Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
HIW, thank you for the Lakeside links. I am embarrassed to admit that I forgot they exist.
I also particularly enjoy personal narratives.
"I never thought about limiting the thread to this country."
Ah, ok. I got that idea from your thread title and initial post which suggest it's about this country specifically.
I think the US was the best place overall to live, but 1880s Paris was arguably the most exciting and innovative place to be. French literature, art, music and education during that era in particular substantially influenced English and American culture.
HIW, thank you for the Lakeside links. I am embarrassed to admit that I forgot they exist.
I also particularly enjoy personal narratives.
"I never thought about limiting the thread to this country."
Ah, ok. I got that idea from your thread title and initial post which suggest it's about this country specifically.
I think the US was the best place overall to live, but 1880s Paris was arguably the most exciting and innovative place to be. French literature, art, music and education during that era in particular substantially influenced English and American culture.
To be frank, I never gave it a thought but just wrote what seemed relevant at the time of writing. I'm always willing to emulate Gibbon going back a few centuries or a few thousand miles to explain how a civilization becomes what it was or is.
La Belle Époque was a wondrous time in France. However, it was the latter part of the Industrial Revolution and France was no longer consumed with its own invention but was happily adopting foreign technologies, especially American. Note the illustrations of early automobiles in the two linked articles. Only the La Jamais contente is French.
France was the leader in culture an the arts leading the others in innovation and refinement including the ability to marry art to technology. France is a special place.
Well, you better go back another 100 years to find your happy time, ...and the first income tax was in 1862.
And might I ask how long that particular "income tax" lasted?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimplySagacious
Thank you for not referring to 19th century America as Victorian like so many do. Victoria was not our queen, and Americans were not interested in emulating Brits, their former enemy oppressors.
But the term "Victorian" does not only refer to England at the time. It refers more to the time frame of "western culture" during the time of the reign of the queen and slightly after. In an architecture-specific sense, it refers to several particular styles and has been expanded to include quite a few that it did not include when the term was first used.
"Victorian Era," in modern usage may be rarely used for, say Japan or Mongolia, but is is commonly used for any region wherein England had any influence on it's history, or more broadly, areas of general European influence (perhaps not so much for those areas of Spanish influence, although you even see that now and again).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nor'Eastah
Wow. I was surprised...the literature of the 1880s was stunning: ...
Quite true. Even more stunning was the literature from the late 1700s to around the 1840s. As in our modern era, the literature of the time can be roughly grouped into "high" and "low" literature. The high literature may have been authors like Charles Brockden Brown or Nathaniel Hawthorne, among many others. For a modern reader, it can be very rough going due solely to the language usage--highly eloquence and sophisticated. I'd venture to say that a good chuck of our society today has about as much a chance of fully comprehending the language in those books as they do reading French (assuming they don't know French). That's not me being elitist, it's fact. I certainly have to have a dictionary handy when reading these authors. But it goes beyond that--it's the grammar, sentence structure, and general usage that would get in the way for many, many people living today.
On the other hand, there were also the "low" literature writers--not meaning low class, meaning their primary targeted audience was "the masses," rather than the literary elite. I might include Hannah Foster as such a writer. The amazing thing to me is that even when Ms. Foster went out of her way to write in a "common way" that the everyday Joe could relate to and recognize as common usage English of the time, it is ASTOUNDINGLY beautiful. I have read Hannah Foster's "The Coquette" at least a dozen times. And it's not so much because of the story itself (it's rather sad and depressing, actually, on many levels), but because I am always inspired nearly to tears every time I really pay attention to Ms. Foster's use of English. It's just beautiful--no other way to put it. Words fail me. I only wish I could use the English language one tenth as beautifully and eloquently as she did. And THAT'S the way people wrote and spoke to a large degree at the time. Even the "lower class" would sound quite eloquent by today's standards (if we have any, today).
That's another of many reasons I feel that I may have been a better match for an earlier time. Quite frankly, I loathe the culture of our day. Our language usage is trashy base slang, including my own, and would have been considered gutter talk a hundred fifty years ago. I look around me... and the way people dress, present themselves, speak, interact, live, their "styles," etc, etc, etc, really saddens me and appeals to me 0%. I wonder how long it will be before we revert back to our distant cousins, the Neanderthals. It's looking pretty close now. And don't get me wrong, I'm not speaking from a glass house. I'm included in the pack as well. But I sure as hell don't want to be. And it is not the fault of the individual, per se. We are a product of our times. The "way it is."
But when some of you keep saying "you don't really want to live in those times" or "you are romanticizing it," I say you can't possibly know that. You are not me and I am not you. You don't know what my motivation to wake up every morning is and I don't know what your motivation is. So quit trying to tell me what I like and don't like, what I would like to do and what I would not like to do, and what I think and don't think.
Some of us see a regressive trend over the years in most everything besides technology, and some of us don't see it. And the thing is, it's COMPLETELY subjective. You have your views on the matter and I have mine. Take for instance, the woman above who decided to wear a corset. I wonder how many folks told her she really did not want to do it before she did it? That it was horrible? That her stomach would squeeze up her throat and out her mouth? I suppose something about that corset must appeal to her, or she wouldn't be wearing it... JUST LIKE something about the 1880s appeals to many of us. You can't know our motivations and whether any of us would embrace those times any more than you could have told that woman whether or not she was going to like wearing that corset.
Hell, for that matter, I'd swap times right now, here today, with the 1970s or even 1960s. I'd far prefer that to what I see when I look around today. And I did live through those times, so you cannot (with any credibility) tell me I'm romanticizing those times. I'd take the surroundings and lifestyle I had at that time any day of the week over the time I'm stuck in right now. The same applies to 1880, 1840, 1800, 1760, etc. How about 1200? No, not so much. There is this thing called the "Golden Era." We are far past that.
Oh, but, yeah, yeah... you can say that because you are this, that, or the other... a man, heterosexual, whitey, blah, blah, blah... Yeah? Well, so what of it? I am what I am. I was born that way. There was no choice, as far as I know. So get over it. I don't owe you an apology for any of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VJDAY81445
None of you have lived in the 1880's so how in the world can you say how great it was.
Reminds me of kids playing cowboys and Indians in the woods.
And by your same logic, sir, how in the world can you say how horrible it was?
As always... it's been fun. As you can see, I do love to write and philosophize. Sue me. And here is to hoping that I may one day deftly navigate the English language half as well as did my Usage Hero, Hannah Foster.
(oh, wait, wasn't Hannah a woman? So wasn't she chained to a hearth and forced to bake biscuits for her man all day and night? How did she find time to write or even learn her ABCs?)
“Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.” --usually attributed to Socrates
We read something very similar in ancient Egyptian poetry (conveniently translated to English) this year in my son's ancient lit. class, too.
Ie, people have been decrying the vulgarity of their own times for millennia. Whenever I see people long for "days gone by" (whenever those days might have been), I tend to doubt they would be happy then, either.
Happy people just ARE. It's a decision they've made, not a mere result of hapless circumstances.
It's a bloom-where-you're-planted philosophy that creates their perspective.
Though I have no doubt people will continue for thousands of years into the future, romanticizing mythical, idealized times that never really existed, except in someone's imagination.
The rest of us are just blooming where we're planted, taking our blessings as they come.
Last edited by itsMeFred; 05-03-2015 at 11:05 AM..
The US was not the world leader in the auto industry in the 19th century. A Frenchman named Cugnot invented the first self-propelled vehicle in 1769. It was steam powered. La jamais contente pictured above was an electric car that broke speed records at the time.
Here is a partial timeline of the French auto industry.
1769 -*Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot*builds the first self-propelled mechanical vehicle.
1859 -*Jean Joseph Étienne Lenoir*develops an internal combustion engine.
1884 -*Edouard Delamare-Deboutteville*is credited in France with building the first gasoline-powered automobile.
1890 -*Armand Peugeot*produces a four-wheeled car powered by a Daimler gasoline fueled internal combustion engine.
1894 -*Albert de Dion*and*Georges Bouton*produce a single cylinder gasoline-powered engine and in 1898 produced a four-wheeler. They had previously built steam-powered vehicles beginning in 1883.
1894 -*Delahaye*is founded by*Emile Delahaye. The company is bought by*Hotchkiss et Cie*in 1954 and discontinues auto production.
1896 -*Armand Peugeot*starts to build and fit his own engines to his cars.
The US was not the world leader in the auto industry in the 19th century.
Neither is it today - the Germans, Swedes, Japanese are - I will take a Volvo or Mercedes, BMW or Audi any time over a Ford or a Chevy. Italians, on the other hand, make pretty but low quality garbage.
And might I ask how long that particular "income tax" lasted?
...
(oh, wait, wasn't Hannah a woman? So wasn't she chained to a hearth and forced to bake biscuits for her man all day and night? How did she find time to write or even learn her ABCs?)
That was an extraordinarily urbane and aristocratic post. You would have been a worthy member of the Roman Senate or the House of Lords during their periods of intellectual and moral vigor.
Sadly, so many writers today have demeaned themselves by pandering to the delight of the lower orders in vulgarity and base conduct. I am presently awaiting a collection of the writings of Basil Lanneau Gildersleeve, a man long familiar to classicists but too long forgotten by the educated layman. He was a true scholar and aristocrat.
Gildersleeve's Latin grammar, first published in 1867, has never been out of print.
Quite true. Even more stunning was the literature from the late 1700s to around the 1840s. As in our modern era, the literature of the time can be roughly grouped into "high" and "low" literature. The high literature may have been authors like Charles Brockden Brown or Nathaniel Hawthorne, among many others. For a modern reader, it can be very rough going due solely to the language usage--highly eloquence and sophisticated. I'd venture to say that a good chuck of our society today has about as much a chance of fully comprehending the language in those books as they do reading French (assuming they don't know French). That's not me being elitist, it's fact. I certainly have to have a dictionary handy when reading these authors. But it goes beyond that--it's the grammar, sentence structure, and general usage that would get in the way for many, many people living today.
Wider access to cheap publishing technologies has produced mass proliferation of garbage. This is true. However, it has also produced authors who are great and on par with the past. Problem becomes finding these authors from the piles of crap that gets put on the shelves every day. "He who has choice, has the doldrums" - old German proverb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC
That's another of many reasons I feel that I may have been a better match for an earlier time. Quite frankly, I loathe the culture of our day. Our language usage is trashy base slang, including my own, and would have been considered gutter talk a hundred fifty years ago. I look around me... and the way people dress, present themselves, speak, interact, live, their "styles," etc, etc, etc, really saddens me and appeals to me 0%. I wonder how long it will be before we revert back to our distant cousins, the Neanderthals. It's looking pretty close now. And don't get me wrong, I'm not speaking from a glass house. I'm included in the pack as well. But I sure as hell don't want to be. And it is not the fault of the individual, per se. We are a product of our times. The "way it is."
I do (loathe it) too. However, there are still people today that pay attention to their language and traditions and everything else. It is just more difficult to seek them out (just like in the book example above).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC
Some of us see a regressive trend over the years in most everything besides technology, and some of us don't see it. And the thing is, it's COMPLETELY subjective. You have your views on the matter and I have mine. Take for instance, the woman above who decided to wear a corset. I wonder how many folks told her she really did not want to do it before she did it? That it was horrible? That her stomach would squeeze up her throat and out her mouth? I suppose something about that corset must appeal to her, or she wouldn't be wearing it... JUST LIKE something about the 1880s appeals to many of us. You can't know our motivations and whether any of us would embrace those times any more than you could have told that woman whether or not she was going to like wearing that corset.
Technology marches on in every era. Corset was a new technology too when it was introduced and it too met resistance from someone. Technology only stays if a sufficient, critical mass of people decides it should stay. Back then the people who decided were the people who controlled the means of production and were the consumers themselves. Today, the playing field is much wider.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC
Hell, for that matter, I'd swap times right now, here today, with the 1970s or even 1960s. I'd far prefer that to what I see when I look around today. And I did live through those times, so you cannot (with any credibility) tell me I'm romanticizing those times. I'd take the surroundings and lifestyle I had at that time any day of the week over the time I'm stuck in right now. The same applies to 1880, 1840, 1800, 1760, etc. How about 1200? No, not so much. There is this thing called the "Golden Era." We are far past that.
There are aspects of 1800s that I would have loved to have seen today. The wide open spaces, the fact that you were anonymous in every new town. The fact that land was up for grabs. However, with 300 million people today - all of those points are moot. It is not that time somehow screwed everything up, it's that back then there were less people. It was easy then to stake a claim on a 1,000 acre ranch, if you had the balls to fight for it. Today, well, you are trespassing, balls or no balls - there simply isn't any more land to claim . I mean, look at Texas - 96% private land. Everywhere you turn around - fences. Land of the free - free to look at your fence
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC
Oh, but, yeah, yeah... you can say that because you are this, that, or the other... a man, heterosexual, whitey, blah, blah, blah... Yeah? Well, so what of it? I am what I am. I was born that way. There was no choice, as far as I know. So get over it. I don't owe you an apology for any of it.
In 1800s you would have truly been born what you are, good or bad. In the 1700s even worse. 1600s? Oh boy. Today you can be born poor and nobody and still make it through school to be somebody. Who knows, maybe you even prove a famous mathematical theorem. In the a few centuries ago just knowing how to read was a privilege of the people "born into it"
I hear ya though. I too yearn for some of the things of years past.
The couple in your second video are Gabriel and Sarah Chrisman. They live an 1880s lifestyle. She published a book detailing her journey wearing a corset. I haven't read the book but based on interviews I've seen, she was reluctant to wear one because she believed the early feminist propaganda taught in women studies classes that corsets maim and kill.
She now credits the corset with transforming her body, posture and overall health. Before and after pic
Wow... our technology isn't always a horrible thing. Especially when you find a gem like this. I had not seen this website or heard of these folks until now. Thanks for posting a reference to Sarah's corset. A corset is just the tip of the iceberg for Gabriel and Sarah Chrisman. Here is a link to their website:
This website is certainly at the top of my bookmarks now. I LOVE their fashions! In addition to all of the other useful hints of the time they are "living." Nice to see that we horrible romanticizers here are not completely alone. If only I could walk down the street and see the fashions The Chrisman's are wearing rather than what I see today (I don't want to offend anyone, so I will not elaborate further on today's "fashions." Let's just say I feel like I'm walking down a death row cell block hallway or in a brothel most of the time these days).
On a related note, I really wish there were more places in the US like Mackinac Island, except not so touristy and dedicated to more an authentic existence (as the Chrismans do to an extent) beyond just banning motor vehicles. We live our daily lives around the noise, stench, and infrastructure related to motor vehicles. It would be very interesting to experience the lack of that aspect of life, even if for just a few days. Mackinac Island is about as close as it gets here in the US, I assume.
That was an extraordinarily urbane and aristocratic post. You would have been a worthy member of the Roman Senate or the House of Lords during their periods of intellectual and moral vigor.
Sadly, so many writers today have demeaned themselves by pandering to the delight of the lower orders in vulgarity and base conduct. I am presently awaiting a collection of the writings of Basil Lanneau Gildersleeve, a man long familiar to classicists but too long forgotten by the educated layman. He was a true scholar and aristocrat.
Gildersleeve's Latin grammar, first published in 1867, has never been out of print.
All good links. I was not familiar with this gentleman.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. I mean, look at Texas - 96% private land. Everywhere you turn around - fences. Land of the free - free to look at your fence 
