It's interesting - I had a history professor tell me that the discussion of history often tells you more about the time when it is being discussed than the time it is discussing. So 2016 was when this was posted and presumably recorded, which is the same time as 2020, and probably 2024; in other words, it tells us about our time now. So: immigration, sexual morality and women's role in society. They are all labeled as fears. The language used such as "repression" is an insight, as is how "snooty" is used, etc. It's interesting that the focus is on the critics of the Victorian era, too, as opposed to what might have perhaps been the dominate way of doing things or the dominate beliefs and values then. The way these topics are discussed tells us how the modern person (or a certain percentage of the modern person, those in positions of power/authority/academia) think. They think our society now, or many people in it, fear immigrant communities and they think we should have a virtually unregulated free flow of people across borders, that sexual morality is archaic and that we live today in a patriarchy. Also, the idea that women wanted the right to vote, demanded it and that's how it happened, is what we believe today, and it fits today's narrative of needing to still fight and smash the patriarchy. And perhaps women wanting and fighting for the vote is largely true; however, there is no mention that most women did not want the right to vote at that time (which is my understanding), and by simply saying "women" it seemed to imply all or at least a vast majority. No mention, at least not yet in this lecture, how working men were only granted the right to vote in the late Victorian era. Anyway, it is really interesting when you consider what my history professor said of how discussing history often tells us more about the time when it is discussed. :D
You got it. This is the typical result of badly-educated academics who know little about the nuances of actual historical-political-economic forces and a lot about woke dogma. It reflects a lack of ability to imagine and appreciate the ways in which the conditions of the past were DIFFERENT, as was their thinking, and the most dangerous possible thing to do is project our limited world-view onto theirs and judge them without first doing out best to understand them from their perspective (not to mention immersing oneself in long-term scholarly study of the nuances of their culture). The past is the culture we all share and least appreciate. It's not dead, and it's not simply "wrong," politically-incorrect, or primitive; it is still with us and part of us and we need to learn from it before we repeat its errors.
In all these videos I find about the Victorian era, things are presented in a bad light. As if morality, social stability, identity were a bad thing. Gimme a break. Victorian times weren't all pink, but the Empire expanded as never before, industrialization took the country into a modern era, the strict laws against crime helped civilise the darker sides of the society. Also, by the end of the period laws were given to better the life of the poor as well: strict rules about employment - working hours, improving working conditions, etc. All these were in the Victorian era.
@@animanoir I'd say the easiest way to start is read the Wikipedia page on Victorianism. It gives you the essence. It also has a nice reference list. Then you can just type Victorian times in Google books and see what you find. This is exactly what I did for my degree paper. Literature is also a good source. But you must keep in mind that authors like Dickens were striving to reform society, by presenting the conditions of the poor in a gloomy but endearing manner, so that people in authority (who really loved his books) may realise the necessity to do something to help the unfortunate. By the end of the era huge reforms were made to improve the life of the poor thanks to the impact of Dickens' books.
Thank you so much for your video, well dome and good expressed, actualy I preferito listening instradare of following all day from a boring book! It si much poweful to mixing both
The Lifestyle of the Victorian Policeman was particularly harsh and the pay was poor, about the same as a Farm Labourer, well through it was better in some City Forces.
This is a grossly revisionist treatment of "Victorian fears" based on contemporary politically-correct overemphasis on race and gender (especially race). The REAL Victorian fears were about class and religion. Victorian politics and society were constantly in fear of a French revolution, of the massive economic dislocations of industrialism and their effects on politics (the switch of power from landowning nobility to industrial capitalists), and swirled around the Reform Acts which extended the vote and attempts to negotiate with the Chartists threatening revolt for working-class rights. The other fear was of falling morality because science was relentlessly undermining the "opiate of the people," religion. The repressive moralities of the era were due to the attempts of the rising middle class to have enough political and familial stability to consolidate their economic gains. That's why the Victorian society was so rigid--the workplace was a dynamic "survival of the fittest" jungle, not the agrarian and predictable life of past centuries, and there was extreme pressure on the family unit to police morality and education. Technological, democratic, and scientific changes were the driving forces.
Worth it!
pro tip : watch movies on KaldroStream. I've been using them for watching lots of of movies recently.
@Grayson Hamza definitely, been using Flixzone} for months myself =)
It's interesting - I had a history professor tell me that the discussion of history often tells you more about the time when it is being discussed than the time it is discussing. So 2016 was when this was posted and presumably recorded, which is the same time as 2020, and probably 2024; in other words, it tells us about our time now. So: immigration, sexual morality and women's role in society. They are all labeled as fears. The language used such as "repression" is an insight, as is how "snooty" is used, etc. It's interesting that the focus is on the critics of the Victorian era, too, as opposed to what might have perhaps been the dominate way of doing things or the dominate beliefs and values then. The way these topics are discussed tells us how the modern person (or a certain percentage of the modern person, those in positions of power/authority/academia) think. They think our society now, or many people in it, fear immigrant communities and they think we should have a virtually unregulated free flow of people across borders, that sexual morality is archaic and that we live today in a patriarchy. Also, the idea that women wanted the right to vote, demanded it and that's how it happened, is what we believe today, and it fits today's narrative of needing to still fight and smash the patriarchy. And perhaps women wanting and fighting for the vote is largely true; however, there is no mention that most women did not want the right to vote at that time (which is my understanding), and by simply saying "women" it seemed to imply all or at least a vast majority. No mention, at least not yet in this lecture, how working men were only granted the right to vote in the late Victorian era. Anyway, it is really interesting when you consider what my history professor said of how discussing history often tells us more about the time when it is discussed. :D
You got it. This is the typical result of badly-educated academics who know little about the nuances of actual historical-political-economic forces and a lot about woke dogma. It reflects a lack of ability to imagine and appreciate the ways in which the conditions of the past were DIFFERENT, as was their thinking, and the most dangerous possible thing to do is project our limited world-view onto theirs and judge them without first doing out best to understand them from their perspective (not to mention immersing oneself in long-term scholarly study of the nuances of their culture). The past is the culture we all share and least appreciate. It's not dead, and it's not simply "wrong," politically-incorrect, or primitive; it is still with us and part of us and we need to learn from it before we repeat its errors.
In all these videos I find about the Victorian era, things are presented in a bad light. As if morality, social stability, identity were a bad thing. Gimme a break.
Victorian times weren't all pink, but the Empire expanded as never before, industrialization took the country into a modern era, the strict laws against crime helped civilise the darker sides of the society. Also, by the end of the period laws were given to better the life of the poor as well: strict rules about employment - working hours, improving working conditions, etc.
All these were in the Victorian era.
All times had bad and good parts. It's not even close to black and white.
Do you have any good book recommendation about this Victorian Era?
@@animanoir I'd say the easiest way to start is read the Wikipedia page on Victorianism. It gives you the essence. It also has a nice reference list. Then you can just type Victorian times in Google books and see what you find. This is exactly what I did for my degree paper.
Literature is also a good source. But you must keep in mind that authors like Dickens were striving to reform society, by presenting the conditions of the poor in a gloomy but endearing manner, so that people in authority (who really loved his books) may realise the necessity to do something to help the unfortunate. By the end of the era huge reforms were made to improve the life of the poor thanks to the impact of Dickens' books.
@@animanoir sorry I can't give you a specific title, but as I said, wiki is a good starting point
@@animanoir Check out The short Oxford history of English literature by Andrew Sanders.
Thank you so much for your video, well dome and good expressed, actualy I preferito listening instradare of following all day from a boring book! It si much poweful to mixing both
Thank you so much, and I love your voice.
Simplified, thank you
The Lifestyle of the Victorian Policeman was particularly harsh and the pay was poor, about the same as a Farm Labourer, well through it was better in some City Forces.
Thanks a lot I got many useful things as student of literature
very helpful :) thanks
Is this 9th grade bio or English ?
phone go bing bing
ROBERT GALLO
Chafter ka hindi translation krke se kijiye ga sir plz
VBL 2023/2024
This is a grossly revisionist treatment of "Victorian fears" based on contemporary politically-correct overemphasis on race and gender (especially race). The REAL Victorian fears were about class and religion. Victorian politics and society were constantly in fear of a French revolution, of the massive economic dislocations of industrialism and their effects on politics (the switch of power from landowning nobility to industrial capitalists), and swirled around the Reform Acts which extended the vote and attempts to negotiate with the Chartists threatening revolt for working-class rights. The other fear was of falling morality because science was relentlessly undermining the "opiate of the people," religion. The repressive moralities of the era were due to the attempts of the rising middle class to have enough political and familial stability to consolidate their economic gains. That's why the Victorian society was so rigid--the workplace was a dynamic "survival of the fittest" jungle, not the agrarian and predictable life of past centuries, and there was extreme pressure on the family unit to police morality and education. Technological, democratic, and scientific changes were the driving forces.
deez nutz
joe nuts
Deez nuts
indeed
yes
Nice introduction. Would had loved to be your student :~)