Your Personal Pop Culture Utopia timeline

Selim III SEEMS was going in that direction, but got assassinated , Abdulaziz did was following the same trend before got assassinated too

But if an empire is willing to assassinate its best and brightest so that vested interests can remain vested, doesn't that herald that an empire is probably doomed?

Well this was not a convo I expected to see on this tread lmao (no offense)

While yes the question of a surviving empire may seem beyond the scope of this thread, it is important to discuss because the survival and failure of that society would also have a profound impact on pop culture.

Suppose Russia had successfully reformed itself into a constitutional monarchy and dodged decades of totalitarian communist rule. In that case, it is feasible that a much richer and more populous Russia would have much more soft power on the world stage. Maybe it would be another major cultural superpower, like Japan.

Perhaps in this world, more schools would assign Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, the top animation studio would be in Moscow, and Russian cars would outcompete American cars.

If the Ottomans had reformed their society to be more egalitarian, the sheer amount of cultural capital combined with the Ottoman's vast oil reserves would've given the Ottomans a good position to develop their own pop culture.

Surviving Ottoman empire means we have Ottoman pop as a subgenre!
I wonder if it would involve people singing in multiple languages, like Turkish or Arabic.

I assume that Armenian culture would do better in an Ottoman reformed TL?

If Armenians gained genuine legal rights, probably.
 
I wonder if it would involve people singing in multiple languages, like Turkish or Arabic.
Absolutely! Honestly depending on the size of the Ottoman republic/empire thing here, or even an alternate Turkey with close relations to its neighbours you could go completely wild with it. Girl group songs with a rap feature that jump between Turkish, Arabic, Greek and Armenian? The boppery would be unbelievable
 
Absolutely! Honestly depending on the size of the Ottoman republic/empire thing here, or even an alternate Turkey with close relations to its neighbours you could go completely wild with it. Girl group songs with a rap feature that jump between Turkish, Arabic, Greek and Armenian? The boppery would be unbelievable

My inspiration for this was the OTL South African national anthem, whose multilingual lyrics reflect a South Africa that is (on paper) free of racial oppression.

If there was some organized civil rights movement within the Ottoman Empire that won gradual rights for non-Turks, would we have seen some anthem to commemorate this new state?
 
A surviving multicultural Ottoman Empire.
Honestly, I would prefer the Eastern Roman Empire - Byzantium was much more multicultural and diverse than many remember. And at the same time, unlike the Ottomans, they had a much better system of government.

Nothing is inevitable plus besides Jannisary fuckery, ottoman biggest issue was European imperialism, especially Russian and British one
Forgive me, of course, but I remind you that the Ottomans were the patrons of the Crimean Khanate (which was the main headache for its neighbors for more than three hundred years), and also supported various Caucasian tribes... Oh, let’s not forget about the huge number of Christian slaves, but this already an old tradition. So we're even.
 
If Tolouse and Provence remain independent and form some sort of Occitania country what would Occitan pop (Occipop) sound like? My guess is an amalgam of French and Spanish sounds which tbf they already mix otl so maybe it wouldn’t be too different lol. I also like the concept of Trabadour rap emerging.
 
Honestly, I would prefer the Eastern Roman Empire - Byzantium was much more multicultural and diverse than many remember. And at the same time, unlike the Ottomans, they had a much better system of government.

At the very least, we'd get awesome Byzantine choir music!
If Tolouse and Provence remain independent and form some sort of Occitania country what would Occitan pop (Occipop) sound like? My guess is an amalgam of French and Spanish sounds which tbf they already mix otl so maybe it wouldn’t be too different lol. I also like the concept of Trabadour rap emerging.

I think if any language remained into the present, we would've seen pop versions of it.

My brother jokingly showed me Romansh music because he was amused to see an obscure language with a robust music culture.


Who knows what Yiddish culture would've produced had it not been decimated during WW2?
 
If you have stuff like a surviving Byzantine or Ottoman empire, or parts of France remain independent, then history changes so much that pop culture is impossible to predict imo. These worlds might not even have any equivalent of pop music or animation studios.
 
At the very least, we'd get awesome Byzantine choir music!
Stereotype - in fact, for a long time it was the most secular state in Europe and the Middle East and had a rich secular culture. In fact, lampoons have survived, where priests of the Komnenos period complain about the abundance of eroticism and pagan remnants in art. Stereotypical Greek religiosity is largely a product of the late Palaiologans.
 
Stereotype - in fact, for a long time it was the most secular state in Europe and the Middle East and had a rich secular culture. In fact, lampoons have survived, where priests of the Komnenos period complain about the abundance of eroticism and pagan remnants in art. Stereotypical Greek religiosity is largely a product of the late Palaiologans.

So what role did religion play in society? Or did most people go through the motions when it came to religion?
 
If you have stuff like a surviving Byzantine or Ottoman empire, or parts of France remain independent, then history changes so much that pop culture is impossible to predict imo. These worlds might not even have any equivalent of pop music or animation studios.
This is true, but pop music will always exist imo. Nothing can stop Britney Spears from fulfilling her destiny.
 
This is true, but pop music will always exist imo. Nothing can stop Britney Spears from fulfilling her destiny.

Pop culture isn't merely mindless garbage, as some snobs say, but it is often a reflection of our values and what we look for in society.

Even supposedly "vapid" artists reflect what society likes and cherishes.

Pop music may still exist, but if that world is one dominated by Persian Zoroastrianism, Syncretic Aztec beliefs, or Taiping Christian gospel, then what they sing about might be very different.

In a world where Zoroastrianism remained a vital belief, we might say "Ahriman-damnit" as a curse. In a world where the most populous nation in the world was taken over by a Christian cult, who knows what kind of hymns would be sung in the name of Hong Xiuquan? And if Aztec faiths survived, who knows how many people would be making cartoons about Aztec gods.

Yes, this world would still have dime-store pop, but the lyrics would be very, very different if our beliefs and ideals shifted considerably from our current understanding.
 
Broadly speaking yes popular culture would be a thing as it has always been, but I'm of the opinion that with this level of historical divergence what it looks like would be so radically different we wouldn't really be able to draw any useful comparisons to our own.
 
Pop culture isn't merely mindless garbage, as some snobs say, but it is often a reflection of our values and what we look for in society.

Even supposedly "vapid" artists reflect what society likes and cherishes.

Pop music may still exist, but if that world is one dominated by Persian Zoroastrianism, Syncretic Aztec beliefs, or Taiping Christian gospel, then what they sing about might be very different.

In a world where Zoroastrianism remained a vital belief, we might say "Ahriman-damnit" as a curse. In a world where the most populous nation in the world was taken over by a Christian cult, who knows what kind of hymns would be sung in the name of Hong Xiuquan? And if Aztec faiths survived, who knows how many people would be making cartoons about Aztec gods.

Yes, this world would still have dime-store pop, but the lyrics would be very, very different if our beliefs and ideals shifted considerably from our current understanding.
This is so fascinating to think about geez… all the different possibilities are mind boggling!
 
So what role did religion play in society? Or did most people go through the motions when it came to religion?
I mean that, of course, the majority of the “Romans” were believers, just like in neighboring states, and the Church played a leading ideological role. However, there is an important nuance - the Byzantine church (with the exception of the highest hierarchy) did not know celibacy, monasticism was not mandatory for career prospects in a number of areas as in the medieval West. There was a developed system of secular education, and one could become an official and a courtier without serving as a cleric.

It is also curious that de jure the local clergy was approved by municipal assemblies. According to Justinian's code, the election of bishops was carried out by "clergy and first citizens" of the diocesan city. There is a custom that the city elects three candidates “just in case.”
This order prevailed in Late Antiquity where the bishop was one of the key municipal magistrates. However, after the decline of the poleis during the decline of the empire, the “city” was often simply unable to nominate a candidate for bishopric that met the “standard.” As a result, the practice itself developed that the Patriarch of Constantinople elected new metropolitans and archbishops to provincial sees, electing them from the clergy of Hagia Sophia.
In the 10th century, the patriarchs attempted to extend this order to the prosperous emporia cities, which were quite capable of finding a bishop on the spot, but they met resistance from the local elites. The “new order” was never firmly established until the end of the empire - in Byzantium, in which the city economy and urban society were rapidly reviving from the 11th century, the idea of electing bishops by the people or part of it never disappeared from the church consciousness; there were different trends that replaced one another depending on the personal views of the patriarchs and metropolitans. In fact, every now and then certain urban communities “did not accept” the archpastor imposed on them from Constantinople, and the patriarch had to make compromises, often approving a local candidate. In Rus', Veliky Novgorod, when it needed to make the archbishopric an “elected city magistracy,” did so based on Justinian’s novella, and there was nothing to object to. In Byzantium, this issue became aggravated in connection with the emergence of the “Greek Orthodox polis” (for example, the same Gregory Palamas, ordained metropolitan of Thessalonica in Constantinople, was “rejected” by Thessalonica).
 
Broadly speaking yes popular culture would be a thing as it has always been, but I'm of the opinion that with this level of historical divergence what it looks like would be so radically different we wouldn't really be able to draw any useful comparisons to our own.

I wouldn't say that we can't draw useful comparisons to our own society.

As long as there has been society, the broader issues of how to run society pop up all the time:

1. What is the role of government and the citizen?

2. What does a person give up for the "greater good" and what do they keep?

3. What are the rights of women in society?

4. How much tradition should we keep and what do we give up in the name of progress?

Throughout the ages, even in supposedly backward times, the same debates and discussions have recurred, but often through different socio-cultural lenses.

In a world where Zoroastrianism triumphed and where Iran was still "Persia", those Persians would still wonder about their place in the world, but they would do so by asking themselves, "What would Ahura Mazda do?"

This is so fascinating to think about geez… all the different possibilities are mind boggling!

And this is why the smallest decisions can have huge ramifications.

I mean that, of course, the majority of the “Romans” were believers, just like in neighboring states, and the Church played a leading ideological role. However, there is an important nuance - the Byzantine church (with the exception of the highest hierarchy) did not know celibacy, monasticism was not mandatory for career prospects in a number of areas as in the medieval West. There was a developed system of secular education, and one could become an official and a courtier without serving as a cleric.

It is also curious that de jure the local clergy was approved by municipal assemblies. According to Justinian's code, the election of bishops was carried out by "clergy and first citizens" of the diocesan city. There is a custom that the city elects three candidates “just in case.”
This order prevailed in Late Antiquity where the bishop was one of the key municipal magistrates. However, after the decline of the poleis during the decline of the empire, the “city” was often simply unable to nominate a candidate for bishopric that met the “standard.” As a result, the practice itself developed that the Patriarch of Constantinople elected new metropolitans and archbishops to provincial sees, electing them from the clergy of Hagia Sophia.
In the 10th century, the patriarchs attempted to extend this order to the prosperous emporia cities, which were quite capable of finding a bishop on the spot, but they met resistance from the local elites. The “new order” was never firmly established until the end of the empire - in Byzantium, in which the city economy and urban society were rapidly reviving from the 11th century, the idea of electing bishops by the people or part of it never disappeared from the church consciousness; there were different trends that replaced one another depending on the personal views of the patriarchs and metropolitans. In fact, every now and then certain urban communities “did not accept” the archpastor imposed on them from Constantinople, and the patriarch had to make compromises, often approving a local candidate. In Rus', Veliky Novgorod, when it needed to make the archbishopric an “elected city magistracy,” did so based on Justinian’s novella, and there was nothing to object to. In Byzantium, this issue became aggravated in connection with the emergence of the “Greek Orthodox polis” (for example, the same Gregory Palamas, ordained metropolitan of Thessalonica in Constantinople, was “rejected” by Thessalonica).

So are these institutions legacies of Western Roman Institutions transferring themselves to the East?
 
Top