The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
My Review of "West Side Story"
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From my movie review in Taki’s Magazine comparing Steven Spielberg’s remake of West Side Story to the 1961 film:

When You’re a Remake
Steve Sailer

December 15, 2021

… Mostly, Spielberg’s West Side Story is similar to the one released when he was 14. But in the interest of tracking the unfolding zeitgeist, here are changes he oversaw:

Spielberg’s big brainstorm for luring in the heavily Hispanic young audience is to keep Bernstein’s magnificent music and even double down on the 1957 setting with added dialogue about Manhattan real estate, but to replace the gay stage violence with straight movie violence. Hence, Justin Peck’s choreography is highly Robbins-like, but butches it up with less toe-pointing.

Also, Spielberg and his screenwriter Tony Kushner (Angels in America and Spielberg’s Lincoln) resolved to reduce the problematic elements by eliminating the original film’s outdatedly evenhanded treatment of the two gangs of juvenile delinquents, the white Jets and the Puerto Rican Sharks. Just as Shakespeare didn’t take sides between the Montagues and Capulets, the 1961 film portrays the two groups as rumbling over turf because that’s what young males like to do.

Today, though, objectivity like that is felt to be immoral. You can now tell who deserves to win and who deserves to lose from the color of their skin. So, Spielberg and Kushner make clear that the Sharks and Jets fight because the browns are the good guys and the whites are the bad guys.

The Sharks are no longer even juvenile delinquents, but instead are grown men with jobs and families defending their graffiti-free vibrant community from the nihilistic Trumpist Jets.

But this means the Sharks don’t seem very cool anymore. …

Read the whole thing there.

And here’s Norm Macdonald attempting to lead a dancing street gang:

 
Hide 316 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. “In contrast to the noble Sharks, the new Jets are an isolated lumpenproletariat vastly outnumbered by the righteous BIPOC masses of 1957. You might think that would make the Jets not very scary, but they are presented as horrifying because in the current year white men bad. Jets do evil things like deface a colossal Puerto Rican flag with Jackson Pollock-like splashes from paint cans they stole from the construction site of Lincoln Center.”

    Sorry, Steves (and Tony), but I’m not buying it:

    “May 14, 1959: Ground-breaking ceremony with U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower.[8]”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Center#Historical_timeline

    http://www.aboutlincolncenter.org/about/history/archive-1950s

    • Replies: @Hangnail Hans
    @D. K.

    It sounds like a plot-advancing anecdote which should perhaps be relegated to the status of a set piece, a thing unto itself amidst the larger play. This set piece could even be narrated, perhaps by an actor named Jussie.

    , @Jack D
    @D. K.

    If you want to be picky about the exact timeline (it's a movie musical, not a documentary), the "Slum Clearance" of Lincoln Square is announced in April of '55 and they then begin buying up/condemning thru eminent domain the buildings in the neighborhood. By May of '59 (nowadays it would take decades of lawsuits), the buildings have been emptied and demolished and Eisenhower is looking at an empty field. So the timeline of the movie is about right. Maybe the paint cans are from the paint that they use to paint the wooden construction fence that surrounds the demolition site.

    Replies: @D. K.

  2. Should have dorne this.

    • Agree: Unit472
    • Thanks: MEH 0910
    • Replies: @Paul Jolliffe
    @Anonymous

    Great parody!

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Anonymous

    How about "West Bank Story"? That would have been an interesting updating of the story. Who would be the Jets then? Who would be the Sharks?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Wilkey, @Dmon

  3. From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @PaceLaw

    I don’t think there is one, really, though the Argentines think they’re better due to being white (Uruguayans are even whiter but their coubtry is too small to get too cocky). There’s a color continuum as Steve has said within the country (whiter is better but if you have dark skin and money you are not necessarily ‘black’) but as a as whole people are nationalistic like anywhere else.

    If you mean in the USA, from what I can see it mostly boils down to overall social status, as you say. Remember there is a lot of selection bias with South Americans having to have enough money to pay for a plane ticket whereas some Mexicans will sneak over the border by foot…but you can bet the legal ones look down on the illegal ones (unless they’re writing application essays for Harvard).

    , @Clyde
    @PaceLaw


    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.
     
    Mostly racial, with the whiter ones dumping on the Hispanics, the next rung down on the ladder. So in the NYC of 1960 or 70, the whitest would be Cubans. They think they are the smartest and most cultured. And of pure Spanish blood.
    They dump on Puerto Ricans (Reason: they are black and Indian)
    Who have the privilege of dumping on Dominicans (Reason: they are black and might as well be Haitians)
    Dominicans get to dump on the black as midnight Caribbeans from the Anglo-islands.

    The average white New Yorker of 1970 has no awareness of these racial one upmanships. He just sees and thinks Hispanics. But within the Hispanic community, coming from a different wretched, sht-hole of an island, this was a very big deal.

    Replies: @Evocatus, @Peter Akuleyev, @AceDeuce

    , @JMcG
    @PaceLaw

    I don’t know the intricacies, but Mexicans and Puerto Ricans pretty famously don’t like each other, at least below the non-elite level. I’m with the Mexicans here.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    , @Thea
    @PaceLaw

    In South Florida, the Cubans indisputably rule roost. I don’t know about New York.

    , @Hapalong Cassidy
    @PaceLaw

    I would say the general pecking order among Latinos in this country is as follows:

    Cubans
    South Americans
    Mexicans
    Central Americans
    Dominicans
    Puerto Ricans

    , @Justvisiting
    @PaceLaw


    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top?
     
    My understanding is that every subgroup believes they are at the top of the pecking order, and the gangs will be pleased to execute anyone who disagrees.

    They give anarchy a bad name. :-)

    Replies: @Peter D. Bredon

    , @Danindc
    @PaceLaw

    I think Colombians are at or near top

    , @Dutch Boy
    @PaceLaw

    Speaking of which, a friend of mine was once at a family picnic with his Cuban-born mother and her relatives. They had a hard time opening a package and someone said: "We need a knife, are there any Puerto Ricans here?"

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @PaceLaw

    , @Pixo
    @PaceLaw

    Puerto Ricans dominate multiple genres of Spanish music. They probably punch 15x their population weight.

    With pop music talent, the triracial PRs, Cubans, and Dominicans are on top, in that order. Next are similarly triracial Colombians and Venezuelans. Behind them are white Spanish, Argentines, and upper class Mexicans. On the bottom are indios and mostly-indio mestizos from Peru, Mexico, and Central America.

    Pictured is Thalia, one of the few Mexican singers to break out internationally.

    https://laverdadnoticias.com/export/sites/laverdad/img/2019/08/06/captura_de_pantalla_2019-08-06_a_laxsx_17_04_32.png_2070948262.png

    Replies: @PaceLaw, @S. Anonyia, @Goddard

    , @R.G. Camara
    @PaceLaw

    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership. The mismanagement of the island after the hurricane during Trump's term is pretty par for the course. It's not a wonder that outside of blacks they are the the big welfare groups in our nation and that the term "Puerto Rican neighborhood" is not a harbinger of high property values and safety.


    A helpful reminder:

    Those from Spain speak high-class Spanish.

    Those from Argentina speak social-climbing Spanish.

    Those from Cuba speak communist-class Spanish.

    Those from Mexico speak working-class Spanish.

    And those from Puerto Rico don't speak Spanish.

    Replies: @Americano, @PaceLaw, @Bill Jones, @Luzzatto

    , @Luzzatto
    @PaceLaw

    Cubans are very White in appearance? Nobody would ever mistake the Cuban mayor of Miami Francis X. Suarez for a Swede.

  4. The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.

    The Broadway version was pretty darned gay for its time.

    Not just the dancing but the attitude of the actors.

    Pretty… darned… gay…

    • Replies: @onetwothree
    @Anonymous

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNzNeGw8Fmo

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    , @Anonymous
    @Anonymous

    The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.

    Maybe shoulda been something like Romeo and Julio. The real taboo attraction is between Riff and Bernado. Their extreme hostility is really a desperate measure to repress their tooty-toot thing for each other.

    In the movie, the person who seems most fruity is Tony. He has a 'gay mouth', and he sings "Maria" as it's about Mario.

    West Side Story is a fabulous movie but maybe too arty and grave(in parts) for a musical, which was Kael's complaint. Stanley Kauffmann in contrast praised it as the best musical ever.

    I don't like the whole thing but the opening and some musical numbers are fantastic. Not just in terms of choreography but framing, movement, and editing. Robert Wise got his start as an editor, I think. It shows. Clearly a triumph of team work. Director and choreographer didn't always see eye to eye but somehow managed to get along.

    As to why rock culture wasn't conducive to musicals. Musicals are about professionalism and expertise. It's about people who trained to be excellent dancers who practiced countless times to do it just right. Though musicals can be loud and brash, they are not about spontaneity but about putting on a good show. Because dancers on stage are so good, the audience is supposed to sit still and admire the excellence of the performance.

    In contrast, rock is nothing without spontaneity, especially in concerts. While rock stars could be good singers and instrumentalists(and put in a lot of time in practice), the key is not to be perfect or consistent. It's to be rambunctious, improvisatory, and just let it happen. So, Stones might do a song one way in at a concert but another way at another one. That element of variation and surprise is important in rock. Because of the looser atmosphere, the audience doesn't just sit still in awe and admiration but joins in the thrill by dancing and screaming. They don't have to dance well. They just have to get into the groove and the beat, like the young people at Woodstock rocking to Santana's "Soul Sacrifice". Unlike in the musical where there's a strict barrier between the professional dancers/singers and the admiring and reverent audience, the rock scene is participatory and porous between the performers and the audience(sometimes to shocking results, as with so many fans who ran onto the stage at Stones concerts). To those weaned on the 'democratic' ways of Rock, the classic musical was just too stuffy and 'anal'.

    This is why the Rock Musical has mostly been dismissed by rock critics as missing the true heart and soul of rock n roll. It's also why Jim Derogatis can't stomach Bruce Springsteen. For all the high energy, it all seems so calculated. A middle class educated guy strutting on stage like some wounded working class hero. "mansions of glory in suicide machines". What blue collar guy thinks that way?
    It's as contrived and strained as a homo trying to be macho on stage or on screen.

    The musical-like qualities ruins The Magnificent Seven. The music is overly bombastic and the action looks choreographed. And the heroes seem almost like homo fantasies of manhood. It's impressive but you expect Yul Brynner and Eli Wallach to suddenly break into a pop-ballet.

    Wise had a much bigger hit with Sound of Music, and that one really is insufferable.

    , @John Johnson
    @Anonymous

    I really don't get this.

    Did it provide a distraction fantasy for Whites that didn't want to face the negro crime increase that happened after integration? Perhaps a slice of fiction where all groups are just as likely to devolve into gangs under the same circumstances?

    It's just so gay and ridiculous. The Greeks had much better plays a few thousand years ago.

    , @Meretricious
    @Anonymous

    4 primary collaborators were gay: Arthur Laurents, Stephen Sondheim, Leonard Bernstein, and Jerome Robbins (only the director, Robert Wise, was straight)

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    @Anonymous

    "The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version."

    Steve prefers the Broadway version. Too many times at the well with the Steve/musical/gay gag. This whole thread with its mental images of vibrant musical theater, the Gibson dinger, and elderly Englishmen sweating it out in equatorial squalor is turning me gay. Might be turning me gay.

    Replies: @HammerJack

    , @Peter Akuleyev
    @Anonymous

    In 1959 this didn't read "homo" to most Americans the way it does now. For one thing people were just more sincere - a man could dance and show emotion and the audience could take it at face value. Only sophisticates knew how much homosexuality was going on behind the scenes. A lot of what reads gay to us now is backwards projection - since we know all the men involved were gay, we've decided these mannerisms are gay. But at the time the gay men were often doing their best to hide that fact.

    Don't forget that in the 1950s it was not unusual for a straight white man to be a pretty good dancer himself, and going out dancing was one of the primary forms of entertainment even for middle aged married couples - something that may be hard for young people to grok. Any white male from a family with social aspirations had logged hours of dancing lessons by the time they were in college.

  5. Wait a second ,white people fighting for their community …….doesn’t that strain credulity just a bit.

    • Replies: @Wade Hampton
    @tyrone

    Michelle Obama from 2019:


    "...she recalled how white families abandoned her once-diverse, middle-class Chicago community and others like it as more black families came into the neighborhood. And she warned that it’s still happening today as immigrants move into communities, spurring some white residents to pack up and leave.

    'There were no gang fights, there were no territorial battles. Yet one by one, they packed their bags and they ran from us,” she said at the event. “And they left communities in shambles.'"
     

    I "took flight" and relocated from a dangerously diverse community to one that is almost lily white. I'm much less likely to get shot while shopping at Walmart now. I know that not wanting to get shot while shopping is highly racist, but I'm OK with that.

    https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/michelle-obama-white-flight/

    Replies: @Art Deco, @AceDeuce

    , @Brutusale
    @tyrone

    You should have been in South Boston during the 70s.

    Replies: @tyrone

  6. @D. K.
    "In contrast to the noble Sharks, the new Jets are an isolated lumpenproletariat vastly outnumbered by the righteous BIPOC masses of 1957. You might think that would make the Jets not very scary, but they are presented as horrifying because in the current year white men bad. Jets do evil things like deface a colossal Puerto Rican flag with Jackson Pollock-like splashes from paint cans they stole from the construction site of Lincoln Center."

    Sorry, Steves (and Tony), but I'm not buying it:

    "May 14, 1959: Ground-breaking ceremony with U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower.[8]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Center#Historical_timeline

    http://www.aboutlincolncenter.org/about/history/archive-1950s

    Replies: @Hangnail Hans, @Jack D

    It sounds like a plot-advancing anecdote which should perhaps be relegated to the status of a set piece, a thing unto itself amidst the larger play. This set piece could even be narrated, perhaps by an actor named Jussie.

  7. I wonder if some of the disdain other lxtxnx (triple X, baby!) have for Puerto Ricans is racial. The vast majority of non-Caribbean Hispanics are mestizo, while the PRs are heavily black. I have heard that in, say, Colombia women with partially black ancestry go to great lengths to straighten their hair, as curly hair is extremely declassé.

    Though I knew a Puerto Rican girl who was very bright, very native-looking and had very straight hair. Seeing her is why I thought Indians contributed at least a little to Puerto Rico’s genetics. Research later proved me right!

    Perhaps Mexicans et al look down on PRs for similar reasons to why the pro-man class looks down on deplorables. They have citizen (white) privilege, but they have made so little from it. Perhaps not, as our insane birthplace citizenship turns illegals into “citizens” (for now).

    [MORE]

    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society? There is also the possibility that we are not going to have “inflation” where people who hold cash or unadusting debt lose a lot of money, but wages rise, too. Like, in Weimar Germany, workers took wheelbarrows full of cash to the market. But if prices double and wages don’t, then we’ve just become a lot poorer, right? I mean, people who don’t own land/capital/crypto(?). People who own the country might appreciate that. Labor gets a lot cheaper. The production of American services and goods (what little we produce) will tolt more towards luxury goods and domestic services. It’s like massive immigration of poor people, except it’s newly poor Americans to clean kitchens and mow lawns.

    Lots of rich people have “jobs” where they manage their portfolios. I wonder if a lot of those people are going to lose asset value and return to the extent of needing to get real jobs. They do have lots of QE dollars. Some of that will come into the real economy, right? But it’ll just be more money chasing the same amount of goods and services, which means inflation, and again, a tilt towards what rich people consume.

    I know call8ng things post 2000 or so “Weimar America” was an alt-right thing, but is it true? Whatever happened to the alt-right guys, anyway? Did they all get de-platformed? Was Trump so worthless that everyone got so discouraged they quit political activism, switching to buying guns for la revolución? I wonder if the left will learn that de-platforming people might have just turned people from tweeting to real-world activity? God, I hope we have a peaceful “reset.” There are a lot of people with a lot of guns. They probably have better aim than black gangbangers.

    What’s the collapse going to look like? I thought things would muddle along until the boomers died, but maybe the demographics that matter are children(?), young adults, and middle-age peak earner types? I hope Steve, how is a good person, has more influence in the coming situation than, say, Richard Spencer. I’d hate to see a shooting civil war followed by American death camps. Like, if the right wins the whole shebang or even just the south, how does it deal with governing a 50% non-white country?

    Wonder if it’s too late to buy Chinese stock?

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Rob

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GH2XfBsWnm0

    , @PaceLaw
    @Rob

    “ . . . while the PRs are heavily black.”

    You are flatly wrong here Rob. When I was with FEMA, I was deployed to Puerto Rico for hurricane relief back in 2017. I was on the island for over a month and had a chance to travel across all of it. The people definitely are not “heavily black.” Obviously, as in most of Latin America, there is some black influence and strain but it does not predominate. When I think of “heavily black,” I think of Dominicans. On average, PRS do not look like Dominicans.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Rob


    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society?
     
    https://twitter.com/BowTiedCommoner/status/1466865741177794562

    tl;dr: Working poor hardest hit. Portfolio class enriched.

    Replies: @Ralph L, @Abe

    , @Art Deco
    @Rob

    while the PRs are heavily black.

    They aren't.

    https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/07/28/dna-portrait-of-puerto-rican-ancestry/

    Replies: @res

    , @Americano
    @Rob

    @Rob

    Puerto Ricans are not heavily black you moronic imbecile.

    See Benicio del Toro, Ricky Martin, Pedro Augusto del Valle (1st Hispanic lieutenant general, and a hard-core American Reactionary), Jose Ferrer (1st Hispanic best actor winner), Raul Julia, Rita Moreno (EGOT), Jose Feliciano, Luis Fonsi, William Carlos Williams (One of America's greatest poet. Anglo/Puerto Rican), 5 Miss Universe (1970: Marisol Malaret, 1985: Deborah Carthy-Deu, 1993: Dayanara Torres, 2001: Denise M. Quiñones and 2006: Zuleyka Rivera), etc., etc., etc.

    Puerto Rico is not dissimilar to the USA--mostly Europeans (with some Native American elements) and a small black population. This was the reason why Teddy Roosevelt was willing to take in Puerto Rico and not Cuba--while Cuba was bigger and wealthier, and had a large white population, it also had a very large black population; by contrast, Puerto Rico had a small black population, concentrated in the coastal areas.

    Replies: @Jack D, @flyingtiger, @Nicholas Stix

  8. Wouldn’t a truly updated West Side Story have the Puerto Ricans driving out Blacks?

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Redneck farmer

    No, Dominicans.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara

    , @PaceLaw
    @Redneck farmer

    In my experience when I used to live in Philadelphia, Puerto Ricans and blacks got along pretty well and there really was nobody being driven out of neighborhoods. I understand the situation is quite different in Los Angeles were Mexicans have been driving blacks out of neighborhoods.

  9. @tyrone
    Wait a second ,white people fighting for their community .......doesn't that strain credulity just a bit.

    Replies: @Wade Hampton, @Brutusale

    Michelle Obama from 2019:

    “…she recalled how white families abandoned her once-diverse, middle-class Chicago community and others like it as more black families came into the neighborhood. And she warned that it’s still happening today as immigrants move into communities, spurring some white residents to pack up and leave.

    There were no gang fights, there were no territorial battles. Yet one by one, they packed their bags and they ran from us,” she said at the event. “And they left communities in shambles.’”

    I “took flight” and relocated from a dangerously diverse community to one that is almost lily white. I’m much less likely to get shot while shopping at Walmart now. I know that not wanting to get shot while shopping is highly racist, but I’m OK with that.

    https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/michelle-obama-white-flight/

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Wade Hampton

    I sell my house and move away (which people in owner-occupied housing do routinely, on average every 12 years). Somehow, I'm blamed for the 'shambles' made by the succeeding cohort of residents. Or perhaps it's her accusation that I trashed the neighborhood and then relocated to a different neighborhood which I did not trash for some reason? (As we speak, the neighborhood she grew up in has a homicide rate of 82 per 100,000; what's typical in inner ring suburbs is 5.6 per 100,000, more distant suburbs, 2.3 per 100,000).

    , @AceDeuce
    @Wade Hampton

    ‘There were no gang fights, there were no territorial battles. Yet one by one, they packed their bags and they ran from us,” she said at the event. “And they left communities in shambles.’

    Someone should have asked Queen Harambe the First (and hopefully the Last) exactly how wypipo packing their bags and running, allowing Wakandan Gentle Joggers the chance to move in wholesale, resulted in making the place a shambles.

  10. This is really OT, is the comment software playing up or is it me?

    If I click on my handle on one of my comments, like this one

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/sailers-law-at-a-memorial-vigil/#comment-5062799

    I’d expect to see all my comments, newest first.

    Instead I see comments apparently dated 2017. If I ask for 2021 comments via the search box it tells me there aren’t any. But I can see them if I use the drop-down box by the “All Comments” at the top of the listing to choose comments by year or decade.

    Tried it with other commenters and the same thing happens, I see JohnnyWalkers stuff from 2014 or JackD as far back as 2007.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @YetAnotherAnon

    That happened to me this morning, but the comments now appear as newest first.

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @YetAnotherAnon

    #metoo

    , @Almost Missouri
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Ron's on the case.

    https://www.unz.com/announcement/bugs-suggestions-2/#comment-5068470

    If it is still happening tomorrow, you can update him.

  11. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    I don’t think there is one, really, though the Argentines think they’re better due to being white (Uruguayans are even whiter but their coubtry is too small to get too cocky). There’s a color continuum as Steve has said within the country (whiter is better but if you have dark skin and money you are not necessarily ‘black’) but as a as whole people are nationalistic like anywhere else.

    If you mean in the USA, from what I can see it mostly boils down to overall social status, as you say. Remember there is a lot of selection bias with South Americans having to have enough money to pay for a plane ticket whereas some Mexicans will sneak over the border by foot…but you can bet the legal ones look down on the illegal ones (unless they’re writing application essays for Harvard).

  12. Ahhhh…… music. Putting aside all socio-cultural nuances, there can be no agreement on that artistic field …

    https://www.classical-music.com/composers/50-greatest-composers-all-time/

    The 50 Greatest Composers of All Time

    Hmmm.. let’s see who’s not there:

    Mussorgsky
    Handel
    Bruckner
    Palestrina
    Lassus
    Josquin des Prez
    Dvorak
    Liszt
    Puccini
    Rossini
    Rimsky Korsakov
    Franck
    Scarlatti
    Saint-Saens
    Faure
    Skriabin
    Mendelssohn
    Orff
    Hindemith
    Corelli
    Paganini
    Khachaturian
    Grieg
    Smetana
    ……………..

    But – Sondheim is out there, along with unavoidable John Cage.

    Food for thought …

  13. OT

    Coupla new Sailer-baits just dropped…

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Almost Missouri

    Almost Missouri, sigh. Adopted black kids' White parents not understanding their culture. What culture is that? Rap music with its vile lyrics. Single moms? Gang Banging? Shooting up memeorial services? Who could love those people?

    Replies: @Loyalty Over IQ Worship

    , @Steve Sailer
    @Almost Missouri

    Thanks.

  14. @Rob
    I wonder if some of the disdain other lxtxnx (triple X, baby!) have for Puerto Ricans is racial. The vast majority of non-Caribbean Hispanics are mestizo, while the PRs are heavily black. I have heard that in, say, Colombia women with partially black ancestry go to great lengths to straighten their hair, as curly hair is extremely declassé.

    Though I knew a Puerto Rican girl who was very bright, very native-looking and had very straight hair. Seeing her is why I thought Indians contributed at least a little to Puerto Rico’s genetics. Research later proved me right!

    Perhaps Mexicans et al look down on PRs for similar reasons to why the pro-man class looks down on deplorables. They have citizen (white) privilege, but they have made so little from it. Perhaps not, as our insane birthplace citizenship turns illegals into “citizens” (for now).

    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society? There is also the possibility that we are not going to have “inflation” where people who hold cash or unadusting debt lose a lot of money, but wages rise, too. Like, in Weimar Germany, workers took wheelbarrows full of cash to the market. But if prices double and wages don’t, then we’ve just become a lot poorer, right? I mean, people who don’t own land/capital/crypto(?). People who own the country might appreciate that. Labor gets a lot cheaper. The production of American services and goods (what little we produce) will tolt more towards luxury goods and domestic services. It’s like massive immigration of poor people, except it’s newly poor Americans to clean kitchens and mow lawns.

    Lots of rich people have “jobs” where they manage their portfolios. I wonder if a lot of those people are going to lose asset value and return to the extent of needing to get real jobs. They do have lots of QE dollars. Some of that will come into the real economy, right? But it’ll just be more money chasing the same amount of goods and services, which means inflation, and again, a tilt towards what rich people consume.

    I know call8ng things post 2000 or so “Weimar America” was an alt-right thing, but is it true? Whatever happened to the alt-right guys, anyway? Did they all get de-platformed? Was Trump so worthless that everyone got so discouraged they quit political activism, switching to buying guns for la revolución? I wonder if the left will learn that de-platforming people might have just turned people from tweeting to real-world activity? God, I hope we have a peaceful “reset.” There are a lot of people with a lot of guns. They probably have better aim than black gangbangers.

    What’s the collapse going to look like? I thought things would muddle along until the boomers died, but maybe the demographics that matter are children(?), young adults, and middle-age peak earner types? I hope Steve, how is a good person, has more influence in the coming situation than, say, Richard Spencer. I’d hate to see a shooting civil war followed by American death camps. Like, if the right wins the whole shebang or even just the south, how does it deal with governing a 50% non-white country?

    Wonder if it’s too late to buy Chinese stock?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PaceLaw, @Almost Missouri, @Art Deco, @Americano

  15. @tyrone
    Wait a second ,white people fighting for their community .......doesn't that strain credulity just a bit.

    Replies: @Wade Hampton, @Brutusale

    You should have been in South Boston during the 70s.

    • Replies: @tyrone
    @Brutusale


    You should have been in South Boston during the 70s.
     
    ......Yes,long, long ago........I feel nostalgic too.
  16. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Mostly racial, with the whiter ones dumping on the Hispanics, the next rung down on the ladder. So in the NYC of 1960 or 70, the whitest would be Cubans. They think they are the smartest and most cultured. And of pure Spanish blood.
    They dump on Puerto Ricans (Reason: they are black and Indian)
    Who have the privilege of dumping on Dominicans (Reason: they are black and might as well be Haitians)
    Dominicans get to dump on the black as midnight Caribbeans from the Anglo-islands.

    The average white New Yorker of 1970 has no awareness of these racial one upmanships. He just sees and thinks Hispanics. But within the Hispanic community, coming from a different wretched, sht-hole of an island, this was a very big deal.

    • Replies: @Evocatus
    @Clyde

    Here in NYC, both the Puerto Ricans and Dominicans tend to look down upon the Mexicans. Mexicans here tend to be from Puebla or other regions in southern Mexico and are smaller and much more Amerindian looking compared to West Coast Mexicans. For the most part, they are ignored by whites and are often the victims of black crime since many of them work delivering food for restaurants and are seen as easy targets.

    Replies: @Clyde

    , @Peter Akuleyev
    @Clyde

    Through the 1970s Cubans were not even a minority. They were simply white - think Desi Arnaz or Mel Ferrer. My family had a good Cuban friend back in the 1970s - he was just as white as any Italian.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Jack D

    , @AceDeuce
    @Clyde

    The top of the latino pecking order? Is that like being the world's tallest midget?

  17. So, Spielberg and Kushner make clear that the Sharks and Jets fight because the browns are the good guys and the whites are the bad guys.

    The Sharks are no longer even juvenile delinquents, but instead are grown men with jobs and families defending their graffiti-free vibrant community from the nihilistic Trumpist Jets.

    Good grief ….

    Interestingly, the Jets don’t even seem to have any territory anymore. My guess is that the filmmakers worried that giving the Jets turf to defend would make today’s youth sympathize too much with them.

    Now- this is interesting.

    Anyway, it all looks like Spielberg’s pandering to wokeness. And not even getting money from it.

    Sad!

  18. OT

  19. So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),…

    Ah, geeze, c’mon, really? You actually believe this?

    Steven Spielberg admires mid-century America, which is why he portrayed a quintessential Jewish existential anguish collective fever dream by utilising and perverting a pinnacle White masterpiece in Shakespeare’s play about families’ history pitted against each other as Broadway stage play pitting non-Whites against Whites with an even more evil demeanour given to the Whites?

    Today’s youth of color seem particularly unenthused. I saw the new West Side Story Saturday night in the heart of the Mexican barrio of Van Nuys, Calif., and there were about seventeen people in the theater.

    Just like Santa Inc. It wasn’t made to make money, it was made to ululate a victory, simultaneously tormenting the losers.

    Twenty-first-century audiences apparently don’t care much about all the brainpower expended on West Side Story. So far, despite all the efforts exerted over the generations by all the famous talents involved, nobody except critics (who are wowed by it) and old white people who liked the 1961 Best Picture-winning film just fine are much interested in going to Spielberg’s reimagining.

    21st C White People see through it! Only the critics, the very same tribe Seth Rogen and Steven Spielberg hail from, appreciate the film. Everyone else instinctively understands what ancient lizard brained hateful mind spawned this continuing diatribe.

    Btw, if you want to hear and visualise a masculine White non-homo take on West Side Story listen to Alice Cooper’s School’s Out:

    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    @Pat Hannagan

    With the ongoing demographic changes, the economic future of live-action movie musicals (animated musicals are thriving) is likely foretold instead by the 2017 surprise hit The Greatest Showman.

    Ongoing demographic changes are much like Best Picture Oscar Nominees: determined by nature.

    I haven't even heard of "the 2017 surprise hit The Greatest Showman.". You move in vastly removed arcs of gravitational pull to the planets I orbit, Sailer.

    If an English playwright were to formulate something original and reality based about the plight of the working class descendants of the victors of The Good War, in the UK, in the face of a dismissive cultural and racial foreign elite, that's something I'd like to see.

    I'd set it to the tune of an Englishman in awe of another, without the foreign mawkish ethnocentric stage play.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrPAtjRvgQU

    , @Anonymous
    @Pat Hannagan


    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),…

    Ah, geeze, c’mon, really? You actually believe this?
     
    Saving Private Ryan is really about hating Germans, not admiring Americans. If Steve had any loyalty to his own people he would see this.

    https://youtu.be/l4FeyONCtfc

    Replies: @Jack D, @LondonBob

    , @JMcG
    @Pat Hannagan

    My opinion is that Spielberg made Saving Private Ryan so he could include the scene of the cowardly American WASP failing to save the brave American Jew from being slaughtered by the SS. It was a pretty bad movie with some good scenes. Band of Brothers was much better.

  20. Steve reports that the theater in Van Nuys was nearly empty. Kyle Smith reported that the theater on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.was full; there had been massive advertising, and hyped-up acclaim by critics. But, Kyle said, the audience response was muted. My conclusion is that if a hyped NYC audience doesn’t like it, then no audience will like it.

    My advice to Spielberg would have been to stick a musical star or two in it. The kind of ridiculous stars who sell-out 50,000 tickets in 10 seconds. Then young people, especially women, would stream it (no one goes to the movies anymore). The omission of stars is puzzling, especially given that the budget was there, and, other concessions to the zeitgeist were being made and this would be just one more. This was “Cabaret” without Liza Minnelli and Joel Gray.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @SafeNow

    The 1961 producers wanted Elvis to play Tony.

    Replies: @Jack D

  21. I saw West Side Story once a while back. Meh. I much rather watch, I am watching, a B movie “In The Blood” 2014. With Gina Carano. This takes place on a Caribbean Island that has gangsters and every shade of human under the sun. So kind of like West Side Story after all.
    I know this much. I will not be seeing the nieuw West Side Story. How can Spielberg improve on what was meh the first time around?

  22. The Great Gatsby [is] really good.

    There our tastes differ. It’s a boreathon in my view. Unpickupable.

    I’ve heard the original WSS film music – good stuff. But can any filmed musical beat My Fair Lady? I say no.

  23. @Rob
    I wonder if some of the disdain other lxtxnx (triple X, baby!) have for Puerto Ricans is racial. The vast majority of non-Caribbean Hispanics are mestizo, while the PRs are heavily black. I have heard that in, say, Colombia women with partially black ancestry go to great lengths to straighten their hair, as curly hair is extremely declassé.

    Though I knew a Puerto Rican girl who was very bright, very native-looking and had very straight hair. Seeing her is why I thought Indians contributed at least a little to Puerto Rico’s genetics. Research later proved me right!

    Perhaps Mexicans et al look down on PRs for similar reasons to why the pro-man class looks down on deplorables. They have citizen (white) privilege, but they have made so little from it. Perhaps not, as our insane birthplace citizenship turns illegals into “citizens” (for now).

    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society? There is also the possibility that we are not going to have “inflation” where people who hold cash or unadusting debt lose a lot of money, but wages rise, too. Like, in Weimar Germany, workers took wheelbarrows full of cash to the market. But if prices double and wages don’t, then we’ve just become a lot poorer, right? I mean, people who don’t own land/capital/crypto(?). People who own the country might appreciate that. Labor gets a lot cheaper. The production of American services and goods (what little we produce) will tolt more towards luxury goods and domestic services. It’s like massive immigration of poor people, except it’s newly poor Americans to clean kitchens and mow lawns.

    Lots of rich people have “jobs” where they manage their portfolios. I wonder if a lot of those people are going to lose asset value and return to the extent of needing to get real jobs. They do have lots of QE dollars. Some of that will come into the real economy, right? But it’ll just be more money chasing the same amount of goods and services, which means inflation, and again, a tilt towards what rich people consume.

    I know call8ng things post 2000 or so “Weimar America” was an alt-right thing, but is it true? Whatever happened to the alt-right guys, anyway? Did they all get de-platformed? Was Trump so worthless that everyone got so discouraged they quit political activism, switching to buying guns for la revolución? I wonder if the left will learn that de-platforming people might have just turned people from tweeting to real-world activity? God, I hope we have a peaceful “reset.” There are a lot of people with a lot of guns. They probably have better aim than black gangbangers.

    What’s the collapse going to look like? I thought things would muddle along until the boomers died, but maybe the demographics that matter are children(?), young adults, and middle-age peak earner types? I hope Steve, how is a good person, has more influence in the coming situation than, say, Richard Spencer. I’d hate to see a shooting civil war followed by American death camps. Like, if the right wins the whole shebang or even just the south, how does it deal with governing a 50% non-white country?

    Wonder if it’s too late to buy Chinese stock?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PaceLaw, @Almost Missouri, @Art Deco, @Americano

    “ . . . while the PRs are heavily black.”

    You are flatly wrong here Rob. When I was with FEMA, I was deployed to Puerto Rico for hurricane relief back in 2017. I was on the island for over a month and had a chance to travel across all of it. The people definitely are not “heavily black.” Obviously, as in most of Latin America, there is some black influence and strain but it does not predominate. When I think of “heavily black,” I think of Dominicans. On average, PRS do not look like Dominicans.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @PaceLaw

    Dominicans aren't necessarily all that Black either.

  24. I’ve heard (from Nicaraguan) they dislike the ‘ghetto-Ricans’ because they lord over the fact they are citizens. Cubans are noted for arrogance due to whiteness, and she (the Nicaraguan) hated American blacks (for bullying her daughter in her Florida high school, and working with them.)

  25. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    I don’t know the intricacies, but Mexicans and Puerto Ricans pretty famously don’t like each other, at least below the non-elite level. I’m with the Mexicans here.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @JMcG

    Mexican/Puerto Rican rivalry is overrated by many White people IMHO.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  26. @Anonymous
    Should have dorne this.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/50/d6/35/50d63534a0dfc333addcff52d6692fb9.jpg

    Replies: @Paul Jolliffe, @Mr. Anon

    Great parody!

  27. @Pat Hannagan
    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),...

    Ah, geeze, c'mon, really? You actually believe this?

    Steven Spielberg admires mid-century America, which is why he portrayed a quintessential Jewish existential anguish collective fever dream by utilising and perverting a pinnacle White masterpiece in Shakespeare's play about families' history pitted against each other as Broadway stage play pitting non-Whites against Whites with an even more evil demeanour given to the Whites?

    Today’s youth of color seem particularly unenthused. I saw the new West Side Story Saturday night in the heart of the Mexican barrio of Van Nuys, Calif., and there were about seventeen people in the theater.

    Just like Santa Inc. It wasn't made to make money, it was made to ululate a victory, simultaneously tormenting the losers.

    Twenty-first-century audiences apparently don’t care much about all the brainpower expended on West Side Story. So far, despite all the efforts exerted over the generations by all the famous talents involved, nobody except critics (who are wowed by it) and old white people who liked the 1961 Best Picture-winning film just fine are much interested in going to Spielberg’s reimagining.

    21st C White People see through it! Only the critics, the very same tribe Seth Rogen and Steven Spielberg hail from, appreciate the film. Everyone else instinctively understands what ancient lizard brained hateful mind spawned this continuing diatribe.

    Btw, if you want to hear and visualise a masculine White non-homo take on West Side Story listen to Alice Cooper's School's Out:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjJMgCSEcS0

    Replies: @Pat Hannagan, @Anonymous, @JMcG

    With the ongoing demographic changes, the economic future of live-action movie musicals (animated musicals are thriving) is likely foretold instead by the 2017 surprise hit The Greatest Showman.

    Ongoing demographic changes are much like Best Picture Oscar Nominees: determined by nature.

    I haven’t even heard of “the 2017 surprise hit The Greatest Showman.”. You move in vastly removed arcs of gravitational pull to the planets I orbit, Sailer.

    If an English playwright were to formulate something original and reality based about the plight of the working class descendants of the victors of The Good War, in the UK, in the face of a dismissive cultural and racial foreign elite, that’s something I’d like to see.

    I’d set it to the tune of an Englishman in awe of another, without the foreign mawkish ethnocentric stage play.

  28. @Rob
    I wonder if some of the disdain other lxtxnx (triple X, baby!) have for Puerto Ricans is racial. The vast majority of non-Caribbean Hispanics are mestizo, while the PRs are heavily black. I have heard that in, say, Colombia women with partially black ancestry go to great lengths to straighten their hair, as curly hair is extremely declassé.

    Though I knew a Puerto Rican girl who was very bright, very native-looking and had very straight hair. Seeing her is why I thought Indians contributed at least a little to Puerto Rico’s genetics. Research later proved me right!

    Perhaps Mexicans et al look down on PRs for similar reasons to why the pro-man class looks down on deplorables. They have citizen (white) privilege, but they have made so little from it. Perhaps not, as our insane birthplace citizenship turns illegals into “citizens” (for now).

    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society? There is also the possibility that we are not going to have “inflation” where people who hold cash or unadusting debt lose a lot of money, but wages rise, too. Like, in Weimar Germany, workers took wheelbarrows full of cash to the market. But if prices double and wages don’t, then we’ve just become a lot poorer, right? I mean, people who don’t own land/capital/crypto(?). People who own the country might appreciate that. Labor gets a lot cheaper. The production of American services and goods (what little we produce) will tolt more towards luxury goods and domestic services. It’s like massive immigration of poor people, except it’s newly poor Americans to clean kitchens and mow lawns.

    Lots of rich people have “jobs” where they manage their portfolios. I wonder if a lot of those people are going to lose asset value and return to the extent of needing to get real jobs. They do have lots of QE dollars. Some of that will come into the real economy, right? But it’ll just be more money chasing the same amount of goods and services, which means inflation, and again, a tilt towards what rich people consume.

    I know call8ng things post 2000 or so “Weimar America” was an alt-right thing, but is it true? Whatever happened to the alt-right guys, anyway? Did they all get de-platformed? Was Trump so worthless that everyone got so discouraged they quit political activism, switching to buying guns for la revolución? I wonder if the left will learn that de-platforming people might have just turned people from tweeting to real-world activity? God, I hope we have a peaceful “reset.” There are a lot of people with a lot of guns. They probably have better aim than black gangbangers.

    What’s the collapse going to look like? I thought things would muddle along until the boomers died, but maybe the demographics that matter are children(?), young adults, and middle-age peak earner types? I hope Steve, how is a good person, has more influence in the coming situation than, say, Richard Spencer. I’d hate to see a shooting civil war followed by American death camps. Like, if the right wins the whole shebang or even just the south, how does it deal with governing a 50% non-white country?

    Wonder if it’s too late to buy Chinese stock?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PaceLaw, @Almost Missouri, @Art Deco, @Americano

    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society?

    tl;dr: Working poor hardest hit. Portfolio class enriched.

    • Replies: @Ralph L
    @Almost Missouri

    Portfolio class enriched.

    That didn't happen in the 70's inflation, the Dow declined a lot in fixed dollars; however, capital gains taxes were much higher than now (until '78), which suppressed the stock market.

    , @Abe
    @Almost Missouri


    tl;dr: Working poor hardest hit. Portfolio class enriched.
     
    iSteve It-Girl Sarah Jeong had a bit to say about this recently:

    all the stuff you see about inflation in the news is driven by rich people flipping their shit because their parasitic assets aren't doing as well as they'd like and they're scared that unemployment benefits + stimmy checks + 15 minimum wage + labor shortage is why
     
    https://reason.com/2021/11/17/new-york-times-writer-sarah-jeong-says-inflation-in-the-news-is-just-rich-people-flipping-their-shit/

    Unlike most of you dudes I was never particularly offended by her “anti-white” Tweets as Sarah has obviously received more white pipe in the back than a Home Depot. I am, however, very much offended by such gross know-nothingness. You are a regular staff contributor for THE NEW YORK TIMES, unfortunately (and pretty much through inertia alone) still the most influential shaper of “respectable” opinion in America. Do you therefore not feel even a tiny bit of obligation to know anything about anything? And then on top of it to wrap your ignorance in the borrowed, ugly idiom of Hip Hop/Ebonics (nothing I find more unpalatable than an Asian girl affecting to sound like some Nuyorican with her factory original chirrupy-shrill East Asian vocal chords).

    Outspoken, undaunted, labia proudly unfurled to the world like Christmas roast beef left out till January 2nd. Actually believes this is how the rich manage their wealth. Sarah Jeong.

    https://eq2wire.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/scrooge_mcduck.jpg

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Jack D

  29. @Rob
    I wonder if some of the disdain other lxtxnx (triple X, baby!) have for Puerto Ricans is racial. The vast majority of non-Caribbean Hispanics are mestizo, while the PRs are heavily black. I have heard that in, say, Colombia women with partially black ancestry go to great lengths to straighten their hair, as curly hair is extremely declassé.

    Though I knew a Puerto Rican girl who was very bright, very native-looking and had very straight hair. Seeing her is why I thought Indians contributed at least a little to Puerto Rico’s genetics. Research later proved me right!

    Perhaps Mexicans et al look down on PRs for similar reasons to why the pro-man class looks down on deplorables. They have citizen (white) privilege, but they have made so little from it. Perhaps not, as our insane birthplace citizenship turns illegals into “citizens” (for now).

    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society? There is also the possibility that we are not going to have “inflation” where people who hold cash or unadusting debt lose a lot of money, but wages rise, too. Like, in Weimar Germany, workers took wheelbarrows full of cash to the market. But if prices double and wages don’t, then we’ve just become a lot poorer, right? I mean, people who don’t own land/capital/crypto(?). People who own the country might appreciate that. Labor gets a lot cheaper. The production of American services and goods (what little we produce) will tolt more towards luxury goods and domestic services. It’s like massive immigration of poor people, except it’s newly poor Americans to clean kitchens and mow lawns.

    Lots of rich people have “jobs” where they manage their portfolios. I wonder if a lot of those people are going to lose asset value and return to the extent of needing to get real jobs. They do have lots of QE dollars. Some of that will come into the real economy, right? But it’ll just be more money chasing the same amount of goods and services, which means inflation, and again, a tilt towards what rich people consume.

    I know call8ng things post 2000 or so “Weimar America” was an alt-right thing, but is it true? Whatever happened to the alt-right guys, anyway? Did they all get de-platformed? Was Trump so worthless that everyone got so discouraged they quit political activism, switching to buying guns for la revolución? I wonder if the left will learn that de-platforming people might have just turned people from tweeting to real-world activity? God, I hope we have a peaceful “reset.” There are a lot of people with a lot of guns. They probably have better aim than black gangbangers.

    What’s the collapse going to look like? I thought things would muddle along until the boomers died, but maybe the demographics that matter are children(?), young adults, and middle-age peak earner types? I hope Steve, how is a good person, has more influence in the coming situation than, say, Richard Spencer. I’d hate to see a shooting civil war followed by American death camps. Like, if the right wins the whole shebang or even just the south, how does it deal with governing a 50% non-white country?

    Wonder if it’s too late to buy Chinese stock?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PaceLaw, @Almost Missouri, @Art Deco, @Americano

    • Agree: PaceLaw
    • Replies: @res
    @Art Deco

    Thanks. That article is brief and the link they gave for more information is broken. Here is an archive page for it.
    https://web.archive.org/web/20150706090353/http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2014/07/25/genographic-project-dna-results-reveal-details-of-puerto-rican-history/

    The bottom line appears to be (but note the mitochondiral and Y DNA differs):


    The average Puerto Rican individual carries 12% Native American, 65% West Eurasian (Mediterranean, Northern European and/or Middle Eastern) and 20% Sub-Saharan African DNA.
     
    However, remember that it was a small sample from a particular region of PR.

    Collaborating with 326 individuals from southeastern Puerto Rico and Vieques
     
    I don't know enough about PR to judge how much ancestry variation there might be by region.

    Looking into it more, I think this paper is based on the same work.
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.22569
    http://labs.icb.ufmg.br/lbem/pdf/Vilar2014AJPAPuertoRico.pdf

    It appears they based the research on a specific subcommunity. I would be careful about making generalizations from it.

    During these trips, we worked with 326 participants from the island of Puerto Rico and the neighboring island of Vieques. The majority of the participants are members of the Naguake Community, which is currently seeking state recognition as an indigenous base community
     
    That said, here is another 2014 paper which seems in line with those results.
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266253047_Association_of_NOD2_and_IL23R_with_Inflammatory_Bowel_Disease_in_Puerto_Rico

    See Figure 1 after the MORE.

    The 1000 Genomes PUR population also looks similar.
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239524406_Reconstructing_Native_American_Migrations_from_Whole-Genome_and_Whole-Exome_Data

    This 2011 paper looks like the best on the topic of PR admixture. It used a "census-based sample of 642 Puerto Rican individuals that were genotyped for 93 ancestry informative markers (AIMs) to estimate African, European and Native American ancestry."
    History Shaped the Geographic Distribution of Genomic Admixture on the Island of Puerto Rico
    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016513

    They look at the regional distribution of ancestry. African ancestry varies from 5-45%. Figure 1 shows this nicely, but the image filename won't work for embedding here.

    Any idea how Puerto Ricans in the US fit into this?



    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Xiuqing-Guo/publication/266253047/figure/fig1/AS:[email protected]/A-Principal-components-analysis-of-the-combined-Puerto-Rican-and-HGDP-subjects-B.png

    A. Principal components analysis of the combined Puerto Rican and HGDP subjects. B. “Global” continental ancestry was estimated using Admixture 1.2 in an analysis supervised by data from HGDP populations as described in Methods (AFR, sub-Saharan African continent, dark blue; EUR, European continent, red; and AMR, Mexico, Central and South America continents, green). HGDP subjects not originating from these three continents are black. Puerto Rican subjects were sorted left-to-right based on ancestry from the African continent.
     
  30. Interestingly, the co-choreographer of West Side Story, Peter Gennaro, was the only straight guy on the production team. Figure that one out, sports fans, the choreographer was the straight guy.

    • LOL: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @mc23
    @Henry Canaday

    Down Low? :)

    , @D. K.
    @Henry Canaday

    "Interestingly, the co-choreographer of West Side Story, Peter Gennaro, was the only straight guy on the production team. Figure that one out, sports fans, the choreographer was the straight guy."

    How did you figure that?!?

    ***

    Directed by

    Jerome Robbins ... (directed by)

    Robert Wise ... (directed by)

    ***

    Writing Credits

    Ernest Lehman ... (screenplay by)

    Arthur Laurents ... (book)

    Jerome Robbins ... (play)

    William Shakespeare ... (play) (uncredited)


    ***

    Produced by

    Saul Chaplin ... associate producer

    Walter Mirisch ... executive producer (uncredited)

    Robert Wise ... producer (uncredited)


    ***

    https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055614/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_wr_sm

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Wise

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Lehman

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Chaplin

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Mirisch

    ***

    Inter alia . . .

  31. Wait a minute iSteve, the great movie of Guys and Dolls was not “satisfactory”? With a wonderful cast including Sinatra and Brando? You have to be kidding! My wife has been to every great play or musical on Broadway for 50+ years, and she loves it…

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @pyrrhus

    "With a wonderful cast including Sinatra and Brando?"

    But Brando insisted on taking the more singing role and thus Sinatra had to take the more acting role.

    Do that the right way and it would have been great.

    Replies: @D. K.

  32. @Henry Canaday
    Interestingly, the co-choreographer of West Side Story, Peter Gennaro, was the only straight guy on the production team. Figure that one out, sports fans, the choreographer was the straight guy.

    Replies: @mc23, @D. K.

    Down Low? 🙂

  33. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    In South Florida, the Cubans indisputably rule roost. I don’t know about New York.

  34. So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan)

    I feel like as with Lincoln there is a very strong who/whom reason he feels so proud of American soldiers during WW2. The same who/whom we see elsewhere in the changes to this film.

    The movie gets off to a flat-footed start with a long talky section offering Kushner’s dysgenic theory of why the Jets are so poor despite all that sweet white privilege: Nature and nurture has made them white trash, urban Jukes descended from a long line of drunks and crooks. The better sorts of whites, the ones with identity, “the Irish, the Italians, the Jews,” have moved up and out, leaving behind these deracinated losers.

    Isn’t this exactly what you’re never supposed to notice about the worst black and Latino ghettos? And since when are the down and outs in NYC Anglo even in the 50s. This kind of language is the surest evidence for the demise of the left on economic issues. This sounds like something you’d hear from the most right-wing libertarian 20 years ago. (Though thought by a great majority of upper middle class liberals)

    Not only do the Sharks work for lower pay, they’re better employees! And better people! (Though as their giant flag murals and hate for the poor American’s they’re displacing make clear, they’re not better Americans)

    It also sounds suspiciously like ‘a people for a land for a land without a people’. And as anyone who has taken a walk through Manhattan in the last 15 years knows, there are no better looking, better dressed or more standout characters than Puerto Ricans.

    And rather than cast Russian-American Natalie Wood as Maria, Spielberg’s team supposedly auditioned 30,000 Latinas before picking Catholic schoolgirl Rachel Zegler. In case you are wondering about how somebody named “Rachel Zegler” represents Puerto Ricans, her mother is from Colombia, which is not exactly Puerto Rico but close enough for Spielberg.

    Her casting announcement did wonders for her career in the woke era. She has since been cast as Snow White.

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan), has decided that what we need to acquaint the increasingly multicultural public with the USA’s past glories, rather like what Lin-Manuel Miranda intended to do for The Federalist Papers with his boyish Hamilton, is for him to remake West Side Story.

    I’d argue that these things represent an attempt to recontextualise things for a new people. The founding fathers in American after the great wave went from statesmen with a particular ethnicity and understanding of whom their ‘posterity’ was into philosopher kings with highly abstract ideals that actually, when you think about it, would have supported the great wave of immigration!

    In a sense history for a place only really begins when the people there arrive and recontextualisng the founding fathers meant America could still maintain a connection to it’s founding. This is why I was shocked when they started to pull down their statues. When you do that you’re ending America’s connection to it’s own past. In a real sense you’re ending America as a state that say white people or WASPs feel as being theirs. And in so doing you kill the citizenist ideal of an ‘American’. There are very real consequences for that both subtle and gross and certainly not all in the direction of the desires of those who took the statues down.

    And speaking of Lin-Manuel Miranda, he tried to steal Spielberg’s thunder and with added authenticity with his own New York musical about Puerto Ricans with his film adaptation of his stage musical ‘In The Heights’ though with an added plot about a plan to round up all the ‘DREAMERs’ and deport them. It did exceptionally poorly even considering the pandemic. (The trailers made it clear it wasn’t for white people and ‘Hispanics’ didn’t go see it, probably as Steve noted because it was about Puerto Ricans/Dominicans and to paraphrase Ann Coulter, how many Puerto Ricans does Hollywood think are in this country?)

    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist and as soon as the ‘Juneteenth’ musical gets finished as both a stage production and film, it will be the thing history (And probably a lot of English) teachers across America play endlessly as a treat to their students over their whole school career. Though I don’t think the Juneteenth musical will be as well-attended, (No fancy clothes and it won’t have the veneer of upper middle classness) it will still take the focus away from Hamilton and the media won’t still-boost it anymore. He still has all the money but I feel like he really wants the attention even more.

    • Replies: @mc23
    @Altai

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White-

    https://iv1.lisimg.com/image/22345621/740full-rachel-zegler.jpg

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous, @PiltdownMan, @Thoughts

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @Altai


    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist...
     
    When did this happen? Asking, not arguing.

    I know a family from flyover country who flew to NYC to see Hamilton. Probably cost them $2500+. You'd have to pay me to go see it.

    Replies: @Altai, @sayless

    , @Anon
    @Altai

    I doubt Miranda can create anything worthwhile unless he's borrowing from a white creation--in the case of Hamilton, borrowing from white-created history. A review of In The Heights said it was like an 80s Fanta commercial. Miranda probably doesn't have any innate creative ability of his own.

    , @ginger bread man
    @Altai

    When did Hamilton become racist?

    , @Mike Tre
    @Altai


    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),
     
    This is not accurate at all. What part of "mid century America" has Spielberg ever admired other than the ones who killed Nazis? How about a movie about the 1930's? Not many of those made for some reason, even though FDR was supposedly the greatest president evar! He could make a movie out of the Hemingway Book "To Have and Have Not" although it may not illustrate the New Deal as the success it supposedly was.

    This is pretty obvious merely by observing the stark differences in the production and tone of Band of Brothers as compared to The Pacific.

    Replies: @Sam Malone

  35. we need to embrace our villainhood and use it to our advantage.

  36. The very camp gangs of West Side Story persisted as a meme – eg in Michael Jackson’s video for Beat It, and even more hilariously in the ’70s film The Warriors, where the improbable multi-racial “good” gang is attacked by an evil white gang dressed in NY Yankees uniforms.

  37. When You’re a Remake

    I’m sure there’s a clever allusion in that title, but I can’t figure it out.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @Calvin Hobbes


    I’m sure there’s a clever allusion in that title, but I can’t figure it out.
     
    Sometimes Steve is a little oblique. It might take you from your first cigarette to your last dying day to get the reference.
  38. I have known a lot of Puerto Ricans. I also have Puerto Rican in-laws. They love Puerto Rico. I have a Mexican friend,very Spanish. They love Mexico. The Mexican really dislikes Cubans and is prejudiced against Puerto Ricans.

    I’ve also known a number of other people from Equador, Columbia and Venezuela. No one identify’s as Hispanic unless they check a box.

  39. I’ll stick with the vague memories of original from back in the day I saw it. Why financially support people who pretty much hate you? However nice to know the music wasn’t messed with. From the ads, I kind of thought maybe it was a non musical interpretation.

  40. @Altai

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan)
     
    I feel like as with Lincoln there is a very strong who/whom reason he feels so proud of American soldiers during WW2. The same who/whom we see elsewhere in the changes to this film.

    The movie gets off to a flat-footed start with a long talky section offering Kushner’s dysgenic theory of why the Jets are so poor despite all that sweet white privilege: Nature and nurture has made them white trash, urban Jukes descended from a long line of drunks and crooks. The better sorts of whites, the ones with identity, “the Irish, the Italians, the Jews,” have moved up and out, leaving behind these deracinated losers.
     
    Isn't this exactly what you're never supposed to notice about the worst black and Latino ghettos? And since when are the down and outs in NYC Anglo even in the 50s. This kind of language is the surest evidence for the demise of the left on economic issues. This sounds like something you'd hear from the most right-wing libertarian 20 years ago. (Though thought by a great majority of upper middle class liberals)

    Not only do the Sharks work for lower pay, they're better employees! And better people! (Though as their giant flag murals and hate for the poor American's they're displacing make clear, they're not better Americans)

    It also sounds suspiciously like 'a people for a land for a land without a people'. And as anyone who has taken a walk through Manhattan in the last 15 years knows, there are no better looking, better dressed or more standout characters than Puerto Ricans.

    And rather than cast Russian-American Natalie Wood as Maria, Spielberg’s team supposedly auditioned 30,000 Latinas before picking Catholic schoolgirl Rachel Zegler. In case you are wondering about how somebody named “Rachel Zegler” represents Puerto Ricans, her mother is from Colombia, which is not exactly Puerto Rico but close enough for Spielberg.
     
    Her casting announcement did wonders for her career in the woke era. She has since been cast as Snow White.

    https://twitter.com/musicmovieshoop/status/1470513991202050054

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan), has decided that what we need to acquaint the increasingly multicultural public with the USA’s past glories, rather like what Lin-Manuel Miranda intended to do for The Federalist Papers with his boyish Hamilton, is for him to remake West Side Story.
     
    I'd argue that these things represent an attempt to recontextualise things for a new people. The founding fathers in American after the great wave went from statesmen with a particular ethnicity and understanding of whom their 'posterity' was into philosopher kings with highly abstract ideals that actually, when you think about it, would have supported the great wave of immigration!

    In a sense history for a place only really begins when the people there arrive and recontextualisng the founding fathers meant America could still maintain a connection to it's founding. This is why I was shocked when they started to pull down their statues. When you do that you're ending America's connection to it's own past. In a real sense you're ending America as a state that say white people or WASPs feel as being theirs. And in so doing you kill the citizenist ideal of an 'American'. There are very real consequences for that both subtle and gross and certainly not all in the direction of the desires of those who took the statues down.

    And speaking of Lin-Manuel Miranda, he tried to steal Spielberg's thunder and with added authenticity with his own New York musical about Puerto Ricans with his film adaptation of his stage musical 'In The Heights' though with an added plot about a plan to round up all the 'DREAMERs' and deport them. It did exceptionally poorly even considering the pandemic. (The trailers made it clear it wasn't for white people and 'Hispanics' didn't go see it, probably as Steve noted because it was about Puerto Ricans/Dominicans and to paraphrase Ann Coulter, how many Puerto Ricans does Hollywood think are in this country?)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HAR3QBuiiU

    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist and as soon as the 'Juneteenth' musical gets finished as both a stage production and film, it will be the thing history (And probably a lot of English) teachers across America play endlessly as a treat to their students over their whole school career. Though I don't think the Juneteenth musical will be as well-attended, (No fancy clothes and it won't have the veneer of upper middle classness) it will still take the focus away from Hamilton and the media won't still-boost it anymore. He still has all the money but I feel like he really wants the attention even more.

    Replies: @mc23, @Jim Don Bob, @Anon, @ginger bread man, @Mike Tre

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White-

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @mc23

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White Beige.

    FIFY

    , @Anonymous
    @mc23

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White-

    Hussey? Not even! Hussey was stunning in her heyday. Not so with Zegler.
    She’d be far better cast as Pocahontas. Casting her is just another woke, "yeh, I’m a stupid asshole, and I’ll do a shitty remake that will be quickly trashed and forgotten, because I can," move.

    She's more like a refreshed, less attractive version of Kathleen Beller.

    https://cdn.shoppingcartthumbnails.com/hollywoodshow/0/catalog/product/k/a/kathleen_beller_dynasty_9.jpg

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @PiltdownMan
    @mc23


    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here ...
     
    Aside from the black hair, which is similar, not very much, I think.

    https://i.imgur.com/XOMgjlx.jpg

    Replies: @Anon 2, @mc23

    , @Thoughts
    @mc23

    The Tittles!

    It's the Tittles!

    To see what Rachel really looks like watch her Vogue Makeup Tutorial on Youtube

    She looks really, really Indian, not Hispanic. Allergy eyes are more Indian. Never seen a Latin American with such bad allergy eyes.

    They REALLY whitened her up for West Side Story

    Or they are darkening her up Ariana Grande style

    Replies: @Thoughts

  41. Spielberg can afford to burnish his rep with films that are meh at the box office, him being worth \$3-\$6 billion US, depending on who you read. He doesn’t need to please the legacy people of America, but he does need to please the mob, lest they turn and rend him.

  42. @Almost Missouri
    @Rob


    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society?
     
    https://twitter.com/BowTiedCommoner/status/1466865741177794562

    tl;dr: Working poor hardest hit. Portfolio class enriched.

    Replies: @Ralph L, @Abe

    Portfolio class enriched.

    That didn’t happen in the 70’s inflation, the Dow declined a lot in fixed dollars; however, capital gains taxes were much higher than now (until ’78), which suppressed the stock market.

  43. What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn’t.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    • Troll: Ian Smith
    • Replies: @Calvin Hobbes
    @Jonathan Mason


    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity?
     
    Presumably for the same reason that the mysterious effects of “systemic racism” supposedly explain so much of the state of affairs in America. What is not viewed through a (crazy) racial lens these days?
    , @TruthRevolution.net
    @Jonathan Mason

    In today's climate, White actors would only be employed if there is absolutely no BIPOC actor available. Or if a white villain is needed.


    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn’t.
     
    You live in a dream world if you think selection for movies (or jobs) still are based on merit and talent.

    You cannot even apply for an Oscar if you don't include Blacks in your medieval European cast.
    , @Boomthorkell
    @Jonathan Mason

    In truth, it depends.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason


    Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor?
     
    Having been born in the US in 1956, Gibson very likely was circumcised. You are free to ask him. I won't.

    However, he played a Roman soldier who wouldn't have been. Jim Caviezel, who played Jesus, was born here in 1968.

    Replies: @Stan Adams

    , @guest007
    @Jonathan Mason

    The choice of the actor does affect the success or failure of many movies. It is why the many remakes of the Great Gatsby always fail. The choice of the actress for Daisy is always bad and probably un-castable. The same with Romeo and Juliet.

    , @Anonymous
    @Jonathan Mason


    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?
     
    She looks like Boris Karloff's daughter. She could be in Daughter of Frankenstein.

    One bold thing Spielberg could have done is make the guy latino and make the girl blanco.

    One thing for sure, puertos were less threatening than total blacks.

    And even though West Side Story is about the problems of crime and delinquency, they still come across as safe haven from what blacks had in store for the city. In The Wanderers, the Italians have to fight the blacks, and they are scared as hell.

    Better brown immigrants than black thugs, I guess. In a way, West Side Story is the fantasy of Immigrants replacing blacks as the lesser problem.

    , @res
    @Jonathan Mason


    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn’t.
     
    Your faux-naïveté is charming. /sarc

    P.S. Regarding the Mel Gibson as Jesus mistake, it's a good thing Jonathan Mason only writes about things he knows about or has an interest in. Imagine how uninformed his comments would be if he was not so conscientious. (oops, guess I was premature with the /sarc above)

    Reading the PS of this comment might help explain my PS.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/open-thread-this-weeks-various-trials-of-the-century/#comment-5049809

    Replies: @TWS, @Mike Tre

    , @MEH 0910
    @Jonathan Mason

    https://twitter.com/DavidColeStein/status/1469762429852602370

    , @MEH 0910
    @Jonathan Mason

    https://www.takimag.com/article/lessons-from-hollywoods-great-replacement/
    https://twitter.com/DavidColeStein/status/1468281460729724928

  44. it was common for masculine men like JFK to prefer show tunes.

    You’ve heard of JFK’s best friend, LeMoyne Billings?

  45. “But that sleeper didn’t feature the combination of the (arguably) most famous musical and director of all time.”

    No, for the greatest most famous filmed musical of the 20th Century, that honor would go to The Siund of Music. It is the 2nd highest grossing film of the 1930-70 Era, and, adjusted for inflation, remains in the top ten grossing films. Did quite well at the Academy Awards in 1965 as well. Unlike Soundheim, Richard Rodgers had no problem in composing melodies.

    Most famous director of all time? Wait, seriously? Ford, Capra, Hitchcock, Welles, and DeMille might have something to say about that. Unless the context connotes most famous filmmaker of the 21st Century.

    By the way, when will the Woke crowd come for the NFL’s NY team the Jets? Doesn’t that designate the Whites in West Side Story?

  46. @Jonathan Mason
    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn't.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    Replies: @Calvin Hobbes, @TruthRevolution.net, @Boomthorkell, @Reg Cæsar, @guest007, @Anonymous, @res, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity?

    Presumably for the same reason that the mysterious effects of “systemic racism” supposedly explain so much of the state of affairs in America. What is not viewed through a (crazy) racial lens these days?

  47. Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor?

    Hate to break it to you but that wasn’t Mel Gibson in the Jesus role.

    • LOL: Bardon Kaldian, Liza
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @kaganovitch


    Hate to break it to you but that wasn’t Mel Gibson in the Jesus role.
     
    Oh, well, I didn't see the movie. But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised. In fact I played the role of Joseph in a nativity play once, and the issue never came up. But today?

    BTW I saw a couple of YouTube clips of Rachel Zegler and she seems terrific. Well done her for getting the part.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Alden, @europeasant

    , @Emil Nikola Richard
    @kaganovitch

    Willem Dafoe might be the most famous movie Jesus. Wikipedia doesn't say anything about Jewish.

  48. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    I would say the general pecking order among Latinos in this country is as follows:

    Cubans
    South Americans
    Mexicans
    Central Americans
    Dominicans
    Puerto Ricans

  49. @Anonymous
    The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.

    The Broadway version was pretty darned gay for its time.

    Not just the dancing but the attitude of the actors.

    Pretty… darned… gay…

    https://youtu.be/C_IvknEFZGs

    Replies: @onetwothree, @Anonymous, @John Johnson, @Meretricious, @SunBakedSuburb, @Peter Akuleyev

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @onetwothree

    Thanks.

  50. @Rob
    I wonder if some of the disdain other lxtxnx (triple X, baby!) have for Puerto Ricans is racial. The vast majority of non-Caribbean Hispanics are mestizo, while the PRs are heavily black. I have heard that in, say, Colombia women with partially black ancestry go to great lengths to straighten their hair, as curly hair is extremely declassé.

    Though I knew a Puerto Rican girl who was very bright, very native-looking and had very straight hair. Seeing her is why I thought Indians contributed at least a little to Puerto Rico’s genetics. Research later proved me right!

    Perhaps Mexicans et al look down on PRs for similar reasons to why the pro-man class looks down on deplorables. They have citizen (white) privilege, but they have made so little from it. Perhaps not, as our insane birthplace citizenship turns illegals into “citizens” (for now).

    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society? There is also the possibility that we are not going to have “inflation” where people who hold cash or unadusting debt lose a lot of money, but wages rise, too. Like, in Weimar Germany, workers took wheelbarrows full of cash to the market. But if prices double and wages don’t, then we’ve just become a lot poorer, right? I mean, people who don’t own land/capital/crypto(?). People who own the country might appreciate that. Labor gets a lot cheaper. The production of American services and goods (what little we produce) will tolt more towards luxury goods and domestic services. It’s like massive immigration of poor people, except it’s newly poor Americans to clean kitchens and mow lawns.

    Lots of rich people have “jobs” where they manage their portfolios. I wonder if a lot of those people are going to lose asset value and return to the extent of needing to get real jobs. They do have lots of QE dollars. Some of that will come into the real economy, right? But it’ll just be more money chasing the same amount of goods and services, which means inflation, and again, a tilt towards what rich people consume.

    I know call8ng things post 2000 or so “Weimar America” was an alt-right thing, but is it true? Whatever happened to the alt-right guys, anyway? Did they all get de-platformed? Was Trump so worthless that everyone got so discouraged they quit political activism, switching to buying guns for la revolución? I wonder if the left will learn that de-platforming people might have just turned people from tweeting to real-world activity? God, I hope we have a peaceful “reset.” There are a lot of people with a lot of guns. They probably have better aim than black gangbangers.

    What’s the collapse going to look like? I thought things would muddle along until the boomers died, but maybe the demographics that matter are children(?), young adults, and middle-age peak earner types? I hope Steve, how is a good person, has more influence in the coming situation than, say, Richard Spencer. I’d hate to see a shooting civil war followed by American death camps. Like, if the right wins the whole shebang or even just the south, how does it deal with governing a 50% non-white country?

    Wonder if it’s too late to buy Chinese stock?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @PaceLaw, @Almost Missouri, @Art Deco, @Americano

    Puerto Ricans are not heavily black you moronic imbecile.

    See Benicio del Toro, Ricky Martin, Pedro Augusto del Valle (1st Hispanic lieutenant general, and a hard-core American Reactionary), Jose Ferrer (1st Hispanic best actor winner), Raul Julia, Rita Moreno (EGOT), Jose Feliciano, Luis Fonsi, William Carlos Williams (One of America’s greatest poet. Anglo/Puerto Rican), 5 Miss Universe (1970: Marisol Malaret, 1985: Deborah Carthy-Deu, 1993: Dayanara Torres, 2001: Denise M. Quiñones and 2006: Zuleyka Rivera), etc., etc., etc.

    Puerto Rico is not dissimilar to the USA–mostly Europeans (with some Native American elements) and a small black population. This was the reason why Teddy Roosevelt was willing to take in Puerto Rico and not Cuba–while Cuba was bigger and wealthier, and had a large white population, it also had a very large black population; by contrast, Puerto Rico had a small black population, concentrated in the coastal areas.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Americano

    Puerto Ricans are more typical of other Latinos and different from North Americans in their genetics. Due to the application of the one-drop rule (which did not exist in Latin America) white Americans tend to be really really white (99+% white like Liz Warren) and not just whitish like "whites" in Puerto Rico.

    The Latin pattern was Indio or black on the maternal line and European on the paternal line and Puerto Rico follows this:


    Approximately 60% of the participants had indigenous mtDNA {maternal} haplotypes (mostly from haplogroups A2 and C1), while 25% had African and 15% European haplotypes.

    However, none of the male participants had indigenous Y-chromosomes, with 85% of them instead being European/Mediterranean and 15% sub-Saharan African in origin.
     

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25043798/

    In other words, the Conquistadors slaughtered all of the Native men and took their women as wives, which is the historic pattern for conquered people. The result is a mostly Mestizo race. Some of the PR elites are (mostly) European but most have (more than) a touch of Indian or African blood. Contra the American practices, a union between a castizo (someone 3/4 Spanish) and a Spaniard was considered to be a Spaniard, so even the whitest PRs (other than recent immigrants) are usually 1/8 non-white (again vs. white Americans who are usually 99%+ white).

    The other funny thing about this is that whitish Latinos tend to be in complete denial about this (or were until they came to the US and realized that the money was being in a "Person of Color". As far as they are concerned, they are white, period. You don't happen to be a whitish Latino? Have you had your DNA tested?

    Replies: @Americano

    , @flyingtiger
    @Americano

    The gringos want the PR because San Juan had on of the best ports in the western hemisphere. We wanted to keep the Kaisers dreadnoughts out. Now that is not a worry.

    , @Nicholas Stix
    @Americano

    "Puerto Ricans are not heavily black you moronic imbecile."

    Talk about a torn-off to reading someone's opinions. Still, I couldn't help notice you citing some rich, hispanic Whites, as if they were typical.

  51. We devised a quantitative measure “obfuscation index” for media misinformation.

    We propose4 the [PC] obfuscation index5 to measure the extent to which media reporting covers up counter-narrative “racist” facts6. Does it distract the reader’s mind from un-PC “racist” or “sexist” facts7(that are relevant to the issue in discussion) and thus contribute to the Brainwashing index?

    It can also be used to analyze a movie. In that case we would analyze the LIKELYHOOD of the movie setting, compared to reality.
    What is the chance of a white gang living in a graffity neighborhood and the non-Asian “minority” BIPOC gang living in a neat neighborhood. Compare that with the chance of the opposite, BIPOC gangs in a graffity neighborhood.
    Similarly, what would be the chance of Whites gang-raping a Muslim girl vs. the opposite.
    These would be measures of intentional manipulation, of distortion of reality with intent to brainwash people into false narratives.

  52. @Jonathan Mason
    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn't.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    Replies: @Calvin Hobbes, @TruthRevolution.net, @Boomthorkell, @Reg Cæsar, @guest007, @Anonymous, @res, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

    In today’s climate, White actors would only be employed if there is absolutely no BIPOC actor available. Or if a white villain is needed.

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn’t.

    You live in a dream world if you think selection for movies (or jobs) still are based on merit and talent.

    You cannot even apply for an Oscar if you don’t include Blacks in your medieval European cast.

  53. @Jonathan Mason
    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn't.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    Replies: @Calvin Hobbes, @TruthRevolution.net, @Boomthorkell, @Reg Cæsar, @guest007, @Anonymous, @res, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

    In truth, it depends.

  54. That’s funny. Puerto Rican beaners defending their graffiti free turf – LOL. If there’s one group that excels at graffiti, it’s beaners. Yet one more movie I’ll be missing.

    Yo Stevo, you should review the upcoming Kurt Warner flick – that actually looks like a good story.

  55. \$10.5 million on opening weekend? Ouch, I don’t see how they’ll come close to recouping their \$100 million investment. Neither the Chinese market nor the spinoff toy market is going to be much help.

    • Agree: Rich
    • Replies: @Alden
    @International Jew

    The Chinese are on an anti effeminate gay men and boys movement right now. They’ll probably cut the dancing boys scenes out. Chinese audiences like action movies lots of easy to understand battles fights and explosions. Is there a Chinese Romeo and Juliet story? Most cultures have them. But China is so conformist and young people so obedient to parents it might be the one culture in the world that doesn’t have one.

    Present day Chinese don’t know it care about ethnic and neighborhood tensions in 1950’s NYC. And after 73 years of communism and re-education camps the concept of teen hooligans being teen hooligans is something Chinese can’t understand.

    I can hear the word of mouth in China and the diaspora. Why aren’t those kids working in the family business? Why aren’t the smartest boys being tutored from 4-11 pm every day after school? Why doesn’t Tony just go to prostitutes and wait for his parents to arrange a marriage when he’s 30? What’s romantic love?

    Replies: @kaganovitch

  56. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top?

    My understanding is that every subgroup believes they are at the top of the pecking order, and the gangs will be pleased to execute anyone who disagrees.

    They give anarchy a bad name. 🙂

    • Replies: @Peter D. Bredon
    @Justvisiting

    Just like everyone who thinks IQ matters thinks they are at least 120 or more; if there’s a Mater Race they belong to it; if they want a caste system they think they’ll be Brahmins etc.

  57. Steve-o: there’s something weird going on with the Comments. I ended up in the wayback machine to 2010. Any way, from one of my comments back then, we’ve been talking about the strangely stunted elite views of Hispanic America for a long time. Hence, elderly Steven Spielberg can’t think of anything better to do with Puerto Ricans than re-boot West Side Story. It’s pretty strange that 68 years have gone by and elites like Spielberg are still back there reading Twelve Angry Men (1954). It fits with the absurdly antiquarian views of modern liberalism and Spielberg’s increasingly cringe cringety cringecringe sentimenatlity.

    Remember David Wilkerson’s The Cross and the Switchblade? And speaking of switchblades, remember when they were outlawed because the Puerto Ricans absolutely loved the things and were constantly carving each other up with them? Nicki Cruz is still alive and preaching, by the way. I bet he’s not a fan of Alexandra Guillermo Duval Ocasio-Cortez.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
  58. @Altai

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan)
     
    I feel like as with Lincoln there is a very strong who/whom reason he feels so proud of American soldiers during WW2. The same who/whom we see elsewhere in the changes to this film.

    The movie gets off to a flat-footed start with a long talky section offering Kushner’s dysgenic theory of why the Jets are so poor despite all that sweet white privilege: Nature and nurture has made them white trash, urban Jukes descended from a long line of drunks and crooks. The better sorts of whites, the ones with identity, “the Irish, the Italians, the Jews,” have moved up and out, leaving behind these deracinated losers.
     
    Isn't this exactly what you're never supposed to notice about the worst black and Latino ghettos? And since when are the down and outs in NYC Anglo even in the 50s. This kind of language is the surest evidence for the demise of the left on economic issues. This sounds like something you'd hear from the most right-wing libertarian 20 years ago. (Though thought by a great majority of upper middle class liberals)

    Not only do the Sharks work for lower pay, they're better employees! And better people! (Though as their giant flag murals and hate for the poor American's they're displacing make clear, they're not better Americans)

    It also sounds suspiciously like 'a people for a land for a land without a people'. And as anyone who has taken a walk through Manhattan in the last 15 years knows, there are no better looking, better dressed or more standout characters than Puerto Ricans.

    And rather than cast Russian-American Natalie Wood as Maria, Spielberg’s team supposedly auditioned 30,000 Latinas before picking Catholic schoolgirl Rachel Zegler. In case you are wondering about how somebody named “Rachel Zegler” represents Puerto Ricans, her mother is from Colombia, which is not exactly Puerto Rico but close enough for Spielberg.
     
    Her casting announcement did wonders for her career in the woke era. She has since been cast as Snow White.

    https://twitter.com/musicmovieshoop/status/1470513991202050054

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan), has decided that what we need to acquaint the increasingly multicultural public with the USA’s past glories, rather like what Lin-Manuel Miranda intended to do for The Federalist Papers with his boyish Hamilton, is for him to remake West Side Story.
     
    I'd argue that these things represent an attempt to recontextualise things for a new people. The founding fathers in American after the great wave went from statesmen with a particular ethnicity and understanding of whom their 'posterity' was into philosopher kings with highly abstract ideals that actually, when you think about it, would have supported the great wave of immigration!

    In a sense history for a place only really begins when the people there arrive and recontextualisng the founding fathers meant America could still maintain a connection to it's founding. This is why I was shocked when they started to pull down their statues. When you do that you're ending America's connection to it's own past. In a real sense you're ending America as a state that say white people or WASPs feel as being theirs. And in so doing you kill the citizenist ideal of an 'American'. There are very real consequences for that both subtle and gross and certainly not all in the direction of the desires of those who took the statues down.

    And speaking of Lin-Manuel Miranda, he tried to steal Spielberg's thunder and with added authenticity with his own New York musical about Puerto Ricans with his film adaptation of his stage musical 'In The Heights' though with an added plot about a plan to round up all the 'DREAMERs' and deport them. It did exceptionally poorly even considering the pandemic. (The trailers made it clear it wasn't for white people and 'Hispanics' didn't go see it, probably as Steve noted because it was about Puerto Ricans/Dominicans and to paraphrase Ann Coulter, how many Puerto Ricans does Hollywood think are in this country?)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HAR3QBuiiU

    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist and as soon as the 'Juneteenth' musical gets finished as both a stage production and film, it will be the thing history (And probably a lot of English) teachers across America play endlessly as a treat to their students over their whole school career. Though I don't think the Juneteenth musical will be as well-attended, (No fancy clothes and it won't have the veneer of upper middle classness) it will still take the focus away from Hamilton and the media won't still-boost it anymore. He still has all the money but I feel like he really wants the attention even more.

    Replies: @mc23, @Jim Don Bob, @Anon, @ginger bread man, @Mike Tre

    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist…

    When did this happen? Asking, not arguing.

    I know a family from flyover country who flew to NYC to see Hamilton. Probably cost them \$2500+. You’d have to pay me to go see it.

    • Replies: @Altai
    @Jim Don Bob

    Once the Juneteenth musical was announced there was a big uptick in people finally realising that Alexander Hamilton was a slave owner. In a sense that was always the direction things were going to head in. First white American history gets 'reclaimed' and then when you hit that level you ask why not just make a musical about black American history instead of white history in black face. Afterall, Hamilton does at some level celebrate the (Albeit vague post-national proposition nation) America.

    https://www.oprahdaily.com/entertainment/tv-movies/a33216431/hamilton-cancelled-lin-manuel-miranda/

    https://www.popmatters.com/lin-manuel-miranda-hamilton-2646365807.html

    , @sayless
    @Jim Don Bob

    Lin-Manuel has been in a career trough since the memorials and statues began coming down.

  59. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    I think Colombians are at or near top

  60. @Altai

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan)
     
    I feel like as with Lincoln there is a very strong who/whom reason he feels so proud of American soldiers during WW2. The same who/whom we see elsewhere in the changes to this film.

    The movie gets off to a flat-footed start with a long talky section offering Kushner’s dysgenic theory of why the Jets are so poor despite all that sweet white privilege: Nature and nurture has made them white trash, urban Jukes descended from a long line of drunks and crooks. The better sorts of whites, the ones with identity, “the Irish, the Italians, the Jews,” have moved up and out, leaving behind these deracinated losers.
     
    Isn't this exactly what you're never supposed to notice about the worst black and Latino ghettos? And since when are the down and outs in NYC Anglo even in the 50s. This kind of language is the surest evidence for the demise of the left on economic issues. This sounds like something you'd hear from the most right-wing libertarian 20 years ago. (Though thought by a great majority of upper middle class liberals)

    Not only do the Sharks work for lower pay, they're better employees! And better people! (Though as their giant flag murals and hate for the poor American's they're displacing make clear, they're not better Americans)

    It also sounds suspiciously like 'a people for a land for a land without a people'. And as anyone who has taken a walk through Manhattan in the last 15 years knows, there are no better looking, better dressed or more standout characters than Puerto Ricans.

    And rather than cast Russian-American Natalie Wood as Maria, Spielberg’s team supposedly auditioned 30,000 Latinas before picking Catholic schoolgirl Rachel Zegler. In case you are wondering about how somebody named “Rachel Zegler” represents Puerto Ricans, her mother is from Colombia, which is not exactly Puerto Rico but close enough for Spielberg.
     
    Her casting announcement did wonders for her career in the woke era. She has since been cast as Snow White.

    https://twitter.com/musicmovieshoop/status/1470513991202050054

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan), has decided that what we need to acquaint the increasingly multicultural public with the USA’s past glories, rather like what Lin-Manuel Miranda intended to do for The Federalist Papers with his boyish Hamilton, is for him to remake West Side Story.
     
    I'd argue that these things represent an attempt to recontextualise things for a new people. The founding fathers in American after the great wave went from statesmen with a particular ethnicity and understanding of whom their 'posterity' was into philosopher kings with highly abstract ideals that actually, when you think about it, would have supported the great wave of immigration!

    In a sense history for a place only really begins when the people there arrive and recontextualisng the founding fathers meant America could still maintain a connection to it's founding. This is why I was shocked when they started to pull down their statues. When you do that you're ending America's connection to it's own past. In a real sense you're ending America as a state that say white people or WASPs feel as being theirs. And in so doing you kill the citizenist ideal of an 'American'. There are very real consequences for that both subtle and gross and certainly not all in the direction of the desires of those who took the statues down.

    And speaking of Lin-Manuel Miranda, he tried to steal Spielberg's thunder and with added authenticity with his own New York musical about Puerto Ricans with his film adaptation of his stage musical 'In The Heights' though with an added plot about a plan to round up all the 'DREAMERs' and deport them. It did exceptionally poorly even considering the pandemic. (The trailers made it clear it wasn't for white people and 'Hispanics' didn't go see it, probably as Steve noted because it was about Puerto Ricans/Dominicans and to paraphrase Ann Coulter, how many Puerto Ricans does Hollywood think are in this country?)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HAR3QBuiiU

    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist and as soon as the 'Juneteenth' musical gets finished as both a stage production and film, it will be the thing history (And probably a lot of English) teachers across America play endlessly as a treat to their students over their whole school career. Though I don't think the Juneteenth musical will be as well-attended, (No fancy clothes and it won't have the veneer of upper middle classness) it will still take the focus away from Hamilton and the media won't still-boost it anymore. He still has all the money but I feel like he really wants the attention even more.

    Replies: @mc23, @Jim Don Bob, @Anon, @ginger bread man, @Mike Tre

    I doubt Miranda can create anything worthwhile unless he’s borrowing from a white creation–in the case of Hamilton, borrowing from white-created history. A review of In The Heights said it was like an 80s Fanta commercial. Miranda probably doesn’t have any innate creative ability of his own.

  61. Off to see how many children the original four spawned.

    I shall return.

  62. @Brutusale
    @tyrone

    You should have been in South Boston during the 70s.

    Replies: @tyrone

    You should have been in South Boston during the 70s.

    ……Yes,long, long ago……..I feel nostalgic too.

  63. @D. K.
    "In contrast to the noble Sharks, the new Jets are an isolated lumpenproletariat vastly outnumbered by the righteous BIPOC masses of 1957. You might think that would make the Jets not very scary, but they are presented as horrifying because in the current year white men bad. Jets do evil things like deface a colossal Puerto Rican flag with Jackson Pollock-like splashes from paint cans they stole from the construction site of Lincoln Center."

    Sorry, Steves (and Tony), but I'm not buying it:

    "May 14, 1959: Ground-breaking ceremony with U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower.[8]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Center#Historical_timeline

    http://www.aboutlincolncenter.org/about/history/archive-1950s

    Replies: @Hangnail Hans, @Jack D

    If you want to be picky about the exact timeline (it’s a movie musical, not a documentary), the “Slum Clearance” of Lincoln Square is announced in April of ’55 and they then begin buying up/condemning thru eminent domain the buildings in the neighborhood. By May of ’59 (nowadays it would take decades of lawsuits), the buildings have been emptied and demolished and Eisenhower is looking at an empty field. So the timeline of the movie is about right. Maybe the paint cans are from the paint that they use to paint the wooden construction fence that surrounds the demolition site.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Jack D

    "If you want to be picky about the exact timeline (it’s a movie musical, not a documentary), the 'Slum Clearance' of Lincoln Square is announced in April of ’55 and they then begin buying up/condemning thru eminent domain the buildings in the neighborhood. By May of ’59 (nowadays it would take decades of lawsuits), the buildings have been emptied and demolished and Eisenhower is looking at an empty field. So the timeline of the movie is about right. Maybe the paint cans are from the paint that they use to paint the wooden construction fence that surrounds the demolition site."

    Even when they are demonstrably wrong, we can count on you, Jack, to jump in to defend your fellow ethnics.

    The preliminary report on the Lincoln Square Project was published by the City of New York on July 20, 1956 (days after I had entered my third trimester, and shortly after my birthplace had celebrated its golden jubilee):

    https://archive.org/details/preliminaryrepor00newy_0

    ( https://archive.org/details/garysgoldenjubilee19061956 )

    ***

    While the residents of Lincoln Square were able to resist by bringing their case to all the way to the Supreme Court, they were unable to undermine Moses' power of eminent domain that allowed him to demolish the neighborhood (Strausbaugh, 2008). Thus, when the Court approved the takeover of sixty-seven acres of land on July 1st, 1958, city officials instated a forced relocation plan among residents of Lincoln Square, dedicating July of 1958 through October of 1961 to the relocate about 3000 families and make way for Lincoln Center (Dodson, 1960). [sic]

    ***

    https://sghistory.blogspot.com/2011/04/lincoln-center-robert-moses-and.html

    Replies: @Jack D

  64. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    Speaking of which, a friend of mine was once at a family picnic with his Cuban-born mother and her relatives. They had a hard time opening a package and someone said: “We need a knife, are there any Puerto Ricans here?”

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @Dutch Boy


    The acts of my life swarm down the street like Puerto Rican kids,
    Foreign but small and, except for one, unknived.
    They do no harm though their voices slash like reeds;
    All except one they have evidently been loved.
     
    , @PaceLaw
    @Dutch Boy

    I have to say that is a pretty funny quip from the Cuban-born mom. So knives and Puerto Ricans go together like peanut butter and jelly? Apparently, it is in fact a thing.

    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Puerto+Rican+knife+fight&amp=true

  65. @kaganovitch
    Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor?

    Hate to break it to you but that wasn't Mel Gibson in the Jesus role.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Emil Nikola Richard

    Hate to break it to you but that wasn’t Mel Gibson in the Jesus role.

    Oh, well, I didn’t see the movie. But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised. In fact I played the role of Joseph in a nativity play once, and the issue never came up. But today?

    BTW I saw a couple of YouTube clips of Rachel Zegler and she seems terrific. Well done her for getting the part.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason


    In fact I played the role of Joseph in a nativity play once, and the issue never came up.
     
    Because your robe didn't. Not that several [ahem] members of the faculty wouldn't have wanted it to.



    Fun fact: the village in which the McGarrigle sisters grew up, Saint-Sauveur-des-Monts, was originally called La Circoncision.

    PAROISSE DE SAINT-SAUVEUR DANS LES LAURENTIDES

    Saint-Sauveur is "San Salvador" in Spanish and "Holy Savior" in English. The feast day is January First, as is the observance of the Circumcision.

    Replies: @D. K., @Hibernian

    , @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    There’s a 99.9 percent chance Mel Gibson and his brothers were circumcised a day or 2 after birth in the hospital. Without the parents even being informed. Or caring.

    It was as much standard procedure for newborn boys as cutting the umbilical cord, washing off the blood and slime, checking heart beat and pulse of newborns, weighing them, wrapping them in a blanket, diapering , and monitoring how much milk they drank and urine and feces output.

    Every word you write reveals your ignorance about America. And many things about which you comment. . FYI circumcision is also a Muslim imperative and widespread in Africa. Add Americans to Muslims and Africans probably at least 1/4 to 1/3 of all men on earth are circumcised. Not just jews.

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb

    , @europeasant
    @Jonathan Mason

    "But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised"

    We're all Jews here in America!

    "In the United States, as many as 85% of male newborns were circumcised in 1965. But that number has fallen steadily for the past half-century, especially as immigration from countries where circumcision is not common has increased. In 2011, the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, as reported by U.S. hospitals, put newborn males' circumcision rate at 57%"

    The Jews here in America kibitzed to have all the Goyim circumcised. They reasoned that if the American NAZIS ever took control again they could not find out who was Jew or Goy. Very smart of the jew!

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Anonymous, @Jack D

  66. @Jonathan Mason
    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn't.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    Replies: @Calvin Hobbes, @TruthRevolution.net, @Boomthorkell, @Reg Cæsar, @guest007, @Anonymous, @res, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

    Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor?

    Having been born in the US in 1956, Gibson very likely was circumcised. You are free to ask him. I won’t.

    However, he played a Roman soldier who wouldn’t have been. Jim Caviezel, who played Jesus, was born here in 1968.

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    @Reg Cæsar

    https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/244828/



    MG: Hey, I was circumcised. That was more like just a medical procedure. It wasn’t for religious purposes. Cleanliness or something.

    JG: Oh yeah?

    MG: I don’t know what it was for. And one of the doctors made a wallet out of it.

    JG: You rub it and it turns into a suitcase, right?

    MG: Yes. Hey, did you know they use foreskins for replacing eyelids?

    JG: No they don’t.

    MG: Yeah, they do.

    JG: Come on, really?

    MG: You tend to look a bit cock-eyed, though.

    JG: I can’t believe I just walked into that one.

    MG: Me either.

  67. @Anonymous
    Should have dorne this.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/50/d6/35/50d63534a0dfc333addcff52d6692fb9.jpg

    Replies: @Paul Jolliffe, @Mr. Anon

    How about “West Bank Story”? That would have been an interesting updating of the story. Who would be the Jets then? Who would be the Sharks?

    • Thanks: JohnnyWalker123
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Mr. Anon

    I like that idea: West Bank Story.

    , @Wilkey
    @Mr. Anon

    I suppose that in both cases Spielberg would side with the invaders.

    , @Dmon
    @Mr. Anon

    Or, "Crown Heights Story".

  68. Spielberg has not only *absolute* creative freedom in the movies he makes, he also has f*ck you money manifold.

    In spite of all the above, he decided to go the anti-Euroamerican route, siding with the new comers, the at-home-spanish-speaking other, the “new” Americans instead of the english-speaking-without-funny-accent, “legacy” EuroAms.

    And to top it off, he moronically and unnecessarily decides not to include subtitles for the spanish spoken parts of the dialogue (I’ve read about a third of the films dialogue) taking a huge kosher dump not only on EuroAms – the majority of the US population still – but also on the many Hispanic Americans who arent fluent enough in spanish, on the disabled who need subtitles and finally on most of the worlds population who barely speak english as a second language and is unable to understand *any* spanish. Including almost all Israelis.

    What an absolute c*nt.

    No conspiracy of Elders of AIPAC, ADL and WJC needed: Jews gonna Jew – I am going to be generous – eight out of ten times.

  69. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    Puerto Ricans dominate multiple genres of Spanish music. They probably punch 15x their population weight.

    With pop music talent, the triracial PRs, Cubans, and Dominicans are on top, in that order. Next are similarly triracial Colombians and Venezuelans. Behind them are white Spanish, Argentines, and upper class Mexicans. On the bottom are indios and mostly-indio mestizos from Peru, Mexico, and Central America.

    Pictured is Thalia, one of the few Mexican singers to break out internationally.

    • Replies: @PaceLaw
    @Pixo

    Thalia is muy caliente! She actually looks like she could be one of J-Lo’s (speaking of Puerto Rican dominance) daughters.

    So Pixo, your pecking order relies exclusively on pop music talent. What about other measures, such as educational attainment, athletic prowess and lack of criminal activity? If you factored in all these elements, I would have to imagine the Cubans would come out on top.

    , @S. Anonyia
    @Pixo

    The majority of Cubans generally aren’t tri-racial by Latin American standards. Most white Cubans are less than 15 % black. There is a large effectively black population in addition to the effectively white population, however.

    Replies: @Luzzatto

    , @Goddard
    @Pixo

    Thalia reaches a level of beauty that only white women can attain.

  70. I don’t know if it’s a NY thing, but here, Puerto Ricans don’t like Mexicans and vice versa. In fact, most Hispanics that I know are very Nationalistic about their heritage, like the Irish or the Italians or the Germans and the rest here. No one is going to pay to see this movie, though. Are any of the new woke movies making money? None of my kids go to the movies anymore, we used to go all the time when I was their ages and the guys I know with young kids say everything is pushing the homosexual and anti-White agenda too hard for the young kids. Maybe movies are finally dead?

    • Replies: @Goddard
    @Rich


    Maybe movies are finally dead?
     
    They’re dead to my family, which includes young children. Boycotting Hollywood is a “sacrifice” many more of us should be willing to make.
  71. Phooey on Spielberg and on his recent movies. He’s supposed to be a fan of all things middle-american, but that isn’t so noticeable in most of his recent movies, which seem to engage in the same shopworn liberalism and the same kind of undermining of traditional heritage America, if somewhat more subtly, as does most of the rest of Hollywood. The fact that he’s made the Jets the villains in this morality tale is further evidence of that. The last movie he made that I liked was Warhorse.

    • Agree: Kylie
  72. In the original movie, after Bernardo’s death at the rumble, Chino goes and gets a gun to wreak revenge. But now, the Jets, being future Trump voters, buy the gun that winds up in Chino’s hands, with massive Chekov’s Gun foreshadowing. (In reality, Spielberg is a gun-loving skeet shooter who rewards himself by ordering a custom-made Italian shotgun each time he finishes a movie.)

    I remember reading an article years ago about how Spielberg was so pro-gun that he went to the Class 3 NFA community to do effects (sound?) for Saving Private Ryan.

    Whatever sympathies he had for the gun community have long since evaporated, as evidenced for the financial support for the already well-monied gun controllers (Bloomberg, Soros,…).

    He doesn’t want you to have private effective firearms for battle, just like the State of Israel denies privately owned rifles to their people.

    Director Steven Spielberg and his wife, Kate Capshaw, have pledged \$500,000 to the upcoming “March for Our Lives” rally calling for gun control legislation in the United States.

    Film producer Jeffrey Katzenberg and his wife, Marilyn, also pledged \$500,000, as did George Clooney and his wife Amal, and Oprah Winfrey.

    The Spielbergs are far from the only Jewish celebrities speaking out in favor of gun control.

    Last week, Gal Gadot, who tends to steer away from political involvement, posted an image on Twitter of a young girl holding up a sign reading “Protect kids not guns.”

    Singing legend Barbra Streisand tweeted last week: “We have seen 18 school shootings in 45 days this year and the only thing coming out of the White House and this Congress are ethereal thoughts and prayers and excuses to delay sensible gun control.”

    She later expressed support for the student activists, saying: “I am so proud of them for demanding change on sensible gun control.”

    Director Judd Apatow also used his Twitter account to stand with the student survivors who are calling for change. “Can you imagine being young and realizing adults will allow you to get murdered just so they can keep getting NRA money,” he wrote. “How furious would you be? That’s how every kid in America feels.”

    Bette Midler also called to support the rally and spoke out strongly for the need for gun control. “GET REAL!” she wrote on Twitter. “It’s not the mentally ill! It’s the GUNS! BAN ASSAULT RIFLES AND BAR SALES TO CONVICTED CRIMINALS! Why is that so hard to get??”

    Mayim Bialik, who is often politically outspoken on social media, also had plenty to say on the issue. “Mass shootings like the one in Parkland, Florida, will keep happening unless we take action to change gun laws in America,” she wrote on Sunday.

    https://www.jpost.com/omg/spielberg-donates-500000-to-gun-control-march-543261

    And you wonder why every scripted television show on US Over-The-Air broadcasting has every legally owned firearm as being REGISTERED, PERMITTED or owner LICENSED.

  73. (In case you are wondering, it’s now totally crucial that no white ever play a Role of Color, whereas it’s totally cool, as in Hamilton, that a nonwhite play characters as white as Hamilton, Jefferson, or Burr.

    In the SF Dickens Fair brouhaha, they were very explicit about this – their request #1 is that ALL casting be colorblind. Request #2 was that only BIPOCs can play BIPOCS. So “ALL” doesn’t really mean all, it means all white people roles.

    Rachel Zegler (like Rita Moren0) has the perfect racial ambiuity to be cast in every possible role in Hollywood. She is “brown” enough to play Maria and “white” enough to be Snow White. Look for more “White Hispanics” like her to be big stars in future America, not just on stage but in politics. And Latinos don’t mind pale skinned politicians/actors – in fact they rather like them and in their mind’s eye they see themselves as being just as white. Same thing in India.

    And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.

    I don’t think this is a big factor. Latinos don’t think that much of any other nationality except for their own. If they made the Sharks Cuban or Dominican or whatever (anything but Mexican) then Mexicans wouldn’t have liked the movie any better.

    • Agree: mc23
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Jack D


    Rachel Zegler (like Rita Moren0) has the perfect racial ambiuity to be cast in every possible role in Hollywood. She is “brown” enough to play Maria and “white” enough to be Snow White.
     
    Generally agreed, but this is not "racial ambiguity". That's just how most whites look like, and have always looked like. Only "racial outliers", like some extreme Nordics cannot "pass" for other whites. Most whites, Europeans, have always been looking "racially ambiguous".



    https://kmesh.io/img/biography/61/ian-mcshane-biography.jpg

    https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/[email protected]@._V1_UY1200_CR162,0,630,1200_AL_.jpg

    https://www.calvertjournal.com/images/uploads/articles/2021/8/Anton-chekhov-4_JAM.jpg

    https://www.biography.com/.image/t_share/MTU5MDUzMTE0Mzk2MTI0OTUy/abraham-lincoln-1809---18652c-sixteenth-president-of-the-united-states-of-america-photo-by-stock-montagestock-montagegetty-images_promo.jpg

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Rudolf_Virchow_NLM3.jpg

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Joseph_Conrad_1904.png

    https://images.newscientist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/16153830/richard_feynman.jpg

    https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/3/the-young-walt-whitman-ana-vaturi.jpg

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Evola.jpg

    https://www.nobelprize.org/images/lorentz-13546-portrait-medium.jpg

    https://www.emmys.com/sites/default/files/Hugh-Laurie-bio-450x600.jpg
    ....

    Replies: @Alden

  74. So speaking of Sondheim, I just started watching the movie of “Into The Woods,” a musical I love. (Sorry, Steve, you are totally wrong about Sondheim and melodies.) And it was just what I expected. Great work on costumes, very fairy-tale looking world creation, but… all the singing is dreadful. Because of course they cast actors who can’t sing worth a damn. Compare, for only one example, Meryl Streep’s throat-strangling gurgle singing vs. the original score with Bernadette Peters, who is both a 1000x better singer, but also better looking. So why didn’t they choose her for the movie? Because it’s actors first, always. In a world with a thousand perfectly good out-of-work Broadway singers for every role, we get plodding clods like James Corden. In a MUSICAL.

    Here’s a hint, producers: the songs only work if you get people who can actually sing them.

    This stupid mentality also gets you Anna Kendrick as Cinderella, who not only can’t sing, but is at best marginally attractive. But she’s friggin’ CINDERELLA. In short, the film is a gigantic failure for the same reason the “Sweeny Todd” film was a gigantic failure: not a single main character can sing worth a damn and all the casting is abysmal.

    I wonder if the same is true for West Side Story? I do see that in Rachel Zeglar they have picked yet another marginally attractive woman for a staring role as a romantic lead.

    Hollywood stinks.

    • Replies: @keypusher
    @peterike

    I assume you have the video of the Broadway production with Peters -- quite good.

  75. @Jonathan Mason
    @kaganovitch


    Hate to break it to you but that wasn’t Mel Gibson in the Jesus role.
     
    Oh, well, I didn't see the movie. But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised. In fact I played the role of Joseph in a nativity play once, and the issue never came up. But today?

    BTW I saw a couple of YouTube clips of Rachel Zegler and she seems terrific. Well done her for getting the part.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Alden, @europeasant

    In fact I played the role of Joseph in a nativity play once, and the issue never came up.

    Because your robe didn’t. Not that several [ahem] members of the faculty wouldn’t have wanted it to.

    Fun fact: the village in which the McGarrigle sisters grew up, Saint-Sauveur-des-Monts, was originally called La Circoncision.

    PAROISSE DE SAINT-SAUVEUR DANS LES LAURENTIDES

    Saint-Sauveur is “San Salvador” in Spanish and “Holy Savior” in English. The feast day is January First, as is the observance of the Circumcision.

    • LOL: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Reg Cæsar

    Sister Kate wrote my favorite song from her then-husband's album "Attempted Mustache" (1973):

    ***

    Well we come a long way since we last shook hands
    Still got a long way to go
    Couldn't see the flowers when we last shook hands
    Couldn't see the flowers on account of the snow

    What did you do with your burden and your cross
    Did you carry it yourself or did you crack
    We all know that a burden and a cross
    Can only be carried on one man's back

    All my life I wanted to roam
    To go to the ends of the earth
    But the earth really ends where you started to roam
    And you and I know what a circle is worth

    Give me your hand for the parting touch
    Fare thee well and thanks a lot
    I know we promised to keep in touch
    But you and I know that we both forgot

    Let's drink a cup to what went down
    There's not much left to reveal
    I think I changed my mind after what went down
    As to who in the end got the better deal

    Ah we come a long way since we last shook hands
    Still got a long way to go
    Couldn't see the flowers when we last shook hands
    Couldn't see the flowers on account of the snow

    ***

    "Come a Long Way" by Kate McGarrigle

    , @Hibernian
    @Reg Cæsar

    The Jan. 1 Holy Day of Obligation became the following, a few years back:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solemnity_of_Mary,_Mother_of_God

    Not sure of the time Wikipedia gives for the changeover; I don't remember it being that long ago.

  76. I loved the original and thought it was the greatest thing ever, but the advent of the Beatles s few years later just instantly made it seem so dated, by pompadour hair styles alone, besides the brassy big band dance music.

    Remember those B&W 50s dramas with Elmer Bernstein soundtracks? Like that.

    Bye Bye Birdie was even harder hit.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Carol


    I loved the original and thought it was the greatest thing ever, but the advent of the Beatles s few years later just instantly made it seem so dated
     
    Does Hard Day's Night count as a musical? There is music but it's mostly the Beatles performing as a band. By musical convention, people break into song-and-dance as extension of reality, with no clear border between song and conversation. The animated Yellow Submarine is certainly a musical in this regard.

    How many good musicals have there been since West Side Story? Many love Sound of Music, but many also loathe it. Expensive productions like Doctor Dolittle, Star, and Paint Your Wagon failed. Oliver! did win best picture, but I've never seen it. Scrooge with Albert Finney is sort of fun.

    The French made two memorable ones with Umbrellas of Cherbourg(mostly song) and Young Girls of Rochefort(song and dance).

    Jesus Christ Superstar has its moments and several good songs. Maybe Fiddler on the Roof is the best post-West-Side musical. Cabaret is awful, but All That Jazz is one of a kind. Hair is really well-done but Tharp's choreography is awful and the message is confused and heavy. One from the Heart is one of the worst ever. Ken Russell's Tommy gave rock opera a bad name. Some say Quadrophenia is good. Absolute Beginners also has its cult-fans. Rocky Horror is horrible. The sequel Shock Treatment was almost universally panned but has its defenders. Jacques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris is inexplicable. Some say Woody Allen's musical is kinda good.

    Other than Fiddler on the Roof, maybe the only truly great musical after West Side is O Brother Where Art Thou? That was amazing though the Grand Wizard of KKKOZ number was overkill.

    Probably the biggest hit musical post-Sound of Music was Grease. A giant hit in the middle of the disco era. But maybe that made sense as there was an element of professionalism and finesse in disco. And it was so 'gay'.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Ian M., @PhysicistDave

  77. @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason


    Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor?
     
    Having been born in the US in 1956, Gibson very likely was circumcised. You are free to ask him. I won't.

    However, he played a Roman soldier who wouldn't have been. Jim Caviezel, who played Jesus, was born here in 1968.

    Replies: @Stan Adams

    https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/244828/

    [MORE]

    MG: Hey, I was circumcised. That was more like just a medical procedure. It wasn’t for religious purposes. Cleanliness or something.

    JG: Oh yeah?

    MG: I don’t know what it was for. And one of the doctors made a wallet out of it.

    JG: You rub it and it turns into a suitcase, right?

    MG: Yes. Hey, did you know they use foreskins for replacing eyelids?

    JG: No they don’t.

    MG: Yeah, they do.

    JG: Come on, really?

    MG: You tend to look a bit cock-eyed, though.

    JG: I can’t believe I just walked into that one.

    MG: Me either.

    • LOL: MEH 0910
  78. @Jonathan Mason
    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn't.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    Replies: @Calvin Hobbes, @TruthRevolution.net, @Boomthorkell, @Reg Cæsar, @guest007, @Anonymous, @res, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

    The choice of the actor does affect the success or failure of many movies. It is why the many remakes of the Great Gatsby always fail. The choice of the actress for Daisy is always bad and probably un-castable. The same with Romeo and Juliet.

  79. @Jonathan Mason
    @kaganovitch


    Hate to break it to you but that wasn’t Mel Gibson in the Jesus role.
     
    Oh, well, I didn't see the movie. But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised. In fact I played the role of Joseph in a nativity play once, and the issue never came up. But today?

    BTW I saw a couple of YouTube clips of Rachel Zegler and she seems terrific. Well done her for getting the part.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Alden, @europeasant

    There’s a 99.9 percent chance Mel Gibson and his brothers were circumcised a day or 2 after birth in the hospital. Without the parents even being informed. Or caring.

    It was as much standard procedure for newborn boys as cutting the umbilical cord, washing off the blood and slime, checking heart beat and pulse of newborns, weighing them, wrapping them in a blanket, diapering , and monitoring how much milk they drank and urine and feces output.

    Every word you write reveals your ignorance about America. And many things about which you comment. . FYI circumcision is also a Muslim imperative and widespread in Africa. Add Americans to Muslims and Africans probably at least 1/4 to 1/3 of all men on earth are circumcised. Not just jews.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    @Alden

    "There's a 99.9 percent chance Mel Gibson and brothers were circumcised a day or 2 after birth in the hospital."

    The Gibson circumcision katzenjammer kerfuffle was brought up in another comment in this thread. Waiting for an especially enterprising iStever to do a deep dive on the Gibson tadger.

    "Every word you write reveals your ignorance about America."

    The "you" you speak of is soft-brained Jonathan Mason. Is Mr. Mason yet another old limey who found sanctuary in a chronically impoverished tropical country? This seems to be a pattern with old limeys.

  80. @Jack D

    (In case you are wondering, it’s now totally crucial that no white ever play a Role of Color, whereas it’s totally cool, as in Hamilton, that a nonwhite play characters as white as Hamilton, Jefferson, or Burr.
     
    In the SF Dickens Fair brouhaha, they were very explicit about this - their request #1 is that ALL casting be colorblind. Request #2 was that only BIPOCs can play BIPOCS. So "ALL" doesn't really mean all, it means all white people roles.

    Rachel Zegler (like Rita Moren0) has the perfect racial ambiuity to be cast in every possible role in Hollywood. She is "brown" enough to play Maria and "white" enough to be Snow White. Look for more "White Hispanics" like her to be big stars in future America, not just on stage but in politics. And Latinos don't mind pale skinned politicians/actors - in fact they rather like them and in their mind's eye they see themselves as being just as white. Same thing in India.

    And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.
     
    I don't think this is a big factor. Latinos don't think that much of any other nationality except for their own. If they made the Sharks Cuban or Dominican or whatever (anything but Mexican) then Mexicans wouldn't have liked the movie any better.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    Rachel Zegler (like Rita Moren0) has the perfect racial ambiuity to be cast in every possible role in Hollywood. She is “brown” enough to play Maria and “white” enough to be Snow White.

    Generally agreed, but this is not “racial ambiguity”. That’s just how most whites look like, and have always looked like. Only “racial outliers”, like some extreme Nordics cannot “pass” for other whites. Most whites, Europeans, have always been looking “racially ambiguous”.

    [MORE]


    ….

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Bardon Kaldian

    There’s still a commenter who thinks Russian Natalie Wood looked “Mediterranean” because she had black hair.

    Replies: @flyingtiger

  81. @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason


    In fact I played the role of Joseph in a nativity play once, and the issue never came up.
     
    Because your robe didn't. Not that several [ahem] members of the faculty wouldn't have wanted it to.



    Fun fact: the village in which the McGarrigle sisters grew up, Saint-Sauveur-des-Monts, was originally called La Circoncision.

    PAROISSE DE SAINT-SAUVEUR DANS LES LAURENTIDES

    Saint-Sauveur is "San Salvador" in Spanish and "Holy Savior" in English. The feast day is January First, as is the observance of the Circumcision.

    Replies: @D. K., @Hibernian

    Sister Kate wrote my favorite song from her then-husband’s album “Attempted Mustache” (1973):

    ***

    Well we come a long way since we last shook hands
    Still got a long way to go
    Couldn’t see the flowers when we last shook hands
    Couldn’t see the flowers on account of the snow

    What did you do with your burden and your cross
    Did you carry it yourself or did you crack
    We all know that a burden and a cross
    Can only be carried on one man’s back

    All my life I wanted to roam
    To go to the ends of the earth
    But the earth really ends where you started to roam
    And you and I know what a circle is worth

    Give me your hand for the parting touch
    Fare thee well and thanks a lot
    I know we promised to keep in touch
    But you and I know that we both forgot

    Let’s drink a cup to what went down
    There’s not much left to reveal
    I think I changed my mind after what went down
    As to who in the end got the better deal

    Ah we come a long way since we last shook hands
    Still got a long way to go
    Couldn’t see the flowers when we last shook hands
    Couldn’t see the flowers on account of the snow

    ***

    “Come a Long Way” by Kate McGarrigle

  82. @Jack D
    @D. K.

    If you want to be picky about the exact timeline (it's a movie musical, not a documentary), the "Slum Clearance" of Lincoln Square is announced in April of '55 and they then begin buying up/condemning thru eminent domain the buildings in the neighborhood. By May of '59 (nowadays it would take decades of lawsuits), the buildings have been emptied and demolished and Eisenhower is looking at an empty field. So the timeline of the movie is about right. Maybe the paint cans are from the paint that they use to paint the wooden construction fence that surrounds the demolition site.

    Replies: @D. K.

    “If you want to be picky about the exact timeline (it’s a movie musical, not a documentary), the ‘Slum Clearance’ of Lincoln Square is announced in April of ’55 and they then begin buying up/condemning thru eminent domain the buildings in the neighborhood. By May of ’59 (nowadays it would take decades of lawsuits), the buildings have been emptied and demolished and Eisenhower is looking at an empty field. So the timeline of the movie is about right. Maybe the paint cans are from the paint that they use to paint the wooden construction fence that surrounds the demolition site.”

    Even when they are demonstrably wrong, we can count on you, Jack, to jump in to defend your fellow ethnics.

    The preliminary report on the Lincoln Square Project was published by the City of New York on July 20, 1956 (days after I had entered my third trimester, and shortly after my birthplace had celebrated its golden jubilee):

    https://archive.org/details/preliminaryrepor00newy_0

    ( https://archive.org/details/garysgoldenjubilee19061956 )

    ***

    While the residents of Lincoln Square were able to resist by bringing their case to all the way to the Supreme Court, they were unable to undermine Moses’ power of eminent domain that allowed him to demolish the neighborhood (Strausbaugh, 2008). Thus, when the Court approved the takeover of sixty-seven acres of land on July 1st, 1958, city officials instated a forced relocation plan among residents of Lincoln Square, dedicating July of 1958 through October of 1961 to the relocate about 3000 families and make way for Lincoln Center (Dodson, 1960). [sic]

    ***

    https://sghistory.blogspot.com/2011/04/lincoln-center-robert-moses-and.html

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @D. K.

    Maybe they hadn't cleared the whole area yet but there is film of the groundbreaking and there is clearly a large vacant lot (looks like the better part of two blocks) where they have set up a tent and chairs.

    https://www.pbs.org/video/groundbreaking-ceremony-lincoln-center-8sr6lc/

    Replies: @D. K.

  83. @Jonathan Mason
    @kaganovitch


    Hate to break it to you but that wasn’t Mel Gibson in the Jesus role.
     
    Oh, well, I didn't see the movie. But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised. In fact I played the role of Joseph in a nativity play once, and the issue never came up. But today?

    BTW I saw a couple of YouTube clips of Rachel Zegler and she seems terrific. Well done her for getting the part.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Alden, @europeasant

    “But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised”

    We’re all Jews here in America!

    “In the United States, as many as 85% of male newborns were circumcised in 1965. But that number has fallen steadily for the past half-century, especially as immigration from countries where circumcision is not common has increased. In 2011, the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, as reported by U.S. hospitals, put newborn males’ circumcision rate at 57%”

    The Jews here in America kibitzed to have all the Goyim circumcised. They reasoned that if the American NAZIS ever took control again they could not find out who was Jew or Goy. Very smart of the jew!

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @europeasant

    You are still missing the point. There seems to be an obsession in Steveland with some kind of hidden racial symbolism and secret message that is conveyed whenever an actor or actress is cast in a prominent movie or musical.

    It has become so absurd that I could imagine there being objections if some uncircumcised person were cast in a Jewish role, though I suppose they could be circumcised especially for the role, just as some actors put on weight or lose weight for a role.

    If you are actually making a movie, what you are concerned about is suspension of disbelief. Does that actor inhabit their role so that the audience believes in that character and feels what they feel?

    Juanita Hall in South Pacific was African-American, but she was terrific as Bloody Mary. Julie Andrews in The Sound of Music was terrific, and yodeled even though she is not Austrian.

    Replies: @Alden

    , @Anonymous
    @europeasant

    Americans started circumcising their sons in the late 19th century because of British Israelism, which has been pretty much forgotten nowadays, but which was huge back then. The heyday of BI lasted from the 1870s to the 1930s, during which time circumcision became routine in all the English-speaking countries, at least for Protestants.

    , @Jack D
    @europeasant


    The Jews here in America kibitzed to have all the Goyim circumcised.
     
    I realize you wanted to throw in a Yiddish word but kibitz is not the right word.

    To kibitz is too look over someone's shoulder and offer unsolicited advice. For example, you are watching someone play chess and you offer up unwelcome and annoying suggestions for moves.

    Conspire fits better but the Yiddish word for conspire is conspire (konspirirt) which never made it into Yinglish for obvious reasons.

  84. Anonymous[193] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.

    The Broadway version was pretty darned gay for its time.

    Not just the dancing but the attitude of the actors.

    Pretty… darned… gay…

    https://youtu.be/C_IvknEFZGs

    Replies: @onetwothree, @Anonymous, @John Johnson, @Meretricious, @SunBakedSuburb, @Peter Akuleyev

    The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.

    Maybe shoulda been something like Romeo and Julio. The real taboo attraction is between Riff and Bernado. Their extreme hostility is really a desperate measure to repress their tooty-toot thing for each other.

    In the movie, the person who seems most fruity is Tony. He has a ‘gay mouth’, and he sings “Maria” as it’s about Mario.

    West Side Story is a fabulous movie but maybe too arty and grave(in parts) for a musical, which was Kael’s complaint. Stanley Kauffmann in contrast praised it as the best musical ever.

    I don’t like the whole thing but the opening and some musical numbers are fantastic. Not just in terms of choreography but framing, movement, and editing. Robert Wise got his start as an editor, I think. It shows. Clearly a triumph of team work. Director and choreographer didn’t always see eye to eye but somehow managed to get along.

    As to why rock culture wasn’t conducive to musicals. Musicals are about professionalism and expertise. It’s about people who trained to be excellent dancers who practiced countless times to do it just right. Though musicals can be loud and brash, they are not about spontaneity but about putting on a good show. Because dancers on stage are so good, the audience is supposed to sit still and admire the excellence of the performance.

    In contrast, rock is nothing without spontaneity, especially in concerts. While rock stars could be good singers and instrumentalists(and put in a lot of time in practice), the key is not to be perfect or consistent. It’s to be rambunctious, improvisatory, and just let it happen. So, Stones might do a song one way in at a concert but another way at another one. That element of variation and surprise is important in rock. Because of the looser atmosphere, the audience doesn’t just sit still in awe and admiration but joins in the thrill by dancing and screaming. They don’t have to dance well. They just have to get into the groove and the beat, like the young people at Woodstock rocking to Santana’s “Soul Sacrifice”. Unlike in the musical where there’s a strict barrier between the professional dancers/singers and the admiring and reverent audience, the rock scene is participatory and porous between the performers and the audience(sometimes to shocking results, as with so many fans who ran onto the stage at Stones concerts). To those weaned on the ‘democratic’ ways of Rock, the classic musical was just too stuffy and ‘anal’.

    This is why the Rock Musical has mostly been dismissed by rock critics as missing the true heart and soul of rock n roll. It’s also why Jim Derogatis can’t stomach Bruce Springsteen. For all the high energy, it all seems so calculated. A middle class educated guy strutting on stage like some wounded working class hero. “mansions of glory in suicide machines”. What blue collar guy thinks that way?
    It’s as contrived and strained as a homo trying to be macho on stage or on screen.

    The musical-like qualities ruins The Magnificent Seven. The music is overly bombastic and the action looks choreographed. And the heroes seem almost like homo fantasies of manhood. It’s impressive but you expect Yul Brynner and Eli Wallach to suddenly break into a pop-ballet.

    Wise had a much bigger hit with Sound of Music, and that one really is insufferable.

  85. @Anonymous
    The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.

    The Broadway version was pretty darned gay for its time.

    Not just the dancing but the attitude of the actors.

    Pretty… darned… gay…

    https://youtu.be/C_IvknEFZGs

    Replies: @onetwothree, @Anonymous, @John Johnson, @Meretricious, @SunBakedSuburb, @Peter Akuleyev

    I really don’t get this.

    Did it provide a distraction fantasy for Whites that didn’t want to face the negro crime increase that happened after integration? Perhaps a slice of fiction where all groups are just as likely to devolve into gangs under the same circumstances?

    It’s just so gay and ridiculous. The Greeks had much better plays a few thousand years ago.

  86. @Henry Canaday
    Interestingly, the co-choreographer of West Side Story, Peter Gennaro, was the only straight guy on the production team. Figure that one out, sports fans, the choreographer was the straight guy.

    Replies: @mc23, @D. K.

    “Interestingly, the co-choreographer of West Side Story, Peter Gennaro, was the only straight guy on the production team. Figure that one out, sports fans, the choreographer was the straight guy.”

    How did you figure that?!?

    ***

    Directed by

    Jerome Robbins … (directed by)

    Robert Wise … (directed by)

    ***

    Writing Credits

    Ernest Lehman … (screenplay by)

    Arthur Laurents … (book)

    Jerome Robbins … (play)

    William Shakespeare … (play) (uncredited)

    ***

    Produced by

    Saul Chaplin … associate producer

    Walter Mirisch … executive producer (uncredited)

    Robert Wise … producer (uncredited)

    ***

    https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055614/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_wr_sm

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Wise

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Lehman

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Chaplin

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Mirisch

    ***

    Inter alia . . .

  87. Anonymous[193] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Mason
    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn't.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    Replies: @Calvin Hobbes, @TruthRevolution.net, @Boomthorkell, @Reg Cæsar, @guest007, @Anonymous, @res, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    She looks like Boris Karloff’s daughter. She could be in Daughter of Frankenstein.

    One bold thing Spielberg could have done is make the guy latino and make the girl blanco.

    One thing for sure, puertos were less threatening than total blacks.

    And even though West Side Story is about the problems of crime and delinquency, they still come across as safe haven from what blacks had in store for the city. In The Wanderers, the Italians have to fight the blacks, and they are scared as hell.

    Better brown immigrants than black thugs, I guess. In a way, West Side Story is the fantasy of Immigrants replacing blacks as the lesser problem.

  88. @Art Deco
    @Rob

    while the PRs are heavily black.

    They aren't.

    https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/07/28/dna-portrait-of-puerto-rican-ancestry/

    Replies: @res

    Thanks. That article is brief and the link they gave for more information is broken. Here is an archive page for it.
    https://web.archive.org/web/20150706090353/http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2014/07/25/genographic-project-dna-results-reveal-details-of-puerto-rican-history/

    The bottom line appears to be (but note the mitochondiral and Y DNA differs):

    The average Puerto Rican individual carries 12% Native American, 65% West Eurasian (Mediterranean, Northern European and/or Middle Eastern) and 20% Sub-Saharan African DNA.

    However, remember that it was a small sample from a particular region of PR.

    Collaborating with 326 individuals from southeastern Puerto Rico and Vieques

    I don’t know enough about PR to judge how much ancestry variation there might be by region.

    Looking into it more, I think this paper is based on the same work.
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.22569
    http://labs.icb.ufmg.br/lbem/pdf/Vilar2014AJPAPuertoRico.pdf

    It appears they based the research on a specific subcommunity. I would be careful about making generalizations from it.

    During these trips, we worked with 326 participants from the island of Puerto Rico and the neighboring island of Vieques. The majority of the participants are members of the Naguake Community, which is currently seeking state recognition as an indigenous base community

    That said, here is another 2014 paper which seems in line with those results.
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266253047_Association_of_NOD2_and_IL23R_with_Inflammatory_Bowel_Disease_in_Puerto_Rico

    See Figure 1 after the MORE.

    The 1000 Genomes PUR population also looks similar.
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239524406_Reconstructing_Native_American_Migrations_from_Whole-Genome_and_Whole-Exome_Data

    This 2011 paper looks like the best on the topic of PR admixture. It used a “census-based sample of 642 Puerto Rican individuals that were genotyped for 93 ancestry informative markers (AIMs) to estimate African, European and Native American ancestry.”
    History Shaped the Geographic Distribution of Genomic Admixture on the Island of Puerto Rico
    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016513

    They look at the regional distribution of ancestry. African ancestry varies from 5-45%. Figure 1 shows this nicely, but the image filename won’t work for embedding here.

    Any idea how Puerto Ricans in the US fit into this?

    [MORE]

    A. Principal components analysis of the combined Puerto Rican and HGDP subjects. B. “Global” continental ancestry was estimated using Admixture 1.2 in an analysis supervised by data from HGDP populations as described in Methods (AFR, sub-Saharan African continent, dark blue; EUR, European continent, red; and AMR, Mexico, Central and South America continents, green). HGDP subjects not originating from these three continents are black. Puerto Rican subjects were sorted left-to-right based on ancestry from the African continent.

    • Thanks: PaceLaw
  89. @Almost Missouri
    @Rob


    How will the massive inflation that’s both here and coming affect politics/society?
     
    https://twitter.com/BowTiedCommoner/status/1466865741177794562

    tl;dr: Working poor hardest hit. Portfolio class enriched.

    Replies: @Ralph L, @Abe

    tl;dr: Working poor hardest hit. Portfolio class enriched.

    iSteve It-Girl Sarah Jeong had a bit to say about this recently:

    all the stuff you see about inflation in the news is driven by rich people flipping their shit because their parasitic assets aren’t doing as well as they’d like and they’re scared that unemployment benefits + stimmy checks + 15 minimum wage + labor shortage is why

    https://reason.com/2021/11/17/new-york-times-writer-sarah-jeong-says-inflation-in-the-news-is-just-rich-people-flipping-their-shit/

    Unlike most of you dudes I was never particularly offended by her “anti-white” Tweets as Sarah has obviously received more white pipe in the back than a Home Depot. I am, however, very much offended by such gross know-nothingness. You are a regular staff contributor for THE NEW YORK TIMES, unfortunately (and pretty much through inertia alone) still the most influential shaper of “respectable” opinion in America. Do you therefore not feel even a tiny bit of obligation to know anything about anything? And then on top of it to wrap your ignorance in the borrowed, ugly idiom of Hip Hop/Ebonics (nothing I find more unpalatable than an Asian girl affecting to sound like some Nuyorican with her factory original chirrupy-shrill East Asian vocal chords).

    Outspoken, undaunted, labia proudly unfurled to the world like Christmas roast beef left out till January 2nd. Actually believes this is how the rich manage their wealth. Sarah Jeong.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Abe

    Yeah, I've been saying Sarah is an over-promoted dufus for years. (And that, as you colorfully suggest, she likely has a ... um ... track record, also likely digitally recorded.)

    Other commenters have pointed out that she is probably from a rich family. She got into Harvard despite being Asian and not particularly smart, so the natural conclusion is that her father made a big donation. Therefore her inflation-is-just-rich-people schtick implies an element of parricidal acting out.

    , @Jack D
    @Abe

    Sarah knows about as much about economics as I know about classical Korean poetry.

    It's rather transparently obvious that she is saying that THIS inflation is only harming the rich (which we all know is good) because THIS inflation is occurring during a Democrat administration. If the same level of inflation had occurred during the Trump Adminstration, she would be tweeting that Donald Trump is personally responsible for the death of millions of Babies of Color due to the horrible inflation that he has triggered and that inflation mainly hurts People of Color and women.

    Midwits like Sarah are not very good at covering their who-whomism. In the current environment, they don't even feel obligated to try.

  90. Rachel Zegler’s father is an American of Polish Catholic ancestry.
    The situation is a bit similar to the case of Tracey Ullman,
    British comedienne whose father was a Polish Catholic, except
    that he was actually born in Poland. German surnames are quite
    common in Poland, just like Polish surnames are fairly common in
    Germany. Being neighbors for at least 1,200 years will do that to
    you.

    Sabrina Pasterski, Ph.D., physics prodigy whose work was cited by Hawking,
    is similar to Rachel Zegler in that Sabrina’s father is Polish Catholic, and
    her mother is Latin. Catholics tend to marry Catholics.

    Poland is now attracting immigrants from Spain and Portugal, and Polish-Iberian
    children are already starting to appear in the Voice Kids (Poland) singing competition.

  91. Spielberg is a failure. Because “its no longer your country White man” is not a very appealing message to Whites. And sure he may LARP as a non-White, but to Shitavious and Jaqarius he’s White. And therefore, prey. When and where they choose. None of his security people are going to die for him, or go to jail for the rest of their lives for him.

    So what then? The bread and circuses fail when there is nothing but bugs, and streaming featuring all black all the black time with blackety blackety blackety black. And black! Or sorta-black Latinx.

    Spielberg and all the rest of Hollywood and Media and Government figure there is no need to placate or preserve any place for Whites, that they have a complete and total solution for that. That at some point the call will go out on Twitter or Instagram or Facebook and “cut down all the White trees” will happen. And they actually do believe that they can do this without any comeback or blowback on themselves, and they will have a country to run instead of a smoking ruin.

    They got high off their own supply of ass-kicking stunning and brave transexuals of color, and think a powerful global empire can run off trannies, gays, blacks, and various third world illiterates. They actually really believe that.

    Really, who the hell wastes a couple of years of their life on a stupid gay musical just to tell Whitey its not his country any more?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Whiskey

    "Spielberg is a failure."

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Jack D

  92. @Jonathan Mason
    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn't.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    Replies: @Calvin Hobbes, @TruthRevolution.net, @Boomthorkell, @Reg Cæsar, @guest007, @Anonymous, @res, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn’t.

    Your faux-naïveté is charming. /sarc

    P.S. Regarding the Mel Gibson as Jesus mistake, it’s a good thing Jonathan Mason only writes about things he knows about or has an interest in. Imagine how uninformed his comments would be if he was not so conscientious. (oops, guess I was premature with the /sarc above)

    Reading the PS of this comment might help explain my PS.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/open-thread-this-weeks-various-trials-of-the-century/#comment-5049809

    • Replies: @TWS
    @res

    He is a maroon with no idea of what he doesn't know. The fact that he doesn't understand how inmates extort money from rich inmates nor how easy it is to move inmates in a facility tells me he has never walked the floor in his life. Much less investigated anything. The idea that he has done anything gives me the shudders. I would rather imagine a chimp performing open heart surgery.

    , @Mike Tre
    @res

    He's a Hindu.

  93. OT

    Why did the US government hide that KGB ordered Kennedy’s assassination? A lot of people knew about the Mexico City and assumed this was the case so it isn’t a very well kept secret. Was Johnson such a traitor to allow this or is there some reason I am missing?

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Thea

    Why did the US government hide that KGB ordered Kennedy’s assassination?

    They didn't hide anything. That never happened.

  94. @International Jew
    $10.5 million on opening weekend? Ouch, I don't see how they'll come close to recouping their $100 million investment. Neither the Chinese market nor the spinoff toy market is going to be much help.

    Replies: @Alden

    The Chinese are on an anti effeminate gay men and boys movement right now. They’ll probably cut the dancing boys scenes out. Chinese audiences like action movies lots of easy to understand battles fights and explosions. Is there a Chinese Romeo and Juliet story? Most cultures have them. But China is so conformist and young people so obedient to parents it might be the one culture in the world that doesn’t have one.

    Present day Chinese don’t know it care about ethnic and neighborhood tensions in 1950’s NYC. And after 73 years of communism and re-education camps the concept of teen hooligans being teen hooligans is something Chinese can’t understand.

    I can hear the word of mouth in China and the diaspora. Why aren’t those kids working in the family business? Why aren’t the smartest boys being tutored from 4-11 pm every day after school? Why doesn’t Tony just go to prostitutes and wait for his parents to arrange a marriage when he’s 30? What’s romantic love?

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    @Alden

    Is there a Chinese Romeo and Juliet story? Most cultures have them.

    They have the Niu Lang/Zhi Nu story, which is a forbidden love story but with a more bittersweet denouement.

  95. I saw a trailer for the new version of West Side Story recently. It was in a stream of other trailers at a theater (during one of my rare visits to a movie theater in the past five years. I went to see Belfast.) It was interesting to see the once somewhat unique moral theme of WSS – accept and embrace that which is different than (and even dangerous to) you – now lost among the other trailers for modern movies, which all have pretty much the identical theme.

    Twenty five minutes of trailers is essentially a twenty five minute sermon from Hollywood. I walked out of the theater until the main attraction started because I couldn’t stomach anymore. Morally bereft Hollywood seeks moral camouflage in social justice so that its abusive whoring and decadence might be overlooked. It’s worse than any 17th century New England village that condemns with scarlet letters.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @J1234

    How did you like Belfast?

    Replies: @J1234

  96. @Jonathan Mason
    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn't.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    Replies: @Calvin Hobbes, @TruthRevolution.net, @Boomthorkell, @Reg Cæsar, @guest007, @Anonymous, @res, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

  97. @europeasant
    @Jonathan Mason

    "But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised"

    We're all Jews here in America!

    "In the United States, as many as 85% of male newborns were circumcised in 1965. But that number has fallen steadily for the past half-century, especially as immigration from countries where circumcision is not common has increased. In 2011, the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, as reported by U.S. hospitals, put newborn males' circumcision rate at 57%"

    The Jews here in America kibitzed to have all the Goyim circumcised. They reasoned that if the American NAZIS ever took control again they could not find out who was Jew or Goy. Very smart of the jew!

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Anonymous, @Jack D

    You are still missing the point. There seems to be an obsession in Steveland with some kind of hidden racial symbolism and secret message that is conveyed whenever an actor or actress is cast in a prominent movie or musical.

    It has become so absurd that I could imagine there being objections if some uncircumcised person were cast in a Jewish role, though I suppose they could be circumcised especially for the role, just as some actors put on weight or lose weight for a role.

    If you are actually making a movie, what you are concerned about is suspension of disbelief. Does that actor inhabit their role so that the audience believes in that character and feels what they feel?

    Juanita Hall in South Pacific was African-American, but she was terrific as Bloody Mary. Julie Andrews in The Sound of Music was terrific, and yodeled even though she is not Austrian.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    Your point was just your usual ignorant irrelevant ridiculous nonsense.

    Replies: @Clyde

  98. @Pixo
    @PaceLaw

    Puerto Ricans dominate multiple genres of Spanish music. They probably punch 15x their population weight.

    With pop music talent, the triracial PRs, Cubans, and Dominicans are on top, in that order. Next are similarly triracial Colombians and Venezuelans. Behind them are white Spanish, Argentines, and upper class Mexicans. On the bottom are indios and mostly-indio mestizos from Peru, Mexico, and Central America.

    Pictured is Thalia, one of the few Mexican singers to break out internationally.

    https://laverdadnoticias.com/export/sites/laverdad/img/2019/08/06/captura_de_pantalla_2019-08-06_a_laxsx_17_04_32.png_2070948262.png

    Replies: @PaceLaw, @S. Anonyia, @Goddard

    Thalia is muy caliente! She actually looks like she could be one of J-Lo’s (speaking of Puerto Rican dominance) daughters.

    So Pixo, your pecking order relies exclusively on pop music talent. What about other measures, such as educational attainment, athletic prowess and lack of criminal activity? If you factored in all these elements, I would have to imagine the Cubans would come out on top.

  99. @Bardon Kaldian
    @Jack D


    Rachel Zegler (like Rita Moren0) has the perfect racial ambiuity to be cast in every possible role in Hollywood. She is “brown” enough to play Maria and “white” enough to be Snow White.
     
    Generally agreed, but this is not "racial ambiguity". That's just how most whites look like, and have always looked like. Only "racial outliers", like some extreme Nordics cannot "pass" for other whites. Most whites, Europeans, have always been looking "racially ambiguous".



    https://kmesh.io/img/biography/61/ian-mcshane-biography.jpg

    https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/[email protected]@._V1_UY1200_CR162,0,630,1200_AL_.jpg

    https://www.calvertjournal.com/images/uploads/articles/2021/8/Anton-chekhov-4_JAM.jpg

    https://www.biography.com/.image/t_share/MTU5MDUzMTE0Mzk2MTI0OTUy/abraham-lincoln-1809---18652c-sixteenth-president-of-the-united-states-of-america-photo-by-stock-montagestock-montagegetty-images_promo.jpg

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Rudolf_Virchow_NLM3.jpg

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Joseph_Conrad_1904.png

    https://images.newscientist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/16153830/richard_feynman.jpg

    https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/3/the-young-walt-whitman-ana-vaturi.jpg

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Evola.jpg

    https://www.nobelprize.org/images/lorentz-13546-portrait-medium.jpg

    https://www.emmys.com/sites/default/files/Hugh-Laurie-bio-450x600.jpg
    ....

    Replies: @Alden

    There’s still a commenter who thinks Russian Natalie Wood looked “Mediterranean” because she had black hair.

    • Replies: @flyingtiger
    @Alden

    Natalie is the granddaughter of the last Russian Czar.

  100. Anonymous[269] • Disclaimer says:
    @Carol
    I loved the original and thought it was the greatest thing ever, but the advent of the Beatles s few years later just instantly made it seem so dated, by pompadour hair styles alone, besides the brassy big band dance music.

    Remember those B&W 50s dramas with Elmer Bernstein soundtracks? Like that.

    Bye Bye Birdie was even harder hit.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    I loved the original and thought it was the greatest thing ever, but the advent of the Beatles s few years later just instantly made it seem so dated

    Does Hard Day’s Night count as a musical? There is music but it’s mostly the Beatles performing as a band. By musical convention, people break into song-and-dance as extension of reality, with no clear border between song and conversation. The animated Yellow Submarine is certainly a musical in this regard.

    How many good musicals have there been since West Side Story? Many love Sound of Music, but many also loathe it. Expensive productions like Doctor Dolittle, Star, and Paint Your Wagon failed. Oliver! did win best picture, but I’ve never seen it. Scrooge with Albert Finney is sort of fun.

    The French made two memorable ones with Umbrellas of Cherbourg(mostly song) and Young Girls of Rochefort(song and dance).

    Jesus Christ Superstar has its moments and several good songs. Maybe Fiddler on the Roof is the best post-West-Side musical. Cabaret is awful, but All That Jazz is one of a kind. Hair is really well-done but Tharp’s choreography is awful and the message is confused and heavy. One from the Heart is one of the worst ever. Ken Russell’s Tommy gave rock opera a bad name. Some say Quadrophenia is good. Absolute Beginners also has its cult-fans. Rocky Horror is horrible. The sequel Shock Treatment was almost universally panned but has its defenders. Jacques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris is inexplicable. Some say Woody Allen’s musical is kinda good.

    Other than Fiddler on the Roof, maybe the only truly great musical after West Side is O Brother Where Art Thou? That was amazing though the Grand Wizard of KKKOZ number was overkill.

    Probably the biggest hit musical post-Sound of Music was Grease. A giant hit in the middle of the disco era. But maybe that made sense as there was an element of professionalism and finesse in disco. And it was so ‘gay’.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    Fiddler on the Roof was a giant hit on Broadway, but the critics put it down as schmaltzy. The film version is excellent, however.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    , @Ian M.
    @Anonymous

    You forgot My Fair Lady.

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Anonymous

    Anonymous[269] asked:


    How many good musicals have there been since West Side Story?
     
    I think most people with enough knowledge to judge would say Les Miz.
  101. @Jonathan Mason
    @europeasant

    You are still missing the point. There seems to be an obsession in Steveland with some kind of hidden racial symbolism and secret message that is conveyed whenever an actor or actress is cast in a prominent movie or musical.

    It has become so absurd that I could imagine there being objections if some uncircumcised person were cast in a Jewish role, though I suppose they could be circumcised especially for the role, just as some actors put on weight or lose weight for a role.

    If you are actually making a movie, what you are concerned about is suspension of disbelief. Does that actor inhabit their role so that the audience believes in that character and feels what they feel?

    Juanita Hall in South Pacific was African-American, but she was terrific as Bloody Mary. Julie Andrews in The Sound of Music was terrific, and yodeled even though she is not Austrian.

    Replies: @Alden

    Your point was just your usual ignorant irrelevant ridiculous nonsense.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Alden

    Mens of Unz! Thanks for the usual laughs and sarcasm. And I am not being sarcastic here. Merry Christmas!

    Replies: @Alden

  102. @Mr. Anon
    @Anonymous

    How about "West Bank Story"? That would have been an interesting updating of the story. Who would be the Jets then? Who would be the Sharks?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Wilkey, @Dmon

    I like that idea: West Bank Story.

  103. Wonder who the heroes would have been in Spielberg’s remake would have been if the movie were called “West Bank Story”?

    Then as now I suppose he still would’ve take. the side of the invaders.

    The trailer to the movie looks pretty good, and of course the music is, too. The girl playing Maria is absolutely butt ugly, though. I have zero interest in funding any more of this Woke shit with my money or my time.

  104. @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    There’s a 99.9 percent chance Mel Gibson and his brothers were circumcised a day or 2 after birth in the hospital. Without the parents even being informed. Or caring.

    It was as much standard procedure for newborn boys as cutting the umbilical cord, washing off the blood and slime, checking heart beat and pulse of newborns, weighing them, wrapping them in a blanket, diapering , and monitoring how much milk they drank and urine and feces output.

    Every word you write reveals your ignorance about America. And many things about which you comment. . FYI circumcision is also a Muslim imperative and widespread in Africa. Add Americans to Muslims and Africans probably at least 1/4 to 1/3 of all men on earth are circumcised. Not just jews.

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb

    “There’s a 99.9 percent chance Mel Gibson and brothers were circumcised a day or 2 after birth in the hospital.”

    The Gibson circumcision katzenjammer kerfuffle was brought up in another comment in this thread. Waiting for an especially enterprising iStever to do a deep dive on the Gibson tadger.

    “Every word you write reveals your ignorance about America.”

    The “you” you speak of is soft-brained Jonathan Mason. Is Mr. Mason yet another old limey who found sanctuary in a chronically impoverished tropical country? This seems to be a pattern with old limeys.

  105. I’m afraid I just can’t synch with this particular piece of American cinematic history. I found the 1961 film to be excruciatingly boring and I have no intention of ever watching the new version.

    Steven Spielberg specializes in the emotional brutalization of audience members through heavy-handed guilt trips and moral hectoring. I don’t care for his work in general and I think it has contributed to making American culture the perpetual ketamine high it increasingly resembles. With Spielberg it is always the same: There is magic in the air—a magic alien or a magic robot or a magic person—and those who won’t abandon all restraint and risk everything for the new, magic vibe are an unchosen people fit for nothing except to be trodden underfoot. You can see how this hermeneutic of self-righteous sanctimony aligns very well cancel culture and wokism.

  106. @res
    @Jonathan Mason


    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn’t.
     
    Your faux-naïveté is charming. /sarc

    P.S. Regarding the Mel Gibson as Jesus mistake, it's a good thing Jonathan Mason only writes about things he knows about or has an interest in. Imagine how uninformed his comments would be if he was not so conscientious. (oops, guess I was premature with the /sarc above)

    Reading the PS of this comment might help explain my PS.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/open-thread-this-weeks-various-trials-of-the-century/#comment-5049809

    Replies: @TWS, @Mike Tre

    He is a maroon with no idea of what he doesn’t know. The fact that he doesn’t understand how inmates extort money from rich inmates nor how easy it is to move inmates in a facility tells me he has never walked the floor in his life. Much less investigated anything. The idea that he has done anything gives me the shudders. I would rather imagine a chimp performing open heart surgery.

  107. @Anonymous
    @Carol


    I loved the original and thought it was the greatest thing ever, but the advent of the Beatles s few years later just instantly made it seem so dated
     
    Does Hard Day's Night count as a musical? There is music but it's mostly the Beatles performing as a band. By musical convention, people break into song-and-dance as extension of reality, with no clear border between song and conversation. The animated Yellow Submarine is certainly a musical in this regard.

    How many good musicals have there been since West Side Story? Many love Sound of Music, but many also loathe it. Expensive productions like Doctor Dolittle, Star, and Paint Your Wagon failed. Oliver! did win best picture, but I've never seen it. Scrooge with Albert Finney is sort of fun.

    The French made two memorable ones with Umbrellas of Cherbourg(mostly song) and Young Girls of Rochefort(song and dance).

    Jesus Christ Superstar has its moments and several good songs. Maybe Fiddler on the Roof is the best post-West-Side musical. Cabaret is awful, but All That Jazz is one of a kind. Hair is really well-done but Tharp's choreography is awful and the message is confused and heavy. One from the Heart is one of the worst ever. Ken Russell's Tommy gave rock opera a bad name. Some say Quadrophenia is good. Absolute Beginners also has its cult-fans. Rocky Horror is horrible. The sequel Shock Treatment was almost universally panned but has its defenders. Jacques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris is inexplicable. Some say Woody Allen's musical is kinda good.

    Other than Fiddler on the Roof, maybe the only truly great musical after West Side is O Brother Where Art Thou? That was amazing though the Grand Wizard of KKKOZ number was overkill.

    Probably the biggest hit musical post-Sound of Music was Grease. A giant hit in the middle of the disco era. But maybe that made sense as there was an element of professionalism and finesse in disco. And it was so 'gay'.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Ian M., @PhysicistDave

    Fiddler on the Roof was a giant hit on Broadway, but the critics put it down as schmaltzy. The film version is excellent, however.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @Steve Sailer


    Fiddler on the Roof was a giant hit on Broadway, but the critics put it down as schmaltzy. The film version is excellent, however.
     
    I never saw a stage version of FotR, although I did once hear some of it on a record. I imagine a lot of the difference was down to Topol vs. Zero Mostel. I always found Mostel to be insufferable with his endless mugging and eye-bulging. Other than in The Producers, I never found him to be funny or entertaining.

    Topol, on the other hand just played the role straight, and he seems to have a much more engaging personality. He was also good in Flash Gordon and For Your Eyes Only.

    The film version also had an able director in Norman Jewison.
  108. @Anonymous
    The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.

    The Broadway version was pretty darned gay for its time.

    Not just the dancing but the attitude of the actors.

    Pretty… darned… gay…

    https://youtu.be/C_IvknEFZGs

    Replies: @onetwothree, @Anonymous, @John Johnson, @Meretricious, @SunBakedSuburb, @Peter Akuleyev

    4 primary collaborators were gay: Arthur Laurents, Stephen Sondheim, Leonard Bernstein, and Jerome Robbins (only the director, Robert Wise, was straight)

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Meretricious

    And Jerome Robbins was more or less the main idea man who came up with the idea of a Irish-Jewish Romeo and Juliet in 1947, directed the Broadway premiere and was the first director of the movie until he fell badly behind schedule and got replaced by Robert Wise.

    Hal Prince who produced the Broadway show was straight.

    Replies: @40 Lashes Less One, @Meretricious

  109. @Whiskey
    Spielberg is a failure. Because "its no longer your country White man" is not a very appealing message to Whites. And sure he may LARP as a non-White, but to Shitavious and Jaqarius he's White. And therefore, prey. When and where they choose. None of his security people are going to die for him, or go to jail for the rest of their lives for him.

    So what then? The bread and circuses fail when there is nothing but bugs, and streaming featuring all black all the black time with blackety blackety blackety black. And black! Or sorta-black Latinx.

    Spielberg and all the rest of Hollywood and Media and Government figure there is no need to placate or preserve any place for Whites, that they have a complete and total solution for that. That at some point the call will go out on Twitter or Instagram or Facebook and "cut down all the White trees" will happen. And they actually do believe that they can do this without any comeback or blowback on themselves, and they will have a country to run instead of a smoking ruin.

    They got high off their own supply of ass-kicking stunning and brave transexuals of color, and think a powerful global empire can run off trannies, gays, blacks, and various third world illiterates. They actually really believe that.

    Really, who the hell wastes a couple of years of their life on a stupid gay musical just to tell Whitey its not his country any more?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    “Spielberg is a failure.”

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Steve Sailer

    I believe Phantom of the Opera was quite popular.

    , @Jack D
    @Steve Sailer

    @Spielberg:

    "Whiskey is a failure"

  110. I find the concept of West Side Story to be silly

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob, LondonBob
  111. @Dutch Boy
    @PaceLaw

    Speaking of which, a friend of mine was once at a family picnic with his Cuban-born mother and her relatives. They had a hard time opening a package and someone said: "We need a knife, are there any Puerto Ricans here?"

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @PaceLaw

    The acts of my life swarm down the street like Puerto Rican kids,
    Foreign but small and, except for one, unknived.
    They do no harm though their voices slash like reeds;
    All except one they have evidently been loved.

  112. Yes, the remake of the creaky and obsolete New York centric West Side Story is a monstrous joke. (iSteve’s longer Taki review is worth the time…)

    The rest of America cares nothing about Puerto Rico or the “west side” of NYC. All of that is insider New Yorker stuff that was crammed down the sleepy middle class American throats in the late 50s.

    As iSteve notes, were it not for the stolen (“borrowed”) plot theme from Shakespeare, it would have never been seen or heard. “So class, we’re going to watch this film today and discuss the underlying Shakespearean themes. First you have to read Romeo & Juliet.

    I recall first watching the movie and it seemed more like gay science fiction with dancing aliens than anything else. Where are the Jews? One thing I knew about NYC was that Jews lived there (not that I had ever met any admitted Jews.) I concluded that the non Jews in the film must be Sharks battling the Puerto Ricans, who were like Mexicans only they all wanted to live in NYC for some reason. Manhattan is a long narrow mostly N-S oriented island. Why is the “west side” different from the east side, or north? Do Puerto Ricans like watching sunsets?

    Later I realized that New Yorkers were more micro geographic obsessed than a mound of termites. They see invisible boundaries which outsiders miss. Their racial radar is second to none. They can even tell what Ukrainian-Polish shetel your Kazarian ancestors came from. Jewdar, gaydar, and whitedar. Oh, and all the White folks are “liberal” and love all races. Just avoid the Orthodox neighborhoods. Or Harlem, or, well, any place where net income is below say, half a mil/yr.

    I naively believed at the time that all musicals were created for and by homosexuals, though I barely knew what that was. Gays like to dance, I guess. Skinny. Who knew NYC gangs were all gay?

    I hope this film loses a ton of money. Woke, hopelessly dated and anti White. Subtitles in English so oppressive. What could go wrong?

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Muggles

    "I recall first watching the movie and it seemed more like gay science fiction with dancing aliens than anything else. Where are the Jews? One thing I knew about NYC was that Jews lived there (not that I had ever met any admitted Jews.)"

    ***

    Ned Glass as Doc, Tony's boss; a decent, elderly Jewish drugstore owner

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_film)#Cast

    ***

    Glass was born in Radom, Congress Poland, Russian Empire, to a Jewish family.[1] He emigrated to the United States at an early age and grew up in New York City.[2] He attended City College.[3]

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Glass#Early_life

    Replies: @D. K.

    , @CCZ
    @Muggles

    "I hope this film loses a ton of money." Maybe wish granted.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SD3USDLXkeY

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Muggles


    As iSteve notes, were it not for the stolen (“borrowed”) plot theme from Shakespeare
     
    You don't seriously believe it was original with Will, do you? Shakespeare came up with precisely one of his storylines, and it isn't one of his more popular ones.

    Everything was halfway done before it got to the Bard, freeing him to concentrate on the wording and stagecraft. A highly efficient system, it turns out.
  113. @Jim Don Bob
    @Altai


    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist...
     
    When did this happen? Asking, not arguing.

    I know a family from flyover country who flew to NYC to see Hamilton. Probably cost them $2500+. You'd have to pay me to go see it.

    Replies: @Altai, @sayless

    Once the Juneteenth musical was announced there was a big uptick in people finally realising that Alexander Hamilton was a slave owner. In a sense that was always the direction things were going to head in. First white American history gets ‘reclaimed’ and then when you hit that level you ask why not just make a musical about black American history instead of white history in black face. Afterall, Hamilton does at some level celebrate the (Albeit vague post-national proposition nation) America.

    https://www.oprahdaily.com/entertainment/tv-movies/a33216431/hamilton-cancelled-lin-manuel-miranda/

    https://www.popmatters.com/lin-manuel-miranda-hamilton-2646365807.html

    • Thanks: Jim Don Bob
  114. @Anonymous
    The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.

    The Broadway version was pretty darned gay for its time.

    Not just the dancing but the attitude of the actors.

    Pretty… darned… gay…

    https://youtu.be/C_IvknEFZGs

    Replies: @onetwothree, @Anonymous, @John Johnson, @Meretricious, @SunBakedSuburb, @Peter Akuleyev

    “The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.”

    Steve prefers the Broadway version. Too many times at the well with the Steve/musical/gay gag. This whole thread with its mental images of vibrant musical theater, the Gibson dinger, and elderly Englishmen sweating it out in equatorial squalor is turning me gay. Might be turning me gay.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @SunBakedSuburb


    This whole thread with its mental images of vibrant musical theater, the Gibson dinger, and elderly Englishmen sweating it out in equatorial squalor is turning me gay. Might be turning me gay.
     
    Here's how to tell. Which of these people would you rather get physical with? If it helps to tip the scale, the one in black and white is a world famous feminist hero! The other is just some dude in a t-shirt. You have 30 seconds to make your selection. Good luck.


    https://i.ibb.co/fGQmqq8/andreadworkin1986.jpg

    https://i.ibb.co/yWHtn4j/Screenshot-20211108-012800-e-Bay.jpg

    Replies: @Jack D, @Athenian Gentleman

  115. @Pixo
    @PaceLaw

    Puerto Ricans dominate multiple genres of Spanish music. They probably punch 15x their population weight.

    With pop music talent, the triracial PRs, Cubans, and Dominicans are on top, in that order. Next are similarly triracial Colombians and Venezuelans. Behind them are white Spanish, Argentines, and upper class Mexicans. On the bottom are indios and mostly-indio mestizos from Peru, Mexico, and Central America.

    Pictured is Thalia, one of the few Mexican singers to break out internationally.

    https://laverdadnoticias.com/export/sites/laverdad/img/2019/08/06/captura_de_pantalla_2019-08-06_a_laxsx_17_04_32.png_2070948262.png

    Replies: @PaceLaw, @S. Anonyia, @Goddard

    The majority of Cubans generally aren’t tri-racial by Latin American standards. Most white Cubans are less than 15 % black. There is a large effectively black population in addition to the effectively white population, however.

    • Replies: @Luzzatto
    @S. Anonyia

    Cubans are a racial mutt group, not a White group. Facts do not care about your muh feelings. Follow the SCIENCE.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubans#Genetics

    Replies: @S. Anonyia

  116. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership. The mismanagement of the island after the hurricane during Trump’s term is pretty par for the course. It’s not a wonder that outside of blacks they are the the big welfare groups in our nation and that the term “Puerto Rican neighborhood” is not a harbinger of high property values and safety.

    A helpful reminder:

    Those from Spain speak high-class Spanish.

    Those from Argentina speak social-climbing Spanish.

    Those from Cuba speak communist-class Spanish.

    Those from Mexico speak working-class Spanish.

    And those from Puerto Rico don’t speak Spanish.

    • Replies: @Americano
    @R.G. Camara

    @R.G. Camara


    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership.
     
    I think you are conflating "Afro-Puerto Ricans" with all Puerto Ricans. No one on earth think of Puerto Rican women as "ugly." The little Island has five (5) Miss Universe (1970: Marisol Malaret, 1985: Deborah Carthy-Deu, 1993: Dayanara Torres, 2001: Denise M. Quiñones and 2006: Zuleyka Rivera).

    The first Hispanic Male Oscar winner was Puerto Rican actor Jose Ferrer. The first Hispanic Female oscar winner was Puerto Rican actress Rita Moreno. Some of the biggest Hispanic superstars are Puerto Ricans: Jennifer Lopez, Ricky Martin, Marc Anthony, and Benicio del Toro.

    Puerto Rico is renowned for producing Salsa singers, most of whom are White (Hector Lavoe, Eddie Santiago, Lalo Rodriguez, Victor Manuel, Tony Vega, Frankie Ruiz, Tito Rojas, Johnny Rivera, etc.)

    To be sure, there was a time in New York City where mostly Afro-Puerto Ricans lived alongside Blacks and thus shared many of the urban social problems.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @Intelligent Dasein

    , @PaceLaw
    @R.G. Camara

    Well, it is interesting that here in the mainland United States, and in cities such as New York and Philadelphia, when Puerto Ricans immigrated en masse they appeared to blend in very well next to black neighborhoods. Their assimilation into/next to these neighborhoods was pretty much seamless.

    , @Bill Jones
    @R.G. Camara

    I remember telling a friend before his first trip to Spain; "There is all the difference in the World between a Spaniard and a Hispanic."
    On his return he agreed.

    , @Luzzatto
    @R.G. Camara

    Mexico has a much higher murder rate than Puerto Rico both in raw numbers and per capita. So no Mexican is looking down on Puerto Ricans as violent when Mexicans themselves are not peaceful model minorities that all other groups in the world should strive to be more like. Mexicans would not need affirmative action if Mexicans were the gold standard.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @Pixo

  117. @Steve Sailer
    @Whiskey

    "Spielberg is a failure."

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Jack D

    I believe Phantom of the Opera was quite popular.

  118. @Thea
    OT

    Why did the US government hide that KGB ordered Kennedy’s assassination? A lot of people knew about the Mexico City and assumed this was the case so it isn’t a very well kept secret. Was Johnson such a traitor to allow this or is there some reason I am missing?

    Replies: @Art Deco

    Why did the US government hide that KGB ordered Kennedy’s assassination?

    They didn’t hide anything. That never happened.

    • Agree: David In TN, sayless
  119. @Meretricious
    @Anonymous

    4 primary collaborators were gay: Arthur Laurents, Stephen Sondheim, Leonard Bernstein, and Jerome Robbins (only the director, Robert Wise, was straight)

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    And Jerome Robbins was more or less the main idea man who came up with the idea of a Irish-Jewish Romeo and Juliet in 1947, directed the Broadway premiere and was the first director of the movie until he fell badly behind schedule and got replaced by Robert Wise.

    Hal Prince who produced the Broadway show was straight.

    • Replies: @40 Lashes Less One
    @Steve Sailer

    Jason Alexander (George from Seinfeld) won a Tony for playing Jerome Robbins on Broadway in the Eighties, and it may have been what got him the role in Seinfeld.

    , @Meretricious
    @Steve Sailer

    Irish/Jewish would have been more interesting IMO as there really is a connection between those communities historically, and the plot could have delved into Jewish and Catholic taboos against intermarriage (but as we all know, the taboo is much stronger in the Jewish community)

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  120. @Americano
    @Rob

    @Rob

    Puerto Ricans are not heavily black you moronic imbecile.

    See Benicio del Toro, Ricky Martin, Pedro Augusto del Valle (1st Hispanic lieutenant general, and a hard-core American Reactionary), Jose Ferrer (1st Hispanic best actor winner), Raul Julia, Rita Moreno (EGOT), Jose Feliciano, Luis Fonsi, William Carlos Williams (One of America's greatest poet. Anglo/Puerto Rican), 5 Miss Universe (1970: Marisol Malaret, 1985: Deborah Carthy-Deu, 1993: Dayanara Torres, 2001: Denise M. Quiñones and 2006: Zuleyka Rivera), etc., etc., etc.

    Puerto Rico is not dissimilar to the USA--mostly Europeans (with some Native American elements) and a small black population. This was the reason why Teddy Roosevelt was willing to take in Puerto Rico and not Cuba--while Cuba was bigger and wealthier, and had a large white population, it also had a very large black population; by contrast, Puerto Rico had a small black population, concentrated in the coastal areas.

    Replies: @Jack D, @flyingtiger, @Nicholas Stix

    Puerto Ricans are more typical of other Latinos and different from North Americans in their genetics. Due to the application of the one-drop rule (which did not exist in Latin America) white Americans tend to be really really white (99+% white like Liz Warren) and not just whitish like “whites” in Puerto Rico.

    The Latin pattern was Indio or black on the maternal line and European on the paternal line and Puerto Rico follows this:

    Approximately 60% of the participants had indigenous mtDNA {maternal} haplotypes (mostly from haplogroups A2 and C1), while 25% had African and 15% European haplotypes.

    However, none of the male participants had indigenous Y-chromosomes, with 85% of them instead being European/Mediterranean and 15% sub-Saharan African in origin.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25043798/

    In other words, the Conquistadors slaughtered all of the Native men and took their women as wives, which is the historic pattern for conquered people. The result is a mostly Mestizo race. Some of the PR elites are (mostly) European but most have (more than) a touch of Indian or African blood. Contra the American practices, a union between a castizo (someone 3/4 Spanish) and a Spaniard was considered to be a Spaniard, so even the whitest PRs (other than recent immigrants) are usually 1/8 non-white (again vs. white Americans who are usually 99%+ white).

    The other funny thing about this is that whitish Latinos tend to be in complete denial about this (or were until they came to the US and realized that the money was being in a “Person of Color”. As far as they are concerned, they are white, period. You don’t happen to be a whitish Latino? Have you had your DNA tested?

    • Replies: @Americano
    @Jack D

    What do you mean by "North American" and "White American"?

    Lest we forget the Northern Italian saying: Africa is south of Rome. In or around 80% of all Italian immigrants to the USA were from the south.

    Are Adam Sandler, Paul Simon, A. Garfunkel, Billy Joe, etc., 99+% White?

    Are Ivanka Trump's children 99+% White? Lmao!!!

    Are you saying that Francis Ford Coppola and Quentin Tarantino are pure "White," but Jorge Ramos and Sofia Vergara are "people of color"?

  121. Anonymous[371] • Disclaimer says:

    The musical format returned somewhat with the rise of MTV and dance music.

    Even though people didn’t wanna see full-length musical narratives, they loved stuff like Michael’s mini-musical numbers like “Beat It” and “Billy Jean” and “Thriller”. And madonna had her thing with “Living in a Material World” based on Marilyn Monroe diamond number. And Cyndi Lauper’s “Girls Just Wanna Have Fun” was like a mini-musical with references to Marx Brothers as well.

    Rock conventions of 60s and 70s was the rockers played instruments on stage. They didn’t dance. Beatles never danced. They might move their bodies a bit. The lead singer, like Mick Jagger, might jump around a bit.

    Black acts were more dance-friendly. Spinners and Temptations had synchronized moves. Still, it was restrained by today’s standards, though things got pretty funky on TV show Soul Train.

    Later, the dance pop-idol turned the singer into singer-dancer. He or more often she played no instrument but danced. Britney Spears and the like. Also, the success of shows like American Idol and Dancing with the Stars brought back interest in conventions.

    The musical-narrative only really thrived in Bollywood, but then Indians don’t seem to believe in separate categories. A seemingly straight drama can suddenly break into song and dance to the bemusement of non-Indian audiences. Probably inspired Moulin Rouge by Luhrman.

    Chicago won best pic oscar but does anyone remember that one? Bigger hit was the movie with Abba songs which went over well with women audiences.

  122. @Steve Sailer
    @Meretricious

    And Jerome Robbins was more or less the main idea man who came up with the idea of a Irish-Jewish Romeo and Juliet in 1947, directed the Broadway premiere and was the first director of the movie until he fell badly behind schedule and got replaced by Robert Wise.

    Hal Prince who produced the Broadway show was straight.

    Replies: @40 Lashes Less One, @Meretricious

    Jason Alexander (George from Seinfeld) won a Tony for playing Jerome Robbins on Broadway in the Eighties, and it may have been what got him the role in Seinfeld.

  123. @SunBakedSuburb
    @Anonymous

    "The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version."

    Steve prefers the Broadway version. Too many times at the well with the Steve/musical/gay gag. This whole thread with its mental images of vibrant musical theater, the Gibson dinger, and elderly Englishmen sweating it out in equatorial squalor is turning me gay. Might be turning me gay.

    Replies: @HammerJack

    This whole thread with its mental images of vibrant musical theater, the Gibson dinger, and elderly Englishmen sweating it out in equatorial squalor is turning me gay. Might be turning me gay.

    Here’s how to tell. Which of these people would you rather get physical with? If it helps to tip the scale, the one in black and white is a world famous feminist hero! The other is just some dude in a t-shirt. You have 30 seconds to make your selection. Good luck.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @HammerJack

    I don't need no 30 seconds. No dude is touching me down there. I don't care if he is the most handsome dude on earth. At least Dworkin had the correct orifice.

    Replies: @HammerJack

    , @Athenian Gentleman
    @HammerJack


    Which of these people would you rather get physical physically intimate with?
     
    (Physical could just as easily mean in a fight.)

    The male,
    when he was younger, say, between the ages of ~12-17*.
    (*Assuming, of course, there would be no question but that he fully desired such attention.)

    But (and this will undoubtedly surprise and perhaps perplex many) only in a manner that respected both his as well as my own dignity, masculinity and anatomical integrity.

    If I absolutely had to choose between the two individuals exactly as they appear in the photos?

    Then it would depend. Would the intimacy have to include a penetrative act? If yes, then the male-- any male-- would simply be out-of-the-question.

    If not, then I'm not certain at the moment which of the two I would find the least repulsive for the required purpose.
  124. @Muggles
    Yes, the remake of the creaky and obsolete New York centric West Side Story is a monstrous joke. (iSteve's longer Taki review is worth the time...)

    The rest of America cares nothing about Puerto Rico or the "west side" of NYC. All of that is insider New Yorker stuff that was crammed down the sleepy middle class American throats in the late 50s.

    As iSteve notes, were it not for the stolen ("borrowed") plot theme from Shakespeare, it would have never been seen or heard. "So class, we're going to watch this film today and discuss the underlying Shakespearean themes. First you have to read Romeo & Juliet. "

    I recall first watching the movie and it seemed more like gay science fiction with dancing aliens than anything else. Where are the Jews? One thing I knew about NYC was that Jews lived there (not that I had ever met any admitted Jews.) I concluded that the non Jews in the film must be Sharks battling the Puerto Ricans, who were like Mexicans only they all wanted to live in NYC for some reason. Manhattan is a long narrow mostly N-S oriented island. Why is the "west side" different from the east side, or north? Do Puerto Ricans like watching sunsets?

    Later I realized that New Yorkers were more micro geographic obsessed than a mound of termites. They see invisible boundaries which outsiders miss. Their racial radar is second to none. They can even tell what Ukrainian-Polish shetel your Kazarian ancestors came from. Jewdar, gaydar, and whitedar. Oh, and all the White folks are "liberal" and love all races. Just avoid the Orthodox neighborhoods. Or Harlem, or, well, any place where net income is below say, half a mil/yr.

    I naively believed at the time that all musicals were created for and by homosexuals, though I barely knew what that was. Gays like to dance, I guess. Skinny. Who knew NYC gangs were all gay?

    I hope this film loses a ton of money. Woke, hopelessly dated and anti White. Subtitles in English so oppressive. What could go wrong?

    Replies: @D. K., @CCZ, @Reg Cæsar

    “I recall first watching the movie and it seemed more like gay science fiction with dancing aliens than anything else. Where are the Jews? One thing I knew about NYC was that Jews lived there (not that I had ever met any admitted Jews.)”

    ***

    Ned Glass as Doc, Tony’s boss; a decent, elderly Jewish drugstore owner

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_film)#Cast

    ***

    Glass was born in Radom, Congress Poland, Russian Empire, to a Jewish family.[1] He emigrated to the United States at an early age and grew up in New York City.[2] He attended City College.[3]

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Glass#Early_life

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @D. K.

    By the way, Ned Glass' mini-biography at IMDb.com claims:

    "His career was briefly put on hold after being blacklisted during the McCarthy era, but, with help from friends like John Houseman and Moe Howard (of The Three Stooges fame) he managed to get enough film work to make ends meet."

    One of the three Trivia items at his IMDb.com entry likewise claims:

    "After being blacklisted in the 1950s, he made his living as a carpenter, a trade he learned by building his own house."

    Checking his credits page, however, we find that Mr. Glass had 86 out of his total of 229 acting credits (ranging from 1937 to 1982) that included performances in the 1950s!?! (N.B. Multiple appearances in a television series are treated as a single credit toward an actor's total.) That decade included a low of four acting credits, for 1955, and a high of 17 acting credits, for 1957. That, of course, is not actually how the studio blacklist of communists worked, back in the 1950s. I have come across several claims on IMDb.com about actors who supposedly were blacklisted, back then, yet who have expansive lists of acting credits, throughout the 1950s.

    Replies: @Jack D

  125. @Altai

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan)
     
    I feel like as with Lincoln there is a very strong who/whom reason he feels so proud of American soldiers during WW2. The same who/whom we see elsewhere in the changes to this film.

    The movie gets off to a flat-footed start with a long talky section offering Kushner’s dysgenic theory of why the Jets are so poor despite all that sweet white privilege: Nature and nurture has made them white trash, urban Jukes descended from a long line of drunks and crooks. The better sorts of whites, the ones with identity, “the Irish, the Italians, the Jews,” have moved up and out, leaving behind these deracinated losers.
     
    Isn't this exactly what you're never supposed to notice about the worst black and Latino ghettos? And since when are the down and outs in NYC Anglo even in the 50s. This kind of language is the surest evidence for the demise of the left on economic issues. This sounds like something you'd hear from the most right-wing libertarian 20 years ago. (Though thought by a great majority of upper middle class liberals)

    Not only do the Sharks work for lower pay, they're better employees! And better people! (Though as their giant flag murals and hate for the poor American's they're displacing make clear, they're not better Americans)

    It also sounds suspiciously like 'a people for a land for a land without a people'. And as anyone who has taken a walk through Manhattan in the last 15 years knows, there are no better looking, better dressed or more standout characters than Puerto Ricans.

    And rather than cast Russian-American Natalie Wood as Maria, Spielberg’s team supposedly auditioned 30,000 Latinas before picking Catholic schoolgirl Rachel Zegler. In case you are wondering about how somebody named “Rachel Zegler” represents Puerto Ricans, her mother is from Colombia, which is not exactly Puerto Rico but close enough for Spielberg.
     
    Her casting announcement did wonders for her career in the woke era. She has since been cast as Snow White.

    https://twitter.com/musicmovieshoop/status/1470513991202050054

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan), has decided that what we need to acquaint the increasingly multicultural public with the USA’s past glories, rather like what Lin-Manuel Miranda intended to do for The Federalist Papers with his boyish Hamilton, is for him to remake West Side Story.
     
    I'd argue that these things represent an attempt to recontextualise things for a new people. The founding fathers in American after the great wave went from statesmen with a particular ethnicity and understanding of whom their 'posterity' was into philosopher kings with highly abstract ideals that actually, when you think about it, would have supported the great wave of immigration!

    In a sense history for a place only really begins when the people there arrive and recontextualisng the founding fathers meant America could still maintain a connection to it's founding. This is why I was shocked when they started to pull down their statues. When you do that you're ending America's connection to it's own past. In a real sense you're ending America as a state that say white people or WASPs feel as being theirs. And in so doing you kill the citizenist ideal of an 'American'. There are very real consequences for that both subtle and gross and certainly not all in the direction of the desires of those who took the statues down.

    And speaking of Lin-Manuel Miranda, he tried to steal Spielberg's thunder and with added authenticity with his own New York musical about Puerto Ricans with his film adaptation of his stage musical 'In The Heights' though with an added plot about a plan to round up all the 'DREAMERs' and deport them. It did exceptionally poorly even considering the pandemic. (The trailers made it clear it wasn't for white people and 'Hispanics' didn't go see it, probably as Steve noted because it was about Puerto Ricans/Dominicans and to paraphrase Ann Coulter, how many Puerto Ricans does Hollywood think are in this country?)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HAR3QBuiiU

    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist and as soon as the 'Juneteenth' musical gets finished as both a stage production and film, it will be the thing history (And probably a lot of English) teachers across America play endlessly as a treat to their students over their whole school career. Though I don't think the Juneteenth musical will be as well-attended, (No fancy clothes and it won't have the veneer of upper middle classness) it will still take the focus away from Hamilton and the media won't still-boost it anymore. He still has all the money but I feel like he really wants the attention even more.

    Replies: @mc23, @Jim Don Bob, @Anon, @ginger bread man, @Mike Tre

    When did Hamilton become racist?

  126. @R.G. Camara
    @PaceLaw

    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership. The mismanagement of the island after the hurricane during Trump's term is pretty par for the course. It's not a wonder that outside of blacks they are the the big welfare groups in our nation and that the term "Puerto Rican neighborhood" is not a harbinger of high property values and safety.


    A helpful reminder:

    Those from Spain speak high-class Spanish.

    Those from Argentina speak social-climbing Spanish.

    Those from Cuba speak communist-class Spanish.

    Those from Mexico speak working-class Spanish.

    And those from Puerto Rico don't speak Spanish.

    Replies: @Americano, @PaceLaw, @Bill Jones, @Luzzatto

    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership.

    I think you are conflating “Afro-Puerto Ricans” with all Puerto Ricans. No one on earth think of Puerto Rican women as “ugly.” The little Island has five (5) Miss Universe (1970: Marisol Malaret, 1985: Deborah Carthy-Deu, 1993: Dayanara Torres, 2001: Denise M. Quiñones and 2006: Zuleyka Rivera).

    The first Hispanic Male Oscar winner was Puerto Rican actor Jose Ferrer. The first Hispanic Female oscar winner was Puerto Rican actress Rita Moreno. Some of the biggest Hispanic superstars are Puerto Ricans: Jennifer Lopez, Ricky Martin, Marc Anthony, and Benicio del Toro.

    Puerto Rico is renowned for producing Salsa singers, most of whom are White (Hector Lavoe, Eddie Santiago, Lalo Rodriguez, Victor Manuel, Tony Vega, Frankie Ruiz, Tito Rojas, Johnny Rivera, etc.)

    To be sure, there was a time in New York City where mostly Afro-Puerto Ricans lived alongside Blacks and thus shared many of the urban social problems.

    • Troll: R.G. Camara
    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
    @Americano

    Exceptions to the rule only prove the rule.

    Replies: @Goddard

    , @Intelligent Dasein
    @Americano


    No one on earth think of Puerto Rican women as “ugly.”
     
    No one with a normal psycho-sexual makeup, anyway. If Rosie Perez is wrong then, brother, I don't want to be right.
  127. Why do Jews so eagerly embrace the malevolent stereotypes assigned t0 them by white nationalists?
    The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is generally regarded as a forgery, except for the many Jews who use it as a manual.

  128. @Almost Missouri
    OT

    Coupla new Sailer-baits just dropped...

    https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1470961361307897861

    https://twitter.com/SaysSimonson/status/1470511155168915456

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Steve Sailer

    Almost Missouri, sigh. Adopted black kids’ White parents not understanding their culture. What culture is that? Rap music with its vile lyrics. Single moms? Gang Banging? Shooting up memeorial services? Who could love those people?

    • Replies: @Loyalty Over IQ Worship
    @Buffalo Joe

    Since culture is downstream from biology, it's probably difficult for you to understand that Blacks would sincerely enjoy a different culture from yours.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

  129. @PaceLaw
    From the Taki article: “(And other Latinos don’t appear to think all that much of Puerto Ricans.)”

    Really? I wonder why that is. Maybe Puerto Ricans are not considered to be nationalistic enough? I guess I’m not up on my Latino intra-cultural distinctions and rivalries.

    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.

    Replies: @SFG, @Clyde, @JMcG, @Thea, @Hapalong Cassidy, @Justvisiting, @Danindc, @Dutch Boy, @Pixo, @R.G. Camara, @Luzzatto

    Cubans are very White in appearance? Nobody would ever mistake the Cuban mayor of Miami Francis X. Suarez for a Swede.

  130. @R.G. Camara
    @PaceLaw

    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership. The mismanagement of the island after the hurricane during Trump's term is pretty par for the course. It's not a wonder that outside of blacks they are the the big welfare groups in our nation and that the term "Puerto Rican neighborhood" is not a harbinger of high property values and safety.


    A helpful reminder:

    Those from Spain speak high-class Spanish.

    Those from Argentina speak social-climbing Spanish.

    Those from Cuba speak communist-class Spanish.

    Those from Mexico speak working-class Spanish.

    And those from Puerto Rico don't speak Spanish.

    Replies: @Americano, @PaceLaw, @Bill Jones, @Luzzatto

    Well, it is interesting that here in the mainland United States, and in cities such as New York and Philadelphia, when Puerto Ricans immigrated en masse they appeared to blend in very well next to black neighborhoods. Their assimilation into/next to these neighborhoods was pretty much seamless.

  131. @Dutch Boy
    @PaceLaw

    Speaking of which, a friend of mine was once at a family picnic with his Cuban-born mother and her relatives. They had a hard time opening a package and someone said: "We need a knife, are there any Puerto Ricans here?"

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @PaceLaw

    I have to say that is a pretty funny quip from the Cuban-born mom. So knives and Puerto Ricans go together like peanut butter and jelly? Apparently, it is in fact a thing.

    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Puerto+Rican+knife+fight&amp=true

  132. @R.G. Camara
    @PaceLaw

    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership. The mismanagement of the island after the hurricane during Trump's term is pretty par for the course. It's not a wonder that outside of blacks they are the the big welfare groups in our nation and that the term "Puerto Rican neighborhood" is not a harbinger of high property values and safety.


    A helpful reminder:

    Those from Spain speak high-class Spanish.

    Those from Argentina speak social-climbing Spanish.

    Those from Cuba speak communist-class Spanish.

    Those from Mexico speak working-class Spanish.

    And those from Puerto Rico don't speak Spanish.

    Replies: @Americano, @PaceLaw, @Bill Jones, @Luzzatto

    I remember telling a friend before his first trip to Spain; “There is all the difference in the World between a Spaniard and a Hispanic.”
    On his return he agreed.

    • Agree: R.G. Camara
  133. @R.G. Camara
    @PaceLaw

    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership. The mismanagement of the island after the hurricane during Trump's term is pretty par for the course. It's not a wonder that outside of blacks they are the the big welfare groups in our nation and that the term "Puerto Rican neighborhood" is not a harbinger of high property values and safety.


    A helpful reminder:

    Those from Spain speak high-class Spanish.

    Those from Argentina speak social-climbing Spanish.

    Those from Cuba speak communist-class Spanish.

    Those from Mexico speak working-class Spanish.

    And those from Puerto Rico don't speak Spanish.

    Replies: @Americano, @PaceLaw, @Bill Jones, @Luzzatto

    Mexico has a much higher murder rate than Puerto Rico both in raw numbers and per capita. So no Mexican is looking down on Puerto Ricans as violent when Mexicans themselves are not peaceful model minorities that all other groups in the world should strive to be more like. Mexicans would not need affirmative action if Mexicans were the gold standard.

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
    @Luzzatto

    1. Citation needed

    2. Mexican organized drug cartels offing rivals, informants, and cops is not the same as random Puerto Rican street violence. Much like with blacks, Puerto Ricans lose their cool a lot and escalate minor disagreements or a bad day into murder and assault.

    One of the reasons people romanticize the Italian Mafia is the idea that they didn't commit such random violence but instead kept the streets clean of riffraff (i.e. blacks and Puerto Ricans) and only targeted each other or corrupt people.

    I've lived in both Puerto Rican and Mexican neighborhoods in the U.S., and the difference is palpable. In the Puerto Rican ones, I felt like around every corner some teenage or 20s youth might randomly try to mug me, whereas in the Mexican one, the thugs I saw ignored me and merely concentrated on doing their drug deals and keeping an eye out for the cops.

    Replies: @PaceLaw

    , @Pixo
    @Luzzatto

    “ Mexico has a much higher murder rate than Puerto Rico”

    PR is under the jurisdiction of the USA. That means big law enforcement subsidies and at least some Anglo competence and non-corruption with the FBI, DEA, US Marshal, Federal prison system.

    Apples to apples would be PR versus a 90% Mexican area also under Anglo jurisdiction like the Rio Grande Valley.

    You can also compare PR slums in NYC with Mexican ones in LA and Chicago. No matter how you look at it, Mexicans are less crime prone.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  134. @Jonathan Mason
    What does it matter if Rachel Zegler was awarded the role of Maria after auditioning against 30,000 (??) competitors?

    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn't.

    Why is the selection of an actor or an actress always deemed to be something that has a hidden meaning about race or ethnicity? The whole point of being an actor or actress is that you play the part of somebody who you are not.

    Should Richard Burton have been replaced in Anthony and Cleopatra with a Latin speaking actor? Should Russell Crowe in Gladiator have been replaced by a Latin speaking actor? Should Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor? Should Yul Brynner in The King and I have been replaced by a Siamese actor? Should Anthony Hopkins as Nixon have been replaced by a Californian actor?

    Replies: @Calvin Hobbes, @TruthRevolution.net, @Boomthorkell, @Reg Cæsar, @guest007, @Anonymous, @res, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

    https://www.takimag.com/article/lessons-from-hollywoods-great-replacement/

  135. @onetwothree
    @Anonymous

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNzNeGw8Fmo

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    Thanks.

  136. @D. K.
    @Jack D

    "If you want to be picky about the exact timeline (it’s a movie musical, not a documentary), the 'Slum Clearance' of Lincoln Square is announced in April of ’55 and they then begin buying up/condemning thru eminent domain the buildings in the neighborhood. By May of ’59 (nowadays it would take decades of lawsuits), the buildings have been emptied and demolished and Eisenhower is looking at an empty field. So the timeline of the movie is about right. Maybe the paint cans are from the paint that they use to paint the wooden construction fence that surrounds the demolition site."

    Even when they are demonstrably wrong, we can count on you, Jack, to jump in to defend your fellow ethnics.

    The preliminary report on the Lincoln Square Project was published by the City of New York on July 20, 1956 (days after I had entered my third trimester, and shortly after my birthplace had celebrated its golden jubilee):

    https://archive.org/details/preliminaryrepor00newy_0

    ( https://archive.org/details/garysgoldenjubilee19061956 )

    ***

    While the residents of Lincoln Square were able to resist by bringing their case to all the way to the Supreme Court, they were unable to undermine Moses' power of eminent domain that allowed him to demolish the neighborhood (Strausbaugh, 2008). Thus, when the Court approved the takeover of sixty-seven acres of land on July 1st, 1958, city officials instated a forced relocation plan among residents of Lincoln Square, dedicating July of 1958 through October of 1961 to the relocate about 3000 families and make way for Lincoln Center (Dodson, 1960). [sic]

    ***

    https://sghistory.blogspot.com/2011/04/lincoln-center-robert-moses-and.html

    Replies: @Jack D

    Maybe they hadn’t cleared the whole area yet but there is film of the groundbreaking and there is clearly a large vacant lot (looks like the better part of two blocks) where they have set up a tent and chairs.

    https://www.pbs.org/video/groundbreaking-ceremony-lincoln-center-8sr6lc/

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Jack D

    "Maybe they hadn’t cleared the whole area yet but there is film of the groundbreaking and there is clearly a large vacant lot (looks like the better part of two blocks) where they have set up a tent and chairs."

    According to Steve, the movie is set in 1957. The groundbreaking ceremony took place on May 14, 1959. The Supreme Court did not settle the legal case filed against the plan's takings under eminent domain until July 1, 1958. The relocation of the residents of the area took from July 1958 until October 1961-- the very month that "West Side Story" (1961) premiered in New York City (10/18/61)!

    ***

    Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts is a 16.3-acre complex of buildings in the Lincoln Square neighborhood of Manhattan in New York City. It is located in the former San Juan Hill neighborhood, which was demolished in 1959 to accommodate it.

    ***

    https://archive.org/details/xd-45324-lincoln-center-the-place-and-the-idea-vwr

    Replies: @Jack D

  137. @S. Anonyia
    @Pixo

    The majority of Cubans generally aren’t tri-racial by Latin American standards. Most white Cubans are less than 15 % black. There is a large effectively black population in addition to the effectively white population, however.

    Replies: @Luzzatto

    Cubans are a racial mutt group, not a White group. Facts do not care about your muh feelings. Follow the SCIENCE.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubans#Genetics

    • Replies: @S. Anonyia
    @Luzzatto

    Who said anything about feelings? I’m not Cuban. The stats from Wikipedia you’re pointing to average the entire population together- they don’t separate white and black Cubans. If you browse the rest of the article it discusses white Cubans/Criollos, who are about 60-65% of the population and have less than 15 % combined SSA & Indian ancestry. 85-90 % white is effectively white. Its why Cubans look quite different than Puerto Ricans and Venezuelans/Colombians, who are more balanced tri-racial groups. I believe Argentines and Southern Brazilians have a similar ancestral breakdown to white Cubans. Only Uruguayans are more European.

  138. @Jack D
    @Americano

    Puerto Ricans are more typical of other Latinos and different from North Americans in their genetics. Due to the application of the one-drop rule (which did not exist in Latin America) white Americans tend to be really really white (99+% white like Liz Warren) and not just whitish like "whites" in Puerto Rico.

    The Latin pattern was Indio or black on the maternal line and European on the paternal line and Puerto Rico follows this:


    Approximately 60% of the participants had indigenous mtDNA {maternal} haplotypes (mostly from haplogroups A2 and C1), while 25% had African and 15% European haplotypes.

    However, none of the male participants had indigenous Y-chromosomes, with 85% of them instead being European/Mediterranean and 15% sub-Saharan African in origin.
     

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25043798/

    In other words, the Conquistadors slaughtered all of the Native men and took their women as wives, which is the historic pattern for conquered people. The result is a mostly Mestizo race. Some of the PR elites are (mostly) European but most have (more than) a touch of Indian or African blood. Contra the American practices, a union between a castizo (someone 3/4 Spanish) and a Spaniard was considered to be a Spaniard, so even the whitest PRs (other than recent immigrants) are usually 1/8 non-white (again vs. white Americans who are usually 99%+ white).

    The other funny thing about this is that whitish Latinos tend to be in complete denial about this (or were until they came to the US and realized that the money was being in a "Person of Color". As far as they are concerned, they are white, period. You don't happen to be a whitish Latino? Have you had your DNA tested?

    Replies: @Americano

    What do you mean by “North American” and “White American”?

    Lest we forget the Northern Italian saying: Africa is south of Rome. In or around 80% of all Italian immigrants to the USA were from the south.

    Are Adam Sandler, Paul Simon, A. Garfunkel, Billy Joe, etc., 99+% White?

    Are Ivanka Trump’s children 99+% White? Lmao!!!

    Are you saying that Francis Ford Coppola and Quentin Tarantino are pure “White,” but Jorge Ramos and Sofia Vergara are “people of color”?

  139. @pyrrhus
    Wait a minute iSteve, the great movie of Guys and Dolls was not "satisfactory"? With a wonderful cast including Sinatra and Brando? You have to be kidding! My wife has been to every great play or musical on Broadway for 50+ years, and she loves it...

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    “With a wonderful cast including Sinatra and Brando?”

    But Brando insisted on taking the more singing role and thus Sinatra had to take the more acting role.

    Do that the right way and it would have been great.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Steve Sailer

    "But Brando insisted on taking the more singing role and thus Sinatra had to take the more acting role.

    "Do that the right way and it would have been great."

    No! (1) Frank Sinatra made a much better 'Nathan Detroit' than he would have a 'Sky Masterson'-- irrespective of his exponentially better singing voice, compared to Marlon Brando; and, (2) no movie in which Marlon Brando's character's singing was not dubbed by a competent singer could be said to be truly "great."

  140. @SafeNow
    Steve reports that the theater in Van Nuys was nearly empty. Kyle Smith reported that the theater on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.was full; there had been massive advertising, and hyped-up acclaim by critics. But, Kyle said, the audience response was muted. My conclusion is that if a hyped NYC audience doesn’t like it, then no audience will like it.

    My advice to Spielberg would have been to stick a musical star or two in it. The kind of ridiculous stars who sell-out 50,000 tickets in 10 seconds. Then young people, especially women, would stream it (no one goes to the movies anymore). The omission of stars is puzzling, especially given that the budget was there, and, other concessions to the zeitgeist were being made and this would be just one more. This was “Cabaret” without Liza Minnelli and Joel Gray.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    The 1961 producers wanted Elvis to play Tony.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Steve Sailer

    So why didn't they? Wood had some star power but none of the male leads were or ever became box office draws. Were they saving on payroll? Were they unable to find someone with enough dancing talent? Too hard to find established actors who are adults but still plausible for the roles (child actors don't usually age well into adult roles - they tend to be short. Daniel Radcliffe is a very shrimp 5'-5" in his platform shoes).

    Even this time, they had to bring David Alvarez out of retirement. He won a Tony for Billy Elliot as a teen but then he went into the Army and didn't tell any of his Army buddies that he had been a dancer (can you spell ghey?) Somehow the casting director found him.

    Replies: @Art Deco

  141. @Luzzatto
    @R.G. Camara

    Mexico has a much higher murder rate than Puerto Rico both in raw numbers and per capita. So no Mexican is looking down on Puerto Ricans as violent when Mexicans themselves are not peaceful model minorities that all other groups in the world should strive to be more like. Mexicans would not need affirmative action if Mexicans were the gold standard.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @Pixo

    1. Citation needed

    2. Mexican organized drug cartels offing rivals, informants, and cops is not the same as random Puerto Rican street violence. Much like with blacks, Puerto Ricans lose their cool a lot and escalate minor disagreements or a bad day into murder and assault.

    One of the reasons people romanticize the Italian Mafia is the idea that they didn’t commit such random violence but instead kept the streets clean of riffraff (i.e. blacks and Puerto Ricans) and only targeted each other or corrupt people.

    I’ve lived in both Puerto Rican and Mexican neighborhoods in the U.S., and the difference is palpable. In the Puerto Rican ones, I felt like around every corner some teenage or 20s youth might randomly try to mug me, whereas in the Mexican one, the thugs I saw ignored me and merely concentrated on doing their drug deals and keeping an eye out for the cops.

    • Replies: @PaceLaw
    @R.G. Camara

    “Much like with blacks, Puerto Ricans lose their cool a lot and escalate minor disagreements or a bad day into murder and assault.”

    Your accurate assessment made me think of one of my former clients (all true, I promise!). I represented this Puerto Rican fellow, who was married to an African-American woman and they had several kids. The dude’s wife got into a traffic altercation with a white guy in front of my client’s house. The Puerto Rican (a construction worker) is alleged to have come out of his house with a box cutter to threaten to stab/slash the white guy because he cussed at his wife. My Puerto Rican client was charged with some serious felonies and misdemeanors. Fortunately I was able to get him off of all charges other than the misdemeanor of disobeying the police (he refused to put a construction tool down that the cops thought was a weapon). My client introduced me to some of his black in-laws as people I also might represent. They all appeared to be drug dealers and thugs.

  142. @Americano
    @R.G. Camara

    @R.G. Camara


    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership.
     
    I think you are conflating "Afro-Puerto Ricans" with all Puerto Ricans. No one on earth think of Puerto Rican women as "ugly." The little Island has five (5) Miss Universe (1970: Marisol Malaret, 1985: Deborah Carthy-Deu, 1993: Dayanara Torres, 2001: Denise M. Quiñones and 2006: Zuleyka Rivera).

    The first Hispanic Male Oscar winner was Puerto Rican actor Jose Ferrer. The first Hispanic Female oscar winner was Puerto Rican actress Rita Moreno. Some of the biggest Hispanic superstars are Puerto Ricans: Jennifer Lopez, Ricky Martin, Marc Anthony, and Benicio del Toro.

    Puerto Rico is renowned for producing Salsa singers, most of whom are White (Hector Lavoe, Eddie Santiago, Lalo Rodriguez, Victor Manuel, Tony Vega, Frankie Ruiz, Tito Rojas, Johnny Rivera, etc.)

    To be sure, there was a time in New York City where mostly Afro-Puerto Ricans lived alongside Blacks and thus shared many of the urban social problems.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @Intelligent Dasein

    Exceptions to the rule only prove the rule.

    • Replies: @Goddard
    @R.G. Camara


    Exceptions to the rule only prove the rule.
     
    No they don’t, at least not in the way you are implying. Exceptions don’t validate the rule. They put the validity of the rule to the test.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara

  143. @Justvisiting
    @PaceLaw


    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top?
     
    My understanding is that every subgroup believes they are at the top of the pecking order, and the gangs will be pleased to execute anyone who disagrees.

    They give anarchy a bad name. :-)

    Replies: @Peter D. Bredon

    Just like everyone who thinks IQ matters thinks they are at least 120 or more; if there’s a Mater Race they belong to it; if they want a caste system they think they’ll be Brahmins etc.

  144. @HammerJack
    @SunBakedSuburb


    This whole thread with its mental images of vibrant musical theater, the Gibson dinger, and elderly Englishmen sweating it out in equatorial squalor is turning me gay. Might be turning me gay.
     
    Here's how to tell. Which of these people would you rather get physical with? If it helps to tip the scale, the one in black and white is a world famous feminist hero! The other is just some dude in a t-shirt. You have 30 seconds to make your selection. Good luck.


    https://i.ibb.co/fGQmqq8/andreadworkin1986.jpg

    https://i.ibb.co/yWHtn4j/Screenshot-20211108-012800-e-Bay.jpg

    Replies: @Jack D, @Athenian Gentleman

    I don’t need no 30 seconds. No dude is touching me down there. I don’t care if he is the most handsome dude on earth. At least Dworkin had the correct orifice.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @Jack D

    Yeah, she's not bad for a Jewish chick.

    Replies: @Bernard, @Rapparee

  145. I think your article is missing one key insight into the musical’s unpopularity: that, by and large, hispanic kids want to go to the movies to see white people playing superheroes, not lame brown people speaking lame Spanish, which they can get plenty of at home.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Agitprop

    Indeed.

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @Agitprop

    not lame brown people speaking lame Spanish

    Q: If German lis the language of science, French the language of diplomacy, and Italian the language of love, what is Spanish?

    A: Spanish is the language of poverty.

    , @Anonymous
    @Agitprop

    Or maybe the setting is too alien for them. It's like ancient history.

    Or maybe they don't like the idea of some wimpy gringo making out with a Latina chick.

    Or maybe this could have been a hit if the music was updated to hip hop or rap or techno-dance.
    Or set in a world of gringo superheroes vs latin superheroes, with a gringo superhero falling for a latina superheroine.

    If Spielberg wanted to try something bold, maybe he would have tried to musicalize The Warriors.
    Some fight scenes in that movie are almost dance-like. Or maybe a musical version of A Clockwork Orange. Alex does sing 'singing in the rain' in that one.

    Or send ET to broadway. The final duet between Elliott and ET.

  146. “Tony is played well by Ansel Elgort (Baby Driver), whom I always get confused with similar-named millennial leading men Alden Ehrenreich and Taron Egerton.”

    Glad to know I’m not the only one.

  147. @Steve Sailer
    @SafeNow

    The 1961 producers wanted Elvis to play Tony.

    Replies: @Jack D

    So why didn’t they? Wood had some star power but none of the male leads were or ever became box office draws. Were they saving on payroll? Were they unable to find someone with enough dancing talent? Too hard to find established actors who are adults but still plausible for the roles (child actors don’t usually age well into adult roles – they tend to be short. Daniel Radcliffe is a very shrimp 5′-5″ in his platform shoes).

    Even this time, they had to bring David Alvarez out of retirement. He won a Tony for Billy Elliot as a teen but then he went into the Army and didn’t tell any of his Army buddies that he had been a dancer (can you spell ghey?) Somehow the casting director found him.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Jack D

    About the stage production, Larry Kert interviewed ca. 1972 said that in casting they were particular about not selecting anyone prominent, as they thought that would generate a distraction that went against their promotional strategy. Also the production was heavy with dancers.

    Kert auditioned for the film but was reportedly thought to be too old at 30 to play the late adolescent Tony, so they cast Richard Beymer, then 22, who had assembled about a dozen screen and television credits over the previous four years (including supporting roles in three films). One problem was that neither Beymer nor Wood had a singing voice of sufficient quality, so their songs were dubbed by studio singers (something concealed for years). They may have seen Beymer as up-and-coming.

  148. Here’s how the Puerto Ricans came to NYC and settled in the part of Harlem that became known as Spanish Harlem.

    1930s part of Harlem was White, mostly Italian, not yet black. Famous Italian restaurant Rao’s is still there. Al Pacino grew up there on one of the last Italian blocks An attorney and politician Vito Marcantonio was the long time Congress critter for the White section of Harlem. He belonged to the American Labor Party. It was a CPUSA front masquerading as a New Deal pro worker party. Disappeared soon after CPUSA ceased supporting it. The mostly Italians of the district voted for him because he was Italian.

    By 1940 the Italians were moving out of Harlem and the district was getting blacker. Plus war industry and the war made the working class who supported the New Deal very prosperous. Less Italian and American Labor Party Marcantonio voters.

    What to do? Import Puerto Ricans to Marcantonio’s district. Which kept him in congress until the early 1950s. That’s how the PRs came to settle in what became known as Spanish Harlem until the neighborhood became almost completely black.

    My teen age review of the original
    West Side Story. I and my contemporaries didn’t like it all. Most of the boomers were children and only went to the kid’s Saturday afternoon 3 cartoons and a cowboy or Disney movie.

    Even in 1961, 62 the movie was really old fashioned and dated. Most visible the girls clothes. 1940 to 1990 young women’s fashions changed drastically every 2 years. Everybody kept up. The girls costumes were fitted bodice full skirts. Out of fashion. But great for a musicals with all the dance numbers.

    Then the entire theme of juvenile delinquency as it was called at the time. From the 1930s on juvenile delinquency was a major story in newspapers and editorials the quality magazines. Sociology was based on it. In my hometown, several high and middle schools were already taken over by black thugs. Delinquents has a bad reputation and here was a movie both glorifying and sissifying them. Weird.

    As far as I can remember they didn’t shoplift, rob anyone steal a car which was easy to do in those days even jump a subway turnstile.

    Except for America which was fast and loud and Officer Krupke the songs were just Sinatra style slow moony old people’s music. The whole thing was an old fashioned musical. Beloved by the greatest generation, not young people.

    The dancing boys were just so skinny and dainty and effeminate it was hard to believe they were delinquents as they were called at the time. All the tough boy delinquent movie actors wore jeans white T shirts and sometimes leather jackets. I don’t remember them even smoking. They dressed like a Gentleman’s Quartely spread on casual wear. Not even the famous duck tail haircut of the day, let alone jeans.

    And Puerto Ricans in NYC. Who outside of NYC ever heard of them? Most people with Spanish surnames lived in the southwest. Not the east coast. For most Americans Puerto Rico was a sentence in the high school history chapter on the Spanish American war.

    Plus they didn’t seem to have homes and parents. It was dated even in 1961. Rita Moreno has a great hair style, and was lively. America was a great song.

    • Thanks: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Alden

    "Except for America which was fast and loud and Officer Krupke the songs were just Sinatra style slow moony old people’s music. The whole thing was an old fashioned musical. Beloved by the greatest generation, not young people."

    ***

    West Side Story was a commercial success upon its release. It became the highest-grossing film of 1961, earning rentals of $19,645,000 in the United States and Canada. It remained the highest-grossing musical film of all-time[34] until the release of The Sound of Music in 1965. The film grossed $44.1 million worldwide ($382 million in 2020). Because of profit participation, United Artists earned a profit of only $2.5 million on the film ($22 million in 2020).[35]

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_film)#Box_office

    ***

    West Side Story is the soundtrack album to the 1961 film West Side Story, featuring music by Leonard Bernstein and lyrics by Stephen Sondheim. Released in 1961, the soundtrack spent 54 weeks at No. 1 on Billboard's album charts, giving it the longest run at No. 1 of any album in history,[2] although some lists instead credit Michael Jackson's Thriller, on the grounds that West Side Story was listed on a chart for stereo albums only at a time when many albums were recorded in mono.[3] In 1962, it won a Grammy award for "Best Sound Track Album – Original Cast." In the United States, it was the best-selling album of the 1960s,[4] certifying three times platinum by the RIAA on November 21, 1986.

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_soundtrack)

    There is nothing wrong with not personally liking a film or soundtrack album that was highly popular and financially successful. There is something wrong with proclaiming that it was not highly popular and financially successful, in its own time, regardless of its current legacy, let alone of a random individual's opinion of it, then or now.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Alden

    , @Anonymous
    @Alden

    My teen age review of the original West Side Story. I and my contemporaries didn’t like it all. Most of the boomers were children and only went to the kid’s Saturday afternoon 3 cartoons and a cowboy or Disney movie.

    Return of Disney's fortunes owed to a good deal on animation musicals like Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, and The Lion King.

    Pixar didn't begin with musicals but later did... I think.

    What makes no sense is going from Hollywood to Broadway. Broadway to Hollywood makes sense as movies are bigger and splashier. But there's only so much one can do on stage.

    Why would anyone turn a movie to a stage production? But it became a thing with stuff like Producers and even Spiderman. But I hear the broadway version of Lion King is really good. Creative puppets and costumes.

    And who wants to see a superhero musical?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dT3EUbOQY4&ab_channel=TurnOffTheDarkArchives

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Dave Pinsen

  149. @Mr. Anon
    @Anonymous

    How about "West Bank Story"? That would have been an interesting updating of the story. Who would be the Jets then? Who would be the Sharks?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Wilkey, @Dmon

    I suppose that in both cases Spielberg would side with the invaders.

  150. @Steve Sailer
    @Meretricious

    And Jerome Robbins was more or less the main idea man who came up with the idea of a Irish-Jewish Romeo and Juliet in 1947, directed the Broadway premiere and was the first director of the movie until he fell badly behind schedule and got replaced by Robert Wise.

    Hal Prince who produced the Broadway show was straight.

    Replies: @40 Lashes Less One, @Meretricious

    Irish/Jewish would have been more interesting IMO as there really is a connection between those communities historically, and the plot could have delved into Jewish and Catholic taboos against intermarriage (but as we all know, the taboo is much stronger in the Jewish community)

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Meretricious

    When Robbins and Laurent brainstormed their 1947 idea for an Irish vs. Jewish "East Side Story," they gave up because it kept sounding like "Abie's Irish Rose."

    The 1922 comedy "Abie's Irish Rose" was the biggest Broadway hit of the 1920s, but loathed by critics, especially Robert Benchley:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abie%27s_Irish_Rose

    "Although the play was a tremendous popular success, it was universally loathed by the critics. Robert Benchley, then the theatre critic for Life magazine, nursed a particular hatred for it. Part of Benchley's job was to write capsule reviews each week. He described Abie's Irish Rose variously as "Something Awful", "Just about as low as good clean fun can get", "Showing that the Jews and the Irish crack equally old jokes", "The comic spirit of 1876", "People laugh at this every night, which explains why democracy can never be a success", "Will the Marines never come?" and finally "Hebrews 13:8," a Biblical passage that reads, “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and today, and forever.”[7] He also held a contest for an outsider to contribute the capsule review, which Harpo Marx won with "No worse than a bad cold."[8][9]"

  151. @Alden
    @International Jew

    The Chinese are on an anti effeminate gay men and boys movement right now. They’ll probably cut the dancing boys scenes out. Chinese audiences like action movies lots of easy to understand battles fights and explosions. Is there a Chinese Romeo and Juliet story? Most cultures have them. But China is so conformist and young people so obedient to parents it might be the one culture in the world that doesn’t have one.

    Present day Chinese don’t know it care about ethnic and neighborhood tensions in 1950’s NYC. And after 73 years of communism and re-education camps the concept of teen hooligans being teen hooligans is something Chinese can’t understand.

    I can hear the word of mouth in China and the diaspora. Why aren’t those kids working in the family business? Why aren’t the smartest boys being tutored from 4-11 pm every day after school? Why doesn’t Tony just go to prostitutes and wait for his parents to arrange a marriage when he’s 30? What’s romantic love?

    Replies: @kaganovitch

    Is there a Chinese Romeo and Juliet story? Most cultures have them.

    They have the Niu Lang/Zhi Nu story, which is a forbidden love story but with a more bittersweet denouement.

    • Thanks: Alden
  152. @YetAnotherAnon
    This is really OT, is the comment software playing up or is it me?

    If I click on my handle on one of my comments, like this one

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/sailers-law-at-a-memorial-vigil/#comment-5062799

    I'd expect to see all my comments, newest first.

    Instead I see comments apparently dated 2017. If I ask for 2021 comments via the search box it tells me there aren't any. But I can see them if I use the drop-down box by the "All Comments" at the top of the listing to choose comments by year or decade.

    Tried it with other commenters and the same thing happens, I see JohnnyWalkers stuff from 2014 or JackD as far back as 2007.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Bardon Kaldian, @Almost Missouri

    That happened to me this morning, but the comments now appear as newest first.

  153. from iSteve circa 2031…

    Here’s my review of the new remake “West, Side Story“:

    Since converting to Islam, Lin-Mohammed Miranda has been re-imagining Americans’ favorite musicals to move Broadway, he says, “from whiteness to whiteless”. In this newest Leonard Bernstein remake, Jets and Sharks are Chinese and Afghan, brilliant choices that touch on two of my themes in recent years–the Chinese buying up real estate in New York City, and the resettlement of refugees from the Harris’s administration’s re-invasion of Afghanistan.

    Miranda claims his choice to rewrite Tony and Maria as Tong and Mohammed, a 10-year-old boy, was “difficult” but introducing bacha bazi to Broadway puts him squarely on the right side of history in World War P. Plus, much of the lyrics seem to have been easy to re-write…

    Mohammed!
    I just met a boy named Mohammed.
    And suddenly that name…

    Here’s my review of the new re-make “Seven Brides for A Brother“:

    iSteve readers probably think of Somali Muslims as welfare recipients living in urban Minneapolis, but according to Lin-Mohammed Miranda, they were also frontier settlers, clearing trees and planting crops on the wind-swept plains of Minnesota. Long ignored for its misogynistic treatment of women, “Seven Brides for Seven Brothers” has gained new respectability by addressing the issue of polygamy in America. In Miranda’s version, Adam’s single brothers have been eliminated, and the plot revolves around Adam (now renamed Mohammed)’s desire to expand his harem. This created some problems for the famous scene in which Adam recounts Plutarch’s story of the Sabine women to his brothers, so Miranda has re-written it as a dream sequence in which Mohammed imagines the life of early Muslim refugees in Germany…

    Tell ya ’bout them sobbin’ women
    Who lived in the German volk.
    It seems that they all went shoppin’
    While their men was off to work.
    Well, a Muslim group was walkin’ by
    And saw them without covered heads
    So they took ’em to a back alley
    Least that’s what Tik Tok says.

    Oh yes!
    And the women was sobbin’, sobbin’, sobbin’
    from the duck tape.
    Ev’ry muscle was throbbin’, throbbin’
    From that riotous rape.
    Seems they cried and cried and apologized
    For racists in their countryside
    So don’t forget that when you’re takin’ a bride.

    • LOL: Alden, Dave Pinsen
  154. @mc23
    @Altai

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White-

    https://iv1.lisimg.com/image/22345621/740full-rachel-zegler.jpg

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous, @PiltdownMan, @Thoughts

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White Beige.

    FIFY

  155. @YetAnotherAnon
    This is really OT, is the comment software playing up or is it me?

    If I click on my handle on one of my comments, like this one

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/sailers-law-at-a-memorial-vigil/#comment-5062799

    I'd expect to see all my comments, newest first.

    Instead I see comments apparently dated 2017. If I ask for 2021 comments via the search box it tells me there aren't any. But I can see them if I use the drop-down box by the "All Comments" at the top of the listing to choose comments by year or decade.

    Tried it with other commenters and the same thing happens, I see JohnnyWalkers stuff from 2014 or JackD as far back as 2007.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Bardon Kaldian, @Almost Missouri

    #metoo

  156. @J1234
    I saw a trailer for the new version of West Side Story recently. It was in a stream of other trailers at a theater (during one of my rare visits to a movie theater in the past five years. I went to see Belfast.) It was interesting to see the once somewhat unique moral theme of WSS - accept and embrace that which is different than (and even dangerous to) you - now lost among the other trailers for modern movies, which all have pretty much the identical theme.

    Twenty five minutes of trailers is essentially a twenty five minute sermon from Hollywood. I walked out of the theater until the main attraction started because I couldn't stomach anymore. Morally bereft Hollywood seeks moral camouflage in social justice so that its abusive whoring and decadence might be overlooked. It's worse than any 17th century New England village that condemns with scarlet letters.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    How did you like Belfast?

    • Replies: @J1234
    @Jim Don Bob


    How did you like Belfast?
     
    I went mostly to amuse myself while my wife was at a concert that I didn't want to attend. The reviews I'd read beforehand piqued my interest, too. One of them described it as a "comedy/drama" or something. I thought, a comedy about Belfast? That wasn't an accurate description. Yes, there were light moments in the film, but not enough to be comedic.

    It was also apparently a semi-autobiographical account of the early days of the troubles (about 1969) told from a Protestant perspective. Once again, it wasn't exactly what I'd interpreted that description to mean. Yes, it was told from a Protestant perspective in a literal sense, but that particular Protestant perspective was very deferential to the (Northern Ireland) Catholic perspective, and I strongly suspect that it was not representative of the community back then.

    I suspect that because I flew into Northern Ireland in '98 on the day the Omaugh bomb went off. You could see and feel the intensity of the Protestant community in that moment. Shop owners put on their military style camos. Land ladies at B&B's would sit my wife and I down very formally with cups of tea and give us long lectures on the savagery of the IRA. Mostly, the Unionist parade we attended brought ought a pride in culture and history among the locals that I've never seen among American whites anywhere. Also, our American accents made us very suspicious among these folks. This is stuff you rarely see in movies.

    To be fair, the British troops first came to Ulster in '69 to protect the Catholics from Protestant violence, so portraying militant Unionists as thugs in this film isn't entirely wrongheaded, but that was a pretty small slice of time in the history of the troubles, and giving that portrayal without proper weight or context is doing what modern filmmakers do all the time - turning a historically accurate inch into a historically inaccurate mile.

    Despite my own heritage, I have/had no dog in that fight. I'm glad the troubles are mostly over, but this film is just more of the same from the entertainment industry - part of the virtue signal liturgy. It's a movie about how majority demographic groups are always cruel to everyone else - especially if those majorities are white and Protestant - and how such majorities have the moral obligation to put others before themselves and to diminish while others increase.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

  157. @R.G. Camara
    @Luzzatto

    1. Citation needed

    2. Mexican organized drug cartels offing rivals, informants, and cops is not the same as random Puerto Rican street violence. Much like with blacks, Puerto Ricans lose their cool a lot and escalate minor disagreements or a bad day into murder and assault.

    One of the reasons people romanticize the Italian Mafia is the idea that they didn't commit such random violence but instead kept the streets clean of riffraff (i.e. blacks and Puerto Ricans) and only targeted each other or corrupt people.

    I've lived in both Puerto Rican and Mexican neighborhoods in the U.S., and the difference is palpable. In the Puerto Rican ones, I felt like around every corner some teenage or 20s youth might randomly try to mug me, whereas in the Mexican one, the thugs I saw ignored me and merely concentrated on doing their drug deals and keeping an eye out for the cops.

    Replies: @PaceLaw

    “Much like with blacks, Puerto Ricans lose their cool a lot and escalate minor disagreements or a bad day into murder and assault.”

    Your accurate assessment made me think of one of my former clients (all true, I promise!). I represented this Puerto Rican fellow, who was married to an African-American woman and they had several kids. The dude’s wife got into a traffic altercation with a white guy in front of my client’s house. The Puerto Rican (a construction worker) is alleged to have come out of his house with a box cutter to threaten to stab/slash the white guy because he cussed at his wife. My Puerto Rican client was charged with some serious felonies and misdemeanors. Fortunately I was able to get him off of all charges other than the misdemeanor of disobeying the police (he refused to put a construction tool down that the cops thought was a weapon). My client introduced me to some of his black in-laws as people I also might represent. They all appeared to be drug dealers and thugs.

    • Thanks: R.G. Camara
  158. Anonymous[691] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pat Hannagan
    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),...

    Ah, geeze, c'mon, really? You actually believe this?

    Steven Spielberg admires mid-century America, which is why he portrayed a quintessential Jewish existential anguish collective fever dream by utilising and perverting a pinnacle White masterpiece in Shakespeare's play about families' history pitted against each other as Broadway stage play pitting non-Whites against Whites with an even more evil demeanour given to the Whites?

    Today’s youth of color seem particularly unenthused. I saw the new West Side Story Saturday night in the heart of the Mexican barrio of Van Nuys, Calif., and there were about seventeen people in the theater.

    Just like Santa Inc. It wasn't made to make money, it was made to ululate a victory, simultaneously tormenting the losers.

    Twenty-first-century audiences apparently don’t care much about all the brainpower expended on West Side Story. So far, despite all the efforts exerted over the generations by all the famous talents involved, nobody except critics (who are wowed by it) and old white people who liked the 1961 Best Picture-winning film just fine are much interested in going to Spielberg’s reimagining.

    21st C White People see through it! Only the critics, the very same tribe Seth Rogen and Steven Spielberg hail from, appreciate the film. Everyone else instinctively understands what ancient lizard brained hateful mind spawned this continuing diatribe.

    Btw, if you want to hear and visualise a masculine White non-homo take on West Side Story listen to Alice Cooper's School's Out:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjJMgCSEcS0

    Replies: @Pat Hannagan, @Anonymous, @JMcG

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),…

    Ah, geeze, c’mon, really? You actually believe this?

    Saving Private Ryan is really about hating Germans, not admiring Americans. If Steve had any loyalty to his own people he would see this.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Anonymous


    If Steve had any loyalty to his own people he would see this
     
    Steve is German? Who knew?
    , @LondonBob
    @Anonymous

    The biggest issue with Saving Private Ryan is it just isn't a good film, I have never watched it the whole way through.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Clyde

  159. @Rich
    I don't know if it's a NY thing, but here, Puerto Ricans don't like Mexicans and vice versa. In fact, most Hispanics that I know are very Nationalistic about their heritage, like the Irish or the Italians or the Germans and the rest here. No one is going to pay to see this movie, though. Are any of the new woke movies making money? None of my kids go to the movies anymore, we used to go all the time when I was their ages and the guys I know with young kids say everything is pushing the homosexual and anti-White agenda too hard for the young kids. Maybe movies are finally dead?

    Replies: @Goddard

    Maybe movies are finally dead?

    They’re dead to my family, which includes young children. Boycotting Hollywood is a “sacrifice” many more of us should be willing to make.

  160. I am told that the movie is partially in Spanish, with no subtitles. No thanks.

  161. @Altai

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan)
     
    I feel like as with Lincoln there is a very strong who/whom reason he feels so proud of American soldiers during WW2. The same who/whom we see elsewhere in the changes to this film.

    The movie gets off to a flat-footed start with a long talky section offering Kushner’s dysgenic theory of why the Jets are so poor despite all that sweet white privilege: Nature and nurture has made them white trash, urban Jukes descended from a long line of drunks and crooks. The better sorts of whites, the ones with identity, “the Irish, the Italians, the Jews,” have moved up and out, leaving behind these deracinated losers.
     
    Isn't this exactly what you're never supposed to notice about the worst black and Latino ghettos? And since when are the down and outs in NYC Anglo even in the 50s. This kind of language is the surest evidence for the demise of the left on economic issues. This sounds like something you'd hear from the most right-wing libertarian 20 years ago. (Though thought by a great majority of upper middle class liberals)

    Not only do the Sharks work for lower pay, they're better employees! And better people! (Though as their giant flag murals and hate for the poor American's they're displacing make clear, they're not better Americans)

    It also sounds suspiciously like 'a people for a land for a land without a people'. And as anyone who has taken a walk through Manhattan in the last 15 years knows, there are no better looking, better dressed or more standout characters than Puerto Ricans.

    And rather than cast Russian-American Natalie Wood as Maria, Spielberg’s team supposedly auditioned 30,000 Latinas before picking Catholic schoolgirl Rachel Zegler. In case you are wondering about how somebody named “Rachel Zegler” represents Puerto Ricans, her mother is from Colombia, which is not exactly Puerto Rico but close enough for Spielberg.
     
    Her casting announcement did wonders for her career in the woke era. She has since been cast as Snow White.

    https://twitter.com/musicmovieshoop/status/1470513991202050054

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan), has decided that what we need to acquaint the increasingly multicultural public with the USA’s past glories, rather like what Lin-Manuel Miranda intended to do for The Federalist Papers with his boyish Hamilton, is for him to remake West Side Story.
     
    I'd argue that these things represent an attempt to recontextualise things for a new people. The founding fathers in American after the great wave went from statesmen with a particular ethnicity and understanding of whom their 'posterity' was into philosopher kings with highly abstract ideals that actually, when you think about it, would have supported the great wave of immigration!

    In a sense history for a place only really begins when the people there arrive and recontextualisng the founding fathers meant America could still maintain a connection to it's founding. This is why I was shocked when they started to pull down their statues. When you do that you're ending America's connection to it's own past. In a real sense you're ending America as a state that say white people or WASPs feel as being theirs. And in so doing you kill the citizenist ideal of an 'American'. There are very real consequences for that both subtle and gross and certainly not all in the direction of the desires of those who took the statues down.

    And speaking of Lin-Manuel Miranda, he tried to steal Spielberg's thunder and with added authenticity with his own New York musical about Puerto Ricans with his film adaptation of his stage musical 'In The Heights' though with an added plot about a plan to round up all the 'DREAMERs' and deport them. It did exceptionally poorly even considering the pandemic. (The trailers made it clear it wasn't for white people and 'Hispanics' didn't go see it, probably as Steve noted because it was about Puerto Ricans/Dominicans and to paraphrase Ann Coulter, how many Puerto Ricans does Hollywood think are in this country?)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HAR3QBuiiU

    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist and as soon as the 'Juneteenth' musical gets finished as both a stage production and film, it will be the thing history (And probably a lot of English) teachers across America play endlessly as a treat to their students over their whole school career. Though I don't think the Juneteenth musical will be as well-attended, (No fancy clothes and it won't have the veneer of upper middle classness) it will still take the focus away from Hamilton and the media won't still-boost it anymore. He still has all the money but I feel like he really wants the attention even more.

    Replies: @mc23, @Jim Don Bob, @Anon, @ginger bread man, @Mike Tre

    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),

    This is not accurate at all. What part of “mid century America” has Spielberg ever admired other than the ones who killed Nazis? How about a movie about the 1930’s? Not many of those made for some reason, even though FDR was supposedly the greatest president evar! He could make a movie out of the Hemingway Book “To Have and Have Not” although it may not illustrate the New Deal as the success it supposedly was.

    This is pretty obvious merely by observing the stark differences in the production and tone of Band of Brothers as compared to The Pacific.

    • Replies: @Sam Malone
    @Mike Tre

    What were the differences in tone between Band of Brothers and The Pacific that you're thinking of? I watched a lot of each series years ago but didn't notice a shift of style.

    The Pacific did drive home just how relentlessly miserable and vicious and 'killing-centric' that war was for the Americans. All I remember is one of the characters after the war trying to get a job and the indifferent office person asking what skills or training he got in the Army that might qualify him in the workplace. This is galling to him and to the audience after having seen all these young men out in the mud and rain trying to stay alive while fulfilling their duty to kill as many of the enemy as possible. And he just answers, "Killing Japs. That's what I did for 3 years. That's all they trained me to do. Killing Japs."

  162. @R.G. Camara
    @Americano

    Exceptions to the rule only prove the rule.

    Replies: @Goddard

    Exceptions to the rule only prove the rule.

    No they don’t, at least not in the way you are implying. Exceptions don’t validate the rule. They put the validity of the rule to the test.

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
    @Goddard

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Exception_that_proves_the_rule#Original_meaning

  163. @Meretricious
    @Steve Sailer

    Irish/Jewish would have been more interesting IMO as there really is a connection between those communities historically, and the plot could have delved into Jewish and Catholic taboos against intermarriage (but as we all know, the taboo is much stronger in the Jewish community)

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    When Robbins and Laurent brainstormed their 1947 idea for an Irish vs. Jewish “East Side Story,” they gave up because it kept sounding like “Abie’s Irish Rose.”

    The 1922 comedy “Abie’s Irish Rose” was the biggest Broadway hit of the 1920s, but loathed by critics, especially Robert Benchley:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abie%27s_Irish_Rose

    “Although the play was a tremendous popular success, it was universally loathed by the critics. Robert Benchley, then the theatre critic for Life magazine, nursed a particular hatred for it. Part of Benchley’s job was to write capsule reviews each week. He described Abie’s Irish Rose variously as “Something Awful”, “Just about as low as good clean fun can get”, “Showing that the Jews and the Irish crack equally old jokes”, “The comic spirit of 1876”, “People laugh at this every night, which explains why democracy can never be a success”, “Will the Marines never come?” and finally “Hebrews 13:8,” a Biblical passage that reads, “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and today, and forever.”[7] He also held a contest for an outsider to contribute the capsule review, which Harpo Marx won with “No worse than a bad cold.”[8][9]”

  164. @Agitprop
    I think your article is missing one key insight into the musical's unpopularity: that, by and large, hispanic kids want to go to the movies to see white people playing superheroes, not lame brown people speaking lame Spanish, which they can get plenty of at home.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Harry Baldwin, @Anonymous

    Indeed.

  165. It’s interesting to contemplate what was normal and became gayed up.

    What is straight now and will be gay in 20 years?

  166. @Pixo
    @PaceLaw

    Puerto Ricans dominate multiple genres of Spanish music. They probably punch 15x their population weight.

    With pop music talent, the triracial PRs, Cubans, and Dominicans are on top, in that order. Next are similarly triracial Colombians and Venezuelans. Behind them are white Spanish, Argentines, and upper class Mexicans. On the bottom are indios and mostly-indio mestizos from Peru, Mexico, and Central America.

    Pictured is Thalia, one of the few Mexican singers to break out internationally.

    https://laverdadnoticias.com/export/sites/laverdad/img/2019/08/06/captura_de_pantalla_2019-08-06_a_laxsx_17_04_32.png_2070948262.png

    Replies: @PaceLaw, @S. Anonyia, @Goddard

    Thalia reaches a level of beauty that only white women can attain.

  167. @res
    @Jonathan Mason


    Presumably she was the best person who auditioned, or brought something to the role that others didn’t.
     
    Your faux-naïveté is charming. /sarc

    P.S. Regarding the Mel Gibson as Jesus mistake, it's a good thing Jonathan Mason only writes about things he knows about or has an interest in. Imagine how uninformed his comments would be if he was not so conscientious. (oops, guess I was premature with the /sarc above)

    Reading the PS of this comment might help explain my PS.
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/open-thread-this-weeks-various-trials-of-the-century/#comment-5049809

    Replies: @TWS, @Mike Tre

    He’s a Hindu.

  168. @Redneck farmer
    Wouldn't a truly updated West Side Story have the Puerto Ricans driving out Blacks?

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @PaceLaw

    No, Dominicans.

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
    @Paperback Writer

    Watching Domincans drive out PRs and blacks and making semi-decent working class neighborhoods out of their slums is something to behold. At first the blacks and PRs think the Domincans will be their brothers/give them their women, and the Domicans are like, "Nope! Hit the road, trash heap!"

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  169. @Jack D
    @HammerJack

    I don't need no 30 seconds. No dude is touching me down there. I don't care if he is the most handsome dude on earth. At least Dworkin had the correct orifice.

    Replies: @HammerJack

    Yeah, she’s not bad for a Jewish chick.

    • Replies: @Bernard
    @HammerJack


    HammerJack says:Next New Comment
    December 16, 2021 at 12:00 am GMT • 5.0 hours ago ↑
    @Jack D
    Yeah, she’s not bad for a Jewish chick.
     
    Gotta disagree with you there HammerJack, Ms Dworkin was a visual offense to any sentient creature, human or otherwise. Though like Jack, I’d prefer her to the alternative proposed.
    , @Rapparee
    @HammerJack

    Andrea Dworkin’s great misfortune was to have been born into a secular socialist Jewish family in the 20th century, rather than a family of French Catholics in the 13th century, from whom she might well have gone on to found and lead an order of ascetic nuns dedicated to making penitential reparation for the world’s sins against chastity. She started out with a pretty thoroughly demented picture of the world, and never really escaped it, but you could see her slowly and tentatively groping her way back toward truth over the course of her lifetime. Gotta give her credit, at least, for telling pedophile Alan Ginsberg to his face that she wanted to see him executed.

    Replies: @Art Deco

  170. @Jack D
    @D. K.

    Maybe they hadn't cleared the whole area yet but there is film of the groundbreaking and there is clearly a large vacant lot (looks like the better part of two blocks) where they have set up a tent and chairs.

    https://www.pbs.org/video/groundbreaking-ceremony-lincoln-center-8sr6lc/

    Replies: @D. K.

    “Maybe they hadn’t cleared the whole area yet but there is film of the groundbreaking and there is clearly a large vacant lot (looks like the better part of two blocks) where they have set up a tent and chairs.”

    According to Steve, the movie is set in 1957. The groundbreaking ceremony took place on May 14, 1959. The Supreme Court did not settle the legal case filed against the plan’s takings under eminent domain until July 1, 1958. The relocation of the residents of the area took from July 1958 until October 1961– the very month that “West Side Story” (1961) premiered in New York City (10/18/61)!

    ***

    Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts is a 16.3-acre complex of buildings in the Lincoln Square neighborhood of Manhattan in New York City. It is located in the former San Juan Hill neighborhood, which was demolished in 1959 to accommodate it.

    ***

    https://archive.org/details/xd-45324-lincoln-center-the-place-and-the-idea-vwr

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @D. K.

    Ok, so the movie is off a year in its timeline. So what. Maybe Steve made a mistake and the movie is really set in 1958. Does that change anything?

    In GWTW, there is a scene where Melani grabs an "oil lamp" and you can see the electrical cord hanging down. Ergo, GWTW is not a great movie.

    https://www.moviemistakes.com/images/mistakegrabs/3541.jpg

    The "movie mistake" gotcha is itself wrong. They call it a "gas lamp".

    Replies: @D. K.

  171. @Wade Hampton
    @tyrone

    Michelle Obama from 2019:


    "...she recalled how white families abandoned her once-diverse, middle-class Chicago community and others like it as more black families came into the neighborhood. And she warned that it’s still happening today as immigrants move into communities, spurring some white residents to pack up and leave.

    'There were no gang fights, there were no territorial battles. Yet one by one, they packed their bags and they ran from us,” she said at the event. “And they left communities in shambles.'"
     

    I "took flight" and relocated from a dangerously diverse community to one that is almost lily white. I'm much less likely to get shot while shopping at Walmart now. I know that not wanting to get shot while shopping is highly racist, but I'm OK with that.

    https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/michelle-obama-white-flight/

    Replies: @Art Deco, @AceDeuce

    I sell my house and move away (which people in owner-occupied housing do routinely, on average every 12 years). Somehow, I’m blamed for the ‘shambles’ made by the succeeding cohort of residents. Or perhaps it’s her accusation that I trashed the neighborhood and then relocated to a different neighborhood which I did not trash for some reason? (As we speak, the neighborhood she grew up in has a homicide rate of 82 per 100,000; what’s typical in inner ring suburbs is 5.6 per 100,000, more distant suburbs, 2.3 per 100,000).

  172. @Redneck farmer
    Wouldn't a truly updated West Side Story have the Puerto Ricans driving out Blacks?

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @PaceLaw

    In my experience when I used to live in Philadelphia, Puerto Ricans and blacks got along pretty well and there really was nobody being driven out of neighborhoods. I understand the situation is quite different in Los Angeles were Mexicans have been driving blacks out of neighborhoods.

  173. @D. K.
    @Jack D

    "Maybe they hadn’t cleared the whole area yet but there is film of the groundbreaking and there is clearly a large vacant lot (looks like the better part of two blocks) where they have set up a tent and chairs."

    According to Steve, the movie is set in 1957. The groundbreaking ceremony took place on May 14, 1959. The Supreme Court did not settle the legal case filed against the plan's takings under eminent domain until July 1, 1958. The relocation of the residents of the area took from July 1958 until October 1961-- the very month that "West Side Story" (1961) premiered in New York City (10/18/61)!

    ***

    Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts is a 16.3-acre complex of buildings in the Lincoln Square neighborhood of Manhattan in New York City. It is located in the former San Juan Hill neighborhood, which was demolished in 1959 to accommodate it.

    ***

    https://archive.org/details/xd-45324-lincoln-center-the-place-and-the-idea-vwr

    Replies: @Jack D

    Ok, so the movie is off a year in its timeline. So what. Maybe Steve made a mistake and the movie is really set in 1958. Does that change anything?

    In GWTW, there is a scene where Melani grabs an “oil lamp” and you can see the electrical cord hanging down. Ergo, GWTW is not a great movie.

    The “movie mistake” gotcha is itself wrong. They call it a “gas lamp”.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Jack D

    "Ok, so the movie is off a year in its timeline. So what. Maybe Steve made a mistake and the movie is really set in 1958. Does that change anything?"

    No, the use of paint cans allegedly stolen from the Lincoln Center construction site still would be an anachronism, if the film were set in 1958 rather than in 1957, because there was no such construction site, let alone any plausible need for paint therein, prior to 1959.

    "In GWTW, there is a scene where Melani grabs an 'oil lamp' and you can see the electrical cord hanging down. Ergo, GWTW is not a great movie."

    When Steven Spielberg's version of "West Side Story" (2021) becomes as successful and beloved as either its 1961 predecessor or David O. Selznick's "Gone with the Wind" (1939), feel welcome to get back in touch with me, Jack-- or, more likely, with whoever is serving as my estate's executor, at that distant point in time, in a dystopic America (or whatever country or countries then exist, where America used to be).

    Here is some pro bono advice, Jack: Beware the "Goofs" sections on IMDb.com! Contributors thereto are exponentially more picky about movies' flaws than I ever would be.

  174. @Jack D
    @Steve Sailer

    So why didn't they? Wood had some star power but none of the male leads were or ever became box office draws. Were they saving on payroll? Were they unable to find someone with enough dancing talent? Too hard to find established actors who are adults but still plausible for the roles (child actors don't usually age well into adult roles - they tend to be short. Daniel Radcliffe is a very shrimp 5'-5" in his platform shoes).

    Even this time, they had to bring David Alvarez out of retirement. He won a Tony for Billy Elliot as a teen but then he went into the Army and didn't tell any of his Army buddies that he had been a dancer (can you spell ghey?) Somehow the casting director found him.

    Replies: @Art Deco

    About the stage production, Larry Kert interviewed ca. 1972 said that in casting they were particular about not selecting anyone prominent, as they thought that would generate a distraction that went against their promotional strategy. Also the production was heavy with dancers.

    Kert auditioned for the film but was reportedly thought to be too old at 30 to play the late adolescent Tony, so they cast Richard Beymer, then 22, who had assembled about a dozen screen and television credits over the previous four years (including supporting roles in three films). One problem was that neither Beymer nor Wood had a singing voice of sufficient quality, so their songs were dubbed by studio singers (something concealed for years). They may have seen Beymer as up-and-coming.

  175. @Alden
    Here’s how the Puerto Ricans came to NYC and settled in the part of Harlem that became known as Spanish Harlem.

    1930s part of Harlem was White, mostly Italian, not yet black. Famous Italian restaurant Rao’s is still there. Al Pacino grew up there on one of the last Italian blocks An attorney and politician Vito Marcantonio was the long time Congress critter for the White section of Harlem. He belonged to the American Labor Party. It was a CPUSA front masquerading as a New Deal pro worker party. Disappeared soon after CPUSA ceased supporting it. The mostly Italians of the district voted for him because he was Italian.

    By 1940 the Italians were moving out of Harlem and the district was getting blacker. Plus war industry and the war made the working class who supported the New Deal very prosperous. Less Italian and American Labor Party Marcantonio voters.

    What to do? Import Puerto Ricans to Marcantonio’s district. Which kept him in congress until the early 1950s. That’s how the PRs came to settle in what became known as Spanish Harlem until the neighborhood became almost completely black.

    My teen age review of the original
    West Side Story. I and my contemporaries didn’t like it all. Most of the boomers were children and only went to the kid’s Saturday afternoon 3 cartoons and a cowboy or Disney movie.

    Even in 1961, 62 the movie was really old fashioned and dated. Most visible the girls clothes. 1940 to 1990 young women’s fashions changed drastically every 2 years. Everybody kept up. The girls costumes were fitted bodice full skirts. Out of fashion. But great for a musicals with all the dance numbers.

    Then the entire theme of juvenile delinquency as it was called at the time. From the 1930s on juvenile delinquency was a major story in newspapers and editorials the quality magazines. Sociology was based on it. In my hometown, several high and middle schools were already taken over by black thugs. Delinquents has a bad reputation and here was a movie both glorifying and sissifying them. Weird.

    As far as I can remember they didn’t shoplift, rob anyone steal a car which was easy to do in those days even jump a subway turnstile.

    Except for America which was fast and loud and Officer Krupke the songs were just Sinatra style slow moony old people’s music. The whole thing was an old fashioned musical. Beloved by the greatest generation, not young people.

    The dancing boys were just so skinny and dainty and effeminate it was hard to believe they were delinquents as they were called at the time. All the tough boy delinquent movie actors wore jeans white T shirts and sometimes leather jackets. I don’t remember them even smoking. They dressed like a Gentleman’s Quartely spread on casual wear. Not even the famous duck tail haircut of the day, let alone jeans.

    And Puerto Ricans in NYC. Who outside of NYC ever heard of them? Most people with Spanish surnames lived in the southwest. Not the east coast. For most Americans Puerto Rico was a sentence in the high school history chapter on the Spanish American war.

    Plus they didn’t seem to have homes and parents. It was dated even in 1961. Rita Moreno has a great hair style, and was lively. America was a great song.

    Replies: @D. K., @Anonymous

    “Except for America which was fast and loud and Officer Krupke the songs were just Sinatra style slow moony old people’s music. The whole thing was an old fashioned musical. Beloved by the greatest generation, not young people.”

    ***

    West Side Story was a commercial success upon its release. It became the highest-grossing film of 1961, earning rentals of \$19,645,000 in the United States and Canada. It remained the highest-grossing musical film of all-time[34] until the release of The Sound of Music in 1965. The film grossed \$44.1 million worldwide (\$382 million in 2020). Because of profit participation, United Artists earned a profit of only \$2.5 million on the film (\$22 million in 2020).[35]

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_film)#Box_office

    ***

    West Side Story is the soundtrack album to the 1961 film West Side Story, featuring music by Leonard Bernstein and lyrics by Stephen Sondheim. Released in 1961, the soundtrack spent 54 weeks at No. 1 on Billboard’s album charts, giving it the longest run at No. 1 of any album in history,[2] although some lists instead credit Michael Jackson’s Thriller, on the grounds that West Side Story was listed on a chart for stereo albums only at a time when many albums were recorded in mono.[3] In 1962, it won a Grammy award for “Best Sound Track Album – Original Cast.” In the United States, it was the best-selling album of the 1960s,[4] certifying three times platinum by the RIAA on November 21, 1986.

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_soundtrack)

    There is nothing wrong with not personally liking a film or soundtrack album that was highly popular and financially successful. There is something wrong with proclaiming that it was not highly popular and financially successful, in its own time, regardless of its current legacy, let alone of a random individual’s opinion of it, then or now.

    • Agree: Jonathan Mason
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @D. K.

    The thing about successful and popular movies is that it always starts with great songs that people take to their hearts.

    When I was a little boy I knew the song "Oh, What a Beautiful Day" even though I had never heard of Oklahoma.

    When I was a slightly bigger boy I knew many of the tunes from South Pacific, I knew nothing of the musical or the movie, but I knew the words to several of the songs.

    When I was an adolescent I fell briefly in love with Julie Andrews, and certainly knew all the words to Doh-Re-Mi and My Favorite Things, and a bit later in life when I was a rebellious adolescent I loved John Coltrane's subversive take on My Favorite Things.

    Sometimes I only discovered much later that beloved songs were originally from musicals, and probably most of the people of many races, ages, and nationalities belting out this song have never heard of the musical Carousel, set in New England, but based on a Hungarian story.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weec_jzudc8

    So great musicals unite us all because of the great songs that people sing all over the world.

    Right from the beginning of musicals there was always the question of whether it was better to have actors who could sing (Rex Harrison, if you can call his rap singing) or singers who could act like Julie Andrews.

    I think that Rachel Zegler is a huge talent, perhaps falling more into the singer who can act category at this stage of her career. Some posters have criticized her looks. Well, she is no Susan Boyle and bears a passing resemblance to Ali McGraw who starred in Love Story, one of the most popular movies of its time in which McGraw managed to die of cancer while looking good.

    I think lots of adolescents and young men will fall in love with her in movie, which is what counts, and I get the feeling that she is going to be a huge star in the future.

    She might be the next Lea Salonga, but perhaps she might become more popular in popular music than on stage if her songwriting abilities mature, rather than have a career like McGraw, whose career was never fully resurrected after her death in Love Story. (Apparently she suffered from alcoholism.)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lExFL3X5-U

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @Alden

    , @Alden
    @D. K.

    It wasn’t popular with young people. It was popular with late 20s and older. Who liked that music and dated clothes. We went to high school traveled on city buses with and interacted with what were call hoods. Those WSS dancing boys weren’t hoods. And didn’t commit any crimes not even shoplifting snacks. They didn’t go to school or seem to have homes or parents. What kind of teens are that? . Some of them had jobs. Which was realistic for the times.

    WSS was a standard musical one of the most popular 1930 to 1970 genres. Popular with the older people who went to musicals all during the 1940s and 50s.

    To high school and just out of high school age viewers it was very unrealistic. They were supposed to be our age. But just danced around their neighborhood. No school no homes no parents no draft for the boys.

    Replies: @D. K.

  176. @Calvin Hobbes

    When You’re a Remake
     
    I’m sure there’s a clever allusion in that title, but I can’t figure it out.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

    I’m sure there’s a clever allusion in that title, but I can’t figure it out.

    Sometimes Steve is a little oblique. It might take you from your first cigarette to your last dying day to get the reference.

  177. @Americano
    @R.G. Camara

    @R.G. Camara


    Puerto Ricans have long been considered the blacks of the Spanish-speaking world. They are often stereotyped amongst Hispanics as stupid, lazy, low-class, ugly, and violent, and being prone to profuse slang and street-gang membership.
     
    I think you are conflating "Afro-Puerto Ricans" with all Puerto Ricans. No one on earth think of Puerto Rican women as "ugly." The little Island has five (5) Miss Universe (1970: Marisol Malaret, 1985: Deborah Carthy-Deu, 1993: Dayanara Torres, 2001: Denise M. Quiñones and 2006: Zuleyka Rivera).

    The first Hispanic Male Oscar winner was Puerto Rican actor Jose Ferrer. The first Hispanic Female oscar winner was Puerto Rican actress Rita Moreno. Some of the biggest Hispanic superstars are Puerto Ricans: Jennifer Lopez, Ricky Martin, Marc Anthony, and Benicio del Toro.

    Puerto Rico is renowned for producing Salsa singers, most of whom are White (Hector Lavoe, Eddie Santiago, Lalo Rodriguez, Victor Manuel, Tony Vega, Frankie Ruiz, Tito Rojas, Johnny Rivera, etc.)

    To be sure, there was a time in New York City where mostly Afro-Puerto Ricans lived alongside Blacks and thus shared many of the urban social problems.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @Intelligent Dasein

    No one on earth think of Puerto Rican women as “ugly.”

    No one with a normal psycho-sexual makeup, anyway. If Rosie Perez is wrong then, brother, I don’t want to be right.

  178. @Jack D
    @D. K.

    Ok, so the movie is off a year in its timeline. So what. Maybe Steve made a mistake and the movie is really set in 1958. Does that change anything?

    In GWTW, there is a scene where Melani grabs an "oil lamp" and you can see the electrical cord hanging down. Ergo, GWTW is not a great movie.

    https://www.moviemistakes.com/images/mistakegrabs/3541.jpg

    The "movie mistake" gotcha is itself wrong. They call it a "gas lamp".

    Replies: @D. K.

    “Ok, so the movie is off a year in its timeline. So what. Maybe Steve made a mistake and the movie is really set in 1958. Does that change anything?”

    No, the use of paint cans allegedly stolen from the Lincoln Center construction site still would be an anachronism, if the film were set in 1958 rather than in 1957, because there was no such construction site, let alone any plausible need for paint therein, prior to 1959.

    “In GWTW, there is a scene where Melani grabs an ‘oil lamp’ and you can see the electrical cord hanging down. Ergo, GWTW is not a great movie.”

    When Steven Spielberg’s version of “West Side Story” (2021) becomes as successful and beloved as either its 1961 predecessor or David O. Selznick’s “Gone with the Wind” (1939), feel welcome to get back in touch with me, Jack– or, more likely, with whoever is serving as my estate’s executor, at that distant point in time, in a dystopic America (or whatever country or countries then exist, where America used to be).

    Here is some pro bono advice, Jack: Beware the “Goofs” sections on IMDb.com! Contributors thereto are exponentially more picky about movies’ flaws than I ever would be.

  179. @Anonymous
    @Pat Hannagan


    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),…

    Ah, geeze, c’mon, really? You actually believe this?
     
    Saving Private Ryan is really about hating Germans, not admiring Americans. If Steve had any loyalty to his own people he would see this.

    https://youtu.be/l4FeyONCtfc

    Replies: @Jack D, @LondonBob

    If Steve had any loyalty to his own people he would see this

    Steve is German? Who knew?

  180. @Steve Sailer
    @pyrrhus

    "With a wonderful cast including Sinatra and Brando?"

    But Brando insisted on taking the more singing role and thus Sinatra had to take the more acting role.

    Do that the right way and it would have been great.

    Replies: @D. K.

    “But Brando insisted on taking the more singing role and thus Sinatra had to take the more acting role.

    “Do that the right way and it would have been great.”

    No! (1) Frank Sinatra made a much better ‘Nathan Detroit’ than he would have a ‘Sky Masterson’– irrespective of his exponentially better singing voice, compared to Marlon Brando; and, (2) no movie in which Marlon Brando’s character’s singing was not dubbed by a competent singer could be said to be truly “great.”

  181. WSS is the only musical that straight men have seen and liked. When it premiered on TV, for the next couple of days the guys in my all male high school would be singing the songs, clicking their thumbs, and so forth.
    The original had Natalie Wood. When I saw her on the big screen, see flashed her Romanov eyes and I developed an obsession over her. I still fear that Robert Wagner will punch me out.

    • LOL: PhysicistDave
  182. @peterike
    So speaking of Sondheim, I just started watching the movie of "Into The Woods," a musical I love. (Sorry, Steve, you are totally wrong about Sondheim and melodies.) And it was just what I expected. Great work on costumes, very fairy-tale looking world creation, but... all the singing is dreadful. Because of course they cast actors who can't sing worth a damn. Compare, for only one example, Meryl Streep's throat-strangling gurgle singing vs. the original score with Bernadette Peters, who is both a 1000x better singer, but also better looking. So why didn't they choose her for the movie? Because it's actors first, always. In a world with a thousand perfectly good out-of-work Broadway singers for every role, we get plodding clods like James Corden. In a MUSICAL.

    Here's a hint, producers: the songs only work if you get people who can actually sing them.

    This stupid mentality also gets you Anna Kendrick as Cinderella, who not only can't sing, but is at best marginally attractive. But she's friggin' CINDERELLA. In short, the film is a gigantic failure for the same reason the "Sweeny Todd" film was a gigantic failure: not a single main character can sing worth a damn and all the casting is abysmal.

    I wonder if the same is true for West Side Story? I do see that in Rachel Zeglar they have picked yet another marginally attractive woman for a staring role as a romantic lead.

    Hollywood stinks.

    Replies: @keypusher

    I assume you have the video of the Broadway production with Peters — quite good.

  183. @Luzzatto
    @R.G. Camara

    Mexico has a much higher murder rate than Puerto Rico both in raw numbers and per capita. So no Mexican is looking down on Puerto Ricans as violent when Mexicans themselves are not peaceful model minorities that all other groups in the world should strive to be more like. Mexicans would not need affirmative action if Mexicans were the gold standard.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @Pixo

    “ Mexico has a much higher murder rate than Puerto Rico”

    PR is under the jurisdiction of the USA. That means big law enforcement subsidies and at least some Anglo competence and non-corruption with the FBI, DEA, US Marshal, Federal prison system.

    Apples to apples would be PR versus a 90% Mexican area also under Anglo jurisdiction like the Rio Grande Valley.

    You can also compare PR slums in NYC with Mexican ones in LA and Chicago. No matter how you look at it, Mexicans are less crime prone.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Pixo

    PR is under the jurisdiction of the USA. That means big law enforcement subsidies and at least some Anglo competence and non-corruption with the FBI, DEA, US Marshal, Federal prison system.

    But what about Detroit and Baltimore?

    The real reason could be Mexico is ideally situated to ship tons of drugs to the US. Puerto Rico, not so much.

  184. Funny to see a somewhat chunky Robert Downey Jr in that great SNL sketch, which aired on November 16, 1996. Oddly, he had been a much-reviled SNL player 11 years earlier.

    In 1985, Downey Jr had his first big breakthrough when he was hired by Saturday Night Live. The actor was introduced as part of the show’s new, younger cast, but after a year of poor ratings and a claim from Rolling Stone that Downey Jr was the worst SNL cast member ever, he was dropped from the show.

    In April 1996, Downey got himself in some serious trouble.

    In April 1996, Downey was arrested for possession of heroin, cocaine, and an unloaded .357 Magnum handgun while he was speeding down Sunset Boulevard. A month later, while on parole, he trespassed into a neighbor’s home while under the influence of a controlled substance, and fell asleep in one of the beds. He received three years’ probation and was ordered to undergo compulsory drug testing. In 1997, he missed one of the court-ordered drug tests and had to spend six months in the Los Angeles County jail.

    After Downey missed another required drug test in 1999, he was arrested again. Despite Downey’s lawyer, Robert Shapiro, assembling the same team of lawyers that had successfully defended O. J. Simpson during his criminal trial for murder, Downey was sentenced to a three-year prison term at the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison in Corcoran, California.

    He ended up doing a year in prison.

    He redeemed himself, which is wonderful to see.

    • Replies: @Mike Tre
    @Harry Baldwin

    In Back to School, he plays a character that is pretty much what you'd expect Tony Stark to be like in college.

    Related - I was also an unaccredited extra in Rodney Dangerfield's 75th Birthday Celebration Special on HBO.

  185. @Agitprop
    I think your article is missing one key insight into the musical's unpopularity: that, by and large, hispanic kids want to go to the movies to see white people playing superheroes, not lame brown people speaking lame Spanish, which they can get plenty of at home.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Harry Baldwin, @Anonymous

    not lame brown people speaking lame Spanish

    Q: If German lis the language of science, French the language of diplomacy, and Italian the language of love, what is Spanish?

    A: Spanish is the language of poverty.

  186. Anonymous[397] • Disclaimer says:
    @Alden
    Here’s how the Puerto Ricans came to NYC and settled in the part of Harlem that became known as Spanish Harlem.

    1930s part of Harlem was White, mostly Italian, not yet black. Famous Italian restaurant Rao’s is still there. Al Pacino grew up there on one of the last Italian blocks An attorney and politician Vito Marcantonio was the long time Congress critter for the White section of Harlem. He belonged to the American Labor Party. It was a CPUSA front masquerading as a New Deal pro worker party. Disappeared soon after CPUSA ceased supporting it. The mostly Italians of the district voted for him because he was Italian.

    By 1940 the Italians were moving out of Harlem and the district was getting blacker. Plus war industry and the war made the working class who supported the New Deal very prosperous. Less Italian and American Labor Party Marcantonio voters.

    What to do? Import Puerto Ricans to Marcantonio’s district. Which kept him in congress until the early 1950s. That’s how the PRs came to settle in what became known as Spanish Harlem until the neighborhood became almost completely black.

    My teen age review of the original
    West Side Story. I and my contemporaries didn’t like it all. Most of the boomers were children and only went to the kid’s Saturday afternoon 3 cartoons and a cowboy or Disney movie.

    Even in 1961, 62 the movie was really old fashioned and dated. Most visible the girls clothes. 1940 to 1990 young women’s fashions changed drastically every 2 years. Everybody kept up. The girls costumes were fitted bodice full skirts. Out of fashion. But great for a musicals with all the dance numbers.

    Then the entire theme of juvenile delinquency as it was called at the time. From the 1930s on juvenile delinquency was a major story in newspapers and editorials the quality magazines. Sociology was based on it. In my hometown, several high and middle schools were already taken over by black thugs. Delinquents has a bad reputation and here was a movie both glorifying and sissifying them. Weird.

    As far as I can remember they didn’t shoplift, rob anyone steal a car which was easy to do in those days even jump a subway turnstile.

    Except for America which was fast and loud and Officer Krupke the songs were just Sinatra style slow moony old people’s music. The whole thing was an old fashioned musical. Beloved by the greatest generation, not young people.

    The dancing boys were just so skinny and dainty and effeminate it was hard to believe they were delinquents as they were called at the time. All the tough boy delinquent movie actors wore jeans white T shirts and sometimes leather jackets. I don’t remember them even smoking. They dressed like a Gentleman’s Quartely spread on casual wear. Not even the famous duck tail haircut of the day, let alone jeans.

    And Puerto Ricans in NYC. Who outside of NYC ever heard of them? Most people with Spanish surnames lived in the southwest. Not the east coast. For most Americans Puerto Rico was a sentence in the high school history chapter on the Spanish American war.

    Plus they didn’t seem to have homes and parents. It was dated even in 1961. Rita Moreno has a great hair style, and was lively. America was a great song.

    Replies: @D. K., @Anonymous

    My teen age review of the original West Side Story. I and my contemporaries didn’t like it all. Most of the boomers were children and only went to the kid’s Saturday afternoon 3 cartoons and a cowboy or Disney movie.

    Return of Disney’s fortunes owed to a good deal on animation musicals like Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, and The Lion King.

    Pixar didn’t begin with musicals but later did… I think.

    What makes no sense is going from Hollywood to Broadway. Broadway to Hollywood makes sense as movies are bigger and splashier. But there’s only so much one can do on stage.

    Why would anyone turn a movie to a stage production? But it became a thing with stuff like Producers and even Spiderman. But I hear the broadway version of Lion King is really good. Creative puppets and costumes.

    And who wants to see a superhero musical?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    "The Lion King" has made over a billion dollars in ticket sales at a single Times Square theater.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Wilkey

    , @Dave Pinsen
    @Anonymous


    And who wants to see a superhero musical?
     
    Judging from the time I saw Spider-Man on Broadway, a lot of families with young kids.

    To be honest, part of the reason I wanted to see it was the history of accidents it had in rehearsals. Live theater is slightly closer to live sports than a movie; there’s an element of uncertainty to it. And Broadway’s mostly practical special effects are interesting in a way that CGI is not: that costumed stuntman flying over your head on a cable could get seriously hurt. You might even get hurt too.
  187. ‘Spielberg and Kushner make clear that the Sharks and Jets fight because the browns are the good guys and the whites are the bad guys.’

    The absurdity, of course, is that for at least three generations, any interracial gang fights have been between browns and blacks, or browns and Asians.

    Any whites in the Barrio would line up with the Mexicans or just hide.

    …but can you imagine Spielberg making that movie? It would…would be about reality.

    Can’t have that. It’d be like making a movie suggesting that Lincoln’s primary concern was to preserve the Union.

  188. @Goddard
    @R.G. Camara


    Exceptions to the rule only prove the rule.
     
    No they don’t, at least not in the way you are implying. Exceptions don’t validate the rule. They put the validity of the rule to the test.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara

  189. Spielberg has another movie in pre-production, “The Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortara”, a true-life story in which a Jewish baby that was given an emergency baptism by a servant was then taken in by the pope given that the baby was now Christian, despite the parents’ (and most everyone else’s) heartfelt demands for his return. Edgardo eventually became a priest.

    Kidnapping of children was actually quite common throughout much of Europe’s post-Roman history, and according to Ariel Toaff, the very real Jewish participation in the medieval abduction of children for slave markets (they were well-positioned as middle-men, having a foothold in both Christian and Islamic markets) helped spur the infamous and (with the possible exception of Simon and Toledo, fictional) “blood libel”.

    But I’m guessing a movie in which Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular, are set up as the obvious baddies is something Spielberg thinks will play better to modern sensibilities. Christianity-bashing certainly helped resurrect Hitchens’ career after he tarnished it by his Iraq warmongering, and the movie will likely have the support of the press. But if West Side Story continues to bomb, it might leave the kidnapping tale in limbo for a bit longer.

    • Replies: @HA
    @HA

    According to one commenter, the above-cited imdb page on the Edgardo Mortara film -- still listed as being in "pre-production" -- says that despite TWO such films being having been planned, one by Harvey Weinstein and one by Spielberg, both are, as of now, officially dead:


    In the early development stages, Steven Spielberg and DreamWorks Pictures were in talks with Harvey Weinstein and the Weinstein Company about collaborating on this film but could not reach an agreement on various aspects of the production. Both went their separate ways, with Spielberg and DreamWorks producing this film, and Weinstein and the Weinstein Company developing their own separate project about Edgardo Mortara. Both projects ironically are now officially dead as Spielberg moved on to other projects and is no longer affiliated with DreamWorks Pictures. Harvey Weinstein was famously incarnated for dozens of sexual allegations and the Weinstein Company has since gone out of business.
     
    (And of course, it's Simon OF Toledo, not Simon and Toledo; the latter sounds like another picture about a cop and his goofy canine companion.)

    Replies: @MEH 0910

    , @Jack D
    @HA

    I can't see the Edgardo film as something that would have widespread appeal so it wouldn't surprise me if they never get the $ to have it made. People here think that Hollywood is a propaganda machine but first and foremost it is a business.

    The Edgardo Mortara story is something that is well documented as actually having happened and not in some dim distant past but in the mid 19th century. Although it was certainly a tragedy for his family (and a cause celebre in its time), compared with later, uh, unfortunate events in Europe, it was a rather minor incident.

    Do you mean Simon of Trent? After the second Vatican Council, the entire episode was declared a fraud; Simon’s name was removed from the calendar of saints’ days, the cult dedicated to him was dissolved, and further veneration of him was forbidden. Maybe this is because the Joos have captured the Vatican but maybe it's because it really was a fraud.

    According to Ariel Toaff, Jews really did make matzo from the blood of Christian children, so I wouldn't take him as a source for anything. He is one of those Jewish Anti-Semites that Ron Unz loves to dig up.

    Replies: @HA

  190. Anonymous[950] • Disclaimer says:
    @mc23
    @Altai

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White-

    https://iv1.lisimg.com/image/22345621/740full-rachel-zegler.jpg

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous, @PiltdownMan, @Thoughts

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White-

    Hussey? Not even! Hussey was stunning in her heyday. Not so with Zegler.
    She’d be far better cast as Pocahontas. Casting her is just another woke, “yeh, I’m a stupid asshole, and I’ll do a shitty remake that will be quickly trashed and forgotten, because I can,” move.

    She’s more like a refreshed, less attractive version of Kathleen Beller.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Anonymous

    She has something of Bernadette Peters as well.

    At any rate, dark whites vs pale whites, that's what it boils down to.

  191. @Paperback Writer
    @Redneck farmer

    No, Dominicans.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara

    Watching Domincans drive out PRs and blacks and making semi-decent working class neighborhoods out of their slums is something to behold. At first the blacks and PRs think the Domincans will be their brothers/give them their women, and the Domicans are like, “Nope! Hit the road, trash heap!”

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @R.G. Camara


    Watching Domincans drive out PRs and blacks and making semi-decent working class neighborhoods out of their slums is something to behold.

     

    It's a dirty rotten job but someone's gotta do it. They sure did it in the Bronx & the Heights.

    Anyone from outside of NYC know of other places they've done it?

    In NYC they only drove out da blacks, not PRs. The PRs either died, moved back to PR, or assimilated. Black PRs became black, white PRs (I know a few) became white. As PRs they gone from NYC.

    And that's another reason this remake gonna fail: no one gives a shit about either group anymore. There's just zero resonance. White working class in Manhattan? Wassat? Rikkans? Who dey?

  192. @HA
    Spielberg has another movie in pre-production, "The Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortara", a true-life story in which a Jewish baby that was given an emergency baptism by a servant was then taken in by the pope given that the baby was now Christian, despite the parents' (and most everyone else's) heartfelt demands for his return. Edgardo eventually became a priest.

    Kidnapping of children was actually quite common throughout much of Europe's post-Roman history, and according to Ariel Toaff, the very real Jewish participation in the medieval abduction of children for slave markets (they were well-positioned as middle-men, having a foothold in both Christian and Islamic markets) helped spur the infamous and (with the possible exception of Simon and Toledo, fictional) "blood libel".

    But I'm guessing a movie in which Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular, are set up as the obvious baddies is something Spielberg thinks will play better to modern sensibilities. Christianity-bashing certainly helped resurrect Hitchens' career after he tarnished it by his Iraq warmongering, and the movie will likely have the support of the press. But if West Side Story continues to bomb, it might leave the kidnapping tale in limbo for a bit longer.

    Replies: @HA, @Jack D

    According to one commenter, the above-cited imdb page on the Edgardo Mortara film — still listed as being in “pre-production” — says that despite TWO such films being having been planned, one by Harvey Weinstein and one by Spielberg, both are, as of now, officially dead:

    In the early development stages, Steven Spielberg and DreamWorks Pictures were in talks with Harvey Weinstein and the Weinstein Company about collaborating on this film but could not reach an agreement on various aspects of the production. Both went their separate ways, with Spielberg and DreamWorks producing this film, and Weinstein and the Weinstein Company developing their own separate project about Edgardo Mortara. Both projects ironically are now officially dead as Spielberg moved on to other projects and is no longer affiliated with DreamWorks Pictures. Harvey Weinstein was famously incarnated for dozens of sexual allegations and the Weinstein Company has since gone out of business.

    (And of course, it’s Simon OF Toledo, not Simon and Toledo; the latter sounds like another picture about a cop and his goofy canine companion.)

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @HA

    https://variety.com/2021/film/news/steven-spielberg-fabelmans-release-date-1235127301/
    https://twitter.com/Variety/status/1467939710672814092


    The semi-autobiographical “The Fabelmans” takes place in Arizona, where Spielberg spent his formative years, and stars Michelle Williams, Seth Rogen, Paul Dano and newcomer Gabriel LaBelle. Plot details have been kept under wraps, but “The Fabelmans” is said to dramatize the developmental experiences of a movie-lover who eventually became the most commercially successful director in modern times. Williams and Dano are expected to play roles inspired by Spielberg’s mother and father, while Rogen’s part is influenced by the director’s favorite uncle. At the center of the film is LaBelle, as aspiring filmmaker named Sammy, with “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” breakout Julia Butters portraying his sister, Anne.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fabelmans
  193. @Harry Baldwin
    Funny to see a somewhat chunky Robert Downey Jr in that great SNL sketch, which aired on November 16, 1996. Oddly, he had been a much-reviled SNL player 11 years earlier.

    In 1985, Downey Jr had his first big breakthrough when he was hired by Saturday Night Live. The actor was introduced as part of the show's new, younger cast, but after a year of poor ratings and a claim from Rolling Stone that Downey Jr was the worst SNL cast member ever, he was dropped from the show.
     
    In April 1996, Downey got himself in some serious trouble.

    In April 1996, Downey was arrested for possession of heroin, cocaine, and an unloaded .357 Magnum handgun while he was speeding down Sunset Boulevard. A month later, while on parole, he trespassed into a neighbor's home while under the influence of a controlled substance, and fell asleep in one of the beds. He received three years' probation and was ordered to undergo compulsory drug testing. In 1997, he missed one of the court-ordered drug tests and had to spend six months in the Los Angeles County jail.

    After Downey missed another required drug test in 1999, he was arrested again. Despite Downey's lawyer, Robert Shapiro, assembling the same team of lawyers that had successfully defended O. J. Simpson during his criminal trial for murder, Downey was sentenced to a three-year prison term at the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison in Corcoran, California.
     
    He ended up doing a year in prison.

    He redeemed himself, which is wonderful to see.

    Replies: @Mike Tre

    In Back to School, he plays a character that is pretty much what you’d expect Tony Stark to be like in college.

    Related – I was also an unaccredited extra in Rodney Dangerfield’s 75th Birthday Celebration Special on HBO.

  194. @HA
    @HA

    According to one commenter, the above-cited imdb page on the Edgardo Mortara film -- still listed as being in "pre-production" -- says that despite TWO such films being having been planned, one by Harvey Weinstein and one by Spielberg, both are, as of now, officially dead:


    In the early development stages, Steven Spielberg and DreamWorks Pictures were in talks with Harvey Weinstein and the Weinstein Company about collaborating on this film but could not reach an agreement on various aspects of the production. Both went their separate ways, with Spielberg and DreamWorks producing this film, and Weinstein and the Weinstein Company developing their own separate project about Edgardo Mortara. Both projects ironically are now officially dead as Spielberg moved on to other projects and is no longer affiliated with DreamWorks Pictures. Harvey Weinstein was famously incarnated for dozens of sexual allegations and the Weinstein Company has since gone out of business.
     
    (And of course, it's Simon OF Toledo, not Simon and Toledo; the latter sounds like another picture about a cop and his goofy canine companion.)

    Replies: @MEH 0910

    https://variety.com/2021/film/news/steven-spielberg-fabelmans-release-date-1235127301/

    The semi-autobiographical “The Fabelmans” takes place in Arizona, where Spielberg spent his formative years, and stars Michelle Williams, Seth Rogen, Paul Dano and newcomer Gabriel LaBelle. Plot details have been kept under wraps, but “The Fabelmans” is said to dramatize the developmental experiences of a movie-lover who eventually became the most commercially successful director in modern times. Williams and Dano are expected to play roles inspired by Spielberg’s mother and father, while Rogen’s part is influenced by the director’s favorite uncle. At the center of the film is LaBelle, as aspiring filmmaker named Sammy, with “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” breakout Julia Butters portraying his sister, Anne.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fabelmans

  195. Enjoyable!

    I only learned about Puerto Ricans when a millionaires daughter I met when my newly divorced Mom moved to Reston, Virginia. Her father, Robert E. Simon, was building the place. Yeah, I had seen the movie but that was New York. The Third World had not yet moved to Northern Virginia in 1967, Simon’s daughter was a real beauty BTW and kept everyone drooling with her cleavage playing pool in the ‘teen center’.

    Anyway, back then, a Jewish girl from NYC, could speak disparagingly of Puerto Ricans as being against progress ( redevelopment? ) and I thought nothing of it, I even approved of it because her father would not be importing negroes into the development that would bear his name.

    Jews and Wasps were once united on this issue.

    • Thanks: AceDeuce
  196. @PaceLaw
    @Rob

    “ . . . while the PRs are heavily black.”

    You are flatly wrong here Rob. When I was with FEMA, I was deployed to Puerto Rico for hurricane relief back in 2017. I was on the island for over a month and had a chance to travel across all of it. The people definitely are not “heavily black.” Obviously, as in most of Latin America, there is some black influence and strain but it does not predominate. When I think of “heavily black,” I think of Dominicans. On average, PRS do not look like Dominicans.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    Dominicans aren’t necessarily all that Black either.

  197. @Anonymous
    @Carol


    I loved the original and thought it was the greatest thing ever, but the advent of the Beatles s few years later just instantly made it seem so dated
     
    Does Hard Day's Night count as a musical? There is music but it's mostly the Beatles performing as a band. By musical convention, people break into song-and-dance as extension of reality, with no clear border between song and conversation. The animated Yellow Submarine is certainly a musical in this regard.

    How many good musicals have there been since West Side Story? Many love Sound of Music, but many also loathe it. Expensive productions like Doctor Dolittle, Star, and Paint Your Wagon failed. Oliver! did win best picture, but I've never seen it. Scrooge with Albert Finney is sort of fun.

    The French made two memorable ones with Umbrellas of Cherbourg(mostly song) and Young Girls of Rochefort(song and dance).

    Jesus Christ Superstar has its moments and several good songs. Maybe Fiddler on the Roof is the best post-West-Side musical. Cabaret is awful, but All That Jazz is one of a kind. Hair is really well-done but Tharp's choreography is awful and the message is confused and heavy. One from the Heart is one of the worst ever. Ken Russell's Tommy gave rock opera a bad name. Some say Quadrophenia is good. Absolute Beginners also has its cult-fans. Rocky Horror is horrible. The sequel Shock Treatment was almost universally panned but has its defenders. Jacques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris is inexplicable. Some say Woody Allen's musical is kinda good.

    Other than Fiddler on the Roof, maybe the only truly great musical after West Side is O Brother Where Art Thou? That was amazing though the Grand Wizard of KKKOZ number was overkill.

    Probably the biggest hit musical post-Sound of Music was Grease. A giant hit in the middle of the disco era. But maybe that made sense as there was an element of professionalism and finesse in disco. And it was so 'gay'.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Ian M., @PhysicistDave

    You forgot My Fair Lady.

  198. @JMcG
    @PaceLaw

    I don’t know the intricacies, but Mexicans and Puerto Ricans pretty famously don’t like each other, at least below the non-elite level. I’m with the Mexicans here.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    Mexican/Puerto Rican rivalry is overrated by many White people IMHO.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Hibernian

    It's not a rivalry. Just a lack of unity.

  199. @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason


    In fact I played the role of Joseph in a nativity play once, and the issue never came up.
     
    Because your robe didn't. Not that several [ahem] members of the faculty wouldn't have wanted it to.



    Fun fact: the village in which the McGarrigle sisters grew up, Saint-Sauveur-des-Monts, was originally called La Circoncision.

    PAROISSE DE SAINT-SAUVEUR DANS LES LAURENTIDES

    Saint-Sauveur is "San Salvador" in Spanish and "Holy Savior" in English. The feast day is January First, as is the observance of the Circumcision.

    Replies: @D. K., @Hibernian

    The Jan. 1 Holy Day of Obligation became the following, a few years back:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solemnity_of_Mary,_Mother_of_God

    Not sure of the time Wikipedia gives for the changeover; I don’t remember it being that long ago.

  200. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    Fiddler on the Roof was a giant hit on Broadway, but the critics put it down as schmaltzy. The film version is excellent, however.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Fiddler on the Roof was a giant hit on Broadway, but the critics put it down as schmaltzy. The film version is excellent, however.

    I never saw a stage version of FotR, although I did once hear some of it on a record. I imagine a lot of the difference was down to Topol vs. Zero Mostel. I always found Mostel to be insufferable with his endless mugging and eye-bulging. Other than in The Producers, I never found him to be funny or entertaining.

    Topol, on the other hand just played the role straight, and he seems to have a much more engaging personality. He was also good in Flash Gordon and For Your Eyes Only.

    The film version also had an able director in Norman Jewison.

  201. @Muggles
    Yes, the remake of the creaky and obsolete New York centric West Side Story is a monstrous joke. (iSteve's longer Taki review is worth the time...)

    The rest of America cares nothing about Puerto Rico or the "west side" of NYC. All of that is insider New Yorker stuff that was crammed down the sleepy middle class American throats in the late 50s.

    As iSteve notes, were it not for the stolen ("borrowed") plot theme from Shakespeare, it would have never been seen or heard. "So class, we're going to watch this film today and discuss the underlying Shakespearean themes. First you have to read Romeo & Juliet. "

    I recall first watching the movie and it seemed more like gay science fiction with dancing aliens than anything else. Where are the Jews? One thing I knew about NYC was that Jews lived there (not that I had ever met any admitted Jews.) I concluded that the non Jews in the film must be Sharks battling the Puerto Ricans, who were like Mexicans only they all wanted to live in NYC for some reason. Manhattan is a long narrow mostly N-S oriented island. Why is the "west side" different from the east side, or north? Do Puerto Ricans like watching sunsets?

    Later I realized that New Yorkers were more micro geographic obsessed than a mound of termites. They see invisible boundaries which outsiders miss. Their racial radar is second to none. They can even tell what Ukrainian-Polish shetel your Kazarian ancestors came from. Jewdar, gaydar, and whitedar. Oh, and all the White folks are "liberal" and love all races. Just avoid the Orthodox neighborhoods. Or Harlem, or, well, any place where net income is below say, half a mil/yr.

    I naively believed at the time that all musicals were created for and by homosexuals, though I barely knew what that was. Gays like to dance, I guess. Skinny. Who knew NYC gangs were all gay?

    I hope this film loses a ton of money. Woke, hopelessly dated and anti White. Subtitles in English so oppressive. What could go wrong?

    Replies: @D. K., @CCZ, @Reg Cæsar

    “I hope this film loses a ton of money.” Maybe wish granted.

  202. @kaganovitch
    Mel Gibson as Jesus have been replaced by a circumcised actor?

    Hate to break it to you but that wasn't Mel Gibson in the Jesus role.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Emil Nikola Richard

    Willem Dafoe might be the most famous movie Jesus. Wikipedia doesn’t say anything about Jewish.

  203. @Almost Missouri
    OT

    Coupla new Sailer-baits just dropped...

    https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1470961361307897861

    https://twitter.com/SaysSimonson/status/1470511155168915456

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Steve Sailer

    Thanks.

  204. @Anonymous
    @Alden

    My teen age review of the original West Side Story. I and my contemporaries didn’t like it all. Most of the boomers were children and only went to the kid’s Saturday afternoon 3 cartoons and a cowboy or Disney movie.

    Return of Disney's fortunes owed to a good deal on animation musicals like Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, and The Lion King.

    Pixar didn't begin with musicals but later did... I think.

    What makes no sense is going from Hollywood to Broadway. Broadway to Hollywood makes sense as movies are bigger and splashier. But there's only so much one can do on stage.

    Why would anyone turn a movie to a stage production? But it became a thing with stuff like Producers and even Spiderman. But I hear the broadway version of Lion King is really good. Creative puppets and costumes.

    And who wants to see a superhero musical?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dT3EUbOQY4&ab_channel=TurnOffTheDarkArchives

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Dave Pinsen

    “The Lion King” has made over a billion dollars in ticket sales at a single Times Square theater.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @Steve Sailer


    “The Lion King” has made over a billion dollars in ticket sales at a single Times Square theater.
     
    The original movie grossed about $1 billion, which is probably an inflation-adjusted record for a Disney or Pixar animated movie.

    But the stage version version of “Lion King” grossed $8 billion over its first 20 years, and it’s still going. That’s the equivalent of a $400 million movie every year for 20 years.

    Stage musicals are a great way to wring ever more money out of already successful properties.
    , @Wilkey
    @Steve Sailer


    “The Lion King” has made over a billion dollars in ticket sales at a single Times Square theater.
     
    The original movie grossed about $1 billion, which is probably an inflation-adjusted record for a Disney or Pixar animated movie.

    But the stage version version of “Lion King” grossed $8 billion over its first 20 years, and it’s still going (“Phantom,” which has been on stage about a decade longer, has grossed about $6 billion). That’s the equivalent of a $400 million movie every year for 20 years.

    Stage musicals are a great way to wring ever more money out of already successful properties.
  205. @Anonymous
    @Carol


    I loved the original and thought it was the greatest thing ever, but the advent of the Beatles s few years later just instantly made it seem so dated
     
    Does Hard Day's Night count as a musical? There is music but it's mostly the Beatles performing as a band. By musical convention, people break into song-and-dance as extension of reality, with no clear border between song and conversation. The animated Yellow Submarine is certainly a musical in this regard.

    How many good musicals have there been since West Side Story? Many love Sound of Music, but many also loathe it. Expensive productions like Doctor Dolittle, Star, and Paint Your Wagon failed. Oliver! did win best picture, but I've never seen it. Scrooge with Albert Finney is sort of fun.

    The French made two memorable ones with Umbrellas of Cherbourg(mostly song) and Young Girls of Rochefort(song and dance).

    Jesus Christ Superstar has its moments and several good songs. Maybe Fiddler on the Roof is the best post-West-Side musical. Cabaret is awful, but All That Jazz is one of a kind. Hair is really well-done but Tharp's choreography is awful and the message is confused and heavy. One from the Heart is one of the worst ever. Ken Russell's Tommy gave rock opera a bad name. Some say Quadrophenia is good. Absolute Beginners also has its cult-fans. Rocky Horror is horrible. The sequel Shock Treatment was almost universally panned but has its defenders. Jacques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris is inexplicable. Some say Woody Allen's musical is kinda good.

    Other than Fiddler on the Roof, maybe the only truly great musical after West Side is O Brother Where Art Thou? That was amazing though the Grand Wizard of KKKOZ number was overkill.

    Probably the biggest hit musical post-Sound of Music was Grease. A giant hit in the middle of the disco era. But maybe that made sense as there was an element of professionalism and finesse in disco. And it was so 'gay'.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Ian M., @PhysicistDave

    Anonymous[269] asked:

    How many good musicals have there been since West Side Story?

    I think most people with enough knowledge to judge would say Les Miz.

  206. OT:
    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/denis-villeneuve-rendezvous-with-rama-movie-1235062337/

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @MEH 0910

    Great news. Steve will enjoy the books, I think.
    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/1471242347010826250?s=21

    Replies: @MEH 0910

  207. @Mr. Anon
    @Anonymous

    How about "West Bank Story"? That would have been an interesting updating of the story. Who would be the Jets then? Who would be the Sharks?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Wilkey, @Dmon

    Or, “Crown Heights Story”.

  208. @Anonymous
    @mc23

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White-

    Hussey? Not even! Hussey was stunning in her heyday. Not so with Zegler.
    She’d be far better cast as Pocahontas. Casting her is just another woke, "yeh, I’m a stupid asshole, and I’ll do a shitty remake that will be quickly trashed and forgotten, because I can," move.

    She's more like a refreshed, less attractive version of Kathleen Beller.

    https://cdn.shoppingcartthumbnails.com/hollywoodshow/0/catalog/product/k/a/kathleen_beller_dynasty_9.jpg

    Replies: @Anonymous

    She has something of Bernadette Peters as well.

    At any rate, dark whites vs pale whites, that’s what it boils down to.

  209. @Hibernian
    @JMcG

    Mexican/Puerto Rican rivalry is overrated by many White people IMHO.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    It’s not a rivalry. Just a lack of unity.

  210. Anonymous[507] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pixo
    @Luzzatto

    “ Mexico has a much higher murder rate than Puerto Rico”

    PR is under the jurisdiction of the USA. That means big law enforcement subsidies and at least some Anglo competence and non-corruption with the FBI, DEA, US Marshal, Federal prison system.

    Apples to apples would be PR versus a 90% Mexican area also under Anglo jurisdiction like the Rio Grande Valley.

    You can also compare PR slums in NYC with Mexican ones in LA and Chicago. No matter how you look at it, Mexicans are less crime prone.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    PR is under the jurisdiction of the USA. That means big law enforcement subsidies and at least some Anglo competence and non-corruption with the FBI, DEA, US Marshal, Federal prison system.

    But what about Detroit and Baltimore?

    The real reason could be Mexico is ideally situated to ship tons of drugs to the US. Puerto Rico, not so much.

  211. Like an 80s comedian said about WSS: “You got a guy running through Spanish Harlem shouting “MARIA!” and only ONE woman opens her window?”

  212. @D. K.
    @Muggles

    "I recall first watching the movie and it seemed more like gay science fiction with dancing aliens than anything else. Where are the Jews? One thing I knew about NYC was that Jews lived there (not that I had ever met any admitted Jews.)"

    ***

    Ned Glass as Doc, Tony's boss; a decent, elderly Jewish drugstore owner

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_film)#Cast

    ***

    Glass was born in Radom, Congress Poland, Russian Empire, to a Jewish family.[1] He emigrated to the United States at an early age and grew up in New York City.[2] He attended City College.[3]

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Glass#Early_life

    Replies: @D. K.

    By the way, Ned Glass’ mini-biography at IMDb.com claims:

    “His career was briefly put on hold after being blacklisted during the McCarthy era, but, with help from friends like John Houseman and Moe Howard (of The Three Stooges fame) he managed to get enough film work to make ends meet.”

    One of the three Trivia items at his IMDb.com entry likewise claims:

    “After being blacklisted in the 1950s, he made his living as a carpenter, a trade he learned by building his own house.”

    Checking his credits page, however, we find that Mr. Glass had 86 out of his total of 229 acting credits (ranging from 1937 to 1982) that included performances in the 1950s!?! (N.B. Multiple appearances in a television series are treated as a single credit toward an actor’s total.) That decade included a low of four acting credits, for 1955, and a high of 17 acting credits, for 1957. That, of course, is not actually how the studio blacklist of communists worked, back in the 1950s. I have come across several claims on IMDb.com about actors who supposedly were blacklisted, back then, yet who have expansive lists of acting credits, throughout the 1950s.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @D. K.

    Apparently he was briefly blacklisted early in the blacklist era and managed to get off .

    From 1942 to 1950, he has one role listed as "Svengarlic's Manager (uncredited)" in a short. Probably from '42 to '45 he was in war service, but I can't imagine that he could have supported himself for 5 years after that on one bit part. Even later most of his roles are uncredited bit parts.

    Regardless of any blacklist, the life of an actor who does not have a breakthrough role is tough. IIRC, Harrison Ford also worked as a carpenter before his breakthru. I read the biography of Leonard Nimoy and he said that before his Star Trek role he supported himself (in a fashion) for many years as a Hollywood bit player but that he had never worked for more than a week in any role. There are tons of people like this in Hollywood - in movie A they are the cashier in the checkout line while the star buys something in the supermarket ("Thank you very much, ma'am"), in TV show B they are the doctor when the star Billy has tonsilitis ("He'll be fine."), etc. They often don't make enough from acting to support themselves.

    The blacklist was real but it was never complete - there were always workarounds and there were ways of getting off of it. Being cancelled today is infinitely worse. I never want to hear another word about the blacklist again from Leftists after what they have done to free speech in America. It turns out that they were not really interested in free speech as an abstract matter. It was just one more tool that they used in order to obtain power and once they had power they no longer had any use for it.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @D. K.

  213. Anonymous[507] • Disclaimer says:
    @Agitprop
    I think your article is missing one key insight into the musical's unpopularity: that, by and large, hispanic kids want to go to the movies to see white people playing superheroes, not lame brown people speaking lame Spanish, which they can get plenty of at home.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Harry Baldwin, @Anonymous

    Or maybe the setting is too alien for them. It’s like ancient history.

    Or maybe they don’t like the idea of some wimpy gringo making out with a Latina chick.

    Or maybe this could have been a hit if the music was updated to hip hop or rap or techno-dance.
    Or set in a world of gringo superheroes vs latin superheroes, with a gringo superhero falling for a latina superheroine.

    If Spielberg wanted to try something bold, maybe he would have tried to musicalize The Warriors.
    Some fight scenes in that movie are almost dance-like. Or maybe a musical version of A Clockwork Orange. Alex does sing ‘singing in the rain’ in that one.

    Or send ET to broadway. The final duet between Elliott and ET.

  214. @HammerJack
    @Jack D

    Yeah, she's not bad for a Jewish chick.

    Replies: @Bernard, @Rapparee

    HammerJack says:Next New Comment
    December 16, 2021 at 12:00 am GMT • 5.0 hours ago ↑

    Yeah, she’s not bad for a Jewish chick.

    Gotta disagree with you there HammerJack, Ms Dworkin was a visual offense to any sentient creature, human or otherwise. Though like Jack, I’d prefer her to the alternative proposed.

  215. Anonymous[335] • Disclaimer says:

    Puerto Ricans are “heavily black” in the sense that minor but significant black ancestry is widespread among the general PR population, even among those who are identified as white Puerto Ricans or generally appear white. The degree of black ancestry is not as high as it is among Dominicans, but it is much higher than it is among Mexicans and many other Latin American groups, in which black ancestry is generally absent or very small. Cubans are similar to Puerto Ricans in this regard.

    Another aspect in which Puerto Ricans are “heavily black” relative to many other Hispanic groups is culturally. Puerto Ricans have generally concentrated in NYC and other areas of the Northeast (and Florida more recently), and they have generally associated with and mixed socially with the black underclass and culture in NYC. There’s generally been lots of cross-assimilation between Puerto Ricans and blacks in NYC as part of a broader underclass. This is in contrast to Mexicans and other Hispanic groups in places like LA, where they may be part of the underclass and gang culture, but generally will not readily associate or affiliate with blacks culturally and socially like Puerto Ricans have.

  216. @mc23
    @Altai

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White-

    https://iv1.lisimg.com/image/22345621/740full-rachel-zegler.jpg

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous, @PiltdownMan, @Thoughts

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here …

    Aside from the black hair, which is similar, not very much, I think.

    • Replies: @Anon 2
    @PiltdownMan

    I once stood a few feet from Olivia Hussey at a public event
    in the 1980s. She looked very humble and didn’t try to call
    attention to herself but what a beauty she still was

    , @mc23
    @PiltdownMan

    God is good, simply a beautiful woman.

  217. @Buffalo Joe
    @Almost Missouri

    Almost Missouri, sigh. Adopted black kids' White parents not understanding their culture. What culture is that? Rap music with its vile lyrics. Single moms? Gang Banging? Shooting up memeorial services? Who could love those people?

    Replies: @Loyalty Over IQ Worship

    Since culture is downstream from biology, it’s probably difficult for you to understand that Blacks would sincerely enjoy a different culture from yours.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Loyalty Over IQ Worship

    Loy, thanks for the reply and it is difficult for me to understand a lot of AA culture in this country. Stay safe.

  218. @Wade Hampton
    @tyrone

    Michelle Obama from 2019:


    "...she recalled how white families abandoned her once-diverse, middle-class Chicago community and others like it as more black families came into the neighborhood. And she warned that it’s still happening today as immigrants move into communities, spurring some white residents to pack up and leave.

    'There were no gang fights, there were no territorial battles. Yet one by one, they packed their bags and they ran from us,” she said at the event. “And they left communities in shambles.'"
     

    I "took flight" and relocated from a dangerously diverse community to one that is almost lily white. I'm much less likely to get shot while shopping at Walmart now. I know that not wanting to get shot while shopping is highly racist, but I'm OK with that.

    https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/michelle-obama-white-flight/

    Replies: @Art Deco, @AceDeuce

    ‘There were no gang fights, there were no territorial battles. Yet one by one, they packed their bags and they ran from us,” she said at the event. “And they left communities in shambles.’

    Someone should have asked Queen Harambe the First (and hopefully the Last) exactly how wypipo packing their bags and running, allowing Wakandan Gentle Joggers the chance to move in wholesale, resulted in making the place a shambles.

  219. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    "The Lion King" has made over a billion dollars in ticket sales at a single Times Square theater.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Wilkey

    “The Lion King” has made over a billion dollars in ticket sales at a single Times Square theater.

    The original movie grossed about \$1 billion, which is probably an inflation-adjusted record for a Disney or Pixar animated movie.

    But the stage version version of “Lion King” grossed \$8 billion over its first 20 years, and it’s still going. That’s the equivalent of a \$400 million movie every year for 20 years.

    Stage musicals are a great way to wring ever more money out of already successful properties.

  220. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    "The Lion King" has made over a billion dollars in ticket sales at a single Times Square theater.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Wilkey

    “The Lion King” has made over a billion dollars in ticket sales at a single Times Square theater.

    The original movie grossed about \$1 billion, which is probably an inflation-adjusted record for a Disney or Pixar animated movie.

    But the stage version version of “Lion King” grossed \$8 billion over its first 20 years, and it’s still going (“Phantom,” which has been on stage about a decade longer, has grossed about \$6 billion). That’s the equivalent of a \$400 million movie every year for 20 years.

    Stage musicals are a great way to wring ever more money out of already successful properties.

  221. @PiltdownMan
    @mc23


    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here ...
     
    Aside from the black hair, which is similar, not very much, I think.

    https://i.imgur.com/XOMgjlx.jpg

    Replies: @Anon 2, @mc23

    I once stood a few feet from Olivia Hussey at a public event
    in the 1980s. She looked very humble and didn’t try to call
    attention to herself but what a beauty she still was

  222. @Clyde
    @PaceLaw


    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.
     
    Mostly racial, with the whiter ones dumping on the Hispanics, the next rung down on the ladder. So in the NYC of 1960 or 70, the whitest would be Cubans. They think they are the smartest and most cultured. And of pure Spanish blood.
    They dump on Puerto Ricans (Reason: they are black and Indian)
    Who have the privilege of dumping on Dominicans (Reason: they are black and might as well be Haitians)
    Dominicans get to dump on the black as midnight Caribbeans from the Anglo-islands.

    The average white New Yorker of 1970 has no awareness of these racial one upmanships. He just sees and thinks Hispanics. But within the Hispanic community, coming from a different wretched, sht-hole of an island, this was a very big deal.

    Replies: @Evocatus, @Peter Akuleyev, @AceDeuce

    Here in NYC, both the Puerto Ricans and Dominicans tend to look down upon the Mexicans. Mexicans here tend to be from Puebla or other regions in southern Mexico and are smaller and much more Amerindian looking compared to West Coast Mexicans. For the most part, they are ignored by whites and are often the victims of black crime since many of them work delivering food for restaurants and are seen as easy targets.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Evocatus


    Here in NYC, both the Puerto Ricans and Dominicans tend to look down upon the Mexicans. Mexicans here tend to be from Puebla or other regions in southern Mexico and are smaller and much more Amerindian looking compared to West Coast Mexicans. For the most part, they are ignored by whites and are often the victims of black crime since many of them work delivering food for restaurants and are seen as easy targets.
     
    I believe it! In the Beantown area loads of Central Americans (Haitians too) came from the mid-80s onward, due to the Catholic connection they had in common with native Irish and Italians. Plus those New England libs had loads of sympathy for them as victims (I suppose) of Ronald Reagan's anti-communist wars in Central America. Those Central Americans are Indian looking and squat, like the NYC Mexicans you mention.

    The NYC Mexicans also get dumped on by the Caribbean derived Hispanics, who have been infesting NYC a lot longer. Decades longer. They are the natives compared to the Mexicans who just got off the banana boat. In the 1980s there were zero Mexicans in NYC. Then their numbers exploded.
  223. Steve forgot to mention that starting in the early 1990s
    Spielberg has established a very productive working relationship
    with the Polish cinematographer Janusz Kamiński who won
    two Academy Awards for his work on “Schindler’s List” (1993)
    and on “Saving Private Ryan” (1998). Who knows, Kamiński may get
    nominated for his work on “West Side Story” (2021) as well. Thus in
    this movie the leading actress Rachel Zegler is Polish-Colombian,
    the cinematographer is Polish, and I remember reading that in the
    original Broadway musical Tony was supposed to be Polish.

    By the way, I have no plans to see this remake.

    • Replies: @Anon 2
    @Anon 2

    Yes, according to charactour.com, Tony’s full name is
    Tony Wyzek. He has blond hair, is Catholic, and is supposed
    to be the son of poor Polish immigrants. He starts a gang
    with his friends, called the Jets.

  224. @Anon 2
    Steve forgot to mention that starting in the early 1990s
    Spielberg has established a very productive working relationship
    with the Polish cinematographer Janusz Kamiński who won
    two Academy Awards for his work on “Schindler’s List” (1993)
    and on “Saving Private Ryan” (1998). Who knows, Kamiński may get
    nominated for his work on “West Side Story” (2021) as well. Thus in
    this movie the leading actress Rachel Zegler is Polish-Colombian,
    the cinematographer is Polish, and I remember reading that in the
    original Broadway musical Tony was supposed to be Polish.

    By the way, I have no plans to see this remake.

    Replies: @Anon 2

    Yes, according to charactour.com, Tony’s full name is
    Tony Wyzek. He has blond hair, is Catholic, and is supposed
    to be the son of poor Polish immigrants. He starts a gang
    with his friends, called the Jets.

  225. @Anonymous
    @Alden

    My teen age review of the original West Side Story. I and my contemporaries didn’t like it all. Most of the boomers were children and only went to the kid’s Saturday afternoon 3 cartoons and a cowboy or Disney movie.

    Return of Disney's fortunes owed to a good deal on animation musicals like Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, and The Lion King.

    Pixar didn't begin with musicals but later did... I think.

    What makes no sense is going from Hollywood to Broadway. Broadway to Hollywood makes sense as movies are bigger and splashier. But there's only so much one can do on stage.

    Why would anyone turn a movie to a stage production? But it became a thing with stuff like Producers and even Spiderman. But I hear the broadway version of Lion King is really good. Creative puppets and costumes.

    And who wants to see a superhero musical?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dT3EUbOQY4&ab_channel=TurnOffTheDarkArchives

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Dave Pinsen

    And who wants to see a superhero musical?

    Judging from the time I saw Spider-Man on Broadway, a lot of families with young kids.

    To be honest, part of the reason I wanted to see it was the history of accidents it had in rehearsals. Live theater is slightly closer to live sports than a movie; there’s an element of uncertainty to it. And Broadway’s mostly practical special effects are interesting in a way that CGI is not: that costumed stuntman flying over your head on a cable could get seriously hurt. You might even get hurt too.

  226. @MEH 0910
    OT:
    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/denis-villeneuve-rendezvous-with-rama-movie-1235062337/
    https://twitter.com/THR/status/1471298115323969542

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Great news. Steve will enjoy the books, I think.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @Dave Pinsen


    Hopefully Rendezvous with Rama does well enough that they make the sequels, which are even better and also HBD-aware.
     
    Interesting. I never read the sequels to Rendezvous With Rama.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendezvous_with_Rama

    https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Literature/RendezvousWithRama

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

  227. @Anonymous
    @Pat Hannagan


    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),…

    Ah, geeze, c’mon, really? You actually believe this?
     
    Saving Private Ryan is really about hating Germans, not admiring Americans. If Steve had any loyalty to his own people he would see this.

    https://youtu.be/l4FeyONCtfc

    Replies: @Jack D, @LondonBob

    The biggest issue with Saving Private Ryan is it just isn’t a good film, I have never watched it the whole way through.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @LondonBob

    I have to agree. Some of the action sequences are amazing, particularly the D-Day landing, but the story as a whole doesn't make sense and leaves you with nothing.

    , @Clyde
    @LondonBob


    The biggest issue with Saving Private Ryan is it just isn’t a good film, I have never watched it the whole way through.
     
    I made it 40% the way though. It got boring and Hanks is a boring, goody two shoes actor. But he just came out with a movie I liked. "News of the World" The girl actress is Helena Zengel, who does quite a job! You will be hearing more from her. Hats off to the director, Paul Greengrass.
  228. @R.G. Camara
    @Paperback Writer

    Watching Domincans drive out PRs and blacks and making semi-decent working class neighborhoods out of their slums is something to behold. At first the blacks and PRs think the Domincans will be their brothers/give them their women, and the Domicans are like, "Nope! Hit the road, trash heap!"

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    Watching Domincans drive out PRs and blacks and making semi-decent working class neighborhoods out of their slums is something to behold.

    It’s a dirty rotten job but someone’s gotta do it. They sure did it in the Bronx & the Heights.

    Anyone from outside of NYC know of other places they’ve done it?

    In NYC they only drove out da blacks, not PRs. The PRs either died, moved back to PR, or assimilated. Black PRs became black, white PRs (I know a few) became white. As PRs they gone from NYC.

    And that’s another reason this remake gonna fail: no one gives a shit about either group anymore. There’s just zero resonance. White working class in Manhattan? Wassat? Rikkans? Who dey?

  229. @Dave Pinsen
    @MEH 0910

    Great news. Steve will enjoy the books, I think.
    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/1471242347010826250?s=21

    Replies: @MEH 0910

    Hopefully Rendezvous with Rama does well enough that they make the sequels, which are even better and also HBD-aware.

    Interesting. I never read the sequels to Rendezvous With Rama.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendezvous_with_Rama

    https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Literature/RendezvousWithRama

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @MEH 0910

    The sequels were co-written by Clarke and Gentry Lee (the chief engineer at JPL).

    Replies: @MEH 0910

  230. @D. K.
    @D. K.

    By the way, Ned Glass' mini-biography at IMDb.com claims:

    "His career was briefly put on hold after being blacklisted during the McCarthy era, but, with help from friends like John Houseman and Moe Howard (of The Three Stooges fame) he managed to get enough film work to make ends meet."

    One of the three Trivia items at his IMDb.com entry likewise claims:

    "After being blacklisted in the 1950s, he made his living as a carpenter, a trade he learned by building his own house."

    Checking his credits page, however, we find that Mr. Glass had 86 out of his total of 229 acting credits (ranging from 1937 to 1982) that included performances in the 1950s!?! (N.B. Multiple appearances in a television series are treated as a single credit toward an actor's total.) That decade included a low of four acting credits, for 1955, and a high of 17 acting credits, for 1957. That, of course, is not actually how the studio blacklist of communists worked, back in the 1950s. I have come across several claims on IMDb.com about actors who supposedly were blacklisted, back then, yet who have expansive lists of acting credits, throughout the 1950s.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Apparently he was briefly blacklisted early in the blacklist era and managed to get off .

    From 1942 to 1950, he has one role listed as “Svengarlic’s Manager (uncredited)” in a short. Probably from ’42 to ’45 he was in war service, but I can’t imagine that he could have supported himself for 5 years after that on one bit part. Even later most of his roles are uncredited bit parts.

    Regardless of any blacklist, the life of an actor who does not have a breakthrough role is tough. IIRC, Harrison Ford also worked as a carpenter before his breakthru. I read the biography of Leonard Nimoy and he said that before his Star Trek role he supported himself (in a fashion) for many years as a Hollywood bit player but that he had never worked for more than a week in any role. There are tons of people like this in Hollywood – in movie A they are the cashier in the checkout line while the star buys something in the supermarket (“Thank you very much, ma’am”), in TV show B they are the doctor when the star Billy has tonsilitis (“He’ll be fine.”), etc. They often don’t make enough from acting to support themselves.

    The blacklist was real but it was never complete – there were always workarounds and there were ways of getting off of it. Being cancelled today is infinitely worse. I never want to hear another word about the blacklist again from Leftists after what they have done to free speech in America. It turns out that they were not really interested in free speech as an abstract matter. It was just one more tool that they used in order to obtain power and once they had power they no longer had any use for it.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin, Alden
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @Jack D

    Well said. Those blacklisted during the McCarthy era had options that those canceled today do not. Any publicized charge of "racism, " without any evidence, will make one unemployable forever, outside of the kind of job an ex-con might get.

    , @D. K.
    @Jack D

    There was a Screen Actors Guild survey, many years ago, that found that something like 95% of its members earned under $5000 per year from acting. It is a very tough business in which to succeed. That has nothing to do with any blacklisting of communists, back in the latter portion of the so-called Golden Age of Hollywood, and the bulk of the so-called Golden Age of Television.

    At Wikipedia.org, Ned Glass' entry reads, in part:

    "Glass did not appear in any films released between 1942 and 1947, possibly because of military service, but he generally worked in a handful of films almost every year thereafter, playing small roles and bit parts, including additional Three Stooges films Hokus Pokus, Three Hams on Rye and Flagpole Jitters. He was reportedly briefly blacklisted, during which time he found work as a carpenter.[citation needed]"

    There is no evidence cited either there or at his IMDb.com entry that he (a) ever served in the military, nor (b) was actively involved in left-wing politics, let alone as a card-carrying member of the American Communist Party. He certainly was not blacklisted in 1942; it is highly unlikely that he would have been blacklisted from the end of the war through 1947. The Motion Picture Association of America did not release its so-called Waldorf Statement until November 24, 1947!

    The most likely explanation for his lull in screen credits in the 1940s was because he decided that he needed to earn a more reliable living, especially since he was married (to actor Frank McHugh's sister).

    Replies: @Art Deco

  231. @Loyalty Over IQ Worship
    @Buffalo Joe

    Since culture is downstream from biology, it's probably difficult for you to understand that Blacks would sincerely enjoy a different culture from yours.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    Loy, thanks for the reply and it is difficult for me to understand a lot of AA culture in this country. Stay safe.

  232. @HA
    Spielberg has another movie in pre-production, "The Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortara", a true-life story in which a Jewish baby that was given an emergency baptism by a servant was then taken in by the pope given that the baby was now Christian, despite the parents' (and most everyone else's) heartfelt demands for his return. Edgardo eventually became a priest.

    Kidnapping of children was actually quite common throughout much of Europe's post-Roman history, and according to Ariel Toaff, the very real Jewish participation in the medieval abduction of children for slave markets (they were well-positioned as middle-men, having a foothold in both Christian and Islamic markets) helped spur the infamous and (with the possible exception of Simon and Toledo, fictional) "blood libel".

    But I'm guessing a movie in which Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular, are set up as the obvious baddies is something Spielberg thinks will play better to modern sensibilities. Christianity-bashing certainly helped resurrect Hitchens' career after he tarnished it by his Iraq warmongering, and the movie will likely have the support of the press. But if West Side Story continues to bomb, it might leave the kidnapping tale in limbo for a bit longer.

    Replies: @HA, @Jack D

    I can’t see the Edgardo film as something that would have widespread appeal so it wouldn’t surprise me if they never get the \$ to have it made. People here think that Hollywood is a propaganda machine but first and foremost it is a business.

    The Edgardo Mortara story is something that is well documented as actually having happened and not in some dim distant past but in the mid 19th century. Although it was certainly a tragedy for his family (and a cause celebre in its time), compared with later, uh, unfortunate events in Europe, it was a rather minor incident.

    Do you mean Simon of Trent? After the second Vatican Council, the entire episode was declared a fraud; Simon’s name was removed from the calendar of saints’ days, the cult dedicated to him was dissolved, and further veneration of him was forbidden. Maybe this is because the Joos have captured the Vatican but maybe it’s because it really was a fraud.

    According to Ariel Toaff, Jews really did make matzo from the blood of Christian children, so I wouldn’t take him as a source for anything. He is one of those Jewish Anti-Semites that Ron Unz loves to dig up.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Jack D

    "The Edgardo Mortara story is something that is well documented as actually having happened and not in some dim distant past..."

    Ah yes, let's forget about what we don't like -- however well-documented -- because even though the places where slave-raiding took place are still places that by and large are trying to catch up with the rest for Europe, that's the "dim distant past" so none of it counts. Why, they're like the stories of Shakespeare, which have no possible relevance or meaning in explaining how things came to be, is that it?

    As for Toaff, a professor of Medieval and Renaissance History at Bar-Ilan University in Israel, Wikipedia has a somewhat different and more evenhanded take on his thesis:


    To forestall possible misinterpretations, [Ariel Toaff] said that the idea that Jews practiced ritual murder is a slanderous stereotype, and that ritual homicide or infanticide was a myth. That said, the possibility existed that:

    certain criminal acts, disguised as crude rituals, were indeed committed by extremist groups or by individuals demented by religious mania and blinded by desire for revenge against those considered responsible for their people’s sorrows and tragedies.
     
    The evidence supporting this hypothesis draws on confessions extracted under torture. His book examines the strong documentary evidence in medieval medical handbooks that dried human blood, traded by both Jewish and Christian merchants, was thought to be medicinally efficacious. Under the stress of forced conversions, expulsions and massacres, Toaff thinks it possible that in certain Ashkenazi groups dried human blood came to play a magical role in calling down God's vengeance on Christians, the historic persecutors of the Jews, and that this reaction may have affected certain forms of ritual practice among a restricted number of Ashkenazi Jews during Passover.
     
    Elsewhere in the book, apart from making clear that the "under torture" confessions actually divulge verifiable and documented rituals that the torturers would not have been privy to, Toaff repeatedly makes clear that the Rhineland sect of Jews that embraced these blood rituals were regarded as weird and extreme even by other Jews, in particular, those in nearby Italy who are the primary subject of his studies, and whom he characterizes as having a much more convivial approach to gentiles. So no, clearly not a case of "da Joos do that", however eager you are to fall back on your standard shtick whereby anyone who says anything you don't like about Jews must have pulled it straight from Der Stürmer. Just because Ron Unz sees some merit in an argument doesn't make it wrong. And you're right that it was Simon of Trent, but the fact that you have nothing remotely substantive or accurate to say with regard to Toaff is pretty much an admission on your part that he's probably on to something. If that's about as well as you hide your tells in poker, then I suggest it's a game you should avoid unless you just losing money.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jew

  233. @Jim Don Bob
    @Altai


    Lin-Manuel is in a bit of career trough since Hamilton went so quickly from woke to racist...
     
    When did this happen? Asking, not arguing.

    I know a family from flyover country who flew to NYC to see Hamilton. Probably cost them $2500+. You'd have to pay me to go see it.

    Replies: @Altai, @sayless

    Lin-Manuel has been in a career trough since the memorials and statues began coming down.

  234. @D. K.
    @Alden

    "Except for America which was fast and loud and Officer Krupke the songs were just Sinatra style slow moony old people’s music. The whole thing was an old fashioned musical. Beloved by the greatest generation, not young people."

    ***

    West Side Story was a commercial success upon its release. It became the highest-grossing film of 1961, earning rentals of $19,645,000 in the United States and Canada. It remained the highest-grossing musical film of all-time[34] until the release of The Sound of Music in 1965. The film grossed $44.1 million worldwide ($382 million in 2020). Because of profit participation, United Artists earned a profit of only $2.5 million on the film ($22 million in 2020).[35]

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_film)#Box_office

    ***

    West Side Story is the soundtrack album to the 1961 film West Side Story, featuring music by Leonard Bernstein and lyrics by Stephen Sondheim. Released in 1961, the soundtrack spent 54 weeks at No. 1 on Billboard's album charts, giving it the longest run at No. 1 of any album in history,[2] although some lists instead credit Michael Jackson's Thriller, on the grounds that West Side Story was listed on a chart for stereo albums only at a time when many albums were recorded in mono.[3] In 1962, it won a Grammy award for "Best Sound Track Album – Original Cast." In the United States, it was the best-selling album of the 1960s,[4] certifying three times platinum by the RIAA on November 21, 1986.

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_soundtrack)

    There is nothing wrong with not personally liking a film or soundtrack album that was highly popular and financially successful. There is something wrong with proclaiming that it was not highly popular and financially successful, in its own time, regardless of its current legacy, let alone of a random individual's opinion of it, then or now.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Alden

    The thing about successful and popular movies is that it always starts with great songs that people take to their hearts.

    When I was a little boy I knew the song “Oh, What a Beautiful Day” even though I had never heard of Oklahoma.

    When I was a slightly bigger boy I knew many of the tunes from South Pacific, I knew nothing of the musical or the movie, but I knew the words to several of the songs.

    When I was an adolescent I fell briefly in love with Julie Andrews, and certainly knew all the words to Doh-Re-Mi and My Favorite Things, and a bit later in life when I was a rebellious adolescent I loved John Coltrane’s subversive take on My Favorite Things.

    Sometimes I only discovered much later that beloved songs were originally from musicals, and probably most of the people of many races, ages, and nationalities belting out this song have never heard of the musical Carousel, set in New England, but based on a Hungarian story.

    So great musicals unite us all because of the great songs that people sing all over the world.

    Right from the beginning of musicals there was always the question of whether it was better to have actors who could sing (Rex Harrison, if you can call his rap singing) or singers who could act like Julie Andrews.

    I think that Rachel Zegler is a huge talent, perhaps falling more into the singer who can act category at this stage of her career. Some posters have criticized her looks. Well, she is no Susan Boyle and bears a passing resemblance to Ali McGraw who starred in Love Story, one of the most popular movies of its time in which McGraw managed to die of cancer while looking good.

    I think lots of adolescents and young men will fall in love with her in movie, which is what counts, and I get the feeling that she is going to be a huge star in the future.

    She might be the next Lea Salonga, but perhaps she might become more popular in popular music than on stage if her songwriting abilities mature, rather than have a career like McGraw, whose career was never fully resurrected after her death in Love Story. (Apparently she suffered from alcoholism.)

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @Jonathan Mason


    bears a passing resemblance to Ali McGraw who starred in Love Story, one of the most popular movies of its time in which McGraw managed to die of cancer while looking good.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Story_(1970_film)#Ali_MacGraw's_%22disease%22

    Ali MacGraw's "disease"

    Vincent Canby wrote in his original New York Times review that it was "as if Jenny was suffering from some vaguely unpleasant Elizabeth Arden treatment".[14] Mad magazine ran a parody of the film ("Lover's Story") in its October 1971 issue, which depicted Ali MacGraw's character as stricken with "Old Movie Disease", an ailment that causes a dying patient to become "more beautiful by the minute".[31][32] In 1997, Roger Ebert defined "Ali MacGraw's Disease" as a movie illness in which "the only symptom is that the patient grows more beautiful until finally dying".[33]
     

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    After the Rittenhouse verdict she tweeted that Rittenhouse committed a heinous heinous crime. And that she was ashamed to be an American because America and Americans are heinous racists. She’s so dumb she probably thinks the men heroic Kyle killed were blacks saints.

  235. @Luzzatto
    @S. Anonyia

    Cubans are a racial mutt group, not a White group. Facts do not care about your muh feelings. Follow the SCIENCE.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubans#Genetics

    Replies: @S. Anonyia

    Who said anything about feelings? I’m not Cuban. The stats from Wikipedia you’re pointing to average the entire population together- they don’t separate white and black Cubans. If you browse the rest of the article it discusses white Cubans/Criollos, who are about 60-65% of the population and have less than 15 % combined SSA & Indian ancestry. 85-90 % white is effectively white. Its why Cubans look quite different than Puerto Ricans and Venezuelans/Colombians, who are more balanced tri-racial groups. I believe Argentines and Southern Brazilians have a similar ancestral breakdown to white Cubans. Only Uruguayans are more European.

  236. @Jack D
    @D. K.

    Apparently he was briefly blacklisted early in the blacklist era and managed to get off .

    From 1942 to 1950, he has one role listed as "Svengarlic's Manager (uncredited)" in a short. Probably from '42 to '45 he was in war service, but I can't imagine that he could have supported himself for 5 years after that on one bit part. Even later most of his roles are uncredited bit parts.

    Regardless of any blacklist, the life of an actor who does not have a breakthrough role is tough. IIRC, Harrison Ford also worked as a carpenter before his breakthru. I read the biography of Leonard Nimoy and he said that before his Star Trek role he supported himself (in a fashion) for many years as a Hollywood bit player but that he had never worked for more than a week in any role. There are tons of people like this in Hollywood - in movie A they are the cashier in the checkout line while the star buys something in the supermarket ("Thank you very much, ma'am"), in TV show B they are the doctor when the star Billy has tonsilitis ("He'll be fine."), etc. They often don't make enough from acting to support themselves.

    The blacklist was real but it was never complete - there were always workarounds and there were ways of getting off of it. Being cancelled today is infinitely worse. I never want to hear another word about the blacklist again from Leftists after what they have done to free speech in America. It turns out that they were not really interested in free speech as an abstract matter. It was just one more tool that they used in order to obtain power and once they had power they no longer had any use for it.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @D. K.

    Well said. Those blacklisted during the McCarthy era had options that those canceled today do not. Any publicized charge of “racism, ” without any evidence, will make one unemployable forever, outside of the kind of job an ex-con might get.

  237. @Jack D
    @HA

    I can't see the Edgardo film as something that would have widespread appeal so it wouldn't surprise me if they never get the $ to have it made. People here think that Hollywood is a propaganda machine but first and foremost it is a business.

    The Edgardo Mortara story is something that is well documented as actually having happened and not in some dim distant past but in the mid 19th century. Although it was certainly a tragedy for his family (and a cause celebre in its time), compared with later, uh, unfortunate events in Europe, it was a rather minor incident.

    Do you mean Simon of Trent? After the second Vatican Council, the entire episode was declared a fraud; Simon’s name was removed from the calendar of saints’ days, the cult dedicated to him was dissolved, and further veneration of him was forbidden. Maybe this is because the Joos have captured the Vatican but maybe it's because it really was a fraud.

    According to Ariel Toaff, Jews really did make matzo from the blood of Christian children, so I wouldn't take him as a source for anything. He is one of those Jewish Anti-Semites that Ron Unz loves to dig up.

    Replies: @HA

    “The Edgardo Mortara story is something that is well documented as actually having happened and not in some dim distant past…”

    Ah yes, let’s forget about what we don’t like — however well-documented — because even though the places where slave-raiding took place are still places that by and large are trying to catch up with the rest for Europe, that’s the “dim distant past” so none of it counts. Why, they’re like the stories of Shakespeare, which have no possible relevance or meaning in explaining how things came to be, is that it?

    As for Toaff, a professor of Medieval and Renaissance History at Bar-Ilan University in Israel, Wikipedia has a somewhat different and more evenhanded take on his thesis:

    To forestall possible misinterpretations, [Ariel Toaff] said that the idea that Jews practiced ritual murder is a slanderous stereotype, and that ritual homicide or infanticide was a myth. That said, the possibility existed that:

    certain criminal acts, disguised as crude rituals, were indeed committed by extremist groups or by individuals demented by religious mania and blinded by desire for revenge against those considered responsible for their people’s sorrows and tragedies.

    The evidence supporting this hypothesis draws on confessions extracted under torture. His book examines the strong documentary evidence in medieval medical handbooks that dried human blood, traded by both Jewish and Christian merchants, was thought to be medicinally efficacious. Under the stress of forced conversions, expulsions and massacres, Toaff thinks it possible that in certain Ashkenazi groups dried human blood came to play a magical role in calling down God’s vengeance on Christians, the historic persecutors of the Jews, and that this reaction may have affected certain forms of ritual practice among a restricted number of Ashkenazi Jews during Passover.

    Elsewhere in the book, apart from making clear that the “under torture” confessions actually divulge verifiable and documented rituals that the torturers would not have been privy to, Toaff repeatedly makes clear that the Rhineland sect of Jews that embraced these blood rituals were regarded as weird and extreme even by other Jews, in particular, those in nearby Italy who are the primary subject of his studies, and whom he characterizes as having a much more convivial approach to gentiles. So no, clearly not a case of “da Joos do that”, however eager you are to fall back on your standard shtick whereby anyone who says anything you don’t like about Jews must have pulled it straight from Der Stürmer. Just because Ron Unz sees some merit in an argument doesn’t make it wrong. And you’re right that it was Simon of Trent, but the fact that you have nothing remotely substantive or accurate to say with regard to Toaff is pretty much an admission on your part that he’s probably on to something. If that’s about as well as you hide your tells in poker, then I suggest it’s a game you should avoid unless you just losing money.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @HA


    Toaff thinks it possible
     
    It's also possible that these children were murdered by space aliens. A lot of things are possible but didn't actually happen. Confessions under torture are considered to be completely unreliable - people will say anything to get the torture to stop. Other than evidence obtained by torture, Toaff has no other evidence.

    Just because Ron Unz sees some merit in an argument doesn’t make it wrong.
     
    It's not 100%, but I would says that in matters relating to the Jews, there is a strong correlation between the level of merit that Ron sees and the likelihood that the argument is wrong. He is a classic crank or contrarian. Contrarians are sometimes right (eppur si muove) but usually they ain't.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Jew
    @HA

    From text you quoted, apparently from Wikipedia:


    To forestall possible misinterpretations, [Ariel Toaff] said that the idea that Jews practiced ritual murder is a slanderous stereotype, and that ritual homicide or infanticide was a myth.
     
    Toaff may very well have said that. I certainly hope he did.

    But, assuming he did, how many who cite Toaff bother to include that disclaimer?

    Is the reality not plainly that nearly all of those who cite Toaff's work favorably, as an authoritative or even credible source, do so in support of alleging those very accusations* against Jews and Judaism that the quote claims he disavowed?

    (*explicitly in many, if not most cases, but at a minimum implicitly)


    That said, the possibility existed that:

    certain criminal acts, disguised as crude rituals, were indeed committed by extremist groups or by individuals demented by religious mania and blinded by desire for revenge against those considered responsible for their people’s sorrows and tragedies.
     

     
    Okay, let's say that there were some "extremist", fringe, demented Jews who did, in fact, commit at least some of the crimes that Toaff contends they may have. How representative would such individuals (or fringe groups) be of Jews as a whole/ collectively/ categorically or of any strain or subset of Judaism that could reasonably be considered normative or mainstream?

    Surely, you would acknowledge that there have been at least some (at least nominal) Christians who have, in the name or under the cover of Christianity, engaged in behavior that you would categorically condemn and disavow-- not only as fundamentally reprobate and depraved, but also, at a minimum, as emphatically not representative of Christianity. In many such cases you would, I have no doubt, go further in your condemnation and disavowal of the actions or beliefs in-question, contending that they are actually in direct violation of Christianity, or even downright heretical. Needless to say what your reaction would be if someone were to even suggest that Christians or Christianity, per se were to blame for the reprobate behaviors or beliefs in-question.

    As a Jew myself, I am Orthodox in my belief. In both my knowledge of Judaism, as well as the level of my personal religious observance, I would place myself neither among the most pious and learned, nor among the least, but somewhere in the middle. I have spent much time, however, over many years, among strictly Orthodox Jews, including many both far more learned as well as far more than pious than myself. I am enough of an insider that if (with the sole, obvious exception of circumcision) there would be any legitimate source or basis within our tradition for any ritual use of human blood, it would hardly seem plausible for someone such as myself to not have heard of it by now.

    (In fact, Judaism (again, with the sole, obvious exception of circumcision), is quite averse to blood. The consumption of human blood (whether Jewish or Gentile) is categorically prohibited. And removal of blood from an animal prior to consumption, through a process of soaking and salting, is an integral part of kashruth (kosher laws).

    Shabbat Shalom/ Gut Shabbos to my fellow Js

    Replies: @HA

  238. @Jack D
    @D. K.

    Apparently he was briefly blacklisted early in the blacklist era and managed to get off .

    From 1942 to 1950, he has one role listed as "Svengarlic's Manager (uncredited)" in a short. Probably from '42 to '45 he was in war service, but I can't imagine that he could have supported himself for 5 years after that on one bit part. Even later most of his roles are uncredited bit parts.

    Regardless of any blacklist, the life of an actor who does not have a breakthrough role is tough. IIRC, Harrison Ford also worked as a carpenter before his breakthru. I read the biography of Leonard Nimoy and he said that before his Star Trek role he supported himself (in a fashion) for many years as a Hollywood bit player but that he had never worked for more than a week in any role. There are tons of people like this in Hollywood - in movie A they are the cashier in the checkout line while the star buys something in the supermarket ("Thank you very much, ma'am"), in TV show B they are the doctor when the star Billy has tonsilitis ("He'll be fine."), etc. They often don't make enough from acting to support themselves.

    The blacklist was real but it was never complete - there were always workarounds and there were ways of getting off of it. Being cancelled today is infinitely worse. I never want to hear another word about the blacklist again from Leftists after what they have done to free speech in America. It turns out that they were not really interested in free speech as an abstract matter. It was just one more tool that they used in order to obtain power and once they had power they no longer had any use for it.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @D. K.

    There was a Screen Actors Guild survey, many years ago, that found that something like 95% of its members earned under \$5000 per year from acting. It is a very tough business in which to succeed. That has nothing to do with any blacklisting of communists, back in the latter portion of the so-called Golden Age of Hollywood, and the bulk of the so-called Golden Age of Television.

    At Wikipedia.org, Ned Glass’ entry reads, in part:

    “Glass did not appear in any films released between 1942 and 1947, possibly because of military service, but he generally worked in a handful of films almost every year thereafter, playing small roles and bit parts, including additional Three Stooges films Hokus Pokus, Three Hams on Rye and Flagpole Jitters. He was reportedly briefly blacklisted, during which time he found work as a carpenter.[citation needed]”

    There is no evidence cited either there or at his IMDb.com entry that he (a) ever served in the military, nor (b) was actively involved in left-wing politics, let alone as a card-carrying member of the American Communist Party. He certainly was not blacklisted in 1942; it is highly unlikely that he would have been blacklisted from the end of the war through 1947. The Motion Picture Association of America did not release its so-called Waldorf Statement until November 24, 1947!

    The most likely explanation for his lull in screen credits in the 1940s was because he decided that he needed to earn a more reliable living, especially since he was married (to actor Frank McHugh’s sister).

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @D. K.

    He was born in 1906. He'd have been 34 when conscription was instituted in October of 1940. He and his wife were childless at the time, so the categorical deferment granted men with dependent children (from the fall of 1940 to the fall of 1943) did not apply to him. IIRC, they had everyone who was under 50 in October 1940 fill out registration cards, with the upper age boundary for induction set at your 36th birthday for most of the war, your 38th birthday for a time in 1944 and 1945. I think he was consistently overage from April 1942 onward. He doesn't appear in any of the common veterans' databases (though that's not dispositive).

    Replies: @Jack D

  239. @HA
    @Jack D

    "The Edgardo Mortara story is something that is well documented as actually having happened and not in some dim distant past..."

    Ah yes, let's forget about what we don't like -- however well-documented -- because even though the places where slave-raiding took place are still places that by and large are trying to catch up with the rest for Europe, that's the "dim distant past" so none of it counts. Why, they're like the stories of Shakespeare, which have no possible relevance or meaning in explaining how things came to be, is that it?

    As for Toaff, a professor of Medieval and Renaissance History at Bar-Ilan University in Israel, Wikipedia has a somewhat different and more evenhanded take on his thesis:


    To forestall possible misinterpretations, [Ariel Toaff] said that the idea that Jews practiced ritual murder is a slanderous stereotype, and that ritual homicide or infanticide was a myth. That said, the possibility existed that:

    certain criminal acts, disguised as crude rituals, were indeed committed by extremist groups or by individuals demented by religious mania and blinded by desire for revenge against those considered responsible for their people’s sorrows and tragedies.
     
    The evidence supporting this hypothesis draws on confessions extracted under torture. His book examines the strong documentary evidence in medieval medical handbooks that dried human blood, traded by both Jewish and Christian merchants, was thought to be medicinally efficacious. Under the stress of forced conversions, expulsions and massacres, Toaff thinks it possible that in certain Ashkenazi groups dried human blood came to play a magical role in calling down God's vengeance on Christians, the historic persecutors of the Jews, and that this reaction may have affected certain forms of ritual practice among a restricted number of Ashkenazi Jews during Passover.
     
    Elsewhere in the book, apart from making clear that the "under torture" confessions actually divulge verifiable and documented rituals that the torturers would not have been privy to, Toaff repeatedly makes clear that the Rhineland sect of Jews that embraced these blood rituals were regarded as weird and extreme even by other Jews, in particular, those in nearby Italy who are the primary subject of his studies, and whom he characterizes as having a much more convivial approach to gentiles. So no, clearly not a case of "da Joos do that", however eager you are to fall back on your standard shtick whereby anyone who says anything you don't like about Jews must have pulled it straight from Der Stürmer. Just because Ron Unz sees some merit in an argument doesn't make it wrong. And you're right that it was Simon of Trent, but the fact that you have nothing remotely substantive or accurate to say with regard to Toaff is pretty much an admission on your part that he's probably on to something. If that's about as well as you hide your tells in poker, then I suggest it's a game you should avoid unless you just losing money.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jew

    Toaff thinks it possible

    It’s also possible that these children were murdered by space aliens. A lot of things are possible but didn’t actually happen. Confessions under torture are considered to be completely unreliable – people will say anything to get the torture to stop. Other than evidence obtained by torture, Toaff has no other evidence.

    Just because Ron Unz sees some merit in an argument doesn’t make it wrong.

    It’s not 100%, but I would says that in matters relating to the Jews, there is a strong correlation between the level of merit that Ron sees and the likelihood that the argument is wrong. He is a classic crank or contrarian. Contrarians are sometimes right (eppur si muove) but usually they ain’t.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Jack D

    "It’s also possible that these children were murdered by space aliens."

    Come up with actual evidence in the way that Toaff did (something none of his critics, you included, even seem to get around to disputing, which is another obvious tell) that space aliens murdered Simon of Trent, and then get back to me. Until then, the advantage goes to him, regardless of whether or not Simon of Trent is on the calendar of saints -- however evidentiary or probative that is to you, all of sudden.

    If the best you've got against him is that Ron Unz thinks his book has merit, and apparently it is, it's thin gruel, and overall, a sign of progress, since you're not even trying to dispute the main point Toaff was making, which was that regardless of whether Simon of Trent was the only victim of this blood-ritual thing that evidently both some Jews and some Christians practiced, the overwhelmingly larger victimization stemming from the very real abduction of children into slave markets that medieval Jews on both sides of the Mediterranean played a very substantial role in facilitating (which, again, according to Toaff, likely helped advance the blood libel claims, however smaller both the body count and body of evidence was in that case) is something you're not even bothering to dispute. Last time, as I recall, you tried to counter with Farrakhan (who was arguing about another slave trade altogether), a non sequitur that is as lame and transparent and unconvincing as your reverse appeal-to-authority-argument regarding Ron Unz. So good for you, I say.

    As undisputed and momentous as that main point evidently is, I'm not holding my breath that Hollywood is going to regard it as being worthy of any notice whatsoever, but as for little Edgardo, God rest his soul, maybe the third time around will be the charm, even though the other two ventures failed.

    Replies: @Alden, @Jack D

  240. @D. K.
    @Alden

    "Except for America which was fast and loud and Officer Krupke the songs were just Sinatra style slow moony old people’s music. The whole thing was an old fashioned musical. Beloved by the greatest generation, not young people."

    ***

    West Side Story was a commercial success upon its release. It became the highest-grossing film of 1961, earning rentals of $19,645,000 in the United States and Canada. It remained the highest-grossing musical film of all-time[34] until the release of The Sound of Music in 1965. The film grossed $44.1 million worldwide ($382 million in 2020). Because of profit participation, United Artists earned a profit of only $2.5 million on the film ($22 million in 2020).[35]

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_film)#Box_office

    ***

    West Side Story is the soundtrack album to the 1961 film West Side Story, featuring music by Leonard Bernstein and lyrics by Stephen Sondheim. Released in 1961, the soundtrack spent 54 weeks at No. 1 on Billboard's album charts, giving it the longest run at No. 1 of any album in history,[2] although some lists instead credit Michael Jackson's Thriller, on the grounds that West Side Story was listed on a chart for stereo albums only at a time when many albums were recorded in mono.[3] In 1962, it won a Grammy award for "Best Sound Track Album – Original Cast." In the United States, it was the best-selling album of the 1960s,[4] certifying three times platinum by the RIAA on November 21, 1986.

    ***

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Story_(1961_soundtrack)

    There is nothing wrong with not personally liking a film or soundtrack album that was highly popular and financially successful. There is something wrong with proclaiming that it was not highly popular and financially successful, in its own time, regardless of its current legacy, let alone of a random individual's opinion of it, then or now.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Alden

    It wasn’t popular with young people. It was popular with late 20s and older. Who liked that music and dated clothes. We went to high school traveled on city buses with and interacted with what were call hoods. Those WSS dancing boys weren’t hoods. And didn’t commit any crimes not even shoplifting snacks. They didn’t go to school or seem to have homes or parents. What kind of teens are that? . Some of them had jobs. Which was realistic for the times.

    WSS was a standard musical one of the most popular 1930 to 1970 genres. Popular with the older people who went to musicals all during the 1940s and 50s.

    To high school and just out of high school age viewers it was very unrealistic. They were supposed to be our age. But just danced around their neighborhood. No school no homes no parents no draft for the boys.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @Alden

    We had the "West Side Story" soundtrack album in my house, when I was a boy growing up in Gary, in the mid-1960s. If either of my parents (born in 1921 and 1923) bought that LP, they bought it as a gift for one of my older siblings; I never saw either of my parents ever play an LP, not even of singers they liked whose records my older siblings owned.

  241. @D. K.
    @Jack D

    There was a Screen Actors Guild survey, many years ago, that found that something like 95% of its members earned under $5000 per year from acting. It is a very tough business in which to succeed. That has nothing to do with any blacklisting of communists, back in the latter portion of the so-called Golden Age of Hollywood, and the bulk of the so-called Golden Age of Television.

    At Wikipedia.org, Ned Glass' entry reads, in part:

    "Glass did not appear in any films released between 1942 and 1947, possibly because of military service, but he generally worked in a handful of films almost every year thereafter, playing small roles and bit parts, including additional Three Stooges films Hokus Pokus, Three Hams on Rye and Flagpole Jitters. He was reportedly briefly blacklisted, during which time he found work as a carpenter.[citation needed]"

    There is no evidence cited either there or at his IMDb.com entry that he (a) ever served in the military, nor (b) was actively involved in left-wing politics, let alone as a card-carrying member of the American Communist Party. He certainly was not blacklisted in 1942; it is highly unlikely that he would have been blacklisted from the end of the war through 1947. The Motion Picture Association of America did not release its so-called Waldorf Statement until November 24, 1947!

    The most likely explanation for his lull in screen credits in the 1940s was because he decided that he needed to earn a more reliable living, especially since he was married (to actor Frank McHugh's sister).

    Replies: @Art Deco

    He was born in 1906. He’d have been 34 when conscription was instituted in October of 1940. He and his wife were childless at the time, so the categorical deferment granted men with dependent children (from the fall of 1940 to the fall of 1943) did not apply to him. IIRC, they had everyone who was under 50 in October 1940 fill out registration cards, with the upper age boundary for induction set at your 36th birthday for most of the war, your 38th birthday for a time in 1944 and 1945. I think he was consistently overage from April 1942 onward. He doesn’t appear in any of the common veterans’ databases (though that’s not dispositive).

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Art Deco

    Aside from serving in the military itself, a huge number of people who were not eligible to be drafted were needed for war related work, especially since able bodied younger men were off fighting. Thus giving rise to Rosie the Riveter.

    Given his less than flourishing film career, it wouldn't surprise me if Glass had found more steady work in some war related industry for the duration. After the war, the government contracts stopped, the veterans came back and took their old jobs back and guys like Ned were again back to going to auditions and doing carpentry.

  242. @MEH 0910
    @Dave Pinsen


    Hopefully Rendezvous with Rama does well enough that they make the sequels, which are even better and also HBD-aware.
     
    Interesting. I never read the sequels to Rendezvous With Rama.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendezvous_with_Rama

    https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Literature/RendezvousWithRama

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    The sequels were co-written by Clarke and Gentry Lee (the chief engineer at JPL).

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @Dave Pinsen

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentry_Lee


    Rendezvous With Rama was written in 1972 and Clarke had no intention of writing a sequel. Lee turned the Rama series into a more character-driven story following the adventures of Nicole des Jardins Wakefield, who becomes the main character in Rama II, The Garden of Rama, and Rama Revealed. When asked, Arthur C. Clarke said that Gentry Lee did the writing while he was a source of ideas.[4]
     
    https://web.archive.org/web/20080723051103/http://www.scifi.com/sfw/interviews/sfw19051.html

    Clarke:
    [...]
    Another important influence on my life, of course, has been Gentry Lee, who was introduced to me by Peter Guber, who wanted to make a film based on Gentry's ideas. It was never filmed, but it led to the novel, Cradle, which was based on our joint ideas but almost entirely written by Gentry. Since then Gentry has collaborated on Rama II and The Garden of Rama, and Rama Revealed, which was written virtually entirely by him, though with consultation with me. I've described our collaboration in the preface, "Co-Authors and Other Nuisances," I think in Rama II.
     
  243. @Abe
    @Almost Missouri


    tl;dr: Working poor hardest hit. Portfolio class enriched.
     
    iSteve It-Girl Sarah Jeong had a bit to say about this recently:

    all the stuff you see about inflation in the news is driven by rich people flipping their shit because their parasitic assets aren't doing as well as they'd like and they're scared that unemployment benefits + stimmy checks + 15 minimum wage + labor shortage is why
     
    https://reason.com/2021/11/17/new-york-times-writer-sarah-jeong-says-inflation-in-the-news-is-just-rich-people-flipping-their-shit/

    Unlike most of you dudes I was never particularly offended by her “anti-white” Tweets as Sarah has obviously received more white pipe in the back than a Home Depot. I am, however, very much offended by such gross know-nothingness. You are a regular staff contributor for THE NEW YORK TIMES, unfortunately (and pretty much through inertia alone) still the most influential shaper of “respectable” opinion in America. Do you therefore not feel even a tiny bit of obligation to know anything about anything? And then on top of it to wrap your ignorance in the borrowed, ugly idiom of Hip Hop/Ebonics (nothing I find more unpalatable than an Asian girl affecting to sound like some Nuyorican with her factory original chirrupy-shrill East Asian vocal chords).

    Outspoken, undaunted, labia proudly unfurled to the world like Christmas roast beef left out till January 2nd. Actually believes this is how the rich manage their wealth. Sarah Jeong.

    https://eq2wire.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/scrooge_mcduck.jpg

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Jack D

    Yeah, I’ve been saying Sarah is an over-promoted dufus for years. (And that, as you colorfully suggest, she likely has a … um … track record, also likely digitally recorded.)

    Other commenters have pointed out that she is probably from a rich family. She got into Harvard despite being Asian and not particularly smart, so the natural conclusion is that her father made a big donation. Therefore her inflation-is-just-rich-people schtick implies an element of parricidal acting out.

  244. @Art Deco
    @D. K.

    He was born in 1906. He'd have been 34 when conscription was instituted in October of 1940. He and his wife were childless at the time, so the categorical deferment granted men with dependent children (from the fall of 1940 to the fall of 1943) did not apply to him. IIRC, they had everyone who was under 50 in October 1940 fill out registration cards, with the upper age boundary for induction set at your 36th birthday for most of the war, your 38th birthday for a time in 1944 and 1945. I think he was consistently overage from April 1942 onward. He doesn't appear in any of the common veterans' databases (though that's not dispositive).

    Replies: @Jack D

    Aside from serving in the military itself, a huge number of people who were not eligible to be drafted were needed for war related work, especially since able bodied younger men were off fighting. Thus giving rise to Rosie the Riveter.

    Given his less than flourishing film career, it wouldn’t surprise me if Glass had found more steady work in some war related industry for the duration. After the war, the government contracts stopped, the veterans came back and took their old jobs back and guys like Ned were again back to going to auditions and doing carpentry.

  245. @Abe
    @Almost Missouri


    tl;dr: Working poor hardest hit. Portfolio class enriched.
     
    iSteve It-Girl Sarah Jeong had a bit to say about this recently:

    all the stuff you see about inflation in the news is driven by rich people flipping their shit because their parasitic assets aren't doing as well as they'd like and they're scared that unemployment benefits + stimmy checks + 15 minimum wage + labor shortage is why
     
    https://reason.com/2021/11/17/new-york-times-writer-sarah-jeong-says-inflation-in-the-news-is-just-rich-people-flipping-their-shit/

    Unlike most of you dudes I was never particularly offended by her “anti-white” Tweets as Sarah has obviously received more white pipe in the back than a Home Depot. I am, however, very much offended by such gross know-nothingness. You are a regular staff contributor for THE NEW YORK TIMES, unfortunately (and pretty much through inertia alone) still the most influential shaper of “respectable” opinion in America. Do you therefore not feel even a tiny bit of obligation to know anything about anything? And then on top of it to wrap your ignorance in the borrowed, ugly idiom of Hip Hop/Ebonics (nothing I find more unpalatable than an Asian girl affecting to sound like some Nuyorican with her factory original chirrupy-shrill East Asian vocal chords).

    Outspoken, undaunted, labia proudly unfurled to the world like Christmas roast beef left out till January 2nd. Actually believes this is how the rich manage their wealth. Sarah Jeong.

    https://eq2wire.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/scrooge_mcduck.jpg

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Jack D

    Sarah knows about as much about economics as I know about classical Korean poetry.

    It’s rather transparently obvious that she is saying that THIS inflation is only harming the rich (which we all know is good) because THIS inflation is occurring during a Democrat administration. If the same level of inflation had occurred during the Trump Adminstration, she would be tweeting that Donald Trump is personally responsible for the death of millions of Babies of Color due to the horrible inflation that he has triggered and that inflation mainly hurts People of Color and women.

    Midwits like Sarah are not very good at covering their who-whomism. In the current environment, they don’t even feel obligated to try.

  246. @Steve Sailer
    @Whiskey

    "Spielberg is a failure."

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Jack D

    @Spielberg:

    “Whiskey is a failure”

  247. @Mike Tre
    @Altai


    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),
     
    This is not accurate at all. What part of "mid century America" has Spielberg ever admired other than the ones who killed Nazis? How about a movie about the 1930's? Not many of those made for some reason, even though FDR was supposedly the greatest president evar! He could make a movie out of the Hemingway Book "To Have and Have Not" although it may not illustrate the New Deal as the success it supposedly was.

    This is pretty obvious merely by observing the stark differences in the production and tone of Band of Brothers as compared to The Pacific.

    Replies: @Sam Malone

    What were the differences in tone between Band of Brothers and The Pacific that you’re thinking of? I watched a lot of each series years ago but didn’t notice a shift of style.

    The Pacific did drive home just how relentlessly miserable and vicious and ‘killing-centric’ that war was for the Americans. All I remember is one of the characters after the war trying to get a job and the indifferent office person asking what skills or training he got in the Army that might qualify him in the workplace. This is galling to him and to the audience after having seen all these young men out in the mud and rain trying to stay alive while fulfilling their duty to kill as many of the enemy as possible. And he just answers, “Killing Japs. That’s what I did for 3 years. That’s all they trained me to do. Killing Japs.”

  248. @Anonymous
    The original movie version seems to have been noticeably degayed compared to the Broadway version.

    The Broadway version was pretty darned gay for its time.

    Not just the dancing but the attitude of the actors.

    Pretty… darned… gay…

    https://youtu.be/C_IvknEFZGs

    Replies: @onetwothree, @Anonymous, @John Johnson, @Meretricious, @SunBakedSuburb, @Peter Akuleyev

    In 1959 this didn’t read “homo” to most Americans the way it does now. For one thing people were just more sincere – a man could dance and show emotion and the audience could take it at face value. Only sophisticates knew how much homosexuality was going on behind the scenes. A lot of what reads gay to us now is backwards projection – since we know all the men involved were gay, we’ve decided these mannerisms are gay. But at the time the gay men were often doing their best to hide that fact.

    Don’t forget that in the 1950s it was not unusual for a straight white man to be a pretty good dancer himself, and going out dancing was one of the primary forms of entertainment even for middle aged married couples – something that may be hard for young people to grok. Any white male from a family with social aspirations had logged hours of dancing lessons by the time they were in college.

    • Agree: Art Deco
  249. @Clyde
    @PaceLaw


    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.
     
    Mostly racial, with the whiter ones dumping on the Hispanics, the next rung down on the ladder. So in the NYC of 1960 or 70, the whitest would be Cubans. They think they are the smartest and most cultured. And of pure Spanish blood.
    They dump on Puerto Ricans (Reason: they are black and Indian)
    Who have the privilege of dumping on Dominicans (Reason: they are black and might as well be Haitians)
    Dominicans get to dump on the black as midnight Caribbeans from the Anglo-islands.

    The average white New Yorker of 1970 has no awareness of these racial one upmanships. He just sees and thinks Hispanics. But within the Hispanic community, coming from a different wretched, sht-hole of an island, this was a very big deal.

    Replies: @Evocatus, @Peter Akuleyev, @AceDeuce

    Through the 1970s Cubans were not even a minority. They were simply white – think Desi Arnaz or Mel Ferrer. My family had a good Cuban friend back in the 1970s – he was just as white as any Italian.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Peter Akuleyev


    Through the 1970s Cubans were not even a minority. They were simply white – think Desi Arnaz or Mel Ferrer. My family had a good Cuban friend back in the 1970s – he was just as white as any Italian.
     
    Just anecdotal from me, but the whitest Hispanics I have encountered have been from Colombia. I mean as pale as a pale Frenchman in Paris. I said about one Colombian woman, "She looks like she just got off the airplane from Paris." She was a waitress at a restaurant we frequented. She got down to business in America and had a baby, we all gave her very nice tips her last day on the job there.

    Desi Arnaz and Lucille Ball, we all know that for putting this on TV to be seen by millions. That this marriage was on the level of an interracial marriage. It was unorthodox and titillating for the American masses. Ha, and then you throw in Desi's (exaggerated?) Spanish accent. Who btw way only made it to 69.

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @Jack D
    @Peter Akuleyev

    This had something to do with the nature of the Cuban migration. The people who left immediately after the Revolution were the upper and middle class, which was almost exclusively white.

    The lumpenproletariat were always much blacker, ranging from a lil bit blackish to really really black.
    Since the first wave cleared out many of the white people. those that remained were blacker. At first, the Revolution was an upgrade for them, especially with Soviet money pouring in and many white people gone and the Revolution preaching an egalitarian ideology and offering opportunities for education, etc.

    Eventually Castro comprehensively ruined the economy (destroying the sugar industry in Cuba was almost as hard as destroying the ice industry in Alaska, but somehow he managed) and later waves of out migration were blacker.

    Think of Cuba as being Detroit writ large.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Bernard

  250. @Evocatus
    @Clyde

    Here in NYC, both the Puerto Ricans and Dominicans tend to look down upon the Mexicans. Mexicans here tend to be from Puebla or other regions in southern Mexico and are smaller and much more Amerindian looking compared to West Coast Mexicans. For the most part, they are ignored by whites and are often the victims of black crime since many of them work delivering food for restaurants and are seen as easy targets.

    Replies: @Clyde

    Here in NYC, both the Puerto Ricans and Dominicans tend to look down upon the Mexicans. Mexicans here tend to be from Puebla or other regions in southern Mexico and are smaller and much more Amerindian looking compared to West Coast Mexicans. For the most part, they are ignored by whites and are often the victims of black crime since many of them work delivering food for restaurants and are seen as easy targets.

    I believe it! In the Beantown area loads of Central Americans (Haitians too) came from the mid-80s onward, due to the Catholic connection they had in common with native Irish and Italians. Plus those New England libs had loads of sympathy for them as victims (I suppose) of Ronald Reagan’s anti-communist wars in Central America. Those Central Americans are Indian looking and squat, like the NYC Mexicans you mention.

    The NYC Mexicans also get dumped on by the Caribbean derived Hispanics, who have been infesting NYC a lot longer. Decades longer. They are the natives compared to the Mexicans who just got off the banana boat. In the 1980s there were zero Mexicans in NYC. Then their numbers exploded.

  251. @Peter Akuleyev
    @Clyde

    Through the 1970s Cubans were not even a minority. They were simply white - think Desi Arnaz or Mel Ferrer. My family had a good Cuban friend back in the 1970s - he was just as white as any Italian.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Jack D

    Through the 1970s Cubans were not even a minority. They were simply white – think Desi Arnaz or Mel Ferrer. My family had a good Cuban friend back in the 1970s – he was just as white as any Italian.

    Just anecdotal from me, but the whitest Hispanics I have encountered have been from Colombia. I mean as pale as a pale Frenchman in Paris. I said about one Colombian woman, “She looks like she just got off the airplane from Paris.” She was a waitress at a restaurant we frequented. She got down to business in America and had a baby, we all gave her very nice tips her last day on the job there.

    Desi Arnaz and Lucille Ball, we all know that for putting this on TV to be seen by millions. That this marriage was on the level of an interracial marriage. It was unorthodox and titillating for the American masses. Ha, and then you throw in Desi’s (exaggerated?) Spanish accent. Who btw way only made it to 69.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Clyde

    You're right that it's ancedotal. There is a distinct white ethnic group in Colombia - as you say some of them are very fair skinned. Sophie Vergara is from Colombia and she is a natural blond - when she moved to the US and started acting they made her dye her hair darker because no one knew what to do with a blond Latino. I don't know the migration history but they ended up with a lot of fair skinned people in certain parts of the country.

    However, they are not the biggest group. Here are the demographics of Colombia


    1 Mestizo (mixed race Indian) 53.5%
    2 White European Colombian 30.7%
    3 African Colombian, Mulatto, etc. 10.5%
    4 Native South American 3.4%

    Replies: @Clyde

  252. @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    Your point was just your usual ignorant irrelevant ridiculous nonsense.

    Replies: @Clyde

    Mens of Unz! Thanks for the usual laughs and sarcasm. And I am not being sarcastic here. Merry Christmas!

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Clyde

    Merry Christmas 🎄. Or as I sometimes say “Happy Winter Holiday that doesn’t offend you.”

  253. @Peter Akuleyev
    @Clyde

    Through the 1970s Cubans were not even a minority. They were simply white - think Desi Arnaz or Mel Ferrer. My family had a good Cuban friend back in the 1970s - he was just as white as any Italian.

    Replies: @Clyde, @Jack D

    This had something to do with the nature of the Cuban migration. The people who left immediately after the Revolution were the upper and middle class, which was almost exclusively white.

    The lumpenproletariat were always much blacker, ranging from a lil bit blackish to really really black.
    Since the first wave cleared out many of the white people. those that remained were blacker. At first, the Revolution was an upgrade for them, especially with Soviet money pouring in and many white people gone and the Revolution preaching an egalitarian ideology and offering opportunities for education, etc.

    Eventually Castro comprehensively ruined the economy (destroying the sugar industry in Cuba was almost as hard as destroying the ice industry in Alaska, but somehow he managed) and later waves of out migration were blacker.

    Think of Cuba as being Detroit writ large.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Jack D

    Trade sanctions meant that it was impossible for Cuba to export sugar to sugar-hungry lard-ass Americans, and anyway the heavy mechanization of the sugar industry in Florida was producing sugar incredibly cheaply and destroyed hand-cut sugar industries throughout the Caribbean.

    Cuba still produces some decent rum, though, which is sold all over the world except in the US.

    Replies: @Alden

    , @Bernard
    @Jack D


    Jack D says:
    December 16, 2021 at 9:44 pm GMT • 5.0 hours ago • 100 Words ↑
    @Peter Akuleyev
    This had something to do with the nature of the Cuban migration. The people who left immediately after the Revolution were the upper and middle class, which was almost exclusively white.
     
    I would also add to that that those who immigrated possessed the traits which are most desirable in our culture. Almost all of them left behind everything they owned and most suffered deprivations while waiting to leave. This self selected group believed that they could do more for themselves than what their socialist government promised. The slackers stayed behind.

    If policies for the selection of immigrants could be fine tuned to identify the important traits that Cuban immigrants possessed and applied to who is now admitted, we might stand a chance. Instead, we settle for a random group of immigrants based on the whims of a faceless bureaucracy.
  254. @Clyde
    @Peter Akuleyev


    Through the 1970s Cubans were not even a minority. They were simply white – think Desi Arnaz or Mel Ferrer. My family had a good Cuban friend back in the 1970s – he was just as white as any Italian.
     
    Just anecdotal from me, but the whitest Hispanics I have encountered have been from Colombia. I mean as pale as a pale Frenchman in Paris. I said about one Colombian woman, "She looks like she just got off the airplane from Paris." She was a waitress at a restaurant we frequented. She got down to business in America and had a baby, we all gave her very nice tips her last day on the job there.

    Desi Arnaz and Lucille Ball, we all know that for putting this on TV to be seen by millions. That this marriage was on the level of an interracial marriage. It was unorthodox and titillating for the American masses. Ha, and then you throw in Desi's (exaggerated?) Spanish accent. Who btw way only made it to 69.

    Replies: @Jack D

    You’re right that it’s ancedotal. There is a distinct white ethnic group in Colombia – as you say some of them are very fair skinned. Sophie Vergara is from Colombia and she is a natural blond – when she moved to the US and started acting they made her dye her hair darker because no one knew what to do with a blond Latino. I don’t know the migration history but they ended up with a lot of fair skinned people in certain parts of the country.

    However, they are not the biggest group. Here are the demographics of Colombia

    1 Mestizo (mixed race Indian) 53.5%
    2 White European Colombian 30.7%
    3 African Colombian, Mulatto, etc. 10.5%
    4 Native South American 3.4%

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Jack D


    However, they are not the biggest group. Here are the demographics of Colombia

    1 Mestizo (mixed race Indian) 53.5%
    2 White European Colombian 30.7%
    3 African Colombian, Mulatto, etc. 10.5%
    4 Native South American 3.4%
     
    They are doing better than Mexico where the pure enough whites are 10% of the population. Sofia Vegara had her own little flight from white. "White Colombians" has its own Wikipedia entry which you might find interesting. Lots of Sephardic Jews made it over there. Many Maronite Lebanese too. This entry claims that only Argentina has more white people and European blood distributed, than Colombia.
  255. @Dave Pinsen
    @MEH 0910

    The sequels were co-written by Clarke and Gentry Lee (the chief engineer at JPL).

    Replies: @MEH 0910

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentry_Lee

    Rendezvous With Rama was written in 1972 and Clarke had no intention of writing a sequel. Lee turned the Rama series into a more character-driven story following the adventures of Nicole des Jardins Wakefield, who becomes the main character in Rama II, The Garden of Rama, and Rama Revealed. When asked, Arthur C. Clarke said that Gentry Lee did the writing while he was a source of ideas.[4]

    https://web.archive.org/web/20080723051103/http://www.scifi.com/sfw/interviews/sfw19051.html

    Clarke:
    […]
    Another important influence on my life, of course, has been Gentry Lee, who was introduced to me by Peter Guber, who wanted to make a film based on Gentry’s ideas. It was never filmed, but it led to the novel, Cradle, which was based on our joint ideas but almost entirely written by Gentry. Since then Gentry has collaborated on Rama II and The Garden of Rama, and Rama Revealed, which was written virtually entirely by him, though with consultation with me. I’ve described our collaboration in the preface, “Co-Authors and Other Nuisances,” I think in Rama II.

  256. @Pat Hannagan
    So, Steven Spielberg, being a patriotic admirer of mid-century America (e.g., Saving Private Ryan),...

    Ah, geeze, c'mon, really? You actually believe this?

    Steven Spielberg admires mid-century America, which is why he portrayed a quintessential Jewish existential anguish collective fever dream by utilising and perverting a pinnacle White masterpiece in Shakespeare's play about families' history pitted against each other as Broadway stage play pitting non-Whites against Whites with an even more evil demeanour given to the Whites?

    Today’s youth of color seem particularly unenthused. I saw the new West Side Story Saturday night in the heart of the Mexican barrio of Van Nuys, Calif., and there were about seventeen people in the theater.

    Just like Santa Inc. It wasn't made to make money, it was made to ululate a victory, simultaneously tormenting the losers.

    Twenty-first-century audiences apparently don’t care much about all the brainpower expended on West Side Story. So far, despite all the efforts exerted over the generations by all the famous talents involved, nobody except critics (who are wowed by it) and old white people who liked the 1961 Best Picture-winning film just fine are much interested in going to Spielberg’s reimagining.

    21st C White People see through it! Only the critics, the very same tribe Seth Rogen and Steven Spielberg hail from, appreciate the film. Everyone else instinctively understands what ancient lizard brained hateful mind spawned this continuing diatribe.

    Btw, if you want to hear and visualise a masculine White non-homo take on West Side Story listen to Alice Cooper's School's Out:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjJMgCSEcS0

    Replies: @Pat Hannagan, @Anonymous, @JMcG

    My opinion is that Spielberg made Saving Private Ryan so he could include the scene of the cowardly American WASP failing to save the brave American Jew from being slaughtered by the SS. It was a pretty bad movie with some good scenes. Band of Brothers was much better.

    • Agree: LondonBob
  257. Anonymous[214] • Disclaimer says:
    @europeasant
    @Jonathan Mason

    "But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised"

    We're all Jews here in America!

    "In the United States, as many as 85% of male newborns were circumcised in 1965. But that number has fallen steadily for the past half-century, especially as immigration from countries where circumcision is not common has increased. In 2011, the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, as reported by U.S. hospitals, put newborn males' circumcision rate at 57%"

    The Jews here in America kibitzed to have all the Goyim circumcised. They reasoned that if the American NAZIS ever took control again they could not find out who was Jew or Goy. Very smart of the jew!

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Anonymous, @Jack D

    Americans started circumcising their sons in the late 19th century because of British Israelism, which has been pretty much forgotten nowadays, but which was huge back then. The heyday of BI lasted from the 1870s to the 1930s, during which time circumcision became routine in all the English-speaking countries, at least for Protestants.

  258. @Jack D
    @Peter Akuleyev

    This had something to do with the nature of the Cuban migration. The people who left immediately after the Revolution were the upper and middle class, which was almost exclusively white.

    The lumpenproletariat were always much blacker, ranging from a lil bit blackish to really really black.
    Since the first wave cleared out many of the white people. those that remained were blacker. At first, the Revolution was an upgrade for them, especially with Soviet money pouring in and many white people gone and the Revolution preaching an egalitarian ideology and offering opportunities for education, etc.

    Eventually Castro comprehensively ruined the economy (destroying the sugar industry in Cuba was almost as hard as destroying the ice industry in Alaska, but somehow he managed) and later waves of out migration were blacker.

    Think of Cuba as being Detroit writ large.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Bernard

    Trade sanctions meant that it was impossible for Cuba to export sugar to sugar-hungry lard-ass Americans, and anyway the heavy mechanization of the sugar industry in Florida was producing sugar incredibly cheaply and destroyed hand-cut sugar industries throughout the Caribbean.

    Cuba still produces some decent rum, though, which is sold all over the world except in the US.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    America never bought much sugar from Cuba. No reason to. Between the sugar cane farms in the south , corn syrup and sugar beets in the Midwest we grew all the sugar we needed. Except for fruit and vegetables from Mexico and Central America during the winter and cheese from France America has never needed to import food. One of our biggest exports is agricultural products aka food.

    Sugar exports actually boomed after Cuba went communist. China, Soviet Union and the Soviet occupied countries in E Europe imported Cuban cane sugar. In fact, the Russians and E European occupied countries stopped farming sugar beets so as to support Cuban cane sugar.

    The only food in ample supply in China N Vietnam’s the Soviet Union and E Europe was Cuban cane sugar.

    About 170-180 nations in the world. Most still traded with Cuba. Cuba’s real economic problems began when soviet Russia and E Europe ended communism in 1990 and stopped supporting Cuba by importing its cane sugar.

  259. @Jack D
    @HA


    Toaff thinks it possible
     
    It's also possible that these children were murdered by space aliens. A lot of things are possible but didn't actually happen. Confessions under torture are considered to be completely unreliable - people will say anything to get the torture to stop. Other than evidence obtained by torture, Toaff has no other evidence.

    Just because Ron Unz sees some merit in an argument doesn’t make it wrong.
     
    It's not 100%, but I would says that in matters relating to the Jews, there is a strong correlation between the level of merit that Ron sees and the likelihood that the argument is wrong. He is a classic crank or contrarian. Contrarians are sometimes right (eppur si muove) but usually they ain't.

    Replies: @HA

    “It’s also possible that these children were murdered by space aliens.”

    Come up with actual evidence in the way that Toaff did (something none of his critics, you included, even seem to get around to disputing, which is another obvious tell) that space aliens murdered Simon of Trent, and then get back to me. Until then, the advantage goes to him, regardless of whether or not Simon of Trent is on the calendar of saints — however evidentiary or probative that is to you, all of sudden.

    If the best you’ve got against him is that Ron Unz thinks his book has merit, and apparently it is, it’s thin gruel, and overall, a sign of progress, since you’re not even trying to dispute the main point Toaff was making, which was that regardless of whether Simon of Trent was the only victim of this blood-ritual thing that evidently both some Jews and some Christians practiced, the overwhelmingly larger victimization stemming from the very real abduction of children into slave markets that medieval Jews on both sides of the Mediterranean played a very substantial role in facilitating (which, again, according to Toaff, likely helped advance the blood libel claims, however smaller both the body count and body of evidence was in that case) is something you’re not even bothering to dispute. Last time, as I recall, you tried to counter with Farrakhan (who was arguing about another slave trade altogether), a non sequitur that is as lame and transparent and unconvincing as your reverse appeal-to-authority-argument regarding Ron Unz. So good for you, I say.

    As undisputed and momentous as that main point evidently is, I’m not holding my breath that Hollywood is going to regard it as being worthy of any notice whatsoever, but as for little Edgardo, God rest his soul, maybe the third time around will be the charm, even though the other two ventures failed.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @HA

    The slave market was one reason why Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Jews and Muslims from Spain. Also a reason for the Spanish style of architecture of even the simplest homes surrounded by a wall and barred gates and windows. And the reasons why girls and young women didn’t go out side alone but in groups or with older women or brothers. Even busy planting and picking farm work the girls and young women stayed in groups and the men kept an eye out for Tartars Arab pirates after the girls. They even sailed to Ireland Iceland and even Greenland raiding for slaves.

    The Armenians were slave traders of their fellow Christian Slavs around the Black and Caspian Seas.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Jack D
    @HA

    This is called shifting the goalposts. Jews were involved in slave trading (probably true to some extent although I have no idea of what % of slave traders they formed at that time - probably not a high % given that Jews were few in number and there was no BLS to keep track so no one will ever know the %) egro they also killed Simon of Trent to make matzoh. Does not follow.

    Replies: @HA, @Peterike

  260. @Jonathan Mason
    @D. K.

    The thing about successful and popular movies is that it always starts with great songs that people take to their hearts.

    When I was a little boy I knew the song "Oh, What a Beautiful Day" even though I had never heard of Oklahoma.

    When I was a slightly bigger boy I knew many of the tunes from South Pacific, I knew nothing of the musical or the movie, but I knew the words to several of the songs.

    When I was an adolescent I fell briefly in love with Julie Andrews, and certainly knew all the words to Doh-Re-Mi and My Favorite Things, and a bit later in life when I was a rebellious adolescent I loved John Coltrane's subversive take on My Favorite Things.

    Sometimes I only discovered much later that beloved songs were originally from musicals, and probably most of the people of many races, ages, and nationalities belting out this song have never heard of the musical Carousel, set in New England, but based on a Hungarian story.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weec_jzudc8

    So great musicals unite us all because of the great songs that people sing all over the world.

    Right from the beginning of musicals there was always the question of whether it was better to have actors who could sing (Rex Harrison, if you can call his rap singing) or singers who could act like Julie Andrews.

    I think that Rachel Zegler is a huge talent, perhaps falling more into the singer who can act category at this stage of her career. Some posters have criticized her looks. Well, she is no Susan Boyle and bears a passing resemblance to Ali McGraw who starred in Love Story, one of the most popular movies of its time in which McGraw managed to die of cancer while looking good.

    I think lots of adolescents and young men will fall in love with her in movie, which is what counts, and I get the feeling that she is going to be a huge star in the future.

    She might be the next Lea Salonga, but perhaps she might become more popular in popular music than on stage if her songwriting abilities mature, rather than have a career like McGraw, whose career was never fully resurrected after her death in Love Story. (Apparently she suffered from alcoholism.)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lExFL3X5-U

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @Alden

    bears a passing resemblance to Ali McGraw who starred in Love Story, one of the most popular movies of its time in which McGraw managed to die of cancer while looking good.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Story_(1970_film)#Ali_MacGraw’s_%22disease%22

    Ali MacGraw’s “disease”

    Vincent Canby wrote in his original New York Times review that it was “as if Jenny was suffering from some vaguely unpleasant Elizabeth Arden treatment”.[14] Mad magazine ran a parody of the film (“Lover’s Story”) in its October 1971 issue, which depicted Ali MacGraw’s character as stricken with “Old Movie Disease”, an ailment that causes a dying patient to become “more beautiful by the minute”.[31][32] In 1997, Roger Ebert defined “Ali MacGraw’s Disease” as a movie illness in which “the only symptom is that the patient grows more beautiful until finally dying”.[33]

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @MEH 0910

    This disease is well known in the opera world. The patient's singing ability also increases until the last second when she collapses and dies and the curtain comes down.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  261. @Americano
    @Rob

    @Rob

    Puerto Ricans are not heavily black you moronic imbecile.

    See Benicio del Toro, Ricky Martin, Pedro Augusto del Valle (1st Hispanic lieutenant general, and a hard-core American Reactionary), Jose Ferrer (1st Hispanic best actor winner), Raul Julia, Rita Moreno (EGOT), Jose Feliciano, Luis Fonsi, William Carlos Williams (One of America's greatest poet. Anglo/Puerto Rican), 5 Miss Universe (1970: Marisol Malaret, 1985: Deborah Carthy-Deu, 1993: Dayanara Torres, 2001: Denise M. Quiñones and 2006: Zuleyka Rivera), etc., etc., etc.

    Puerto Rico is not dissimilar to the USA--mostly Europeans (with some Native American elements) and a small black population. This was the reason why Teddy Roosevelt was willing to take in Puerto Rico and not Cuba--while Cuba was bigger and wealthier, and had a large white population, it also had a very large black population; by contrast, Puerto Rico had a small black population, concentrated in the coastal areas.

    Replies: @Jack D, @flyingtiger, @Nicholas Stix

    The gringos want the PR because San Juan had on of the best ports in the western hemisphere. We wanted to keep the Kaisers dreadnoughts out. Now that is not a worry.

  262. @HA
    @Jack D

    "It’s also possible that these children were murdered by space aliens."

    Come up with actual evidence in the way that Toaff did (something none of his critics, you included, even seem to get around to disputing, which is another obvious tell) that space aliens murdered Simon of Trent, and then get back to me. Until then, the advantage goes to him, regardless of whether or not Simon of Trent is on the calendar of saints -- however evidentiary or probative that is to you, all of sudden.

    If the best you've got against him is that Ron Unz thinks his book has merit, and apparently it is, it's thin gruel, and overall, a sign of progress, since you're not even trying to dispute the main point Toaff was making, which was that regardless of whether Simon of Trent was the only victim of this blood-ritual thing that evidently both some Jews and some Christians practiced, the overwhelmingly larger victimization stemming from the very real abduction of children into slave markets that medieval Jews on both sides of the Mediterranean played a very substantial role in facilitating (which, again, according to Toaff, likely helped advance the blood libel claims, however smaller both the body count and body of evidence was in that case) is something you're not even bothering to dispute. Last time, as I recall, you tried to counter with Farrakhan (who was arguing about another slave trade altogether), a non sequitur that is as lame and transparent and unconvincing as your reverse appeal-to-authority-argument regarding Ron Unz. So good for you, I say.

    As undisputed and momentous as that main point evidently is, I'm not holding my breath that Hollywood is going to regard it as being worthy of any notice whatsoever, but as for little Edgardo, God rest his soul, maybe the third time around will be the charm, even though the other two ventures failed.

    Replies: @Alden, @Jack D

    The slave market was one reason why Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Jews and Muslims from Spain. Also a reason for the Spanish style of architecture of even the simplest homes surrounded by a wall and barred gates and windows. And the reasons why girls and young women didn’t go out side alone but in groups or with older women or brothers. Even busy planting and picking farm work the girls and young women stayed in groups and the men kept an eye out for Tartars Arab pirates after the girls. They even sailed to Ireland Iceland and even Greenland raiding for slaves.

    The Armenians were slave traders of their fellow Christian Slavs around the Black and Caspian Seas.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Alden

    "The slave market was one reason why Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Jews and Muslims from Spain. "

    I've addressed this issue before. The first Christians of Spain were Visigothic Arians who -- like many newly converted tribes -- didn't want some new religion getting in the way of making money, and they had good relations with the Jews (who had been in Spain long before Christ). Later, when the more theologically punctilious Trinitarians came along (eventually defeating the Arians), they took a dim view towards allowing Jews to own Christian slaves since it meant exposing the slaves to conversion pressure, something the Arians hadn't previously bothered to forbid. This made certain industries that relied on slave labor (e.g. agriculture) more difficult for Jews, since the restrictions meant they would have to partner with a Christian slaveowner, etc. Jews responded by plotting to allow the Muslims (another Arian offshoot, you might say) situated across the Mediterranean to invade Spain. Eventually, as I related earlier,

    ...the plot was discovered, and accordiing to Graetz ["the father of the lachrymose vision of Jewish history, for his narrative is drenched in darkness"], all the Jews of Spain, Septimania and Narbonne were made slaves.
     

    It's a complicated tale (here's a little more about Graetz), and it should be noted that numerous groups of Jews fought bravely for the Christian side of Spain in the centuries to follow, but it's fair to say their participation in the slave markets (like their moneylending) did not endear them to the locals.

    Moreover, the expulsion put a serious dent in their participation in the European slave markets, since their continental headquarters of "Slavery, Inc." were basically shut down. If one reads about the sacking of Baltimore, which took place several decades after William Shakespeare wrote the first draft of West Side Story, there's not a Jewish character to be found there (at least, not on the European side).

    I'd also note that many of those Irish villagers whose lives were destroyed by Barbary pirates were already being brutalized by British royals as opposed to some Algerian caliph, an enslavement narrative of another kind which led up to the famine two centuries later and a far more massive depopulation. So in pointing fingers at who enslaved who, all that needs to be taken into account, which is why I get annoyed when certain people, whether in Hollywood or the editorial board of the NYT, take it upon themselves to demand that only certain types of kidnapping and enslaving are worthy of our attention.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Alden, @Art Deco

  263. @LondonBob
    @Anonymous

    The biggest issue with Saving Private Ryan is it just isn't a good film, I have never watched it the whole way through.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Clyde

    I have to agree. Some of the action sequences are amazing, particularly the D-Day landing, but the story as a whole doesn’t make sense and leaves you with nothing.

    • Agree: flyingtiger
  264. @Alden
    @D. K.

    It wasn’t popular with young people. It was popular with late 20s and older. Who liked that music and dated clothes. We went to high school traveled on city buses with and interacted with what were call hoods. Those WSS dancing boys weren’t hoods. And didn’t commit any crimes not even shoplifting snacks. They didn’t go to school or seem to have homes or parents. What kind of teens are that? . Some of them had jobs. Which was realistic for the times.

    WSS was a standard musical one of the most popular 1930 to 1970 genres. Popular with the older people who went to musicals all during the 1940s and 50s.

    To high school and just out of high school age viewers it was very unrealistic. They were supposed to be our age. But just danced around their neighborhood. No school no homes no parents no draft for the boys.

    Replies: @D. K.

    We had the “West Side Story” soundtrack album in my house, when I was a boy growing up in Gary, in the mid-1960s. If either of my parents (born in 1921 and 1923) bought that LP, they bought it as a gift for one of my older siblings; I never saw either of my parents ever play an LP, not even of singers they liked whose records my older siblings owned.

  265. @Clyde
    @Alden

    Mens of Unz! Thanks for the usual laughs and sarcasm. And I am not being sarcastic here. Merry Christmas!

    Replies: @Alden

    Merry Christmas 🎄. Or as I sometimes say “Happy Winter Holiday that doesn’t offend you.”

  266. @europeasant
    @Jonathan Mason

    "But the point is that I think you could play the part of a Jew on stage, without being circumcised"

    We're all Jews here in America!

    "In the United States, as many as 85% of male newborns were circumcised in 1965. But that number has fallen steadily for the past half-century, especially as immigration from countries where circumcision is not common has increased. In 2011, the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, as reported by U.S. hospitals, put newborn males' circumcision rate at 57%"

    The Jews here in America kibitzed to have all the Goyim circumcised. They reasoned that if the American NAZIS ever took control again they could not find out who was Jew or Goy. Very smart of the jew!

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Anonymous, @Jack D

    The Jews here in America kibitzed to have all the Goyim circumcised.

    I realize you wanted to throw in a Yiddish word but kibitz is not the right word.

    To kibitz is too look over someone’s shoulder and offer unsolicited advice. For example, you are watching someone play chess and you offer up unwelcome and annoying suggestions for moves.

    Conspire fits better but the Yiddish word for conspire is conspire (konspirirt) which never made it into Yinglish for obvious reasons.

    • Agree: PaceLaw
    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
  267. @HA
    @Jack D

    "It’s also possible that these children were murdered by space aliens."

    Come up with actual evidence in the way that Toaff did (something none of his critics, you included, even seem to get around to disputing, which is another obvious tell) that space aliens murdered Simon of Trent, and then get back to me. Until then, the advantage goes to him, regardless of whether or not Simon of Trent is on the calendar of saints -- however evidentiary or probative that is to you, all of sudden.

    If the best you've got against him is that Ron Unz thinks his book has merit, and apparently it is, it's thin gruel, and overall, a sign of progress, since you're not even trying to dispute the main point Toaff was making, which was that regardless of whether Simon of Trent was the only victim of this blood-ritual thing that evidently both some Jews and some Christians practiced, the overwhelmingly larger victimization stemming from the very real abduction of children into slave markets that medieval Jews on both sides of the Mediterranean played a very substantial role in facilitating (which, again, according to Toaff, likely helped advance the blood libel claims, however smaller both the body count and body of evidence was in that case) is something you're not even bothering to dispute. Last time, as I recall, you tried to counter with Farrakhan (who was arguing about another slave trade altogether), a non sequitur that is as lame and transparent and unconvincing as your reverse appeal-to-authority-argument regarding Ron Unz. So good for you, I say.

    As undisputed and momentous as that main point evidently is, I'm not holding my breath that Hollywood is going to regard it as being worthy of any notice whatsoever, but as for little Edgardo, God rest his soul, maybe the third time around will be the charm, even though the other two ventures failed.

    Replies: @Alden, @Jack D

    This is called shifting the goalposts. Jews were involved in slave trading (probably true to some extent although I have no idea of what % of slave traders they formed at that time – probably not a high % given that Jews were few in number and there was no BLS to keep track so no one will ever know the %) egro they also killed Simon of Trent to make matzoh. Does not follow.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Jack D

    "This is called shifting the goalposts. Jews were involved in slave trading..."

    It's beyond any legitimate dispute that they were indeed "involved", and it's not shifting the goalposts given that it was the main point I was making from the very beginning. Here's the link if you're too lazy to scroll up. Go ahead and read through the accompanying wikipedia link if you think "involved with" is as much as needs be said. To repeat, Toaff regards that very real and amply documented participation in the abduction of children into the slave markets to be a driver in feeding the far more secretive blood libel. And however unwilling you may be to admit it, he provides actual evidence of said blood rituals that stands on its own and makes it far less secretive than it once was, but again, that was never the main point.

    So you can keep on with the misdirection and deflection and failure to confront with what was actually said, but beware of that Streisand-effect bounce.

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @Peterike
    @Jack D

    “ I have no idea of what % of slave traders they formed at that time – probably not a high % given that Jews were few in number”

    Lol, yeah it’s just a numbers game. So in the U.S. if Jews are 2% of the population they can’t be much more than 2% of, say, film studio and news media executives.

  268. @MEH 0910
    @Jonathan Mason


    bears a passing resemblance to Ali McGraw who starred in Love Story, one of the most popular movies of its time in which McGraw managed to die of cancer while looking good.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Story_(1970_film)#Ali_MacGraw's_%22disease%22

    Ali MacGraw's "disease"

    Vincent Canby wrote in his original New York Times review that it was "as if Jenny was suffering from some vaguely unpleasant Elizabeth Arden treatment".[14] Mad magazine ran a parody of the film ("Lover's Story") in its October 1971 issue, which depicted Ali MacGraw's character as stricken with "Old Movie Disease", an ailment that causes a dying patient to become "more beautiful by the minute".[31][32] In 1997, Roger Ebert defined "Ali MacGraw's Disease" as a movie illness in which "the only symptom is that the patient grows more beautiful until finally dying".[33]
     

    Replies: @Jack D

    This disease is well known in the opera world. The patient’s singing ability also increases until the last second when she collapses and dies and the curtain comes down.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Jack D


    ...the last second when she collapses and dies and the curtain comes down.
     
    It ain't over till the fat lady wrings.
  269. @Alden
    @Bardon Kaldian

    There’s still a commenter who thinks Russian Natalie Wood looked “Mediterranean” because she had black hair.

    Replies: @flyingtiger

    Natalie is the granddaughter of the last Russian Czar.

  270. @mc23
    @Altai

    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here, I think she could do Snow White-

    https://iv1.lisimg.com/image/22345621/740full-rachel-zegler.jpg

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous, @PiltdownMan, @Thoughts

    The Tittles!

    It’s the Tittles!

    To see what Rachel really looks like watch her Vogue Makeup Tutorial on Youtube

    She looks really, really Indian, not Hispanic. Allergy eyes are more Indian. Never seen a Latin American with such bad allergy eyes.

    They REALLY whitened her up for West Side Story

    Or they are darkening her up Ariana Grande style

    • Replies: @Thoughts
    @Thoughts

    If you watch the makeup tutorial video

    This chick is a Big Bag of Trouble ala Meghan Markle

  271. @Thoughts
    @mc23

    The Tittles!

    It's the Tittles!

    To see what Rachel really looks like watch her Vogue Makeup Tutorial on Youtube

    She looks really, really Indian, not Hispanic. Allergy eyes are more Indian. Never seen a Latin American with such bad allergy eyes.

    They REALLY whitened her up for West Side Story

    Or they are darkening her up Ariana Grande style

    Replies: @Thoughts

    If you watch the makeup tutorial video

    This chick is a Big Bag of Trouble ala Meghan Markle

  272. @Jack D
    @HA

    This is called shifting the goalposts. Jews were involved in slave trading (probably true to some extent although I have no idea of what % of slave traders they formed at that time - probably not a high % given that Jews were few in number and there was no BLS to keep track so no one will ever know the %) egro they also killed Simon of Trent to make matzoh. Does not follow.

    Replies: @HA, @Peterike

    “This is called shifting the goalposts. Jews were involved in slave trading…”

    It’s beyond any legitimate dispute that they were indeed “involved”, and it’s not shifting the goalposts given that it was the main point I was making from the very beginning. Here’s the link if you’re too lazy to scroll up. Go ahead and read through the accompanying wikipedia link if you think “involved with” is as much as needs be said. To repeat, Toaff regards that very real and amply documented participation in the abduction of children into the slave markets to be a driver in feeding the far more secretive blood libel. And however unwilling you may be to admit it, he provides actual evidence of said blood rituals that stands on its own and makes it far less secretive than it once was, but again, that was never the main point.

    So you can keep on with the misdirection and deflection and failure to confront with what was actually said, but beware of that Streisand-effect bounce.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @HA

    Here is what your link says:

    [There were] four main trade routes utilized by the Radhanites [Jewish traders in the Dark Ages - not much is known about them aside from an account by an Arab named Ibn Khordadbeh] in their journeys; all four began in the Rhone Valley in southern France and terminated on China's east coast [this at a time when most people lived and died within 50 miles of their birthplace]. Radhanites primarily carried commodities that combined small bulk and high demand, including spices, perfumes, jewellery, and silk. They are also described as transporting oils, incense, steel weapons, furs, and slaves.

    In other words, slaves were by far not their main line of business. They were mainly dealers in luxury goods. They had to transport their stuff on camel back and specialized in high value, low weight items.

    This is what it also says:


    Jewish merchants enjoyed significant privileges under the early Carolingian dynasty in France and throughout the Muslim world, a fact that sometimes vexed local Church authorities.
     
    Could this vexation perhaps have led to false accusations such as the blood libel?

    Of course by 21st century standards, the Radhanites should not have been selling ANY slaves, not even a few. Too bad that they lived in the 9th century and didn't have the benefit of Oprah and other great minds to instruct them.

    Replies: @HA

  273. @Jack D
    @HA

    This is called shifting the goalposts. Jews were involved in slave trading (probably true to some extent although I have no idea of what % of slave traders they formed at that time - probably not a high % given that Jews were few in number and there was no BLS to keep track so no one will ever know the %) egro they also killed Simon of Trent to make matzoh. Does not follow.

    Replies: @HA, @Peterike

    “ I have no idea of what % of slave traders they formed at that time – probably not a high % given that Jews were few in number”

    Lol, yeah it’s just a numbers game. So in the U.S. if Jews are 2% of the population they can’t be much more than 2% of, say, film studio and news media executives.

  274. @Clyde
    @PaceLaw


    In terms of the Latino cultural pecking order, who is considered to be at the top? I would imagine it would be the Cubans (very white in appearance and they produce a lot of professionals), but I am not sure which group would follow after that.
     
    Mostly racial, with the whiter ones dumping on the Hispanics, the next rung down on the ladder. So in the NYC of 1960 or 70, the whitest would be Cubans. They think they are the smartest and most cultured. And of pure Spanish blood.
    They dump on Puerto Ricans (Reason: they are black and Indian)
    Who have the privilege of dumping on Dominicans (Reason: they are black and might as well be Haitians)
    Dominicans get to dump on the black as midnight Caribbeans from the Anglo-islands.

    The average white New Yorker of 1970 has no awareness of these racial one upmanships. He just sees and thinks Hispanics. But within the Hispanic community, coming from a different wretched, sht-hole of an island, this was a very big deal.

    Replies: @Evocatus, @Peter Akuleyev, @AceDeuce

    The top of the latino pecking order? Is that like being the world’s tallest midget?

  275. @Muggles
    Yes, the remake of the creaky and obsolete New York centric West Side Story is a monstrous joke. (iSteve's longer Taki review is worth the time...)

    The rest of America cares nothing about Puerto Rico or the "west side" of NYC. All of that is insider New Yorker stuff that was crammed down the sleepy middle class American throats in the late 50s.

    As iSteve notes, were it not for the stolen ("borrowed") plot theme from Shakespeare, it would have never been seen or heard. "So class, we're going to watch this film today and discuss the underlying Shakespearean themes. First you have to read Romeo & Juliet. "

    I recall first watching the movie and it seemed more like gay science fiction with dancing aliens than anything else. Where are the Jews? One thing I knew about NYC was that Jews lived there (not that I had ever met any admitted Jews.) I concluded that the non Jews in the film must be Sharks battling the Puerto Ricans, who were like Mexicans only they all wanted to live in NYC for some reason. Manhattan is a long narrow mostly N-S oriented island. Why is the "west side" different from the east side, or north? Do Puerto Ricans like watching sunsets?

    Later I realized that New Yorkers were more micro geographic obsessed than a mound of termites. They see invisible boundaries which outsiders miss. Their racial radar is second to none. They can even tell what Ukrainian-Polish shetel your Kazarian ancestors came from. Jewdar, gaydar, and whitedar. Oh, and all the White folks are "liberal" and love all races. Just avoid the Orthodox neighborhoods. Or Harlem, or, well, any place where net income is below say, half a mil/yr.

    I naively believed at the time that all musicals were created for and by homosexuals, though I barely knew what that was. Gays like to dance, I guess. Skinny. Who knew NYC gangs were all gay?

    I hope this film loses a ton of money. Woke, hopelessly dated and anti White. Subtitles in English so oppressive. What could go wrong?

    Replies: @D. K., @CCZ, @Reg Cæsar

    As iSteve notes, were it not for the stolen (“borrowed”) plot theme from Shakespeare

    You don’t seriously believe it was original with Will, do you? Shakespeare came up with precisely one of his storylines, and it isn’t one of his more popular ones.

    Everything was halfway done before it got to the Bard, freeing him to concentrate on the wording and stagecraft. A highly efficient system, it turns out.

  276. @Jack D
    @Peter Akuleyev

    This had something to do with the nature of the Cuban migration. The people who left immediately after the Revolution were the upper and middle class, which was almost exclusively white.

    The lumpenproletariat were always much blacker, ranging from a lil bit blackish to really really black.
    Since the first wave cleared out many of the white people. those that remained were blacker. At first, the Revolution was an upgrade for them, especially with Soviet money pouring in and many white people gone and the Revolution preaching an egalitarian ideology and offering opportunities for education, etc.

    Eventually Castro comprehensively ruined the economy (destroying the sugar industry in Cuba was almost as hard as destroying the ice industry in Alaska, but somehow he managed) and later waves of out migration were blacker.

    Think of Cuba as being Detroit writ large.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Bernard

    Jack D says:
    December 16, 2021 at 9:44 pm GMT • 5.0 hours ago • 100 Words ↑

    This had something to do with the nature of the Cuban migration. The people who left immediately after the Revolution were the upper and middle class, which was almost exclusively white.

    I would also add to that that those who immigrated possessed the traits which are most desirable in our culture. Almost all of them left behind everything they owned and most suffered deprivations while waiting to leave. This self selected group believed that they could do more for themselves than what their socialist government promised. The slackers stayed behind.

    If policies for the selection of immigrants could be fine tuned to identify the important traits that Cuban immigrants possessed and applied to who is now admitted, we might stand a chance. Instead, we settle for a random group of immigrants based on the whims of a faceless bureaucracy.

  277. @Jack D
    @MEH 0910

    This disease is well known in the opera world. The patient's singing ability also increases until the last second when she collapses and dies and the curtain comes down.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    …the last second when she collapses and dies and the curtain comes down.

    It ain’t over till the fat lady wrings.

  278. @HA
    @Jack D

    "This is called shifting the goalposts. Jews were involved in slave trading..."

    It's beyond any legitimate dispute that they were indeed "involved", and it's not shifting the goalposts given that it was the main point I was making from the very beginning. Here's the link if you're too lazy to scroll up. Go ahead and read through the accompanying wikipedia link if you think "involved with" is as much as needs be said. To repeat, Toaff regards that very real and amply documented participation in the abduction of children into the slave markets to be a driver in feeding the far more secretive blood libel. And however unwilling you may be to admit it, he provides actual evidence of said blood rituals that stands on its own and makes it far less secretive than it once was, but again, that was never the main point.

    So you can keep on with the misdirection and deflection and failure to confront with what was actually said, but beware of that Streisand-effect bounce.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Here is what your link says:

    [There were] four main trade routes utilized by the Radhanites [Jewish traders in the Dark Ages – not much is known about them aside from an account by an Arab named Ibn Khordadbeh] in their journeys; all four began in the Rhone Valley in southern France and terminated on China’s east coast [this at a time when most people lived and died within 50 miles of their birthplace]. Radhanites primarily carried commodities that combined small bulk and high demand, including spices, perfumes, jewellery, and silk. They are also described as transporting oils, incense, steel weapons, furs, and slaves.

    In other words, slaves were by far not their main line of business. They were mainly dealers in luxury goods. They had to transport their stuff on camel back and specialized in high value, low weight items.

    This is what it also says:

    Jewish merchants enjoyed significant privileges under the early Carolingian dynasty in France and throughout the Muslim world, a fact that sometimes vexed local Church authorities.

    Could this vexation perhaps have led to false accusations such as the blood libel?

    Of course by 21st century standards, the Radhanites should not have been selling ANY slaves, not even a few. Too bad that they lived in the 9th century and didn’t have the benefit of Oprah and other great minds to instruct them.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Jack D

    "In other words, slaves were by far not their main line of business."

    Oh, well, no biggie, then. "Your honor, my client was only transporting a pound of cocaine and you're completely overlooking the thousands of pounds of bananas he hid them in. Such a small fraction, really, and no more than a rounding error, so what's the big deal?"

    Did that kind of argument ever work for you? If not, don't bother trying it on me.

    Moreover, your powers of citation are oddly and ridiculously selective. Here's some more on Radhanites by way of Wikipedia:


    By the turn of the 6th to the 7th century, Jews had become the CHIEF SLAVE TRADERS in Italy, and were active in Gallic territories...By the 9th and 10th centuries, Jewish merchants, sometimes called Radhanites, were a MAJOR FORCE in the slave trade continent-wide. (emphasis added)

    Jews were one of the few groups who could move and trade between the Christian and Islamic worlds. Ibn Khordadbeh observed and recorded routes of Jewish merchants in his Book of Roads and Kingdoms from the South of France to Spain, carrying (amongst other things) enslaved women, eunuchs, and young enslaved boys. He also notes Jews purchasing enslaved Slavs in Prague...

    As German rulers of Saxon dynasties took over the enslavement (and slave trade) of Slavs in the 10th century, Jewish merchants bought enslaved people at the Elbe, sending caravans into the valley of the Rhine...Many would be castrated and sold as eunuchs as well.
     

    See? However "few in numbers", Jews were able to corner a large chunk of certain markets. It wasn't just the Nobel Prizes. And THAT longstanding presence in the business of slavery is why Toaff is saying (as I understand him) that people had no problem believing the (largely) dubious claim that of the thousands of gentiles the Jews were indisputably involved in trafficking, a few might have been sequestered for even more nefarious ends. It's a plausible argument to anyone who isn't hopelessly grasping at straws in an effort to avoid the obvious.

    Note the entry I cited contains numerous other ethnic groups who contributed to the European slave trade, and it would be amazing if any group that enslaved another WASN'T vehemently hated by their victims for doing so. You seem convinced that Jews should be some exception. They aren't.

    Replies: @Jack D

  279. @Jack D
    @Clyde

    You're right that it's ancedotal. There is a distinct white ethnic group in Colombia - as you say some of them are very fair skinned. Sophie Vergara is from Colombia and she is a natural blond - when she moved to the US and started acting they made her dye her hair darker because no one knew what to do with a blond Latino. I don't know the migration history but they ended up with a lot of fair skinned people in certain parts of the country.

    However, they are not the biggest group. Here are the demographics of Colombia


    1 Mestizo (mixed race Indian) 53.5%
    2 White European Colombian 30.7%
    3 African Colombian, Mulatto, etc. 10.5%
    4 Native South American 3.4%

    Replies: @Clyde

    However, they are not the biggest group. Here are the demographics of Colombia

    1 Mestizo (mixed race Indian) 53.5%
    2 White European Colombian 30.7%
    3 African Colombian, Mulatto, etc. 10.5%
    4 Native South American 3.4%

    They are doing better than Mexico where the pure enough whites are 10% of the population. Sofia Vegara had her own little flight from white. “White Colombians” has its own Wikipedia entry which you might find interesting. Lots of Sephardic Jews made it over there. Many Maronite Lebanese too. This entry claims that only Argentina has more white people and European blood distributed, than Colombia.

  280. Steve,

    You really need to white-list more people. Look at what has happened to the progression of this discussion.

    So many threads (like this one) morph into Jack D having endless, off-topic arguments with one of the other few privileged posters, because they are the only ones whose comments go through during the hours you are incommunicado. These brouhahas always end up reminding me of Leslie Nielsen dressed up as the umpire in Naked Gun, bumping bellies with general manager.

    Your other pass-through posters add very little to the dialogue when you aren’t around, unless you’re a fan of Grease Car’s interminable punning or the random tweet-drop by Desiderius. And then there’s Buzz Mohawk, who has exactly three kinds of posts in his repertoire: 1) You’re an idiot. 2) You were right; I’m sorry for calling you an idiot. 3) There was this girl I banged back in college who…

    The conversation here sucks.

    I have been here for six years now. I’ve written more than half a million words in some 3300 posts, and I still can’t get my comments through in a timely fashion. I’m sure there are many others in the same predicament. The approved commenter roster definitely needs some fresh blood. What do you think?

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Maybe there's a way Ron's software can show Steve who are his least-whimmed commenters, i.e., the ones where he is wasting the most time on moderating. If I were blogging, I would certainly want to know where to save time by activating autopilot.

    As a commenter, it is dismaying, as you aver, to find that a comment I wrote got an interesting reply, but only well after the main scrum has moved on, so the chances that anyone will read my own reply to the reply are low. If anyone is still reading, it's often because they are obsessives of some kind, which leads to the heated trivia-dueling that can characterize the tail-end of comment sections. (Not that I'm above trivia-dueling myself. But I'm not proud of it.)


    Sometimes, it's just belated commenting, but the moderation time-delay plays a role too.

  281. @Jack D
    @HA

    Here is what your link says:

    [There were] four main trade routes utilized by the Radhanites [Jewish traders in the Dark Ages - not much is known about them aside from an account by an Arab named Ibn Khordadbeh] in their journeys; all four began in the Rhone Valley in southern France and terminated on China's east coast [this at a time when most people lived and died within 50 miles of their birthplace]. Radhanites primarily carried commodities that combined small bulk and high demand, including spices, perfumes, jewellery, and silk. They are also described as transporting oils, incense, steel weapons, furs, and slaves.

    In other words, slaves were by far not their main line of business. They were mainly dealers in luxury goods. They had to transport their stuff on camel back and specialized in high value, low weight items.

    This is what it also says:


    Jewish merchants enjoyed significant privileges under the early Carolingian dynasty in France and throughout the Muslim world, a fact that sometimes vexed local Church authorities.
     
    Could this vexation perhaps have led to false accusations such as the blood libel?

    Of course by 21st century standards, the Radhanites should not have been selling ANY slaves, not even a few. Too bad that they lived in the 9th century and didn't have the benefit of Oprah and other great minds to instruct them.

    Replies: @HA

    “In other words, slaves were by far not their main line of business.”

    Oh, well, no biggie, then. “Your honor, my client was only transporting a pound of cocaine and you’re completely overlooking the thousands of pounds of bananas he hid them in. Such a small fraction, really, and no more than a rounding error, so what’s the big deal?”

    Did that kind of argument ever work for you? If not, don’t bother trying it on me.

    Moreover, your powers of citation are oddly and ridiculously selective. Here’s some more on Radhanites by way of Wikipedia:

    By the turn of the 6th to the 7th century, Jews had become the CHIEF SLAVE TRADERS in Italy, and were active in Gallic territories…By the 9th and 10th centuries, Jewish merchants, sometimes called Radhanites, were a MAJOR FORCE in the slave trade continent-wide. (emphasis added)

    Jews were one of the few groups who could move and trade between the Christian and Islamic worlds. Ibn Khordadbeh observed and recorded routes of Jewish merchants in his Book of Roads and Kingdoms from the South of France to Spain, carrying (amongst other things) enslaved women, eunuchs, and young enslaved boys. He also notes Jews purchasing enslaved Slavs in Prague…

    As German rulers of Saxon dynasties took over the enslavement (and slave trade) of Slavs in the 10th century, Jewish merchants bought enslaved people at the Elbe, sending caravans into the valley of the Rhine…Many would be castrated and sold as eunuchs as well.

    See? However “few in numbers”, Jews were able to corner a large chunk of certain markets. It wasn’t just the Nobel Prizes. And THAT longstanding presence in the business of slavery is why Toaff is saying (as I understand him) that people had no problem believing the (largely) dubious claim that of the thousands of gentiles the Jews were indisputably involved in trafficking, a few might have been sequestered for even more nefarious ends. It’s a plausible argument to anyone who isn’t hopelessly grasping at straws in an effort to avoid the obvious.

    Note the entry I cited contains numerous other ethnic groups who contributed to the European slave trade, and it would be amazing if any group that enslaved another WASN’T vehemently hated by their victims for doing so. You seem convinced that Jews should be some exception. They aren’t.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @HA

    people had no problem believing the (largely) dubious claim that of the thousands of gentiles the Jews were indisputably involved in trafficking, a few might have been sequestered for even more nefarious ends

    Oh, so it's largely dubious and not entirely dubious. If I claimed that out of of the thousands of black slaves that Christians were indisputably involved in trafficking in the 18th and early 19th century America, a few might have been sequestered for even more nefarious ends (e.g. to use their blood to make Hasty Pudding) would that be largely dubious or completely dubious?

    Replies: @HA

  282. @PiltdownMan
    @mc23


    Zegler does resemble Olivia Hussey here ...
     
    Aside from the black hair, which is similar, not very much, I think.

    https://i.imgur.com/XOMgjlx.jpg

    Replies: @Anon 2, @mc23

    God is good, simply a beautiful woman.

  283. On the other hand, the old West Side Story movie has probably played as big a role as any in alienating the straight male audience from musicals. The ballet-dancing chorus boys miming stylized fighting often lose the guys in the back row of the classroom during their first number.

    Bob Newhart cracked several jokes about the choreography’s obvious gayness back in 1961:

    I suspect the Coen Brothers’ Hail Caesar! was also humourously riffing on how gay liberation strangled the broad popularity of musicals with the dance number “No Dames”:

    . Lots of musical numbers and comedy scenes from old films, which seemed quite innocuous when homosexual acts were felonious in all 48 states and pretty much all gays were at least semi-closeted, seem to more jaded modern eyes kinda fruity (e.g., the dance lessons between the sailors in Fred and Ginger’s Follow the Fleet).

  284. Sondheim, who died last month, went on with heroic determination to make a vast career out of the one thing he wasn’t good at, writing melodies.

    My impression from Sondheim’s semi-autobiographical song “Opening Doors” is that he was perhaps perfectly capable of writing catchy, hummable melodies, but adamantly refused to on general spoiled-egocentric-artist principle:

  285. @HammerJack
    @Jack D

    Yeah, she's not bad for a Jewish chick.

    Replies: @Bernard, @Rapparee

    Andrea Dworkin’s great misfortune was to have been born into a secular socialist Jewish family in the 20th century, rather than a family of French Catholics in the 13th century, from whom she might well have gone on to found and lead an order of ascetic nuns dedicated to making penitential reparation for the world’s sins against chastity. She started out with a pretty thoroughly demented picture of the world, and never really escaped it, but you could see her slowly and tentatively groping her way back toward truth over the course of her lifetime. Gotta give her credit, at least, for telling pedophile Alan Ginsberg to his face that she wanted to see him executed.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @Rapparee

    Andrea Dworkin’s great misfortune was to have been born into a secular socialist Jewish family in the 20th century, rather than a family of French Catholics in the 13th century, from whom she might well have gone on and found and lead an order of ascetic nuns

    Ascetic?

    A pithier assessment of Dworkin suggested she'd concluded that if you eat all the food, there won't be any for men to eat.

  286. @HA
    @Jack D

    "In other words, slaves were by far not their main line of business."

    Oh, well, no biggie, then. "Your honor, my client was only transporting a pound of cocaine and you're completely overlooking the thousands of pounds of bananas he hid them in. Such a small fraction, really, and no more than a rounding error, so what's the big deal?"

    Did that kind of argument ever work for you? If not, don't bother trying it on me.

    Moreover, your powers of citation are oddly and ridiculously selective. Here's some more on Radhanites by way of Wikipedia:


    By the turn of the 6th to the 7th century, Jews had become the CHIEF SLAVE TRADERS in Italy, and were active in Gallic territories...By the 9th and 10th centuries, Jewish merchants, sometimes called Radhanites, were a MAJOR FORCE in the slave trade continent-wide. (emphasis added)

    Jews were one of the few groups who could move and trade between the Christian and Islamic worlds. Ibn Khordadbeh observed and recorded routes of Jewish merchants in his Book of Roads and Kingdoms from the South of France to Spain, carrying (amongst other things) enslaved women, eunuchs, and young enslaved boys. He also notes Jews purchasing enslaved Slavs in Prague...

    As German rulers of Saxon dynasties took over the enslavement (and slave trade) of Slavs in the 10th century, Jewish merchants bought enslaved people at the Elbe, sending caravans into the valley of the Rhine...Many would be castrated and sold as eunuchs as well.
     

    See? However "few in numbers", Jews were able to corner a large chunk of certain markets. It wasn't just the Nobel Prizes. And THAT longstanding presence in the business of slavery is why Toaff is saying (as I understand him) that people had no problem believing the (largely) dubious claim that of the thousands of gentiles the Jews were indisputably involved in trafficking, a few might have been sequestered for even more nefarious ends. It's a plausible argument to anyone who isn't hopelessly grasping at straws in an effort to avoid the obvious.

    Note the entry I cited contains numerous other ethnic groups who contributed to the European slave trade, and it would be amazing if any group that enslaved another WASN'T vehemently hated by their victims for doing so. You seem convinced that Jews should be some exception. They aren't.

    Replies: @Jack D

    people had no problem believing the (largely) dubious claim that of the thousands of gentiles the Jews were indisputably involved in trafficking, a few might have been sequestered for even more nefarious ends

    Oh, so it’s largely dubious and not entirely dubious. If I claimed that out of of the thousands of black slaves that Christians were indisputably involved in trafficking in the 18th and early 19th century America, a few might have been sequestered for even more nefarious ends (e.g. to use their blood to make Hasty Pudding) would that be largely dubious or completely dubious?

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @HA
    @Jack D

    "Oh, so it’s largely dubious and not entirely dubious. "

    Yes, were you not paying attention? Toaff found some merit in the claims regarding Simon of Trent case given that the evidence the torturers uncovered was of rituals that they would not have known about or been able to concoct and that he was able to corroborate from Jewish sources unrelated to the case. As far as I know, he grants no similar allowances to all the other blood libel claims that were put forth over the centuries, other than noting that many of them were a not-surprising reaction of a group of people who, down through the centuries, witnessed many thousands of their fellow citizens disappearing into slave markets across the Mediterranean or in Al-Andalus, with much of that disappearance being facilitated by Jewish merchants, something no honest person can dispute.

    Ergo, the claims were largely -- but not entirely -- dubious. A small group of Jews (and perhaps some Christians, for that matter) did have a creepy fascination with blood rituals that might have led to children being kidnapped, but that small window of plausibility is nowhere enough to cover every single case of blood libel that has been put forth over the centuries. Regardless, all that, when set against the hundreds of thousands of other lives indisputably ruined by all that slave trafficking, is a pittance of a number indeed, however horrific a ritualistic death by exsanguination might be.

    Again, if you're reduced to playing semantic games over something as accurately worded as that was, it's a clear sign that you've got nothing but flustered blubbering to offer. And the fact that even you can't seem to dispute in any substantive way all that slaving, and who was largely behind it, then perhaps it's time to admit that with regard to kidnapping throughout Europe's past (a past not nearly as distant or murky as you would have us believe), there's a bit more to the story than the one-off portions Hollywood finds worthy of detailing, even if the efforts thus far never made it past pre-production stage.

    Replies: @Jack D

  287. @LondonBob
    @Anonymous

    The biggest issue with Saving Private Ryan is it just isn't a good film, I have never watched it the whole way through.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Clyde

    The biggest issue with Saving Private Ryan is it just isn’t a good film, I have never watched it the whole way through.

    I made it 40% the way though. It got boring and Hanks is a boring, goody two shoes actor. But he just came out with a movie I liked. “News of the World” The girl actress is Helena Zengel, who does quite a job! You will be hearing more from her. Hats off to the director, Paul Greengrass.

  288. @Jack D
    @HA

    people had no problem believing the (largely) dubious claim that of the thousands of gentiles the Jews were indisputably involved in trafficking, a few might have been sequestered for even more nefarious ends

    Oh, so it's largely dubious and not entirely dubious. If I claimed that out of of the thousands of black slaves that Christians were indisputably involved in trafficking in the 18th and early 19th century America, a few might have been sequestered for even more nefarious ends (e.g. to use their blood to make Hasty Pudding) would that be largely dubious or completely dubious?

    Replies: @HA

    “Oh, so it’s largely dubious and not entirely dubious. “

    Yes, were you not paying attention? Toaff found some merit in the claims regarding Simon of Trent case given that the evidence the torturers uncovered was of rituals that they would not have known about or been able to concoct and that he was able to corroborate from Jewish sources unrelated to the case. As far as I know, he grants no similar allowances to all the other blood libel claims that were put forth over the centuries, other than noting that many of them were a not-surprising reaction of a group of people who, down through the centuries, witnessed many thousands of their fellow citizens disappearing into slave markets across the Mediterranean or in Al-Andalus, with much of that disappearance being facilitated by Jewish merchants, something no honest person can dispute.

    Ergo, the claims were largely — but not entirely — dubious. A small group of Jews (and perhaps some Christians, for that matter) did have a creepy fascination with blood rituals that might have led to children being kidnapped, but that small window of plausibility is nowhere enough to cover every single case of blood libel that has been put forth over the centuries. Regardless, all that, when set against the hundreds of thousands of other lives indisputably ruined by all that slave trafficking, is a pittance of a number indeed, however horrific a ritualistic death by exsanguination might be.

    Again, if you’re reduced to playing semantic games over something as accurately worded as that was, it’s a clear sign that you’ve got nothing but flustered blubbering to offer. And the fact that even you can’t seem to dispute in any substantive way all that slaving, and who was largely behind it, then perhaps it’s time to admit that with regard to kidnapping throughout Europe’s past (a past not nearly as distant or murky as you would have us believe), there’s a bit more to the story than the one-off portions Hollywood finds worthy of detailing, even if the efforts thus far never made it past pre-production stage.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @HA


    Ergo, the claims were largely — but not entirely — dubious.
     
    I understand what you are getting at (although I still don't agree with Toaff's conclusion) - there is maybe a chance that there is a small kernel of truth in the blood libel myth. What's the big deal, most blood libel claims are still false, even in our version.

    The problem is this (aside from the fact that Toaff's evidence as to the "small kernel" is less than convincing) - if you accept Toaff's position, certain people are going to take Toaff's molehill and inflate it into a mountain - " See - Jews REALLY DID make matzoh from the blood of Christian children"). Not that it's possible that or there's a small chance that in a few instances ... The nuances that you are proposing are going to get completely lost and only the headline is going to remain.

    Now if Toaff's evidence was truly clear and convincing, then you would have to follow his conclusions wherever they took you, even if it gladdens the heart of anti-Semites. But I don't think that is the case at all. He offers a semi-plausible theory on how this MIGHT have happened or COULD have happened but no proof that it actually DID happen.

    Replies: @HA

  289. Never saw the original, had no interest in the remake, Steve’s review makes it sound like an abortion with those Woke revisions.

    Nobody else appears interested either, may be the biggest bomb of Spielberg’s career. His next autobiographical flick will do even worse, looks like he’s plummeting into obscurity.

  290. @HammerJack
    @SunBakedSuburb


    This whole thread with its mental images of vibrant musical theater, the Gibson dinger, and elderly Englishmen sweating it out in equatorial squalor is turning me gay. Might be turning me gay.
     
    Here's how to tell. Which of these people would you rather get physical with? If it helps to tip the scale, the one in black and white is a world famous feminist hero! The other is just some dude in a t-shirt. You have 30 seconds to make your selection. Good luck.


    https://i.ibb.co/fGQmqq8/andreadworkin1986.jpg

    https://i.ibb.co/yWHtn4j/Screenshot-20211108-012800-e-Bay.jpg

    Replies: @Jack D, @Athenian Gentleman

    Which of these people would you rather get physical physically intimate with?

    (Physical could just as easily mean in a fight.)

    The male,

    [MORE]

    when he was younger, say, between the ages of ~12-17*.
    (*Assuming, of course, there would be no question but that he fully desired such attention.)

    But (and this will undoubtedly surprise and perhaps perplex many) only in a manner that respected both his as well as my own dignity, masculinity and anatomical integrity.

    If I absolutely had to choose between the two individuals exactly as they appear in the photos?

    Then it would depend. Would the intimacy have to include a penetrative act? If yes, then the male– any male— would simply be out-of-the-question.

    If not, then I’m not certain at the moment which of the two I would find the least repulsive for the required purpose.

  291. @Alden
    @HA

    The slave market was one reason why Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Jews and Muslims from Spain. Also a reason for the Spanish style of architecture of even the simplest homes surrounded by a wall and barred gates and windows. And the reasons why girls and young women didn’t go out side alone but in groups or with older women or brothers. Even busy planting and picking farm work the girls and young women stayed in groups and the men kept an eye out for Tartars Arab pirates after the girls. They even sailed to Ireland Iceland and even Greenland raiding for slaves.

    The Armenians were slave traders of their fellow Christian Slavs around the Black and Caspian Seas.

    Replies: @HA

    “The slave market was one reason why Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Jews and Muslims from Spain. “

    I’ve addressed this issue before. The first Christians of Spain were Visigothic Arians who — like many newly converted tribes — didn’t want some new religion getting in the way of making money, and they had good relations with the Jews (who had been in Spain long before Christ). Later, when the more theologically punctilious Trinitarians came along (eventually defeating the Arians), they took a dim view towards allowing Jews to own Christian slaves since it meant exposing the slaves to conversion pressure, something the Arians hadn’t previously bothered to forbid. This made certain industries that relied on slave labor (e.g. agriculture) more difficult for Jews, since the restrictions meant they would have to partner with a Christian slaveowner, etc. Jews responded by plotting to allow the Muslims (another Arian offshoot, you might say) situated across the Mediterranean to invade Spain. Eventually, as I related earlier,

    …the plot was discovered, and accordiing to Graetz [“the father of the lachrymose vision of Jewish history, for his narrative is drenched in darkness”], all the Jews of Spain, Septimania and Narbonne were made slaves.

    It’s a complicated tale (here’s a little more about Graetz), and it should be noted that numerous groups of Jews fought bravely for the Christian side of Spain in the centuries to follow, but it’s fair to say their participation in the slave markets (like their moneylending) did not endear them to the locals.

    Moreover, the expulsion put a serious dent in their participation in the European slave markets, since their continental headquarters of “Slavery, Inc.” were basically shut down. If one reads about the sacking of Baltimore, which took place several decades after William Shakespeare wrote the first draft of West Side Story, there’s not a Jewish character to be found there (at least, not on the European side).

    I’d also note that many of those Irish villagers whose lives were destroyed by Barbary pirates were already being brutalized by British royals as opposed to some Algerian caliph, an enslavement narrative of another kind which led up to the famine two centuries later and a far more massive depopulation. So in pointing fingers at who enslaved who, all that needs to be taken into account, which is why I get annoyed when certain people, whether in Hollywood or the editorial board of the NYT, take it upon themselves to demand that only certain types of kidnapping and enslaving are worthy of our attention.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @HA


    only certain types of kidnapping and enslaving are worthy of our attention.
     
    Slavery in 9th century Spain (a poorly documented era in any case) is not going to be of the same interest to an American audience as 19th century slavery in America.

    Of course Barbary Piracy existed up to the 19th century as well and did implicate Americans, whom the pirates would take hostage off of ships. I haven't seen too many movies about this either but it is commemorated in song = "From the halls of Montezuma to THE SHORES OF TRIPOLI".

    Replies: @HA

    , @Alden
    @HA

    Ferdinand and Isabella reigned 800 years after the Visigoths and Muslims cooperated in the slave trade.

    Replies: @HA

    , @Art Deco
    @HA

    In Visigothic Spain, as elsewhere, the Germanic elite followed Arianism while the bulk of the population was Catholic. It was in the latter 6th century that Arianism was displaced by Catholic Christianity among the elite.

    Replies: @HA

  292. @HA
    @Alden

    "The slave market was one reason why Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Jews and Muslims from Spain. "

    I've addressed this issue before. The first Christians of Spain were Visigothic Arians who -- like many newly converted tribes -- didn't want some new religion getting in the way of making money, and they had good relations with the Jews (who had been in Spain long before Christ). Later, when the more theologically punctilious Trinitarians came along (eventually defeating the Arians), they took a dim view towards allowing Jews to own Christian slaves since it meant exposing the slaves to conversion pressure, something the Arians hadn't previously bothered to forbid. This made certain industries that relied on slave labor (e.g. agriculture) more difficult for Jews, since the restrictions meant they would have to partner with a Christian slaveowner, etc. Jews responded by plotting to allow the Muslims (another Arian offshoot, you might say) situated across the Mediterranean to invade Spain. Eventually, as I related earlier,

    ...the plot was discovered, and accordiing to Graetz ["the father of the lachrymose vision of Jewish history, for his narrative is drenched in darkness"], all the Jews of Spain, Septimania and Narbonne were made slaves.
     

    It's a complicated tale (here's a little more about Graetz), and it should be noted that numerous groups of Jews fought bravely for the Christian side of Spain in the centuries to follow, but it's fair to say their participation in the slave markets (like their moneylending) did not endear them to the locals.

    Moreover, the expulsion put a serious dent in their participation in the European slave markets, since their continental headquarters of "Slavery, Inc." were basically shut down. If one reads about the sacking of Baltimore, which took place several decades after William Shakespeare wrote the first draft of West Side Story, there's not a Jewish character to be found there (at least, not on the European side).

    I'd also note that many of those Irish villagers whose lives were destroyed by Barbary pirates were already being brutalized by British royals as opposed to some Algerian caliph, an enslavement narrative of another kind which led up to the famine two centuries later and a far more massive depopulation. So in pointing fingers at who enslaved who, all that needs to be taken into account, which is why I get annoyed when certain people, whether in Hollywood or the editorial board of the NYT, take it upon themselves to demand that only certain types of kidnapping and enslaving are worthy of our attention.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Alden, @Art Deco

    only certain types of kidnapping and enslaving are worthy of our attention.

    Slavery in 9th century Spain (a poorly documented era in any case) is not going to be of the same interest to an American audience as 19th century slavery in America.

    Of course Barbary Piracy existed up to the 19th century as well and did implicate Americans, whom the pirates would take hostage off of ships. I haven’t seen too many movies about this either but it is commemorated in song = “From the halls of Montezuma to THE SHORES OF TRIPOLI”.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Jack D

    "Slavery in 9th century Spain (a poorly documented era in any case) is not going to be of the same interest to an American audience as 19th century slavery in America."

    On the contrary, it was documented well enough. The word you're looking for is "overlooked" or maybe "ignored" or "blocked out" or met with lame objections like "hey, that's Ron Unz kind of talk". I'm not surprised that there is more attention paid to 19th century slavery in America. But the fact that that means there is absolutely zero attention of a kind of slavery that was quite prevalent for over a millennium, and that still affects us today? No, spare me your cheap rationalizations.

    The very fact that anyone still wants to pretend -- as you did -- that "because of their small numbers" or some other similar moronic objection, Jews couldn't have been that big a presence with regard to slavery, is evidence enough that certain topics regarding slavery are largely off-limits, whereas the need to keep informing us about 19th century slavery in America is never-ending.

    And if "interest to an American audience" was all that this amounted to, we wouldn't need two movie treatments on one "Italian" boy that date back a century and a half to a time when Italy, as such, did not even exist.

    Replies: @Art Deco

  293. @HA
    @Jack D

    "Oh, so it’s largely dubious and not entirely dubious. "

    Yes, were you not paying attention? Toaff found some merit in the claims regarding Simon of Trent case given that the evidence the torturers uncovered was of rituals that they would not have known about or been able to concoct and that he was able to corroborate from Jewish sources unrelated to the case. As far as I know, he grants no similar allowances to all the other blood libel claims that were put forth over the centuries, other than noting that many of them were a not-surprising reaction of a group of people who, down through the centuries, witnessed many thousands of their fellow citizens disappearing into slave markets across the Mediterranean or in Al-Andalus, with much of that disappearance being facilitated by Jewish merchants, something no honest person can dispute.

    Ergo, the claims were largely -- but not entirely -- dubious. A small group of Jews (and perhaps some Christians, for that matter) did have a creepy fascination with blood rituals that might have led to children being kidnapped, but that small window of plausibility is nowhere enough to cover every single case of blood libel that has been put forth over the centuries. Regardless, all that, when set against the hundreds of thousands of other lives indisputably ruined by all that slave trafficking, is a pittance of a number indeed, however horrific a ritualistic death by exsanguination might be.

    Again, if you're reduced to playing semantic games over something as accurately worded as that was, it's a clear sign that you've got nothing but flustered blubbering to offer. And the fact that even you can't seem to dispute in any substantive way all that slaving, and who was largely behind it, then perhaps it's time to admit that with regard to kidnapping throughout Europe's past (a past not nearly as distant or murky as you would have us believe), there's a bit more to the story than the one-off portions Hollywood finds worthy of detailing, even if the efforts thus far never made it past pre-production stage.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Ergo, the claims were largely — but not entirely — dubious.

    I understand what you are getting at (although I still don’t agree with Toaff’s conclusion) – there is maybe a chance that there is a small kernel of truth in the blood libel myth. What’s the big deal, most blood libel claims are still false, even in our version.

    The problem is this (aside from the fact that Toaff’s evidence as to the “small kernel” is less than convincing) – if you accept Toaff’s position, certain people are going to take Toaff’s molehill and inflate it into a mountain – ” See – Jews REALLY DID make matzoh from the blood of Christian children”). Not that it’s possible that or there’s a small chance that in a few instances … The nuances that you are proposing are going to get completely lost and only the headline is going to remain.

    Now if Toaff’s evidence was truly clear and convincing, then you would have to follow his conclusions wherever they took you, even if it gladdens the heart of anti-Semites. But I don’t think that is the case at all. He offers a semi-plausible theory on how this MIGHT have happened or COULD have happened but no proof that it actually DID happen.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Jack D

    "if you accept Toaff’s position, certain people are going to take Toaff’s molehill and inflate it into a mountain – ” See – Jews REALLY DID make matzoh from the blood of Christian children”)...The nuances that you are proposing are going to get completely lost and only the headline is going to remain."

    Didn't seem to happen with me. I'm perfectly willing to address topics as diverse as all those Christians who were also into blood-magick rituals, and whatever that means for the hapless Jews who also got murdered over the centuries. I'm also more than willing to address the who-knows-how-many-but-probably-way-more-than-zero cases of children disappearing into the slave markets that were conveniently blamed on Jews (or gypsies) but were actually the fault of Christians in cahoots with Muslim slavers, either surreptitiously, or else brazenly out-in-the-open, as with Khmelnitsky.

    Clamping down on all of that, or worse yet, lying about it or throwing a hissy fit about it -- which is what you do with your agitated "nothing to see here" approach or your canards about how Toaff is saying blood libel is OK, is just going to backfire because not only is it an abject lie, at some point it's going to become obvious that the people with the power to say "this is the only thing you're allowed to pay attention to" are themselves "the problem" that requires a radical "solution". And once people come to ignore history as just some corrupt and sanitized conspiracy that the people in power are promulgating -- and that's definitely the end-game as far as your deflections and bluster are concerned -- then you'll have no one but yourself to blame for the Pandora's box of all the outrageous conspiracies and outright lies that fill that void. You don't like Der Stürmer? Then stop trying to make Der Stürmer happen, and that includes pretending that Edgardo Mortara is indeed a worthier topic of discussion than a millennium and up to a million so abductions of another kind, just because those topics are going to bring up truths you'd rather stay hidden.

    "He offers a semi-plausible theory on how this MIGHT have happened or COULD have happened but no proof that it actually DID happen."

    He does far more than that. He offers, as I said, clear documented evidence of rituals in which the blood of a gentile child is indeed regarded with magical salvific powers, thereby quashing centuries of lame deflections of how Jewish aversion to blood, etc., was proof positive that such rituals could not exist -- i.e. "proof that it actually did NOT happen". THAT in and of itself is a momentous discovery and for making it, Toaff deserves far better than your knee-jerk -- and pathetically lame and transparent -- putdowns. On the contrary, those just make you look bad. I'm so sorry that admitting how those centuries of deflections were in fact a lie -- and really, a conspiracy in and of itself (and another case of backing the wrong horse) -- might make things uncomfortable for you, but that's all the more reason why the deflection game is likely to end very, very badly.

  294. @Jonathan Mason
    @Jack D

    Trade sanctions meant that it was impossible for Cuba to export sugar to sugar-hungry lard-ass Americans, and anyway the heavy mechanization of the sugar industry in Florida was producing sugar incredibly cheaply and destroyed hand-cut sugar industries throughout the Caribbean.

    Cuba still produces some decent rum, though, which is sold all over the world except in the US.

    Replies: @Alden

    America never bought much sugar from Cuba. No reason to. Between the sugar cane farms in the south , corn syrup and sugar beets in the Midwest we grew all the sugar we needed. Except for fruit and vegetables from Mexico and Central America during the winter and cheese from France America has never needed to import food. One of our biggest exports is agricultural products aka food.

    Sugar exports actually boomed after Cuba went communist. China, Soviet Union and the Soviet occupied countries in E Europe imported Cuban cane sugar. In fact, the Russians and E European occupied countries stopped farming sugar beets so as to support Cuban cane sugar.

    The only food in ample supply in China N Vietnam’s the Soviet Union and E Europe was Cuban cane sugar.

    About 170-180 nations in the world. Most still traded with Cuba. Cuba’s real economic problems began when soviet Russia and E Europe ended communism in 1990 and stopped supporting Cuba by importing its cane sugar.

  295. @HA
    @Alden

    "The slave market was one reason why Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Jews and Muslims from Spain. "

    I've addressed this issue before. The first Christians of Spain were Visigothic Arians who -- like many newly converted tribes -- didn't want some new religion getting in the way of making money, and they had good relations with the Jews (who had been in Spain long before Christ). Later, when the more theologically punctilious Trinitarians came along (eventually defeating the Arians), they took a dim view towards allowing Jews to own Christian slaves since it meant exposing the slaves to conversion pressure, something the Arians hadn't previously bothered to forbid. This made certain industries that relied on slave labor (e.g. agriculture) more difficult for Jews, since the restrictions meant they would have to partner with a Christian slaveowner, etc. Jews responded by plotting to allow the Muslims (another Arian offshoot, you might say) situated across the Mediterranean to invade Spain. Eventually, as I related earlier,

    ...the plot was discovered, and accordiing to Graetz ["the father of the lachrymose vision of Jewish history, for his narrative is drenched in darkness"], all the Jews of Spain, Septimania and Narbonne were made slaves.
     

    It's a complicated tale (here's a little more about Graetz), and it should be noted that numerous groups of Jews fought bravely for the Christian side of Spain in the centuries to follow, but it's fair to say their participation in the slave markets (like their moneylending) did not endear them to the locals.

    Moreover, the expulsion put a serious dent in their participation in the European slave markets, since their continental headquarters of "Slavery, Inc." were basically shut down. If one reads about the sacking of Baltimore, which took place several decades after William Shakespeare wrote the first draft of West Side Story, there's not a Jewish character to be found there (at least, not on the European side).

    I'd also note that many of those Irish villagers whose lives were destroyed by Barbary pirates were already being brutalized by British royals as opposed to some Algerian caliph, an enslavement narrative of another kind which led up to the famine two centuries later and a far more massive depopulation. So in pointing fingers at who enslaved who, all that needs to be taken into account, which is why I get annoyed when certain people, whether in Hollywood or the editorial board of the NYT, take it upon themselves to demand that only certain types of kidnapping and enslaving are worthy of our attention.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Alden, @Art Deco

    Ferdinand and Isabella reigned 800 years after the Visigoths and Muslims cooperated in the slave trade.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Alden

    "Ferdinand and Isabella reigned 800 years after the Visigoths and Muslims cooperated in the slave trade."

    And yet, the rocky start between Spanish Christian and Jewish relations left a long wake that extended well into the 1490's. The overall story arc with regard to Spain is a familiar one, and it amounts to Jews backing the wrong horse, more so than "anti-Semitism" or some other variation of "why do they hate us so?" A similar gamble that their alliance with Egypt would save them from Nebuchadnezzar helps explain how Israelites exiled to Babylon, and we have to go back much further than 800 years to find that. Understanding how all that history "rhymes" still matters.

    Along with civil wars and foreign gods, backing the wrong horse seems to be a recurring theme in how things somehow manage to keep falling apart for Israel and its fans. But like I said, the slave-trafficking (not to mention the moneylending and the liquor-hustling) probably doesn't help either, given how it sours relations with the locals. If people want to understand slavery in America, and how hard it is to get past that, then all those other slave stories deserve their time in the spotlight given that we really haven't gotten past them, either. But they won't get told if people in Hollywood and elsewhere keep coming up with lame excuses why we should keep looking away.

  296. @Jonathan Mason
    @D. K.

    The thing about successful and popular movies is that it always starts with great songs that people take to their hearts.

    When I was a little boy I knew the song "Oh, What a Beautiful Day" even though I had never heard of Oklahoma.

    When I was a slightly bigger boy I knew many of the tunes from South Pacific, I knew nothing of the musical or the movie, but I knew the words to several of the songs.

    When I was an adolescent I fell briefly in love with Julie Andrews, and certainly knew all the words to Doh-Re-Mi and My Favorite Things, and a bit later in life when I was a rebellious adolescent I loved John Coltrane's subversive take on My Favorite Things.

    Sometimes I only discovered much later that beloved songs were originally from musicals, and probably most of the people of many races, ages, and nationalities belting out this song have never heard of the musical Carousel, set in New England, but based on a Hungarian story.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weec_jzudc8

    So great musicals unite us all because of the great songs that people sing all over the world.

    Right from the beginning of musicals there was always the question of whether it was better to have actors who could sing (Rex Harrison, if you can call his rap singing) or singers who could act like Julie Andrews.

    I think that Rachel Zegler is a huge talent, perhaps falling more into the singer who can act category at this stage of her career. Some posters have criticized her looks. Well, she is no Susan Boyle and bears a passing resemblance to Ali McGraw who starred in Love Story, one of the most popular movies of its time in which McGraw managed to die of cancer while looking good.

    I think lots of adolescents and young men will fall in love with her in movie, which is what counts, and I get the feeling that she is going to be a huge star in the future.

    She might be the next Lea Salonga, but perhaps she might become more popular in popular music than on stage if her songwriting abilities mature, rather than have a career like McGraw, whose career was never fully resurrected after her death in Love Story. (Apparently she suffered from alcoholism.)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lExFL3X5-U

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @Alden

    After the Rittenhouse verdict she tweeted that Rittenhouse committed a heinous heinous crime. And that she was ashamed to be an American because America and Americans are heinous racists. She’s so dumb she probably thinks the men heroic Kyle killed were blacks saints.

  297. @Rapparee
    @HammerJack

    Andrea Dworkin’s great misfortune was to have been born into a secular socialist Jewish family in the 20th century, rather than a family of French Catholics in the 13th century, from whom she might well have gone on to found and lead an order of ascetic nuns dedicated to making penitential reparation for the world’s sins against chastity. She started out with a pretty thoroughly demented picture of the world, and never really escaped it, but you could see her slowly and tentatively groping her way back toward truth over the course of her lifetime. Gotta give her credit, at least, for telling pedophile Alan Ginsberg to his face that she wanted to see him executed.

    Replies: @Art Deco

    Andrea Dworkin’s great misfortune was to have been born into a secular socialist Jewish family in the 20th century, rather than a family of French Catholics in the 13th century, from whom she might well have gone on and found and lead an order of ascetic nuns

    Ascetic?

    A pithier assessment of Dworkin suggested she’d concluded that if you eat all the food, there won’t be any for men to eat.

  298. @HA
    @Alden

    "The slave market was one reason why Ferdinand and Isabella expelled both Jews and Muslims from Spain. "

    I've addressed this issue before. The first Christians of Spain were Visigothic Arians who -- like many newly converted tribes -- didn't want some new religion getting in the way of making money, and they had good relations with the Jews (who had been in Spain long before Christ). Later, when the more theologically punctilious Trinitarians came along (eventually defeating the Arians), they took a dim view towards allowing Jews to own Christian slaves since it meant exposing the slaves to conversion pressure, something the Arians hadn't previously bothered to forbid. This made certain industries that relied on slave labor (e.g. agriculture) more difficult for Jews, since the restrictions meant they would have to partner with a Christian slaveowner, etc. Jews responded by plotting to allow the Muslims (another Arian offshoot, you might say) situated across the Mediterranean to invade Spain. Eventually, as I related earlier,

    ...the plot was discovered, and accordiing to Graetz ["the father of the lachrymose vision of Jewish history, for his narrative is drenched in darkness"], all the Jews of Spain, Septimania and Narbonne were made slaves.
     

    It's a complicated tale (here's a little more about Graetz), and it should be noted that numerous groups of Jews fought bravely for the Christian side of Spain in the centuries to follow, but it's fair to say their participation in the slave markets (like their moneylending) did not endear them to the locals.

    Moreover, the expulsion put a serious dent in their participation in the European slave markets, since their continental headquarters of "Slavery, Inc." were basically shut down. If one reads about the sacking of Baltimore, which took place several decades after William Shakespeare wrote the first draft of West Side Story, there's not a Jewish character to be found there (at least, not on the European side).

    I'd also note that many of those Irish villagers whose lives were destroyed by Barbary pirates were already being brutalized by British royals as opposed to some Algerian caliph, an enslavement narrative of another kind which led up to the famine two centuries later and a far more massive depopulation. So in pointing fingers at who enslaved who, all that needs to be taken into account, which is why I get annoyed when certain people, whether in Hollywood or the editorial board of the NYT, take it upon themselves to demand that only certain types of kidnapping and enslaving are worthy of our attention.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Alden, @Art Deco

    In Visigothic Spain, as elsewhere, the Germanic elite followed Arianism while the bulk of the population was Catholic. It was in the latter 6th century that Arianism was displaced by Catholic Christianity among the elite.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Art Deco

    "It was in the latter 6th century that Arianism was displaced by Catholic Christianity among the elite."

    It wasn't just "displaced" by Catholic Christians. It was soundly defeated by Arabs and Berbers at the Battle of Guadalete. And as I said, the Trinitarians were willing to be more hardcore than the Arians were with regard to what the Jews were allowed to do. In that sense, I guess the plot to aid the Moors in overthrowing the Visigoths was a case of Jews backing the right horse -- until it wasn't.

    Replies: @Art Deco

  299. @Jack D
    @HA


    only certain types of kidnapping and enslaving are worthy of our attention.
     
    Slavery in 9th century Spain (a poorly documented era in any case) is not going to be of the same interest to an American audience as 19th century slavery in America.

    Of course Barbary Piracy existed up to the 19th century as well and did implicate Americans, whom the pirates would take hostage off of ships. I haven't seen too many movies about this either but it is commemorated in song = "From the halls of Montezuma to THE SHORES OF TRIPOLI".

    Replies: @HA

    “Slavery in 9th century Spain (a poorly documented era in any case) is not going to be of the same interest to an American audience as 19th century slavery in America.”

    On the contrary, it was documented well enough. The word you’re looking for is “overlooked” or maybe “ignored” or “blocked out” or met with lame objections like “hey, that’s Ron Unz kind of talk”. I’m not surprised that there is more attention paid to 19th century slavery in America. But the fact that that means there is absolutely zero attention of a kind of slavery that was quite prevalent for over a millennium, and that still affects us today? No, spare me your cheap rationalizations.

    The very fact that anyone still wants to pretend — as you did — that “because of their small numbers” or some other similar moronic objection, Jews couldn’t have been that big a presence with regard to slavery, is evidence enough that certain topics regarding slavery are largely off-limits, whereas the need to keep informing us about 19th century slavery in America is never-ending.

    And if “interest to an American audience” was all that this amounted to, we wouldn’t need two movie treatments on one “Italian” boy that date back a century and a half to a time when Italy, as such, did not even exist.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @HA

    Very little from the 9th century is 'well documented'.

    Replies: @HA

  300. @Alden
    @HA

    Ferdinand and Isabella reigned 800 years after the Visigoths and Muslims cooperated in the slave trade.

    Replies: @HA

    “Ferdinand and Isabella reigned 800 years after the Visigoths and Muslims cooperated in the slave trade.”

    And yet, the rocky start between Spanish Christian and Jewish relations left a long wake that extended well into the 1490’s. The overall story arc with regard to Spain is a familiar one, and it amounts to Jews backing the wrong horse, more so than “anti-Semitism” or some other variation of “why do they hate us so?” A similar gamble that their alliance with Egypt would save them from Nebuchadnezzar helps explain how Israelites exiled to Babylon, and we have to go back much further than 800 years to find that. Understanding how all that history “rhymes” still matters.

    Along with civil wars and foreign gods, backing the wrong horse seems to be a recurring theme in how things somehow manage to keep falling apart for Israel and its fans. But like I said, the slave-trafficking (not to mention the moneylending and the liquor-hustling) probably doesn’t help either, given how it sours relations with the locals. If people want to understand slavery in America, and how hard it is to get past that, then all those other slave stories deserve their time in the spotlight given that we really haven’t gotten past them, either. But they won’t get told if people in Hollywood and elsewhere keep coming up with lame excuses why we should keep looking away.

  301. @Art Deco
    @HA

    In Visigothic Spain, as elsewhere, the Germanic elite followed Arianism while the bulk of the population was Catholic. It was in the latter 6th century that Arianism was displaced by Catholic Christianity among the elite.

    Replies: @HA

    “It was in the latter 6th century that Arianism was displaced by Catholic Christianity among the elite.”

    It wasn’t just “displaced” by Catholic Christians. It was soundly defeated by Arabs and Berbers at the Battle of Guadalete. And as I said, the Trinitarians were willing to be more hardcore than the Arians were with regard to what the Jews were allowed to do. In that sense, I guess the plot to aid the Moors in overthrowing the Visigoths was a case of Jews backing the right horse — until it wasn’t.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @HA

    The Muslims conquered Hispania in the 8th century. The Arian court in the Visigothic kingdom converted to Catholicism in the latter 6th century.

  302. @HA
    @Jack D

    "The Edgardo Mortara story is something that is well documented as actually having happened and not in some dim distant past..."

    Ah yes, let's forget about what we don't like -- however well-documented -- because even though the places where slave-raiding took place are still places that by and large are trying to catch up with the rest for Europe, that's the "dim distant past" so none of it counts. Why, they're like the stories of Shakespeare, which have no possible relevance or meaning in explaining how things came to be, is that it?

    As for Toaff, a professor of Medieval and Renaissance History at Bar-Ilan University in Israel, Wikipedia has a somewhat different and more evenhanded take on his thesis:


    To forestall possible misinterpretations, [Ariel Toaff] said that the idea that Jews practiced ritual murder is a slanderous stereotype, and that ritual homicide or infanticide was a myth. That said, the possibility existed that:

    certain criminal acts, disguised as crude rituals, were indeed committed by extremist groups or by individuals demented by religious mania and blinded by desire for revenge against those considered responsible for their people’s sorrows and tragedies.
     
    The evidence supporting this hypothesis draws on confessions extracted under torture. His book examines the strong documentary evidence in medieval medical handbooks that dried human blood, traded by both Jewish and Christian merchants, was thought to be medicinally efficacious. Under the stress of forced conversions, expulsions and massacres, Toaff thinks it possible that in certain Ashkenazi groups dried human blood came to play a magical role in calling down God's vengeance on Christians, the historic persecutors of the Jews, and that this reaction may have affected certain forms of ritual practice among a restricted number of Ashkenazi Jews during Passover.
     
    Elsewhere in the book, apart from making clear that the "under torture" confessions actually divulge verifiable and documented rituals that the torturers would not have been privy to, Toaff repeatedly makes clear that the Rhineland sect of Jews that embraced these blood rituals were regarded as weird and extreme even by other Jews, in particular, those in nearby Italy who are the primary subject of his studies, and whom he characterizes as having a much more convivial approach to gentiles. So no, clearly not a case of "da Joos do that", however eager you are to fall back on your standard shtick whereby anyone who says anything you don't like about Jews must have pulled it straight from Der Stürmer. Just because Ron Unz sees some merit in an argument doesn't make it wrong. And you're right that it was Simon of Trent, but the fact that you have nothing remotely substantive or accurate to say with regard to Toaff is pretty much an admission on your part that he's probably on to something. If that's about as well as you hide your tells in poker, then I suggest it's a game you should avoid unless you just losing money.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jew

    From text you quoted, apparently from Wikipedia:

    To forestall possible misinterpretations, [Ariel Toaff] said that the idea that Jews practiced ritual murder is a slanderous stereotype, and that ritual homicide or infanticide was a myth.

    Toaff may very well have said that. I certainly hope he did.

    But, assuming he did, how many who cite Toaff bother to include that disclaimer?

    Is the reality not plainly that nearly all of those who cite Toaff’s work favorably, as an authoritative or even credible source, do so in support of alleging those very accusations* against Jews and Judaism that the quote claims he disavowed?

    (*explicitly in many, if not most cases, but at a minimum implicitly)

    [MORE]

    That said, the possibility existed that:

    certain criminal acts, disguised as crude rituals, were indeed committed by extremist groups or by individuals demented by religious mania and blinded by desire for revenge against those considered responsible for their people’s sorrows and tragedies.

    Okay, let’s say that there were some “extremist”, fringe, demented Jews who did, in fact, commit at least some of the crimes that Toaff contends they may have. How representative would such individuals (or fringe groups) be of Jews as a whole/ collectively/ categorically or of any strain or subset of Judaism that could reasonably be considered normative or mainstream?

    Surely, you would acknowledge that there have been at least some (at least nominal) Christians who have, in the name or under the cover of Christianity, engaged in behavior that you would categorically condemn and disavow– not only as fundamentally reprobate and depraved, but also, at a minimum, as emphatically not representative of Christianity. In many such cases you would, I have no doubt, go further in your condemnation and disavowal of the actions or beliefs in-question, contending that they are actually in direct violation of Christianity, or even downright heretical. Needless to say what your reaction would be if someone were to even suggest that Christians or Christianity, per se were to blame for the reprobate behaviors or beliefs in-question.

    As a Jew myself, I am Orthodox in my belief. In both my knowledge of Judaism, as well as the level of my personal religious observance, I would place myself neither among the most pious and learned, nor among the least, but somewhere in the middle. I have spent much time, however, over many years, among strictly Orthodox Jews, including many both far more learned as well as far more than pious than myself. I am enough of an insider that if (with the sole, obvious exception of circumcision) there would be any legitimate source or basis within our tradition for any ritual use of human blood, it would hardly seem plausible for someone such as myself to not have heard of it by now.

    (In fact, Judaism (again, with the sole, obvious exception of circumcision), is quite averse to blood. The consumption of human blood (whether Jewish or Gentile) is categorically prohibited. And removal of blood from an animal prior to consumption, through a process of soaking and salting, is an integral part of kashruth (kosher laws).

    Shabbat Shalom/ Gut Shabbos to my fellow Js

    • Replies: @HA
    @Jew

    "But, assuming he did, how many who cite Toaff bother to include that disclaimer?"

    You're asking me, who bothered to include it? Who got it from the editors of the Wikipedia article, meaning that they included it as well? Who got it by way of Toaff himself? Why are any of those people the object of your grumbling?

    Maybe you should instead take that up with the people distorting what he uncovered, not with those who do their best to describe it accurately.

    "Is the reality not plainly..."

    The reality, as far as can be currently determined, is what Toaff discovered. The very fact that no one is even bothering to dispute that is proof enough at this point. As for those who try to convince us that we must ignore that reality because the "plain reality" is something else, let's be honest enough to admit that they're not interested in reality, so maybe you should first issue a disclaimer admitting that, instead of worrying about the ones that too often don't come with what Toaff discovered?

    There are far better ways to keep the rabble in line other than lying about Toaff. He has, despite of (or perhaps because of) the "nothing to see here" Streisand effect he's received, made it into sources as widespread as Wikipedia at this point, which makes me suspect that at some point the powers that be which determine what is and isn't worthy of notice (and remember, the history that is worthy of notice, just like science, advances one funeral at a time) will simply stop trying to lie about him, and instead issue another one of those "we have always been at war with Eurasia" notices about how they never really had a problem with him at all, and the world will continue spinning just as before (i.e. we'll have ten more movies about Edgardo and Emmet, and about those who must ever more be held responsible for what happened to them, and zip-all about the million or so who for hundreds of years kept losing relatives to the slave-traders, oftentimes also losing their homes and farms to the moneylenders later on in a failed effort to ransom those relatives back, not to mention the people -- many of them gentiles, I'll be the first to admit -- who enriched themselves on both ends of that losing transaction and then had the audacity to preen themselves about how people hate them just because of their success, or superior IQ, or "who they are"). Maybe at some point, all that managing of reality will blow apart to smithereens, but if that happens, I'm not going to blame those who always tried to speak the truth, but I'll have plenty of blame for the disastrous attempts to manage it.

    Regardless, whenever "reality management" gets in the way of actual reality, then it's time to stop managing reality. If you or anyone else can't see that the efforts to shut him down are far more damaging than whatever it was that he uncovered, then you've got far bigger problems than Toaff to deal with.

  303. @Jack D
    @HA


    Ergo, the claims were largely — but not entirely — dubious.
     
    I understand what you are getting at (although I still don't agree with Toaff's conclusion) - there is maybe a chance that there is a small kernel of truth in the blood libel myth. What's the big deal, most blood libel claims are still false, even in our version.

    The problem is this (aside from the fact that Toaff's evidence as to the "small kernel" is less than convincing) - if you accept Toaff's position, certain people are going to take Toaff's molehill and inflate it into a mountain - " See - Jews REALLY DID make matzoh from the blood of Christian children"). Not that it's possible that or there's a small chance that in a few instances ... The nuances that you are proposing are going to get completely lost and only the headline is going to remain.

    Now if Toaff's evidence was truly clear and convincing, then you would have to follow his conclusions wherever they took you, even if it gladdens the heart of anti-Semites. But I don't think that is the case at all. He offers a semi-plausible theory on how this MIGHT have happened or COULD have happened but no proof that it actually DID happen.

    Replies: @HA

    “if you accept Toaff’s position, certain people are going to take Toaff’s molehill and inflate it into a mountain – ” See – Jews REALLY DID make matzoh from the blood of Christian children”)…The nuances that you are proposing are going to get completely lost and only the headline is going to remain.”

    Didn’t seem to happen with me. I’m perfectly willing to address topics as diverse as all those Christians who were also into blood-magick rituals, and whatever that means for the hapless Jews who also got murdered over the centuries. I’m also more than willing to address the who-knows-how-many-but-probably-way-more-than-zero cases of children disappearing into the slave markets that were conveniently blamed on Jews (or gypsies) but were actually the fault of Christians in cahoots with Muslim slavers, either surreptitiously, or else brazenly out-in-the-open, as with Khmelnitsky.

    Clamping down on all of that, or worse yet, lying about it or throwing a hissy fit about it — which is what you do with your agitated “nothing to see here” approach or your canards about how Toaff is saying blood libel is OK, is just going to backfire because not only is it an abject lie, at some point it’s going to become obvious that the people with the power to say “this is the only thing you’re allowed to pay attention to” are themselves “the problem” that requires a radical “solution”. And once people come to ignore history as just some corrupt and sanitized conspiracy that the people in power are promulgating — and that’s definitely the end-game as far as your deflections and bluster are concerned — then you’ll have no one but yourself to blame for the Pandora’s box of all the outrageous conspiracies and outright lies that fill that void. You don’t like Der Stürmer? Then stop trying to make Der Stürmer happen, and that includes pretending that Edgardo Mortara is indeed a worthier topic of discussion than a millennium and up to a million so abductions of another kind, just because those topics are going to bring up truths you’d rather stay hidden.

    “He offers a semi-plausible theory on how this MIGHT have happened or COULD have happened but no proof that it actually DID happen.”

    He does far more than that. He offers, as I said, clear documented evidence of rituals in which the blood of a gentile child is indeed regarded with magical salvific powers, thereby quashing centuries of lame deflections of how Jewish aversion to blood, etc., was proof positive that such rituals could not exist — i.e. “proof that it actually did NOT happen”. THAT in and of itself is a momentous discovery and for making it, Toaff deserves far better than your knee-jerk — and pathetically lame and transparent — putdowns. On the contrary, those just make you look bad. I’m so sorry that admitting how those centuries of deflections were in fact a lie — and really, a conspiracy in and of itself (and another case of backing the wrong horse) — might make things uncomfortable for you, but that’s all the more reason why the deflection game is likely to end very, very badly.

  304. @YetAnotherAnon
    This is really OT, is the comment software playing up or is it me?

    If I click on my handle on one of my comments, like this one

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/sailers-law-at-a-memorial-vigil/#comment-5062799

    I'd expect to see all my comments, newest first.

    Instead I see comments apparently dated 2017. If I ask for 2021 comments via the search box it tells me there aren't any. But I can see them if I use the drop-down box by the "All Comments" at the top of the listing to choose comments by year or decade.

    Tried it with other commenters and the same thing happens, I see JohnnyWalkers stuff from 2014 or JackD as far back as 2007.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Bardon Kaldian, @Almost Missouri

    Ron’s on the case.

    https://www.unz.com/announcement/bugs-suggestions-2/#comment-5068470

    If it is still happening tomorrow, you can update him.

  305. @Jew
    @HA

    From text you quoted, apparently from Wikipedia:


    To forestall possible misinterpretations, [Ariel Toaff] said that the idea that Jews practiced ritual murder is a slanderous stereotype, and that ritual homicide or infanticide was a myth.
     
    Toaff may very well have said that. I certainly hope he did.

    But, assuming he did, how many who cite Toaff bother to include that disclaimer?

    Is the reality not plainly that nearly all of those who cite Toaff's work favorably, as an authoritative or even credible source, do so in support of alleging those very accusations* against Jews and Judaism that the quote claims he disavowed?

    (*explicitly in many, if not most cases, but at a minimum implicitly)


    That said, the possibility existed that:

    certain criminal acts, disguised as crude rituals, were indeed committed by extremist groups or by individuals demented by religious mania and blinded by desire for revenge against those considered responsible for their people’s sorrows and tragedies.
     

     
    Okay, let's say that there were some "extremist", fringe, demented Jews who did, in fact, commit at least some of the crimes that Toaff contends they may have. How representative would such individuals (or fringe groups) be of Jews as a whole/ collectively/ categorically or of any strain or subset of Judaism that could reasonably be considered normative or mainstream?

    Surely, you would acknowledge that there have been at least some (at least nominal) Christians who have, in the name or under the cover of Christianity, engaged in behavior that you would categorically condemn and disavow-- not only as fundamentally reprobate and depraved, but also, at a minimum, as emphatically not representative of Christianity. In many such cases you would, I have no doubt, go further in your condemnation and disavowal of the actions or beliefs in-question, contending that they are actually in direct violation of Christianity, or even downright heretical. Needless to say what your reaction would be if someone were to even suggest that Christians or Christianity, per se were to blame for the reprobate behaviors or beliefs in-question.

    As a Jew myself, I am Orthodox in my belief. In both my knowledge of Judaism, as well as the level of my personal religious observance, I would place myself neither among the most pious and learned, nor among the least, but somewhere in the middle. I have spent much time, however, over many years, among strictly Orthodox Jews, including many both far more learned as well as far more than pious than myself. I am enough of an insider that if (with the sole, obvious exception of circumcision) there would be any legitimate source or basis within our tradition for any ritual use of human blood, it would hardly seem plausible for someone such as myself to not have heard of it by now.

    (In fact, Judaism (again, with the sole, obvious exception of circumcision), is quite averse to blood. The consumption of human blood (whether Jewish or Gentile) is categorically prohibited. And removal of blood from an animal prior to consumption, through a process of soaking and salting, is an integral part of kashruth (kosher laws).

    Shabbat Shalom/ Gut Shabbos to my fellow Js

    Replies: @HA

    “But, assuming he did, how many who cite Toaff bother to include that disclaimer?”

    You’re asking me, who bothered to include it? Who got it from the editors of the Wikipedia article, meaning that they included it as well? Who got it by way of Toaff himself? Why are any of those people the object of your grumbling?

    Maybe you should instead take that up with the people distorting what he uncovered, not with those who do their best to describe it accurately.

    “Is the reality not plainly…”

    The reality, as far as can be currently determined, is what Toaff discovered. The very fact that no one is even bothering to dispute that is proof enough at this point. As for those who try to convince us that we must ignore that reality because the “plain reality” is something else, let’s be honest enough to admit that they’re not interested in reality, so maybe you should first issue a disclaimer admitting that, instead of worrying about the ones that too often don’t come with what Toaff discovered?

    There are far better ways to keep the rabble in line other than lying about Toaff. He has, despite of (or perhaps because of) the “nothing to see here” Streisand effect he’s received, made it into sources as widespread as Wikipedia at this point, which makes me suspect that at some point the powers that be which determine what is and isn’t worthy of notice (and remember, the history that is worthy of notice, just like science, advances one funeral at a time) will simply stop trying to lie about him, and instead issue another one of those “we have always been at war with Eurasia” notices about how they never really had a problem with him at all, and the world will continue spinning just as before (i.e. we’ll have ten more movies about Edgardo and Emmet, and about those who must ever more be held responsible for what happened to them, and zip-all about the million or so who for hundreds of years kept losing relatives to the slave-traders, oftentimes also losing their homes and farms to the moneylenders later on in a failed effort to ransom those relatives back, not to mention the people — many of them gentiles, I’ll be the first to admit — who enriched themselves on both ends of that losing transaction and then had the audacity to preen themselves about how people hate them just because of their success, or superior IQ, or “who they are”). Maybe at some point, all that managing of reality will blow apart to smithereens, but if that happens, I’m not going to blame those who always tried to speak the truth, but I’ll have plenty of blame for the disastrous attempts to manage it.

    Regardless, whenever “reality management” gets in the way of actual reality, then it’s time to stop managing reality. If you or anyone else can’t see that the efforts to shut him down are far more damaging than whatever it was that he uncovered, then you’ve got far bigger problems than Toaff to deal with.

  306. @Intelligent Dasein
    Steve,

    You really need to white-list more people. Look at what has happened to the progression of this discussion.

    So many threads (like this one) morph into Jack D having endless, off-topic arguments with one of the other few privileged posters, because they are the only ones whose comments go through during the hours you are incommunicado. These brouhahas always end up reminding me of Leslie Nielsen dressed up as the umpire in Naked Gun, bumping bellies with general manager.

    Your other pass-through posters add very little to the dialogue when you aren't around, unless you're a fan of Grease Car's interminable punning or the random tweet-drop by Desiderius. And then there's Buzz Mohawk, who has exactly three kinds of posts in his repertoire: 1) You're an idiot. 2) You were right; I'm sorry for calling you an idiot. 3) There was this girl I banged back in college who...

    The conversation here sucks.

    I have been here for six years now. I've written more than half a million words in some 3300 posts, and I still can't get my comments through in a timely fashion. I'm sure there are many others in the same predicament. The approved commenter roster definitely needs some fresh blood. What do you think?

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Maybe there’s a way Ron’s software can show Steve who are his least-whimmed commenters, i.e., the ones where he is wasting the most time on moderating. If I were blogging, I would certainly want to know where to save time by activating autopilot.

    As a commenter, it is dismaying, as you aver, to find that a comment I wrote got an interesting reply, but only well after the main scrum has moved on, so the chances that anyone will read my own reply to the reply are low. If anyone is still reading, it’s often because they are obsessives of some kind, which leads to the heated trivia-dueling that can characterize the tail-end of comment sections. (Not that I’m above trivia-dueling myself. But I’m not proud of it.)

    Sometimes, it’s just belated commenting, but the moderation time-delay plays a role too.

  307. @HA
    @Jack D

    "Slavery in 9th century Spain (a poorly documented era in any case) is not going to be of the same interest to an American audience as 19th century slavery in America."

    On the contrary, it was documented well enough. The word you're looking for is "overlooked" or maybe "ignored" or "blocked out" or met with lame objections like "hey, that's Ron Unz kind of talk". I'm not surprised that there is more attention paid to 19th century slavery in America. But the fact that that means there is absolutely zero attention of a kind of slavery that was quite prevalent for over a millennium, and that still affects us today? No, spare me your cheap rationalizations.

    The very fact that anyone still wants to pretend -- as you did -- that "because of their small numbers" or some other similar moronic objection, Jews couldn't have been that big a presence with regard to slavery, is evidence enough that certain topics regarding slavery are largely off-limits, whereas the need to keep informing us about 19th century slavery in America is never-ending.

    And if "interest to an American audience" was all that this amounted to, we wouldn't need two movie treatments on one "Italian" boy that date back a century and a half to a time when Italy, as such, did not even exist.

    Replies: @Art Deco

    Very little from the 9th century is ‘well documented’.

    • Replies: @HA
    @Art Deco

    "Very little from the 9th century is ‘well documented’."

    Maybe according to outdated texts you and Jack D surround yourselves with. According to people who actually bother to keep up with the field, medieval history has undergone a significant shift in the last couple of decades. As a result, numerous old chestnuts -- including the one about how Jews were cruelly "forced" into banking , -- have been out of date among academics for quite some time, but they persist in the popular imagination (including the minds of the Spielbergs and Weinsteins and NYT editorial board and others who take it upon themselves to be the gatekeepers of where our attention should be focused). Maybe someday there'll be a little more elucidation as to how those earlier chestnuts were allowed to linger for so long, so keep a bag of popcorn around for that big reveal.

    "The Muslims conquered Hispania in the 8th century. The Arian court in the Visigothic kingdom converted to Catholicism in the latter 6th century."

    Yes, the Battle of Guadalete that I previously cited, took place in the year 711, which does indeed put it in the 8th century. I look forward to more of your earth-shattering revelations regarding your ability to count up to eight, and any other such superpowers you may possess.

    That being said, the fact that the Trinitarians eventually prevailed -- something I already noted -- changes absolutely zilch with regard to the point I made earlier about how the Arians who previously ran things in Spain on the Christian side had no problems with Jews owning Christian slaves, something the more rigorous Trinitarians (not just more rigorous with regard to Christology, but also with Christian obligations toward their poor) later on forbade (and which I would guess played a part in the lower classes favoring orthodoxy), a turnaround that helped sour Jewish-Christian relations and spurred subsequent efforts by some Jews to assist Muslim forces in establishing a foothold in Europe, something which even as long as 800 years later would likely be well remembered (despite the loyal service -- and heap big revenue -- other Jews dutifully and copiously provided to the Spanish crown).

    Let all that come out in the wash, I say, for better or for worse. I'm not interested in hiding any of it, and we all live in glass houses at this point. But I don't need anyone with an obvious agenda -- on either side -- dictating what I am supposed to ignore or dismiss because they take it upon themselves to know better than I do what my motivations are or what is and isn't sufficiently documented, especially when I can see they're either simply deluded or else lying through their teeth just because they think the wrong kind of people might be encouraged by the truth coming out.

    Replies: @Art Deco

  308. @HA
    @Art Deco

    "It was in the latter 6th century that Arianism was displaced by Catholic Christianity among the elite."

    It wasn't just "displaced" by Catholic Christians. It was soundly defeated by Arabs and Berbers at the Battle of Guadalete. And as I said, the Trinitarians were willing to be more hardcore than the Arians were with regard to what the Jews were allowed to do. In that sense, I guess the plot to aid the Moors in overthrowing the Visigoths was a case of Jews backing the right horse -- until it wasn't.

    Replies: @Art Deco

    The Muslims conquered Hispania in the 8th century. The Arian court in the Visigothic kingdom converted to Catholicism in the latter 6th century.

  309. @Art Deco
    @HA

    Very little from the 9th century is 'well documented'.

    Replies: @HA

    “Very little from the 9th century is ‘well documented’.”

    Maybe according to outdated texts you and Jack D surround yourselves with. According to people who actually bother to keep up with the field, medieval history has undergone a significant shift in the last couple of decades. As a result, numerous old chestnuts — including the one about how Jews were cruelly “forced” into banking , — have been out of date among academics for quite some time, but they persist in the popular imagination (including the minds of the Spielbergs and Weinsteins and NYT editorial board and others who take it upon themselves to be the gatekeepers of where our attention should be focused). Maybe someday there’ll be a little more elucidation as to how those earlier chestnuts were allowed to linger for so long, so keep a bag of popcorn around for that big reveal.

    “The Muslims conquered Hispania in the 8th century. The Arian court in the Visigothic kingdom converted to Catholicism in the latter 6th century.”

    Yes, the Battle of Guadalete that I previously cited, took place in the year 711, which does indeed put it in the 8th century. I look forward to more of your earth-shattering revelations regarding your ability to count up to eight, and any other such superpowers you may possess.

    That being said, the fact that the Trinitarians eventually prevailed — something I already noted — changes absolutely zilch with regard to the point I made earlier about how the Arians who previously ran things in Spain on the Christian side had no problems with Jews owning Christian slaves, something the more rigorous Trinitarians (not just more rigorous with regard to Christology, but also with Christian obligations toward their poor) later on forbade (and which I would guess played a part in the lower classes favoring orthodoxy), a turnaround that helped sour Jewish-Christian relations and spurred subsequent efforts by some Jews to assist Muslim forces in establishing a foothold in Europe, something which even as long as 800 years later would likely be well remembered (despite the loyal service — and heap big revenue — other Jews dutifully and copiously provided to the Spanish crown).

    Let all that come out in the wash, I say, for better or for worse. I’m not interested in hiding any of it, and we all live in glass houses at this point. But I don’t need anyone with an obvious agenda — on either side — dictating what I am supposed to ignore or dismiss because they take it upon themselves to know better than I do what my motivations are or what is and isn’t sufficiently documented, especially when I can see they’re either simply deluded or else lying through their teeth just because they think the wrong kind of people might be encouraged by the truth coming out.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @HA

    You keep making really gross mistakes, then expect people to take you seriously when you chuffer about quite granular matters (e.g. whether or not a tiny Jewish minority was permitted to own slaves in the early medieval period).

    Replies: @HA

  310. @Jim Don Bob
    @J1234

    How did you like Belfast?

    Replies: @J1234

    How did you like Belfast?

    I went mostly to amuse myself while my wife was at a concert that I didn’t want to attend. The reviews I’d read beforehand piqued my interest, too. One of them described it as a “comedy/drama” or something. I thought, a comedy about Belfast? That wasn’t an accurate description. Yes, there were light moments in the film, but not enough to be comedic.

    It was also apparently a semi-autobiographical account of the early days of the troubles (about 1969) told from a Protestant perspective. Once again, it wasn’t exactly what I’d interpreted that description to mean. Yes, it was told from a Protestant perspective in a literal sense, but that particular Protestant perspective was very deferential to the (Northern Ireland) Catholic perspective, and I strongly suspect that it was not representative of the community back then.

    I suspect that because I flew into Northern Ireland in ’98 on the day the Omaugh bomb went off. You could see and feel the intensity of the Protestant community in that moment. Shop owners put on their military style camos. Land ladies at B&B’s would sit my wife and I down very formally with cups of tea and give us long lectures on the savagery of the IRA. Mostly, the Unionist parade we attended brought ought a pride in culture and history among the locals that I’ve never seen among American whites anywhere. Also, our American accents made us very suspicious among these folks. This is stuff you rarely see in movies.

    To be fair, the British troops first came to Ulster in ’69 to protect the Catholics from Protestant violence, so portraying militant Unionists as thugs in this film isn’t entirely wrongheaded, but that was a pretty small slice of time in the history of the troubles, and giving that portrayal without proper weight or context is doing what modern filmmakers do all the time – turning a historically accurate inch into a historically inaccurate mile.

    Despite my own heritage, I have/had no dog in that fight. I’m glad the troubles are mostly over, but this film is just more of the same from the entertainment industry – part of the virtue signal liturgy. It’s a movie about how majority demographic groups are always cruel to everyone else – especially if those majorities are white and Protestant – and how such majorities have the moral obligation to put others before themselves and to diminish while others increase.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @J1234


    It’s a movie about how majority demographic groups are always cruel to everyone else – especially if those majorities are white and Protestant – and how such majorities have the moral obligation to put others before themselves and to diminish while others increase.
     
    Ok, then. I will wait for it at Redbox. Thanks for the reply.
  311. @J1234
    @Jim Don Bob


    How did you like Belfast?
     
    I went mostly to amuse myself while my wife was at a concert that I didn't want to attend. The reviews I'd read beforehand piqued my interest, too. One of them described it as a "comedy/drama" or something. I thought, a comedy about Belfast? That wasn't an accurate description. Yes, there were light moments in the film, but not enough to be comedic.

    It was also apparently a semi-autobiographical account of the early days of the troubles (about 1969) told from a Protestant perspective. Once again, it wasn't exactly what I'd interpreted that description to mean. Yes, it was told from a Protestant perspective in a literal sense, but that particular Protestant perspective was very deferential to the (Northern Ireland) Catholic perspective, and I strongly suspect that it was not representative of the community back then.

    I suspect that because I flew into Northern Ireland in '98 on the day the Omaugh bomb went off. You could see and feel the intensity of the Protestant community in that moment. Shop owners put on their military style camos. Land ladies at B&B's would sit my wife and I down very formally with cups of tea and give us long lectures on the savagery of the IRA. Mostly, the Unionist parade we attended brought ought a pride in culture and history among the locals that I've never seen among American whites anywhere. Also, our American accents made us very suspicious among these folks. This is stuff you rarely see in movies.

    To be fair, the British troops first came to Ulster in '69 to protect the Catholics from Protestant violence, so portraying militant Unionists as thugs in this film isn't entirely wrongheaded, but that was a pretty small slice of time in the history of the troubles, and giving that portrayal without proper weight or context is doing what modern filmmakers do all the time - turning a historically accurate inch into a historically inaccurate mile.

    Despite my own heritage, I have/had no dog in that fight. I'm glad the troubles are mostly over, but this film is just more of the same from the entertainment industry - part of the virtue signal liturgy. It's a movie about how majority demographic groups are always cruel to everyone else - especially if those majorities are white and Protestant - and how such majorities have the moral obligation to put others before themselves and to diminish while others increase.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    It’s a movie about how majority demographic groups are always cruel to everyone else – especially if those majorities are white and Protestant – and how such majorities have the moral obligation to put others before themselves and to diminish while others increase.

    Ok, then. I will wait for it at Redbox. Thanks for the reply.

  312. @HA
    @Art Deco

    "Very little from the 9th century is ‘well documented’."

    Maybe according to outdated texts you and Jack D surround yourselves with. According to people who actually bother to keep up with the field, medieval history has undergone a significant shift in the last couple of decades. As a result, numerous old chestnuts -- including the one about how Jews were cruelly "forced" into banking , -- have been out of date among academics for quite some time, but they persist in the popular imagination (including the minds of the Spielbergs and Weinsteins and NYT editorial board and others who take it upon themselves to be the gatekeepers of where our attention should be focused). Maybe someday there'll be a little more elucidation as to how those earlier chestnuts were allowed to linger for so long, so keep a bag of popcorn around for that big reveal.

    "The Muslims conquered Hispania in the 8th century. The Arian court in the Visigothic kingdom converted to Catholicism in the latter 6th century."

    Yes, the Battle of Guadalete that I previously cited, took place in the year 711, which does indeed put it in the 8th century. I look forward to more of your earth-shattering revelations regarding your ability to count up to eight, and any other such superpowers you may possess.

    That being said, the fact that the Trinitarians eventually prevailed -- something I already noted -- changes absolutely zilch with regard to the point I made earlier about how the Arians who previously ran things in Spain on the Christian side had no problems with Jews owning Christian slaves, something the more rigorous Trinitarians (not just more rigorous with regard to Christology, but also with Christian obligations toward their poor) later on forbade (and which I would guess played a part in the lower classes favoring orthodoxy), a turnaround that helped sour Jewish-Christian relations and spurred subsequent efforts by some Jews to assist Muslim forces in establishing a foothold in Europe, something which even as long as 800 years later would likely be well remembered (despite the loyal service -- and heap big revenue -- other Jews dutifully and copiously provided to the Spanish crown).

    Let all that come out in the wash, I say, for better or for worse. I'm not interested in hiding any of it, and we all live in glass houses at this point. But I don't need anyone with an obvious agenda -- on either side -- dictating what I am supposed to ignore or dismiss because they take it upon themselves to know better than I do what my motivations are or what is and isn't sufficiently documented, especially when I can see they're either simply deluded or else lying through their teeth just because they think the wrong kind of people might be encouraged by the truth coming out.

    Replies: @Art Deco

    You keep making really gross mistakes, then expect people to take you seriously when you chuffer about quite granular matters (e.g. whether or not a tiny Jewish minority was permitted to own slaves in the early medieval period).

    • Replies: @HA
    @Art Deco

    "You keep making really gross mistakes, "

    If that were true, your link- and citation-free huffing would contain substantially more substance than attempting to "correct" me by telling me that 711 is in the 8th century or whatever else you have a problem with.

    Here's an expanded citation from Norman Roth, the author of my earlier link:


    Much has been written about this invasion which was destined to change the course, not only of Spanish, but, to a great extent, of ALL MEDIEVAL EUROPEAN HISTORY…The “Father of Jewish History,” Heinrich Graetz, already mentioned the plot of the Jews in Visigothic Spain, noting that in 1694 they purportedly “entered into an alliance with their more fortunate brethren in Northern Africa, with the intention of overthrowing the Visigothic Empire” and were “probably” aided in this attempt by the Muslims.
     
    So that checks out, whatever reservations Roth may have as to the truth of this. And according Alfredo Mordechai Rabello (Hebrew University)

    The Jews had been living in Spain since the Roman Period…much later, Spain was conqured by the Visigoths…During this period the Visigoths were Arian and their treatment of the Jews was RELATIVELY GOOD.
     
    So there's that. As for the prominence of the question of to what extent Jews would be allowed to own Christian slaves and under what circumstances, it seems a pretty sizable chunk of what Jewish historians have since come to characterize as "anti-Jewish legislation" (search for "slave" in that article, if you want to get a sense of the role slavery played in all this) – which, again is understandable given the importance of agriculture to the economy and the fact that slaves were an essential component of making agriculture work -- though it's worth noting that Visigoths also used slaves in their military).

    In other words, whatever "granularity" is really supposed to mean, I'm going to regard it as yet another attempt to handwave and bluster through something you'd rather not see the light of day.

    Finally, here is an entry on Reccared, the Visigothic king who converted from Arianism to orthodoxy -- it seems the slave-owning issue is prominently noted there as well:


    RECCARED °, Visigothic king of Spain (586–601). He succeeded his father Leovigild and shortly thereafter converted from Arianism to orthodox Christianity. This conversion was followed in 589 by the Third Council of Toledo, where it was decreed that all Arians must become orthodox. His preoccupation with religious matters seems to have led Reccared to reaffirm and modify existing anti-Jewish legislation. He forbade Jews to own Christian slaves and decreed that if a Jew circumcised a Christian slave, the latter was to be set free and the owner was himself to be enslaved. Jews were further forbidden to have Christian wives or mistresses and any children born from such a union were to be baptized.[Note however, that according to the same article, such edicts were poorly enforced.]
     
    So yeah, spare me the editorializing on what it is that I'm allowed to regard as important.
  313. @Art Deco
    @HA

    You keep making really gross mistakes, then expect people to take you seriously when you chuffer about quite granular matters (e.g. whether or not a tiny Jewish minority was permitted to own slaves in the early medieval period).

    Replies: @HA

    “You keep making really gross mistakes, “

    If that were true, your link- and citation-free huffing would contain substantially more substance than attempting to “correct” me by telling me that 711 is in the 8th century or whatever else you have a problem with.

    Here’s an expanded citation from Norman Roth, the author of my earlier link:

    Much has been written about this invasion which was destined to change the course, not only of Spanish, but, to a great extent, of ALL MEDIEVAL EUROPEAN HISTORY…The “Father of Jewish History,” Heinrich Graetz, already mentioned the plot of the Jews in Visigothic Spain, noting that in 1694 they purportedly “entered into an alliance with their more fortunate brethren in Northern Africa, with the intention of overthrowing the Visigothic Empire” and were “probably” aided in this attempt by the Muslims.

    So that checks out, whatever reservations Roth may have as to the truth of this. And according Alfredo Mordechai Rabello (Hebrew University)

    The Jews had been living in Spain since the Roman Period…much later, Spain was conqured by the Visigoths…During this period the Visigoths were Arian and their treatment of the Jews was RELATIVELY GOOD.

    So there’s that. As for the prominence of the question of to what extent Jews would be allowed to own Christian slaves and under what circumstances, it seems a pretty sizable chunk of what Jewish historians have since come to characterize as “anti-Jewish legislation” (search for “slave” in that article, if you want to get a sense of the role slavery played in all this) – which, again is understandable given the importance of agriculture to the economy and the fact that slaves were an essential component of making agriculture work — though it’s worth noting that Visigoths also used slaves in their military).

    In other words, whatever “granularity” is really supposed to mean, I’m going to regard it as yet another attempt to handwave and bluster through something you’d rather not see the light of day.

    Finally, here is an entry on Reccared, the Visigothic king who converted from Arianism to orthodoxy — it seems the slave-owning issue is prominently noted there as well:

    RECCARED °, Visigothic king of Spain (586–601). He succeeded his father Leovigild and shortly thereafter converted from Arianism to orthodox Christianity. This conversion was followed in 589 by the Third Council of Toledo, where it was decreed that all Arians must become orthodox. His preoccupation with religious matters seems to have led Reccared to reaffirm and modify existing anti-Jewish legislation. He forbade Jews to own Christian slaves and decreed that if a Jew circumcised a Christian slave, the latter was to be set free and the owner was himself to be enslaved. Jews were further forbidden to have Christian wives or mistresses and any children born from such a union were to be baptized.[Note however, that according to the same article, such edicts were poorly enforced.]

    So yeah, spare me the editorializing on what it is that I’m allowed to regard as important.

  314. @Americano
    @Rob

    @Rob

    Puerto Ricans are not heavily black you moronic imbecile.

    See Benicio del Toro, Ricky Martin, Pedro Augusto del Valle (1st Hispanic lieutenant general, and a hard-core American Reactionary), Jose Ferrer (1st Hispanic best actor winner), Raul Julia, Rita Moreno (EGOT), Jose Feliciano, Luis Fonsi, William Carlos Williams (One of America's greatest poet. Anglo/Puerto Rican), 5 Miss Universe (1970: Marisol Malaret, 1985: Deborah Carthy-Deu, 1993: Dayanara Torres, 2001: Denise M. Quiñones and 2006: Zuleyka Rivera), etc., etc., etc.

    Puerto Rico is not dissimilar to the USA--mostly Europeans (with some Native American elements) and a small black population. This was the reason why Teddy Roosevelt was willing to take in Puerto Rico and not Cuba--while Cuba was bigger and wealthier, and had a large white population, it also had a very large black population; by contrast, Puerto Rico had a small black population, concentrated in the coastal areas.

    Replies: @Jack D, @flyingtiger, @Nicholas Stix

    “Puerto Ricans are not heavily black you moronic imbecile.”

    Talk about a torn-off to reading someone’s opinions. Still, I couldn’t help notice you citing some rich, hispanic Whites, as if they were typical.

  315. Anonymous[143] • Disclaimer says:

    Maybe the worst musical ever, even worse than the Wall, which at least tried to be faithful to the spirit of rock.

    Inexplicable. Bee Gees were at the top of their game in the late 70s. Why the need to cover the Beatles? It’d be like Beatles in 67 doing cover songs of Elvis.

  316. Beatles haven’t been lucky with movies after Hard Day’s Night though Yellow Submarine is pretty good.

    McCartney flopped with Give My Regards to Broad Street.

    Taymor’s Across the Universe may be even worse than the Sgt Pepper movie.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Becker update V1.3.2
How America was neoconned into World War IV