[lbo-talk] Re: Fidel

[Brad DeLong]

>At 01:10 PM 05/08/2003 -0700, Brad quoting Adam Smith wrote:
>>"It is the misfortunes of Kings only which afford the proper subjects
>>for tragedy. They resemble, in this respect, the misfortunes of
>>lovers. Those two situations are the chief which interest us upon the
>>theatre; because, in spite of all that reason and experience can tell
>>us to the contrary, the prejudices of the imagination attach to these
>>two states a happiness superior to any other. To disturb, or to put
>>an end to such perfect enjoyment, seems to be the most atrocious of
>>all injuries. The traitor who conspires against the life of his
>>monarch, is thought a greater monster than any other murderer. All
>>the innocent blood that was shed in the civil wars, provoked less
>>indignation than the death of Charles I.
>
>I think the reason Kings get to be main characters in tragedy is 
>because they best exemplify the paradox of the "unfettered/free" 
>man. It is difficult to write a drama about people who live at the 
>command of others. As for those mourning the death of Charles the 
>1st, I think Smith is speaking for his class.
>
>>"A stranger to human nature, who saw the indifference of men about
>>the misery of their inferiors, and the regret and indignation which
>>they feel for the misfortunes and sufferings of those above them,
>>would be apt to imagine, that pain must be more agonizing, and the
>>convulsions of death more terrible to persons of higher rank, than to
>>those of meaner stations."
>
>I don't know about this either. It certainly doesn't describe my feelings.
>
>Joanna

But consider the reaction of the British public to the death of Diana 
Spenser...

Brad DeLong