Talk:Askeladden

removed: "not to protect child pornography, nor to encourage gangsta rap-style violence against whites..." in discussion about the first amendment. Didn't seem necessary to make the point. AbsolutDan 07:52, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

which ash?
Does "ash" in this case mean ash-tree or fire-ash? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * According to the final paragraph, the author indicates it's fire-ash AbsolutDan 07:52, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Article too political and generalising, aswell as incorrect in some cases!
I find the paragraph bellow to be pretty pointless to the article, is it really neccesary to be informed about how Anglo the founding fathers in America are? And are Nordic (Or more correctly in this case Germanic people) more 'heretical' than anywhere else?

Here is the passage:

"Nordic culture has traditionally valued rugged individualism and heretical, dissident thought in science, politics, economics, religion, and other fields. Nordic peoples include the Anglo-Saxons who created the Magna Carta, and later in early America comprised the majority of the population that created the Constitution and Bill of Rights. (The Founding Fathers such as Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and George Washington were very "Anglo.") Nordic peoples also include the Ionians and Dorians who created science and a coherent theory of republican and democratic government in ancient Greece beginning in the 5th and 6th centuries B.C. Therefore, some traditional American conservatives argue that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was originally intended to allow Ash Lad types to make their thoughtful yet heretical contributions to society."

It is strange, the name Paine for instance is of Latin origin through French and not Anglo-Saxon, and the Dorians and Ionians were not Nordic (nor Germanic) but were Hellenic tribes from Northern Greece.

And which Conservatives claim that the First Amendment is to benefit the Ash Lad types? Does the author know what heretical means. This passage is frankly strange and thus removed.

-- Sigurd Dragon Slayer 08:32, 08 May 2006 (GMT)

I'm adding a citation tag and removing the stub tag. It also still needs to be cleaned-up some before taking it off the wikify list however. maybe even rewritten, but until I can afford to join some online research sites im not qualified. Syzergy 02:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I think it needs rewrite in some parts. I'll see if I can fix parts of it as I know a little...though I hasten to add, I am not a professional researcher...on the subject of Northern European and specifically Germanic Folklore. -- -- Sigurd Dragon Slayer 18:24, 29 May 2006 (GMT)

vs. other nationalities
A final question might be, why is the Ash Lad character so prominent in Norwegian fairy tales as opposed to Swedish, Danish, Dutch, Anglo-Saxon, or some other Nordic (or Gothic, Indo-European, or Germanic -these terms become synonymous as one goes back further in time) folklore?'

Since the simple answer is that he isn't, being a perfectly typical fairy tale hero, that paragraph probably needs a simple excision. Goldfritha 13:19, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

You are correct...The character is even in English (Anglo-Saxon) folklore...He is certainly in my local folklore! His name may change from story to story but he is fundementally the same! Sigurd Dragon Slayer

Funny
This article is filled with polemical, analytical garb which has no place on wikipedia, and it's not even correct!

Trying to assert that Askeladden is the product of an individualist culture in Norway is simply idiotic, because he is still popular here, yet Norway is one of the most collectivistic countries in the developed world. If this was the culture that produced Askeladden it ought to be more prevalent. Not to mention that it's full of references to the hardy, brave unique Norwegian fisherman who is somehow better than everyone else, typically Norwegian. Sometimes I'm ashamed of this country.

The argument not only has no place on wikipedia, it is based on nothing but air and thought. --Joffeloff 20:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

With a delicious undercurrent of batty, wishful white-power thought too... 89.100.130.17 14:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

And -- no references. I'm cutting the paragraph where the citations were asked for. Goldfritha (talk) 04:11, 17 August 2010 (UTC)