Drama (on television, film or stage) is the most popular of all modes of fictional cognition. Drama consists of direct representation of a fictional social network in which characters have conflicting desires. It is dominated by two main genres: tragedy, which generally concerns status competition, and comedy, which generally concerns the process of mate selection. I argue that the evolved mind is intrinsically interested in information about the attempts to maximise fitness by individuals in the surrounding group. This is because such information is useful for optimising the individual's own behaviour. In particular, the strategies of others with regard to status attainment and mate selection impinge directly on our fitness and so have strong attention-grabbing power. I argue from analyses of Twelfth Night and Richard III that comedies and tragedies appear well designed to exploit these informational biases of the mind. This may explain the enduring appeal of the genres.
Character, meaning a full personality, seems to be naturally connected to action in modern thought. In contrast, Aristotle dissociates these concepts inasmuch that he accepts the possibility of action without character, as well as texts representing character without action. Action and character can nonetheless be linked through the concept of proairesis, a concept that is also useful for clarifying the possibility of a tragedy without character, in spite of the fundamental connection between action and character. At the end of the paper the modern concept of ordeal is also discussed since this concept appears to be a useful general approach and one also related to Aristotle's concept of proairesis.
We discuss each of the recommendations made by Hochberg et al. (Ecol Lett 12:2–4, 2009) to prevent the “tragedy of the reviewer
commons”. Having scientific journals share a common database of reviewers would be to recreate a bureaucratic organization,
where extra-scientific considerations prevailed. Pre-reviewing of papers by colleagues is a widespread practice but raises
problems of coordination. Revising manuscripts in line with all reviewers’ recommendations presupposes that recommendations
converge, which is acrobatic. Signing an undertaking that authors have taken into accounts all reviewers’ comments is both
authoritarian and sterilizing. Sending previous comments with subsequent submissions to other journals amounts to creating
a cartel and a single all-encompassing journal, which again is sterilizing. Using young scientists as reviewers is highly
risky: they might prove very severe; and if they are not yet published authors themselves, the recommendation violates the
principle of peer review. Asking reviewers to be more severe would only create a crisis in the publishing houses and actually
increase reviewers’ workloads. The criticisms of the behavior of authors looking to publish in the best journals are unfair:
it is natural for scholars to try to publish in the best journals and not to resign themselves to being second rate. Punishing
lazy reviewers would only lower the quality of reports: instead, we favor the idea of paying reviewers “in kind” with, say,
complimentary books or papers.
The Greek financial crisis that erupted in 2010 was possibly cured after 8 years in 2018. It has been extraordinary in its social cost and its cost to European taxpayers. The causes of this failure are multiple. The main burden lies with consecutive Greek governments that did not carry out the necessary fiscal adjustment and reforms. In their lack of urgency they were strongly supported by American economists, especially Paul Krugman, who opposed austerity and instead called for fiscal stimulus, ignoring the need for financial stability. Much of this discussion was devoted to the benefits or harm of the Eurozone, which eventually hardly mattered. The crisis resolution was complicated by the European Union wanting to play a big role but not knowing how and weakening the traditional role of the International Monetary Fund. The key lessons are back to basics: A government needs to act hard and fast to resolve a severe financial crisis. The IMF is the best leader for financial stabilization. Early and fast fiscal adjustment brings about early financial stabilization, more structural reforms and early and higher growth.
Summary A working cultural assumption that makes any dialogue with the past possible is: features recalled with pride are apt to be safeguarded against erosion and vandalism; those that reflect shame may be ignored or expunged from the landscape. Unlike in the West where history seems to be more or less processed on the basis of working through the problematic, in Croatia - a representative of so-called countries in transition, strange and liminal monuments are being erected in order to signify collective cultural identity and bear witness of times past. There are two examples of crossing the lines between the division pride/shame: two monuments: one to Jure Francetih, and the other to Mile Budak - both convicted criminals of war. This paper argues some of the following topics: what is the point of resurrecting the past in such vein? Why does Croatia have the need to celebrate its dark side of history? Why are the butchers, the representatives of shame and crimes against humanity remembered with pride; at least among some Croatians, still powerful enough to erect a monument and place it in public? Is there something peculiar in Croatian history, or in histories of some Central European countries, that belongs to no other history(ies) and calls for bridging the gap between pride and shame? Is the Croatian collective past in fact past at all? Where is Croatia's place on the map of Europe with such signs of its present times? Using the American geographer Kenneth Foote's ideas and types of remembering (sanctification, obliteration, designation, rectification), the paper explores modes of representing the past and contextualizes them in a broader framework of establishing a productive communication with the present. Using the already mentioned examples and enriching them with a positive one - the example of The Holocaust Museum in Jasenovac, I first asses the current situation in Croatian cultural dialogue with the past (including both ethical and human poles of the binary) and then propose possible venues useful for establishing a constructive cultural dialogue within the newly emerged space of the European Union.
The fragmentary Euripidean Antiope, presumably performed in 411–408, shows an outstanding heroine. After tragic experiences she reflects, accorded by other characters of the play, on the misery of the circumstances which possibly might integrate the situation of Athens, too, going to be defeated in the Peloponnesian War. Antiope’s twins, Amphion and Zethos, form, notwithstanding their communities, a very different pair. Amphion, a sensible poet, wants to win new horizons with his work and achieves critical insights, while Zethos, concerned with practical tasks, excels as a brave citizen. They both are bound to the polis, Zethos absolutely affirming, Amphion rather being free and easy, but nevertheless loyal.