[WikiEN-l] Phrase, fable, popular culture

[Daniel P. B. Smith]

> From: Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
>
> Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
>
>> charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com wrote:
>>
>>> I glanced yesterday at a recent dictionary 'of phrase and fable',
>>> which had a Pokemon article.
>>
> It's amazing how pop culture articles make people squirm so much.  I
> don't really do anything with them, but they have never bothered me.
> Pop culture is as important a part of culture as history or science.
> Naturally, we want to make sure that fictional characters aren't put
> forth as something more real than they are,   If we confine  
> ourselves to
> "scholarly treatment" it strikes me as though we would be putting  
> on the
> same pompous airs of superiority that are often attrivbuted to  
> ivory towers.

1) A "dictionary of phrase and fable" sounds like a _perfectly_ good  
source for Wikipedia material.

2) I think that by definition an "encyclopedia" does _and must_ carry  
a bit of what might be spun as "the same pompous airs of superiority  
that are often attributed to ivory towers." Just as there are such  
things as journalistic standards, we have a commitment to accuracy  
that goes beyond what is required of USENET postings and web forums.  
Any dedication to standards seems pompous to those who do not share it.

3) What makes me squirm about pop culture articles is their general  
low quality, lack of references, and air of inexperience. I think a  
good deal of them are being written from personal expertise. The edit  
wars I see on some of them convince me that these self-appointed  
experts have quite different opinions about the supposed content of  
the supposed canon, and the reader has no way to know which is  
correct. When people argue about the canon known as the Bible, they  
customarily cite chapter and verse. So, for that matter, do  
Holmesians. So should... what should I call them? Pokemonitors?

4) I do think that the "distanced" tone with which, say, Homeric  
mythology, and folklore are conveyed, is very misleading. (It doesn't  
help that a lot of it was filtered through Victorian English  
translations).

I think a lot of this stuff was pop culture in its time. I suspect  
the ancients regarded Mars or Apollo in a way that is much closer to  
the way we regard Superman or Batman than to the way we regard the  
characters of Wagner's operas.

Homer was a superstar performer, and he probably riffed on his lyre  
like Bruce Springsteen. I've always heard that educated Greeks did  
not believe the gods and goddesses were real. I suspect the less  
educated ones may have had a degree of belief that was like the  
degree of belief that fans of professional wrestling have in their  
sport.

I assume I'm not the only person who, as an adolescent, discovered a  
passage in the Odyssey, which, for some reason was not part of our  
assigned reading in class. The one about how Hephaestus catches Ares  
and Aphrodite making love. Literally catches them at it. Traps them.  
Nude. In a contraption of metal chains. Then calls all the gods and  
goddess to come and see them. Who stand around admiring Aphrodite and  
making coarse jokes. I'll bet I'm not the only adolescent that  
thought that was pretty hot. Did I mention that they were chained up  
nude, in the act, and exhibited to a crowd of acquaintances? Nude?