+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Voynich Talk (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: On purpose (/thread-3303.html)
RE: On purpose - bi3mw - 02-08-2020
(02-08-2020, 02:31 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..... and musicians exist who do what they do for the sheer pleasure of itAs far as musicians are concerned, they were particularly dependent on patrons or sponsors. Sheer pleasure was therefore not the decisive driving force behind the composition of their works. There is a saying: "Whose bread I eat, I sing his song. "
RE: On purpose - Koen G - 02-08-2020
(02-08-2020, 10:33 AM)Helmut Winkler Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I am sure you are completely wrong there
Why?
If the VM was made ca. 1420, its makers were born in the late 14th century. But even if you want them born in the early 15th century, the difference is still significant. Copernicus was born 1473 and became a full-blown Renaissance astronomer that gave the Copernican revolution its name. He finished his studies in the early 1500s.
I agree that we don't have to rely on stereotypes, but I see no point in denying that the Middle Ages were different from the Renaissance, that is what they get different names.
RE: On purpose - MarcoP - 02-08-2020
(02-08-2020, 10:05 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Copernicus was born in a completely different world than the makers of the Voynich.
Of course the Renaissance was different from the Middle Ages, but the Renaissance began about You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. the VMS was written; if one prefers 1492 instead, we could say that Copernicus was born in the Middle Ages.
One could also say that he was born in a geocentric world, a major trait of Medieval ideology.
Kepler, who was born in 1571 and amply built on Copernicus' ideas, could still write (in Latin) this description of the sun (from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.):
Kepler Wrote:producer, conserver, and warmer of all things; a fountain of light, rich in fruitful heat, most fair, limpid, and pure to the sight, the source of vision, portrayer of all colors, though himself empty of colour, called king of the planets for his motion, heart of the world for his power, its eye for his beauty ... the Sun, who alone appears, by virtue of his dignity and power, suited for this motive duty and worthy to become the home of God himself, not to say the first mover
I think these ideas suggest that the Copernical revolution also had a medieval / symbolic appeal, together with the modern / scientific value which makes Copernicus and Kepler still famous and respected.
PS: In 1616 the Congregation of the Index banned Copernicus's De Revolutionibus and other heliocentric works. The Middle Ages were hard to die.
RE: On purpose - Mark Knowles - 02-08-2020
(02-08-2020, 04:55 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(02-08-2020, 10:33 AM)Helmut Winkler Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I am sure you are completely wrong there
Why?
If the VM was made ca. 1420, its makers were born in the late 14th century. But even if you want them born in the early 15th century, the difference is still significant. Copernicus was born 1473 and became a full-blown Renaissance astronomer that gave the Copernican revolution its name. He finished his studies in the early 1500s.
I agree that we don't have to rely on stereotypes, but I see no point in denying that the Middle Ages were different from the Renaissance, that is what they get different names.
It is unquestionable that the Voynich was written during the Italian Renaissance. Whether the author was influenced by renaissance culture depends on where he/she/they came from. Given the distinct possibility that the author was from Northern Italy it makes sense that the author could have been influenced by renaissance culture.
As far as I can tell nobody dates the start of the Italian renaissance to much later than 1401, though some would date it significantly earlier. The writing of the Voynich coincides with the Brunelleschi's construction of the dome of Florence's cathedral.
RE: On purpose - Koen G - 02-08-2020
Of course, the Renaissance was a process. A process that had nearly a century to rage over Europe between the time the VM was created and the time Copernicus finished his education.
RE: On purpose - Mark Knowles - 02-08-2020
"I am possessed by one insatiable passion , which I cannot restrain nor would I if I could ... I cannot get enough books" Petrarch
RE: On purpose - Helmut Winkler - 02-08-2020
Periodenbildung is an outdated concept I think. It is only used by publishers and editors because you need a limit somewhere for practical reasons.There is a Carolingian R., a R. of the 12th c. and an Italian R. And Copernicus is as medieval as Peuerbach or Regiomontan and as modern as Kepler.
RE: On purpose - Koen G - 02-08-2020
So the pendulum swings. Are we no longer allowed to think of the advent of print as revolutionary?
RE: On purpose - nablator - 02-08-2020
"We have never been modern" (Bruno Latour)
RE: On purpose - -JKP- - 02-08-2020
(02-08-2020, 02:31 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
...
Yes, but novelists exist and clothes designers exist and painters exist and musicians exist who do what they do for the sheer pleasure of it. So why not our manuscript writers. What you have said surely just reinforces my point.
Well, being a musician, I know this. But what I've been trying to say for several posts is that intellectual curiosity and craft are not the same.
Reading books (intellectual curiosity) is not the same as writing books. Listening to music is not the same as LEARNING how to play a sonata, playing scales and practicing for three hours a day (look up what Jonathan Bell says about practice. He does not like it, but he loves his instrument, he loves the final result).
Going to a museum to see a sculpture is not the same as planning, casting and scraping and burnishing and polishing. There is WORK involved in getting to the finish line or to the part that is pleasurable. In other words, there is, in a sense, a cost-benefit balance in what is pleasurable. How much pain and repetition and annoyance is a person willing to endure to get to the part that is pleasurable? This varies greatly from person-to-person and considering that most of the world consists of viewers rather than doers, consumers rather than creators, I would say that most people don't feel it's worth the trouble. Intellectual curiosity is more common than learning the skills to tackle a big project.