posted
And when I say "game," of course, I mean "help me brainstorm."
I've been sketching out an idea for a literary work—probably theatrical, maybe a three-act play. Or possibly a novella in the guise of a closet drama. Anyway, the (admittedly not terribly original) idea is that each of the three acts will be centered around a hypothetical conversation between ten of the most interesting people alive at the time.
What I could use are some suggestions on what three years to use and potential world figures that might be interesting. Right now I'm planning on 1609 and 1842, but the third is still up in the air. Also, the character list for 1609 is pretty much done, but I still have a lot of interesting possibilities for 1842. So, yeah, give me some suggestions for a third year (I'm leaning toward it being earlier than 1609) and some good candidates for who would be interesting interlocutors for that year. While each year will probably have an over-represented nationality (Italian for 1609, American for 1842) and the whole will probably be Euro-centric, I would certainly welcome "jarring" characters that could bring in unexpected points of view.
So, give me some possible years and/or interlocutors. Oh, and jot down the age of the interlocutor at the given year, too.
For example:
1609 William Shakespeare, 45 John Donne, 37 John Smith, 29 Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, 38 Artemisia Gentileschi, 17 Peter Paul Rubens, 32 El Greco, 68
posted
I took a quick look at the year pages on wikipedia for the years leading up to 1942, and here's a random list of interesting people that stood out to me.
John Tyler. He was the first vice president to succeed a president who died in office. Apparently, his succession was a matter of controversy at the time, since there was no clear plan in place. He was sworn in April 6, 1941, so I imagine that he would have an interesting perspective due to his somewhat unique political situation
James Braid is the man who pioneered the idea of hypnotism. He publicly presented his ideas sometime in 1984, so depending on when the piece was set he would either have just presented or would still be formulating his ideas. Either could be interesting, IMO.
Frederick Douglas was fairly new to the abolitionist scene in 1842. For some perspective, his first public speech at an abolitionist event was on August 11, 1841, and his autobiography was published in 1845.
John Quincy Adams was serving in the house of representatives during 1984. The most recent thing of any note was that he represented the former slaves from the Amistad in their supreme court case in 1839.
I'll add others as I think of them. This is an interesting idea, and there's definitely an interesting story in there.
Finally, some major events of the time that might be worth looking into
Obviously, there's the abolitionist movement
also, the first opium war was drawing to a close in 1842. Among other things, the treaty that ended the war ceded Hong Kong to the British.
The organized labor movement was still in its infancy in the US, at this point, but the supreme court case Commonwealth v. Hunt legalized unions and strikes.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Lyrhawn--For 1842, the following have tentatively made the cut:
Nathaniel Hawthorne, 38 Joseph Smith, 37 Abraham Lincoln, 33 Søren Kierkegaard, 29 Karl Marx, 24 Herman Melville, 23
I have a short list of about 15-20 others. I need some older folks here, which makes Manzoni or Wordsworth interesting.
Honestly, for a third date, I'm really feeling good about sometime around 600 B.C. There was just such an interesting flowering of religious and philosophical thought in some pretty diverse areas.
I also think it will be fun to think about which characters from each period are played by the same actors. Then once I'm done, I'll just need to find some actors who can play, say, Anaximander, John Donne, and Alexandre Dumas in the same night. <grin>
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wrote a conversation between Mark Twain, Alfred Russel Wallace, and Mary Mantel one time. I'm not sure what the year was, I think I had them meet up in a western gold rush town. The assignment was to write about mythology, and I was exploring the "mythos" of evolution as a worldview.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Alexander the Great, 20 Philip of Macedon, 46 Demosthenes 48 Darius III 44
This was the year Philip was assassinated (some evidence that Alexander connived in this), two years before the first defeat of Darius at the Granicus, and when Demosthenes was in full cry against Philip, and by extension, Alexander.
The conversation would be fascinating, with Philip's underlying resentment of Alexander and vice versa, Demosthenes' hatred of both of them, and the threat to Darius becoming increasingly apparent, if not yet fully understood by him, although Philip had been authorised by Greece to wage a war of vengeance against Persia for offences committed 150 years before.
This is after the voyage of the Beagle, but before he published "Origin of Species".
Francis Scott Key, 63
The year before his death. Don't know much about him, but he wrote the Star Spangled Banner and witnessed a lot of warfare firsthand, and you wanted older people.
Giuseppe Verdi, 29
1842 was the year he got back into writing opera after the death of his family.
Samuel F.B. Morse, 41
After he developed the telegraph, and this was the year that he went to D.C. and convinced the government to help fund his work by proving that it worked.
Alright, adding to your 1842 list I would have to toss in Henry Clay. He'd be I think 65 at the time, and would have already had a phenomenal impact on American government and society. He'd still be 8 years away from the Compromise of 1850, but the Missouri Compromise and a dozen other things had been accomplished by then.
I'd also suggest a young Robert E Lee, though that'd be easier if you did it after the Mexican American War, he'd be 35 in 1842.
336BC, or a time period a little bit later, would be a pretty cool timeline as well, but so would a period around Julius Caesar, there were a lot of interesting people alive around that time, though almost exclusively Roman and Greek.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
By most interesting in 1609, do you actually mean 'most famous artists?' For that year, I'd toss in the Puritans Anne Hutchinson (18) and John Winthrop (20), and John Milton, who was three weeks old.
For 1842, Ralph Waldo Emerson (39). No contest. And William Miller (60). Garibaldi (35). Victoria (22).
I like Cashew's idea for the earlier time, though I'd go even earlier. Mid 5th century BC. There, you've got the Buddha, Pericles, Socrates and all the rest of the classical Greeks, and even Zoroaster.
Posts: 794 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's a debate on when Zoroaster lived, and personally I side with the people who say he lived earlier, maybe even much, much earlier than the mid 5th century BC, even if Zoroastrianism as a religion entered history more officially during that time period.
Mid 5th century BC however does offer a lot of great people to talk about, especially Greek. There's almost always a handful of great people to talk about in Greek or Roman history if you're back in that time period.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:By most interesting in 1609, do you actually mean 'most famous artists?'
Nope, I meant "most interesting." It's not my fault that artists and writers are more interesting than theologians and politicians and such.
Emerson, quite frankly, bores me to tears. But I was actually considering both Garibaldi and Victoria, and Hutchinson, Winthrop, and (especially) Milton are great suggestions.
For me--with my background in Roman history--a Classical setting is almost too on the nose; I'd feel like I'm playing to type. But if I could supplement greeksandromans with a few interesting Persians/Indians/Chinese/etc., that might just work.
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you're going to have the characters converse with each other at their ages, would it really be worthwhile to add in a young Winthrop and Hutchinson?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
There's some evidence that Hutchinson was theologically weird and interesting from her youth. I think she's a great choice. Other than Artimesia, you've got no women.
Plus, definitely go with Milton. You could get Jake Lloyd to play him.
Posts: 794 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you're going to have the characters converse with each other at their ages, would it really be worthwhile to add in a young Winthrop and Hutchinson?
I think that's actually why I find it amusing. Some of the characters will be in there for intellectual stimulation, but some will just be fun. Like Shakespeare--his Latin will be so barbaric that he'll be hard to understand.
Matt--I know, I know, but I'm just not into the Transcendentalists. And I do need more women, though I've got Florence Nightengale, 22; Charlotte/Emily Bronte, 26/24; and Mary Shelley, 45, on my list of possibilities.
quote:You could get Jake Lloyd to play him.
So wrong, and yet so right.
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
