The History of the Castrati

I watched a play on the castrati last night. While the play itself was a bit out-in-left-field for me, it was interesting in that I had never heard about the castrati (yes, history was always a weak spot). These were boys who were castrated for the purpose of becoming great soprano players. I thought this might have been a myth, but this article from the Urological Sciences Research Foundation website suggests there were valid medical reasons why this was the case.

The genital mutilation caused a unique physical appearance too. An excerpt from the USRF article:

The manner in which the castrati appeared to their audiences can be judged from our clinical experience of eunuchoidism due to spontaneous primary hypogonadism. A tallness of stature, which was unusual in the 18th century, was commented upon by contemporary writers and was due to failure of the epiphyses to close at puberty, thereby allowing the unopposed action of growth hormone and other growth factors. There was a smooth pale skin, with, later in life, fine wrinkles around the eyes, no beard, plentiful scalp hair, a tendency to obesity, rounding of the hips, and narrowness of the shoulders; the pitch of the speaking voice was similar to that of a female.

I did find some disparities between what I read online and what was talked about in the play, so I guess take I have to everything with a grain of salt, unless I decide to make a trip to the library.

Pick and Pan of the Week: American History

Pick of the Week

Why do high school students hate history so much? Author James Loewen argues it's because our presentation of the material is so sanitized, so heroificied (he made that word up!) that history becomes not the story of real events past, but rather an attempt to force a recitation of cherry-picked, or sometimes invented, facts. The author argues that every college professor, and several high school teacher, knows that history is about controversy, the clash of ideas, of tortuous opposing viewpoints, and yet the presentation of this information is so distorted as to make a realtor proud!

But worse, it may be racist. Loewen argues convincingly that there is an inherent tendency to ignore the contributions of non-whites and overplay those of Europeans, even in the face of tremendous historical evidence to the contrary.

As someone who loathed history in high school and now am discovering a love for it, I concur! So it does excite me to learn (not in this book) that, for example, that George Washington likely defrauded his fellow veterans of the French and Indian War to obtain their lands for dirt cheap - it doesn't diminish, in my view, his very important contributions to the America we cherish today, but does make him more human, and me more optimistic.

Pan of the Week

I have a confession to make - I did not finish watching this film. Actually I didn't even come close. Ken Burns is an acclaimed film maker, but sometimes I wonder if he had learned his trade from Communist propaganda training schools. All the criticisms from Loewen apply to this film. The last straw was when a discussion of slavery came on, and they somewhat brushed Jefferson's hypocrisy on this issue as somehow that he realized he was ahead of his times, and chose incremental change over substantial reform.

A Potrait of Lee

Interesting article on how the Confederate general, Robert E. Lee wasn't quite what he's made out to be. He did believe in slavery and was quite harsh with his slaves. Hmm, add one to list of books to read.

Incidentally, a very good historical piece is Setting the World Ablaze, John Ferlig's bio of the real George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and John Adamns.