As someone who studies kingship and the idea of rulers to my fellow scholars who also study this stuff: why this incessant and persistent twee woobification of kings and queens?
-
Show this thread
-
-
Replying to @prof_gabriele @AdmiralHip
oh I read the thread now I get it. yes, they all super suck and it’s ok to say that. some are definitely more interesting than others but that’s because we ourselves are interested in certain aspects of politics/ religion/ etc. in our own work
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @prof_gabriele
Sure, and there are certain rulers that I find more interesting myself. But I don’t “like” them as if I thought they were actually cool dudes or whatever. But there are definitely people out there who DO think that.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @prof_gabriele
Like I just want to understand the thought process, and it seems to be common.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @prof_gabriele
I “like” the people I study (some of whom are rulers) the same way I like Samwise Gamgee or Hudson Hawk: they are cultural touchstones, not real people (anymore) and the extent to which we may know them is through the medium of storytelling. But I still like some of them.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I can appreciate Voldemort as a villain; I can appreciate Notker’s Charlemagne; I can sympathize with John McClane; I can see how Ardo turned Benedict of Aniane into the Best Aristocrat (also monk), and, in every case appreciate the efforts and study how they are made likeable.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
That isn’t really what I’m talking about though, their depictions in the text or the efforts to depict them as relatable or admirable. I'm talking about twitter polls about the "best" king or queen or who was our fave roman emperor. The obsession with making them relatable now.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.