From AllenAmet@aol.com Sat Jun  3 13:21:28 2000
Received: from mxu2.u.washington.edu (mxu2.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.9])
	by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.05/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id NAA42378
	for <classics@lists.u.washington.edu>; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 13:21:27 -0700
From: AllenAmet@aol.com
Received: from imo-d02.mx.aol.com (imo-d02.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.34])
	by mxu2.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id NAA11735
	for <classics@u.washington.edu>; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 13:21:26 -0700
Received: from AllenAmet@aol.com
	by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v27.9.) id d.77.4eb5e4e (3988)
	 for <classics@u.washington.edu>; Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:21:12 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <77.4eb5e4e.266ac2b8@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:21:12 EDT
Subject: Re: Gladiators, Books, and the decline of authenticity with time
To: classics@u.washington.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 64

In a message dated 00-06-03 09:17:06 EDT, Steve Z. writes:

<< Why are less authentic representations more acceptable the farther back in 
time the book or novel is set? >>
<snip>
  <<It is probably safe to say that the producers and directors of "Saving
Private Ryan," "Glory," "Gettysburg," and "Henry V" both _respected_ their
audiences and felt that they had to.  What does that say about those who
brought us "Gladiator?"
******************
  It is probably not a function of the time period at all - although the 
longer the period material has been around, the more it becomes 
"romanticized."

  More lilkely, just the result of one's own knowledge about a particular 
era. The further away the material is from one's own expertise, the more 
authentic it appears. The closer it is, the less...

  e.g. I have always enjoyed reading the weekly Science Section of the NY 
Times, but my brother (who is in the field) calls it the "Science Fiction" 
Times... and he doesn't mean "sci-fi" either.

  If I recall, the old Raymond Massey film on Lincoln showed Abe in a general 
store selling something in a paper bag, in the 1820s, a feat not possible for 
another half century. 

  Entertainment and long-term memory only fitfully co-exist. Does Homer 
really know what to do with chariot warfare in the Iliad? Is anyone put off 
by it today?

  A certain amount of distance, even inaccuracy, is probably desirable - it's 
an art, not a science... different mentalities.

  And who remembers the name of the book on the table (as the camera pans) 
when Martin Sheen is about to assassinate Marlon Brando in "Apocalypse Now"? 
Symbolic to be sure, but does anyone notice it?

Allen Koenigsberg

  
  

.