bibliophile
10-08-2011, 01:57 PM
Hi everybody! New guy here. Kind of exploring the site looking for different ways to get to know some people and this book discussion area seemed like a good fit (just look at my moniker!).
I guess I'll start it off: I'm reading many books right now. However, one that is really interesting is "A History of the Balkans" by Ferdinand Schevill. It was originally published in 1922 and it is interesting not only as history, but also because you get a sense of how cultural mores, particularly in academic culture, were much different in those times (e.g. "The Bulgar state, though Asiatic in origin and institutions, thus became essentially a Slav state, in fact, the first Slave state of the peninsula, worthy of the name. That the Slavs owed this, their first political creation, to an Asiatic impulse, emphasizes the feeble sense of organization which seems to have been one of their fundamental characteristics. ... Exactly what the social and intellectual significance of the Mongolian contribution was, there is no means of telling; but doubtless the fact that the Bulgar through the ages and down to our day differs somewhat in physical type and mental endowment from the purer Slav to the west of him, the Serb, may be ascribed to the Asiatic factor in his blood."--p. 95)
Okay, have I bored everyone already with my first post? Haha... But I just find this interesting in the historical context as an era of "scientific racism" with theories of linear cultural evolution, craniometry, etc. in the interwar years of the early twentieth century. Imagine how a history professor writing those words today would be ostracized!
So, does anyone else want to share what they're reading? Hopefully your posts will be a little more exciting than mine. Hahaha...
I guess I'll start it off: I'm reading many books right now. However, one that is really interesting is "A History of the Balkans" by Ferdinand Schevill. It was originally published in 1922 and it is interesting not only as history, but also because you get a sense of how cultural mores, particularly in academic culture, were much different in those times (e.g. "The Bulgar state, though Asiatic in origin and institutions, thus became essentially a Slav state, in fact, the first Slave state of the peninsula, worthy of the name. That the Slavs owed this, their first political creation, to an Asiatic impulse, emphasizes the feeble sense of organization which seems to have been one of their fundamental characteristics. ... Exactly what the social and intellectual significance of the Mongolian contribution was, there is no means of telling; but doubtless the fact that the Bulgar through the ages and down to our day differs somewhat in physical type and mental endowment from the purer Slav to the west of him, the Serb, may be ascribed to the Asiatic factor in his blood."--p. 95)
Okay, have I bored everyone already with my first post? Haha... But I just find this interesting in the historical context as an era of "scientific racism" with theories of linear cultural evolution, craniometry, etc. in the interwar years of the early twentieth century. Imagine how a history professor writing those words today would be ostracized!
So, does anyone else want to share what they're reading? Hopefully your posts will be a little more exciting than mine. Hahaha...