Talk:Jester
Page contents not supported in other languages.
![]() | Middle Ages Mid‑importance | ||||||
|
![]() | Occupations (inactive) | |||
|
![]() Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
I honestly don't know how things work here in Wiki land, please don't let that allow you to dismiss what I'm asking here. but in this part
Political significanceScholar David Carlyon has cast doubt on the "daring political jester", calling historical tales "apocryphal", and concluding that "popular culture embraces a sentimental image of the clown; writers reproduce that sentimentality in the jester, and academics in the Trickster", but it "falters as analysis".
Who is David Carlyon?
I took at look back thru the source and it has only been cited 3X. No one takes this seriously so why is it included? Seems kinda contrarian for contrarianism's sake. Entropic Katabasis (talk) 16:44, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looking into it, this recurring quote about jester's privilege is one of those zombie edits where text that used to be in a Wikipedia article gets screenshotted for a meme (https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2464965-maladaptive-pattern), is later removed from the original Wikipedia article for some policy reason, and then occasionally people seeing the meme months or years later will look it up on Wikipedia, find that the text isn't there and instinctively decide that it needs to be added back. Belbury (talk) 15:07, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the main text was copied from the TED-Ed video on jesters. The first example seems to be at 0:58 in the video "Jesters had unique relationships to power:". 84.224.177.150 (talk) 21:10, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Till Eulenspiegel stands out as a sole fictional character among a discussion of historical jesters in various countries. Surely his inclusion at List of fictional tricksters is more appropriate, and at the very least at Fool (stock character), than in this article. Ibadibam (talk) 06:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]