NP Re: propaganda [was Re: Vineland]

[MASCARO at humnet.ucla.edu]

Yes, good point re O'Neill, davemarc.  Still, that *Little* and *Helper*--those seem a bit 
sinister, though as you say, not in today's league.
john m
******************
davemarc writes:
>
>19th century medications are a story in themselves.  I don't think they're
>simply a matter of marketing.  I know I've been harping on O'Neill
>recently, so I'll stay on the subject a little longer to point out that
>Eugene's mom became addicted to morphine after being treated with it
>following a painful birth experience in the late part of the century.  The
>doctor wasn't great, but I don't think he was a complete incompetent
>either; such usages were as common as they were regrettable.  Considering
>that the "safe" anesthesia pioneered c.1864 wasn't all that safe (and still
>isn't, in some ways), and that addictive substances like alcohol and
>codeine are still in cough medicines, the origins of "Mother's Little
>Helper" might have been less sinister, and more primitive and desperate,
>than suggested.  Now if we're gonna talk about modern-day cigarettes and
>heroin and cocaine....