I don't mean to knit-pick on the CBS movie and just point out flaws for the time period, but I do agree that the houses (exterior and interior) looked pretty darn large and upscale for the time, place, and financial status of their owners. Two scenes really struck me as being "wrong". 1. The girls stirred an egg yolk and screamed out they saw a coffin or a dead man. Huh? I recall reading that the girls stirred egg whites to see who they might marry -- which was a common practice for young girls to do at that time. Sort of witchy, but more like voodoo practice that Tituba could have brought from Barbados. Is my memory faulty? Did they stir yolks into whites, or did they just stir the whites? And weren't they looking for clues as to the men they might marry, and they didn't see dead men or coffins? 2. Did I see Kirste Alley throw on a handsome, long flowing red cloak? Red? I don't think Puritan women wore lavish red cloaks ... or anything the color red. I recall reading in Essex County Court Records that a woman was whipped for wearing a bright colored scarf. In another scene, Kirste wore a flowing dark black cloak with some sort of color running through it. I don't think that Ann Putnam, Sr., would own two lavish cloaks at the same time. According to wills and inventories of the time, people just did not have a lot of clothing. (Tonight I am going to see what else Kirste wears -- same cloaks, or a third one?) What do the rest of you think? Picky, picky, Helen Greenslit Graves (I wonder if my Ann Pudeator is going to get a mention tonight. Wonder what she will look like... )

Me too!! Helen, I was glad to see you posting again. Wish it were for a happier occasion. I taped, not watched, tonight so I don't know if our Ann was in it. I agree with you completely about the cloaks. Too many, too fine, too bright. Ladies & gents, I think we have to just grind our teeth and remind ourselves of the age-old truth: Hollywood will do anything for money. Hollywood will betray consultants, invent affairs, libel the dead (which is not actionable under law), slander entire sects and generations, pervert history, and so on, and so forth, and OF COURSE any media outlet will lie in its advertising! "The Truth," indeed, ha! The real story would be fascinating, but it will never be told unless PBS gets the urge and the funding to tell it. <sigh> Or maybe get a law school to put it on from the transcripts with a voice-over narrator for Law Month (which is March) some year? Court TV would televise that. Gee, can we think of any good law schools up Massachusetts way? <Just Kidding!> At 07:27 PM 3/4/03, Helen Graves wrote: >Picky, picky, >Helen Greenslit Graves >(I wonder if my Ann Pudeator is going to get a mention tonight. Wonder >what she will look like... )

On Tuesday, March 4, 2003, at 10:48 PM, Lisa Small wrote: > The real story would be fascinating, but it will never be told unless > PBS gets the urge and the funding to tell it. > > <sigh> Or maybe get a law school to put it on from the transcripts > with a voice-over narrator for Law Month (which is March) some year? > Court TV would televise that. Gee, can we think of any good law > schools up Massachusetts way? Just so you all know, the reason I started this list in the first place was because I am working at what I call a "non-fiction novel" about the episode, with the determination to get it right -- no action or character except what can be distilled from the historical record. Historically accurate, but brought to life with the tools of a novelist. The full Parris household is present. The story of Andover told. Rev. Burroughs' tale recounted. The correct legal procedures of the day outlined. My personal library contains every book imaginable on the subject. I am working hard to get all the families fleshed out accurately, which is the biggest challenge. I started this list as a way to find the people who were most passionate about the history of what happened, and had it hosted at Rootsweb to make sure it would find people who were researching their own ancestors who were involved, so that I could have a wealth of knowledge available if I would but ask. In the course of my research, I encountered Bernie Rosenthal, author of Salem Story, and have been working with him and others for the past several years to produce accurate, scholarly transcriptions of all the original manuscripts. (Boyer & Nissenbaum's 1977 publication of the WPA transcriptions done in the 1930s has errors, omissions, and is missing texts which have surfaced since then.) This has delayed my work on my novel, but the time and effort I have been investing has been priceless to me in the long run. I expect to make a lot of headway over my summer vacation this year. I have mixed feelings when I watch something like this CBS gobbledeegoop (since *when* did Joseph Putnam and his wife ever get arrested??? And stripping Rebecca Nurse in front of a group of men??? Come on!) -- I'd like to hear the story told properly, but if someone else does it first, where would that leave my work-in-progress of eight years? LOL! For every botched telling of the tale, there is an increased need for my accurate one! So when I periodically post a request for genealogical info on various people, this is why: I really want to get it right, and you are the folks who I trust to help me find the resources I need to do so. Now I have to stop laughing at that drivel and try to get some sleep. (No one told me it was "Salem Witchcraft Trials: The Comedy"!) Cheers to one and all, Margo

Go, Margo, go Margo, go Margo, Go! You GO, girl! At 11:40 PM 3/4/03, Margo Burns wrote: >Just so you all know, the reason I started this list in the first place >was because I am working at what I call a "non-fiction novel" about the >episode, with the determination to get it right -- no action or character >except what can be distilled from the historical record. Historically >accurate, but brought to life with the tools of a novelist.