Comment author: Lumifer 20 June 2015 03:53:27PM *  2 points [-]

having women in your university was not akin to inviting a gang of succubi to turn the school into an orgy pit

LOL. To quote Nobel Laureate Tom Hunt as of a couple of weeks ago:

Let me tell you about my trouble with girls … three things happen when they are in the lab … You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticise them, they cry.

Comment author: VivienneMarks 20 June 2015 06:40:04PM 0 points [-]

Uggghhhh.... that guy. I may not be a scientist, but I saw red when I read that.

Comment author: [deleted] 18 June 2015 09:11:54AM 5 points [-]

Hi!

Victorian social peculiarities

I just want to say I found Stefan Zweig's The World Of Yesterday really insightful about that. I used to think that kind of prudishness came from religion. According to Zweig, it was actually almost the opposite: it came from Enlightenment values, as in, trying really really hard to always act rationally (not 100% in our sense, but in the sense of: deliberately, thoughtfully, impassionately) and considered sexual instincts a far too dangerous, uncontrollable, passionate, "irrational" force, that is where it came from. Which suggests that Freud was the last Victorian, so to speak.

Comment author: VivienneMarks 20 June 2015 03:44:52PM 4 points [-]

Hi back!

Actually, interestingly, some Victorian prudishness was encouraged by Victorian feminists, weirdly enough. Old-timey sexism said that women were too lustful and oozed temptation, hence why they should be excluded from the cool-headed realms of men (Arthurian legend is FULL of this shit, especially if Sir Gallahad is involved). Victorian feminists actually encouraged the view of women as quasi-asexual, to show that no, having women in your university was not akin to inviting a gang of succubi to turn the school into an orgy pit (this was also useful, as back then, there were questions on the morality of women). A lot of modern sexism actually has its roots not in anything ancient, but in a weird backlash of Victoriana.

Comment author: [deleted] 18 June 2015 09:35:32AM 1 point [-]

if the magic system is internally consistent in a fantasy novel

Do you find D&D's cast-and-forget system consistent? It was borrowed from Jack Vance's Dying Earth novels, but those felt really weird novels to me.

Comment author: VivienneMarks 20 June 2015 03:40:25PM 2 points [-]

No! I actually find D&Ds system super-frustrating, but then I hate having luck-based elements in magic systems. :P

Comment author: Nornagest 16 June 2015 09:10:43PM 2 points [-]

Welcome to LW! I suspect you'll find a lot of company here, at least as regards thinking in unwarranted detail about fictional magic systems.

Comment author: VivienneMarks 16 June 2015 11:30:38PM 1 point [-]

Thanks! I actually had a VERY long side discussion in an undergrad history course about whether stabbing a person possessed by a dybbuk creates a second dybbuk...

Comment author: VivienneMarks 16 June 2015 09:08:48PM 14 points [-]

Finally bit the bullet and made an account-- hi people! I've been "LW adjacent" for a while now (meatspace friends with some prominent LWers, hang around Rationalist Tumblr/ Ozy's blog on the sidelines, seems like everyone I know has read HPMOR but me), and figured I ought to take the plunge.

Call me Vivs. I'm in my early twenties, currently doing odd jobs (temping, restaurant work, etc.) in preparation to start a Masters' this fall. I'm a historian, and would loooooove to talk history with any of you! (fans of Anne Boleyn/Thomas Cromwell/Victorian social peculiarities to the front of the line, please) I've always been that girl who pays waaaaay too much attention to if the magic system is internally consistent in a fantasy novel and gets overly irritated if my questions are brushed off with "But magic isn't real," so I have a feeling I'll like the way this site thinks, even if I'm way out of the median 'round these parts in a lot of ways.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit