Movies | David Watkins - 08:16am Apr 6, 1999 PST (# 261 of 308))

I protest against the depiction of Hitchcock as some sort of moral monster - "a troll" as one poster called him.

Obviously he took pleasure in frightening his audience, but since his audience took pleasure in being frightened, what right have we to disapprove. I'm sure that nearly everybody in this thread takes an ultra-liberal stance on kinky sex between consenting adults - isn't the principle identical?

Hitchcock's wife and daughter, who surely knew him better than anybody else could have, have been loyal to his memory. This must count for something.

His fondness for practical jokes didn't alienate the people who worked for him. Towards Tippi Hedren he does seem to have behaved very badly, but this was one episode in a long life - haven't we all done things we'd love to forget. And OTOH Hedren owes her position as a minor but unchallengeable movie icon only to Hitchcock. Without him she'd be a woman who once appeared in a beer commercial.

I don't see that his films, taken as a whole, are morally perverse. I think he genuinely disapproved of cruelty, (real, not playful cruelty), and of any creed that justifies cruelty. There is a story, the source of which I don't recall, that, travelling through France by train, he looked out of the window, saw a little boy and a priest walking with the priest's arm resting on the boy's shoulder, and commented quietly: "That's the most terrifying thing I've ever seen."

Does anyone recall Stewart's final speech in "Rope"? It goes something like this: "That's true. You've only put my theory into practice. Logically, I should be with you. Well, I shall never trust logic again." This, I maintain, is the nearest thing to a moral manifesto in Hitchcock's oeuvre.

Mental Illness and PC language

Mind and Spirit | Wyatt Parkinson - 05:53am Mar 10, 1999 PST (# 4 of 12)

Often those who call you "crazy" are doing so because you do not conform to society's standards. I believe there is Relative Insanity and Absolute Insanity, but they often get confused. Relative Insanity depends on culture and society, and Absolute Insanity is an actual physiological disfunction of the brain. When you're relatively insane, it could mean that either you're an insane person living in a sane society, or a sane person living in an insane society (and often, it's the latter). As with absolute insanity, the physiological disfunction along with the often impulsive behaviours that go along with it should truly indicate that the person is insane.

As for PC, I find it annoying in that the people who promote it think that changing language and dropping euphemisms everywhere will somehow unite society and get rid of hatred. Of course, this is total bullshit, because as it has already demonstrated, it only divides people and stirs up hatred. There are better ways of bringing people together than reforming language. One way is to bring communities back to together after they have been ripped apart by the assembly-line housing and ubiquious shopping malls created by suburban sprawl.

Does your mommyhood define you?

Mothers Who Think |maryanne - 05:54pm Apr 5, 1999 PST (# 8 of 101)

I work full-time as a professor at a university, I have a full and active social life, lots of hobbies and always make sure that I have lots of personal time....that said, I think that being a parent of 2 small children is a big part of my identity. It's an enormously important part of who I am and how I spend my time. The same holds true for my husband who also teaches full time, plays basketball every week, etc. So, of course, being a parent defines me, it's a central part of my life...but it's also not the ONLY part of my life....