Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2012 December 25

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 25

Early American History New York University

A few months ago, the NY Times posted an article and included a photo of a Library bldg [ I think, if memory serves me right ]. I hope it was NYU and not Harvard inter alia.

The photo showed the front steps and massive columns at the entrance. An overhead inscription, in part, read something to the effect of " ... in the province of ". The remaining portion out of the photo shot.

I wrote the NYT, asking if that building was relocated from some Canadian province originally, or was NYC originally in a province. Also, could the original photo have included the whole inscription overhead. The reply from NYT was simply that no answer was available.

Any relevant info ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve8rox (talk • contribs) 00:23, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Province of New York would likely get you started. --Jayron32 02:51, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like Low Memorial Library.--Cam (talk) 04:11, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Source for quotation

"I believe stories are written and read to rebel against the fact that you only live once." Any idea who said this? It's supposedly from an author. Dncsky (talk) 03:43, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Did you try asking The Guardian Angel - it's one of his/her favourite authors, so he/she might know. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:00, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll try to message that person but I doubt they know the original source.Dncsky (talk) 07:10, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Christianity and America

If America is a secular state with separation of church and state, it doesn't have a Christian heritage, and it wasn't founded as a Christian nation, then how come the following things?

1. In the Declaration of Independence, it says, "All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights."

2. When its presidents swear into office, they hold a Bible and say "So help me God.".

3. Its motto is In God We Trust. In its money, it is written, In God We Trust.

Annihilationism (talk) 05:41, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Your 2nd assumption is wrong, it does have a Christian heritage. Also, all your examples show the belief in some God, not particularly Christianity, although I do agree that a secular state shouldn't profess a belief in God at all (and using God in the singular also exclude polytheists, like some Hindus). StuRat (talk) 06:06, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that's the Christian Bible in the example of the swearing in ceremony. HiLo48 (talk) 08:26, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Not always. John Quincy Adams, Teddy Roosevelt, and Lyndon B. Johnson didn't use a bible.Dncsky (talk) 09:53, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Why are some people here so keen to prove a non-existent point? Annihilationism mentioned the Bible. I said it was the Christian Bible. To say that some didn't use a Bible is to actually disagree with Annihilationism, not me. HiLo48 (talk) 10:04, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Annihilationism posited that the Bible is mandatory, and I proved him wrong, which in turn makes your point void. I assumed that my response to you would be read by Annihilationism as well, so there's no need for a second reply specifically addressed to him.Dncsky (talk) 11:20, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

No, it doesn't make my point void at all. HiLo48 (talk) 14:35, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

"God" is undefined. Also, "In God we trust - all others pay cash." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:17, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Annihilationism -- See Ceremonial Deism... -- AnonMoos (talk) 06:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

"So help me God" isn't prescribed by law. The president can say whatever they want; I see nothing that proscribes the president from ending the oath with "So help me, FSM.".Dncsky (talk) 06:54, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

You're right, there's no "So help me God" in it.[1] If they say it, that's because it's strictly a custom. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:13, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

The Declaration is not a part of the US Constitution. Also, "Creator" can be taken any number of ways. "Mother Nature", for one. And by the way, the wording is "UNalienable". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:10, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

"Creator" was chosen as opposed to "God", not as a synonym of it. This is perfectly in line with the Enlightenment belief in deism, because not all of the "founding fathers" (is there a more neutral term?) were sure they believed in the Christian deity. --140.180.249.194 (talk) 09:25, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. The Declaration of Independence is not law, as the United States Constitution is. It's not at all difficult to understand that a nation has a particular religious "heritage", but that doesn't necessarily become its law. Shadowjams (talk) 10:52, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Japanese home funerals

A few days ago, I watched the last episode of the anime Chūnibyō Demo Koi ga Shitai!. At the beginning of the episode, the main female character is mourning the death of her father. What I noticed is that the funeral took place at their house (which, in a previous episode, was revealed to have since been demolished). Since then, I have been wondering: are home funerals commonplace in Japan? I read the article on Japanese funerals way back (before watching the series, in order to understand one of my earlier questions on Japanese funerals), but it doesn't mention anything about home funerals. However, from what I've read about the topic, wakes and funerals frequently take place in temples or halls. So are home funerals common or rare in Japan?

As a side question, are home funerals common in the United States? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:44, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the US: The article Wake (ceremony) says "A wake (Irish: faire) is a ceremony associated with death. Traditionally, a wake takes place in the house of the deceased, with the body present; however, modern wakes are often performed at a funeral home. In the United States and Canada it is synonymous with a viewing." Duoduoduo (talk) 15:39, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

As for Japanese funerals, our article leaves it unclear to me as to whether the wake (viewing) is typically held at the home shrine or at a public temple. But the section Japanese funeral#Funeral implies that the norm is to hold the funeral itself at the temple. However, a February 2012 edit on the article's talk page says "The article as it stands is not very informative about the current practices, there is a desire often seen in articles about Japan to pick out a few extreme practices and emphasize those, but not to discuss the most common practices." So I don't know how much one can safely infer from this article. Duoduoduo (talk) 16:01, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I cannot speak for Japan, though as for America: It may depend on what part of the US, but I've not heard of any home funerals occurring in my lifetime. There are funeral homes all over the place, a few going back to the 19th century. I've seen home funerals occasionally in movies, usually in not in the present day, and generally rural areas or in areas with higher Irish, Latino, or Asian populations. This New York Times article shows that this is still not the norm. This Washington Post article confirms my suspicion that most areas in the 19th and 20th century came to require funeral homes to be used for health reasons (and sometimes for the benefit of the funeral industry).

Checking with my mother, the last home funeral she went to was when she was a teenager, about 40 years ago, and in a poor town that was 20 miles away from a funeral home. She knows from her genealogical research that home funerals were pretty much the only option in the early 19th century and earlier. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:27, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Home funerals have been getting fewer in Japan. See this translated page. According to this pdf file (page 13), funeral at home was 45.2% in 1995 and 12.7% in 2007. Oda Mari (talk) 05:56, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Exactly why is the United States relatively conservative compared to European countries and Canada?

I've noticed that the United States seems to tend to lean towards conservatism while Europe and Canada seem to tend to be liberal, in both cultural and political aspects. For example, while same-sex marriage is now legal in some states, European countries legalized it first. Europeans and Canadians also tend to be more open-minded (for example, Canadians and Europeans [even the British except for some values like speed] use the metric system, they travel abroad more often than Americans, and Europe [Iceland to be precise] even has an openly gay prime minister), whereas in the United States, everyone wants to be politically correct. And let's not even get started on American exceptionalism and American xenophobia. But what are the factors as to why the United States tends to be conservative while Canada and Europe tend to be liberal? I've read articles on Wikipedia about the topic, but they don't answer the question why America seems to be more conservative than Canada or Europe. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:14, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

For a classic work, you can look at "Why is There no Socialism in the United States" by Werner Sombart. Also, in many European countries, the death penalty was abolished, the metric system adopted, currency decimalized etc. often in spite of the wishes of the majority of the population, while in the United States, the widespread public adoption of the metric system failed precisely because of public discontent -- which may make Europe more enlightened than the United States, but it doesn't seem to make it more democratic. In Germany, when the Euro was adopted and the Deutschmark abolished, this decision ignored the contrary views of a very significant proportion of the German population, probably a majority -- and it's precisely that fact which now greatly constrains Merkel's political freedom of action to implement sweeping measures in response to the situation in Greece etc... AnonMoos (talk) 12:47, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

P.S. As for traveling, if you've looked at a map, you may notice that only Canada and Mexico directly border on the U.S., and many parts of the U.S. aren't very close to either... AnonMoos (talk) 12:59, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

• And Canada borders...? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

The U.S. (or also St. Pierre and Miquelon and Greenland if you count sea boundaries). The patterns of Canadians travelling to the U.S. and Americans travelling to Canada are not going to be symmetrical, because the Canadian population is heavily-concentrated in areas within a few hundred miles of the Canada-U.S. border, while the U.S. population is not concentrated in such areas... AnonMoos (talk) 05:48, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

• Which would, theoretically, preclude Canadians from being more dominant in Europe than Americans. I generally have to travel through the US anyways when I go back home. Toronto's just too far.

As a side note, Americans seem more common than Canadians here in Indonesia, although Australians and some Europeans (French and Dutch, especially) are much more common. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:07, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to see some reference for the claim that in many European countries, the death penalty was abolished, the metric system adopted, currency decimalized against the majority opinion. Also for the claim that establishing the Euro in Germany was contrary to the views of a significant proportion of the population. Both claims sound like a pipe-dream of the British/American tabloids to me. The introduction of the Euro in Germany was never controversial enough for it to become an important issue in any elections. 81.156.176.219 (talk) 00:12, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

We've had this discussion several times before at WP:RDH, it should be possibly to dig up some older discussions. --Soman (talk) 15:41, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Re the travelling bit... As an Australian who has visited the US a few times, there's an uncomfortable recurring conversation point I've experienced while there. People discover I'm Australian (usually as soon as I open my mouth), and then say "I've always wanted to visit Australia, but it's so far away." The thought that immediately goes through my head is "Well, I've made it here. What's really stopping you?", but I've never felt confident that I could express that thought diplomatically, so I usually just change the subject, sit back, and enjoy the great hospitality. (Still confused about tipping though.) HiLo48 (talk) 16:03, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

HiLo48 -- Australia is a long way from the continental United States for a pure pleasure vacation, without definite goals. The travel times mean that a vacation of less than about five days is not too practical (i.e. it's not a weekend getaway), and if you're contemplating taking at least five days off and traveling halfway around the world, then you're probably also contemplating some alternatives -- and if you mainly want some beach/pool lounging with a little light sightseeing, then there are more accessible (and cheaper) destinations than Australia. Ditto if you're looking for some exposure to exotic cultures. Australia is also less easy to combine with other countries on the same itinerary (the way you can have a sightseeing trip which covers parts of both Germany and France, etc.). AnonMoos (talk) 00:08, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't think you have understood my point at all. HiLo48 (talk) 00:20, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

HiLo, I think I understand your point. It is true that Americans are probably less likely to leave their country than Australians. (Europeans are also likely to travel outside their countries, but that's not a fair comparison because it is easy to leave a European country by traveling a few hundred kilometers for a weekend getaway.) Probably the biggest reason is that most Americans get no more than a week or two (if that) of vacation/holidays per year. It is relatively easy for Europeans and Australians, who may get more than 4 weeks paid leave from work per year, to travel across oceans and time zones. If you get just one week of vacation, it will take you half of that week to travel to and from Australia, and you will leave long before you've escaped from brutal jet lag. I'd like to see how far you travel with a typical American job. Another factor is that, let's face it, there isn't really that much to see in Australia. The country has half a dozen cities worthy of the name. Certainly there are some beautiful natural features, but after a few years you've seen most of them. By contrast, Americans don't have to leave their country to experience a wide variety of cultural and natural regions, and there are at least a couple dozen major urban areas rich in culture and worth a visit. While I have traveled to many countries on several continents, I have been much more fortunate than most Americans in having gaps between commitments or jobs with liberal vacation allowances. Typically, when I visit another country on a quick 7-10 day trip, I run into Europeans and Australians halfway through a 6-week odyssey. Easy for them. If I did that, I'd be out of a job. Marco polo (talk) 01:20, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I could easily find some Americans who unconsciously believe that any distance leaving US is magically much larger than the distance coming to the US. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually, how far or near you are willing to travel is psychological. Objective is only the distance (x miles), but your disposition not. OsmanRF34 (talk) 03:28, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Despite claiming/trying to be a melting pot, and despite having a fair amount of diversity, much of the US is isolated from radically different cultures (I once dated a woman who had never had Mexican, Thai, German, Japanese, Arabic, or Indian food, and had no American Southern food beyond the occasional KFC or Popeyes). (I'm also amazed at how many Americans, even Southerners, have any trouble understanding Gullah). The US (being barely over two centuries old) is also only just "finishing" (as if a culture can do so and survive) developing a unique identity (though the rapidly increasing Latino and Asian populations should make things more interesting), and a lot of that is based on opposition to the left-wing ("liberal") Soviets in the 20th century, and a big (conservative) Romantic "ain't home great?" attitude in the 19th century. Europe became more left-wing and socially liberal while the US was still figuring out whether or not it was going to grant some basic human rights (c.f. Benjamin Disraeli and American Civil War). However, our right-wing politics aren't as commonly insane as other countries. The largest US Neo-Nazi party only has about 400 members (with the non-member votes maybe balancing out the guaranteed felon members lost votes), while in much smaller countries, the UK's National Front has twice that many votes, multiple Swiss groups each have at least twice that many votes, and Greece's Golden Dawn has a hundred times that many votes. The US's far-right may be equally common and crazy, but most of them pretend to be sane, totally-not-racist Republicans like Michael Bloomberg from 2001 to 2007. (Re tipping: leave the server an amount equal to 15% of the bill for acceptable service, 20% to 25% and a quick thank you note for good to great service, but really only 10% at buffets or poor service. Tip delivery but not take-out or drive-throughs. A lot of servers get paid near nothing because they get tip money, and may bring home more that way for doing a better job than not. When paying by card, it is also acceptable to write "sorry, I can't math" in the tip field and give something sorta/approximately/maybe/not close to the correct tip amount to round the total up to some nice even number. If the server takes your payment (instead of paying at the register), it is also acceptable to round up to the next highest $5, $10, or $20 (depending on how expensive the meal is) and tell the server to keep the change because "sorry, I horrible with math.") Ian.thomson (talk) 17:11, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

The United States is one of, if not the, most multicultural country in the world (Brazil has a strong claim on this too, but I can't think of any other country of any size who would otherwise). If you lump all western European nations together and still continue with the "not a melting pot" line, over 10% of Americans are foreign born and the U.S. Our article on the U.S. says "It is one of the world's most ethnically diverse and multicultural nations, the product of large-scale immigration from many countries.[6]" Shadowjams (talk) 00:13, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Of those %10 who were foreign born, how many of them are still in major port cities? The US is extremely multicultural overall, but that multiculturalism is concentrated on the edges of the country. The Midwestern United States (except Illinois, thanks to Chicago; and Michigan, thanks to Dearborn) are not especially diverse, and the northern Mountain States are also a bit isolated (though I gather it's easier to find Native Americans there than the West coast). Idaho is about as white as the insides of their potatoes. Most of the non-WASP larger populations are in the west (Asian, Latino, see San Francisco as an example), the south (Latinos, African-Americans, see Atlanta or Houston for examples), or in larger cities along the East Coast (such as New York City). The boonies in Minnesota or Nebraska? Around 90% white, give or take a few points. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Based on the info in this article (Non-Hispanic Whites), 18 out of 50 U.S. states were 80.0% or more Non-Hispanic White in 2010. This number has probably been lowered to 17 states (or even less), since Utah was just barely above 80.0% white in 2010 and that was two years ago. Even some of the other states which are above 80.0% non-Hispanic white by population are just barely above that 80.0% mark, and will fall below this mark in the next decade or two. Futurist110 (talk) 00:55, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

The west coast of New York City is the Hudson River, though I've never heard it described as a West Coast city. --Jayron32 01:39, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

D'oh! That's what I get for editing sober (and tired). Consarn egg nog didn't have any rum just because there was a Southern Baptist preacher there too. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:42, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

They say that Jewish people don't recognize the divinity of Jesus, that Protestants don't recognize the authority of the Pope, and that Baptists don't recognize each other at the liquor store. --Jayron32 01:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

ATTENTION ATTENTION!! Read this previous discussion: [2]. And Merry Christmas. --140.180.249.194 (talk) 21:25, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

"I don't understand why you're not more fascinated with this! I mean, we could be living next door to a murderer, Larry."

"New York is a melting pot!" Shadowjams (talk) 00:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Here's another link to an earlier RefDesk discussion on this topic. Marco polo (talk) 01:28, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

This would be an educated guess, but perhaps the U.S. not enduring two world wars on its territory might have something to do with it, as well as the whole concept of American exceptionalism and the stronger influence of the Religious Right here in the United States. Futurist110 (talk) 06:11, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Maybe you're unaware of some of the stuff the Germans and the Japanese were up to during WWII, including attacks not just at Pearl Harbor but also on land. Regardless, Rugged Individualism figures into it also. There's an inherent distrust of authoritarian governments or expecting someone else to fix our problems. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:23, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Where else on American soil besides Pearl Harbor did the Germans and Japanese attack? Futurist110 (talk) 20:11, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Attu and Kiska, the Oregon forests I, and the Oregon forests II. The general article is American Theater (1939-1945) (whose content would appear to be more accurately summarized by its former name "Attacks on North America during World War II")... AnonMoos (talk) 21:23, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Alright but the impact of those attacks on the U.S. wasn't anywhere near the impact of WWII (and perhaps WWI as well) on many/most European countries. Futurist110 (talk) 00:48, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

We've had quite enough wars on our soil. To say that Europe "endured" two world wars (the first of which led to the second one) suggests those wars were imposed by some external force somehow. As to the original poster's question, if you think "puritanism", it explains a great deal about the USA. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you about Puritanism. As for the wars, Europeans started them but these wars took a heavy toll on Europe to an extent that I doubt most wars on U.S. soil did. In the last 200 years, only the U.S. Civil War even comes somewhat close to the extent of the damage that WWI and WWII did on some/many European countries, and that was because Americans were fighting themselves in the U.S. Civil War. Futurist110 (talk) 11:36, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Types of criminal gangs

From my extensive knowledge of television, I have become aware of three different types of organised crime gang: the "traditional" Mafia -style mob (including Irish, Jewish, etc. mobs) like on The Sopranos, biker gangs such as the Hells Angels like on Sons of Anarchy, and street gangs like the Crips and Bloods, of the sort depicted on The Wire. I was thinking about this earlier and I got to wondering how different these organisations really are. I could tell you that Mafiosi wear suits, and bikers ride motorbikes, but does anyone know what the major differences between how these gangs work and how they're structured are? That is, if there really are major differences. --149.135.146.66 (talk) 14:50, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

This is also based on my extensive knowledge of television, but the Mafia seem to penetrate more deeply into a society than any other type of gang, and enjoy something close to social respectability in some circles. They also assassinate judges, which I think is very rare for other types of gangs. Bikie gangs typically espouse the "one-percenter" lifestyle, that is, they officially deem themselves outside the law. Not that the Mafia follow it, but they seem to try to control the law, so perhaps you could say bikies see themselves as outside the law, mafiosi as above it. IBE (talk) 16:36, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

And maybe I could add that street gangs are below it? IBE (talk) 16:45, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

books set in maine

i would like an exhuastive list of all childrens and young adult literature set entirely or partially maine (including fiction set in imaginary places in maine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.247.60.254 (talk) 20:53, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, I guess I can contribute a few books (so by no means is this exhaustive): From my own collections: the Emergency Rescue! series by James and Lois Cowan, and Santa Paws and the Christmas Storm by Kris Edwards (takes place on a fictitious island off of Maine). Also, on Google Books, I found a book called A celebration of Maine children's books; if you could get a hold of that, that would provide you with quite a few books set in Maine as well. Brambleclawx 21:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

We have Category:Novels set in Maine and Category:Maine in fiction. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:41, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

You may also wish to look at Maine#Maine in fiction. Brambleclawx 21:43, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Practically anything Stephen King writes. 216.93.234.239 (talk) 23:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't classify him as a children's writer. Young adult is closer, but he's still probably not what the OP is looking for. Matt Deres (talk) 21:40, 27 December 2012 (UTC)