Difference between revisions of "Talk:Hagiography"
(→Too much gloss) |
(→Too much gloss) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
: What you see now was my initial, quick descularization. It was by no means the best or most thorough of jobs. Do feel free to rectify it! --[[User:ASDamick|Rdr. Andrew]] 14:26, 29 Jan 2005 (CST) | : What you see now was my initial, quick descularization. It was by no means the best or most thorough of jobs. Do feel free to rectify it! --[[User:ASDamick|Rdr. Andrew]] 14:26, 29 Jan 2005 (CST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :: OK. I'll look through the history later tonight. By the way, I really like that you explained why sins are omitted. That is very helpful. It doesn't convince me to like it, but it does help in understanding the genre. --[[User:Basil|Basil]] 15:07, 29 Jan 2005 (CST) | ||
Revision as of 21:07, January 29, 2005
It's not fully adapted yet, but I do think we should leave in something about the Bollandists and the modern study of hagiography. FrJohn
- Agreed. I don't think we necessarily need to have an "adapted from Wikipedia" template. After all, the original articles themselves are likely to be changed subsequent to our adaptation of them. I think it's probably save to keep such attribution in the comment in the editing history and/or in a "Sources" header at the bottom. --Rdr. Andrew 16:11, 18 Jan 2005 (CST)
Too much gloss
I must object to the "desecularization" of this article. I applaud placing the mythologizing character of hagiography into an ecclesial context, but a great deal of information that has been excised in recent redactions was very beneficial to me. I think it would probably be beneficial to others, as well. Specifically, I think people would be refreshed by an honest appraisal of the role of legend and miracle story in hagiography; also, I think people need to know that hagiography, as a genre, underwent a process of "gradually departing from the actual facts of the saints life." This was like a breeze of fresh air when I read it. Being honest with hagiography may have the effect of giving people a healthy way of integrating these stories into their life. --Basil 13:44, 29 Jan 2005 (CST)
- What you see now was my initial, quick descularization. It was by no means the best or most thorough of jobs. Do feel free to rectify it! --Rdr. Andrew 14:26, 29 Jan 2005 (CST)
- OK. I'll look through the history later tonight. By the way, I really like that you explained why sins are omitted. That is very helpful. It doesn't convince me to like it, but it does help in understanding the genre. --Basil 15:07, 29 Jan 2005 (CST)
