Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: General History Discussion Thread

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,138

    Default General History Discussion Thread

    I didn't think this forum had a thread for the discussion of history generally...like any history at all, that isn't related to Koei games, or just about history itself, for instance, the development of history writing, etc.

    I was just wondering...as a discipline, would you think that it would have more appeal if it was approached from a literary or scientific point of view. This is the kind of thing that pops into my head during history extension class...which is actually quite relevant (^.^) The reason I ask this is just because...well, as we know, history writing has evolved from the telling of a good tale(Herodotus) to a professionalisation of the discipline itself(von Ranke), and I was just wondering if this evolution of history might've taken away from the literary attraction that it mightve once had. (^.^)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    913

    Default

    I freely admit I do not know much, but while reality can be more interesting than a lie, romantised history tended to be far more entertaining than real history for me. Gladiatior being a prime example as my father(real history buff) reminds me constantly. Another example is the DW games which apparently are based on a book heavily in favour of Shu.

    That said this kind of topic I would prefer the truth for obvious reasons. Not exactly sure if that was if you were asking compared to verbose storytelling or getting to the point.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,138

    Default

    Yeah, that was the point that I was kind of trying to make, whether or not the facts get in the way of a good story...and this is quite obviously seen in the movies that you see that are based on historical events, very loosely based being the more correct term you will find. You mentioned Dynasty Warriors, and that itself is a pretty good example of using a generalised history for the purpose of entertainment...not that it's a bad thing though, it just gets annoying for historians when people see these kinds of games and films and start thinking that it is a dead set truth about what happened, all that is shown is just a representation of the evidence, with an agenda attatched to the piece($$$).

    The movies that come into mind when refering to the balance of historical accuracies and entertainment would have to be films such as Troy, 300...and as you say, Gladiator...as they are obvious examples of how history has been skewed for the purpose of entertainment.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    913

    Default

    I will always prefer the most entertaining version of something for obvious reasons, however the exception being, well, history. Certainly, things must be kept in mind but thats something for the people who take it up as a discipline. The future needs to know of the past and it needs to be truthful not a bunch of bull.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    209

    Default

    I think there should be both - like what actually happened in history, then things like ROTK. As long as they don't get confused with each other!! that's the important bit. Though it's going to be impossible to escape bias, I really think that having both is not only good but important because it represents the thinking of the culture at the time that's my thoughts in a nutshell anyway lol

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •