NP question

[peterthooper at juno.com]

Thank you.

What an interesting backdrop for the managers! Almost like the “wandering heart” grain in that desk in M&D!

And what an amazing challenge for them, to set forth the facts compellingly. Naturally I had a lot of ideas on how one could proceed -  but realistically, they are doing as well as one could expect or even hope. 

One hopes their speeches ignited the intellects and coaxed the consciences of all present, restored them to their rightful minds in deeper reverence, awakened a bipartisan consensus to administer justice tempered with mercy. 

The obstacles were formidable.

The age-old problem of sustaining interest 
- that’s a toughie right there. Even 10 minutes is a long time to listen to someone, imho, and twice as long to talk. 

Trying to build rapport with the crowd - appealing to common ground, mentioning shared goals, gaining assent to any guiding principles - risked becoming an exercise in frustration due to partisanship.

The narrative is replete with details which need to be organized - “you will want cause and effect”
The underlying crookedness, beholdenness to oligarchs, the general Daffy Duck despicable nature of the regime, the Pyrrhic victory over the CCCP and its kleptocratic aftermath washing up on our shores, the tragic miserabilist Mideast interventions, ie the background that makes the tale so poignant, isn’t really part of the story - “they got Capone for tax evasion, but at least they got him” type of feeling. 
These charges, in other words, aren’t even the worst thing about the Trump Administration, and the Trump Administration isn’t even the worst thing about the Republican Party (hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis would certainly agree) — so I for one would have a hard time coloring within the lines, were I they.

Anticipating objections is another frustration, since it seems likely that the defense will still raise them and not acknowledge they were dealt with. 

I found it soothing to be able to watch the backdrop, but I wonder if this staging is meant to be a somewhat demeaning “free speech zone” 

(like, those Democrats stood in front of the cracked glass, but the President and his lawyers roar from the rostrum, or podium, or what have you, with the flag behind them)

We shall see...

Anyway, thanks!

I was looking around the Senate website for pics of the layout but hadn’t really zeroed in because there are so many other interesting things to see there. 

How would a P treatment of this look? A preference for preterite protagonists precludes peering through the peepers of the principals...
perhaps a latter-day Profane could watch the hearings on the Tube after a hard day in the sewers. Or Maxine could follow the money.


---------- Original Message ----------
From: Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
To: "peterthooper at juno.com" <peterthooper at juno.com>
Cc: pynchon -l <Pynchon-l at waste.org>
Subject: Re: NP question
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 05:09:40 -0500

>From a NYT story six days ago: 
On Friday, the large tables were again wedged between the front row of the senators’ desks and the marble-and-polished-wood Senate rostrum, so they could be ready next week for the start of oral arguments in President Trump’s impeachment trial.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 8:23 PM peterthooper at juno.com <peterthooper at juno.com> wrote:
 what is Adam Schiff standing in front of? Marble? Modern art? Spiderweb? Cracked glass?


____________________________________________________________
Sad News For Royal Family
track.volutrk.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/5e28f560c7b2755f022est01vuc
--
Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l