My, that's casting for you, a gorgeous modern young female presenter talking about the fate of female witches in bygone times! So, so far a pretty good sell, and that's even if I wasn't hooked by the theme of witch hunts in the first place - which I am, having experienced the modern form of it plus being a lover of history. Seriously, Suzannah Lipscomb does have a distinctly seductive air, above and beyond being merely beautiful, does she not? It's in the eyes, in her intelligence, and in her eloquence; 400 years ago she would quite probably have been singled out as a witch herself, and it's no coincidence she has got this slot. It makes for a curiously mesmeric watch, but what of the actual content if we can separate that out?
We can, and it's actually pretty good. It's brought to life rather than cheapened by the dramatizations and costumes. Whilst being palatable to the average viewer - and not simply because of the fronting eye candy - it satisfies on an intellectual level. For this, respect to Suzannah. She can't help the way she looks, but all she can do is try to convince of her credentials by what she says. She does not dumb down, but she appeals to us on an empathetic level in inviting us to imagine 'what it was like to undergo those tortures when completely innocent' and to be accused on a whim by spiteful mobs. She also makes some key observations and interpretations, such as the impact of King James's book, the influence of the civil war, and the possibility of sexual resentment being the motivator for the accusation of Gillis Duncan. All in all, she does a good job of evoking the tapestry of hysteria, skepticism, intellectual and spiritual judgement afoot in the 17th century psyche. This - getting a handle on the people of the past - is surely what history is all about.
I'd like to see more of. Suzannah Lipscomb.
We can, and it's actually pretty good. It's brought to life rather than cheapened by the dramatizations and costumes. Whilst being palatable to the average viewer - and not simply because of the fronting eye candy - it satisfies on an intellectual level. For this, respect to Suzannah. She can't help the way she looks, but all she can do is try to convince of her credentials by what she says. She does not dumb down, but she appeals to us on an empathetic level in inviting us to imagine 'what it was like to undergo those tortures when completely innocent' and to be accused on a whim by spiteful mobs. She also makes some key observations and interpretations, such as the impact of King James's book, the influence of the civil war, and the possibility of sexual resentment being the motivator for the accusation of Gillis Duncan. All in all, she does a good job of evoking the tapestry of hysteria, skepticism, intellectual and spiritual judgement afoot in the 17th century psyche. This - getting a handle on the people of the past - is surely what history is all about.
I'd like to see more of. Suzannah Lipscomb.