Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


Multiculturalism: pros and cons

   
I think The Simpsons started getting stale around Season 10.

Sometimes my cable brings on a Simpsons marathon from Season 1 to present, and so many of those first episodes still hold up.

Imo anyway .

Just throwing this out there: The Lion King is just Hamlet with talking animals.

So...yeah. That's all I've got for wading into this swamp. I'll just see myself out.

Sure, but that's a pretty substantial adaptation then.

Also, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern don't die (and aren't traitors), Ophelia is normal and sane, Hamlet has no wise magical mentor, I don't recall Hamlet really giving a carp about Denmark as a whole, etc etc.

That said, I think it was said in jest, and my rebuttal was also in jest.

Partly in jest, sure. But while Timon and Pumba don't die, they are dopey sidekicks who never really know much of the true scope of what's going on, so they have that in common with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Ophelia? Yeah, that doesn't really work. No doubt there. But for a wise, magical, ghostly mentor, I'd say both the lion and the man have that (both kings' ghosts, in fact), and both Hamlet and Simba care enough about their home-country to fight for it and come back to it when the chips are down. They're also both epic whiners.

Pumba/Timon and Rosencrantz/Guildenstern also doesn't work because they're actual childhood friends who stick with Hamlet/Simba the whole film giving him genuine counsel and support. They're not spies hired by Scar/Claudius due to their past associations with Hamlet/Simba. Remember, Hamlet says of them "I will trust [them] as I will adders fang’d" and sends them to their deaths.

I was referring to Rafikki on wise mentor, the dad ghost parallel is pretty clear. But there's no Rafikki analogue in Hamlet that I recall unless you go for Horatio, but that really doesn't work at all.

I'd also say that Hamlet/Simba's motivations (and those of their respective daddy ghosts) are quite different. The stories and their characters are quite different both in style and substance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyber_Goddess View Post
Yes, because they're culturally identified as French.
Hang on for just a second. They're only called French in American English. Not even in all English. Outside of your corner of the world, there's no link between fries and the French.
Does the fact that people in the US believe something is French make it "culturally identified" as French? Is something a particular culture's achievement because folks in the States believe it to be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikul View Post
Hang on for just a second. They're only called French in American English. Not even in all English. Outside of your corner of the world, there's no link between fries and the French.
Does the fact that people in the US believe something is French make it "culturally identified" as French? Is something a particular culture's achievement because folks in the States believe it to be?
Apparently.
US for the cultural win, since we apparently *define* other cultures...
... as we incorporate them into our multicultural society.
You will be assimilated, resistance is futile.

Now that's an interesting question.

Can culture be seen differently depending on the place it's viewed? I.e French fries are French in the USA, but not in the UK.

For example that North Korean propaganda cartoon, where a lot of the US viewed the USA wolves as badass? While in North Korea it was trying to scare the population into submission out of fear of the US?

It is possible, that there is "Death of the Author" as applies to culture?

Oh and on the Lion King is "Hamlet" thing. Look up the story of a medieval Scandinavian legend called "Amleth".

Yeah....Hamlet is basically only famous because copyright law didn't exist when Shakespeare was stealing from other people....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amleth





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status