Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

HappyMonk3y99 t1_iz6qasl wrote

Reply to comment by BeakersDream in Why is it that the life of William the Conquerer seems to be taken from a drama tv show? by Dawnbreaker234

But isn’t it based on facts and evidence that Richard was skilled in warfare? I feel like this is a difference between partial truths and holistic overview rather than accuracy vs inaccuracy. Again the relevance of each varies depending on the context and depth of conversation. If someone were to argue that Richard was a great king based solely on his martial prowess then I absolutely would agree with you, in that context

2

BeakersDream t1_iz72klc wrote

Popular culture has the unfortunate habit of presenting Richard as an overall good king BECAUSE he was an effective military leader. However, this presentation is inaccurate because if you take his entire reign into consideration it becomes patently obvious that he greatly struggled in non-military governance, thus making him a poor king.

My original comment was directed at the issues surrounding popular culture because they often present their work as factually accurate or 'based off true events' and as a result the audience will go 'okay so now I have an accurate idea of *insert topic*'

Just in response to your second sentence: Partial truths are still inaccurate. No one is going to be happy with "Well its mostly correct." If you're learning about something you're going to want a full understanding of the subject, not bits and pieces that give you a partial understanding. As a professor once told me, "The devil is in the details, if you don't address the details he'll make an ass out of you and I."

1