Talk:Nostalgia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Caleighs.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

General Questions
Shouldn't this page mention something about the modern definition of nostalgia- the longing for the "good old days", and often the conviction that everything was better back then? I see only passing reference to this definition. --Ntg
 * I wholly agree with this comment, but I don't reall know what to do about it. Somewhat relatedly, I would like to point out that this page has one of the best "See Also" sections on Wikipedia. unless 13:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * i would like to work on this article more when i have more time.--Sp0 (talk) 18:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'm puzzled about Balraj Singh who is named here as the "famous journalist" who first termed the word nostalgia. A little more information here would be great.

Balraj Singh is an error, an odd one too. I've altered the origin of nostalgia, returned it to its original: Johannes Hofer.

In Spanish it is also called 'Nostalgia'. The phrase 'Mal del corazón' is often used for the depression feeling caused when a relationship ends.

I am Spanish and I can assure that "Mal del corazón" does not mean "Nostalgia". "Nostalgia" is also called "Nostalgia" in Spanish. 

Homesic is called "Morriña" in Spanish. 

searching for a word describing something similar but not quite the same as nostalgia
Like "nostalgia" this is a word of Greek origin. It describes a longing for a time period before one is born. I first encountered this term in a book a while back and I have forgotten it. I was hoping it would appear in this article.Smiloid 05:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * saudade? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudade 2601:404:C67F:D6C2:DCEE:338A:64B6:9F31 (talk) 09:34, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

perhaps too easy, but reminiscence? reminiscent invokes more of an affectionate recollection and lacks part of the 'longing' aspect of nostalgia, as well as being less bitter and more sweet. Dyukanon 21:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

It's "Protonostalgia", dawg. It's been added thanks to Dinosaur Comics. I'd edit it out, but it rocks so much!--76.23.95.54 17:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Just a guess, but is the word you're searching for "epigone," someone 'born too late'? Definition from the O.E.D.:


 * "The designation ... was applied especially to the sons of the seven heroes who led the war against Thebes; the modern use is in allusion to this. ... One of a succeeding generation. Chiefly in plural the less distinguished successors of an illustrious generation. ... 1937 H. READ Art & Society 257: That task may perhaps be left to future epigoni.  1964 F. H. BLUM in I. L. Horowitz New Sociology 162: Unlike the epigoni of his time...Mills grasped this problem in its totality."


 * For instance, there's set of classicizing German playwrights & poets from the 1820s & 1830s (August von Platen, Karl Immermann, Franz Grillparzer) who sometimes get referred to collectively as "epigones" to Goethe & Schiller. -- Kmbush40 (talk) 09:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Severely lacking
Wow, I came to this page hoping for instances of nostalgia in art and literature, psychological explanations etc., and all there is is a brief description of it's history as a pseudo-disease in some parts of western Europe during the last couple hundred years.

Am I the only one that thinks this article needs to be beefed up HUGELY? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.7.74.130 (talk) 09:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, something should be done about this article. I found it strange upon visiting this article that it was in such a bad shape. I'll see if I can do something later to get this article on it's feet and more useful, because it's semi-useless the way it is now. --- Silenced Gamer 10: 56, October 22, 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 02:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree. I wish I knew more about the topic so I could update the page, I was surprised to see an article so lacking in information. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 23:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, the current article is written such that Nostalgia is a disease - does it need to be treated? I would not say the article is "severely" lacking though - there is a lot of truth here. We all know it - we all "suffer" from it from time to time, but unless it is chronic, I would argue that it is not a disease but simply a condition. As a disease, some sort of harm should follow, and this is not clear from the current edition. I recently attended my 40th high school class reunion (with some disappointment as you might expect). My 85 year old father, although somewhat demented, still has memories of the time at his childhood days at his long-gone farmhouse. I'm not sure either of these is a disease. Perhaps Nostalgia is simply part of a process of maturity, or as an attempted means to retrieve old memories. --68.188.183.91 (talk) 02:16, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Photo Removal
Yes there may be a better photo to illustrate Nostalgia, but please don't remove this one until you find one! Also, if you remove this photo (nostalgia item BHH front desk as bar) please remove the whole text section "Recalling Celebrity" which was entered at the same time as the photo. The photo is an illustration for the section. Are you familiar with The Beverly Hills Hotel? You might also consider not to deprive Wikipedia users the viewing of this very rare photo donated together with the rest of the Southerly Clubs collection (see my user page for link). Saw your user page & thought this revert might fit into your wishes there. Thx! EmilEikS (talk) 15:56, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that there could be a better image - or additional images - here, but also that this image is a valuable asset to the current section next to it. What this article lacks the most is more about the common connotation of the subject, as used by a broaer public in the English-speaking world. It this meant to be an elitist text only for specialists, or can we try to turn it into a real world piece? SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Popular culture section removed
A new section on nostalgia in popular culture was removed now instead of being expanded. It is hard to understand why as the lack of anything on that obviously important factor seems to be a major flaw with this article. I think the little section should be restored and expanded. SoCoColl (talk) 08:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with such a section, provided it has any content. As it stood, it was just empty. It contained
 * Nostalgia in popular culture is widely known, less clinically, to include a general interest of many people in past eras and their personalities and events. It has then often effected fashions, decor and the arts.

this isn't in any obviuos way related to "popular culture" at all but more or less a dictionary definition of "nostalgia". If you have any content to add, you are certainly welcome, but I do not think we need empty sections just because they "should" be there. Thus, please do restore and expand it, but I see no point in the restoring without the expanding. --dab (𒁳) 09:41, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I have tested your opinion and mine, neutrally, on a couple of readers, both of whom felt there was something sorely missing without the little section, at least a few lines about what's obviously needed for a well-rounded text. Hope you don't mind too much that I am restoring it, and let's hope someone will expand it soon. The article really limps without anything at all like that in there, even though I agree that the section now only briefly relates what's rather obvious. SoCoColl (talk) 22:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Excellent move of this text to lead - thanx! SoCoColl (talk) 10:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Definition
Bear with me on this and please give it your consideration. Words are used as tools to express the intent of the person who uses the words. A single word can have many different meanings, depending on the intent of the person using the word. One person might attach a different meaning to a word than does someone else. That much should be easily recognizable, but which meaning is to be recognized as correct or invalid? This is an opinion based on perspective and in the case of society agreeing on a definition, the definition is based on the collective perspective, i.e., what "most" people who use the common language would mean.

So the primary definition of a word as recognized by the collective would be what the majority of people mean when they use the word. But what of the other people who use the word in a way other than this? Will their meaning be recognized by society? If the meaning is so far off base from the common usage that only one or two people understand it, then it is usually ignored. But if there is a significant number of people who use the word in a way other than the common usage, even if they do not constitute the majority, such a usage should be recognized and identified by society for the sake of understanding the various meanings behind the word's usage.

With the above in mind, I move to have a secondary definition included for the word "nostalgia": "A feeling of appreciation for the past or something related to the past, often in an idealized form." Whereas, the primary definition currently stated is "The term nostalgia describes a yearning for the past, often in idealized form." A yearning and a feeling of appreciation are two fairly separate things. I do not yearn for the past, I do not long for it, but I do have a feeling of appreciation with regards to aspects of it or things connected to it.

— sloth_monkey 05:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I do not think that second definition is relevant enough. The second paragraph of the introduction and the "As a description" section seem to supersede the section you created.

Also, the introduction of the article, as well as the body of the first section, are very good, but the section names and the organization are not. We need someone to rewrite this before adding more stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.27.233.126 (talk) 21:35, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Sloth monkey: I agree entirely with your linguistic analysis. There is always a tension between the central and outlying meanings. Innumerable examples can be found where the fringe meaning eclipsed the original, central one completely. I also agree that "nostalgia," as a concept, is moving more towards an appreciation of the past rather than a remembrance of things past. (One of these days I'll actually have to read Proust.) This could be a result of people having fewer concrete things to remember while at the same time having more pop culture things to tie memories to. For example: people who lived through the Great Depression and WWII have nostalgic attachments to the struggle for survival. Their children and grandchildren are nostalgic about movies about the Great Depression and WWII, which they saw in their youth. "Nostalgia" is becoming synonymous with collecting memorabilia, with dressing retro...Execreblete (talk) 06:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Tricky verb agreement
As I found it: Nostalgic preferences, the belief that the past was better than the present, has been linked to biases in memory.

I've bolded the subject and verb (I've already changed the verb in the article to 'have').

It's not just the intervening phrase here messing up the ear. There's a tendency to hear the sentence with an implied preamble:

The having of nostalgic preferences—a psychological posture that the past was better than the present—has been linked to biases in memory.

(Again with subject and main verb in bold.) So those are your choices. &mdash; MaxEnt 01:02, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Please remove photo of pre-computer home office
I'm sorry, but that picture is completely ridiculous as an illustration of "nostalgia". Rotary dial phones and manual typewriters are what I grew up with. And we didn't have "home offices" in those days. Just space up in the attic, or something. 73.81.116.164 (talk) 15:43, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree that the photo likely does not illustrate "nostalgia" well for most visitors to the page. In particular, its caption seems inaccurate: "pre-computer-era settings" suggests a time before home computers existed (or were more common for most page visitors), but the photo was taken in 2012, after the "computer-era" began. In its current form, the photo seems to illustrate "the time before I owned a computer". In addition, the reference to "no modern computer equipment" (emphasis mine) somewhat contradicts "pre-computer-era". Thus, while the photo "can inspire nostalgia", as its caption indicates, I think a much better and more general illustration could be found. It could be a historical example in a work of art, or something more recent that would cover a broader range of cultures, genders, and ages. Mcorson (talk) 11:47, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed and ✅ — RCraig09 (talk) 17:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

""rose tinted spectacles"" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect & and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 3 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:45, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Redudancy
Within "Improve mood", shouldn't "One way to improve mood is to effectively cope with problems that hinder one's happiness." be removed? This sentence adds nothing to the article. This is a general wellness statement.

Additionally shouldn't the sections "Improve mood" and "Enhance positive self-regard" be merged? They include similar ideas. 2601:404:C67F:D6C2:DCEE:338A:64B6:9F31 (talk) 09:31, 26 October 2022 (UTC)