M&D Deep Duck Where are all the children?

[alice malice]

Yes, thank you for correcting my misread and for helping me see my confusion.

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:03 PM,  <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
> The Dickens and Salem references I made were side-conversations about grave-stones and indentured servants, not evidence to prove that you were mythologizing anything. Sorry if you misread them as a counter-argument to your post. As you say, different times, different places.
>
> Laura
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: alice malice <alicewmalice at gmail.com>
>>Sent: Jan 23, 2015 3:57 PM
>>To: "pynchon-l at waste.org" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>Subject: Re: M&D Deep Duck Where are all the children?
>>
>>I'm merely describing the family and economic, the work conditions of
>>the folks who lived in America, and more specifically in and around
>>Philadelphia, when the novel commences, that is, 1787. I don't know
>>why I'm being accused of mythologizing when the evidence against the
>>description I'm providing, comes from Dickens novels and the Salem
>>Trials. While Dickens did describe the period of abuse and neglect of
>>children, some that he experiences in his childhood,  in his novels,
>>he wasn't alive until 1812, and he was, obviously, born in England and
>>lived there,  not in America. The Salem Trials were in 1692-93.
>>
>>
>>
>>On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Laura Kelber <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> The Salem witch hysteria began among indentured servant girls ( one can only
>>> imagine the sexual and/ or physical abuse they must have endured within the
>>> confines of such a repressive theocracy). Whether conscious or subconscious,
>>> their accusations constituted a failed rebellion against the powers that be.
>>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>> Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> I heard a piece on the radio recently about indentured servitude. A very
>>> common and miserable status at the time.
>>>
>>> In New York State most land was owned by large holders and those who worked
>>> on this land had great difficulty both legally and financially escaping a
>>> condition of impoverished renters. Slavery was a common feature of
>>> successful ventures.
>>>
>>> The farms had to be very large to sustain families and the unsustainability
>>> of these practices eventually led directly to the violent seizure of western
>>> lands.
>>>
>>> Some places were better than others, opportunities were many, but it is my
>>> sense that you seem to be mythologizing the situation a bit.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 23, 2015, at 4:42 AM, alice malice wrote:
>>>
>>>> Though these Americans do carry with them some of the European Myths
>>>> of Destruction, that they have come to a Virgin Land, to a Promised
>>>> Land, to a New World, to a land of Savages, who must be Exterminated
>>>> or made Noble, to a place that Providence had Promised their brave
>>>> predecessors and so on, by now, they have new Myths, and they have a
>>>> reality that is not European, not what Britannia Dreamed, but what
>>>> they know. The streets are not paved with gold, their are no fountains
>>>> of youth, but america is a place of incredible opportunity. The family
>>>> is big because America can support big families. They can marry
>>>> younger, get land and a home, prosper, be fruitful and multiply. And
>>>> they do.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:40 PM, alice malice <alicewmalice at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> If P wants to show us what might have been, what was possible, if only
>>>>> the Americans had...he has to begin with prosperity and success, and
>>>>> that is the case in Christmastide 1778. There were no serious economic
>>>>> reasons, not even taxes, or taxes on Tea even, fro the colonies to
>>>>> rebel. Things were mighty fine. But they had other reasons to get rid
>>>>> of the English. The had money and power and people and prosperity and
>>>>> they didn't need England so why not get rid of the then and make start
>>>>> their own country? And this where it began with so much promise,
>>>>> though there are dark and bloody hauntings, the murder of the Indians,
>>>>> the enslaving of Africans, the destruction of the Earth etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:33 PM, alice malice <alicewmalice at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> in 1775, the 13 colonies has a population of apx. 2.6mm, 2.1mm white,
>>>>>> 540000 blacks, 50,000 or fewer Native American; 21% of the people
>>>>>> lived in Virginia and 22% were in Penn. and Mass., 11% each. In
>>>>>> Philadelphia there were 35,000. The 13 colonies were not dependent,
>>>>>> for anything, on England, Europe, or anyplace else. Still the case in
>>>>>> the US, where trade comprises a relatively small percentage of the
>>>>>> Economy.   In 1775, the Colonies had 1/3 as many inhabitants as the
>>>>>> mother country, and more than 30% of her economic output. As
>>>>>> Franklin's famous demographic publications, though flawed, as were
>>>>>> Malthusian Theories all, predicted, the colonies would, in a few
>>>>>> generations, far outnumber the inhabitants in England.  This because
>>>>>> the average family had 8 children in the colonies but only 4 in
>>>>>> England. It was not the poor who, in their ignorance and poverty,
>>>>>> living on the 1% of the wealth of the nation that were supporting
>>>>>> large families, for other than the enslaved population, where family
>>>>>> size was also 8 children, America was not 19th century industrial or
>>>>>> urban Europe, the black poverty of Pip or  Blake's Chimney Sweeper did
>>>>>> not exist in America, as it was only the 18th century, but more so
>>>>>> because America was prosperous and people married younger and
>>>>>> sustained large families on the land and wealth, not on poverty and
>>>>>> infant mortality and abuse.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> a valid point  but the large families may not have been the ones
>>>>>>> cashing in on economic growth.
>>>> -
>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>-
>>Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l