Casanova’s bastard child

27 May 2019

The original Casanova is almost entirely misunderstood in Western culture. His life is the subject of more legends and myths than perhaps any other prominent figure in modern history. Indeed, the popular conception of Casanova is no more based on hard historical facts than our ideas about the shadowy men of antiquity, like Achilles and Gilgamesh. The most obscene distortions and lies have been promulgated by commercial interests in the United States of America.

It’s time to demystify the original Casanova and lay the key facts on the table.

To begin with, and contrary to what is very widely believed, Casanova was not an 18th century Venetian Italian, but rather a 20th century Mexican. The source of this extraordinary false belief about Casanova’s epoch and nationality is unknown. Since it is solidly entrenched among the elites in universities, there seems to be no possibility of rectifying the error in the short-to-medium term.

Another extraordinary false belief about the original Casanova is that he died over two hundred years ago. This is doubly false, for not only was Casanova not even born two hundred years ago, he’s not even dead now. Casanova is alive and well in the country of his birth. He has, of course, lost some of the spirit and vigour of his adventurous heyday, but he maintains a steady work ethic and may still be spotted cavorting around town on the arms of young ladies.

Third, almost all extant portraits of Casanova are wild fantasies from the minds of mad charlatans. The travesty on the left below, which is attributed to Casanova’s own brother, is a typical example. A genuine portrait is also provided below for comparison. If you inspect the two images closely, you will eventually see that the popular portrayal of Casanova’s physiognomy looks nothing like the real thing.

Left: Casanova as he is popularly portrayed; right: Casanova as he really is

Even though the foregoing facts will shock most people, they are old-news in the boxing community, which has known the truth for decades now.

But there is another fact about the original Casanova which is not even well-known in the boxing community. The story goes like this.

The original Casanova travelled across the border to United States of America – attracted, no doubt, by the social freedoms and general licentiousness in that country – where he soon found himself immersed in all manner of debauchery. This included a most depraved jaunt in Philadelphia, during which time he cavorted with many impoverished creative types like the wannabe filmmaker Sylvester Stallone. This, as everyone in the boxing community knows, led to a brief stint as an actor in the seedy world of low-budget movies.

Casanova’s only film appearance was small but memorable for those in the boxing community

However, what is not so well-known, even among hardcore gear aficionados, is the fact that one of Casanova’s many American amours eventually turned sour and then irreversibly rancid. The original Casanova somehow got himself entangled with a vixen well-known today as Pro Boxing Supplies (PBS). The details are hazy, but the relationship apparently ended badly, leaving PBS intent on exacting revenge on Casanova, regardless of how many innocent consumers on Amazon and elsewhere it might hurt in the process. It soon gave birth to a bastard child, named the unfortunate creature with the trademark “Casanova Sports” against the express wishes of Casanova himself, and commenced a dogged campaign destroy its former lover while milking his modicum of fame for everything it was worth.

(Although it can hardly be said to be a fact, there is at least some reason to believe that the etymology of the sexist perjorative “gold-digger” has something to do with the Casanova-PBS affair and Aztec gold. But given the predominance of false beliefs about the original Casanova, it’s unlikely that any of the top linguistic departments in the USA or elsewhere would contemplate undertaking the etymological research required to confirm or refute this interesting hypothesis.)

The bastard child of Casanova certainly bears some resemblance to the original Casanova, but it’s widely acknowledged to be utterly inferior in every respect, except price. The original Casanova exhibits a stately boxy form with a strong back devoid of vulgar decoration. His bastard child, on the other hand, appears stooped and flimsy by comparison, as if the sad deformity is actually made in the sweatshops of Pakistan rather than, as the malignant and vindictive PBS repeatedly tries to reassure us, in the USA.

Left: the original Casanova; right: Casanova’s bastard child, whom some wise people consider to provide compelling justification for infanticide

That’s the true story of how an American corporation committed an act of intellectual property theft with the deliberate intention to deceive consumers and, for some unknown reason, destroy an old-school Mexican gear manufacturer.

Do you own either original Casanovas or the fake PBS ones? If so, let me know what you think about them in the comments below!

Did you like this post? Share it!

Posted by ScepticalBoxer

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published