Anybody can become angry — that is easy, but to be angry with the right man and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way — that is not within everybody's power and is not easy.
We don’t have to imagine it, we saw it in the past. My father was a soy-infused softie. Then he was drafted into the army, became a fit, fighting machine, was shipped off to France to join the tail end of the Battle of the Bulge in WWII.
Never confuse how the civilized man behaves to how he could behave when he is trained to kill.
Hmm fascinating, I think he must have always had a certain grit in him. Thanks for sharing Nick, can I just say your father did something great and wondrous, even as I feel bad that he likely suffered a great deal in WWII.
I loved this piece! I'm forwarding it to my husband and plan to print it out and discuss with my 9 year old son (and younger daughter to her level). I homeschool and my emphasis right now, is really character development. We cover the other stuff but everything (even when they don't notice) is centered around what kind of people we choose to be, not just who we say we are. Also, dispensing the idea that avoiding confrontation is any kind of solution. I didn't realize how much my husband actually subscribed to this idea, lol, to bad for him. Good thing I didn't underestimate his loyalty. He's stuck with me and grows despite himself lol. And I say that with all the love. It's just what we've been trained to do, not because it's right but because it makes it easier for those that would control us. Anyway, I digress. I just wanted to share my true appreciation for your work and this piece in particular! Much value for the collective 😉
Anytime madame, I’m glad you like it that much, though remember also that real men do negotiate and compromise with their wives and kindred. Ferocity is reserved for those who are our enemies, reserved for the external world outside the home, for those who oppose us. Gentleness reserved for those we love.
I imagine your husband might agree with this sentiment haha.
Do feel free to discuss it. I hope to have the Grande Code fully finished before December if possible X) so hopefully you’ll have even more to discuss with the kids and husband soon. Let me know what they think?
Absolutely! In fact, as I was writing/reflecting, I was considering how he absolutely also teaches honing ones frustration and anger and he is a much better reflection of that strength! Sheathing his sword, so to speak. I am breaking the habit of the quick draw, haha. (I really loved that reference and analogy, BTW.) I am really working on reigning in my quick reaction and not sparking confrontation just for the sake of what I would now consider a "self perceived solution" - where we feel like we're interjecting for the benefit but are actually inserting our foot into our mouth, lol.
I've got to say, as someone who waited until I was 29 to have kids and my husband is 18 years older than me, there are no life lessons like having children. And if you choose to take on the responsibility with your eyes wide open, because you know, knowing is better than pretending, it'll change your life, hopefully for the better.
Parenting through this time is something I'm incredibly passionate about and yet it feels so personal. I struggle to write about it as openly as I feel it needs to be written about and discussed. I'm currently working on and through this block of mine.
In the mean time, I thoroughly enjoy content and discussions such as these 😀
I totally get it with having to reign in the ‘foot in mouth’ I’m still learning to do that.
And as to myself, I’ve waited until 33 or so before looking into having kids, though my situation is likely different. I’ve only kudos to give to you, and plenty of praise good lady.
I’m glad you like these sorts of discussions and essays X)
Conan definitely wasn't a safe person. He followed his appetites, which included fighting, exploring, savoring women, and carousing. He was a pirate, a khan, a merchant guard, and a king.
Women felt safe around him, but his wildness affected them, and they were often described as being at his feet, on their knees.
Yes indeed, many of them were, with even the likes of Belit and Valeria both dangerous women reduced to such a state.
What is your opinion of Zenobia, the only one never described that way but being so bold with her passion as to make Conan blink?
As to Conan he is the living definition of the word ‘farouche’ and is ferocious, and yet not a disloyal man. He might occasionally sell his loyalties for coin, but then there are stories where we refuses out of friendship with this man or that one. Heck when he’s at one point promoted above an officer he liked he’s respectful and even kindly and polite to the man (a rare occurence for Conan).
Zenobia was also brought to her knees. Remember, she said she'd seen him from afar and wanted to be rescued by him. If he could get her out of the seraglio, she would have served him happily for the rest of her life. She was in love with him enough to put her own life in danger to set up his escape.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree. The untamed man or the barbarian is about as effeminate (in the old sense of the word) as a man can get. When I think of a barbarian in reality, rather than the sort being glorified in pop culture, I think of this quote:
"The untamed men were nothing but effeminate brutes. They wouldn’t keep their word, never took responsibility and had to result to violence because they had no concept of social dominance."
Now don't get me wrong, I understand the need for men to be ferocious. But that ferocity needs to be controlled. Being tamed doesn't mean being harmless. A sheepdog is tamed, but it is not harmless.
And I’m not sure I buy into the effeminite barbarian stereotype of history as we know the Visigoths were no effeminite pansies, given what happened at Adrianople and the Sack of Rome.
I’m going to say they were not always half as ferocious as what some make them out to be, but to say they were all effeminite is false. The untamed man is the opposite of feminine arguably. I doubt we can describe Charlemagne, Oda Nobunaga, Taizong as feminine as each of them were untamed and ferocious.
But Michael I just said that the ferocity has to be controlled in the essay. My analogy was of bared steel and unbared steel.
I'd argue though that tamed/domestication of man does indeed = harmlessness. I'd say the chihuahua is a better example of tamed. The sheepdog is never totally tamed at its core, and that it is gentle but not harmless.
When I mean effeminate, I don't mean feminine. Rather, I mean "unmanly". Someone who indulges in vices is effeminate, even if he is not a homosexual (for example). Rather, he is someone who is spiritually weak and gives in to temptations, which is as unmanly as you can get. Another example: someone who beats his wife is effeminate. Not because he isn't "tough", but because picking on someone weaker than he is unbecoming of a man. I hope that helps.
Anyways, I don't agree that some of the men you brought up are examples of an "untamed man". For example, I don't think of Aragorn as "untamed" by any means. But I've only watched the Peter Jackson movies, so I won't make too much of that. On the other hand, Charlemagne was literally crowned by the Pope, implying that he accepts a higher authority than he is. That is not the mark of someone who is "untamed".
As for the chihuahua example, I would say that people can be "too civilized". So that would be the other extreme. Of course, chihuahuas are also known to be very aggressive and would bark at everything they see (but I digress, there's a point that can be made from this but I don't know how to express it, lol).
I suppose my argument is that you can't have controlled ferocity if you are a barbarian. It's simply not possible. A barbarian or an untamed man by definition is a brute. Rather than the Samurai of Old Japan, I think of gangbangers in Detroit who kill each other at the first sign of "disrespect".
Ah, when you describe it that way I do fully agree with you Michael.
I’d say Charlemagne though dominated the Pope, bear in mind he pardoned the man and demanded the coronation. So going to disagree with you there. But yeah one can be too ‘civilized’.
I meant when I said barbarian and untamed purely in the mode of how Howard interpreted those words. Thoughts on his views?
I haven't read Howard's works (yet), so I can't really comment on him per se.
That said, I have many times run into this quote of his which from my understanding is from one of his Conan books (correct me if I'm wrong):
“Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.”
To me, this is something that sounds good until I actually started to think about the implications. Again, I can't help but think of the black ghetto where you have to watch what you say if you don't want to get shot. Heck, it reminds me of social media (especially back in the covid days) where saying the wrong thing can get you banned (effectively killing you in cyberspace).
If that's what Howard meant by untamed, then I want no part of it, to be quite honest.
Howard was anti-pc, and was referring to those who would wish to kill you socially and cancel you and the like. And that politeness and mindfulness is necessary amongst those who might otherwise kill you or maim you.
Anyone who has hunted or otherwise killed his own food knows in the back of his mind that everyone is ultimately made of meat and incredibly fragile. It's an instinctive understanding alien to a lot of men nowadays, but those who have killed, know. What may look like ferocity to some may just as easily be necessary action based on a cool view of an uncomfortable reality. The beefsteak will never sympathise, but sometimes what must be done, must be done.
Agreed, I’ve been around hunters, and am about to go for my hunting license, and have eaten hunted meat a good chunk of my life.
Human beings are fragile things, and ferocity scorned by some as intolerable or unrealistic are to my mind already tamed. I’m not calling for men to be ‘gigachads’ or whatever internet ideal is desirable right now, but just to make themselves fierce and protect that which they love.
Felanar and Kara will cut off your head if you threaten their family, but are gentle and loving toward bunnies, foxes, and innocent villagers.
Haha very well put!
Anybody can become angry — that is easy, but to be angry with the right man and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way — that is not within everybody's power and is not easy.
― Aristotle
Wise words, always did love Aristotle.
Imagine the soy-infused spoiled brats on the front lines!
We don’t have to imagine it, we saw it in the past. My father was a soy-infused softie. Then he was drafted into the army, became a fit, fighting machine, was shipped off to France to join the tail end of the Battle of the Bulge in WWII.
Never confuse how the civilized man behaves to how he could behave when he is trained to kill.
Hmm fascinating, I think he must have always had a certain grit in him. Thanks for sharing Nick, can I just say your father did something great and wondrous, even as I feel bad that he likely suffered a great deal in WWII.
Thus, we need to means for such potential! Tainting and degradating our institutions kills the fuel that builds civilizations.
Very well said!
I rather feel pity for them.
I loved this piece! I'm forwarding it to my husband and plan to print it out and discuss with my 9 year old son (and younger daughter to her level). I homeschool and my emphasis right now, is really character development. We cover the other stuff but everything (even when they don't notice) is centered around what kind of people we choose to be, not just who we say we are. Also, dispensing the idea that avoiding confrontation is any kind of solution. I didn't realize how much my husband actually subscribed to this idea, lol, to bad for him. Good thing I didn't underestimate his loyalty. He's stuck with me and grows despite himself lol. And I say that with all the love. It's just what we've been trained to do, not because it's right but because it makes it easier for those that would control us. Anyway, I digress. I just wanted to share my true appreciation for your work and this piece in particular! Much value for the collective 😉
Anytime madame, I’m glad you like it that much, though remember also that real men do negotiate and compromise with their wives and kindred. Ferocity is reserved for those who are our enemies, reserved for the external world outside the home, for those who oppose us. Gentleness reserved for those we love.
I imagine your husband might agree with this sentiment haha.
Do feel free to discuss it. I hope to have the Grande Code fully finished before December if possible X) so hopefully you’ll have even more to discuss with the kids and husband soon. Let me know what they think?
Absolutely! In fact, as I was writing/reflecting, I was considering how he absolutely also teaches honing ones frustration and anger and he is a much better reflection of that strength! Sheathing his sword, so to speak. I am breaking the habit of the quick draw, haha. (I really loved that reference and analogy, BTW.) I am really working on reigning in my quick reaction and not sparking confrontation just for the sake of what I would now consider a "self perceived solution" - where we feel like we're interjecting for the benefit but are actually inserting our foot into our mouth, lol.
I've got to say, as someone who waited until I was 29 to have kids and my husband is 18 years older than me, there are no life lessons like having children. And if you choose to take on the responsibility with your eyes wide open, because you know, knowing is better than pretending, it'll change your life, hopefully for the better.
Parenting through this time is something I'm incredibly passionate about and yet it feels so personal. I struggle to write about it as openly as I feel it needs to be written about and discussed. I'm currently working on and through this block of mine.
In the mean time, I thoroughly enjoy content and discussions such as these 😀
I totally get it with having to reign in the ‘foot in mouth’ I’m still learning to do that.
And as to myself, I’ve waited until 33 or so before looking into having kids, though my situation is likely different. I’ve only kudos to give to you, and plenty of praise good lady.
I’m glad you like these sorts of discussions and essays X)
Conan definitely wasn't a safe person. He followed his appetites, which included fighting, exploring, savoring women, and carousing. He was a pirate, a khan, a merchant guard, and a king.
Women felt safe around him, but his wildness affected them, and they were often described as being at his feet, on their knees.
Yes indeed, many of them were, with even the likes of Belit and Valeria both dangerous women reduced to such a state.
What is your opinion of Zenobia, the only one never described that way but being so bold with her passion as to make Conan blink?
As to Conan he is the living definition of the word ‘farouche’ and is ferocious, and yet not a disloyal man. He might occasionally sell his loyalties for coin, but then there are stories where we refuses out of friendship with this man or that one. Heck when he’s at one point promoted above an officer he liked he’s respectful and even kindly and polite to the man (a rare occurence for Conan).
Zenobia was also brought to her knees. Remember, she said she'd seen him from afar and wanted to be rescued by him. If he could get her out of the seraglio, she would have served him happily for the rest of her life. She was in love with him enough to put her own life in danger to set up his escape.
Fair enough
I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree. The untamed man or the barbarian is about as effeminate (in the old sense of the word) as a man can get. When I think of a barbarian in reality, rather than the sort being glorified in pop culture, I think of this quote:
"The untamed men were nothing but effeminate brutes. They wouldn’t keep their word, never took responsibility and had to result to violence because they had no concept of social dominance."
(Source: https://shorttermthoughts.substack.com/p/the-gigafad)
IOW, they're basically the Sith.
Now don't get me wrong, I understand the need for men to be ferocious. But that ferocity needs to be controlled. Being tamed doesn't mean being harmless. A sheepdog is tamed, but it is not harmless.
And I’m not sure I buy into the effeminite barbarian stereotype of history as we know the Visigoths were no effeminite pansies, given what happened at Adrianople and the Sack of Rome.
I’m going to say they were not always half as ferocious as what some make them out to be, but to say they were all effeminite is false. The untamed man is the opposite of feminine arguably. I doubt we can describe Charlemagne, Oda Nobunaga, Taizong as feminine as each of them were untamed and ferocious.
But Michael I just said that the ferocity has to be controlled in the essay. My analogy was of bared steel and unbared steel.
I'd argue though that tamed/domestication of man does indeed = harmlessness. I'd say the chihuahua is a better example of tamed. The sheepdog is never totally tamed at its core, and that it is gentle but not harmless.
When I mean effeminate, I don't mean feminine. Rather, I mean "unmanly". Someone who indulges in vices is effeminate, even if he is not a homosexual (for example). Rather, he is someone who is spiritually weak and gives in to temptations, which is as unmanly as you can get. Another example: someone who beats his wife is effeminate. Not because he isn't "tough", but because picking on someone weaker than he is unbecoming of a man. I hope that helps.
Anyways, I don't agree that some of the men you brought up are examples of an "untamed man". For example, I don't think of Aragorn as "untamed" by any means. But I've only watched the Peter Jackson movies, so I won't make too much of that. On the other hand, Charlemagne was literally crowned by the Pope, implying that he accepts a higher authority than he is. That is not the mark of someone who is "untamed".
As for the chihuahua example, I would say that people can be "too civilized". So that would be the other extreme. Of course, chihuahuas are also known to be very aggressive and would bark at everything they see (but I digress, there's a point that can be made from this but I don't know how to express it, lol).
I suppose my argument is that you can't have controlled ferocity if you are a barbarian. It's simply not possible. A barbarian or an untamed man by definition is a brute. Rather than the Samurai of Old Japan, I think of gangbangers in Detroit who kill each other at the first sign of "disrespect".
Ah, when you describe it that way I do fully agree with you Michael.
I’d say Charlemagne though dominated the Pope, bear in mind he pardoned the man and demanded the coronation. So going to disagree with you there. But yeah one can be too ‘civilized’.
I meant when I said barbarian and untamed purely in the mode of how Howard interpreted those words. Thoughts on his views?
I haven't read Howard's works (yet), so I can't really comment on him per se.
That said, I have many times run into this quote of his which from my understanding is from one of his Conan books (correct me if I'm wrong):
“Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.”
To me, this is something that sounds good until I actually started to think about the implications. Again, I can't help but think of the black ghetto where you have to watch what you say if you don't want to get shot. Heck, it reminds me of social media (especially back in the covid days) where saying the wrong thing can get you banned (effectively killing you in cyberspace).
If that's what Howard meant by untamed, then I want no part of it, to be quite honest.
Howard was anti-pc, and was referring to those who would wish to kill you socially and cancel you and the like. And that politeness and mindfulness is necessary amongst those who might otherwise kill you or maim you.
I’d recommend reading Howard’s work Michael.
Anyone who has hunted or otherwise killed his own food knows in the back of his mind that everyone is ultimately made of meat and incredibly fragile. It's an instinctive understanding alien to a lot of men nowadays, but those who have killed, know. What may look like ferocity to some may just as easily be necessary action based on a cool view of an uncomfortable reality. The beefsteak will never sympathise, but sometimes what must be done, must be done.
Agreed, I’ve been around hunters, and am about to go for my hunting license, and have eaten hunted meat a good chunk of my life.
Human beings are fragile things, and ferocity scorned by some as intolerable or unrealistic are to my mind already tamed. I’m not calling for men to be ‘gigachads’ or whatever internet ideal is desirable right now, but just to make themselves fierce and protect that which they love.
Exactly.
Merci