Any 'real Beaujolais' being made?

[MLipton]

originally posted by Arjun Mendiratta:

originally posted by Rahsaan:
Perhaps. But 'liberty' is such a vague term that can be defined so many ways, it seems at home both on the left and the right.

Well yes. As I mentioned, any politician will seek the mantle of the founding fathers.

Would you disagree that myth-building is an inherently conservative exercise? One that distorts history in order to glorify the past?

I'd argue that mythmaking is central to nationalism, and that all nations engage, to varying degrees in cultural mythology. Our own starts with the Declaration of Independence: "the proposition that all men are created equal" in a land where slavery was largely accepted?

Claude: Europeans are less prone to mythologizing? Ever read Spengler??? Did you miss all those interviews with Bosnian Serbs during the war? For that matter, that was Kundera's major point about Communism in his classic "Book of Laughter and Forgetting."

Arjun: I think that it's nave to view mythmaking as any more native to Conservatives than Liberals or Progressives. Look at the myth of JFK and ask who created that.

Prof L: Don't you think that present-day Christian Fundamentalism would be as alien to the Protestant Nonconformists of 18th Century America as Scientology? (well, maybe that's a bit hyperbolic) Those early Protestant "Fundamentalists" were largely Presbyterian and other Congregationalists, along with the splinter groups such as the Quakers, Shakers and Amish. Today's Fundamentalism I see as an outgrowth of Pentacostalism, which really didn't exist in the US until the late 19th Century.

Mark Lipton

 

[VLM]

originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:

originally posted by VLM:
I hate paying taxes.

Who was the Supreme Court justice who said, something like, I like paying taxes, its the cost of civilization. Not that civilization is necessarily a priority for you, of course. What do you teach, by the way?

I pay taxes because I would go to jail otherwise.

I don't teach, I do research.

 

[VLM]

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
The question comes up less frequently when I teach German philosophers since it's virtually a given that the whole line from Kant to Heidegger are atheists, or, at best, weird forms of theists.

I had never thought about whether Kant was an atheist or not.

Heidegger is just weird and mostly impenetrable.

 

[Rahsaan]

originally posted by MLipton:
Rahsaan: Europeans are less prone to mythologizing?

I never said that.

I was arguing against that notion.

 

[Ian Fitzsimmons]

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:

originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
... My students are genuinely shocked when I tell them that among Victorian and 19th century French and German intellectuals, the general belief was that Christianity was untenable and would certainly be a dead religion by the middle of the 20th century (so much for the predictive power of intellectuals)...

What do you teach, Jeff?

I don't teach Jeff anything. No one named Jeff has every listened to a word I say. I occasionally teach courses in Victorian Literature, in 19th century French fiction, and in various flavors of 19th century intellectual history. This issue comes up most frequently in the Victorian course where, after the students have read Darwin, Eliot, Arnold and Hardy, they wonder if I'm stacking the deck. The question comes up less frequently when I teach German philosophers since it's virtually a given that the whole line from Kant to Heidegger are atheists, or, at best, weird forms of theists.

Oops. Sorry. Thanks.

 

[Ian Fitzsimmons]

originally posted by VLM:

originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:

originally posted by VLM:
I hate paying taxes.

Who was the Supreme Court justice who said, something like, I like paying taxes, its the cost of civilization. Not that civilization is necessarily a priority for you, of course. What do you teach, by the way?

I pay taxes because I would go to jail otherwise.

I don't teach, I do research.

What do you research? Regeneration of brain cells in apes?

 

[MLipton]

originally posted by SteveTimko:
Any 'real Beaujolais' being made?Kermit Lynch, in "Adventures on the Wine Route," suggests readers try what he calls "real Beaujolais," which is Beaujolais that has single-digit alcohol percentage and maybe some fizz.
Anyone make/sell that today?

Steve,
That comment was made by Chauvet, whose disciple was Marcel Lapierre. Lapierre in turn mentored the other "Gang of Five" in Villi-Morgon (Foillard, Thevenet, Breton and Chamonard). As Joe Dressner says, global warming and better vineyard practices are behind the higher alcohol levels, but these guys as well as the other Usual Suspects (Brun, Tete, Desvignes, Coudert, Descombes, Vissoux, Thivin, Diochon) are making wines that I suspect Chauvet would understand and approve of. It's all about Real Wine.

As an aside, I am perplexed that this modern Renaissance in the Beaujolais seemed to reach most of the top Crus before it arrived in Moulin--Vent, which I always heard was the most "serious" of the Crus. Now, I guess that Brun and Vissoux are giving Diochon a run for his money there.

Further aside: has anyone tried recent wines of Christophe Pacalet/Dom. de Marcellin? I had his '99 Cote de Brouilly when he was still working in Lapierre's cellar, but nothing of his more recent efforts.

Mark Lipton

 

[MLipton]

originally posted by Rahsaan:

originally posted by MLipton:
Rahsaan: Europeans are less prone to mythologizing?

I never said that.

I was arguing against that notion.

Oops! So you were; it was Claude's comment that I was thinking of. Sorry about that (I should've realized that a Political Scientist wouldn't say that). I'll fix my post.

Mark Lipton

 

[Claude Kolm]

Of course there is myth-making everywhere. But that's not the issue. The issue is the kind, extent, and significance.

 

[Jonathan Loesberg]

originally posted by MLipton:

originally posted by Arjun Mendiratta:

originally posted by Rahsaan:

Prof L: Don't you think that present-day Christian Fundamentalism would be as alien to the Protestant Nonconformists of 18th Century America as Scientology? (well, maybe that's a bit hyperbolic) Those early Protestant "Fundamentalists" were largely Presbyterian and other Congregationalists, along with the splinter groups such as the Quakers, Shakers and Amish. Today's Fundamentalism I see as an outgrowth of Pentacostalism, which really didn't exist in the US until the late 19th Century.

Mark Lipton

The roots of our fundamentalism go back at least to the first half of the nineteenth century. Farther if one considers those roots not merely with Nonconformism but with the belief of American Nonconformists to have gotten back to a purer, more basic religion. The anti-intellectualism of American fundamentalism probably doesn't develop until the second half of the 19th century, though there were No-Nothings in the 1850s (but I think they were tied to Northeast Catholics). I should say that I'm a rank amateur with regard to US intellectual history.

 

[Kay Bixler]

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
I don't teach Jeff anything. No one named Jeff has every listened to a word I say. I occasionally teach courses in Victorian Literature, in 19th century French fiction, and in various flavors of 19th century intellectual history. This issue comes up most frequently in the Victorian course where, after the students have read Darwin, Eliot, Arnold and Hardy, they wonder if I'm stacking the deck. The question comes up less frequently when I teach German philosophers since it's virtually a given that the whole line from Kant to Heidegger are atheists, or, at best, weird forms of theists.

Jonathan, how about offering an Internet correspondence version of your Victorian Literature course for Nathan and I? You could host it right here in a thread on Wine Disorder. I mean lets face it, wine discussion is getting us nowhere. We need to branch out and this seems like the perfect opportunity.

Best,
Kay

 

[Jonathan Loesberg]

originally posted by Kay Bixler:

originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg:
I don't teach Jeff anything. No one named Jeff has every listened to a word I say. I occasionally teach courses in Victorian Literature, in 19th century French fiction, and in various flavors of 19th century intellectual history. This issue comes up most frequently in the Victorian course where, after the students have read Darwin, Eliot, Arnold and Hardy, they wonder if I'm stacking the deck. The question comes up less frequently when I teach German philosophers since it's virtually a given that the whole line from Kant to Heidegger are atheists, or, at best, weird forms of theists.

Jonathan, how about offering an Internet correspondence version of your Victorian Literature course for Nathan and I? You could host it right here in a thread on Wine Disorder. I mean lets face it, wine discussion is getting us nowhere. We need to branch out and this seems like the perfect opportunity.

Best,
Kay

Well, I'm leading an independent study in Victorian fiction this semester. If you want to join in, just read Vanity Fair by next Tuesday and start a thread on it. Like a good professor, I will occasionally offer a leading question or a guiding remark, but otherwise, you guys will do all the work.

 

[Jay Miller]

Wow, I haven't read Vanity Fair in over a decade. Might be fun.

 

[Kay Bixler]

Tuesday the 20th?

Hey, you can get the book for free via e-mail in just 355 easy to read installments.

Loading…

dailylit.com

Everyone who wants to enroll in the class please meet here, in the Beaujolais thread, tomorrow afternoon at 3:30. We will take attendance and distribute course guidelines.

 

[Rahsaan]

originally posted by Jay Miller:
Wow, I haven't read Vanity Fair in over a decade. Might be fun.

You read Vanity Fair every decade?

A devoted Thackeray fan I see.

 

[Chris Coad]

Lisa has a subscription to Vanity Fair, I'll see if I can borrow this month's issue. I think it has Tina Fey on the cover.

 

[Kay Bixler]

This is going to be great!

 

[Ian Fitzsimmons]

originally posted by Chris Coad:
Lisa has a subscription to Vanity Fair, I'll see if I can borrow this month's issue. I think it has Tina Fey on the cover.

That's too bad. I like Tina, and VF does unspeakably grotesque things to women on its cover.

 

[Chris Coad]

It's not so bad. It's an Annie Liebovitz photo, Tina's dressed like the Star-Spangled girl. Kind of cute, really.

Have we started? Is this the seminar? Cause I haven't even read any of the articles yet.

 

[Jonathan Loesberg]

This class hasn't even started yet and I'm ready to flunk all of your for bad attitude. By the way, if you aren't reading in an edition with Thackeray's illustrations, you need another one.