"Run For Your Life" and Roseanne Barr
White Shadow
from the mid-1990's. In this particular episode, Roseanne and her
sister Jackie were reminiscing about the music they loved as
teenagers, and they mentioned how much they had enjoyed the Beatles,
among others.
But then Roseanne backtracked and brought up Lennon's song "Run For
Your Life" that appeared on Rubber Soul. She recited the song's line
"I'd rather see you dead, little girl, than to be with another man."
and she pointed out, "That's just what wife beaters need....their own
anthem!!"
When you stop and think about it, she was right. That song sends a
terribly inappropriate message to males who are of the jealous,
possessive type -- as was Lennon, who was known to beat women in his
younger days.
Same thing applies to Tom Jones' song "Delilah" from the late 1960's,
which is about a guy knifing his unfaithful girlfriend.
abby now
"White Shadow" <wam...@maximus.com> wrote in message
news:2qp1r213b690f804p...@4ax.com...
> Earlier today I was watching an old rerun of the "Roseanne" sitcom
> from the mid-1990's.
You watched ROSEANNE???!!!???
Was Grace Under Fire not on during that time?
White Shadow
wrote:
Never heard of it. Is that an actual show??
"Roseanne" was one of the funniest and (at times) most daring, most
imaginatively written shows ever to appear on network television.
Ironically, I never watched a single episode of it during its original
run from 1988 to 1997. Back then, I dismissed it as a show about
trailer trash. WRONG!!
abby now
I was just joking with you... I used to watch Roseanne and it was hilarious!
Grace Under Fire came on maybe in the early 90's. The comic Brett Butler was
the star and it showcased a bunch of simpletons just like Roseanne. :-)
Interesting on-topic tidbit: It used a cover of "Lady Madonna" as it's
theme song the first few seasons.
Sixties Gen
"Run For Your Life" has received a bad rap.
And I remember the "Roseanne" show that mentioned it. It was odd that
they singled out a Beatles song regarding violence
It is one of only two songs written by The Beatles in which violence
towards a woman is mentioned. The other being "Getting Better". In
the latter, an actual admission of violence is made...but in "Run for
Your Life", it's a threat, perhaps empty.
I think we can allow a group like The Beatles a couple of lapses in
judgement against the two hundred songs they wrote about loving women,
loving peace, loving love.
mingl...@nls.net
>
> When you stop and think about it, she was right. That song sends a
> terribly inappropriate message to males who are of the jealous,
> possessive type -- as was Lennon, who was known to beat women in his
> younger days.
>
> Same thing applies to Tom Jones' song "Delilah" from the late 1960's,
> which is about a guy knifing his unfaithful girlfriend.
I dunno. The line from "Run for Your Life" was taken from Elvis'
"That's All Right Mama," which itself was taken almost verbatum from a
blues song recorded in the early 50s. Blues records were full of
violent sentiments like that that just reflected the passions of life,
not as recommended ways to behave. I realize that this line seems a
shocking thing to sing in a 60s pop song. I think John's biggest error
here was just being lazy and not writing a first-rate song this late in
the Beatles' career. I think it's a cool rocker, though.
UsurperTom
> I think we can allow a group like The Beatles a couple of lapses in judgement against the two hundred songs they wrote about loving women, loving peace, loving love.
Songs, like movies, are just entertainment. There's no constant theme
in Beatle songs. "Hey Joe" by Jimi Hendrix and "Down by the River" by
Neil Young were songs about shooting your lover.
rfor...@msn.com
White Shadow wrote:
> Earlier today I was watching an old rerun of the "Roseanne" sitcom
> from the mid-1990's. In this particular episode, Roseanne and her
> sister Jackie were reminiscing about the music they loved as
> teenagers, and they mentioned how much they had enjoyed the Beatles,
> among others.
>
> But then Roseanne backtracked and brought up Lennon's song "Run For
> Your Life" that appeared on Rubber Soul. She recited the song's line
> "I'd rather see you dead, little girl, than to be with another man."
> and she pointed out, "That's just what wife beaters need....their own
> anthem!!"
>
That is a funny line, and Roseanne was one of the funniest sitcoms
ever, not top 5 but top 10 I'd probably say.
But I think people complaining about RFYL's lyric is ridiculous. It
seems to be subjected to some silly standard of pacifistic politically
correct altruism because it's the beloved Beatles, but that's
ridiculous. A man's jealousy, insecurity, misogyny and violent impules
and feelings are perfectly suitable, legitimate, interesting material
for a song - one based on actual human emotions that exist in the world
(or a movie or novel or play, you get the idea) and this nastily
rockin' little track captures the mood perfectly. ("Jealous Guy"
seems to me a variation on the same theme, from a different angle
completely, and also successful and good, although both songs could use
a bridge or contrasting section or more musical development, which is a
criticism I have about a number of John Lennon songs....but I digress.)
Similarly with the rap some people want to give to Paul's excellent "We
Can Work It Out." The argument goes, the song sounds conciliatory and
reasonable on the surface but actually expresses the narrator's
inflexibility and male chauvanism, as he threatens to end the
relationship if the person he's talking to doesn't come around to his
way of thinking and let him win the argument. I say, so what!!!! The
fact that if you listen a little more closely, the song has more edge
and attitude and bite than it might seem to at first, makes it that
much better! Who says the sentiments in a rock song or a Beatles song
have to always be admirable and enlightened? That Paul should only
sing chivalrous romantic words? Again - ridiculous!
richforman
n...@epix.net
I agree with you that ROSANNE in the first few years was very
inventive. But as the years rolled on it became unwatchable
Its funny how Rosanne would bash a BEATLE lyric about abuse when what
she was doing was equal to verbal
abuse of her children. The season she was pregnant is cringe inducing,
her character lies to her husband about being sick and
becomes a complete bitch to the rest of her family. The show got so
over the top even my mom stopped watching and she was a huge fan.
It made me mad when she singled out RFYL, there were certainly better
examples then a "filler" track on an a gret album.
White Shadow
It was taken from "Baby, Let's Play House," NOT from "That's All
Right, Mama"
mingl...@nls.net
White Shadow wrote:
>
> It was taken from "Baby, Let's Play House," NOT from "That's All
> Right, Mama"
You are correct. My mistake.
Jimbace
<rfor...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1169237957.2...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
extolling the virtues of treating your women right, so I'm sure it all
balances out.
:)
White Shadow
>> "Roseanne" was one of the funniest and (at times) most daring, most
>> imaginatively written shows ever to appear on network television.
>> Ironically, I never watched a single episode of it during its original
>> run from 1988 to 1997. Back then, I dismissed it as a show about
>> trailer trash. WRONG!!
>
>
>I agree with you that ROSANNE in the first few years was very
>inventive. But as the years rolled on it became unwatchable
>Its funny how Rosanne would bash a BEATLE lyric about abuse when what
>she was doing was equal to verbal
>abuse of her children. The season she was pregnant is cringe inducing,
>her character lies to her husband about being sick and
>becomes a complete bitch to the rest of her family. The show got so
>over the top even my mom stopped watching and she was a huge fan.
>It made me mad when she singled out RFYL, there were certainly better
>examples then a "filler" track on an a gret album.
Funny you should mention this because i'm watching the series for the
first time at the rate of two reruns per day, five days a week, with
all the episodes in their original sequence. I'm seeing the Connor
kids and household change and grow over a much shorter period of time
than if I'd seen the show in its original run.
And you're absolutely right about the nasty, over-the-top direction
the characters and the show took in the last few seasons. Darlene in
particular comes across as repellent in the way she treats people
starting with the fifth or sixth season. And yes, in the later
seasons Roseanne frequently behaves toward her children and husband in
a cruel, almost negligent way.
And like your mom, I even debated not watching the show anymore, until
I realized that despite the apparent dysfunctional relationships in
the family and the sometimes hateful attitudes family members have
toward each other, there always comes a point where Roseanne expresses
and even demonstrates genuine love toward one or the other of her
kids, or toward Darlene's boyfriend David who lives with the Connors
and becomes like a son to Roseanne. And then I feel better about
laughing at the dysfunctional moments, which CAN be extremely funny IF
you believe that the family members really do love each other. The
show was basically "Married with Children" but with a heart, in my
opinion.
I'm at the beginning of the sixth or seventh season, and I can't wait
to see what kind of change or deterioration occurs in the family in
the last couple seasons.
Jimbace
<n...@epix.net> wrote in message
news:1169238095.1...@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com...
Many Stones songs, for example, of the same period.
>
Sean Carroll
> When you stop and think about it, she was right. That song sends a
> terribly inappropriate message to males who are of the jealous,
> possessive type -- as was Lennon, who was known to beat women in his
> younger days.
Thank you. We would never have realised that we have all already been
fully aware of this for years if you hadn't mentioned it. And then we
might never have known what John was talking about two years later when
he said 'I used to be cruel to my woman, I beat her and kept her apart
from the things that she loved. Man I was mean, but I'm changing my
scene, and I'm doing the best that I can.'
> Same thing applies to Tom Jones' song "Delilah" from the late 1960's,
> which is about a guy knifing his unfaithful girlfriend.
What about 'Hey Joe'? He shot his woman down.
Sometimes a song is just a song.
--
--Sean
http://spclsd223.livejournal.com/
'Saying there appears to be clotting is like saying there appears to be
a traffic jam up ahead. Is it a ten-car pileup? Or just a really slow
bus in the center lane? And if it is a bus, is it a thrombotic bus or an
embolic bus? ... Think I pushed that metaphor too far.'--Dr Gregory House
Sean Carroll
> "abby now" <itsn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>You watched ROSEANNE???!!!???
>>Was Grace Under Fire not on during that time?
> Never heard of it. Is that an actual show??
Yes, Grace Under Fire was a show starring Brett Butler.
> "Roseanne" was one of the funniest and (at times) most daring, most
> imaginatively written shows ever to appear on network television.
> Ironically, I never watched a single episode of it during its original
> run from 1988 to 1997. Back then, I dismissed it as a show about
> trailer trash. WRONG!!
I used to love both Roseanne and Grace. They were both ahead of their
time -- shows starring working-class women who acted like people in the
real world, trying to raise a family, make ends meet, and have some fun
in life, too. Along with some other shows, they did a lot to change our
culture's attitudes about motherhood and family life.
Sean Carroll
> Grace Under Fire came on maybe in the early 90's. The comic Brett Butler was
> the star and it showcased a bunch of simpletons just like Roseanne. :-)
> Interesting on-topic tidbit: It used a cover of "Lady Madonna" as it's
> theme song the first few seasons.
That was the first time I'd heard that song. Years later, when I started
listening to the Fab Four, I was rather taken off guard by hearing it
again. I still have a hard time listening to it without thinking of Brett.
Sixties Gen
I also enjoyed "Roseanne" when if first came on. IMHO, it started to
go downhill when the daughters' live-in boyfriend and husband began to
populate the show. Ruined the dynamics.(hope that doesn't spoil your
first time viewing).
CBS recently had a program that was on a few years that was almost a
carbon-copy of the "Roseanne". Two irreverent, non-achieving, lazy
parents, three kids, and they even lived near Chicago too. It was
called "Still Standing". That was good for the first two seasons, but
I lost interest after that.
Weatherman
Lapses in "judgement?" "Loving women?" What band have you been
listening to?
You need to look closer at Lennon and Harrison's early songs, many of
which are filled with spite, jealousy and resentment ("You Can't Do
That" and "Think for Yourself" spring to mind but there are others).
In the human experience, there are many emotions. And these include
rage, jealous anger and violence. What was great about The Fabs is they
wrote about the human experience.
They did not write politically correct "love songs," a la John Denver.
And man-hating feminist Roseanne Barr should not be the measuring stick
for which to judge the work of the Beatles. If all you want to listen
to is politically correct Beatles, get the "Love Songs" LP, and even
there you will find things like "Girl."
Sixties Gen
I was speaking about the fact that the majority of their songs were
about being in love, falling in love, wanting love and all of the
various ups and downs that involves, as opposed to songs stating they
wanted to hit their women up-side the head.
Why didn't you get that...after all you are supposed to know which way
the wind blows. ;-)
Sean Carroll
> But when a show becomes as popular as
> Roseanne it's hard for all the parties to walk away on top (even the last
> season of M*A*S*H pretty much sucked).
Yeah, that must be why the last episode of M*A*S*H attracted the largest
audience in the history of television. Because the show had been sucking
for the year leading up to it.
> I think the problem was that "Roseanne" was the #1 show on TV for several
> years and by the last couple of seasons (at least) Barr's ego was
> completely out of control, then you got such self-indulgent story lines as
> "winning the lottery."
The lottery storyline did sort of leave the realm of what *I* found
enjoyable, personally. But it was her show, not mine. If you can't be
self-indulgent on your own damn television show, where the hell CAN you
be self-indulgent?
Sean Carroll
> And man-hating feminist Roseanne Barr
Yeah, doesn't everyone marry things they hate four or five times?
BlackMonk
"abby now" <itsn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:12r23el...@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> Grace Under Fire came on maybe in the early 90's. The comic Brett Butler
> was the star and it showcased a bunch of simpletons just like Roseanne.
> :-)
>
> Interesting on-topic tidbit: It used a cover of "Lady Madonna" as it's
> theme song the first few seasons.
>
Aretha, wasn't it? Probably just a coincidence, but it got a lot worse after
they changed theme songs.
Steve Worek
"White Shadow" <wam...@maximus.com> wrote in message
news:2qp1r213b690f804p...@4ax.com...
Ron Fowler
was a popular subject in the old folk, blues and country songs.
Manfred Noland
You " from Elvis' Sun Sessions. And anyone who can get so worked up by a
lyric like that is a moron. it's artistry. Lots of artists sing about
wanting to die or committing suicide and it is done to convey the
emotional power , not as a recommendation. The lyrics in " Run For Your
Life " via Elvis show how much it would hurt to see your girl with
someone else, not to prefer her death; it never states that the guy
wants to cause her death. Only a bull dyke man hating feminist would
even think it worth mentioning unless as tongue in cheek like Rosanne,
although I heard it is banned from Canadian radio..DERRRRRRR.
Dave The Rave
Stones "Midnite Rambler" "I'll stick my knife right down yer throat
baby an' it hurts"
Dave The Rave
Sixties Gen
Dennis M wrote:
> In article <s9esh.11476$fh6...@newsfe13.lga>, Sean Carroll
> <sean...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Dennis M wrote:
> >
> >> But when a show becomes as popular as
> >> Roseanne it's hard for all the parties to walk away on top (even the last
> >> season of M*A*S*H pretty much sucked).
> >
> >Yeah, that must be why the last episode of M*A*S*H attracted the largest
> >audience in the history of television.
>
> the stops were pulled out, I assumed anyone would know that.
>
> >Because the show had been sucking for the year leading up to it.
>
> wasn't very good, I have a feeling only yourself and the most devout MASH
> freaks would disagree.
I have never read or heard anywhere that the last season of M*A*S*H was
bad.
As someone who watched every single show of all 11 seasons, I can tell
you that with every change that the program went through during its
run, it always maintained the same excellence.
The 1982-1983 season was wonderful, culminating in the single greatest
finale in TV history.
TAR
>
> I have never read or heard anywhere that the last season of M*A*S*H was
> bad.
>
> As someone who watched every single show of all 11 seasons, I can tell
> you that with every change that the program went through during its
> run, it always maintained the same excellence.
>
> The 1982-1983 season was wonderful, culminating in the single greatest
> finale in TV history.
But certainly not better than Newhart's finale!
Sixties Gen
Are you talking about the series where he was the Inn Keeper in
Vermont?
I had mixed feelings about that finale. As a devoted watcher of his
first series when he was the psychiatrist in Chicago, I appreciated
it...but it also struck me as just an ode to "Bobby really didn't die
in Dallas". Then again, if that was the purpose...I guess it worked.
;-)
But better than "M*A*S*H's conclusion....hmmmm, I don't think so
Salvador Astucia
White Shadow wrote:
> Earlier today I was watching an old rerun of the "Roseanne" sitcom
> sister Jackie were reminiscing about the music they loved as
> teenagers, and they mentioned how much they had enjoyed the Beatles,
> among others.
>
> But then Roseanne backtracked and brought up Lennon's song "Run For
> Your Life" that appeared on Rubber Soul. She recited the song's line
> "I'd rather see you dead, little girl, than to be with another man."
> and she pointed out, "That's just what wife beaters need....their own
> anthem!!"
>
> When you stop and think about it, she was right. That song sends a
> terribly inappropriate message to males who are of the jealous,
> possessive type -- as was Lennon, who was known to beat women in his
> younger days.
>
> Same thing applies to Tom Jones' song "Delilah" from the late 1960's,
> which is about a guy knifing his unfaithful girlfriend.
It's an interesting song because it gives what I believe is an honest
insight into John's psyche.
"Well you know that I'm a wicked guy and I was born with a jealous
mind."
That's a great line. As for encouraging men to beat their wives,
somehow I don't think that song (or any Beatle song) is a tune that
serious wife-beaters pay attention to. And the song was apparently
written about his first wife, Cyn, the perpetual victim.
Salvador
TAR
>
> TAR wrote:
> > Sixties Gen wrote:
> > >
> > > I have never read or heard anywhere that the last season of M*A*S*H was
> > > bad.
> > >
> > > As someone who watched every single show of all 11 seasons, I can tell
> > > you that with every change that the program went through during its
> > > run, it always maintained the same excellence.
> > >
> > > The 1982-1983 season was wonderful, culminating in the single greatest
> > > finale in TV history.
> >
> >
> > But certainly not better than Newhart's finale!
>
> Are you talking about the series where he was the Inn Keeper in
> Vermont?
The very one.
> I had mixed feelings about that finale. As a devoted watcher of his
> first series when he was the psychiatrist in Chicago, I appreciated
> it...but it also struck me as just an ode to "Bobby really didn't die
> in Dallas". Then again, if that was the purpose...I guess it worked.
> ;-)
>
> But better than "M*A*S*H's conclusion....hmmmm, I don't think so
For me it was. I wasn't cracking up with M*A*S*H's finale the way I was
with Newhart's. ;)
As far as a show with a bad finale, I'd like to nominate Seinfeld.
Sixties Gen
Donna, I see your point on this, but the intent of the final M*A*S*H
episode wasn't done for laughs. It was an homage and good-bye to
characters we had grown to love, even new characters like Potter and
Winchester who had replaced Blake and Burns. I cried when it was over.
In retrospect, I think the series could have survived any kind of a
script change, except for one...it never could have been a success, or
maintained it's success without Alan Alda's "Hawkeye Pierce". btw, TV
Land has started to show all the reruns again every night.
As for "Seinfeld", yes that finale was a terrible let down. The entire
series was based upon totally irresponsible, selfish, self-absorbed
adults living in Manhattan during the 1990s. To all of a sudden
attempt to seriously punish them and send them to prison was stupid. I
enjoyed the series retrospective that immediately preceded the finale
much more.
Jimbace
news:1169314172.6...@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
The problem with MASH's finale was the whole 'wrung the chicken's
neck/Alan Alda's bid for one more Emmy' over-acted arc that was
embarassing and critically slammed at the time. Yes, for the most part
it was great and greatly anticipated, but the entire last show was not a
complete masterpiece.
Bob Newhart's crew put out some fake scenarios to keep the tabloids on
the wrong scent, such as Bob might get hit by a golf ball and go to
heaven where he meets George Burns (reprising his God role)and other red
herrings. So the complete surprise ending was very funny and very
satisfying.
>
>
White Shadow
Noland) wrote:
>Actually John Lennon took those lyrics from " I Wanna Play House With
>You " from Elvis' Sun Sessions.
No he didn't. He took them from "Baby, Let's Play House." And why
would he borrow the lyrics if he didn't agree with the sentiment??
>And anyone who can get so worked up by a
>lyric like that is a moron. it's artistry. Lots of artists sing about
>wanting to die or committing suicide and it is done to convey the
>emotional power , not as a recommendation.
Ummm...John wasn't talking about wanting to die or commit suicide in
RFYL. He was talking about how he would see his girlfriend DEAD
before he'd see her out with another man.
>The lyrics in " Run For Your
>Life " via Elvis show how much it would hurt to see your girl with
>someone else, not to prefer her death;
READ THE DAMN LYRICS!!!!
>it never states that the guy
>wants to cause her death.
IT SAYS HE'D MUCH PREFER TO SEE HER DEAD IF SHE WERE TO CHEAT ON
HIM!!!!
CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND ENGLISH???
White Shadow
<cropdu...@cs.com> wrote:
Oh really? So please tell us how Cynthia Lennon is a "perpetual
victim".
TAR
>
> TAR wrote:
> > Sixties Gen wrote:
> > >
> > > TAR wrote:
> > > > Sixties Gen wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > The 1982-1983 season was wonderful, culminating in the single greatest
> > > > > finale in TV history.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > But certainly not better than Newhart's finale!
> > >
> > > Are you talking about the series where he was the Inn Keeper in
> > > Vermont?
> >
> > The very one.
> >
> >
> > > I had mixed feelings about that finale. As a devoted watcher of his
> > > first series when he was the psychiatrist in Chicago, I appreciated
> > > it...but it also struck me as just an ode to "Bobby really didn't die
> > > in Dallas". Then again, if that was the purpose...I guess it worked.
> > > ;-)
> > >
> > > But better than "M*A*S*H's conclusion....hmmmm, I don't think so
> >
> > For me it was. I wasn't cracking up with M*A*S*H's finale the way I was
> > with Newhart's. ;)
> >
> > As far as a show with a bad finale, I'd like to nominate Seinfeld.
>
> Donna, I see your point on this, but the intent of the final M*A*S*H
> episode wasn't done for laughs.
I know. That's why I added the wink.
> It was an homage and good-bye to
> characters we had grown to love, even new characters like Potter and
> Winchester who had replaced Blake and Burns. I cried when it was over.
>
> In retrospect, I think the series could have survived any kind of a
> script change, except for one...it never could have been a success, or
> maintained it's success without Alan Alda's "Hawkeye Pierce". btw, TV
> Land has started to show all the reruns again every night.
>
> As for "Seinfeld", yes that finale was a terrible let down. The entire
> series was based upon totally irresponsible, selfish, self-absorbed
> adults living in Manhattan during the 1990s. To all of a sudden
> attempt to seriously punish them and send them to prison was stupid. I
> enjoyed the series retrospective that immediately preceded the finale
> much more.
Yeah, so did I.
TAR
>
> <snip>
>
> Bob Newhart's crew put out some fake scenarios to keep the tabloids on
> the wrong scent, such as Bob might get hit by a golf ball and go to
> heaven where he meets George Burns (reprising his God role)and other red
> herrings. So the complete surprise ending was very funny and very
> satisfying.
Right. They managed to keep that one from the public, so it was a
surprise. The episode was silly, but the last few seconds definitely
made up for it.
gior...@gmail.com
What songs do serious wife-beaters listen to?
Sixties Gen
Wow, I don't remember that criticism at all. Of course, I do remember
what you were referring to. It wasn't a surprise that Hawkeye would
"go over the edge", but it was surprise that they would actually show
it as part of the finale...as opposed to a "American Graffitti" type
ending, showing his photo, and saying that he checked into a
psychiatric hospital upon his arrival in the US in 1953.
>
> Bob Newhart's crew put out some fake scenarios to keep the tabloids on
> the wrong scent, such as Bob might get hit by a golf ball and go to
> heaven where he meets George Burns (reprising his God role)and other red
> herrings. So the complete surprise ending was very funny and very
> satisfying.
>
I just remember having a chuckle, rolling my eyes, and saying,
"OOOOOOOOOOOOO K"
Jimbace
Really? Yeah, I bet one could find something about that online. It kind
of ruined the show for me, but that's just me. The ending itself of
course was nice and sweet and drawn out the way one would want for
friends of over a decade.
Sixties Gen
remember being horrified by what the "clucking chicken" really was. I
never saw it coming. It was a very frightening moment in M*A*S*H for
me. Although the show had ample scenes of people dying in a hospital
bed, I couldn't recall actually seeing someone being murdered. In
fact, that entire scene...the sheer desperation of the mother to
actually do such a thing still haunts me today whenever I think about
it
So, for me anyway, it didn't seem improbable for Hawkeye to suppress
what he had witnessed, and subsitute a different image. The man had
seen enough...and could no longer process it normally. In retrospect,
the only contrived aspect of Hawkeye's rehab was the rapidity with
which it ended, but I guess they had to let him out, and go right back
to work, or otherwise the good-bye scenes would not have been the same.
;-)
Dylan
>
> What songs do serious wife-beaters listen to?
>
Dylan
UsurperTom
> new characters like Potter and Winchester who had replaced Blake and Burns.
Potter was there for eight years and Winchester was there for six
years. Both of their stints on the show were longer than Blake and
Burns and longer than most TV series last on the air.
Sixties Gen
True.
And to be honest, as much as I liked Blake and McIntyre...I always
thought that the Potter and BJ characters were better...more fleshed
out as real people. A great show actually improved with their additions
Salvador Astucia
Cynthia "Cyn" Powell Lennon Bassanni Twist Charles is a perpetual
victim because she whines about how badly she was treated by John
Lennon even though he's been dead for 26 years. Plus she turned Julian
against John. Before people pile on and start trashing John for this
and that, I just want to state that a good mother would never encourage
her son to publicly insult his father, no matter what.
Salvador
Sean Carroll
I always preferred Potter to Blake and Winchester to Burns. BJ to
Trapper, too. They were all much more real people.
McLean Stevenson did do some great stuff -- his speech in 'Sometimes You
Hear the Bullet' comes to mind -- and his last episode was
extraordinarily important to the show, but generally he was a bit too
much of a buffoon to be a believable commanding officer (as he himself
admitted). I mean, I *liked* the guy, but I didn't really respect him.
Harry Morgan, on the other hand, is one of my favourite actors, and
practically everything he did was pure gold.
Larry Linville was a brilliant actor, I'm sure -- everyone seems to
agree that playing such a stupid character takes lots of skill and
intelligence, and I'm willing to take their word for it. And in the
early seasons he was a good foil, but he just wouldn't have continued to
be as effective as the show evolved in a less slapstick and more
dramatic direction. He left because he felt he had done all he could
with the character, and I think it was a smart decision. David Ogden
Stiers was a much more formidable presence, and much more subtly intriguing.
--
--Sean
http://spclsd223.livejournal.com/
'Saying there appears to be clotting is like saying there appears to be
a traffic jam up ahead. Is it a ten-car pileup? Or just a really slow
bus in the center lane? And if it is a bus, is it a thrombotic bus or an
embolic bus? ... Think I pushed that metaphor too far.'--Dr Gregory House
Sean Carroll
> It's a very common criticism that M*A*S*H* went downhill in later
> seasons, due to becoming too preachy/sanctimonious and too much a
> mouthpiece for Alda's own politics.
Yes, it is. It's also a very thin, flimsy criticism. The show was
infinitely better in the later seasons than the early seasons. It went
from a typical slapstick comedy with no real substance to one of the
most artistically deep and influential shows in the history of
television. IMO, those who criticise the later years are just flinging
sour grapes because they disagree with the shows' message, and they were
made uncomfortable by how eloquently and irrefutably it expressed that
message.
Salvador Astucia
gior...@gmail.com wrote:
> What songs do serious wife-beaters listen to?
Wife-beaters typically dig Merle Haggard and George Jones. If you're
realling interested, try going to the nearest American Legion or VFW
hall and asking an ex-Vietnam vet with a bar stool stuck up his butt
since 1961 what his favorite music is.
Salvador
Weatherman
Sixties Gen wrote:
> Weatherman wrote:
> > Sixties Gen wrote:
> > > White Shadow wrote:
> > > > Earlier today I was watching an old rerun of the "Roseanne" sitcom
> > > > from the mid-1990's. In this particular episode, Roseanne and her
> > > > sister Jackie were reminiscing about the music they loved as
> > > > teenagers, and they mentioned how much they had enjoyed the Beatles,
> > > > among others.
> > > >
> > > > But then Roseanne backtracked and brought up Lennon's song "Run For
> > > > Your Life" that appeared on Rubber Soul. She recited the song's line
> > > > "I'd rather see you dead, little girl, than to be with another man."
> > > > and she pointed out, "That's just what wife beaters need....their own
> > > > anthem!!"
> > > >
> > > > When you stop and think about it, she was right. That song sends a
> > > > terribly inappropriate message to males who are of the jealous,
> > > > possessive type -- as was Lennon, who was known to beat women in his
> > > > younger days.
> > > >
> > > > Same thing applies to Tom Jones' song "Delilah" from the late 1960's,
> > > > which is about a guy knifing his unfaithful girlfriend.
> > >
> > >
> > > And I remember the "Roseanne" show that mentioned it. It was odd that
> > > they singled out a Beatles song regarding violence
> > >
> > > It is one of only two songs written by The Beatles in which violence
> > > towards a woman is mentioned. The other being "Getting Better". In
> > > the latter, an actual admission of violence is made...but in "Run for
> > > Your Life", it's a threat, perhaps empty.
> > >
> > > I think we can allow a group like The Beatles a couple of lapses in
> > > judgement against the two hundred songs they wrote about loving women,
> > > loving peace, loving love.
> >
> > Lapses in "judgement?" "Loving women?" What band have you been
> > listening to?
> >
> > You need to look closer at Lennon and Harrison's early songs, many of
> > which are filled with spite, jealousy and resentment ("You Can't Do
> > That" and "Think for Yourself" spring to mind but there are others).
> > In the human experience, there are many emotions. And these include
> > rage, jealous anger and violence. What was great about The Fabs is they
> > wrote about the human experience.
> >
> > They did not write politically correct "love songs," a la John Denver.
> > And man-hating feminist Roseanne Barr should not be the measuring stick
> > for which to judge the work of the Beatles. If all you want to listen
> > to is politically correct Beatles, get the "Love Songs" LP, and even
> > there you will find things like "Girl."
>
> I was speaking about the fact that the majority of their songs were
> about being in love, falling in love, wanting love and all of the
> various ups and downs that involves, as opposed to songs stating they
> wanted to hit their women up-side the head.
>
> Why didn't you get that...after all you are supposed to know which way
> the wind blows. ;-)
I think the "love angle" though, was somewhat of a revisionist history.
A lot of their earlier number deal with jealously and spite, although
in a more subtle way that the Stones. "If I Fell" is a love song
written not to profess love, but to get back a woman who dumped the
singer! There are also the defeatist "loser" songs (most by Lennon)
and the McCartney kiss-off songs. Some songs, like "If I Needed
Someone" and "I'll Follow the Sun" come of sweet but are actually
arrogant when you look at just the lyrics.
What I was trying to say is the Beatles had a bigger emotiona range
than they were given credit for. If you made a list, I bet the number
of nasty songs and sefl-loathing songs would come close to the love
songs.
Sixties Gen
> UsurperTom wrote:
> > Sixties Gen wrote:
>
> >>new characters like Potter and Winchester who had replaced Blake and Burns.
>
> > Potter was there for eight years and Winchester was there for six
> > years. Both of their stints on the show were longer than Blake and
> > Burns and longer than most TV series last on the air.
>
> I always preferred Potter to Blake and Winchester to Burns. BJ to
> Trapper, too. They were all much more real people.
>
> McLean Stevenson did do some great stuff -- his speech in 'Sometimes You
> Hear the Bullet' comes to mind -- and his last episode was
> extraordinarily important to the show, but generally he was a bit too
> much of a buffoon to be a believable commanding officer (as he himself
> admitted). I mean, I *liked* the guy, but I didn't really respect him.
> Harry Morgan, on the other hand, is one of my favourite actors, and
> practically everything he did was pure gold.
I liked Blake, but he was too much of a cartoon character, and Potter
brought this great contrast of an Army regular against the less
disciplined enlisted Doctors.
" Look, all I know is what they taught me at command school. There are
certain rules about a war and rule number one is young men die. And
rule number two is doctors can't change rule number one."
Yes, that was one of the greatest episodes with the Blake character.
I've never forgotten that quote.
>
> Larry Linville was a brilliant actor, I'm sure -- everyone seems to
> agree that playing such a stupid character takes lots of skill and
> intelligence, and I'm willing to take their word for it. And in the
> early seasons he was a good foil, but he just wouldn't have continued to
> be as effective as the show evolved in a less slapstick and more
> dramatic direction. He left because he felt he had done all he could
> with the character, and I think it was a smart decision. David Ogden
> Stiers was a much more formidable presence, and much more subtly intriguing.
The casting of McIntyre and Hunnicutt was also good because they were
the "All-American" boys in contrast to Hawkeye's more outlandish
character. Some of the one-liners written for Alda as Hawkeye are
right up there with the Marx Brothers. "Too err is Truman".
That episode where he keeps talking and doing whatever he can to not
fall asleep because he fears that he suffered a concussion is also a
classic.
For awhile in the mid-80s and early 90s there were reruns on TV several
times a day, but in the last ten years they all but disappeared.
Thankfully, TV Land is showing them again.
In 1984, I visited the Smithsonian, and they had a M*A*S*H display.
The actual "Swamp" set was there. You couldn't walk in it, but you
could walk all around it. Really enjoyed that, especially when I
didn't know it was on display until I got there.
After that, I went to the Vietnam Wall for the first time. Having seen
the M*A*S*H exhibit at the Smithsonian, and then seeing the Wall just
brought home the message. Two different wars, two affronts to
humanity.
>
vogelzang
I agree. MASH was supposed to be a comedy.
> Bob Newhart's crew put out some fake scenarios to keep the tabloids on
> the wrong scent, such as Bob might get hit by a golf ball and go to
> heaven where he meets George Burns (reprising his God role)and other red
> herrings. So the complete surprise ending was very funny and very
> satisfying.
Again, I agree.
As for Seinfeld, I thought it a great and fitting finale.
TAR
>
> Even if it IS indisputably "thin" and "flimsy" as you assert, this
> counters Marcus's blinkered statement that he has never seen any
> criticisms about the show's concluding stretch.
>
> This is the same mistake Marcus always makes -- the inability to
> grant objections to the presentation and tone of a message, rather
> than to the message itself.
Marcus this, Marcus that. Marcus, Marcus, Marcus.
Sixties Gen
The Beatles were supposed to be a pop group.
They evolved.
So did M*A*S*H.
Sixties Gen
TAR wrote:
> Marcus this, Marcus that. Marcus, Marcus, Marcus
Wait a minute...I know those lyrics.
Weren't they from Bobby Freeman's song, "Do The Marcus"?
TAR
Maybe. Isn't that the one where Jan Brady did the backing vocals?
MikeLawyr2
"I Got Too Drunk So I Shot Her"
"Was That You Or Your Dog I Made Love To Last Night?"
Sixties Gen
Of course, I'm waiting for the inevitable post stating that one of the
dance steps is putting one's foot in one's mouth.
Oh, dang, I just said it myself. ;-)
Jimbace
Well, MASH always was a 'dramadey', it never changed that. I just found
that last bit over the top and unnecessary padding for a 2 hour slot.
But the show itself was groundbreaking for years and years, and of course
very well done.
Sixties Gen
Well, Charlie being the fair-minded gentlemen that we are, we will just
have to agree to disagree on the M*A*S*H finale.
After all, it was just a made-for-TV movie.
Not "Sgt. Pepper".
Jimbace
I only disagree with the Alan Alda bit. Everything else was quite
satisfying. But yeah, it's no big to me.
>
>
Salvador Astucia
"If You Feel Like I Don't Love You, Feel Again."
joe b
<arosebyan...@aol.com> wrote:
>White Shadow <wam...@maximus.com> wrote:
>
>> Darlene in
>> particular comes across as repellent in the way she treats people
>> starting with the fifth or sixth season.
>
>Yes...when her sullenness moved past the "defensiveness, stemming
>from adolescent insecurity" stage and became adult viciousness, it
>just wasn't appealing anymore.
>
The actress was so effective at being unlikeable that I can't stand to
see her show up on TV to this day. When she was on in the early
seasons of "24", I couldn't wait for her to be killed.
Sixties Gen
And let's not forget the classic,
"You're My Mother And My Sister"
TAR
>
> "Sixties Gen" <sixti...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Sixties Gen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > TAR wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Wait a minute...I know those lyrics.
> > > >
> > > > Weren't they from Bobby Freeman's song, "Do The Marcus"?
> > >
> > > Maybe. Isn't that the one where Jan Brady did the backing vocals?
> >
> > Of course, I'm waiting for the inevitable post stating that one of the
> > dance steps is putting one's foot in one's mouth.
> >
> > Oh, dang, I just said it myself. ;-)
>
Criticize this, criticize that. Criticize, criticize, criticize.
vogelzang
Now she is on E.R. acting the same way.
Talk about typecasting!
Salvador Astucia
"My Wife Left With My Best Friend, and I Miss Him"
Slip Kid
<snip>
> After that, I went to the Vietnam Wall for the first time. Having seen
> the M*A*S*H exhibit at the Smithsonian, and then seeing the Wall just
> brought home the message. Two different wars, two affronts to
> humanity.
My day before and after my first visit to The Wall was long and grueling.
D.C. in August...
But I remember not much of several days except the decent into that
monument.
I do recall with haunting detail the two notes I read.
The first was from a daughter to the dad she never met.
The second was from a widow (married for a few months but still
unmarried after decades).
Nope, I was unable to pick up another.
I doubt Maya Lin had any idea the Vietnam Veterans Memorial and the
scraps of paper on the ground could have more impact than any television
show, book or film...
Upon me, that is.
It's prolly just me.
Michael
White Shadow
<cropdu...@cs.com> wrote:
>
>White Shadow wrote:
>> On 20 Jan 2007 09:00:49 -0800, "Salvador Astucia"
>> <cropdu...@cs.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >White Shadow wrote:
>> >> Earlier today I was watching an old rerun of the "Roseanne" sitcom
>> >> from the mid-1990's. In this particular episode, Roseanne and her
>> >> sister Jackie were reminiscing about the music they loved as
>> >> teenagers, and they mentioned how much they had enjoyed the Beatles,
>> >> among others.
>> >>
>> >> But then Roseanne backtracked and brought up Lennon's song "Run For
>> >> Your Life" that appeared on Rubber Soul. She recited the song's line
>> >> "I'd rather see you dead, little girl, than to be with another man."
>> >> and she pointed out, "That's just what wife beaters need....their own
>> >> anthem!!"
>> >>
>> >> When you stop and think about it, she was right. That song sends a
>> >> terribly inappropriate message to males who are of the jealous,
>> >> possessive type -- as was Lennon, who was known to beat women in his
>> >> younger days.
>> >>
>> >> Same thing applies to Tom Jones' song "Delilah" from the late 1960's,
>> >> which is about a guy knifing his unfaithful girlfriend.
>> >
>> >It's an interesting song because it gives what I believe is an honest
>> >insight into John's psyche.
>> >
>> >"Well you know that I'm a wicked guy and I was born with a jealous
>> >mind."
>> >
>> >That's a great line. As for encouraging men to beat their wives,
>> >somehow I don't think that song (or any Beatle song) is a tune that
>> >serious wife-beaters pay attention to. And the song was apparently
>> >written about his first wife, Cyn, the perpetual victim.
>>
>> Oh really? So please tell us how Cynthia Lennon is a "perpetual
>> victim".
>
>Cynthia "Cyn" Powell Lennon Bassanni Twist Charles is a perpetual
>victim because she whines about how badly she was treated by John
>Lennon even though he's been dead for 26 years. Plus she turned Julian
>against John. Before people pile on and start trashing John for this
>and that, I just want to state that a good mother would never encourage
>her son to publicly insult his father, no matter what.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Julian ever spoke for anyone but
himself in any of his public comments about his father.
YOU ought to be ashamed of yourself.
BlackMonk
"Sixties Gen" <sixti...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1169348439....@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> The Beatles were supposed to be a pop group.
>
> They evolved.
>
> So did M*A*S*H.
>
In both cases, they "evolved" into something different, not necessarily
better.
In MASH's case, the anti-war message was always there, the thing that's
considered preachy was the increased emphasis on it and the occasional
heavy-handed approach the show began to take.
It doesn't take much to get people to go along with you if you say "war is
bad." Everyone already agrees with the principle and they'd already made
that point numerous times, perhaps most notably in Blake's final episode.
Salvador Astucia
> >> Oh really? So please tell us how Cynthia Lennon is a "perpetual
> >> victim".
Salvador Astucia wrote:
> >Cynthia "Cyn" Powell Lennon Bassanni Twist Charles is a perpetual
> >victim because she whines about how badly she was treated by John
> >Lennon even though he's been dead for 26 years. Plus she turned Julian
> >against John. Before people pile on and start trashing John for this
> >and that, I just want to state that a good mother would never encourage
> >her son to publicly insult his father, no matter what.
White Shadow wrote:
> There is no evidence whatsoever that Julian ever spoke for anyone but
> himself in any of his public comments about his father.
>
> YOU ought to be ashamed of yourself.
After reading Cynthia "Cyn" Powell Lennon Bassanni Twist Charles' book,
"John", it is quite clear that she is very bitter over her divorce from
John, and it is obvious that she passed her bitterness on to their son,
Julian. THIS is truly shameful.
Salvador
joe b
<vogelzang...@yahoo.com> wrote:
She's also on a new comedy called "The Class". They cast her to play
a mousey bitch. She's the most unfunny thing on a not very funny
show. Maybe it's just her.
Slip Kid
> There is no evidence whatsoever that Julian ever spoke for anyone but
> himself in any of his public comments about his father.
>
> YOU ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Fat chance o' that...Most people believe 'shame' requires a conscience.
It's more likely we'll see Sal levitate or travel faster than the speed
of light before he exhibits contrition.
And don't discount the effort it takes to countermand the five senses.
A freakish capacity indeed, but he's proficient at self-deception.
Michael
"Remorse sleeps during prosperity but awakes bitter consciousness during
adversity."
Rousseau
Salvador Astucia
> >> Oh really? So please tell us how Cynthia Lennon is a "perpetual
> >> victim".
Salvador Astucia
> >Cynthia "Cyn" Powell Lennon Bassanni Twist Charles is a perpetual
> >victim because she whines about how badly she was treated by John
> >Lennon even though he's been dead for 26 years. Plus she turned Julian
> >against John. Before people pile on and start trashing John for this
> >and that, I just want to state that a good mother would never encourage
> >her son to publicly insult his father, no matter what.
White Shadow wrote:
> There is no evidence whatsoever that Julian ever spoke for anyone but
> himself in any of his public comments about his father.
>
> YOU ought to be ashamed of yourself.
One more thing, Julian was only five when his parents divorced, so his
public criticisms of John don't make much sense. Whatever bad feelings
he has about John were obviously implanted in his young mind by someone
else.
Salvador
Slip Kid
> One more thing, Julian was only five when his parents divorced, so his
> public criticisms of John don't make much sense. Whatever bad feelings
> he has about John were obviously implanted in his young mind by someone
> else.
>
> Salvador
"Obviously"?
I thought the kooky notions in your mind were your own.
Are we to understand someone is 'implanting' the wacky in your not so
young brain-box?
Michael
"When you cease to exist, then who will you blame?"
Dylan
fishandchips
Salvador Astucia wrote:
>
> gior...@gmail.com wrote:
> > What songs do serious wife-beaters listen to?
>
> Wife-beaters typically dig Merle Haggard and George Jones.
What did your daddy listen to?
If you're
> realling interested, try going to the nearest American Legion or VFW
> hall and asking an ex-Vietnam vet with a bar stool stuck up his butt
> since 1961 what his favorite music is.
>
> Salvador
Salvador Astucia
> > One more thing, Julian was only five when his parents divorced, so his
> > public criticisms of John don't make much sense. Whatever bad feelings
> > he has about John were obviously implanted in his young mind by someone
> > else.
Slip Kid wrote:
> "Obviously"?
Yes, obviously. Five-year-olds don't draw conclusions without help from
adults.
Salvador
Rocket Scientist
descended into the monument. The monument was deeply moving.and the
notes were heart-wrenching.
Slip Kid wrote:
>
> <snip>
Dave The Rave
I listen to "Metal Machine Music" by Lou Reed
Dave The
Rave
Sean Carroll
> Except for Klinger, Potter was the most cartoonish character of the
> bunch.
Say WHAT?
> I repeatedly rolled my eyes at all his stilted "cornpone"
> dialogue. His "colorful" word choices were just so, so scripted.
Well, maybe. But that doesn't change the fact that Harry Morgan's
portrayal of him was that of a sensitive, nuanced father figure who
successfully navigated the difficult balancing act of being both an
upstanding Army commander with the respect of all the fellow officers he
ever worked with, and an okay guy who understood and sympathised with
what Hawkeye and the others were about. It's not easy to play a
character who both respects military traditions and official dignity,
*and* has a doctor's powerful conscience for respecting all human life.
If you can't look past his occasional 'cornpone phrase' and see the
heart of a character who was complex, demanding of respect not by his
words or his position but by his actions, and achingly, poignantly
human, then you were missing the whole point of the show.
> And Blake's too much of a cartoon character because...what, he wore
> a fishing hat?
No, because he was constantly in an apparent haze, easily taken
advantage of, much more goofy and affable than any real commanding
officer could be, not particularly smart, and prone to saying silly
things that made no sense. He was a good guy, a likeable guy, but he
wasn't very realistic most of the time. (He did have his moments.)
--
--Sean
http://spclsd223.livejournal.com/
'Saying there appears to be clotting is like saying there appears to be
a traffic jam up ahead. Is it a ten-car pileup? Or just a really slow
bus in the center lane? And if it is a bus, is it a thrombotic bus or an
embolic bus? ... Think I pushed that metaphor too far.'--Dr Gregory House
Sean Carroll
> The casting of McIntyre and Hunnicutt was also good because they were
> the "All-American" boys in contrast to Hawkeye's more outlandish
> character.
The differences *between* Trapper and BJ were also crucial -- for
example, Trapper was an even bigger nurse-chaser than Hawkeye, and BJ
was happily married, and had a huge crisis of conscience over one brief
affair.
It was very smart of them to not try to truly 'replace' the previous
characters when they brought in new people.
> That episode where he keeps talking and doing whatever he can to not
> fall asleep because he fears that he suffered a concussion is also a
> classic.
One among many. Another that springs to mind is 'The Best of Enemies',
where a North Korean soldier stops Hawkeye and tries to get him to save
his comrade, but distrust and the language barrier keep Hawkeye from
being able to do anything, and at the end he helps the Korean bury his
friend, instead of leaving to make sure he saved his own ass.
Sixties Gen
> poisoned rose wrote:
>
> > Except for Klinger, Potter was the most cartoonish character of the
> > bunch.
>
> Say WHAT?
>
> > I repeatedly rolled my eyes at all his stilted "cornpone"
> > dialogue. His "colorful" word choices were just so, so scripted.
>
> Well, maybe. But that doesn't change the fact that Harry Morgan's
> portrayal of him was that of a sensitive, nuanced father figure who
> successfully navigated the difficult balancing act of being both an
> upstanding Army commander with the respect of all the fellow officers he
> ever worked with, and an okay guy who understood and sympathised with
> what Hawkeye and the others were about. It's not easy to play a
> character who both respects military traditions and official dignity,
> *and* has a doctor's powerful conscience for respecting all human life.
>
> If you can't look past his occasional 'cornpone phrase' and see the
> heart of a character who was complex, demanding of respect not by his
> words or his position but by his actions, and achingly, poignantly
> human, then you were missing the whole point of the show.
I thought that Morgan had the most difficult role of the newcomers.
Everyone loved McLean Stevenson's "Blake". Heck, I loved it, and was
shocked when they "killed" him off, even though my shock was balanced
with my appreciation that a TV show showed the reality of death in a
war. It wasn't until the balancing act that Morgan did (as you
described above) that I began to like the post-Blake shows a bit better
than the earlier ones. The Blake character had it's roots in the mood
set by the original M*A*S*H movie. When Blake left, the show
"grew-up", evolving into thoughtfulness without abandoning it's humor.
>
> > And Blake's too much of a cartoon character because...what, he wore
> > a fishing hat?
>
> No, because he was constantly in an apparent haze, easily taken
> advantage of, much more goofy and affable than any real commanding
> officer could be, not particularly smart, and prone to saying silly
> things that made no sense. He was a good guy, a likeable guy, but he
> wasn't very realistic most of the time. (He did have his moments.)
He was very likeable. In fact, watching the reruns recently on TV
Land, I remember how much I enjoyed his contributions to the program,
but he was a bit cartoonish. Radar was also cartoonish, but the show
gave Radar more humanity with his relationship to Potter, and in that
famous show where he stands up to Hawkeye.
Philip S.
sean...@hotmail.com wrote on 1/22/07 4:15 PM:
> poisoned rose wrote:
>
>> Except for Klinger, Potter was the most cartoonish character of the
>> bunch.
>
> Say WHAT?
>
>> I repeatedly rolled my eyes at all his stilted "cornpone"
>> dialogue. His "colorful" word choices were just so, so scripted.
>
> Well, maybe. But that doesn't change the fact that Harry Morgan's
> portrayal of him was that of a sensitive, nuanced father figure who
> successfully navigated the difficult balancing act of being both an
> upstanding Army commander with the respect of all the fellow officers he
> ever worked with, and an okay guy who understood and sympathised with
> what Hawkeye and the others were about. It's not easy to play a
> character who both respects military traditions and official dignity,
> *and* has a doctor's powerful conscience for respecting all human life.
>
> If you can't look past his occasional 'cornpone phrase' and see the
> heart of a character who was complex, demanding of respect not by his
> words or his position but by his actions, and achingly, poignantly
> human, then you were missing the whole point of the show.
From my experience, the problem with the later seasons of MASH is identical
to that of every series I've ever watched that lasted for more than, say,
five or six seasons--namely, that the characters become caricatures.
The transition can be variable and subtle, but it always seems to happen--at
some point, I start to notice the writing, and not in a good way. In the
case of Potter, he begins as a guy who has a folksy way of talking,
gradually morphs into a folksy character, and finally becomes a folksy
caricature. Kind of like someone doing an imitation of Colonel Potter, or
filling out a Potter MadLib.
That aside, I also found the later seasons to be heavy-handed in the extreme
with their "messaging", and I'm not someone who normally has a problem with
an anti-war message.
Sixties Gen
although I agree with your assessment of what happens to programs on
too long, I have always found M*A*S*H to be the exception. You see a
laziness of acting, and falling back on a stereotype of the characters
on that program, whereas I see script writing based on the loving
familiarity that the show had for its audience, and vice versa.
All of this reminds me of a saying that I proposed years ago:
"TV series shouldn't run more than seven seasons...except for M*A*S*H".
I don't mean to single you out as other posters have expressed similar
views, but if we assume that some of the episodes of M*A*S*H had very
heavy anti-war themes, my question is...what is wrong with that. The
purpose of the show, as defined by the original movie, was to show a
humor derived from tremendous pressures on people due to the insanity
of war. That was what M*A*S*H was about, and sometimes in very small
quantities that came through, and other times it was more concentrated.
Would you criticize "CSI" because it talks too much about how someone
was killed?
Would you criticize "Law And Order" because it concentrates on the
underside of human character?
Would you be aghast at "House" because the show spends too much time in
a hospital?
Would you be angry at "Monk" because he keeps trying to solve
mysteries?
If you answered "No" to any or all of the above...you have no reason to
be critical of M*A*S*H because it was against war.
BlackMonk
> > If you answered "No" to any or all of the above...you have no reason to
> be critical of M*A*S*H because it was against war.
>
No one is critical of MASH because it was against war. People are critical
of MASH because they presented their anti-war position poorly. Bad art in
the service of a good cause is still bad art.
Sixties Gen
Well this is the first that I'm hearing this slant.
Up until now the critics in this thread have been critical of supposed
"heavy-handedness" of the antiwar message. How did you miss that
critique here?
So, you are saying that they didn't do enough, or do it right?
How so?
BlackMonk
Yes, NOT that the message was anti-war, but that it was presented in a
heavy-handed way. If it were done well, it wouldn't have come across as
heavy-handed.
abe slaney
He didn't miss it. What do you think "heavy-handed" means? It means
"clumsy" or "graceless". I didn't see anybody in this thread objecting
to the anti-war message itself - how could any fan of the show object
to that? - only to how it was treated in later episodes.
Jimbace
news:ep41nh$so8$1...@aioe.org:
It wasn't done poorly. The writing was quite good. It just went on much
longer than most wars and after Vietnam was over the necessity of the
strident tone wasn't as crucial.
>
>
Jimbace
news:1169527925....@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com:
And again, by the -latter- episodes it did become a bit more preachy but
for most of it's run it was dead on , well written and performed.
I think too the audience was ready for something else by then anyway,
over a decade of anti-war dramadey...it was just time for something new.
>
>
Sean Carroll
> "BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote
>>No one is critical of MASH because it was against war. People are
>>critical of MASH because they presented their anti-war position
>>poorly. Bad art in the service of a good cause is still bad art.
> It wasn't done poorly. The writing was quite good. It just went on much
> longer than most wars and after Vietnam was over the necessity of the
> strident tone wasn't as crucial.
I beg to differ. After Vietnam was over was precisely when it was MOST
crucial. Without the war to rally people and prick their consciousness,
they easily began to slip into the 'well, that was the most important
thing, now let's pack up the protests and go home' attitude. But there
was and is a whole lot of other things still wrong in our society.
People easily slip into complacence in such a situation. It is the
moment when it is most crucial to send them the message that nothing
fundamental changed after Vietnam -- there will always be another
Vietnam somewhere down the line if no one does anything to stop it while
'peace' (which is more like 'unwar' in regular usage, btw -- the absence
of war is not, contradictory to the opinions of some, the same thing as
peace) still reigns and the issues are fading from our collective minds.
Jimbace
news:qUjth.43594$sE7....@newsfe21.lga:
> Jimbace wrote:
>> "BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote
>
>>>No one is critical of MASH because it was against war. People are
>>>critical of MASH because they presented their anti-war position
>>>poorly. Bad art in the service of a good cause is still bad art.
>
>> It wasn't done poorly. The writing was quite good. It just went on
>> much longer than most wars and after Vietnam was over the necessity
>> of the strident tone wasn't as crucial.
>
> I beg to differ. After Vietnam was over was precisely when it was MOST
> crucial. Without the war to rally people and prick their
> consciousness, they easily began to slip into the 'well, that was the
> most important thing, now let's pack up the protests and go home'
> attitude. But there was and is a whole lot of other things still wrong
> in our society. People easily slip into complacence in such a
> situation. It is the moment when it is most crucial to send them the
> message that nothing fundamental changed after Vietnam -- there will
> always be another Vietnam somewhere down the line if no one does
> anything to stop it while 'peace' (which is more like 'unwar' in
> regular usage, btw -- the absence of war is not, contradictory to the
> opinions of some, the same thing as peace) still reigns and the issues
> are fading from our collective minds.
While I may agree about the intent, realistically people tire of things
and the war had been a huge centerpiece for a decade and a half. By the
end of the 70's people were looking for anything BUT war/anti-war
rhetoric. Whether that is good or not is debatable, but it is human
nature and that's exactly what happened.
What if's are nice but most folks simply don't live by them.
>
Manfred Noland
wam...@maximus.com (White Shadow)
******************************************
Noland) wrote:
Actually John Lennon took those lyrics from " I Wanna Play House With
You " from Elvis' Sun Sessions.
No he didn't. He took them from "Baby, Let's Play House." And why would
he borrow the lyrics if he didn't agree with the sentiment??
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I stand corrected on the actual song title though it is obvious I'm
certain even to you that I meant that exact same song. Maybe
John just payed homage to Elvis via such a COOL lyric as he did with
using Chuck Berry's lyrics from" You Can't Catch Me " in John's " Come
Together ".
We can relate to the lyric without wishing death as fulfillment ? It's a
damn cool lyric. Damn cool.
***********************************************
And anyone who can get so worked up by a lyric like that is a moron.
it's artistry. Lots of artists sing about wanting to die or committing
suicide and it is done to convey the emotional power , not as a
recommendation.
_____________________
Ummm...John wasn't talking about wanting to die or commit suicide in
RFYL. He was talking about how he would see his girlfriend DEAD before
he'd see her out with another man.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
He would RATHER see her dead....is the actual lyric ( I can nit pick too
! )
I know want of self death or suicide is not in the song moron. My
obvious point was that in many songs, to convey emotion..poetically,
these sorts of extreme lyrics are used and not to be taken as a
recommendation to kill yourself or another as many others have also
pointed out here. It is common in Rock & Blues and Country. When someone
sings that she is cold as ice it does not mean actual coldness. Get it ?
John sang " Yes I'm lonely. want to die " in " Yer Blues " and even
if he felt this for a moment, I doubt he really wanted to die or was
suggesting this for lonely people. Get it ?
***********************************************
The lyrics in " Run For Your
Life " via Elvis show how much it would hurt to see your girl with
someone else, not to prefer her death;
READ THE DAMN LYRICS!!!!
it never states that the guy
wants to cause her death.
IT SAYS HE'D MUCH PREFER TO SEE HER DEAD IF SHE WERE TO CHEAT ON HIM!!!!
CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND ENGLISH???
***********************************************
CAN YOU READ ENGLISH MORON ????? Read my above statement again.
The song lyric is this:
" I'd Rather See You Dead Little Girl Than To Be With Another Man "
as I said..It NEVER says that he would kill her or cause her death but
that he'd RATHER see her dead. Get it ?
it is used to convey feeling...not action. If you want to bitch and
moan, why not bitch about the LITTLE GIRL lyric ? isn't that suggesting
an adult with a child relationship which is sick ? Was John suggesting
sex with a ten year old girl ? what does " Little Girl " mean here then
? Wold you insinuate hat it is promoting pedophila ? I imagine in your
PC literal boogie-man world it would be.