Current mood:

Caffeinated

yes,I mock your doctorites
I'm having a hard time deciding what's lamer, the fact that you're seriously bringing up a weeks-old post again to revive an old argument I'd quite frankly forgotten about, or the fact that you really seem to believe your Internet PhDs are the sole justification of your fandom opinion. You seriously are telling me that a) everything all us plebes (read: everyone but you) knows about the Middle Ages is wrong and all my arguments are "survey course bullshit?" Fuck off. I am a graduate student who's studied medieval scholarship extensively. Furthermore, my father's actually had his medieval scholarship published and has a degree from an actual University (as in, not the same one where Internet Lawyers get their law degrees). I showed him your post, and he said--and I quote--"I need to know what institution this guy supposedly went to, so I can warn everyone away from it."

I'm sorry I ever responded to your wankbaity post, because if I knew you were going to bury me under a mound of pedantic spooge for my belief that *gasp* you don't need 5 degrees from Crackerjack University to know that some elements are just out of place in a medieval fantasy 'verse, I'd have spent my time surfing ohnotheydidnt for intelligent discussion instead. Furthermore, if I were you, I'd be more concerned with the fact that you are rude, wankbaity, and profane, after I went out of my way to be tactful and said I was fine with agreeing to disagree, than your whole "my doctorite is bigger than yours!" moronitude.

*gets towel*

ETA: the "doctorites" thing was purposeful misspelling, referring to this wank.

(Post a new comment)

	altoidsaddict 2008-04-23 12:43 am UTC (link)
	God, I just wanna see this post. I really really do. Not to respond or anything, you understand, but just to see it. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	squeakthemouse 2008-04-23 01:21 am UTC (link)
	Unforch, I can't link the post directly, because the board doesn't seem to have that option. But here's the page. It starts a little ways down, then comes up again near the end. I'm Sidewalk Doctor (with the spiffy Mean Girls icon). I'm arguing with bravowhatshisass. I did get wanky in my final post, but jeez, he would not let it go. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	chaimonkey 2008-04-23 02:01 am UTC (link)
	Wow, not only does he have some mysterious sort of studies under his belt, but he was in teh Army and it is his Moral and Superior Duty to instruct the world? Gag me on a fucking spoon. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	squeakthemouse 2008-04-23 02:32 am UTC (link)
	He speaks of his credentials here. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	annabelle_lee 2008-04-23 03:39 pm UTC (link)
	Please tell me that when he says 'military historian' he's just using the term wrongly (a historian from the military as opposed to a person versed in military history) and not that he actually believes that being a military historian actually gives him credence about medieval fantasy. Please. I may have to bang my head on the keyboard if this is not true. (Reply to this)(Parent)

altoidsaddict
2008-04-23 05:25 am UTC (link)

I'm with you - it takes a skilled writer to pull off anachronistic behaviors. Readers, and for historical novels this necessarily includes amateur and professional scholars, always start with an understanding based on our world. Bad fantasy either fails to explain anachronistic or bizarre behavior (everything from "why does she have retractable wings" to "why is a c. 900s priest eating with a fork") or fails to establish enough trust and authority so the reader will automatically accept certain anachronisms as they are introduced. Good historical writers (Michener springs to mind) must stand up to at least some scrutiny because it's as much a part of their genre's craft as how mystery writers must know police procedure and forensics. (Not that they have to be experts - Cornwell's fiction is awesome, but her nonfiction is positively deluded.) If you don't want to put forth the effort, then go write in some other genre - but poor research always, always shows through regardless. Bad historical writers, for example, invest far too much in the experiences of progressives. Why? Because progressive works hold the most relevance for our age today. But the entire reason they're progressive and bold and remembered is because their experiences were not normal. You can write a bold epic about Galileo all you want, but the man suffered extreme penalties because he was not normal and this made him hated in some corners. Lady Godiva, ~60 years old in her flesh-colored tunic, fought damn hard to be able to act the way she did. Most eras did not have any sort of provision for free speech or even the capacity to take massive sociological leaps in stride, even our own - look at the Red Scare. It doesn't ring false because mirrors weren't introduced until whatever age, it rings false because advances are hard-fought and hard-won. Hell, there are large groups of people right now fighting against vaccinations, fluoridation of water, and the DMV. We know for a fact about global warming and the folly of fossil fuels, but guess what we drive every day? (I['m no exception. I get around 25 mpg and my husband works for an oil company.) There's ignorance, then knowledge, then acceptance, and maybe after a century or so change follows.

I haven't read the series you talk about, but there was a godawful anachronistic poorly-written historical fiction about Lucrezia Borgia I read a few years ago. It was so bad it's stuck with me. The author kept setting himself up as an authority by using obscure references to the time period (and doing a piss-poor job of it like he was constantly pointing out how goddamn smart he was), except he used references that came a good two hundred years after Borgia. It completely undermined the book.

Erm. Ignorance of craft and apologists for ignorance of craft is something that bugs me even more than medieval anachronisms. You can throw all the pop history at it you want (let's all cite generalists like Connections and Jared Diamond instead of primary sources!) but nothing will mask poor writing.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	sgtgeorgecarter 2008-04-23 01:08 am UTC (link)
	Sounds like the ass I had a run in with on byzance-L back in the day. No one does insuffferable clod like a threatened academic. (Reply to this)

	onaga 2008-04-23 03:36 am UTC (link)
	Until you linked to another forum, I totally thought you were talking about FPB. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	esclaramonde 2008-04-23 08:41 am UTC (link)
	Ahaha, so did I (Reply to this)(Parent)

	waltraute 2008-04-23 01:32 pm UTC (link)
	ME TOO. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	squeakthemouse 2008-04-23 07:45 pm UTC (link)
	So that's why I was having such a sense of déja vu while I was writing this up! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	hitwoman 2008-04-23 06:02 am UTC (link)
	So, all those years of study obviously never included spelling or any sort of vocabulary. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	squeakthemouse 2008-04-23 07:02 am UTC (link)
	The "doctorites" thing was a reference to an old wank. Some HP fan was going on about not mocking their doctorites or something. I know how it's spelled. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	hitwoman 2008-04-23 12:10 pm UTC (link)
	Actually I was referring to your wanker--I would reference one of his misspelled words, but frankly reading his posts was such a chore I'd rather not. What I really don't get is why so many posters at that forum take up for the guy. Seriously, what's there to love? I'd be all for booting his know-it-all derriere. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	squeakthemouse 2008-04-23 07:44 pm UTC (link)
	Ahh, OK. My bad. I wasn't sure if everyone would get that reference, since the wank is quite old. It's a hilarious one, though. I admit that his posts have the Harmonian Effect on me... meaning, I read a few sentences and then my eyes kind of glaze over and I'm like tlas;dr. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	notjo 2008-04-23 05:23 pm UTC (link)
	Ooh, medieval scholarship!! ... Sorry, distracted. Anything you care to share? I like people who share. :) (Reply to this)