In this issue: OT: Charlotte Bronte book movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Re: And talking about movies Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book Re: And talking about movies Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book Speaking of An Ideal Husband Re: Folklore: Blair Witch Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book Re: Chat: Friendship (fwd) Re: Charlotte Bronte book Re: And talking about movies Re: And talking about movies Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book Sing-Song (1893) by Christina Rossetti Re: And talking about movies RE: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Re: And talking about movies Today in History -- Aug 04 Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Civil War Medicine Re: Re: Today in History - August 2 - and Farewell Re: Civil War Medicine CHAT: New mystery novel Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. -----------------------------THE POSTS----------------------------- Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 10:14:36 -0700 From: Deborah McMillion Nering <deborah(at)alice.gloaming.com> Subject: OT: Charlotte Bronte book Does anyone have any information the book CRIMES OF CHARLOTTE BRONTE?--written by James Tully. It purports to be a research book about real murders (Anne?) and horrible machinations in the Bronte family? With no spoilers, has anyone read this? Deborah Deborah McMillion deborah(at)gloaming.com http://www.gloaming.com/deborah.html
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 13:11:34 -0400 (EDT) From: GargoyleMG(at)aol.com Subject: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Over the weekend I saw " The Haunting ". Three little points: The book was better. The original movie was far superior. And the only good thing about the updated version was Liam Neeson in black jeans. Anita
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 13:15:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Maedhros9(at)aol.com Subject: Re: And talking about movies One of my favorite Wilde plays is The Importance of Being Earnest...I know there is a movie version out there (black and white?) but I haven't seen it. The play is great though, Wilde at his best. Has anybody seen the film? Does it compare to the play itself? Phil
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 12:27:23 -0500 From: Chris Carlisle <CarlislC(at)psychiatry1.wustl.edu> Subject: Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book My, my...this sounds so much like the book that Mr. "Mybug" was writing in _Cold Comfort Farm_ to prove that Bramwell Bronte really wrote his sisters' books. Kiwi
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 12:33:40 -0500 From: Chris Carlisle <CarlislC(at)psychiatry1.wustl.edu> Subject: Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book Deborah, my library has this book. To my delight, it's listed as a novel. I'll certainly request it! Kiwi
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 10:35:47 -0700 From: Deborah McMillion Nering <deborah(at)alice.gloaming.com> Subject: Re: And talking about movies >One of my favorite Wilde plays is The Importance of Being Earnest...I know there is a movie version out there (black and white?) but I haven't seen it If you're talking about a very old version of it, yes, I have seen it. And its excellent, too--very much the play and very much the charm and wit. It was one of my favorites for years. A cameo part with Margaret Rutherford as the nanny. Deborah Deborah McMillion deborah(at)gloaming.com http://www.gloaming.com/deborah.html
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 13:41:51 -0400 (EDT) From: MLKasputis(at)aol.com Subject: Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book I've just finished
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 12:52:58 -0500 From: Chris Carlisle <CarlislC(at)psychiatry1.wustl.edu> Subject: Speaking of An Ideal Husband There's a brief appearance by Oscar Wilde himself, who gives a curtain speech at a performance of The Importance of Being Earnest, which serves as a backdrop for a scene. I remember reading on this list that there is another film version of this play. Can anyone refresh my memory about it? Kiwi
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 11:02:57 -0700 From: "J. Alec West" <j(at)alecwest.com> Subject: Re: Folklore: Blair Witch The problem with a some fiction coming out nowadays is that the publishers or producers of it, in an effort to hype "the product," embellish things with falsehoods and rumor. I imagine, for instance, that there are still some people out there who believe James Redfield's "The Celestine Prophecy" is a true story. As people out there are looking for historical information on the "Blair Witch," I imagine there are others so naive that they flew to South America looking for the secret/hidden "insights" Redfield claimed existed. P.S. I've seen the "Blair Witch Project" and didn't care for it all that much. I wrote a review of it which is on film.com webspace. In summation, I said that if a person took any one of the last dozen summertime teenage exploitation horror flicks they've seen and removed from it (a)the sex, (b)the slashing, (c)the mood music, (d)the special effects, and (e)professional cinematography, that what they'd end up with is "The Blair Witch Project." Hehe. J. Alec
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 10:47:03 -0700 From: Deborah McMillion Nering <deborah(at)alice.gloaming.com> Subject: Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book >My, my...this sounds so much like the book that Mr. "Mybug" >was writing in _Cold Comfort Farm_ to prove that Bramwell >Bronte really wrote his sisters' books. Oh good!--I was wondering the same thing! Didn't really want to put that forward in case it was just me! Deborah Deborah McMillion deborah(at)gloaming.com http://www.gloaming.com/deborah.html
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 10:59:21 -0700 From: Deborah McMillion Nering <deborah(at)alice.gloaming.com> Subject: Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book >I've just finished Fiction novel?--or trying to be fact? Any good? Deborah Deborah McMillion deborah(at)gloaming.com http://www.gloaming.com/deborah.html
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 11:46:26 -0700 From: Jack Kolb <kolb(at)UCLA.EDU> Subject: Re: Chat: Friendship (fwd) >Point apologetically taken. And I hope to see more of these delightful >tales. I simply couldn't resist trying to track the tale's origins and was >fascinated by how many times it was repeated verbatim, copied from one web >page to another, without question - a clear demonstration of our fundamental >need for fairy tales. > >Kay Douglas > >"Nothing is so firmly believed, as what we least know." - Michel de >Montaigne The web site (www.snopes.com) is a great place to disabuse yourselves. Firmly skeptical Jack Kolb Dept. of English, UCLA kolb(at)ucla.edu
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 16:26:24 -0500 From: Ann Hilgeman <eahilg(at)seark.net> Subject: Re: Charlotte Bronte book Deborah, I haven't read it, but a friend reviewed it recently, and said it was a prime candidate for "worst book of the decade." My friend said that the author seemed to believe that since one of the Brontes was at the very least an accessory to murder, he simply took everything that Bronte wrote and assumed that it was a lie. So much for documented evidence! My friend also said that even though the book is listed as a novel, the author obviously believed every word of his theory. There was a review of it a month or so ago in the London Times. Ann
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 17:34:48 -0700 From: North <north(at)spiritmail.zzn.com> Subject: Re: And talking about movies There is sometimes an advantage to making a movie out of a great book. I like to think An Ideal Husband" was once such attempt. I have never read anything by Wilde aside from the portrait of dorian grey, but now I feel a certain yen to read more by Wilde. Does anyone else feel that way after seeing a movie based on a book? North ___________________________________________________________ Get your own Web-based E-mail Service at http://www.zzn.com
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 18:11:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Champ <rchamp(at)polaris.umuc.edu>
Subject: Re: And talking about movies
The black-and-white movie version is, I believe, a product of the Ealing
Studios, which is by itself something of a recommendation. A very young
Sir Michael Redgrave appears in the film, as do the fine character actor
Miles Malleson, Dame Edith Evans, and the always delicious Joan Greenwood
(her husky voice is irrestible, at least to me). This "very old version,"
as Deborah calls it, was made in the early '50s. I suppose that would
make me a "very old version" myself!
I would recommend this film to anyone interested in hearing well-trained
and highly talented actors and actresses speak exquisite dialog that was
meant to be spoken exquisitely. No one makes a false step here; everyone
seems to be matched to roles they were born to play. Indeed, I can never
read Wilde's play without imagining this cast in the various parts.
Bob C.
On Tue, 3 Aug 1999, Deborah McMillion Nering wrote:
> >One of my favorite Wilde plays is The Importance of Being Earnest...I know
> there is a movie version out there (black and white?) but I haven't seen it
>
> If you're talking about a very old version of it, yes, I have seen
> it. And its excellent, too--very much the play and very much the
> charm and wit. It was one of my favorites for years. A cameo part
> with Margaret Rutherford as the nanny.
>
> Deborah
>
> Deborah McMillion
> deborah(at)gloaming.com
> http://www.gloaming.com/deborah.html
>
>
_________________________________________________
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Robert L. Champ
rchamp(at)polaris.umuc.edu
Editor, teacher, anglophile, human curiosity
Whatever things are pure, whatever things are
lovely, whatever things are of good report, if
there is any virtue and if there is anything
praiseworthy, meditate on these things
Philippians 4:8
rchamp7927(at)aol.com robertchamp(at)netscape.net
_________________________________________________
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 16:02:39 -0700 From: Jack Kolb <kolb(at)UCLA.EDU> Subject: Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. How could any film hope to compete with Wise's 1963 film, with two of the greatest actresses ever, Julie Harris and Claire Bloom? What idiot attempted a remake? He'll probably be promoted (given the crassness of the industry) rather than fired. What I've seen in previews is profoundly wrong-headed: the effect of the horror depends upon closeness, not broad grotesqueries. The scene in which Harris thinks that she is being clutched by Bloom's hand is one of the greatest scenes in all ghost films. Jack Kolb Dept. of English, UCLA kolb(at)ucla.edu Over the weekend I saw " The Haunting ". > >Three little points: > >The book was better. > >The original movie was far superior. > >And the only good thing about the updated version was Liam Neeson in black >jeans. > >Anita
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 18:32:45 +0000 From: Marta Dawes <smdawes(at)home.com> Subject: Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Amen to that, Anita. When we went to see this newer version, the projector broke down 10 minutes before the end of the movie and put me out of my misery; I couldn't wait to leave. They couldn't fix the projector and gave us all tickets to see another movie. Needless to say, I will not go back to see this film again. We came home and watched the widescreen version of the original film again. What a masterpiece! There is no comparison. My husband said that he didn't think their new massive soundstage set of the house was any better, really, than the original film's actual house and interiors. Just bigger. Trivia: The same house from the 1963 version, exterior and interior, was used for several scenes in "Watcher in the Woods", Disney's 80's film with Bette Davis which was filmed in England. You can see the same front hall, parlor and stairs during one of the interior scenes. In color they were beautiful and not at all creepy or scary. Marta GargoyleMG(at)aol.com wrote: > > Over the weekend I saw " The Haunting ". > > Three little points: > > The book was better. > > The original movie was far superior. > > And the only good thing about the updated version was Liam Neeson in black > jeans. > > Anita
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 18:40:04 +0000 From: Marta Dawes <smdawes(at)home.com> Subject: Re: OT: Charlotte Bronte book I'm on a separate Bronte discussion list, and some of the people in the know have said that it started out as a novel, but in order to boost sales this murder idea has been brought out. If an author could be hanged in absentia, several of the people on the list would have done it after that news blurb. I think it's the lowest possible sales tactic and could only have been proposed by greed; knowing the hell that Charlotte went through after all the siblings had died really makes the entire marketing scheme that much worse. Marta Deborah McMillion Nering wrote: > > Does anyone have any information the book CRIMES OF CHARLOTTE > BRONTE?--written by James Tully. It purports to be a research book > about real murders (Anne?) and horrible machinations in the Bronte > family? With no spoilers, has anyone read this? > > Deborah > > Deborah McMillion > deborah(at)gloaming.com > http://www.gloaming.com/deborah.html
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 19:39:35 -0400 (EDT) From: LoracLegid(at)aol.com Subject: Sing-Song (1893) by Christina Rossetti <A HREF="http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mmbt/women/rossetti/singsong/singsong.html">Sing- Song (1893) by Christina Rossetti</A> http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mmbt/women/rossetti/singsong/singsong.html Wonderful stuff! Carol Digel www.focdarley.org
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 18:55:16 +0000 From: Marta Dawes <smdawes(at)home.com> Subject: Re: And talking about movies Speaking of Ealing, they also did "Dead of Night", 1945. One of my favorite old British films. Sir Michael Redgrave starred in the infamous ventriloquist segment; but my favorite part of the film is the one starring Sally Anne Howe, which I'd heard was a sort of recreation of the Constance Kent murder. The 2nd best segment is the one starring Googie Withers and the strange antique mirror. The entire film has a kind of creepy air to it that is marvelous. Marta Robert Champ wrote: > > The black-and-white movie version is, I believe, a product of the Ealing > Studios, which is by itself something of a recommendation. A very young > Sir Michael Redgrave appears in the film, as do the fine character actor > Miles Malleson, Dame Edith Evans, and the always delicious Joan Greenwood > (her husky voice is irrestible, at least to me). This "very old version," > as Deborah calls it, was made in the early '50s. I suppose that would > make me a "very old version" myself! > > I would recommend this film to anyone interested in hearing well-trained > and highly talented actors and actresses speak exquisite dialog that was > meant to be spoken exquisitely. No one makes a false step here; everyone > seems to be matched to roles they were born to play. Indeed, I can never > read Wilde's play without imagining this cast in the various parts. > > Bob C. > > On Tue, 3 Aug 1999, Deborah McMillion Nering wrote: > > > >One of my favorite Wilde plays is The Importance of Being Earnest...I know > > there is a movie version out there (black and white?) but I haven't seen it > > > > If you're talking about a very old version of it, yes, I have seen > > it. And its excellent, too--very much the play and very much the > > charm and wit. It was one of my favorites for years. A cameo part > > with Margaret Rutherford as the nanny. > > > > Deborah > > > > Deborah McMillion > > deborah(at)gloaming.com > > http://www.gloaming.com/deborah.html > > > > > > _________________________________________________ > @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ > > Robert L. Champ > rchamp(at)polaris.umuc.edu > Editor, teacher, anglophile, human curiosity > > Whatever things are pure, whatever things are > lovely, whatever things are of good report, if > there is any virtue and if there is anything > praiseworthy, meditate on these things > Philippians 4:8 > > rchamp7927(at)aol.com robertchamp(at)netscape.net > _________________________________________________ > @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 19:20:22 -0500 From: Mattingly Conner <muse(at)iland.net> Subject: RE: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. On the other hand, some productions are making up for past horrors, at least in regard to classic books. The 6-hr Pride & Prejudice had a cast that didn't make me cringe, and even kept to the original story. I rented the 1940 Laurence Olivier version and couldn't believe what they had been done to it. It was as if it had morphed with the Little Women.( Riding the petticoats? ) Most curious of all was seeing Aldous Huxley listed as script writer! By my soul, Deborah Mattingly Conner muse(at)iland.net http://www.iland.net/~muse . . . "I must not fear. Fear is the Mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past, I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain." ~ Frank Herbert
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 19:31:34 +0000 From: Marta Dawes <smdawes(at)home.com> Subject: Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Warning: There are "The Haunting" spoilers below from the new film, so if you don't want to know what happened, don't look. Also some ranting by me about this dumbing down of good literature. keep going keep going keep going The utter stupidity of the writers on this film is unbelieveable. The entire point of the film's story was that Eleanor was unable to fight the pull of the house (or her own mind, whichever it was), and in the end was resigned, even looking forward to joining the other world of the house since she had no where else to go and it offered her a place. At the end of this new film, Eleanor is slugging it out with an animated griffin, taking wild swings at it with an iron rod. Where, in heaven's name, does that happen in Shirley Jackson's novel? Another blunder was that Liam played Dr. Marrow, who brought these people to the house for an insomnia study, but really wants to know how they react to fear. No mention is made of the psychic abilities of Theo or Eleanor, so that throws a wrench in the story right from the start. Theo's lesbianism is completely lost after one short scene near the beginning where she talks about her girlfriend and boyfriend; it's never referred to again. I read another review of the film by a young kid, who said, "What's the deal with Catherine Zeta Jones being lesbian; it has nothing to with the story." My God! It has everything to do with the original novel and even with most of the original film, but this uninformed kid (whose review reminds me of the Blair witch posts we've seen here on the list) and probably a lot of the adults watching the film, don't know this because they didn't read the novel, and the new movie never gets beyond the single sentence in setting up the premise. They might as well have left the entire idea out. Hugh Crain was the villain in the new movie, which in the book and the original film he was really just the instigator. But the worst faux pas, the very worst, was that there was no nursery, no mention beyond her name, of Abigail Crain in this film, or of the companion. The focal point of the film was that Hugh Crain had brought all the local poor children in to work at his mills, then abducted them all one by one to live in his huge mansion that he'd built for the children he and his wives never had, and then he'd kill them. Okay, that may be a decent plotline for a movie, but it's certainly not the plotline of "The Haunting of Hill House", and if they were going to make this movie it should have been named something else. It's insulting to Shirley Jackson's memory to have this purport to be anything she wrote. I'm done ranting, and I apologize, but these Hollywood execs who ruin classic stories really deserve to be shot into deep space with a random flight plan programmed into the onboard computer, so we never see them again. I'm also mad at myself; I went despite my better judgement because my husband wanted to see it. By buying a ticket I played into their greedy plans. It's not going to happen again. Marta Jack Kolb wrote: > > How could any film hope to compete with Wise's 1963 film, with two of the > greatest actresses ever, Julie Harris and Claire Bloom? What idiot > attempted a remake? He'll probably be promoted (given the crassness of the > industry) rather than fired. > > What I've seen in previews is profoundly wrong-headed: the effect of the > horror depends upon closeness, not broad grotesqueries. The scene in which > Harris thinks that she is being clutched by Bloom's hand is one of the > greatest scenes in all ghost films. > > Jack Kolb > Dept. of English, UCLA > kolb(at)ucla.edu > > Over the weekend I saw " The Haunting ". > > > >Three little points: > > > >The book was better. > > > >The original movie was far superior. > > > >And the only good thing about the updated version was Liam Neeson in black > >jeans. > > > >Anita
===0===
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 19:14:41 -0700 From: Deborah McMillion Nering <deborah(at)alice.gloaming.com> Subject: Re: And talking about movies >T This "very old version,"as Deborah calls it, was made in the early '50s. Really?--I guess I had the impression it was made in the 30's and 40's. Is this the same one with, I think, Michael Wilding, Joan Greenwood and Margaret Rutherford? 50's? Deborah (who did like the new Haunting, even though I didn't think it was Shirley Jackson's HAUNTING OF HILL HOUSE. I figured Robert Wise already did that so well someone else was going to do it different. Instead, think of it like the 1973 movie "Legend of Hell House", really, the same thing but also very scary. And yes...no scare scene has ever come up with that one where Eleanor is gripping...some thing's hand. For all the pounding on the doors and the pulsing of the house, that is the best!) Deborah McMillion deborah(at)gloaming.com http://www.gloaming.com/deborah.html
===0===
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 00:19:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Champ <rchamp(at)polaris.umuc.edu>
Subject: Today in History -- Aug 04
Interesting things that happened August 4th:
Birthdays on this date:
In 1755 Nicolas-Jacque Conte, invented the modern pencil
In 1792 Percy Bysshe Shelley, poet
In 1859 Knut Hamsun, Norwegian writer (Hunger) (Nobel 1920), Nazi
In 1900 Arturo Umberto Illia, president of Argentina (1963-66)
+ Britain's Queen Mother
In 1910 William Schuman, composer
Events worth noting:
In 1777 Retired British cavalry officer Philip Astley establishes the first
circus.
In 1790 United States Coast Guard founded.
In 1864 Land and naval action new Brazos Santiago, Texas.
In 1925 US marines leave Nicaragua after 13-year occupation.
In 1927 Peace Bridge between US and Canada opened.
Bob C.
===0===
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 05:27:55 -0400 (EDT) From: CLemas1161(at)aol.com Subject: Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. This also would be a "spoiler'" to the Haunting, so if you still want to see the movie, don't read the following. keep going. keep going. keep going. as far as Theo's lesbianism, the worst is that the makers of the film itself decided that "lesbianism" wasn't an important theme in the movie! which shows how clueless they are! one of the best articles on the original movie The Haunting that i've read was in "inside/out: lesbian theories, gay theories" edited by Diana Fuss. Patricia White wrote the article "Female Spectator, Lesbian Spectator". The Haunting and the original Psycho came out roughly the same era, and the theory is that Psycho was abuot men's problems with identity and separation and The Haunting is about women's difficulty in separation as shown in Nell's inability to forge an identity separate from her mother, or from the house. The article has some interesting ideas, and I gained a deeper appreciation of the film after reading it. but oh, god, this last movie was so awful! glad to know others were also sick at heart to see Shirley Jackson's wonderful novel butchered.
===0===
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 10:46:22 -0500 From: Chris Carlisle <CarlislC(at)psychiatry1.wustl.edu> Subject: Civil War Medicine The latest issue of JAMA has a review of a book which may be of interest to list members, Gangrene and Glory: Medical Care during the American Civil War, Frank R. Freeman, Fairlight Dickinson Press, Cranbury, NJ, 1998, ISBN 0-8386-3753-1. It sounds on the icky side, but Civil War historians and those who are passionately interested in the period will surely find it useful. Here's a small quote from the review: "An unofficial count suggests 12000 doctors were called up for the North and 3000 for the South, and of this latter group, only 24 had previous military medical training. Even more startling, men without any medical training received state appointments as regimental surgeons! It was customary to call all army physicians "surgeon, even though most were woefully unqualified to practice surgery." These folks were operating with some chloroform, ether and opiates (though all were scarce in the South), no knowledge of antisepsis, nor of nutritional problems, which seem to have killed and disabled thousands of soldiers. Twice as many soldiers died due to infection and disease as in battle. I don't think I'll try to read this book, it looks both sad and disturbing. Kiwi Carlisle carlislc(at)psychiatry.wustl.edu
===0===
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 08:50:44 -0700 From: Patricia Teter <PTeter(at)getty.edu> Subject: Re: Re: Today in History - August 2 - and Farewell Bob C. wrote: <<Wow, I would sure hate to lose you, Jerry. Your posts, on whatever topic, are among the ones I always look forward to. Please don't say that you're giving up the list entirely!>> Ditto, Jerry! Bob C. wrote again: <<I started posting the "Today in History" messages quite some time ago, and if it's agreeable will resume the posts.>> Bob, thanks for taking up the "Today in History" messages again. I have thoroughly enjoyed the posts over the years. best regards, Patricia
===0===
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 12:36:08 -0400 From: "J.M. Jamieson" <jjamieson(at)odyssey.on.ca> Subject: Re: Civil War Medicine At 10:46 AM 04/08/1999 -0500, Kiwi Carlisle wrote: >The latest issue of JAMA has a review of a book which may >be of interest to list members, Gangrene and Glory: Medical >Care during the American Civil War, Frank R. Freeman, Fairlight >Dickinson Press, Cranbury, NJ, 1998, ISBN 0-8386-3753-1. [text snipped] >I don't think I'll try to read this book, it looks both >sad and disturbing. Thanks for bringing this book to my attention. I certainly relate to your last comment even though my Civil War readings have taken me into this area before it is hard going. There is a fascinating poem by Walt Whitman called "The Wound-Dresser" which is part of a series of Civil War poems by him called "Drum-Taps". During the war Whitman visited the wounded and dying soldiers, wrote letters for them, talked to them, and nursed them. The poem's narrator is an old man who is asked to reflect back on his experiences in the war "Of those armies so rapid so wonderous what saw you to tell us?/What stays with you latest and deepest?" Whitman tells not of the wonderous armies but of the wounded and dying soldiers in a moving and very graphic way based on his experiences. I dress a wound in the side, deep, deep, But a day or two more, for see the frame all wasted and sinking And the yellow-blue countenance see. I dress the perforated shoulder, the foot with the bullet wound, Cleanse the one with the gnawing and putrid gangerene, so sickening, so offensive While the attendent stands behind aside me holding the tray and pail, I am faithful, I do not give out........ Not the usual school-room Whitman I'm afraid. The composer John Adams of _Nixon in China_ fame has a wonderous setting of this poem. Mac - - Copyright ? 1999 J.M. Jamieson ICQ #17834084 RSA & DH/DSS keys at http://pgp.rivertown.net/keyserver/
===0===
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 15:56:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Champ <rchamp(at)polaris.umuc.edu>
Subject: CHAT: New mystery novel
A cyber-friend, Ellen Larsen, has just had her first novel published, a
mystery set in the wilds of darkest New Jersey. It is called _The Hatch
and Brood of Time_. I can't vouch for it but the story looks interesting
enough that I will certainly buy it. If you want to find out more about
the book, the author, the illustrator, and read a couple of reviews,
her publisher has set up a page at
http://www.savvypress.com/hatch
Not surprisingly, Ellen is an interesting person. When you are an
American woman who has spent the last few years living in Cairo, Egypt,
you have more than a few stories to tell.
Bob C.
_________________________________________________
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Robert L. Champ
rchamp(at)polaris.umuc.edu
Editor, teacher, anglophile, human curiosity
Whatever things are pure, whatever things are
lovely, whatever things are of good report, if
there is any virtue and if there is anything
praiseworthy, meditate on these things
Philippians 4:8
rchamp7927(at)aol.com robertchamp(at)netscape.net
_________________________________________________
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
===0===
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 13:18:36 -0700 (PDT) From: charles king <lit57(at)hotmail.com> Subject: Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Hmmm? Sounds like it could win the golden crack pipe award. I have to see it now to see it's the winner . . . www.goldencrackpipe.com C. King >From: GargoyleMG(at)aol.com >Reply-To: gaslight(at)MtRoyal.AB.CA >To: gaslight(at)MtRoyal.AB.CA >Subject: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. >Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 13:11:34 -0400 (EDT) > >Over the weekend I saw " The Haunting ". > >Three little points: > >The book was better. > >The original movie was far superior. > >And the only good thing about the updated version was Liam Neeson in black >jeans. > >Anita > _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
===0===
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 13:20:11 -0700 (PDT) From: charles king <lit57(at)hotmail.com> Subject: Re: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. Hmmm? Sounds like it could win the golden crack pipe award. I have to see it now it, might be the winner . . . www.goldencrackpipe.com Someone was smoking some serious crack! . . . C. King >From: GargoyleMG(at)aol.com >Reply-To: gaslight(at)MtRoyal.AB.CA >To: gaslight(at)MtRoyal.AB.CA >Subject: movies, movies everywhere and you don't have to think. >Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1999 13:11:34 -0400 (EDT) > >Over the weekend I saw " The Haunting ". > >Three little points: > >The book was better. > >The original movie was far superior. > >And the only good thing about the updated version was Liam Neeson in black >jeans. > >Anita > _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ End of Gaslight Digest V1 #88 *****************************