Anyone else see PBS "Colonial House"

The Chico News & Review ^

[stainlessbanner]

PBS ruined any historical accuracy by throwing in atheists and homosexuals and celebrities. They chose to focus on entertainment rather than history.

We had a pretty good discussion over here: Oprah Goes Back In Time In PBS 'Colonial House'

[2Jedismom]

"I felt myself fading intellectually.

I found the same thing happening to myself as a watched a bit of this stupidity.

Thankfully, before it was too late, I was able to quickly change the channel to "The Simpsons".

[dirtboy]

PBS ruined any historical accuracy by throwing in atheists and homosexuals and celebrities.

Just what we need - Queer Eye for the Puritan Guy.

[AgentEcho]

I agree with you. I was pissed when the Governor suspended the Sabbath then all the other junk came up.

Æ

[ZGuy]

Dear PBS:

I refuse to watch shows like this that are beneath me and insult my intelligence. And my Mommy and Daddy don't watch them either.

[frankenMonkey]

Both this series, and the earlier "Prarie House" (?) were disappointing - focusing on the whining participants rather than illustrating the real hardships and lifestyles of the periods.

My thought when the homosexual came out of the closet - he probably would have been killed, exiled, or had certain body parts "sewed up."

[USNFighting31st]

hehehe I did for about 20 minutes. It was so poorly done, I first thought it was a documentary on some cult hippy commune. No kidding.

[risk]

I didn't see the incident that offended you, but I did hear the segment on the first encounter with Indians. The words "genocide" and "holocaust" came up, and it was just like listening to Adolf Hitler justifying the final solution: the narrator said that what we did to the Indians was much worse than what the Nazis did to the Jews.

There was no mention of the fact that Jews were productive members of European society, and were supportive of their nations' cultures and legal structures.

If the media had been shaping attitudes in 1609, there would not be an America as we know it today. Now that the media and its classroom cohorts are shaping attitudes with a vengence now, how long will America stand?

Folks, are we the last of the Mohicans?

[aft_lizard]

I just couldnt watch it. IMO it was poorly produced the characters were boring and some of the scenarios seemed unlikely.

[Antoninus]

This whole series is absolute, total, absurd, bull-hockey. Here's an example of what really happened to "out of the closet" types in colonial America taken from http://www.ulster.net/~hrmm/halfmoon/gehring.htm

-------------------------------

"The diarist, Harmen Meyndertsa van den Bogaert, went on to become a prominent privateer and commissary in Manhattan — until the fall of 1647, when he was accused of sodomy, an offense punishable by drowning. After escaping and fleeing into the wilderness, van den Bogaert was recaptured and imprisoned at Fort Orange. As the authorities were awaiting the thaw to take him back to Manhattan for execution, he escaped across the frozen Hudson only to have it give way. He disappeared beneath the ice."

-------------------------------

I watched about 20 minutes of the first episode, but turned it off as soon as the "I don't want to go to church" conversation started. Made me sick. I am now VERY glad I did.

[richardtavor]

Gee, watching PBS was your first mistake.

[Adder]

I watched some of it. I was disappointed.
These people made zero attempt to fit the perieod, unlike Frontier House which I saw and liked.
I quit after the gay guy announced. In 1628, he'd have been burned alive.

[KeyLargo]

"Gee, watching PBS was your first mistake."

You're right. Like an idiot moth attracted to the flame!

I can't help myself. I need to join PBS Anonymous.

[plain talk]

I was pissed when the Governor suspended the Sabbath then all the other junk came up.

Under the restrictions he was under, he probably did the pragmatic thing. He could not implement the real displicine that would have ensured compliance so participation was becoming a joke. Plus forcing people to go to church was stupid anyway (although I realize they were trying to be as authentic as possible).

[Fenris6]

Agreed. My wife & I are idealogical opposites, but both of us found the "coming out" announcement to be distasteful. Seemed like the guy just wanted to make a big deal about his sexual preference so he could reclaiim his "victim" status. Its interesting from a psyche status: 20th Century Amercians are SO attached to their victimhood. Did anyone find his INTOLERANT remarks about those who abhor sodomy to be ironic? LOL. Funny how its always the Left that stereotypes others as being hateful and ignorant.

In general, the episode grew tiresome as it became apparent that very few peeps were interested in recreating the hardships of the 17th Century. Females arguing about being punished for profanity, the English guy "exploring" for a beer outside the park at the local town pub, whining about having to sit through 2 3-hour sermons on the sabbath. I have trouble understanding why tolerant atheists and agnostics would refuse to role-play through this. In the 17th Century you went along with the Church or were persecuted. So much for their integrity and "courage".

[68skylark]

Like most of you, I could have used less 21st drama and more 17th century history. But the parts of the show that illustrated the 17th century were interesting to me.

The Governor and his family seem well chosen for their roles -- I'm glad they felt able to return for episodes 3 and 4. And I gotta give them credit to the producers for choosing the two ministers from such typical blue state and red state type personalities -- I thought it was a nice touch to have such different people on the show.

Oh, and I wish the colonists had a wheellock or a blunderbuss or something -- wouldn't that have looked cool on TV, and been historically accurate as well?

[Antoninus]

I didn't see the incident that offended you, but I did hear the segment on the first encounter with Indians. The words "genocide" and "holocaust" came up, and it was just like listening to Adolf Hitler justifying the final solution: the narrator said that what we did to the Indians was much worse than what the Nazis did to the Jews.

Such nonsense. I heard that the Indians who arrived convenietly spoke English as well--highly unlikely in 1628.

As for the Indian wars being worse than what the Nazis did to the Jews--sheer historical revisionist idiocy. Most of the tribes were decimated by European diseases (not purposely spread, contrary to prevailing mythology) and intertribal warfare long before settlers showed up on their lands. And in terms of sheer numbers killed in war, I would argue that many more Indians were slaughtered at the hands of rival tribes than by whites. The Iroquois themselves were guilty of destroying the following nations that are today completely extinct or nearly so:

Huron
Petun
Neutral
Erie
Susquehannock

Each of these nations are estimated to have numbered some 20-40,000 at their heights. The Iroquois also constantly warred with every other nation on their borders including the Mahicans, Delawares, Montagnais, Algonquins, Shawnee, Miami, Ottawa, and dozens of others long before the whites ever arrived in those parts.

[cruiserman]

It's no Frontier House, that's for sure.

[freeeee]

Don Heinz was irked that, even though it was the law of the time that everyone attend church services, he was forced to deal with a handful of modern-day atheists who refused to play along....In the midst of what the preacher called "the Sabbath wars," one participant skipped church to go skinny dipping--an historically unlikely escapade

The hell it was "historically unlikely". It might have not been atheists skinny dipping back then, but religious differences among the colonials let to the establishment of Providence, Rhode Island.