This HTML5 document contains 10 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

PrefixNamespace IRI
n11http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/ontology/
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
n12http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/ZqM_Fh5ftjC58XWlBDcJ_g==
n3http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/uncyclopedia/property/
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n8http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/XB2IfJyWZBQfGew7nCTbfw==
n4http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/-p1WJwBKpIZ6kc-pxCk3rQ==
n2http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/xl5GC4DgH-6Pi8kVNbzEBQ==
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
n10http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/EBTk8fB32gpdlsr7xXF73Q==
n6http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/DUzBRvYzEKH2jG_8jfKhag==
n13http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/L9y_QEJU-rjojCemiVmohQ==
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n9http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/DeDmOK-TmtfQ1ik_KqzeRw==
Subject Item
n2:
rdfs:label
Classical Satire
rdfs:comment
This study aims only to clarify the most salient points. Its purpose is not to try converting any of our humoristic axioms into a thing understandable in the latter part of the 21st century - we will never be mature enough for that - but to clarify the most salient points. Those tuned in for what actually is funny should ignore the article in its entirety: mens sana in corpore is not what gives our truths the complexity they deserve. Is satire, after all, just a myth - and is classical satire, therefore, a classical myth? That is what cannot be told for certain. What we do know is that the myth-makers of the satire industry - Voltaire, Swift, Oliver Stone and Milton to name just a few - have been pretty busy trying to convince us that some of it existed before the year 1924. Talk about fea
dcterms:subject
n6: n8: n13:
n3:wikiPageUsesTemplate
n4: n12:
n9:
4273037
n10:
2009-12-22
n11:abstract
This study aims only to clarify the most salient points. Its purpose is not to try converting any of our humoristic axioms into a thing understandable in the latter part of the 21st century - we will never be mature enough for that - but to clarify the most salient points. Those tuned in for what actually is funny should ignore the article in its entirety: mens sana in corpore is not what gives our truths the complexity they deserve. Is satire, after all, just a myth - and is classical satire, therefore, a classical myth? That is what cannot be told for certain. What we do know is that the myth-makers of the satire industry - Voltaire, Swift, Oliver Stone and Milton to name just a few - have been pretty busy trying to convince us that some of it existed before the year 1924. Talk about feathering your own nest.