thought / question

[tysolna]

The Outback is to Australia what the Wild West is to the US, and what the Middle Ages are to Europe.
True or false?

Comments

[endless-psych.livejournal.com]

False. By pure logic - The outback is a geographical area to Australia so logically we must take the Wild West to be a geographical area. The middle are not the same thing to Europe as there is no specific geographical area attatched to them.

What the wild west is to the US the Middle ages is to Europe could be a statement you could count as true.

[endless-psych.livejournal.com]

That probably isn't pure logic but never mind.

[athenais.livejournal.com]

What the wild west is to the US the Middle ages is to Europe could be a statement you could count as true.

In what respect? This seems as false as the Outback=Wild West equation to me.

[endless-psych.livejournal.com]

Both can be considered time period. Outback and wild west can be considered to refer to a place - if not an exact geographical location (the wrong choice of words perhaps) and Wild west and Middle ages both refer to time periods. The statements don't have to be internally true as the question asks if a is to b as c is to d. You could say What man is to woman cat is to dog and it would be logically true.

[tysolna]

I'm sorry I didn't phrase my initial question more clearly. You're right if you are comparing the "real thing" (for want of a better word); I was trying to compare the concepts. Different kind of logic. ;)

[nugirlontheblok.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't term it a geographical 'area' either really unless you're just referring to desert regions, which exist in a multitude of places. I guess if you look at it dispassionately, any area outside the coastal urban fringe could be termed 'outback' but that's not correct either. The 'concept' of the outback is more a 'myth'- the idealised 'philosophical jackaroo' surviving drought and flood, but the image of the 'suntanned Aussie' has long passed- it's how those outside of Australia like to imagine us.

[endless-psych.livejournal.com]

Yeah geographical area was the wrong term to use. However both wild west and outback exist as 'myths' or ideas of a place.

[nugirlontheblok.livejournal.com]

I agree, but as you said above, the 'wild west' is viewed more as a time period.

[tysolna]

That's what I meant, yes - the concept, the myth behind the term. I keep seeing "outback" and "bush" referred to in books about Australian literature, but it's used as shorthand for something I have no cultural knowledge of. Which is annoying. Hence my question. :)

If this idealized image has by now turned into an outsider's cliché, how do I deal with it turning up in recent literature?

[nugirlontheblok.livejournal.com]

It is a 'myth' and therefore can be used as such to represent that particular idealised image of Australia. I didn't mean it wasn't still used- it certainly is- but I think writers are also catering to their perceived audience as well. It can be used as a symbol- of the vastness, of the supposed 'freedom' and space. The 'bush' on the other hand is perhaps less esoteric- it can refer to any area outside the larger cities- even a regional city- as well as a more isolated area.