You say “discredited” as if it is an objective fact, like Lamerican inheritance is discredited, when what it really means is that a majority of literary critics hold one philosophical opinion over a different philosophical opinion. (Myself, I think a very large percentage of so-called literary criticism is pure horseshit. If Flannery O’Conner says her hat is just a head covering, then the young teacher is an idiot, period.)
It was Ted. His dad was the police captain.
Perhaps not! I think it would be a misfit’s black hat (thanks @RealityChuck, I’m stealing this!) to call the movie a trans allegory, even though writer/producer Howard Ashman was gay, and Ursula was modeled on the drag queen Divine. But the story is very much about coming of age, going after the life you want and becoming your authentic self in spite of parental pressure to conform and stay home where it’s safe. It’s a universal theme, but I imagine especially poignant for gay and trans kids.
I’ve heard that song so many times and I never knew those were the lyrics! I never looked them up, I just thought it was something like “something something trusted lights” and “something something saints upon crosses.”
Well now.
He’s an idiot for wondering if the hat had any additional meaning? Not even for assuming a particular meaning, but just for asking?
This is my biggest problem with that anecdote: Flannery O’Connor comes across as an enormous asshole. Some guy read her story, was impressed enough by it to spend some time thinking about it, and that’s her reaction? What an utter boor.
And mine is the opposite–the teacher comes off like some pretentious art-critic clown–the type who interprets the deep meaning of the mop bucket exhibit in the museum until the janitor walks by and wheels it away.
B&T may be a silly, silly movies, but its understanding of time travel mechanics is rock solid, and better than many “serious” time travel stories. It also has surprisingly accurate costume design.
Your timeline’s off. They stopped publishing Captain Marvel in 1953, almost a decade before Thor came out. But they were still publishing into the 1960s and 1970s. I have lots of Dennis the Menace comics published by Fawcett.
Not that it’s relevant – Jack Kirby was a published artist since the 1930s, and was well aware of Captain Marvel (who wouldn’t be – there was a big trial and everything).
One of the relatively recent Pop Culture memes that bugs me is the idea that when James Bond breaks through the back wall of a set in Nevada where guys dressed as astronauts appear to be working o the moon, that he’s busted into some “Capricorn One” scenario where they’re shooting fake moon landing scenes to fool people into thinking the moon landing are real (This shows up in The Big Book of Conspiracies from Factoid Press, among others).
The scene is from Diamonds are Forever, which came out in 1971, at which point not even people who thought the moon landings didn’t happen thought that the government was going to such lengths to fake them.
This was pretty clearly a simulation made by “Willard Whyte’s” company, possibly for training or publicity.
Yep, I’ve always said this was the greatest time-travel movie ever made, and that’s the example I use. But it’s not the only one. Once they realize the actual power of time travel, they exploit it mercilessly.
(I agree this is irrelevant to the point at issue, but…)
I think your timeline is also off, as far as Fawcett’s overall comics publishing (I think you’re dead on about Captain Marvel and Thor).
This is all before my time, but from what I can find online, Fawcett completely shut down its comics division in 1953, with the last issue appearing in January 1954. It sold some of its characters and titles to Charlton (but not Captain Marvel, who remained in limbo until DC revived him in the '70s). Fawcett then briefly returned to publishing comics in the '60s and '70s, but notably not Captain Marvel. I can’t find any good sources on this phase of their comics publishing; Wikipedia indicates “Fawcett returned to publishing comics in the 1960s, mainly publishing Dennis the Menace and other such titles”, but only actually lists Dennis the Menace comics from 1969 to 1980.
Which is all really a nitpick irrelevant to the point at issue.
What book of the Bible are they from?
That’s definitely wrong. I have Dennis the Menace comics from the early 1960s.
This page lists , in addition to the 1953 Fawcett Dennis the Menace comic, "specials running from 1959 onwards. And the editions I have say “Fawcett” on them.
https://www.mycomicshop.com/search?q=Dennis+the+Menace+%231
Here’s Dennis the Menace #43 from Fawcett from 1960
Dennis the Menace was Fawcett’s only title after 1958 and ran from 1958 to 1980. I suspect Standard Comics was the true publisher and just used Dennis as a way to keep the Fawcett comic brand legally active.
The idea that there isn’t just one way to interpret things, or that differing viewpoints are equally valid, is a fiction created by the ivory tower elites to justify their existence. And you can’t prove me wrong without invalidating your own premise. 
Or, that you were in High School, not acedemia, and the teacher was rewarding ingenuity and creativity. For HS students, he was probably happy you cound string sentences togather to make a coherent thought. It’s not his fault you took the wrong lesson.
I did a little more digging and it appears the only reason Fawcett kept publishing a Dennis comic book is because they also published the mass market collections of the comic strip.
When I bought a stack of Beatles CDs (the '09 Remasters), a friend asked me how good the sound was, and if I was hearing details I’d never noticed before. I said "It’s not just me, Chuck Manson said he listened to remastered Helter Skelter and said ‘Oops…’."
Did you find anything about the period 1953-1958? Every source I can find online says Fawcett completely shut down its comics division in 1953 and laid off its staff - this seems pretty well documented because the kerfuffle over Captain Marvel. But after that, I just find vague cites like Wikipedia’s that they resumed publishing “some” comics, “including” Dennis the Menace, “in the 1960s”. From what you’ve written, it looks like they might have started publishing Dennis the Menace and only that from 1958 to 1980.
Correct. Dennis was the only title after 1953. Most comic book companies closed up shop around that time, thanks to the mass hysteria over comics and juvenile delinquency. The Captain Marvel fight with DC probably had little to do with Fawcett getting out of the comics business.
So you’re saying that it doesn’t matter if you mean what you say or not. That a high school essay can be meaningless bullshit as long as you can rationalize it?
Shouldn’t the essay be what the writer actually thinks about the essay? What good is it teaching students to bullshit?
Well, when the author specifically says a cigar is a cigar, then yes. Anything else is spouting nonsense.
The report would also include the writer’s impressions of the quality of the work and why it succeeded or failed. Not everything has a hidden meaning.
Avoiding the question, but Manson said the song was a call for an uprising of Blacks in America. But you’re proving my point: you think everything has to be seen in your own lens, whether the evidence or intent is not. Maybe “Helter Skelter” is about an uprising and if you want to believe that, it’s no different than trying to put a meaning on the Misfit’s black hat.
So any interpretation is valid if you like it. There are two problems with that: it makes any interpretation meaningless (because anyone else can come up with a different one or one they like more) and you’re setting yourself as the arbiter of what the story means.
I’m curious – do you write fiction?