и вечный бой, покой нам только снится

[avva]

Сам не заметил, как в очередной раз влез в спор о израильской культуре и о том, насколько она хужее "русской" израильской.

Ну и ладно.

Зато пристроил туда любимый аргумент про Лондон конца 16-го - начала 17-го века. Кажется, я его в ЖЖ ещё не излагал. А может, и излагал. Вот, процитирую оттуда:

Я обычно в таких случаях вспоминаю, что во время Шекспира население Англии было примерно 5 миллионов человек - меньше Израиля; при этом подавляющее большинство из них были неграмотными. В Лондоне жило, наверное, тысяч двести, из них тоже большинство неграмотные. Тем не менее, за четверть века там появились Спенсер, Донн, Шекспир, Джонсон, Марлоу итд.

Да, размер аудитории важен, но не всегда так уж важен.

Хотел бы я как следует понимать -- что действительно важно.

Comments

Sorry for using English

[watertank.livejournal.com]

I think a combination of the following evolutionary model factors is really important:
1) Some fundamental changes in the society, which happen to become highly relevant for the future generations.
2) Gifted individuals capable to detect and express those changes.
3) Barely sufficient resources to support those individuals, so that “fluff” is filtered out early on in the process, and conditions for competition and/or "coopetition" are established.

Re: Sorry for using English

[avva.livejournal.com]

I don't know if that's true.
Consider that, for example, in the Elizabethan period the famous paywrights and poets moved in very different circles of society. They had different ways of supporting themselves. Some of them were pretty well off and cetainly weren't unduly constrained in resources available to them.

I don't know about "fundamental changes in the society" either. Some amazing writers lived through fundamental changes, and others led pretty dull lives.

Re: Sorry for using English

[watertank.livejournal.com]

Well, the real issue is whether an evolutionary approach works here or not. If it does, one must consider environmental changes wherein the propagation of a replicator (http://maxwell.lucifer.com/virus/alt.memetics/what.is.html), in our case a body of plays, occurs. One also must be able to separate the replicator from its carrier, the author(s) with an understanding that the carrier may need to survive for a period of time sufficient enough for the replicator to catch on. There's a number of cases, when works of a dead author were "discovered", i.e. a latent replicator was found capable of propagation in a new environment. So, the critical part is how an idea fits into the future, not necessarily the present, therefore I talk about fundamental changes. A number of individuals may compete/cooperate making the idea more "survivable".
From what I know, in the Elizabethan period theater, as a public entertainment institution, was quite controversial. Therefore, play-writes of the time had to offer something worth the trouble of supporting it politically and financially.

What you say about "amazing" and "dull" writers, actually, confirms that the author's personality and/or lifestyle doesn't really matter in the long run. It may, though, affect short term propagation of a replicator, which would explain the popularity of anecdotes about famous people.

Re: Sorry for using English

[avva.livejournal.com]

Well, the real issue is whether an evolutionary approach works here or not.

I really don't think it does.

Re: Sorry for using English

[(Anonymous)]

This is very funny (and meaningful) typo: "paywrights"!

Re: Sorry for using English

[avva.livejournal.com]

Wow, you're right ;)