Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 34,35 (click to see context) from:
Plus, there's also that "passing" or "failing" the test of time is by no means a permanent qualification. A piece of art can, and very often does, fall in and out of favor in both the mainstream and the academy's eyes multiple times. Maybe a piece of art is revolutionary when it first comes out and gets appraised for that, but then it [[SeinfeldIsUnfunny is considered to be dated and no longer relevant]] by later generations, only to be reappraised positively again down the line because of a new reading of the text, or just because its themes become relevant again. Or the opposite, a piece of art that is heavily criticised when it first comes out, but then gets VindicatedByHistory, but then falls down out of HypeBacklash. Then, lather, rinse, repeat, as decades and even centuries pass.
to:
Plus, there's also that "passing" or "failing" the test of time is by no means a permanent qualification. A piece of art can, and very often does, fall in and out of favor in both the mainstream and the academy's eyes multiple times. Maybe a piece of art is revolutionary when it first comes out and gets appraised for that, but then it [[SeinfeldIsUnfunny [[CondemnedByHistory is considered to be dated and no longer relevant]] by later generations, only to be reappraised positively again down the line because of a new reading of the text, or just because its themes become relevant again. Or the opposite, a piece of art that is heavily criticised when it first comes out, but then gets VindicatedByHistory, but then falls down out of HypeBacklash. Then, lather, rinse, repeat, as decades and even centuries pass.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 30,31 (click to see context) from:
Conversely, the works that we lost weren't necessarily bad. Remember: Lost works are lost, and if they're lost then we can't exactly judge them on the merits, can we? There might be any number of gems that were lost to time for one reason or another. Maybe the creator criticized some powerful people and they burned all her works. Maybe the work expressed ideas that would be considered very wise in the present day, but in the author's time those ideas were considered scandalous and thus nobody paid any attention to them and nobody bothered to preserve them. And again, maybe it was just bad luck.
to:
Conversely, the works that we lost weren't necessarily bad. Remember: Lost works are lost, and if they're lost then we can't exactly judge them on the merits, can we? There might be any number of gems that were lost to time for one reason or another. Maybe the creator criticized some powerful people and they burned all her works. Maybe the work expressed ideas that would be considered very wise in the present day, but in the author's time those ideas were considered scandalous and thus nobody paid any attention to them and nobody them, or, for that matter, bothered to preserve them. And again, maybe it was just bad luck.
Changed line(s) 34,35 (click to see context) from:
Plus, there's also that "passing" of "failing" the test of time is by no means a permanent qualification. A piece of art can, and very often does, fall in and out of favor in both the mainstream and the academy's eyes multiple times. Maybe a piece of art is revolutionary when it first comes out and gets appraised for that, but then it [[SeinfeldIsUnfunny is considered to be dated and no longer relevant]] by later generations, only to be reappraised positively again down the line because of a new reading of the text, or just because its themes become relevant again. Or the opposite, a piece of art that is heavily criticised when it first comes out, but then gets VindicatedByHistory, but then falls down out of HypeBacklash. Then, lather, rinse, repeat, as decades, and even centuries pass.
to:
Plus, there's also that "passing" of or "failing" the test of time is by no means a permanent qualification. A piece of art can, and very often does, fall in and out of favor in both the mainstream and the academy's eyes multiple times. Maybe a piece of art is revolutionary when it first comes out and gets appraised for that, but then it [[SeinfeldIsUnfunny is considered to be dated and no longer relevant]] by later generations, only to be reappraised positively again down the line because of a new reading of the text, or just because its themes become relevant again. Or the opposite, a piece of art that is heavily criticised when it first comes out, but then gets VindicatedByHistory, but then falls down out of HypeBacklash. Then, lather, rinse, repeat, as decades, decades and even centuries pass.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
[[iarchive:Martin Van Creveld The Privileged Sex 2013/page/n17/mode/2up|The Privileged Sex]] by [[Martin van Creveld]] says the following: Women also left home, the literature shows, to visit their favorite soothsayer,[18] participate in some public ceremonies,[19] admire works of art on the Acropolis,[20] visit men in prison,[21] argue their case before arbitrators,[22] and attend courtrooms to rouse the sympathy of juries for their male relatives.[23] Women also listened to public speeches; one, Elphinike, reproached Pericles after the latter gave a speech in honor of the Athenians killed in the war against Samos.[24] Plato says that refined women preferred tragedy to comedy; from this, as from two other passages, it appears that women frequented the theater as well.[25] Not only did women participate in their relatives’ funerals, but without them those funerals could not be carried out at all. Women were active in religion.[26] They could become priestesses; indeed, some priesthoods were reserved exclusively for women. Some religious rites in which women participated were carried out daily, while others focused on festivals held on fixed dates. Some of the festivals were mixed, with others reserved for women. None could have taken place if women had been confined at home. And that is not to mention the feast of Dionysus, during which women not only left their homes but the city as well, making for the mountains instead.
Changed line(s) 38,39 (click to see context) from:
What if the only complete poem of Sappho was a first draft and thus incomplete, or something she considered an OldShame? Later generations may typically depend on translations being easily produced, and having copious remaining works from an artist. Further, posthumous evaluation can fluctuate over time. Creator/{{Euripides}} is a dramatist praised today for his strong female characters, but in the Athens of his day, not only were women forbidden to act, but women were forbidden to even see the plays, and were likewise enshrined by law to remain immured indoors (with exceptions only made to [[HighClassCallGirl prostitutes]] of certain respectable standing). That his female characters are three-dimensional does not necessarily mean that they were intended for the women of his day, and the fact that women of later centuries appreciated it is something that almost no one in the Ancient World would have predicted and anticipated (because, again, it was an extremely misogynist society). It must bear in mind that the literate audience and the reading public (which is not always the same thing) have only increased in number from yesteryear to the present-day. In the classical age from Ancient Athens to Rome, the number of people who had literacy were a tiny part of the populace, and among those, the kind who appreciated art was even smaller. It is inarguable, as classicist Mary Beard has pointed out, that ''Literature/TheAeneid'' is read by more people on any given day in the late-20th and early 21st Century than at any time in UsefulNotes/TheRomanEmpire. The really popular art of the Ancient World, the one people did know involved the oral tradition, stuff like Creator/{{Aesop}}'s fables, more than Creator/{{Homer}}, and while Aesop is also considered great, few would consider him as great as Homer, despite the fact that many of Aesop's fables via adaptation and/or {{Bowdlerization}} reaches a much bigger global audience of small children than Homer's epics do.
to:
What if the only complete poem of Sappho was a first draft and thus incomplete, or something she considered an OldShame? Later generations may typically depend on translations being easily produced, and having copious remaining works from an artist. Further, posthumous evaluation can fluctuate over time. Creator/{{Euripides}} is a dramatist praised today for his strong female characters, but in the Athens of his day, not only were women forbidden to act, but women were forbidden to even see the plays, and were likewise enshrined by law to remain immured indoors (with exceptions only made to [[HighClassCallGirl prostitutes]] of certain respectable standing). That his female characters are three-dimensional does not necessarily mean that they were intended for the women of his day, and the fact that women of later centuries appreciated it is something that almost no one in the Ancient World would have predicted and anticipated (because, again, it was an extremely misogynist society). It must bear in mind that the literate audience and the reading public (which is not always the same thing) have only increased in number from yesteryear to the present-day. In the classical age from Ancient Athens to Rome, the number of people who had literacy were a tiny part of the populace, and among those, the kind who appreciated art was even smaller. It is inarguable, as classicist Mary Beard has pointed out, that ''Literature/TheAeneid'' is read by more people on any given day in the late-20th and early 21st Century than at any time in UsefulNotes/TheRomanEmpire. The really popular art of the Ancient World, the one people did know involved the oral tradition, stuff like Creator/{{Aesop}}'s fables, more than Creator/{{Homer}}, and while Aesop is also considered great, few would consider him as great as Homer, despite the fact that many of Aesop's fables via adaptation and/or {{Bowdlerization}} reaches a much bigger global audience of small children than Homer's epics do.
