I agree with Thing Bad about “historical accuracy” being a retarded idea for a fantasy setting. I find it weird how Martin never uses the word “breakfast” and instead says a character “broke fast” in the morning. When I commented on this to someone they remarked that “well that word didn’t exist back then” and then said the books are inspired by The War of the Roses.
You know, because we had dragons and white walkers running around in 15th century England. You can’t say his convoluted use of language is to adhere to historical accuracy when the story doesn’t even take place on Earth.
They aren’t complaining about historical accuracy. That’s the motte. The bailey is creating fictional universes where leftist fantasies are a reality via dismissal of cause and effect.
Take OP’s example. Why would a fictional fantasy universe need to have any sexual violence whatsoever? The answer is actually very simple: because the existence of sexual violence on a population level is an inevitable consequence of the simultaneous existence of sexual desire, power imbalance, and free will. From these three prerequisites, non-zero sexual violence is inevitable.
If you want to ignore this simple equation to focus on other ideas within your own fantasy setting, by all means, do so. Rape can exist in your world without you feeling compelled to constantly address it in your storytelling. But if you write your story contending that a certain bad thing doesn’t exist, without also addressing the factors that inevitably create that bad thing, then you are writing a bad story without valid internal logic or coherence.
The French influences in the nobility would likely have them saying "small meal" or "little dinner" for breakfast (Petit-dejeuner). Breaking away from that though... Breakfast, according to dictionary.com, had recorded and written usage by the more commoner/priestly castes as early as 1425. Which, you know, is well within the 15th-century.
Which I think falls into the "modern British accent paradox" thing, where Americans have closer to the original British accent than British people do, because almost as a nation, Britain changed their accent to distinguish themselves from the colonies, meaning the established colonies had the legacy and original accent remain. But despite that, you'd 100% expect a medieval British castle guard to sound more "oi guvnah" than "Howdy do".
"Broke fast" sounds more medieval, even if "Brekky" or "breakfast" was likely common-enough parlance.
I disagree, simply because you have dragons and magic does not mean you get to have any change you want.
Where do you draw the line? Should the people wear sneakers, drink coffee, have cars, have cellphones? Should they have modern makeup and modern haircuts?
You do not need "historical accuracy" but if you can get as close as possible to it then you should definitely do it.
I agree with Thing Bad about “historical accuracy” being a retarded idea for a fantasy setting. I find it weird how Martin never uses the word “breakfast” and instead says a character “broke fast” in the morning. When I commented on this to someone they remarked that “well that word didn’t exist back then” and then said the books are inspired by The War of the Roses.
You know, because we had dragons and white walkers running around in 15th century England. You can’t say his convoluted use of language is to adhere to historical accuracy when the story doesn’t even take place on Earth.
They aren’t complaining about historical accuracy. That’s the motte. The bailey is creating fictional universes where leftist fantasies are a reality via dismissal of cause and effect.
Take OP’s example. Why would a fictional fantasy universe need to have any sexual violence whatsoever? The answer is actually very simple: because the existence of sexual violence on a population level is an inevitable consequence of the simultaneous existence of sexual desire, power imbalance, and free will. From these three prerequisites, non-zero sexual violence is inevitable.
If you want to ignore this simple equation to focus on other ideas within your own fantasy setting, by all means, do so. Rape can exist in your world without you feeling compelled to constantly address it in your storytelling. But if you write your story contending that a certain bad thing doesn’t exist, without also addressing the factors that inevitably create that bad thing, then you are writing a bad story without valid internal logic or coherence.
Neither usage is ideal.
The French influences in the nobility would likely have them saying "small meal" or "little dinner" for breakfast (Petit-dejeuner). Breaking away from that though... Breakfast, according to dictionary.com, had recorded and written usage by the more commoner/priestly castes as early as 1425. Which, you know, is well within the 15th-century.
Which I think falls into the "modern British accent paradox" thing, where Americans have closer to the original British accent than British people do, because almost as a nation, Britain changed their accent to distinguish themselves from the colonies, meaning the established colonies had the legacy and original accent remain. But despite that, you'd 100% expect a medieval British castle guard to sound more "oi guvnah" than "Howdy do".
"Broke fast" sounds more medieval, even if "Brekky" or "breakfast" was likely common-enough parlance.
I disagree, simply because you have dragons and magic does not mean you get to have any change you want. Where do you draw the line? Should the people wear sneakers, drink coffee, have cars, have cellphones? Should they have modern makeup and modern haircuts?
You do not need "historical accuracy" but if you can get as close as possible to it then you should definitely do it.