Connie I've only seen a part of Colonial House but that was when people were rebelling against going to church so the mayor changed the law. Then some lady came and wanted more rights/chances for them women and that pissed me off.

Yes, women's situations sucked in Colonial times but the whole point of the show is to live in Colonial times. There shouldn't be any changing the rules because you don't like the life.

Go team Hecubus...I didn't remember that. So, nobody else here wanted to be in love so hard it made them ill?(Maybe the Bayliss thing was the rule, not the exception.) Just me? Ok, then.

Yes, women's situations sucked in Colonial times but the whole point of the show is to live in Colonial times. There shouldn't be any changing the rules because you don't like the life.

They should have run off to join the Indians.

Wrod.

when people were rebelling against going to church so the mayor changed the law

Right. There were people in Colonial days who rebelled against compulsory church attendance, but it was from major league competing religious scruples. I suppose there were people who simply didn't believe, but the social pressures were such that they probably just attended and daydreamed through the entire service. Plus, religion was so much more in the minds of people. I wasn't much of a fan of the first governor of the colony, who was passing out the punishments on the colonists, but at least he was trying to follow the rules of the game as presented.

At the end of the program, some of the people who organized the entire project came in to evaluate the success of the colony. They gave them points for being potentially viable economically and for being supportive of each other, but they did point out that they weren't following the social rules.

The non-conformists got off lucky by being forced to sit in the fields. My Quaker ancestors of the time were publically whipped and sold into indentured servitude.

Go team Hecubus...I didn't remember that.

It's a throwaway image buried in the book. I don't know if I would've noticed it except one introduction pointed it out.

So, nobody else here wanted to be in love so hard it made them ill?(Maybe the Bayliss thing was the rule, not the exception.) Just me? Ok, then.

I'm trying to remember wanting to be in love before I was in love. I did have one image that seemed tantalizingly possible before it happened. I just wanted somebody to lay their head in my lap and I'd play with their hair. (Note: in its original conception this imagery was not particularly porny for location or hair-play.)

I understand. And I was fourteen then. I've evolved...somewhat.

There was a scene in "Colonial House" where some Native Americans came by to trade. They kept saying how conflicted they felt about the whole things. They were proud to show that their ancestors were civilized, advanced people, but reliving the days of the colonists coming in to displace them was very upsetting to them. One of the young men said, "All I keep thinking is, 'If we burn them out now, maybe we can stop this.' That's scary."

One of the "braves" stole a chicken from the colony. The woman in charge of the native group gave him a royal scolding. "Is that what you think we are? Thieves? Is that what you want people watching this to think of us? That we the kind of thieves that the stories always say?" "I thought it would be fun to put one over on them." "And if they figure out it was us who took that chicken?" "Ummm..." "Go get more firewood, dork." Though she didn't call him dork.

So, nobody else here wanted to be in love so hard it made them ill?

I used to think that Cathy and Heathcliff were the ideal of romantic love -- the drama, the passion, the lovers wandering the moors for all eternity. I always loved Cathy's statement to Edgar: "Your cold blood cannot be worked into a fever -- your veins are full of ice-water -- but mine are boiling, and the sight of such chilliness makes them dance." I thought that romantic love should always be all about the boiling veins, etc., etc. Oh, the drama!

NSM anymore. Not that I think Edgar was a catch, or anything; I just think that Cathy was a nutjob.

Also? I've always loved the theory that Heathcliff is Cathy's half-brother. Because surely Heathcliff wasn't the only starving urchin on the streets of Liverpool -- why, out of all the starving urchins, would Mr. Earnshaw bring one specific one home? Why hadn't he ever brought an urchin home before Heathcliff, or after? So possibly Heathcliff was Mr. Earnshaw's illegitimate son, brought home to be raised.

Makes things a little more interesting, no? It's been so long since I read it that, truthfully, I can't remember if there's anything at all in the text to support or discredit that theory.

I think that could be, Tep. We talked about it for a while when I studied it. And I'm over it, irl, in re KathiNHeathcliffforevah. But it made a huge impression at the time.