Burqas in nurseries / kindergartens

[NickKIELCEPoland]

In one nursery / kindergarten in Oslo, there is a teacher who wears a burqa.

I must stress that the burqa is NOT a head-scarf. It leaves only the eyes, visible.


Would you want your children to have a burqa-wearing kindergarten teacher?

Should parents in the EU / North-America / Russia have the right to demand non-burqa wearing teachers in their children's kindergartens?

(it's not an Islamic garment / it's mentioned NOWHERE in the Quran / it's only an Arabic grament)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1375770/France-burka-ban-Burka-alien-cultural-monstrosity-CAN-banned-Britain.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/yasmin-alibhai-brown/yasmin-alibhaibrown-wearing-the-burqa-is-neither-islamic-nor-socially-acceptable-1743375.html

[Michael]

In one nursery / kindergarten in Oslo, there is a teacher who wears a burqa.

I must stress that the burqa is NOT a head-scarf. It leaves only the eyes, visible.


Would you want your children to have a burqa-wearing kindergarten teacher?

Should parents in the EU / North-America / Russia have the right to demand non-burqa wearing teachers in their children's kindergartens?

(it's not an Islamic garment / it's mentioned NOWHERE in the Quran / it's only an Arabic grament)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1375770/France-burka-ban-Burka-alien-cultural-monstrosity-CAN-banned-Britain.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/yasmin-alibhai-brown/yasmin-alibhaibrown-wearing-the-burqa-is-neither-islamic-nor-socially-acceptable-1743375.html

We have kindergarten classrooms full of little kiddies wearing burqas. :shrug:

[NickKIELCEPoland]

We have kindergarten classrooms full of little kiddies wearing burqas. :shrug:
Now, now, Mickey, answer the question!
;)

[Non Sequitur]

Would you want your children to have a burqa-wearing kindergarten teacher?

Should parents in the EU / North-America / Russia have the right to demand non-burqa wearing teachers in their children's kindergartens?

I don't think that wearing a burqa has any effect on whether the teacher is good at her job. I would have no problem with it as long as she was a good teacher.

As to having a right to demand a teacher who looks more in line with Western culture, I think that is a dangerous path to go down. There is a dangerous principles there: that we should have a right to demand someone fulfill our cultural expectations regardless of qualifications for a job. That isn't a right, it's prejudice.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

I don't think that wearing a burqa has any effect on whether the teacher is good at her job. I would have no problem with it as long as she was a good teacher.

As to having a right to demand a teacher who looks more in line with Western culture, I think that is a dangerous path to go down. There is a dangerous principles there: that we should have a right to demand someone fulfill our cultural expectations regardless of qualifications for a job. That isn't a right, it's prejudice.
I think it is part of a nursery / kindergarten teacher's job to teach the children about being a person - they need to be able to smile, and frown, and teach the children about facial communication.

It is NOT a religious symbol, and we would not permit a nursery / kindergarten teacher to wear a balaclava, or a Mickey Mouse costume.

We are not living in Yemen, and I think we should stop being softies. They can wear the head-scarf, no problem, but not the burqa.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

http://www.tv2.no/nyheter/innenriks/politikk/frp-vil-ha-nikabnekt-i-barnehager-3511868.html
I forgot to post the link about the nursery / kindergarten in Oslo, wear the burqa is worn.

[Non Sequitur]

I think it is part of a nursery / kindergarten teacher's job to teach the children about being a person - they need to be able to smile, and frown, and teach the children about facial communication.

It is NOT a religious symbol, and we would not permit a nursery / kindergarten teacher to wear a balaclava, or a Mickey Mouse costume.

We are not living in Yemen, and I think we should stop being softies. They can wear the head-scarf, no problem, but not the burqa.

Except it is a religious symbol to the people who wear it. Who made us arbiters of what is religious and what isn't...

[pramjockey]

Except it is a religious symbol to the people who wear it. Who made us arbiters of what is religious and what isn't...

A fair question. I'd follow it up with "and what harm is it doing such that you have to involve yourself?"

As far as to a previous comment about "not living in Yemen," I don't live in the Vatican, either, yet I tolerate crucifixes. I don't live in Southeast Asia, yet, I tolerate statues of the Buddha, Krishna, and a number of other gods.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

A fair question. I'd follow it up with "and what harm is it doing such that you have to involve yourself?"

As far as to a previous comment about "not living in Yemen," I don't live in the Vatican, either, yet I tolerate crucifixes. I don't live in Southeast Asia, yet, I tolerate statues of the Buddha, Krishna, and a number of other gods.
And I will reluctantly support Burqas in Europe - when the people in Saudi-Arabia and Yemen accept gay clubs.

[Non Sequitur]

And I will reluctantly support Burqas in Europe - when the people in Saudi-Arabia and Yemen accept gay clubs.

Freedom of expression is entirely dependent on authoritarian regimes huh?

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Freedom of expression is entirely dependent on authoritarian regimes huh?
No, but it wouldn't harm to let the authoritarian regimes understand what we feel about their repression.

[Non Sequitur]

No, but it wouldn't harm to let the authoritarian regimes understand what we feel about their repression.

But why does that influence what we must do? Yes Saudi Arabia is not the most liberal country in terms of homosexual rights. Why does that mean others freedoms must be abused?

[NickKIELCEPoland]

But why does that influence what we must do? Yes Saudi Arabia is not the most liberal country in terms of homosexual rights. Why does that mean others freedoms must be abused?
Because our enlightened liberal laws about respecting everyone's culture were made at a time when Europeans lived in Europe, and Arabs lived in Arabia.

Now, Europeans and Arabs live in Europe, and Europeans and Arabs live in Arabia (well, Europeans are only allowed to settle there if they convert to Islam).

Our laws were made for a different time. The French have understood this.

[Non Sequitur]

Because our enlightened liberal laws about respecting everyone's culture were made at a time when Europeans lived in Europe, and Arabs lived in Arabia.

Now, Europeans and Arabs live in Europe, and Europeans and Arabs live in Arabia (well, Europeans are only allowed to settle there if they convert to Islam).

Our laws were made for a different time. The French have understood this.

Did you just say freedom of expression was an outdated idea???

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Did you just say freedom of expression was an outdated idea???
No - freedom of expression is the overriding philosophy in Europe, and long may it remain so.

But equality is another very important European ideal.

Here are some scenarioes for this global village that we live in now, but didn't used to live in...

Unequal scenario:
-Arabs and Europeans live in the Arabian Peninsula. Arabs are free to practise their culture in both the Arab Pensinsula and in Europe, but Europeans are only free to practise their culture in Europe, and not in the Arab Peninsula.

Equal scenarioes:
-Arabs and Europeans live in both Europe and in the Arab Peninsula, and they may both freely practise their cultures, in either Europe or the Arab Peninsula.
-Arabs and Europeans live in both Europe and in the Arab Peninsula, but Europeans can only practise their culture in Europe, while Arabs may only practise their culture in the Arab Peninsula.

So, there is 1 unequal scenario, and 2 equal scenarioes.

My preferred scenario is the 1st of the 2 equal scenarioes.
However, the important thing is that it is one of the equal scenarioes.

The unequal scenario is a poor deal for Europeans, and only softies would accept that.

[MeMyselfAndI]

And I will reluctantly support Burqas in Europe - when the people in Saudi-Arabia and Yemen accept gay clubs.

You are starting that again? :rolleyes:

[Americano]

No - freedom of expression is the overriding philosophy in Europe, and long may it remain so.

But equality is another very important European ideal.

Here are some scenarioes for this global village that we live in now, but didn't used to live in...

Unequal scenario:
-Arabs and Europeans live in the Arabian Peninsula. Arabs are free to practise their culture in both the Arab Pensinsula and in Europe, but Europeans are only free to practise their culture in Europe, and not in the Arab Peninsula.

Equal scenarioes:
-Arabs and Europeans live in both Europe and in the Arab Peninsula, and they may both freely practise their cultures, in either Europe or the Arab Peninsula.
-Arabs and Europeans live in both Europe and in the Arab Peninsula, but Europeans can only practise their culture in Europe, while Arabs may only practise their culture in the Arab Peninsula.

So, there is 1 unequal scenario, and 2 equal scenarioes.

My preferred scenario is the 1st of the 2 equal scenarioes.
However, the important thing is that it is one of the equal scenarioes.

The unequal scenario is a poor deal for Europeans, and only softies would accept that.

Seems simple; you need to avoid visiting the Arabian Peninsula and forget about it.

[Donkey]

In one nursery / kindergarten in Oslo, there is a teacher who wears a burqa.

I must stress that the burqa is NOT a head-scarf. It leaves only the eyes, visible.


Would you want your children to have a burqa-wearing kindergarten teacher?

Should parents in the EU / North-America / Russia have the right to demand non-burqa wearing teachers in their children's kindergartens?

(it's not an Islamic garment / it's mentioned NOWHERE in the Quran / it's only an Arabic grament)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1375770/France-burka-ban-Burka-alien-cultural-monstrosity-CAN-banned-Britain.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/yasmin-alibhai-brown/yasmin-alibhaibrown-wearing-the-burqa-is-neither-islamic-nor-socially-acceptable-1743375.htmlIs she a good teacher?


I think it is part of a nursery / kindergarten teacher's job to teach the children about being a person - they need to be able to smile, and frown, and teach the children about facial communication.

Children learn facial expressions and whatnot at a MUCH earlier age than that. It is not part of a kindergarten education.
And I will reluctantly support Burqas in Europe - when the people in Saudi-Arabia and Yemen accept gay clubs.

This idea of yours has been so thoroughly discredited multiple times I can't believe you're not embarrassed to trot it out again.

[MeMyselfAndI]

Children learn facial expressions more from parents then teachers anyway.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Would people want their children taught at a nursery / kindergarten by a teacher wearing a burqa?

[Donkey]

Would people want their children taught at a nursery / kindergarten by a teacher wearing a burqa?

I really don't care. Is the teacher a good teacher? Because that's what I want for my kids.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

I really don't care. Is the teacher a good teacher? Because that's what I want for my kids.
I've no idea how good a teacher she is. But thank you for answering the question.

Will other people answer the question too? Would people want their children taught by a nursery / kindergarten teacher, wearing a burqa?

[Donkey]

We have kindergarten classrooms full of little kiddies wearing burqas. :shrug:
Really? Hmm. The Muslims I know that wear scarves (don't know any that wear burqas) didn't wear them as children. They donned them when they reached a level of maturity. I thought that was common practice.

[MeMyselfAndI]

I've no idea how good a teacher she is. But thank you for answering the question.

Will other people answer the question too? Would people want their children taught by a nursery / kindergarten teacher, wearing a burqa?

To me, it would not matter. But, of course, my opinion is not representative of Moscow people. Or majority of Russians in general.

But, then, majority did not grow up like I did lol Our women may not cover their face, but they do everything else.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/-pqrE2vhw0SU/S1R4EFZvzFI/AAAAAAAAAM0/ap4hW0Thcak/s512/39.jpghttp://img35.imageshack.us/img35/1732/kogurinvstrecha.jpg
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4408/siryoga.f/0_5fcbb_bd7c13c_XL.jpg
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4810/siryoga.f/0_5fcba_d120c8af_XL.jpg
http://www.bessarabia.ru/sm13.jpg

So, no, for me, it is not strange to see a woman wrapped in cloth. :lol: If they want to also cover their face, well, that is up to them. Their face, their choice, I say.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Thank you for that answer, MeMyselfandI.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Thank you for that answer, MeMyselfandI.
Thank you for that answer, MeMyselfandI.

[Michael]

Really? Hmm. The Muslims I know that wear scarves (don't know any that wear burqas) didn't wear them as children. They donned them when they reached a level of maturity. I thought that was common practice.

The burqa is entirely political. Doesn't surprise me to see 6 year olds in full burqas for that reason.

[pramjockey]

But why does that influence what we must do? Yes Saudi Arabia is not the most liberal country in terms of homosexual rights. Why does that mean others freedoms must be abused?

Exactly. "I'll abuse these people because other people are being abused" is not a solution that reduces abuse anywhere. The "nanny nanny boo boo pants, I'm gonna get you because you got me" school of diplomacy was shut down for incompetence a long, long time ago.

Children learn facial expressions and whatnot at a MUCH earlier age than that. It is not part of a kindergarten education.


Interesting (to me) side note - facial expressions appear to be mostly genetic, rather than learned.

http://www.physorg.com/news82125637.html


Sorry, I'm just a nerd.

:)

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Exactly. "I'll abuse these people because other people are being abused" is not a solution that reduces abuse anywhere. The "nanny nanny boo boo pants, I'm gonna get you because you got me" school of diplomacy was shut down for incompetence a long, long time ago.



Interesting (to me) side note - facial expressions appear to be mostly genetic, rather than learned.

http://www.physorg.com/news82125637.html


Sorry, I'm just a nerd.

:)
"concentration, sadness, anger, disgust, joy and surprise"
The study is about emotional facial expressions, not the deployment of facial expressions as a language.

[Donkey]

Exactly. "I'll abuse these people because other people are being abused" is not a solution that reduces abuse anywhere. The "nanny nanny boo boo pants, I'm gonna get you because you got me" school of diplomacy was shut down for incompetence a long, long time ago.



Interesting (to me) side note - facial expressions appear to be mostly genetic, rather than learned.

http://www.physorg.com/news82125637.html


Sorry, I'm just a nerd.

:)So you're saying that these kids are genetically pre-disposed to wearing burqas. :) :D :p

"concentration, sadness, anger, disgust, joy and surprise"
The study is about emotional facial expressions, not the deployment of facial expressions as a language.

If facial expressions are genetic, a genetic understanding of them is highly likely as well.

If not, then refer to my original post on the subject.

[pramjockey]

"concentration, sadness, anger, disgust, joy and surprise"
The study is about emotional facial expressions, not the deployment of facial expressions as a language.

Huh?

There's also a universal nature to facial expressions among humanity. Whether you're Australian Aborigine, African Bushman, Icelander, or Aztec, happiness, sadness, disgust, fear, etc. are communicated the same way, using the same expressions.

Given that, it makes much more sense that they're biological in nature, not cultural. So, a covered face is irrelevant. Even the blind use facial expressions.

[Greendruid]

Huh?

There's also a universal nature to facial expressions among humanity. Whether you're Australian Aborigine, African Bushman, Icelander, or Aztec, happiness, sadness, disgust, fear, etc. are communicated the same way, using the same expressions.

That's actually not true. Although there are probably a few universal basics, there are numerous cultural nuances on these making a smile actually mean different things in each culture. Just imagine that smile Jack Nicholson gives in The Shining as he says "Here's Johnny!" being "the norm" for your culture versus the smile you might give as you pass a stranger in a hospital who is grimacing in pain. It's that different. I'm not an expert in facial expression but this is what the literature I've read says. Psychologists will tell you the opposite, which is where the popular belief comes from. How many psychologists study with the Etoro of Papua New Guinea? I think I'll trust my colleagues on this. By the way, the wrong smile to a baboon, gorilla or chimp can get you attacked. Although the fear face is pretty universal among other primates.

[MeMyselfAndI]

That's actually not true. Although there are probably a few universal basics, there are numerous cultural nuances on these making a smile actually mean different things in each culture. Just imagine that smile Jack Nicholson gives in The Shining as he says "Here's Johnny!" being "the norm" for your culture versus the smile you might give as you pass a stranger in a hospital who is grimacing in pain. It's that different. I'm not an expert in facial expression but this is what the literature I've read says. Psychologists will tell you the opposite, which is where the popular belief comes from. How many psychologists study with the Etoro of Papua New Guinea? I think I'll trust my colleagues on this. By the way, the wrong smile to a baboon, gorilla or chimp can get you attacked. Although the fear face is pretty universal among other primates.

How about showing this smile to a baby
http://darkperception.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/joker_smile.jpg
:lol: That or burqa?

[pramjockey]

That's actually not true. Although there are probably a few universal basics, there are numerous cultural nuances on these making a smile actually mean different things in each culture. Just imagine that smile Jack Nicholson gives in The Shining as he says "Here's Johnny!" being "the norm" for your culture versus the smile you might give as you pass a stranger in a hospital who is grimacing in pain. It's that different. I'm not an expert in facial expression but this is what the literature I've read says. Psychologists will tell you the opposite, which is where the popular belief comes from. How many psychologists study with the Etoro of Papua New Guinea? I think I'll trust my colleagues on this. By the way, the wrong smile to a baboon, gorilla or chimp can get you attacked. Although the fear face is pretty universal among other primates.

First, I didn't say universal among primates. Universal among H. Sapiens Sapiens.

Second, is there conscious manipulation of expressions? I don't think I'm saying otherwise. But, how do you explain the blind acquiring facial expressions?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=blind-relatives-prove-fac

and especially ones that mimic the ones of their parents? How do you explain a blind person acquiring facial expressions that can be uniformly recognized throughout the species, regardless of culture? Yes, there are some that are not universal, and I'm not saying otherwise. But, there are clearly a good number of expressions that are acquired via heredity.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

First, I didn't say universal among primates. Universal among H. Sapiens Sapiens.

Second, is there conscious manipulation of expressions? I don't think I'm saying otherwise. But, how do you explain the blind acquiring facial expressions?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=blind-relatives-prove-fac

and especially ones that mimic the ones of their parents? How do you explain a blind person acquiring facial expressions that can be uniformly recognized throughout the species, regardless of culture? Yes, there are some that are not universal, and I'm not saying otherwise. But, there are clearly a good number of expressions that are acquired via heredity.
I don't know what your saying, but conscious manipulation of expression is a very important part of being a kindergarten / nursery teacher.

[Donkey]

I don't know what your saying, but conscious manipulation of expression is a very important part of being a kindergarten / nursery teacher.

Why is it?

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Why is it?
Because kindergarten / nursery teachers would lose their voices otherwise.

[Donkey]

Because kindergarten / nursery teachers would lose their voices otherwise.

Your opposition to a Burqa'd teacher is entirely based on your concern for her vocal chords?

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Your opposition to a Burqa'd teacher is entirely based on your concern for her vocal chords?
Yes ;)

[Donkey]

Yes ;)

Then that is patently ridiculous.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Then that is patently ridiculous.
Well, that's your opinion, and your entitled thereto.
;)

[pramjockey]

I don't know what your saying, but conscious manipulation of expression is a very important part of being a kindergarten / nursery teacher.

:shrug:

So demonstrate that the teacher is ineffective.

It wasn't that long ago that men were excluded from teaching. And married women. Or people with too much melanin. Instead of rushing to judgment, why not allow the person to demonstrate their ability? You might learn something.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

:shrug:

So demonstrate that the teacher is ineffective.

It wasn't that long ago that men were excluded from teaching. And married women. Or people with too much melanin. Instead of rushing to judgment, why not allow the person to demonstrate their ability? You might learn something.
So you'd be perfectly happy if children of yours had a nursery / kindergarten teacher who was wearing a burqa?

[pramjockey]

So you'd be perfectly happy if children of yours had a nursery / kindergarten teacher who was wearing a burqa?

Yes. The burqua itself would not be an issue. I judge people based on their behavior and performance. I wouldn't judge someone for wearing a burqua any more than I would for having traditional Russian Orthodox clothing, Orthodox Jewish clothing, or a sari for that matter.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Yes. The burqua itself would not be an issue. I judge people based on their behavior and performance. I wouldn't judge someone for wearing a burqua any more than I would for having traditional Russian Orthodox clothing, Orthodox Jewish clothing, or a sari for that matter.
Okay - thank you for answering the question.

[MeMyselfAndI]

:shrug:

So demonstrate that the teacher is ineffective.

It wasn't that long ago that men were excluded from teaching. And married women. Or people with too much melanin. Instead of rushing to judgment, why not allow the person to demonstrate their ability? You might learn something.

Agreed.

Also, (RE: highlighted text), that is true in Russia too, since the Soviet times, where almost all subjects, except Physical Education; Boys' Trades (Wood and Metalwork); and Basics of Military Prepapartion and Basics of Civil Defense [wildreness survival; behaviour in different emergency situations, including natural catastrophes, or a gas, viral, and even nuclear attack; etc], are taught by women.

However, in traditional Orthodox Christian societies, like those of Cossacks, and my people, Pomors/Old Believers, all teachers are, actually, male. This goes back to the ancient times, middle ages, when only literate people in Russia were Orthodox monks. In fact, it is thanks to those monks that we have a history, as they were only ones who could write in those times, and write they did in their dark little rooms, for hours, for days, for months, and years. They wrote everything that happened, wrote down their whole lives
http://www.nosh.unn.ru/images/ivanovskaja/DSC_0074.jpg
Nestor was the most famous monk-writer
http://staratel.com/pictures/ruspaint/big/36-1.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestor_the_Chronicler

Today, there are many thousands of manuscripts preserved, it is called Letopis, "Chronicles". So, yes, it was those men, monks, who originally taught themselves and then tutored noble and royal children, and, eventually, opened first public schools.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

DUring the Middle Ages the whole of Europe was the same - the only people who could write were monks, and they wrote everything that happened.

[Michael]

DUring the Middle Ages the whole of Europe was the same - the only people who could write were monks, and they wrote everything that happened.

Really? What about all those universities that were invented in the Middle Ages?

Or how about that printing press Gutenburg invented to print bibles in vernacular - in the 15th century?

Suffice it to say that you appear to be confused. Literacy was limted to monks and priests during the Dark Ages. Middle Ages was a time of growing social wealth, prosperity and literacy.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Well, the 15th century is only debatably in the Middle Ages - especially in Italy and Germany.

[Michael]

Well, the 15th century is only debatably in the Middle Ages - especially in Italy and Germany.

In European history, as a general rule:

400-700 AD is known as the "Dark Ages"

500 to 1000 AD is known as the "Early Middle Ages"

1000 to 1250 AD is known as the "High Middle Ages"

1250 to 1500 AD is known as the "Late Middle Ages".

Thus, the "Middle Ages" (aka medieval era) covers 500 to 1500 AD, according to most mainstream western academic historians.

Post 1500 AD is known as 'Renaissance Era' (or Early Modern Europe).

[NickKIELCEPoland]

MacMillan's encyclopedia from the late 1980s had 1350 as the beginning of the Renaissance.

I have trouble with this definition - I think Gutenberg's invention was the beginning of the Renaissance. Only after his invention had well and truly made literacy commonplace, did the church lose their monopoly over reading and writing.

To me the Middle Ages is defined by illiteracy outside the church, and all the gullibility that this brought with it.

[Greendruid]

MacMillan's encyclopedia from the late 1980s had 1350 as the beginning of the Renaissance.

I have trouble with this definition - I think Gutenberg's invention was the beginning of the Renaissance. Only after his invention had well and truly made literacy commonplace, did the church lose their monopoly over reading and writing.

To me the Middle Ages is defined by illiteracy outside the church, and all the gullibility that this brought with it.

I'm pretty sure the Renaissance begins with double-entry bookkeeping by the Medici family in Venice. This is an economic marker and places it squarely in the mid-14th century. Suffice it to say that not all places in Europe entered the Renaissance at the same time and that this economic marker was only the precursor to all kinds of changes in literature, the printed word, song, poetry, warfare, politics, etc.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

However, in traditional Orthodox Christian societies, like those of Cossacks, and my people, Pomors/Old Believers, all teachers are, actually, male. This goes back to the ancient times, middle ages, when only literate people in Russia were Orthodox monks. .

DUring the Middle Ages the whole of Europe was the same - the only people who could write were monks, and they wrote everything that happened.



So you see, I was merely saying that it was the same in the whole of Europe - monks were the only people who could read and write, and the read and wrote very very much.

[Michael]

I'm pretty sure the Renaissance begins with double-entry bookkeeping by the Medici family in Venice. This is an economic marker and places it squarely in the mid-14th century. Suffice it to say that not all places in Europe entered the Renaissance at the same time and that this economic marker was only the precursor to all kinds of changes in literature, the printed word, song, poetry, warfare, politics, etc.

Yes, the renaissance in Northern Italy certainly begins in the mid-1400's.

And double-entry bookkeeping is mid-1400's (Northern Italy). However, that's a marker for the rise of capitalism, not the renaissance.

Btw, all those changes in literature, printed word, song, poetry, warfare and politics that are attributed to the Renaissance all actually occured in the Medieval era, not the Renaissance! Check the date on Gutenburg's press (early 1400's)- or the infantry/cavalry switch (early 1300's) or the introduction of firearms which occured in the 15th century. Heck, even the British parliament rose to full standing in the 15th century.

But it all doesn't seem to matter to the 'epoches' of history though. They have arbitrarily chosen 1500 as the date marker - probably because of 1492 was such a significant world-changing date.

Actually, from what I've been reading, I'd expect the 'renaissance' itself is about to be wiped from history as pure bullshit. Almost everything that is generally attributed to the 'renaissance' can be found much earlier. The category just doesn't serve any purpose or make any distinctions.

Personally, I've never accepted the 'renaissance' as an 'era' of history since it is non-descriptive, non-exact and non-functional term. There is nothing about the 'renaissance' era that is a clear break from either the Medieval era or the Early Modern period. The distinctions between Medieval and Modern are huge.

P.S. why the heck we are discussing this in some "kindergarten" thread is entirely beyond me. :shrug:

[NickKIELCEPoland]

I'm pretty sure the Renaissance begins with double-entry bookkeeping by the Medici family in Venice. This is an economic marker and places it squarely in the mid-14th century. .

Yes, the renaissance in Northern Italy certainly begins in the mid-1400's.


Spot the difference. Greendruid, like Macmillan's Encyclopedia (1987) views the mid 1350s as the starting point.

As I said, I find this irreconcileable with the fact that Gutenberg hadn't even been born.

Victor Hugo pointed out that Rebirth actually came about in music, architecture, painting, drama etc. because of a lack or original ideas in those fields, since printing was taking up so much of people's creativity.

[Michael]

Victor Hugo pointed out that Rebirth actually came about in music, architecture, painting, drama etc. because of a lack or original ideas in those fields, since printing was taking up so much of people's creativity.

Yes, medieval architecture lacked original ideas. Like the cathedral with the arched vault, vaulted groin, flying buttresses and load-bearing columns - a thousand years more advanced than anything Rome ever built.

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Yes, medieval architecture lacked original ideas. Like the cathedral with the arched vault, vaulted groin, flying buttresses and load-bearing columns - a thousand years more advanced than anything Rome ever built.

Michael, you've misunderstood, the lack of original ideas was thought (by Hugo) to be AFTER the middle ages. That's why they needed to revive antique styles.

And Hugo attributes this RENAISSANCE lack of ideas, to the invention of the printing press.

[Michael]

Michael, you've misunderstood, the lack of original ideas was thought (by Hugo) to be AFTER the middle ages. That's why they needed to revive antique styles.

And Hugo attributes this RENAISSANCE lack of ideas, to the invention of the printing press.

Victor Hugo ought to stick to writing novels. That statement is so wrong that I just can't be bothered to shoot it down point by point.

Suffice it to say that the renaissance ushered in the greatest amount of architectural changes in the shortest period of time ever - based on massive sociological changes that came from the late medieval/early modern era.

Btw, from what I've read, virtually NOTHING but bibles (mostly vernacular) were printed during the first 100 years after the invention of the printing press. How this 'smothered' European ideas is beyond me. :rolleyes:

[NickKIELCEPoland]

Victor Hugo ought to stick to writing novels.
Well he speaks very highly of you ;)