I know that the concept of a untied "German people" didn't really exist prior to the 19th century, but it still seems like before that, people recognized *some* sort of commonality amongst those Germanic-speakers located between France, Italy and Poland.
Was there really absolutely no concept of "Germans" prior to 1800s?
>inb4 ass-blasted slavs and ebin refugee yamyams
>>935209
The idea that nationalism didn't exist until the 1800s is a cuck meme.
Nations are way older than nation-states
>>935209
The cultural-linguistic group existed yes. Both Germans and Non-Germo Euronigs did know there was such a group.
The idea that they were a state/should be a state: not so much. Due to the amount of powerful nobles in Germany who were big on their rights and could only agree with centralized rule via rare consensus on the guy in Charge.
>i hate krauts who disagree with me but i hate other countries more
Here, you have your answer.
How could they fuck up so bad? Who the fuck paints freakin Parian marble? That's like putting an Anonymous mask on God's face.
I thought Ancient Rome and Greece were pinnacles of civilization?
Jupiter, get a grip...
Oh. My. Gods.
>>934987
Your modern sensibilities have blinded to you to the differences between us and them.
>>934987
color and pigment were commodities
Rome and Greece were so rich that they painted useless shit like statues as a way of saying "Hey fuckers, look how fancy we are"
>Now it says here that you've done extensive research on... on the "Holy Roman Empire"? Care to explain?
holy roman dubs
>it was neither holy, roman, nor an empire
>>933965
Yea, it was Holy, unlike you, you fedora tipping French faggot
What are your favorite ballets? Ballets you haven't seen but want to? Do you think that DVD/home video releases of ballet are ever comparable to seeing it live?
>>933598
How was the ABT sleeping beauty?
>>933662
It was fucking miraculous. It set the bar so high I'm not sure I can see a standard Sleeping Beauty live again, because it was so refreshing and so well done, and so much more engrossing than other productions I've seen. The original Pepita steps give every role so much more vitality and character than they normally have nowadays. I've been watching other clips of Violente and none of them come even close to capturing the feisty, fun and genuinely temperamental (which is the point of her gift, after all) version from ABT. Same with the other fairies and even the more mimed characters. It was like breathing new (but old, I guess, considering the context) life into these people. They weren't just Presentations, they were Characters. I was interested in Catalabutte, for goodness sake--Catalabutte!
The mime was much more engaging as well. The standard mime for Sleeping Beauty has gotten bare-bones, but this version (which I don't know if it's taken from Pepita's notes or is Ratmansky's variation on it) was a lot clearer and more expressive than it normally is, and there was more of it. I loved seeing Sleeping Beauty acknowledge while dancing with the prince that she loves him, and the way she beckons during the vision sequence wasn't just generic longing but genuinely expressed: "come to me!" And thank goodness Ratmansky introduced the original ending of Carabosse--she's forgiven and invited to the wedding, and she attends with the Lilac Fairy. In modern productions nowadays she tends to be brutally murdered, which is against the spirit of the show.
oop 1/2
>>933758
Oh, and the way the mime was incorporated was a revelation.The mime was part of the dance itself, a fluid movement. There was something the director said during the talk before the show, "Imagine that you live in a world where you don't communicate with words, but with dance and gestures." And the show perfectly captured that completely.
The only thing I wasn't 100% sold on was Hee Seo's Act I version of Aurora, who was much more like Act I Giselle than Aurora. She didn't have the regal air that normally accompanies Aurora. Yes she's bright and innocent and fun-loving but she was missing the little touches that should have been there, like acknowledging her suitors with a nod of her head, that sort of thing. Her Adagio was perfectly executed... truthfully I think that sequence is overrated and always looks too tension-filled no matter the dancer, I would rather have something fluid there, but I get why it's impressive. She was much more interesting in Act II and III, with the romantic scenes and the post-awakening where you could practically see 100 years of dreaming about this day fall from her shoulders.
And I'm almost sorry to say it, but woah is Misty Copeland overhyped. She was fine, not any better or worse than the other dancers for the fairy tale roles in the wedding, but she was getting wild cheers for name recognition alone. It makes me feel bad for the other dancers who had way more complex work to do but didn't receive screaming cheers every time they showed up on stage. I'm glad that they revamped Princess Florine, though, and made her a Princess once again.
If you haven't seen it, and you have the opportunity to see it, go see it. I'm reminded of something that was written to Pepita after the premiere of the original show: "Your ballet has become a kind of obsession... people have ceased saying to each other 'How are you?' Instead, they ask, 'Have you seen The Sleeping Beauty?'"
Is Orson Welles the Shakespeare of film?
Because he was in Macbeth. Hehe.
>>933468
I dont understand this pic
>>933545
you don't want to
> "How dare you mock the honors rendered to Voltaire in the temple of which he is the god, and by the priests who for fifty years have been living off his masterpieces?" - Jean Jacques Rousseau
What does he mean by this ?
>holy
Well I'm not totally sure but if I had to warrant a guess I'd say he meant how dare people mock the honors rendered to Voltaire in the temple of which he is the god, and by the priests who for fifty years have been living off his masterpieces
>>933060
It means you can't outmeme the master memester.
has this country ever done anything in the entirety of it's fucking history? All it's done is get it's shit kicked in the Vietnamese, Thais, used as a road by Vietcong, and does nothing today.
>>931781
Kahn and Minh from King of the Hill are from there
It was always part of Dai Viet Empire until the collapsed of Nguyen Dynasty
>>931781
They and Cambodia produce some of the most ratchet, ho-ass Asian Americans I've ever met.
Daily university thread
Where are you going to Uni?
It's ok
>>921711
elaborate
University of Lisbon, doing a course that enables me to take classes in several schools within the uni (I know it's common in the States but it's a one of its kind thing here). It's centred in the Humanities school (Faculdade de Letras) and I plan on taking there about two thirds of my classes, the rest being in the Law school (FDUL), the Economics school (ISEG) and the political science school (ISCSP), by order of relevance.
Why do atheists think it's "science vs religion" when it has always been religion vs religion?
Evolutionism is a religion. Its god is plastic monkeys and their prophet is Darwin. They believe in club-wielding Flintstone myths. They reject Biblical creation and embrace Satan's alternative.
Science is unbiased.
Science is observable facts.
Evolutionism relies on assumptions, circular reasoning and presuppositions. It's also founded on admitted hoaxes and frauds.
The world makes much more sense if you look at it through the Biblical sense.
Darwinism is a depressing nihilist cult that is responsible for decadence and degeneracy of western civilization.
Children are getting brainwashed into believing that they are just animals, a cosmic accident. So they grow up to be an edgy militant atheist shitposting on an imageboard about how the Bible is false and God doesn't exist.
Atheism leads to eternal destruction.
Christianity leads to eternal life.
>Christian "Dark Age" is a myth
http://www.strangenotions.com/gods-philosophers/
>Theology & Eschatology
http://www.ichthys.com/
>Evolution Debunked
http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32.html
>Evolution is the "Great Delusion" of the end times
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMr278CMAIA
>Kent Hovind debunks Evolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shyI-aQaXD0
>Hovind destroys an atheist critic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wAxPG4WpN8
>Evolution is a modern fairy tale
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gjvuwne0RrE
>The Greatest Lie Ever Told
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1ufK04tjOI
>Overwhelming Evidence for a world-wide Flood
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lktmmd7YnD8
Since 1963:
>Divorce Rates
>Breakup of family units
>Acceptance of homosexuality
>Teen-age Pregnancies
>Murder of inconvenient babies
>Crime Rates
Have all escalated and increased.
What happened that year? The Bible got outlawed from schools.
"The fool has said in his heart, there is no God." Psalm 14:1
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" Romans 1:22
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie" 2 Thessalonians 2:11
"Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator" Romans 1:25
Atheists worship the creation over the creator.
"The heavens declare the glory of God" Psalm 19:1
"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" Galatians. 4:16
Has anyone here ever looked at the threads with creationism vs Darwinism and actually changed their view on the subject?
Or is it a waste of time for everyone included?
Don't...You'll summon him...
>>940154
Arguments on 4chan are useless time sinks in general. Not to mention that the autists who tend to argue are hardwired not to change their minds.
>>940154
Has anyone ever changed their views due to internet discussions? People usually don't start these because they want to have their worldview properly challenged.
Nietzsche was _______.
A very important man.
well-mustachioed
>>940581
Literally me.
>>940387
JUST FUCK MY SHIT UP SENPAI
>Daemonic
The year is 1345. You live in Europe. You have 1 year until the Plague hits and kills nearly everybody. What do you do to maximize your odds of survival?
Move to Cracow, apparently.
>>942443
Get a cat
this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decameron
What makes a person good?
Why?
I have come to think that one of the elements of being a good person is doing good things, as in helpin others, not doing wrong things such as breaking the law or hurting others in legal ways, etc. This conclusion comes from the premises of:
1) good things are good
2) people enjoy good things
3) the more people enjoy good things, more good there will be
What other elements can be logically traced into the goodness of a person?
More importantly...
If a person is by default, bad. And that person hates herself for that, therefore deciding to deliberately become a better person in their own selfish interest to feel better about themselves, and does indeed become a better person, wouldn't that make the person even worse? After all, what this person does is good - but its selfish, escapist intentions are bad.
Would that be a bad good? Or should I say, a good bad?
Don't mind the hottie, I just need attention in this thread.
>>941615
Goodness is a spook
>>941615
Who was phone?
>>941615
There is objective good and objective evil. There are also grey areas.
Was Britain really irrelevant in wwii?
>>940721
No.
Who do you think managed the sea blockade?
>>940721
other than being a stagging point for operation overlord, yes
