It seems to me what makes these kind of characters often not-to-be-taken-seriously characters are not their sorrows, but their belief that "living in another era" would be a remedy to all sorrows, which often comes across as naive.
Ye Goode Olde Days are by definition an idealized, rose-tinted version of the past. Also see Original Position Fallacy: People who "yearn for the past" often make the unspoken assumption that they would have had a higher social position in the past than they have in the present, or that they would be inexplicably immune against the problems and risks that were common in the past but are not now. "The grass is always greener on the other side", respectively in another time.
Edited by LordGro Let's just say and leave it at that.
Can somebody please figure out what the second sentence of the Leonardo Da Vinci entry is supposed to say and fix it?
"Note that this trope usually involves characters who live in modern industrialized democracies where they have a great deal of freedom and luxuries, which can make their nostalgia hard to take seriously. "
What's that mean? Rich people can't be sad? Besides maybe they yearn for a future where they still have plenty of luxuries but get to be more heroic?
As for "freedom" that is complicated in definition and it is easier to define who doesn't have freedom then who does. A Galley Slave doesn't have freedom. Does a clansman in Bonny Scotland who is bound by a chain of obligations but also gets mutual support that he might prefer to a modern urbanized world? That is a matter of philisophical argument that is entertaining but endless.
That is taking to long. But the point is that sneering at someone elses sorrow simply because it is not inspired by material concerns is a dubious proposition.
Hide / Show Replies