Revision as of 15:23, 2 March 2006 view sourcePaul Barlow (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers93,539 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:15, 2 March 2006 view source Aucaman (talk | contribs)2,729 edits QuestionNext edit → | ||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
Nice. ] | ] 15:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC) | Nice. ] | ] 15:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
==Question== | |||
I was wondering if you agree with the proposition that the term "Aryan" is no longer used in technical writings (or if it used it only refers to Indo-Aryans and not Indo-Iranians or Indo-Europeans). If not, what do you think is the definition of term and how do you think it should be applied? Thank you, ]<sup>]</sup> 17:15, 2 March 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:15, 2 March 2006
User talk:Paul Barlow Archive1
Kuna
I very much doubt that the Kuna were aware of any "international swastika craze". I don't know if you've been to the islands and seen how they live, but even today it's not exactly wired into mainstream society. And in 1925, its surprising that they knew about Panama... ;-) The Kuna revolution (they fought with traditional poisoned arrows) was sparked off by Panamanian authoritarianism, and their expression of their cultural identity sprang directly from that. A symbol identical to the swastika (though I don't know what they call it) seems to have been in use there for many years, and as it represents creation, it must have been the natural choice as the basis for their flag. — Johan the Ghost seance 10:48, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- You make a fair point about the lack of available evidence for truly "ancient" use of the swastika. However, the 1925 flag was created in response to direct attacks on the Kuna by the then Panamanian regime, and was for use in that conflict, not for international use (as far as I know, they weren't making representations to the UN or anything); and several sources make reference to the swastika as an "ancient" symbol, and as a symbol of creation. So basically I'm skeptical as to what extent the Kuna were influenced at that time by the "international swastika craze": although the existence of that craze, and at the same period, I certainly don't dispute. And while "classic" swastikas appear on old Mola art, I certainly have to recognise the syncretic nature of this art — I almost bought (wish I had now) a really cool, well-made, classic-style mola featuring Daffy Duck and Bugs Bunny.
- I have to say though that the comment in the article:
- The ubiquity of the swastika symbol is easily explained by it being a very simple symbol that will arise independently when people incise patterns on pottery or stone.
- ties in very well with truly traditional mola designs, which are characteristically geometric and frequently angular; in fact, if you look at some old mola designs, it's hard to see how they could avoid a swastika. So I guess my challenge is to hunt down some really old swastikas in Kuna art... trouble is Molas haven't been documented / preserved for very long. Oh well. Cheers, — Johan the Ghost seance 13:39, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
And now they are trying to fix the vote
http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:StanZegel#Jesus_Article_Vote Robsteadman 13:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Was Richard Wagner an opera manager?
Hmm. I see you have reverted my deletion of Wagner from the 'opera manager' category. No big deal, however while Wagner did indeed 'manage opera' he was considerably more than the other professional managers like Bing, Christie etc. who are in this category. In his younger days, Wagner's role in the opera house was that of a conductor not a manager.
If you are going to list composers, why stop at Wagner? You can list Verdi, Richard Strauss and probably dozens of others. Almost all composers are involved in the productions of their operas, the selection of singers.
Kleinzach 10:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Piss Christ
Nice. Slrubenstein | Talk 15:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Question
I was wondering if you agree with the proposition that the term "Aryan" is no longer used in technical writings (or if it used it only refers to Indo-Aryans and not Indo-Iranians or Indo-Europeans). If not, what do you think is the definition of term and how do you think it should be applied? Thank you, Aucaman 17:15, 2 March 2006 (UTC)