Comments on: Can you play short, ugly, and second-worst? http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/ History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:16:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Of corpse-kicking and His Irrelevancy : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-140054 Of corpse-kicking and His Irrelevancy : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present Thu, 04 Dec 2008 00:41:20 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-140054 [...] is officially over.  Welcome to the Pantheon of failed presidencies, Your Irrelevancy!  John Adams and James Buchanan sure are happy to see [...] [...] is officially over.  Welcome to the Pantheon of failed presidencies, Your Irrelevancy!  John Adams and James Buchanan sure are happy to see [...]

]]> By: The Ladies of Edenton meet the next lady of Foggy Bottom : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-130713 The Ladies of Edenton meet the next lady of Foggy Bottom : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present Sat, 22 Nov 2008 18:45:50 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-130713 [...] Thanks, Nate, for your informed opinions and bibliographical suggestions.  I don’t know about Clinton running in 2016–I’m skeptical myself, but then, I was surprised that she did so well this year.  (I think our first woman President will be a moderate-seeming member of whatever we call the conservative party at that point in history, and that I won’t live to see the day of her inauguration myself.)  Secretary of State was historically the stepping-stone to the Presidency:  Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren, and James Buchanan all served as Secretaries of State before their elections to the Presidency.  All of these men are ranked as better than average Presidents with the exception of Buchanan.  But, note well that this hasn’t happened since Buchanan was elected in 1856, and we all know how well that turned out, don’t we?  (Curse you, third-worst President Buchanan!) [...] [...] Thanks, Nate, for your informed opinions and bibliographical suggestions.  I don’t know about Clinton running in 2016–I’m skeptical myself, but then, I was surprised that she did so well this year.  (I think our first woman President will be a moderate-seeming member of whatever we call the conservative party at that point in history, and that I won’t live to see the day of her inauguration myself.)  Secretary of State was historically the stepping-stone to the Presidency:  Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren, and James Buchanan all served as Secretaries of State before their elections to the Presidency.  All of these men are ranked as better than average Presidents with the exception of Buchanan.  But, note well that this hasn’t happened since Buchanan was elected in 1856, and we all know how well that turned out, don’t we?  (Curse you, third-worst President Buchanan!) [...]

]]> By: Weekend doll blogging: boys of Indian summer edition : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-104288 Weekend doll blogging: boys of Indian summer edition : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:32:46 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-104288 [...] approximation of Indyanna’s eclectic interests:  “John Adams” (say it with me:  President Second-Worst!) is on the left, glaring at Mary Wollstonecraft in the background behind his collection of [...] [...] approximation of Indyanna’s eclectic interests:  “John Adams” (say it with me:  President Second-Worst!) is on the left, glaring at Mary Wollstonecraft in the background behind his collection of [...]

]]> By: Beau Radley http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3443 Beau Radley Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:58:04 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3443 Historiann: I agree to a certain extent, but then might it not be considered somewhat brave of Kidman to put on the rubber schnoz in the first place. That's really getting into a role. But I do agree that plain or "funny-looking" women should be allowed to act in major films, but I fear that ain't gonna happen in Follywood. I'd say my emphasis was more on Abigail than on John; she was an extraordinary woman and she obviously did love him. And her letters are moving to this day for me. Historiann: I agree to a certain extent, but then might it not be considered somewhat brave of Kidman to put on the rubber schnoz in the first place. That’s really getting into a role.
But I do agree that plain or “funny-looking” women should be allowed to act in major films, but I fear that ain’t gonna happen in Follywood.
I’d say my emphasis was more on Abigail than on John; she was an extraordinary woman and she obviously did love him. And her letters are moving to this day for me.

]]> By: Historiann http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3437 Historiann Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:41:47 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3437 Beau--I agree that Virginia Woolf wasn't as beauteous as Nicole Kidman. But the solution to that is allowing plain or funny-looking women to act in major roles too. Why should Adams get the credit for his wife? The guy got lucky, that's all. True, Adams didn't invade Mexico. But nobody's making biopics about Polk now, are they? Beau–I agree that Virginia Woolf wasn’t as beauteous as Nicole Kidman. But the solution to that is allowing plain or funny-looking women to act in major roles too. Why should Adams get the credit for his wife? The guy got lucky, that’s all.

True, Adams didn’t invade Mexico. But nobody’s making biopics about Polk now, are they?

]]> By: GayProf http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3435 GayProf Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:32:50 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3435 At least John Adams didn't invade Mexico. At least John Adams didn’t invade Mexico.

]]> By: Beau Radley http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3433 Beau Radley Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:25:21 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3433 I can nearly justifiably forgive Adams for his lunacies and pusillanimity for one reason and one reason only, though a pretty damn fine one at that: Abigail. Their letters are incredible as was she. Regarding Nicole Kidman's "nose", Virginia did not exactly have, and I wish to put this as delicately as possible, a petite one. As for Kate Winslet: Hallelujah, brothers and sisters. May the gods be praised. I can nearly justifiably forgive Adams for his lunacies and pusillanimity for one reason and one reason only, though a pretty damn fine one at that: Abigail. Their letters are incredible as was she. Regarding Nicole Kidman’s “nose”, Virginia did not exactly have, and I wish to put this as delicately as possible, a petite one. As for Kate Winslet: Hallelujah, brothers and sisters. May the gods be praised.

]]> By: Historiann http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3426 Historiann Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:03:35 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3426 Well, the John Adams of 1770-76 is a very different person than the John Adams of 1796-1800. Well, the John Adams of 1770-76 is a very different person than the John Adams of 1796-1800.

]]> By: Ryan Tripp http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3376 Ryan Tripp Wed, 19 Mar 2008 02:55:08 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3376 I'm interested in the first "Boston Massacre" episode. So the series included the trial??? I'm with Jill Lepore on this one---from what I've seen of the trailers, the first episodes of JA look like genius resurrections of Boston on the eve of the Revolution. After a few beers, I deliberated with a friend on the difficulties we might face realizing an HBO series entitled Boston Revolutions (this conversation took place in the context of the first-season Rome fever and prior to the second-season disillusionment). That McCullough book really weirded me out, especially his take on Franklin...so I'm not sitting on my seat waiting for a YouTube bootleg. I’m interested in the first “Boston Massacre” episode. So the series included the trial??? I’m with Jill Lepore on this one—from what I’ve seen of the trailers, the first episodes of JA look like genius resurrections of Boston on the eve of the Revolution. After a few beers, I deliberated with a friend on the difficulties we might face realizing an HBO series entitled Boston Revolutions (this conversation took place in the context of the first-season Rome fever and prior to the second-season disillusionment).

That McCullough book really weirded me out, especially his take on Franklin…so I’m not sitting on my seat waiting for a YouTube bootleg.

]]> By: amity b http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3333 amity b Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:20:28 +0000 http://www.historiann.com/2008/03/17/can-you-play-short-ugly-and-second-worst/#comment-3333 Giamatti was a bit hard to swallow as Adams, and I think the key reason why this series will continue to be both dull and disingenuous is that it is based on a McCullough pop history novel. But that sexy silverfox Justin Thoreaux as John Hancock--oh yeah, that's some good stuff. Giamatti was a bit hard to swallow as Adams, and I think the key reason why this series will continue to be both dull and disingenuous is that it is based on a McCullough pop history novel. But that sexy silverfox Justin Thoreaux as John Hancock–oh yeah, that’s some good stuff.

]]>