10 thoughts on “Forget me not

  1. I often read things from the 19th century and am amazed at how well written the people were, how beautifully crafted their use of the language was.
    Were they all so adept at expressing themselves, or are we only left with the exemplary ones?

    Given that this was a simple autograph book, not a published work, I am tempted to think that use of the language as a medium that needed effort and conscious construction, was a common understanding among even those who were not in the intellectual elite.

    Does out use of language compare? I don’t think so. I think we view language as an empty vehicle of meaning, undeserving of deliberate and conscious construction. Does anyone compose thoughts, editing and orchestrating the sentences and paragraphs in a way that has beauty in and of itself? Do we communicate better as a result?Report

    1. I find most it overblown honestly.

      Keep in mind I have never been a great fan of Victoriana. I prefer the clean, modern, airy, and light-filled if a bit sparse to Victorian clutter.

      This comes in all things. And my least favorite artists are those most Victorian group:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Raphaelite_Brotherhood especially as they got overblown in pseudo-Middle Ages stuff like:

      http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3PI4TMCMtds/TzVRWFDiLiI/AAAAAAAABaY/FlYO4itZ130/s1600/god_speed.jpgReport

      1. You notice, though, that there’s quite the difference between the two books? The notes in the second one were much more plainspoken. I’m unsure if that’s just because the first was from four decades earlier or if the gender of the recipient played a part in it.Report

        1. Well, half the second book’s comments are all of a kind, really. “I hope you get married AND SOON.” Well, there’s one “quit worrying about getting married.”

          There’s only so witty you can get.Report

Comments are closed.