Did Christmas Become Less Holy Once It Was Associated with "Merry" or "Happy"?
December 26, 2004 10:23 PM Subscribe
Should Christmas really be "merry"? Can't the origin of the decline of this sacred day, as a sacred day be traced to couching it as a "merry" or "happy," rather than something "good" or something similarly sober?
Merry was the mother of Jeebus, who was the Christ.
Why is this posted anonymously?
posted by riffola at 10:25 PM on December 26, 2004
Why is this posted anonymously?
posted by riffola at 10:25 PM on December 26, 2004
No.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 10:26 PM on December 26, 2004
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 10:26 PM on December 26, 2004
The original meaning of "merry" was peaceful or blessed, not jolly... for instance "God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen" meant "God Rest Ye Peacefully, Gentlemen." (Of course, googling isn't bringing anything up, but I was told this by a priest.)
As for the change in definition, I got nothing. Probably came along during the wave of commercialization around 1900... when Macy's invented Rudolph and all that.
posted by strikhedonia at 12:22 AM on December 27, 2004
As for the change in definition, I got nothing. Probably came along during the wave of commercialization around 1900... when Macy's invented Rudolph and all that.
posted by strikhedonia at 12:22 AM on December 27, 2004
Not sure about that, strikhednonia; my Chambers Dictionary of Etymology traces Merry from "Before 1200 murie mirthful, joyous, pleasing; later mirie (about 1250) and mery, meri"
The entry mentions also "the transition from what was the original Proto-Germanic and Indo-European sense "short" to the Old English sense "pleasant" may have occurred through the intervention of a lost Old English verb meaning "to shorten", and hence "to shorten time, to cheer"
So unless people were going around wishing each other a short Christmas season, it's probably not quite right.
posted by slightlybewildered at 12:53 AM on December 27, 2004
The entry mentions also "the transition from what was the original Proto-Germanic and Indo-European sense "short" to the Old English sense "pleasant" may have occurred through the intervention of a lost Old English verb meaning "to shorten", and hence "to shorten time, to cheer"
So unless people were going around wishing each other a short Christmas season, it's probably not quite right.
posted by slightlybewildered at 12:53 AM on December 27, 2004
This question is full of holes.
1. It is posted anonymously.
2. It assumes the day has been and should be, sacred.
3. It assumes the "sacred day" is no longer sacred.
4. It assumes the day celebrating the Christ's birth should be somber rather than happy or merry.
The only thing left worth answer is the underlying question, "Do changes in language affect the way we perceive the things to which that language applies?" Short answers: not usually, no; probably not; it doesn't matter.
A better-framed question will get a better answer.
posted by Mo Nickels at 6:14 AM on December 27, 2004
1. It is posted anonymously.
2. It assumes the day has been and should be, sacred.
3. It assumes the "sacred day" is no longer sacred.
4. It assumes the day celebrating the Christ's birth should be somber rather than happy or merry.
The only thing left worth answer is the underlying question, "Do changes in language affect the way we perceive the things to which that language applies?" Short answers: not usually, no; probably not; it doesn't matter.
A better-framed question will get a better answer.
posted by Mo Nickels at 6:14 AM on December 27, 2004
I'd say it's just further evidence of the holiday's derivation from the mid-winter festival & its insignificance as a religious holiday, as we've discussed on various threads around here already.
posted by mdn at 6:27 AM on December 27, 2004
posted by mdn at 6:27 AM on December 27, 2004
Why do they "celebrate" a mass? Shouldn't they "endure" a mass, since any expression of joy during a sacred ceremony would obviously be blasphemous?
Can't the origin of the decline of this sacred ceremony, as a sacred ceremony be traced to couching it as a "celebration," rather than something "good" or something similarly sober?
posted by Floydd at 11:22 AM on December 27, 2004
Can't the origin of the decline of this sacred ceremony, as a sacred ceremony be traced to couching it as a "celebration," rather than something "good" or something similarly sober?
posted by Floydd at 11:22 AM on December 27, 2004
Christmas has never been a "sacred day"; it's an imitation of the Roman Saturnalia designed to at least somewhat Christianize the midwinter celebrations everyone was having anyway, and it continued to be a raucous event until Victorian times, when department stores and civic leaders managed to "civilize" it (making it lucrative rather than sacred, however). See the extensive quotations here from an excellent history of the holiday. As Cotton Mather complained in 1712: “[T]he Feast of Christ’s Nativity is spent in Reveling, Dicing, Carding, Masking, and in all Licentious Liberty … by Mad Mirth, by long Eating, by hard Drinking, by lewd Gaming, by rude Reveling …”
And yeah, it's very odd Matt agreed to make this an anonymous question; I can't imagine why that would be needed.
posted by languagehat at 1:10 PM on December 27, 2004
And yeah, it's very odd Matt agreed to make this an anonymous question; I can't imagine why that would be needed.
posted by languagehat at 1:10 PM on December 27, 2004
And yeah, it's very odd Matt agreed to make this an anonymous question; I can't imagine why that would be needed.
I'm guessing it was right before he left on the road trip mentioned in his blog and not paying as much attention as he usually would.
posted by billsaysthis at 4:26 PM on December 27, 2004
I'm guessing it was right before he left on the road trip mentioned in his blog and not paying as much attention as he usually would.
posted by billsaysthis at 4:26 PM on December 27, 2004
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Kwantsar at 10:24 PM on December 26, 2004