NP - The Witch (movie)

Mon Dec 19 05:20:18 CST 2016

In terms of "rebellious" votes for Trump, I'd liken it to: 1) a severely depressed person who botches a suicide attempt and ends up severely disabled; or 2) a spoiled brat who throws a tantrum and smashes Daddy's car, also ending up severely disabled. I.e., an emotional decision with dire consequences.

Back to The Witch, I happen to be reading a book called The Witches, by Stacy Schiff, which debunks a lot of the popular depictions of Salem ( I haven't read House of the Seven Gables, but The Crucible, and a beloved childhood book, Tituba of Salem Village). I'm not far enough in to have a feeling for whether this document-based approach is going to make the story more or less interesting. Anyone happen to have read it?

https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Witches.html?id=YqE4jwEACAAJ

Laura 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:

>I'm calling this for P-List thread of the year. I've wanted to see The
>VVitch (that's how it was spelled here) for a while but wanted to
>avoid spoilers, and every day I find not spoilers but tangents going
>to god knows where. If this thread ever makes its way back to the
>movie I'll be disappointed.
>Anyway: what do we make of this idea that voting for Trump appeals as
>a subversive act these days? In the last year I've read more and more
>younger people make articulate defences of a turn towards conservatism
>as a new kind of rebellion, and I think people in their teens and
>twenties *should* rebel and question and interrogate the power
>structures they're expected to inherit etc and I hope I'm still doing
>the same now, but my, oh my. What would Pynchon make of it.
>
>On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 7:06 PM, kelber at mindspring.com
><kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>> Sadly, even heroin addicts have the right to vote. Perhaps the next time we
>> can round them up and put them in internment camps, or even extermination
>> camps. Would that meet with your approval?
>>
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID
>>
>>
>> David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I didn't catch the reason these idiots voted for Trump. But their sad
>> anti-existential reasons for nihilistic Trump voting is why we lost.
>>
>> David Morris
>>
>> On Sunday, December 18, 2016, kelber at mindspring.com <kelber at mindspring.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Michael Moore's pre-election analysis is absolutely spot-on,
>>> post-election:
>>>
>>> http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/
>>>
>>> Point 5 is particularly relevant for people to consider. My daughter
>>> reports that a sub-set if her friends - millennials, by and large,
>>> marginally employed, drug-addled, with no future - voted for Trump for this
>>> very reason.
>>>
>>> LK
>>>
>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID
>>>
>>>
>>> ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Krugman, like so many who think like liberals with a conscience missed
>>> something huge in the recent election and he still doesn't seem to
>>> realize how wrong he was about the working people who supported Trump
>>> and how the trade agreements with China and Mexico impacted wages.
>>> Krugman, who defends trade, and the trade agreements (WTO, Most
>>> Favored Trading Nation Status for China, for example )that stripped US
>>> workers of wealth and job security argues that the US  jobs and the
>>> benefits were lost to technology. This is false and those simple folk
>>> Krugman claims to care about know it, even though he is a professor of
>>> Economics,  has the Nobel in Economics and most of them don't have a
>>> degree in anything. China's gain was the  US loss, in wages, job
>>> security. Sure, the wealth got skewed more and more to the top 10%
>>> under US Capitalism while in China the poor were lifted out of
>>> poverty, so one could argue, as liberals often do, and did when the
>>> unfair trade advantage was extended to China, that the US needed to
>>> redistribute the wealth, educate, re-educate, invest in
>>> infrastructure, productivity, workers...to offset the unfair trade
>>> that raised the Chinese workers out of poverty and stripped US workers
>>> of the wages, and that, in the long run, a China without poverty would
>>> benefit not only China but the US, US workers, and the world. Not true
>>> of course, but this was the thinking and Krugman was a big cheerleader
>>> for it. Now he is reluctant to admit that he was wrong. The Liberals
>>> got it wrong. At least from the American worker's point of view they
>>> did. The US gave up a lot of manufacturing. It would shift to service
>>> and knowledge economy. The shift, from Clinton through Bush and to
>>> Obama, 24 years, failed. The Chinese took full advantage, and they
>>> manipulated the currency to boot. Workers know this. Will Trump change
>>> things?
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > I look at the Times everyday and agree about the treatment of Hillary's
>>> > silly emails, which clearly shouldn't have amounted to a row of beans in
>>> > this crazy world. Krugman calls it false equivalency and says the
>>> > mainstream
>>> > press in general was guilty. He recently wrote a scathing piece on the
>>> > subject.
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 7:09 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Hi Paul!
>>> >>
>>> >> I like the NYT grammarian.  Otherwise I hate the NYT for endlessly
>>> >> persecuting Hillary's emails and not showcasing Trump's endless lies,
>>> >> race-baiting, Putin-loving anti-NATO crap. I HATE the NYT.
>>> >>
>>> >> Just saying..
>>> >> David Morris
>>> >>
>>> >> On Saturday, December 17, 2016, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> No more than any other English teacher would--Hi David.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> p
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 5:35 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> OK.  Is it no different than our English?  You quibble.  Do you have
>>> >>>> a
>>> >>>> point?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> David Morris
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Saturday, December 17, 2016, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Shakespeare's language is Modern English, not Old or Middle English.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 7:53 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>> >>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>> > http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-witch-2016
>>> >>>>> >
>>> >>>>> > I'm only at the first third, but everything so far is layered in
>>> >>>>> > deep
>>> >>>>> > resonances.  The language is faithfully old English, but that's
>>> >>>>> > not
>>> >>>>> > the only
>>> >>>>> > reason it reminds me of Shakespeare.  The drama is smart and real.
>>> >>>>> > Cinematography is superb, as is the soundtrack.  In that regard
>>> >>>>> > this
>>> >>>>> > feels
>>> >>>>> > like Kubrick, but without the symmetry and clean edges.
>>> >>>>> >
>>> >>>>> > David Morris
>>> >>>>> -
>>> >>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20161219/0b7ff533/attachment.html>