As a teacher of history and a fiend at making sure the facts get out about what has led us to be who we are today, I find it my duty to post this on all the forums I participate in.
I know that it's just a movie, you don't have to give me that line. And I know Hollywood likes to change things around to make things more interesting. But to me, the real history of Athenians and Spartans is very interesting without changing anything. But, I'm sure it's a great film. It just really bothers me to think that I have to explain to countless classes for the next who knows how many years that 300 is not factual. But oh how impressive those images will be in their memories. I'm sure much more impressive than I could ever hope to be. But I'll do my best to make things right...
------------------------------------------------------
Sparta? No. This is madnesswww.thestar.com/article/190493
An expert assesses the gruesome new epic Mar 11, 2007 04:30 AM
The battle of Thermopylae was real, but how real is 300? Ephraim Lytle, assistant professor of hellenistic history at the University of Toronto, has seen the movie and offers his view.
History is altered all the time. What matters is how and why. Thus I see no reason to quibble over the absence in 300 of breastplates or modest thigh-length tunics. I can see the graphic necessity of sculpted stomachs and three hundred Spartan-sized packages bulging in spandex thongs. On the other hand, the ways in which 300 selectively idealizes Spartan society are problematic, even disturbing.
We know little of King Leonidas, so creating a fictitious backstory for him is understandable. Spartan children were, indeed, taken from their mothers and given a martial education called the agoge. They were indeed toughened by beatings and dispatched into the countryside, forced to walk shoeless in winter and sleep uncovered on the ground. But future kings were exempt.
And had Leonidas undergone the agoge, he would have come of age not by slaying a wolf, but by murdering unarmed helots in a rite known as the Crypteia. These helots were the Greeks indigenous to Lakonia and Messenia, reduced to slavery by the tiny fraction of the population enjoying Spartan "freedom." By living off estates worked by helots, the Spartans could afford to be professional soldiers, although really they had no choice: securing a brutal apartheid state is a full-time job, to which end the Ephors were required to ritually declare war on the helots.
Elected annually, the five Ephors were Sparta's highest officials, their powers checking those of the dual kings. There is no evidence they opposed Leonidas' campaign, despite 300's subplot of Leonidas pursuing an illegal war to serve a higher good. For adolescents ready to graduate from the graphic novel to Ayn Rand, or vice-versa, the historical Leonidas would never suffice. They require a superman. And in the interests of portentous contrasts between good and evil, 300's Ephors are not only lecherous and corrupt, but also geriatric lepers.
Ephialtes, who betrays the Greeks, is likewise changed from a local Malian of sound body into a Spartan outcast, a grotesquely disfigured troll who by Spartan custom should have been left exposed as an infant to die. Leonidas points out that his hunched back means Ephialtes cannot lift his shield high enough to fight in the phalanx. This is a transparent defence of Spartan eugenics, and laughably convenient given that infanticide could as easily have been precipitated by an ill-omened birthmark.
300's Persians are ahistorical monsters and freaks. Xerxes is eight feet tall, clad chiefly in body piercings and garishly made up, but not disfigured. No need – it is strongly implied Xerxes is homosexual which, in the moral universe of 300, qualifies him for special freakhood. This is ironic given that pederasty was an obligatory part of a Spartan's education. This was a frequent target of Athenian comedy, wherein the verb "to Spartanize" meant "to bugger." In 300, Greek pederasty is, naturally, Athenian.
This touches on 300's most noteworthy abuse of history: the Persians are turned into monsters, but the non-Spartan Greeks are simply all too human. According to Herodotus, Leonidas led an army of perhaps 7,000 Greeks. These Greeks took turns rotating to the front of the phalanx stationed at Thermoplyae where, fighting in disciplined hoplite fashion, they held the narrow pass for two days. All told, some 4,000 Greeks perished there. In 300 the fighting is not in the hoplite fashion, and the Spartans do all of it, except for a brief interlude in which Leonidas allows a handful of untrained Greeks to taste the action, and they make a hash of it. When it becomes apparent they are surrounded, this contingent flees. In Herodotus' time there were various accounts of what transpired, but we know 700 hoplites from Thespiae remained, fighting beside the Spartans, they, too, dying to the last man.
No mention is made in 300 of the fact that at the same time a vastly outnumbered fleet led by Athenians was holding off the Persians in the straits adjacent to Thermopylae, or that Athenians would soon save all of Greece by destroying the Persian fleet at Salamis. This would wreck 300's vision, in which Greek ideals are selectively embodied in their only worthy champions, the Spartans.
This moral universe would have appeared as bizarre to ancient Greeks as it does to modern historians. Most Greeks would have traded their homes in Athens for hovels in Sparta about as willingly as I would trade my apartment in Toronto for a condo in Pyongyang.
reavo
Member Posts: 2,173
Comments
So wait...the Persians weren't really monster-men? Dang.
Seriously though...Other than small historical nuance, I don't think that anybody considers this a work of historical authenticity any more than people consider the Daily Show to be a news source.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Truth is spoken around these parts.
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now."
Boba Fett
The Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania released study results showing that "Daily Show" viewers are better informed than viewers of David Letterman or Jay Leno's late-night programs and that viewers of all three late-night shows know more about election issues than others who regularly read newspapers or watch television news.
Draenor, I doubt you even gave the show a chance. How many times have you watched it? Who do you watch for the news?
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
While I saw the 300 and thought (and still think) it's a great movie, I do appreciate your post recounting the actual historical facts that were not in the 300. I'm sure I learned about all that back in school, but I've forgotten most of it.
The Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania released study results showing that "Daily Show" viewers are better informed than viewers of David Letterman or Jay Leno's late-night programs and that viewers of all three late-night shows know more about election issues than others who regularly read newspapers or watch television news.
Draenor, I doubt you even gave the show a chance. How many times have you watched it? Who do you watch for the news?
Thats a whole lot of assuming and non-important questions to follow. I think you should take a deep breath and count to ten.
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now."
Boba Fett
The Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania released study results showing that "Daily Show" viewers are better informed than viewers of David Letterman or Jay Leno's late-night programs and that viewers of all three late-night shows know more about election issues than others who regularly read newspapers or watch television news.
Draenor, I doubt you even gave the show a chance. How many times have you watched it? Who do you watch for the news?
Way to completely miss the point...but I'll entertain you anyway.
I've watched many episodes of the Daily Show, how many episodes? I have no idea how many episodes I have seen. I don't find Jon Stewart funny, when he's talking about democrats, it's the same. When he's talking about republicans, it's the same. The Daily Show has been using the same tired format/setup-delivery system for their jokes for more than a decade. It's the same thing as the Colbert report, sarcastic jokes one after another, it's not funny when it's so repetetive.
What news do I watch? I don't watch the news. MSNBC is liberal on a level that screams retardation. CNN is boring on a level that screams John Kerry, and FOX's shows annoy the crap out of me. When I want to be informed about something, I go about it by searching for my own information from various sources and forming an opinion for myself, I don't need Bill O'Reiley or Chris Mathews to tell me what to think.
ps. If you're watching the Daily Show as your news source, you really REALLY need to stop, you'll end up like people who debated me in high school about politics: confused and overcome with a feeling of ignorance.
I've stopped caring about global politics though, I've since realized that knowing something in ultimate futility is a waste of space in my brain and will only lead to stress that I can't do anything about. If there's an issue that I feel I might be able to make a difference in, I'll get informed about it. If it's an issue regarding religious persecution or something of that nature, then I'll usually read up on it. Generally speaking though, I don't give a crap what politician slept with what intern, or which senator fondled which little boy.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
The Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania released study results showing that "Daily Show" viewers are better informed than viewers of David Letterman or Jay Leno's late-night programs and that viewers of all three late-night shows know more about election issues than others who regularly read newspapers or watch television news.
Draenor, I doubt you even gave the show a chance. How many times have you watched it? Who do you watch for the news?
Way to completely miss the point...but I'll entertain you anyway.
QFEHere's my issue with your feeling that historical accuracy outweighs the story behind 300. First, there is almost no agreement by scholars about what exactly happened at Thermopylae. Some no-name assistant professor from University of Toronto is far from being the global expert on the subject either. But really my point is that what was the goal of the Greek mythology of the time, from which much of 300 is gleamed. Greek mythology is ripe with examples of the storytellers embellishing their subject matter to make it more interesting for their audience. Personally, I think Hollywood did an excellent job at presenting an epic Greek story. In no way should it be taken as a factual documentation of the battle on those three days, but more in the context of the story of that time, tailored in a classical Greek way for our times.
Bottom line is, don't get wrapped around the axle on historical accuracy of an event which doesn't have even the globes leading historians agreeing on what is accurate. If your students enjoy the movie, it may inspire them to seek more information about the era, about Greek mythology, about the Persian empire, and overall in their scholastic knowledge of history. You don't have to "set them right," because truthfully, you don't know what is right. Just tell them that Hollywood made a movie in true Hollywood fashion, and possibly with a little Greek orator fashion. Archaelogical digs can verify, though, that about 300 Greeks, most likely Spartans, were killed in a rain of arrows on the last day of the battle, which is exactly what happens in the movie.
Its a movie..........
If I wanted a history lesson I would go to college. I went to be entertained and I was. As far as historical accuracy goes, were you there? did you see any of this happen? do you personally know anyone who did? Do you have in your peossesion a book or scroll that was written by someone who was there?
Thats right you dont know what really happened and neither does anyone else. For all we know that movie was right on the money. Its not a point anyone alive today is in a position to argue.
Critical thinking is a desire to seek, patience to doubt, fondness to meditate, slowness to assert, readiness to consider, carefulness to dispose and set in order; and hatred for every kind of imposture.
The Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania released study results showing that "Daily Show" viewers are better informed than viewers of David Letterman or Jay Leno's late-night programs and that viewers of all three late-night shows know more about election issues than others who regularly read newspapers or watch television news.
Draenor, I doubt you even gave the show a chance. How many times have you watched it? Who do you watch for the news?
Way to completely miss the point...but I'll entertain you anyway.
QFEI believe that AlexMoore looks for my posts, and then tries to find something that he can correct about it. It's a little bit sad, but entertaining to completely refute him so easily.
As for them not fighting like Hoplites...I wouldn't want to watch an hour of people poking other people with long sticks while standing in a rigid phalanx formation.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
I find it more hilarious to watch than the Daily Show.
I CREATED MYSELF!
"<Claus|Dev> i r pk"
SW:TOR|War40K:DMO|GW2
I find it more hilarious to watch than the Daily Show.
You fail at being funny for the same reason that the Daily Show does: No origionality.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
I find it more hilarious to watch than the Daily Show.
You fail at being funny for the same reason that the Daily Show does: No origionality. Anyone els hear that sound from that SNL skit Debby Downer? I'm not attacking the content of what you're saying or anything even if I disagree with most of it, it's just that some of your posts are f'n depressing. I gotta try to catch some of your other posts, I'm sure you have a sense of humor, maybe just a bad night or maybe we can all give you a nice big e-group hug or something?
Never give up and never surrender!
I find it more hilarious to watch than the Daily Show.
You fail at being funny for the same reason that the Daily Show does: No origionality.Anyone els hear that sound from that SNL skit Debby Downer? I'm not attacking the content of what you're saying or anything even if I disagree with most of it, it's just that some of your posts are f'n depressing. I gotta try to catch some of your other posts, I'm sure you have a sense of humor, maybe just a bad night or maybe we can all give you a nice big e-group hug or something?
I've got a great sense of humor...but when most of my posts are confined to religious debate on these forums, it doesn't exactly shine through. I just don't find repetetive humor funny, especially after a full decade, Jon Stewart has been doing the same damn thing for a decade, and some people are still laughing, I'm just not one of them.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
The Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania released study results showing that "Daily Show" viewers are better informed than viewers of David Letterman or Jay Leno's late-night programs and that viewers of all three late-night shows know more about election issues than others who regularly read newspapers or watch television news.
Draenor, I doubt you even gave the show a chance. How many times have you watched it? Who do you watch for the news?
Way to completely miss the point...but I'll entertain you anyway.
I've watched many episodes of the Daily Show, how many episodes? I have no idea how many episodes I have seen. I don't find Jon Stewart funny, when he's talking about democrats, it's the same. When he's talking about republicans, it's the same. The Daily Show has been using the same tired format/setup-delivery system for their jokes for more than a decade. It's the same thing as the Colbert report, sarcastic jokes one after another, it's not funny when it's so repetetive.
That's your opinion. This isn't about the comedy factor, i'm talking about the news factor. You said Daily Show is a bad news source and I pointed out that they do report the real news. There has been no mention of the comedy factor until now.
What news do I watch? I don't watch the news. MSNBC is liberal on a level that screams retardation. CNN is boring on a level that screams John Kerry, and FOX's shows annoy the crap out of me. When I want to be informed about something, I go about it by searching for my own information from various sources and forming an opinion for myself, I don't need Bill O'Reiley or Chris Mathews to tell me what to think.
Ok i'm just talking about the REAL news. Fox, MSNBC, CNN all report real news but there is a lot of filler that is propaganda. Jon Stewart has real news, and his filler is comedy that generally include exposing irony and hypocrisy and sometimes in a sarcastic way in our government. Anyone can watch these news programs, extract the news items of the day, and form an opinion about them on their own. I've watched Bill O'Reiley before and got some news on some hot topics...doesn't mean I have to agree with his opinion on them and I often don't.
ps. If you're watching the Daily Show as your news source, you really REALLY need to stop, you'll end up like people who debated me in high school about politics: confused and overcome with a feeling of ignorance.
He's not my sole source of news, i'm on the computer a lot and generally get it from browsing. Anyways, your claim has no basis (I have a study that says exactly the opposite)...funny how you mention debate team.
I've stopped caring about global politics though, I've since realized that knowing something in ultimate futility is a waste of space in my brain and will only lead to stress that I can't do anything about. If there's an issue that I feel I might be able to make a difference in, I'll get informed about it. If it's an issue regarding religious persecution or something of that nature, then I'll usually read up on it. Generally speaking though, I don't give a crap what politician slept with what intern, or which senator fondled which little boy.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Never give up and never surrender!
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Anyways...here you go Alex Moore.
300 is not a historical documentary
The Daily Show is not a News Show, it's satire show about news
Thus: judging 300 on its historical merits is like judging the Daily Show on how well they report the news.
Why is this a valid analogy? Because 300 is intended to be an action movie, judging it based on history = apples to oranges >>>>and<<<< Because the Daily Show is intended to be satirical comedy, judging it based on its actual news content = apples to oranges.
Does that make sense to you yet Alex? I don't see how I could be any more clear than that...but you seem to love picking things out of my posts and then trying to find something wrong. I believe that's known as trolling.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
People who think 300 is real probably think the DaVinci is all factual.
I don't think he's thinking of the one or two who might decide to read and learn more about the subject, I think he's getting into a preemptive rant for the 10+ students who will write "and then they sent in the cyclops" in a history paper on the subject. I think all teachers have to deal with that stupidity whenever Hollywood butchers the subjects they teach.
I don't think he's thinking of the one or two who might decide to read and learn more about the subject, I think he's getting into a preemptive rant for the 10+ students who will write "and then they sent in the cyclops" in a history paper on the subject. I think all teachers have to deal with that stupidity whenever Hollywood butchers the subjects they teach.
That's why you slap a big F on their paper and tell them to do their research. As long as such stupidity isn't reinforced with passing grades, kids will be forced to do some research.And if anyone over the age of 6 took 300 as fact, they need to be removed from the breeding pool anyway.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
They came from the sea and they came from the sky, Captain America is going to die!
This movie was big pos.