Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5380476" data-attributes="member: 18280">That's not revisionist -- that's what people in the real world thought/did.  They believed that undead existed, and they believed that they were aware of the existence of the undead.  They therefore implimented death rituals intended to placate the dead and/or prevent the dead from rising and/or move the spirits of the dead onto other rewards.Unless, for example, Hamlet, should be considered revisionist, or Dracula, or centuries of folklore."Revisionism" IMHO arises only when the original intent is forgotten.  We forget why graveyards exist, so they become only convenient places for storing bodies.  Then, one looks at the threat and says "Why not burn 'em?"  That is revisionism -- it revises the original purpose, reimagines it to be something else, and then wonders why it no longer seems to make sense.I would say:(1)  Primitive:  I know undead exist, and I take steps to placate/bind/move the dead on their way to the next world.(2)  Classic:  The primitive rituals become formalized.  While I still know the undead exist, I might no longer know what the relationship between the ritual and the placating/binding/moving the dead on is.(3)  Revisionism:  I no longer believe in undead, and I know longer understand the reasons behind the rituals.  Therefore, my mind tries to fill in the gaps, and things don't seem to make sense anymore.(4)  Parody:  I now make fun of how things don't seem to make sense anymore.You know, this topic makes me think I should do an Undead thread similar to the one I created for Faerie Encounters..........  <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" />RC</blockquote>

Verification