[BaalChatzaf]

Ayn Rand admired the vikings. What she saw was the heroic and the adventurous. She even made a Viking (Ragnar Danesgold) one of the heroes in -Atlas Shrugged-.

However the real Vikings were something else entirely. They were plunderers, marauders, thieves, rapists and murderers. They were the scourge of human settlements in the eastern part of England and Scotland and they plundered and raped their way all the way down to Odessa. They even founded Russia. The Rus were one of the Viking peoples, after whom Russia is named. Danesgold (after whom Ragnar is named) is protection money gathered by the various tribes to pay the Vikings not to loot, kill and rape as much as they were normally inclined to do. It was protection money.

Was Rand unaware of the true nature of the Vikings? Or did she not care? Romanticism is a way of hiding the ugly real honest to goodness details of the real honest to goodness world. This is one of the reasons I despise Romanticism. It is a kind of self inflicted blindness to fact.

God, the Devil and Man all live in the details.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Brant Gaede]

Jesus, Bob. Talk about nit-picking. Your evidence is trivial in support of your thesis. And the Vikings assimilated and settled down, except in Iceland where their banks just recently screwed over foreign depositors.

--Brant

BaalChatzaf, on Dec 19 2008, 08:54 AM, said:

Ayn Rand admired the vikings. What she saw was the heroic and the adventurous. She even made a Viking (Ragnar Danesgold) one of the heroes in -Atlas Shrugged-.

However the real Vikings were something else entirely. They were plunderers, marauders, thieves, rapists and murderers. They were the scourge of human settlements in the eastern part of England and Scotland and they plundered and raped their way all the way down to Odessa. They even founded Russia. The Rus were one of the Viking peoples, after whom Russia is named. Danesgold (after whom Ragnar is named) is protection money gathered by the various tribes to pay the Vikings not to loot, kill and rape as much as they were normally inclined to do. It was protection money.

Was Rand unaware of the true nature of the Vikings? Or did she not care? Romanticism is a way of hiding the ugly real honest to goodness details of the real honest to goodness world. This is one of the reasons I despise Romanticism. It is a kind of self inflicted blindness to fact.

God, the Devil and Man all live in the details.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[ginny]

For pete sakes, this was the middle ages. Most of Europe was filled with savages. Except, actually, Italy, which specialized in art and the French, who specialized in being french. Otherwise, there was very little if any civilization all around.

The Vickings, however, couldn't have been all bad. They were the first the reach North America (Canada) long before anyone else even though of such a trip. They did this because of the money they could make off the abundant salmon fishing off of Nova Scota.

Stop looking for faults. There are enough real ones out there. Find something better to do.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Hi Ginny.



It's great to see a sudden voice for the upside.

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

ginny, on Dec 19 2008, 03:24 PM, said:

For pete sakes, this was the middle ages. Most of Europe was filled with savages. Except, actually, Italy, which specialized in art and the French, who specialized in being french. Otherwise, there was very little if any civilization all around.

The Vickings, however, couldn't have been all bad. They were the first the reach North America (Canada) long before anyone else even though of such a trip. They did this because of the money they could make off the abundant salmon fishing off of Nova Scota.

Stop looking for faults. There are enough real ones out there. Find something better to do.

Forgive me for confusing the issue with facts. Damned pesky facts.

And self-inflicted blindness is a fault. Under certain conditions it could be fatal.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[ginny]

Did you just call my crankiness my "upside?" Hmmmmmm. You're probably right, at that.

[Brant Gaede]

BaalChatzaf, on Dec 19 2008, 08:54 AM, said:

Ayn Rand admired the vikings. What she saw was the heroic and the adventurous. She even made a Viking (Ragnar Danesgold) one of the heroes in -Atlas Shrugged-.

However the real Vikings were something else entirely. They were plunderers, marauders, thieves, rapists and murderers. They were the scourge of human settlements in the eastern part of England and Scotland and they plundered and raped their way all the way down to Odessa. They even founded Russia. The Rus were one of the Viking peoples, after whom Russia is named. Danesgold (after whom Ragnar is named) is protection money gathered by the various tribes to pay the Vikings not to loot, kill and rape as much as they were normally inclined to do. It was protection money.

Was Rand unaware of the true nature of the Vikings? Or did she not care? Romanticism is a way of hiding the ugly real honest to goodness details of the real honest to goodness world. This is one of the reasons I despise Romanticism. It is a kind of self inflicted blindness to fact.

God, the Devil and Man all live in the details.

Well, Rand called her fiction "romantic realism," so maybe she wasn't so bad after all?

Logically you should despise all fiction, no? I mean isn't it contra-factual?

--Brant

This post has been edited by Brant Gaede: 19 December 2008 - 05:25 PM

[Judith]

BaalChatzaf, on Dec 19 2008, 10:54 AM, said:

Ayn Rand admired the vikings. What she saw was the heroic and the adventurous. She even made a Viking (Ragnar Danesgold) one of the heroes in -Atlas Shrugged-.

However the real Vikings were something else entirely.

If recollection serves me correctly, Rand put Dannesjold in "Atlas" out of tribute to a romantic children's story that inspired her in childhood about a brave Viking. I don't remember her ever saying anything about admiring real Vikings. Ragnar's father was a bishop in Scandinavia and his family had disowned him, if recollection serves me correctly.

Judith

[BaalChatzaf]

Brant Gaede, on Dec 19 2008, 06:19 PM, said:

Logically you should despise all fiction, no? I mean isn't it contra-factual?

--Brant

There is fiction that portrays the real world accurately and there is fiction that does not. Fiction can depict the real world quite faithfully. However, the idea of presenting rapists, plunderers and murderers as heroic figures bothers me.

Fortunately for the world, the Vikings settled down and became quite peaceful productive folks. It is amazing to think that the Danes who make the world's best butter and furniture used to be the scourge of the east coast of Britain.

The idea of naming a hero Danesgold is weird. Can you see a hero named Tommy Taxloot? Or Roger Robber.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Chris Grieb]

Judith is right.

I can see someone creating a character who is a criminal and still hating crime and criminals. Miss Rand had some characters who were seen by some as criminals. Ragnar is a great example. She was very opposed to real crime and criminals.

I have no doubt that she would had despised the real Vikings

[Brant Gaede]

BaalChatzaf, on Dec 19 2008, 05:03 PM, said:

There is fiction that portrays the real world accurately and there is fiction that does not. Fiction can depict the real world quite faithfully. However, the idea of presenting rapists, plunderers and murderers as heroic figures bothers me.

Okay. Just where did Rand do this? Ragnar sank relief ships. He stole from the plunderers. Whom did he rape? Is there someone else Viking you are talking about? His was an unrealistic, romantic depiction of a pirate, I supose. For instance, he seems never to have hurt anybody. Similarly, Roark was unrealistically depicted blowing up a housing project. Hard to do without hurting somebody--except he almost killed Dominique.

--Brant

[BaalChatzaf]

Brant Gaede, on Dec 19 2008, 07:45 PM, said:

Okay. Just where did Rand do this? Ragnar sank relief ships. He stole from the plunderers. Whom did he rape? Is there someone else Viking you are talking about? His was an unrealistic, romantic depiction of a pirate, I supose. For instance, he seems never to have hurt anybody. Similarly, Roark was unrealistically depicted blowing up a housing project. Hard to do without hurting somebody--except he almost killed Dominique.

--Brant

In -Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical- see page 99.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Brant Gaede]

BaalChatzaf, on Dec 19 2008, 06:54 PM, said:

Brant Gaede, on Dec 19 2008, 07:45 PM, said:

Okay. Just where did Rand do this? Ragnar sank relief ships. He stole from the plunderers. Whom did he rape? Is there someone else Viking you are talking about? His was an unrealistic, romantic depiction of a pirate, I supose. For instance, he seems never to have hurt anybody. Similarly, Roark was unrealistically depicted blowing up a housing project. Hard to do without hurting somebody--except he almost killed Dominique.

--Brant

In -Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical- see page 99.

Rand was using "Viking" symbolically with no reference to rape and pillage. I looked up Sciabarra's reference in The Early Ayn Rand, "Kira's Viking" (Peikoff's title) and Rand's Viking isn't your Viking. Frankly, this is becoming tendentious. You have a queer, literal way of looking at things but give no slack to the way others look at things. "Things" being your sacred facts. I sometimes think you use evaluation as a stolen concept, as if facts don't need it, but you evaluate all over the map while saying facts this and facts that as if "facts" was an argument unto itself.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Brant,

This is solely my opinion, but I think Bob is a flaming romantic who got the crap scared out of him by the enormity of the Nazi monstrosity. Rather than once again subject the beauty inside himself to a world where Nazism is possible, he now tries to deny its very existence. The rub is that people keep reminding him of that beauty, so he has to try to deny it for them, too. But it's a flame that simply will not die and it torments him sometimes.

I know I am psychologizing all over the place, but that's how I see Bob.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Michael Stuart Kelly, on Dec 19 2008, 08:55 PM, said:

Brant,

This is solely my opinion, but I think Bob is a flaming romantic who got the crap scared out of him by the enormity of the Nazi monstrosity. Rather than once again subject the beauty inside himself to a world where Nazism is possible, he now tries to deny its very existence. The rub is that people keep reminding him of that beauty, so he has to try to deny it for them, too. But it's a flame that simply will not die and it torments him sometimes.

I know I am psychologizing all over the place, but that's how I see Bob.

Michael

I agree with your last sentence.

--Brant

[Ted Keer]

I won't pretend to understand Bob's denial here, but I will say that one does have to be a Romantic to appreciate Tolkien the way he does.

[Brant Gaede]

Ted Keer, on Dec 19 2008, 10:19 PM, said:

I won't pretend to understand Bob's denial here, but I will say that one does have to be a Romantic to appreciate Tolkien the way he does.

Maybe that's why he's really here?? Maybe that's why I really like him. I never believed all that grind your enemies into the dust shit. Been there, done that; it's crap. What you do is leave them to whither on the vine--or lack of a vine--if they're not worth loving attention if not love.

--Brant

[Ted Keer]

Oh, and as for the Vikings themselves, there are some obvious things to note. The Viking virtues are bravery and boldness and personal glory, not sacrifice and the needs of the race. The Viking is supposed to embody a positive physical type. Also, Russia was founded by Vikings who entered through the St Petersburg area and adventured for trade through out the rivers of Russia. "Rus" comes from the Fennic Ruotsi, "Westerner" - specifically the norse, now refers to Sweden. Much more inspiring founders than the friggin pilgrims if you ask me. See Varangian, especially the second article.

[Chris Grieb]

Vikings in literature and the movies are neat. They weren't much in real life. Many people in the past were not. For one thing they didn't bath as much as we in the 21st century do.

I love Kira's Viking. I think Ayn Rand knew the difference between the real ones and those she created.

[BaalChatzaf]

Chris Grieb, on Dec 20 2008, 06:30 AM, said:

Vikings in literature and the movies are neat. They weren't much in real life. Many people in the past were not. For one thing they didn't bath as much as we in the 21st century do.

I love Kira's Viking. I think Ayn Rand knew the difference between the real ones and those she created.

Thank you. You make my very point.

Kira's Viking lived in Rand's head. Real Vikings raped, plundered, murdered and wrecked. And, as you point out, they often stank. Strangely enough the descendants of Real Vikings, gave up the old gods and became Christians. After which they settled down and became rather productive folk. Think of the Danes. No one makes better furniture or pastries than the Danes. These are the g....g. grandchildren of people with names like Arne Bloodaxe and Ragnar Danesgold.

As bloody as the Real Vikings were, they were the best northern hemisphere navigators that ever sailed on blue water. They were better than Columbus. They were to the northern hemisphere what the Tahitians were to the southern hemisphere and all without a magnetic compass, too. P.S. The Vikings got to North America hundreds of years before Columbus and they never believed they were in the Orient.

To get some feel for what these braves were like, see the motion picture -The 13th Warrior-. And forget the motion picture -The Vikings- starring Leif Demsky and Arne Schwartz (Kirk Douglas and Tony Curtis). Jewish Vikings! Totally oxymoronic.

Ba'al Chatzaf (aka Pincus Bloodaxe)