At It Again (1912) Keystone

Anything and everything silent photoplay!
User avatar
donnie
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:28 am

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by donnie » Fri May 05, 2017 2:07 pm

Kitty wrote:
Fri May 05, 2017 1:40 pm
I know I saw it.... But I don't know where the link is. Sorry, Can you link me to the post?
That's interesting about her name. I bet your gut feeling is right. Why mar those happy years, and risk damaging Griffith's name with bitter details?
Sure! https://archive.org/details/whenmovieswereyo00arvi
By the way, I now notice that "Linda Arvidson" is in small print underneath "Mrs. D.W. Griffith" on the title page—hadn't noticed that.

User avatar
Kitty
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by Kitty » Fri May 05, 2017 4:05 pm

Thank you! I'll definitely take a peek
You trying to tell me you didn't hear that shriek? That was something trying to get out of its premature grave, and I don't want to be here when it does. - Phantom of the Paradise (1974)

User avatar
Kitty
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by Kitty » Sun May 07, 2017 1:33 pm

donnie wrote:
Fri May 05, 2017 2:07 pm
Sure! https://archive.org/details/whenmovieswereyo00arvi
Did you read the comment under the book? It is an interesting thought. I can't wait to look at this; I'm going to put it on my kindle. :)
You trying to tell me you didn't hear that shriek? That was something trying to get out of its premature grave, and I don't want to be here when it does. - Phantom of the Paradise (1974)

User avatar
donnie
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:28 am

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by donnie » Sun May 07, 2017 1:47 pm

Great! I'd be interested in your thoughts on it.

I did read the comment below—I felt he was a little too cynical, accusing her of trying to create a false innocence, in effect. There is no doubt that she is studiously avoiding certain things, but I don't know that she was deliberately trying to mislead anybody. Sometimes, in these cynical days of ours, if somebody isn't dredging up dirt, their motives are suspected. :roll: Oh, well... To me, there are worse crimes than looking through rose-colored glasses.

While I had that up on the screen, I reread the first chapter. I had forgotten about that part, where she goes back to the Brownstone to try to relive a little of the old days—only to be told coldly by the current occupant that she couldn't even photograph the old studio. That was very sad. And I think I remember reading somewhere that the Brownstone is gone now, another victim of modern "progress".

User avatar
Kitty
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by Kitty » Thu May 11, 2017 3:23 pm

donnie wrote:
Tue May 02, 2017 1:43 pm
This was interesting reading, tho I had to keep looking up words: peachblow, tyro, tonneau...—and notice I learned a new spelling, too. :) (Wonder why we reverted back to "though"?)
I'm quoting this for clarity. Here is a good example that I just happened upon in the November 1912 issue of the magazine. It's a good point! My thinking is they probably had people write in asking why they say tho and thought they needed to address it. This is just the second time I've seen it addressed.
Attachments
motionpicturesto04moti_0858.jpg
motionpicturesto04moti_0858.jpg (31.48 KiB) Viewed 346 times
You trying to tell me you didn't hear that shriek? That was something trying to get out of its premature grave, and I don't want to be here when it does. - Phantom of the Paradise (1974)

User avatar
donnie
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:28 am

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by donnie » Thu May 11, 2017 3:59 pm

English spelling is a mess, and that's an excellent example! :lol: I know there have been a lot of attempts to revise English spelling, but they have always failed. I think the playwright George Bernard Shaw was one who tried to promote a new system, and sometimes publications, also, have tried to spearhead it. (I think the Chicago Sun-Times was one of them, several decades ago.)

It would be a great idea to have a sensible system, but the problem is the current way is just so ingrained. Think about it, everybody over the age of kindergarten would have to practically learn to read over again. And everything that had been published up to that point would be obsolete, so you'd really have to know two systems if you were going to use a library, etc. Ain't gonna happen. I think the method they've usually tried is to sneak it in over a period of time, with a word here, a word there, so people have a chance to get used to it. It sounds like that's what the movie magazine is doing. But that method has always flopped, too.

The same thing happened with the metric system back in the 80's. There was this big push to change us over from miles to kilometers, etc., and the government planned to ease it in over a period of time. It would have made a lot of sense, but that fell on its face, too, and they finally called it quits. The only thing that stuck was selling soft drinks in liters rather than quarts. ;) People have gone to all the trouble to learn and they just don't want to change. I guess I'm one of them. 8-)

User avatar
Kitty
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by Kitty » Thu May 11, 2017 4:30 pm

You make perfect points. I can't really add to that, except this one thing I will say. There are too many purists out there to be able to make a big change like that. It reminds me of the people who have a fit when they realize that cursive isn't being taught as much in schools anymore. It's not needed! Everything is digitized, and when they make the argument of "How will our children read the constitution?" I'll tell you one thing, you can barely read it anyway. That's why it's great that they are typed up and digitized all over the place.
It's much like people who don't like colorizing in black and white films---even when the colorizing was done during the era! Progress bad-Old way good. 4 legs good, 2 legs bad.
Ok I am done. :lol:
You trying to tell me you didn't hear that shriek? That was something trying to get out of its premature grave, and I don't want to be here when it does. - Phantom of the Paradise (1974)

User avatar
donnie
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:28 am

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by donnie » Thu May 11, 2017 8:09 pm

Well, you're right, but the cursive...I hate to see it go. :cry:

User avatar
Kitty
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by Kitty » Thu May 11, 2017 9:47 pm

donnie wrote:
Thu May 11, 2017 8:09 pm
Well, you're right, but the cursive...I hate to see it go. :cry:
I actually had a lot of fun learning cursive in 2nd grade. We used shaving cream right on the desks, and in 3rd grade our teacher took sand from Florida (white sand, I grew up on the Jersey Shore, and the sand was not white!) And practiced tracing letters with our fingers. Good memories, but I realize not all teachers were as good as ours.
You trying to tell me you didn't hear that shriek? That was something trying to get out of its premature grave, and I don't want to be here when it does. - Phantom of the Paradise (1974)

User avatar
donnie
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 8:28 am

Re: At It Again (1912) Keystone

Post by donnie » Thu May 11, 2017 10:27 pm

That sounds like fun. So what color is the sand in New Jersey?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest