Ahh. Nice ending. ^^ Made more sense than the original, too. Which was a lot illogical.
revisionist (ie, if an old story is sexist, it's a product of its time...)
I don't think that makes someone a revisionist. Human beings don't exist in a vacuum: we absorb the mores and attitudes of the society around us to a greater or lesser extent. Expecting a story written in the 1800s to be completely palatable to our modern sensibilities is like expecting a scientist in the 1800s to know about relativity. It's just not reasonable. While hints of the idea existed, hints that society and science would later build upon to fully understand the concept, it wasn't popularly known about and/or people didn't have the mathematical/psychological tools to grasp it. :/ It sucks, but it's life.
Now when a modern story or scientist ignores generally established truth like gender equality or relativity... different kettle of fish. IMO.
Comments 1
revisionist (ie, if an old story is sexist, it's a product of its time...)
I don't think that makes someone a revisionist. Human beings don't exist in a vacuum: we absorb the mores and attitudes of the society around us to a greater or lesser extent. Expecting a story written in the 1800s to be completely palatable to our modern sensibilities is like expecting a scientist in the 1800s to know about relativity. It's just not reasonable. While hints of the idea existed, hints that society and science would later build upon to fully understand the concept, it wasn't popularly known about and/or people didn't have the mathematical/psychological tools to grasp it. :/ It sucks, but it's life.
Now when a modern story or scientist ignores generally established truth like gender equality or relativity... different kettle of fish. IMO.
DragonLady
Reply
Leave a comment