the word, just weird.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up