>>6117692>>6117669>>6117085>>6117699>Tudor overcrowding, population immiseration etcYes thanks for this explanation! I see the designers of Dragon Age
>>6111281 have carefully evaluated historical notions of urban overcrowding / negative density dependence and plausible floor-area ratios in the design of the Tevinter cyberpunk(?) mage city, Minrathous. I suppose architecture is different if your buildings can fly
But some more evidence of the "Shakespeare as royal propaganda, re-writing history amidst social backdrop of population impoverishment etc" the Queen's Men (whose plays were drawn upon by Shakespeare, eg King Lear as well as the histories etc) acting troupe were founded by the spymaster, Sir Frances Walsingham in 1583, possibly to tour deliberately in rural areas (where Catholic sympathy was greater). The political messaging / patronage probably also gives another perspective or political dimension on the Puritan eagerness to close down playhouses etc.
So maybe the literary theme of all fiction being written by spies
>>6112387 stretches back even further, hehe
>crossdressing, promotes gender fluid identity>hidden political messages>worked in troupe founded by spymaster patron>Shakespeare was Elizabethan CIAhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitheatricality>Variations of Plato's reasoning on mimesis re-emerged. One problem was the representation of rulers and the high-born by those of low birth. Another issue was that of effeminization in the boy player when he took on female clothing and gesture. Both Ben Jonson and Shakespeare used cross-dressing as significant themes within their plays, and Laura Levine (1994) explores this issue in Men in Women's Clothing: Anti-theatricality and Effeminization, 1579-1642. In 1597 Stephen Gosson said that theatre "effeminized" the mind, and four years later Philip Stubbes claimed that male actors who wore women's clothing could "adulterate" male gender. Further tracts followed, and 50 years later William Prynne who described a man whom cross-dressing had caused to "degenerate" into a woman. Levine suggests these opinions reflect a deep anxiety over collapse into the feminine.>Ben Jonson was against the use of theatrical costume because it lent itself to unpleasing mannerisms and an artificial triviality. (...) He put typical anti-theatrical arguments (...) including the view that men mimicking women was forbidden in the Bible, in that the Book of Deuteronomy 22 verse 5, the text states that "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are an abomination unto the Lord thy God." 