this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
30 points (96.9% liked)

Collapse

857 readers
85 users here now

This is the place for discussing the potential collapse of modern civilization and the environment.


Collapse, in this context, refers to the significant loss of an established level or complexity towards a much simpler state. It can occur differently within many areas, orderly or chaotically, and be willing or unwilling. It does not necessarily imply human extinction or a singular, global event. Although, the longer the duration, the more it resembles a ‘decline’ instead of collapse.


RULES

1 - Remember the human

2 - Link posts should come from a reputable source

3 - All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith.

4 - No low effort, high volume and low relevance posts.


Related lemmys:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Original Text:

As much mud in the streets, as if the waters had but newly retired from the face of the earth, and it would not be wonderful to meet a Megalosaurus, forty feet long or so, waddling like an elephantine lizard up Holborn Hill.

Subject:

[Pause.] [Laughs.] So it’s like, um, [Pause.] the mud was all in the streets, and we were, no . . . [Pause.] so everything’s been like kind of washed around and we might find Megalosaurus bones but he’s says they’re waddling, um, all up the hill.

The subject cannot make the leap to figurative language.

How do people even get like this? Holy shit.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago

Original Text:

On such an afternoon, if ever, the Lord High Chancellor ought to be sitting here—as here he is—with a foggy glory round his head, softly fenced in with crimson cloth and curtains, addressed by a large advocate with great whiskers, a little voice, and an interminable brief, and outwardly directing his contemplation to the lantern in the roof, where he can see nothing but fog.

Subject:

Describing him in a room with an animal I think? Great whiskers?

Facilitator:

[Laughs.]

Subject:

A cat?

What the actual fuck.

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I mean, the snippet you posted out of context took me a second read, but in context it makes perfect sense. It’s so goddamn muddy it defies understanding. Not unlike these undergraduate’s brains, apparently.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's just purple prose and metaphor, it takes a little translation but it's not that hard!

What's the world like for these people? If I tell them "this will just take a second" do they get surprised when it takes more than literally one second?

[–] skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

Considering the number of people I say that to and then have them count "One!" and then stare at me with a blank expression,

Yeah probably.

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

About the only thing I am unsure about is how the waddling dinosaur contributes to the gloomy atmosphere, aside from the physical threat of being trampled underfoot that it would pose.

I guess a modern turn of phrase would be something like, “I almost expected to see…”, in that the conditions were so bad that it wouldn’t be above a sauropod to be present.

Plus, there are also historical interpretations to consider, because when this passage was penned, large dinosaurs were also considered to be mostly aquatic due to their sheer size (water bouyancy was seen as an aid to allow them to stand) and not particularly graceful on land. So “waddling” is indeed a period-appropriate view of how such a sauropod would walk, and not just artistic license by the author.

[–] podperson@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My take on this is that the "as if the waters had but newly retired from the face of the earth" section is key for the rest of it. All of this is obviously metaphor, but the metaphor Dickens seems to be going with is that "it's so muddy out there, that it's just like prehistoric earth just after land started becoming visible (waters receding and making land visible), and to imagine yourself there walking along and seeing a huge fucking dinosaur basically swimming up the street (in the wet mud) and that 'would not be wonderful to meet' that dinosaur because obviously that's fucking terrifying and it might eat you."

All of the metaphor references are pointing to "muddy as fuck out there and really slippery, and so much so that there might as well be dinosaurs/lizards swimming down the street and that's just miserable".

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

it's just like prehistoric earth just after land started becoming visible (waters receding and making land visible),

Ironically, it’s more of a Christian source than a scientific one. Once we had any sort of a clear idea of what happened that far back, it’s the land that acquired lakes and oceans by a million years of constant rain as the earth cooled enough for vapour in the atmosphere to precipitate out, whereas the story of Genesis had the waters first, then god creating land by drawing the waters back.

In this case, the dinosaur is just an inadvertent hitchhiker.

[–] podperson@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yep - that tracks. Your take is a bit more precise. I think the important part is not to be too hung up on the science of that age and their exact interpretation of how the earth came about, but more just focusing on the general “muddy like (probably) just after the earth was formed and land first came into existence.”

[–] DrBob@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

Also a comparison to the Lord Chancellor - an incredibly significant figure of an old institution not fit for modern times.