If you evaluate the way things are said only in the piece,
solely on the surface and removed from the context of the time, it does seem as
if they are being painstakingly polite. I site the line on page 579 for my
example. It reads, "It is clear, my dear Raphael, that you seek neither
wealth nor power, and indeed I value and revere a man of such a disposition as
much as I do the mightiest persons in the world."
Plucked from the context of the time, the identity of the author, and isolated from the text, it seems as if he were paying Raphael a great compliment. However, he immediately follows the statement with the line, "Yet I think that if you would devote your time and energy to public affairs, you would do a thing worthy of a generous and philosophical nature, even if you did not much like it."
Sir Thomas More was a man in who was a personal counselor to Henry the VIII. He had strong and controversial ideas. In this respect, he never compromised and would place his thoughts in the ear of the court, and the king himself, even at the risk of personal detriment. It was his strong convictions that eventually caused him his life when King Henry VIII had him beheaded.
I feel that More was actually insulting Raphael. He was essentially stating that it was all well and good to sit back and reflect on what is wrong with the world, but the real challenge was in applying yourself to make a change in the world you find fault with. Reading the work, is obvious the scorn that More has for those in power and he said he revered Raphael as much as he revered the mightiest in the world. That, in my opinion, was not very polite at all.
Should we follow this same pattern of speech in today's world? Sometimes we do. We are often more flattering and polite to strangers or others in the workforce. We often will placate someone with niceties and know when others are nice to us with ulterior motives in mind. The expression "kill them with kindness" puts it in perspective. Things are not so different from now and then at all.
Plucked from the context of the time, the identity of the author, and isolated from the text, it seems as if he were paying Raphael a great compliment. However, he immediately follows the statement with the line, "Yet I think that if you would devote your time and energy to public affairs, you would do a thing worthy of a generous and philosophical nature, even if you did not much like it."
Sir Thomas More was a man in who was a personal counselor to Henry the VIII. He had strong and controversial ideas. In this respect, he never compromised and would place his thoughts in the ear of the court, and the king himself, even at the risk of personal detriment. It was his strong convictions that eventually caused him his life when King Henry VIII had him beheaded.
I feel that More was actually insulting Raphael. He was essentially stating that it was all well and good to sit back and reflect on what is wrong with the world, but the real challenge was in applying yourself to make a change in the world you find fault with. Reading the work, is obvious the scorn that More has for those in power and he said he revered Raphael as much as he revered the mightiest in the world. That, in my opinion, was not very polite at all.
Should we follow this same pattern of speech in today's world? Sometimes we do. We are often more flattering and polite to strangers or others in the workforce. We often will placate someone with niceties and know when others are nice to us with ulterior motives in mind. The expression "kill them with kindness" puts it in perspective. Things are not so different from now and then at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment