Real and Fake History: Can it be the Same? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

drigel · 08-24-2006, 07:25 AM

I would say that the vast and broad appeal of ME and the Legendarium in general exists. I would also so say that there is a reason or explanation for that reason. The reasons are as varied and myriad as there are people with opinions. But, IMO, part of that reason, I would say, is genetic, and therefore historical in nature (whether we are aware of it, or not).

The nature of it's importance has a direct relationship to time. Or, you can see it in two different lights - 1: the farther back in time you go, the more diluted the importance becomes, and/or 2: the farther back in time you go, the more monumental the influence we see on us, the end result becomes. Like a river: if you want to see why a river flows this way or that, you don't look at the last fork, you look at the first. If that makes sense to anyone at all...

And in the "you never know" department - as I reread this thread, I always go back to a guy who profited (as did history and archeology) somewhat from exploiting "imagined" or "perceived" history: Heinrich Schliemann. Who's going to be the next Heinrich Schliemann, and what will be the discovery?

08-24-2006, 07:25 AM	#15
drigel Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: commonplace city Posts: 518	I would say that the vast and broad appeal of ME and the Legendarium in general exists. I would also so say that there is a reason or explanation for that reason. The reasons are as varied and myriad as there are people with opinions. But, IMO, part of that reason, I would say, is genetic, and therefore historical in nature (whether we are aware of it, or not). The nature of it's importance has a direct relationship to time. Or, you can see it in two different lights - 1: the farther back in time you go, the more diluted the importance becomes, and/or 2: the farther back in time you go, the more monumental the influence we see on us, the end result becomes. Like a river: if you want to see why a river flows this way or that, you don't look at the last fork, you look at the first. If that makes sense to anyone at all... And in the "you never know" department - as I reread this thread, I always go back to a guy who profited (as did history and archeology) somewhat from exploiting "imagined" or "perceived" history: Heinrich Schliemann. Who's going to be the next Heinrich Schliemann, and what will be the discovery?