What is "Sentimentality"?

[Marcel_Prix]

Hello everyone,
This is a topic that I've always been fascinating by. Since I noticed that in the English Speaking World people appear to have a immediate "rejection" of anything that's sentimental. Anything "sentimental" is tagged as a bad.

Meanwhile, based on my studies, I don't think other cultures necessarily have this reaction. Hence, I always wondered. What's really going on.

To begin, what do they mean when they say, "Sentimental"

-If its the influence of, a Protestant denomination?

- Or if its just a "quirk" particular of British Culture that has spread to the Anglosphere at large. For instance, Robert Smith wrote the song, "Boys don't cry." For instance, he said, "as an English boy at the time, you’re encouraged not to show your emotion to any degree."
Moreover, the reason why Morrisey is more liked than the Robert Smith by critics and others is because they liked that he always "juxtaposes" his emotions. He says everything indirectly, he'll say something sad then backtrack and say something funny. "Critics" praise this act as smart/clever however, it also seems to lack honesty/sincerity.

-Or is it present in other Germanic cultures, for instance the whole concept of, "Kitsch" or "Schmaltz" which still is not clear seems to have originated in German culture. However, we need to be clear that it seems to have been Communists/Anarchists/Marxists who were "criticizing" traditional German Art and saying that it was fascistic. Hence they "subverted" it and said it was, "not authentic." I am not sure I really buy what they are saying.

Hence, why I feel there's more to the discussion that needs to be had.

 

[timothyu]

Not sure I follow. Sentimental or sentimentality is merely a fondness for something personally known in the past.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

Hello everyone,
This is a topic that I've always been fascinating by. Since I noticed that in the English Speaking World people appear to have a immediate "rejection" of anything that's sentimental. Anything "sentimental" is tagged as a bad.

Meanwhile, based on my studies, I don't think other cultures necessarily have this reaction. Hence, I always wondered. What's really going on.

To begin, what do they mean when they say, "Sentimental"

-If its the influence of, a Protestant denomination?

- Or if its just a "quirk" particular of British Culture that has spread to the Anglosphere at large. For instance, Robert Smith wrote the song, "Boys don't cry." For instance, he said, "as an English boy at the time, you’re encouraged not to show your emotion to any degree."
Moreover, the reason why Morrisey is more liked than the Robert Smith by critics and others is because they liked that he always "juxtaposes" his emotions. He says everything indirectly, he'll say something sad then backtrack and say something funny. "Critics" praise this act as smart/clever however, it also seems to lack honesty/sincerity.

-Or is it present in other Germanic cultures, for instance the whole concept of, "Kitsch" or "Schmaltz" which still is not clear seems to have originated in German culture. However, we need to be clear that it seems to have been Communists/Anarchists/Marxists who were "criticizing" traditional German Art and saying that it was fascistic. Hence they "subverted" it and said it was, "not authentic." I am not sure I really buy what they are saying.

Hence, why I feel there's more to the discussion that needs to be had.

It's an Americanism that means feelings in regards to an object or thing. Sometimes they can be shallow, other times not. A sentimental person would be somebody who holds onto an object or thing from childhood due to the nostalgic memory or specific feelings associated with the object, whereas somebody who is not sentimental would see those feelings as shallow or something they disregard.

The modern redefinition of sentimentality is something I honestly seethe (not really) over. There's no other word in English that describes it's traditional definition which is a philosophical concept of the reliance on feelings as a guide to truth. Which is something we have in Christianity to a certain extent and it's very important, but it's also something that is simultaneously running rampant in our secular western culture unhinged.

 

[timothyu]

but it's also something that is simultaneously running rampant in our secular western culture unhinged.

Interesting. In what way?

 

[essentialsaltes]

As with most things, it's a matter of degree. Fortunately, the English language provides a multitude of shades of meaning.

I don't think anyone would object to being fond of something from one's past.

Nostalgic and sentimental are fairly neutral; I think they can be spun as both positive and negative depending on context.

But if it's too extreme, it ventures into mawkish, twee, cloying...

 

[Chesterton]

Let's not forget "maudlin".

 

[Nettle]

-

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

Interesting. In what way?

People judge what is true based upon their feelings. The phrase "your truth" & "my truth" comes to mind, which isn't how truth works and also doesn't describe truth at all but instead misnomers belief. Then there's subjective morality (thanks to the subjectification of truth) in which morality is entirely based upon the feelings & desires of an individual as apposed to there being true/universal morals that apply to all people in existence at all times, that is until you ask them the question if the atrocities of WW2 were universally evil and you'll see people shift their perspective based entirely upon the emotional response.

I say unhinged because without The Holy Spirit we're slaves to our deceitful heart and can't trust our feelings as a guide to truth far as we can throw them.

 

[timothyu]

I say unhinged because without The Holy Spirit we're slaves to our deceitful heart and can't trust our feelings as a guide to truth far as we can throw them.

I like your post but wouldn't we be better off understanding truth if we focused on what Jesus taught as truth about our will versus God's and how all truth comes from putting His will first? My feelings are fully allied with God's will rather than man's so does that leave me room for conflict of opinion or is everything I think based on the rock of His truth rather than ours and therefore trustworthy??

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

I like your post but wouldn't we be better off understanding truth if we focused on what Jesus taught as truth about our will versus God's and how all truth comes from putting His will first? My feelings are fully allied with God's will rather than man's so does that leave me room for conflict of opinion or is everything I think based on the rock of His truth rather than ours and therefore trustworthy??

Yeah mate I fully agree that's why originally I said for us it's important "to a certain extent". While The Holy Spirit often times uses our feelings to guide us and teach us, our feelings are ultimately in subjection to God's revealed Word. It's why I dislike the redefinition of sentimentality because the concept of feelings as a guide to truth has been extremely helpful for me in avoiding relying on that behaviour.

 

[Marcel_Prix]

It's an Americanism that means feelings in regards to an object or thing. Sometimes they can be shallow, other times not. A sentimental person would be somebody who holds onto an object or thing from childhood due to the nostalgic memory or specific feelings associated with the object, whereas somebody who is not sentimental would see those feelings as shallow or something they disregard.

The modern redefinition of sentimentality is something I honestly seethe (not really) over. There's no other word in English that describes it's traditional definition which is a philosophical concept of the reliance on feelings as a guide to truth. Which is something we have in Christianity to a certain extent and it's very important, but it's also something that is simultaneously running rampant in our secular western culture unhinged.

It's an Americanism that means feelings in regards to an object or thing. Sometimes they can be shallow, other times not. A sentimental person would be somebody who holds onto an object or thing from childhood due to the nostalgic memory or specific feelings associated with the object, whereas somebody who is not sentimental would see those feelings as shallow or something they disregard.

The modern redefinition of sentimentality is something I honestly seethe (not really) over. There's no other word in English that describes it's traditional definition which is a philosophical concept of the reliance on feelings as a guide to truth. Which is something we have in Christianity to a certain extent and it's very important, but it's also something that is simultaneously running rampant in our secular western culture unhinged.

I agree with this definition ""A sentimental person would be somebody who holds onto an object or thing from childhood due to the nostalgic memory or specific feelings associated with the object."

It's interesting, because it could be said that there are cases where you should be justified for being sentimental. For instance, what if you have a family business of multiple generations but then its tore down to make space for a new building. You could say that you are justified in wanting to "preserve" your business but some people will say, "You're being Sentimental." I think that some forms of Capitalism bring about this, "Anti-Sentimental" type of culture. But maybe there's other words to describe this phenomenon.

 

[timothyu]

 

[Ligurian]

My feelings are fully allied with God's will rather than man's so does that leave me room for conflict of opinion or is everything I think based on the rock of His truth rather than ours and therefore trustworthy??

Feelings are the most untrustworthy of all things...

 

[timothyu]

Feelings are the most untrustworthy of all things...

Yet some countries have taken to running their political agendas and nightly news on just that.

 

[Robban]

Good or bad trustworthy or untrustworthy.

Feelings are proof you are alive.

What is alive is alive,
what is dead is dead.

 

[Ligurian]

Feelings are the most untrustworthy of all things...

Yet some countries have taken to running their political agendas and nightly news on just that.

Sure they have, because they've done their brainwashing ahead of time, and now Pavlov's dog sits up and barks because he's been taught to feel hungry whenever his master rings the bell. Feelings... on command.

 

[Ligurian]

To begin, what do they mean when they say, "Sentimental"

-If its the influence of, a Protestant denomination?

- Or if its just a "quirk" particular of British Culture that has spread to the Anglosphere at large. For instance, Robert Smith wrote the song, "Boys don't cry." For instance, he said, "as an English boy at the time, you’re encouraged not to show your emotion to any degree."
Moreover, the reason why Morrisey is more liked than the Robert Smith by critics and others is because they liked that he always "juxtaposes" his emotions. He says everything indirectly, he'll say something sad then backtrack and say something funny. "Critics" praise this act as smart/clever however, it also seems to lack honesty/sincerity.

-Or is it present in other Germanic cultures, for instance the whole concept of, "Kitsch" or "Schmaltz" which still is not clear seems to have originated in German culture. However, we need to be clear that it seems to have been Communists/Anarchists/Marxists who were "criticizing" traditional German Art and saying that it was fascistic. Hence they "subverted" it and said it was, "not authentic." I am not sure I really buy what they are saying.

Hence, why I feel there's more to the discussion that needs to be had.

---Edit: removed religious talk---

- Anglo-Saxons are not Britons. Europeans don't call themselves Cherokees because they live in North Carolina.

Some folks are just naturally sentimental at birth. Those born under the sign of Cancer are attached to the past and sentimental about all-things-hearth-and-home, they have keepsakes for every memory.