NP - The Witch (movie)

[ish mailian]

Pynchon readers, and especially readers who are interested in
Pynchon's and Slothrop's Puritan ancestors should read Hawthorne, not
only HSG, a story that entwines P's family with Hawthorne's,  but all
the short stories or tales. Young Goodman Brown and The Birthmark, The
Black Veil are the most anthologized... try the Maypole.

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 6:20 AM, kelber at mindspring.com
<kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
> 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
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l