Attila the Hun
I’ve been fascinated by Attila for a while, at least partly because there seems to be so little actually known about him and he – along with his Huns – have become synonymous with evil bad rampaging Vandals (with whom they were contemporaneous – lovely). So when I saw a bio of him written by John Man, who I just love after reading Alpha Beta and The Gutenberg Revolution, I was very impressed. And I am still impressed after reading it. He does a lot to make his work accessible, and bring the subject to life: I wonder how many other would-be biographers of Attila would go to Hungary and find the man who has, single-handedly, basically reinvented the art of horse-mounted archery? And from he description, this is quite an amazing feat.
So anyway, finally I have an understanding of where Attila actually fits into the whole world history picture. I also really appreciated Man spending a chapter on later representations of Attilla and the Huns, since I never understood why the Germans suddenly became Huns in WWI. Plus, to read about the near-veneration of Attila frm modern Hungarians is also eye-opening; that old chestnut about one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter…
Sucks be to Post-modernism
How I enjoy being me: not being at BDO, I have put on the Wolfmother concert I taped off Rage ages ago (bad me). I am also reading Charles Freeman’s The Greek Achievement.
This is not the reason I can say nasty things to postmodernists, although it is a bit out there.
No, the reason I am feeling smug towards PMs at the moment is what I just read in the aforementioned book. There was a philosopher who lived around 490-420BC, name of Protagoras. His most famous words, apparently, are “man is the measure of all things.” He claimed that if one person said a drink was bitter, then it is true to say that it is bitter; and if another person said the same drink was sweet, it was true to say it was indeed sweet. Ha ha! PMs are not so postmodern after all! They are indeed rehashing ancient ideas! And to add a cherry to this glorious statement, Freeman continues with: “This was easily challenged by Democritus, and after him, Plato. If all beliefs are true, so too is the belief that no beliefs are true and there is an insoluble contradition.” Mahahahaha.
*sigh* Back to school tomorrow.
Cornelia Funke and Anna Lanyon
I know it’s a bit sad, but for only the second time in my life I sent a fan email to an author – to Cornelia Funke. I got areply today, from her sister, who apparently has taken on the task of answering the fan mail Cornelia receives. (Although of course, she still reads all of it, and it’s very precious to her….) Anyway, she let me in on the tentative title of the third Ink book: Inkdeath. Oh dear.
I think I quite like being a fan. I think I’ve written before about the issues of being a fan, me being such a snob and all… but the look on Anna Lanyon’s face, after I heard her speaking about her books Malinche and The New World of Martin Cortes, and then I asked her for her autograph, was incredibly worthwhile. I think, if I were an author, I would get a kick out of anyone saying they liked my work. Surely you don’t get sick of that too quickly?
Caligula
Just about to finish a bio of Caligula, which I have quite enjoyed – which is a good thing, since I recently bought a book on Agrippina (the Younger) by the same author. I had to laugh, though; I don’t know whether he did it deliberately, but I thought he was aiming for a dispassionate account, or as dispassionate as an historian is capable of being, but there’s a great line about Caligula being condemned by historians through the ages largely because he deserves it! Ah, Objectivity; how we worship Thee. As well, i’m not entirely convinced by his treatment of the sources, who are basically Suetonius and Dio, with a bit of Philo and Seneca thrown in. He says they’re unreliable, and totally dismisses some stories – and I think I agree with his rationale in those cases – but I wasn’t always able to follow his logic for the stories that he accepted as likely to be basically true, or containing some useful historical nugget.
Nonetheless, it was an interesting read. And the above issues are always interesting for an historian, and perhaps especially a history teacher, to be reminded of.
Walkerville book sale
Well, yes… the most expensive book I bought was $2… I bought 10 books. For $11. I felt a bit guilty, but hey; good books, and cheap! There were stacks of people there… if I’d had time I think I probably could have picked up even more (I would have had to grab a bag in order to do so, though). As it was, I am glad they didn’t weigh my bag at the airport since I was just a little over the limit.
So what did I get? Good question, so glad you asked:
A Short History of the World, by none other than HG Wells
The Last Plantagenet, by Tyler White (that’s about Richard III, in case you’re wondering)
The Borgias, by Michael Mallett (which I started reading at the airport, and got a fair bit read because the plane was late in leaving; more readable than I had expected)
Journey among Warriors, by Eve Curie (yes, the daughter; no idea what this is going to be like)
The Idea of History, by Collingwood (hurrah! for $1, no less!)
Firebird, by Muchael Asher (some conspiracy novel)
Empyrion Omnibus, by Stephen Lawhead (confused me no end when I saw the title and it not by Simmonds; looks good)
The Chosen, by Ricardo Pinto (some fantasty schlock, I expect; interesting to try)
and Running with the Demon, by Terry Brooks (I’m feeling a bit guilty about not having read the entirety of the Shannara series).
Some Edith Pargeter (aka Ellis Peters) novel, which I actually left in Adelaide so as to save room in the bag
So that’s the lot. Very exciting. I also came home with one of Mum’s books, which she has donated to the cause (of teaching, that is): Queen Bees and Wannabes, by Rosaling Wiseman, which she says is excellent and well worth reading as a teacher. So that should be good.
Books I am in the middle of
There’s quite a few. Mostly history books that I have begun and got bored of/waylaid from. It’s guilt-making – which is a bit silly in itself, really, because why do I insist on feeling beholden to a book, for goodness’ sake? But here’s a sample:
History of London Bridge – I think I got up to about the last chapter of this and then got waylaid. I should go back and just finish it off, but her style got on my nerves a bit.
History of London – Peter Ackroyd’s bio of the place – is not really designed to be read from cover to cover, I think. The chapters are essentially vignettes, and I should read them as such. I should actually read them…
Something about Emma and Enid, the last two ‘English’ queens (ie before the Norman Conquest; actually Enid is the last, since Emma is French herself…). This was a really full-on bio, and I found it quite hard to read and fairly dry. I should try it again now that I’m actually teaching the period and have a better, if still rudimentary, knowledge of it.
Chaos – James someone wrote it (Gleick, J says; I pronounce it Glike, he Gleek…) – I started it mainly to see how my attempt at reading real science would go, albeit something written for a fairly lay audience. After a while, poorly, it turns out. It was interesting, but…
1066: the year of the three battles. Begun the first time I was teaching this period. A bit too much military stuff for me; I just don’t have the head for that sort of info… I find it hard enough visualising which way north is, let alone anything else.
And there are a few more books on the shelf, throwing accusatory stares my way every time I start a new book rather than finishing them off…
Bad history
I bought this book at Borders called something like A Handy History Handbook; it wasn’t quite that bad, but it was $10 and I thought it might have some interesting and/or useful facts in it.
It does.
Like the fact that the Roman Empire began in 27BC when Julius Caesar became emperor.
U-571
My goodness. I hadn’t realised how bad submarine movies could get. I guess we have been spoiled, with Red October and K-19: The Widowmaker, but still! Largely boring action bits that don’t compensate for no character development. Disappointing… and you hardly hear boo from Bon Jovi, so even that potentially entertaining bit is squished.
Pft. Boring.
Troy
It was good.
I went with Mum because she has just recently done some Classics (actually she’s doing it at the moment, but not actual myth stuff), and so she understood when I got miffed or excited, which James would not really have.
They made a few changes, of course… I was a bit surprised at them completely leaving out the gods, to be honest. However, I guess it was already a fairly long movie, so things had to be sacrificed. A few people died who shouldn’t have, and didn’t need to (I thought, anyway). Eric Bana was fantastic, as expected, and Orlando Bloom was perfect for the role – if only because he just looked simply too beautiful to be a warrior; I thought he fit Paris just right. And Brad Pitt was pretty good too. It was also much fun, and not a little smug-ifying, to say “that must be Ajax” or Nestor or someone else… and be right. I think that says good things both about me and the film. Glad they got Aeneas in there too, much as I dislike Virgil.
It looked good: it was really well shot, I thought, although the bro got annoyed with some of Achilles’ long lingering looks. Personally I thought they fit. They must have used the Massive program from Peter Jackson – it reminded me very strongly of LOTR, in places, particularly the thousand ships.
Mum tells me that millihelens is a standard of measurement. If you’ve got 10 millihelens of beauty, you can launch 10 ships…
Christians and history
This is a short piece I wrote a while ago in response to a friend of mine asking me what the point of studying history was, as Christians (her questions are included; she was asking from the point of view of being pasionate about both).
Randomly Yours, Alex 