Social Question

zenele's avatar

Look at these differences in speech, and convention, a century has done... do you have other examples?

Asked by zenele (8252points) May 27th, 2010

Phileas Fogg was not known to have either wife or children, which may
happen to the most honest people; either relatives or near friends,
which is certainly more unusual. He lived alone in his house in
Saville Row, whither none penetrated. A single domestic sufficed to
serve him.

From Around the world in 80 days, of course.

Nowadays, I think it would offend half the fluther population, and insult the other half.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

8 Answers

Jeruba's avatar

I think it would offend…

What would? The writing style?

augustlan's avatar

I don’t think it’s offensive, just a little old-fashioned. What do you suppose folks would find offensive about it?

zenele's avatar

“not known to have either wife or children, which may
happen to the most honest people;”

“A single domestic sufficed to
serve him.”

Maybe I’m old-fashioned.

But I got my two babes to write in my Q. Yay.

* sigh *

janbb's avatar

Well, sure writing styles and moral conventions have changed in 100 years but isn’t that why we like to read classics? Although, having said that, there has been a great deal of censorship of Huckleberry Finn in recent years because of its condescension to Jim. I don’t believe in censoring fiction from the past; I do believe in using it as departure points for discussion.

(And now a third “babe” has weighed in.)

Dr_Lawrence's avatar

I see nothing offensive or insulting here, especially to those experienced with 19th century English literature. Many of us are literate and openminded enough to deal with a wide range of moral approaches.

Those among us who are unlikely to even approach such literature are certainly sheltered form offense or insult. I pity them more than I fear for their sensibilities.

anartist's avatar

@zenele Ain’t you the sneaky ol’ dog?
I agree with all above, no offense.
Maybe a longing among the more reclusive for affordable domestics. LOL

pinksnowflake's avatar

How about changes in the meanings of words, such as “gay” (which was once and is now primarily defined as “1 a: happily excited : merry [in a gay mood]; b: keenly alive and exuberant; having or inducing high spirits [a bird’s gay spring song]; 2 a: bright, lively [gay sunny meadows”]; b: brilliant in color; etc.) or “diva” (“a principal female singer in an opera or concert organization”)?

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther