It is a topsy-turvy world and man is a giddy thing.

Writing upon the subject of dread king Richard is an example. Shakespeare's play is a lot of fun. Aside from ghosts and other devices it is also a plausible history with some corrections made to some dates and characters. Despite acknowledging that is an example of Tudor propaganda. Those poor nephews were intercepted by their Lord Protector uncle and loads of enemies were dispatched at the tower and at Pomfret. One marvels that the victims were trapped so easily given history and the times. Today is hard to get into the mindset of those who went along with the whole thing. Not the cronies but those not directly benefitting.

Those who propose alternative histories seem mad until time is spent listening to their views. While it is impossible to remove Richard's guilt in the bl00dbath given his duty as Protector, one can certainly paint his motives and specific acts in a different light. Not to mention those of the other players.

You are one conversation, one pod cast, one experience away from a drastically different world view. An evil villain one step away from seeming merely a confused primate navigating a complex world.

And I am for the sunshine and fresh air right now. This world makes my poor brain hurt!



Quote

No, I have to say more...

There are those who have formed and joined a society for the merry tyrant. Who try to make Henry Tudor the villain.

Mobsters perk up thine ears. Your g0dfadder, who passed so recently, could have his whole image rejuvenated. You too, witch hunters of Salem. If we never found Luciano's body, and it is an entertaining mystery how things went down in da boibs, who are we to assume, based upon past patterns and our oh so subjective judgement, that the g0dfadder and not the d.a. is to blame?

Especially if some little bit of evidence, during an obvious show trial of our innocent boss, some subset of the grand picture was tainted by false witness of overenthusiastic prosecution team. No it is more likely ergot poisoning by chance rather than nefarious plotting that took down supposed witches in Salem. Because even though human nature is what it is, and none of us today has seen witches bites on teeenager skin, with some in the courtroom that day even claiming that they observed accusers pinching themselves... no, where there is mystery we will give villainy a pass and default to unknown f0rces.

Does Richard's story deserve some care? Or is a trial in a foreign land at another time have no impact on this day? Did Anne trap poor Gloucestor with caskets? Was he really a noble s0n of York? I promise the reader I will look dispassionately and with ice and alcohol in my veins at such matters. I am still on that wall. Doing that thing you need me to do...



Quote

You catch my drift I am sure merry reader. We hear the histories and wonder. I have heard the flip side. Explanations of paranoia by our need to react strongly in the old days to rustlings in the bush. Because of the large penalty for mistaking a tiger for the wind. But an unseen tyrant is a more lasting and dangerous threat than a tiger. After all a tiger will quit when full, the cubs are protected, or that toothache subsides. But the tyrant? And a poor lonely predator has less reach than a tyrant, his allies, and his armies.

Perhaps we simply need an order of magnitude more experiences. The tiger has been with us since our species split off into our own branch on the Tree of Life. The tyrant had to wait until our social constructs were a good deal more complex. Or perhaps has a tendency to allow some descendants to pass genes as his bl00dy policies take more time, go after more powerful but scarce rivals, and has a need like any respectable parasitic blight on a species not to fully eradicate its host. The fate of Charles I has only made kings more subtle, not more just.

You must deal not merely with caskets. And that is more fully under your power. A decision made once and decisively, no matter its grand scale, is a different beast than the long, subtle process of living to avoid the iron fiist. Add it to that which makes life the interesting proposition that it is. I watch, and celebrate your struggle, along with the gods and Fates.

Quote

Those of you who are adults and think these times lour too much upon our houses to joke about... Those well aware of the wide range in quality of historical depictions... Know that I can feel you saying don't mention it, please don't mention it, I don't think he is going to mention it.

But those of you who have marveled at my sense of poetry and daring do perhaps know I would never miss such a reference for lack of trust in you, noble reader:

The battle that in reality took the tyrant's life, Bosworth Field, is the subject of the first episode of a typically irresponsible and immature series: Blackadder. In which very loose treatment of the proud English succession is made. As explained by the intro scene.

They of course knew that their typical viewer would be late to his own funeral and so laughed up their sleeves at their ability to screw up the poor, likely druunk, audience's sense of the events. Without incurring any legal liability.

Of course these hacks took potshots throughout at poor Shakespeare. The Bard. The virtual creator of their ambiguous, fraught language. As well as at famous actors in that line. In a sloppy way that stole popular lines all across his famous tragedies.

I think this work answers a lot of our questions about human nature. I submit it as Exhibit A in my own explanation of our species' history. It is too easy to take the easy way out and ascribe it to flaws with the English. Especially if you are French.

Blaze on blaze on noble reader with no obstacles in your quest for truth!



Quote

But I want to pause and consider Richard with a different hypothesis. Mid-way between villain and victim.

Oh he done the deed or is responsible for it. Whacking of his own nephews.

But isn't it worse, somehow, if he was an otherwise virtuous man, by standards of his Age and society, who made a really bad decision thinking he was serving his country. He was brave. Supported his br0ther the king well. Was skilled as warden of the north. If he had somehow perished before the king died History would lack a colorful character and his reputation would be boringly respectable. If his br0ther had ruled longer and a strong heir lived to maturity, with no regent or protector required: also no tyrant created.

People of all stripes were thinking of how to return their country to peace after years of civil wars. The wars of the roses. Could it be that Richard made a kind of bl00d sacrifice? That he actually cared for his family members? That he was putting duty above other priorities? That in addition to all the other things expected of a king that he could not have one drop of compassion for his own family if they stood between secure, iron rule?

Maybe you'd let go of your dick, stop staring out the window at the squirrels, if you thought about such things in history. Maybe you'd stop swearing at your rulers and pity them a bit. Maybe you'd not go to the tower thinking you were planning a coronation ceremony while humming merrily with sugar plum visions of your enemies at Pomfret losing their heads and ending up on the tip of a pike feeding tower ravens..

Thinking more about it I think you'd see there were a number of things or actions that could have derailed this horrible chain of events. Even as cost climbs the later intervention made.
Not just junking the whole flawed idea of absolute rule. But just being more reasonable and better priorities even retaining it.

Tudor propaganda, entertaining plays, great comedies, babes, power and wealth... I can see why you have no time to think. Ah well.







Quote