[uf-discuss] rel="muse" implies romantic relationship?

Benjamin West bewest at gmail.com
Sun Dec 10 16:52:06 PST 2006

> Certainly "muse" was not intended to only be purely romantic in the literal
> "romantic relationship" sense (though it is clear how that could easily be
> misconstrued), and of course that meaning is included.
> The categorization as "romantic" is in a broader sense, similar to
> romanticism [1] as in enabling the elevation of:
> "the achievements of what it [Romanticism] perceived as misunderstood heroic
> individuals and artists that altered society."
> or romance the genre [2]
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanticism
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_%28genre%29
> That the first specific section in [1] is on music only echoes what Ben West
> wrote as well.
> Is this worthy of an xfn-faq entry?
> Tantek

Ah, that's interesting, I was just thinking "the historical period
would kind of fit", but even so I feel this is a bit of a stretch!
I'm not so sure muse should be grouped with "crush, date, and
sweetheart."  I actually think muse is more apropriate under Identity
than anything else.  The Greeks had a play on words that roughly meant
"control the rhymes of a nation, and you can control their laws." The
idea was that music (or "the muses") had an "ethos" that could have a
profound impact on the composition of the person.  The people that
inspire us often have a profound impact on how we see ourselves, and
how we identify with others.

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list