A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate.
(This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!)
I do have a couple of things I want to share, though.
(a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.)
(b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title.
------------------------
Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.) What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.) But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA. The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives. But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.) So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope. I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally. My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally. But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of.
-----------
That's it! Hope to see you all again soon!
Love,
Mike
P.S. As the prince told Gertrude, "arras me no more questions, and I'll kill you no more guys."
Love, Mike
On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 1:45 PM Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com wrote:
A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate.
(This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!)
I do have a couple of things I want to share, though.
(a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.)
(b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title.
Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.) What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.) But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA. The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives. But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.) So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope. I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally. My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally. But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of.
That's it! Hope to see you all again soon!
Love,
Mike
For those of you who knew and loved David, his obituaryhttps://www.legacy.com/legacy/david-ziegler?ttm_pid=210749124&ttm_affiliate=legacyremembers&ttm_affiliatetype=standard&ttm_campaign=legacy. This has also been posted on his Facebook page. Love to all, Jayne
From: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com on behalf of Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com Reply-To: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com Date: Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:13 PM To: Shakespeare Winedale shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: Welcome to 2026! Plus some content.
P.S. As the prince told Gertrude, "arras me no more questions, and I'll kill you no more guys."
Love, Mike
On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 1:45 PM Michael Godwin <mnemonic@gmail.commailto:mnemonic@gmail.com> wrote:
A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate.
(This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!)
I do have a couple of things I want to share, though.
(a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.)
(b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title.
------------------------
Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.) What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.) But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA. The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives. But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.) So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope. I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally. My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally. But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of.
-----------
That's it! Hope to see you all again soon!
Love,
Mike
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you! --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H...https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H-D9Jfg%2B8Rba5vY-7cSRyarcuifYFAX%2B4Rz%3D5RFZMeURw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
This obituary is excellently lovely, Jayne, and thank you for sharing it.
Love to all.
Mike
On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 3:08 PM Jayne Mack Suhler jmacksuhler@gmail.com wrote:
For those of you who knew and loved David, his obituary https://www.legacy.com/legacy/david-ziegler?ttm_pid=210749124&ttm_affiliate=legacyremembers&ttm_affiliatetype=standard&ttm_campaign=legacy. This has also been posted on his Facebook page. Love to all, Jayne
*From: *"shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" < shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com *Reply-To: *"shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" < shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com> *Date: *Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:13 PM *To: *Shakespeare Winedale < shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com>, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org *Subject: *Re: Welcome to 2026! Plus some content.
P.S. As the prince told Gertrude, "arras me no more questions, and I'll kill you no more guys."
Love, Mike
On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 1:45 PM Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com wrote:
A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate.
(This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!)
I do have a couple of things I want to share, though.
(a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.)
(b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title.
Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.)
What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.)
But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA.
The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives.
But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.)
So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope.
I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally.
My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally.
But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of.
That's it! Hope to see you all again soon!
Love,
Mike
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H... https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H-D9Jfg%2B8Rba5vY-7cSRyarcuifYFAX%2B4Rz%3D5RFZMeURw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer .
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20... https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20MB246939F51EE7CC72ABE5DB4EA792A%40BYAPR20MB2469.namprd20.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer .
David was truly a lovely human, bright in every sense of the word. My sympathy for the loss of those who were closest to him On 1/25/2026 12:14:31, Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com wrote: This obituary is excellently lovely, Jayne, and thank you for sharing it.
Love to all.
Mike
On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 3:08 PM Jayne Mack Suhler <jmacksuhler@gmail.com [mailto:jmacksuhler@gmail.com]> wrote:
For those of you who knew and loved David, his obituary [https://www.legacy.com/legacy/david-ziegler?ttm_pid=210749124&ttm_affili...]. This has also been posted on his Facebook page. Love to all, Jayne From: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com]" <shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com]> on behalf of Michael Godwin <mnemonic@gmail.com [mailto:mnemonic@gmail.com]> Reply-To: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com]" <shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com]> Date: Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:13 PM To: Shakespeare Winedale <shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com]>, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums <winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org]> Subject: Re: Welcome to 2026! Plus some content. P.S. As the prince told Gertrude, "arras me no more questions, and I'll kill you no more guys." Love, Mike On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 1:45 PM Michael Godwin <mnemonic@gmail.com [mailto:mnemonic@gmail.com]> wrote: A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate. (This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!) I do have a couple of things I want to share, though. (a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.) (b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title. ------------------------ Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.) What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.) But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA. The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives. But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.) So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope. I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally. My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally. But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of. ----------- That's it! Hope to see you all again soon! Love, Mike -- Be vigitant, I beseech you! --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com [mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H... [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H...].
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you! --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com [mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20... [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20...].
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you! --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com [mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H... [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H...].
I did not have the privilege of meeting David, having passed through Winedale more than a decade before he did, but as we have all noted previously: once a part of the Winedale family, always a member of that family. I thought the obituary was beautiful and I mourn for his friends and loved ones.Heather DolstraSent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device -------- Original message --------From: Jayne Mack Suhler jmacksuhler@gmail.com Date: 1/25/26 3:16 PM (GMT-05:00) To: shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: David Ziegler (1965-2025)
For those of you who knew and loved David,
his obituary. This has also been posted on his Facebook page. Love to all, Jayne
From: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com on behalf of Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com Reply-To: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com Date: Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:13 PM To: Shakespeare Winedale shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: Welcome to 2026! Plus some content.
P.S. As the prince told Gertrude, "arras me no more questions, and I'll kill you no more guys."
Love, Mike
On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 1:45 PM Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com wrote:
A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate.
(This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!)
I do have a couple of things I want to share, though.
(a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.)
(b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title.
------------------------
Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.)
What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.)
But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA.
The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives.
But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.)
So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope.
I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally.
My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally.
But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of.
-----------
That's it! Hope to see you all again soon!
Love,
Mike
Ah, Jayne, I'm grateful to you for sharing this with us. It was a pleasure to spend a little more time basking in the shining light that David truly was.
I fully agree with Robert - this captured David amazingly well - the world is a lesser place for David’s loss
From: Robert Faires via Winedale-l winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Sunday, January 25, 2026 at 5:07 PM To: Jayne Mack Suhler jmacksuhler@gmail.com Cc: shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Winedale-l] Re: David Ziegler (1965-2025)
Ah, Jayne, I'm grateful to you for sharing this with us. It was a pleasure to spend a little more time basking in the shining light that David truly was.
Dearest Jayne,
What an obituary! It captures The mercurial David, and I learned so much about him while reading it. Thank you for sending it. Like you, I send love to All,
Mary
Mary Collins 646-554-3076 collinsmary166@gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 3:08 PM Jayne Mack Suhler jmacksuhler@gmail.com wrote:
For those of you who knew and loved David, his obituary https://www.legacy.com/legacy/david-ziegler?ttm_pid=210749124&ttm_affiliate=legacyremembers&ttm_affiliatetype=standard&ttm_campaign=legacy. This has also been posted on his Facebook page. Love to all, Jayne
*From: *"shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" < shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com *Reply-To: *"shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" < shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com> *Date: *Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:13 PM *To: *Shakespeare Winedale < shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com>, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org *Subject: *Re: Welcome to 2026! Plus some content.
P.S. As the prince told Gertrude, "arras me no more questions, and I'll kill you no more guys."
Love, Mike
On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 1:45 PM Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com wrote:
A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate.
(This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!)
I do have a couple of things I want to share, though.
(a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.)
(b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title.
Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.)
What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.)
But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA.
The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives.
But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.)
So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope.
I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally.
My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally.
But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of.
That's it! Hope to see you all again soon!
Love,
Mike
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H... https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H-D9Jfg%2B8Rba5vY-7cSRyarcuifYFAX%2B4Rz%3D5RFZMeURw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer .
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20... https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20MB246939F51EE7CC72ABE5DB4EA792A%40BYAPR20MB2469.namprd20.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer .
David was an absolute sweetheart-- immediately warm and welcoming. And so funny. I feel lucky that I got to know him at the reunions and got to see him in action. He tickled me. I love you guysTerry On Monday, January 26, 2026 at 11:40:46 AM EST, Anne Smith via Winedale-l winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
As a 90s Winedale alum, I heard many a tale of David, a Plan II genius, which made him the man, the myth, the legend to us. And then having the good fortune to get to know him via Reunions, I understood why. And I then could be in awe of the beautiful human he was. His timing was impeccable. His gift for finding deep moments of play was a joy to watch. Never a showboat, he stole many a performance moment, while (usually!!) staying in bounds of the text and the story. I can still chuckle about all of his “noting” during Much Adonin 2015. I’m so sad to learn of his passing. We few, we happy few, are quite lucky to have known him. Anne Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 26, 2026, at 10:43 AM, Mary Collins collinsmary166@gmail.com wrote:
Dearest Jayne, What an obituary! It captures The mercurial David, and I learned so much about him while reading it. Thank you for sending it. Like you, I send love to All, Mary Mary Collins646-554-3076collinsmary166@gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 3:08 PM Jayne Mack Suhler jmacksuhler@gmail.com wrote:
For those of you who knew and loved David,his obituary. This has also been posted on his Facebook page. Love to all, Jayne
From:"shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com on behalf of Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com Reply-To: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com Date: Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:13 PM To: Shakespeare Winedale shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: Welcome to 2026! Plus some content.
P.S. As the prince told Gertrude, "arras me no more questions, and I'll kill you no more guys."
Love, Mike
On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 1:45 PM Michael Godwin mnemonic@gmail.com wrote:
A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate.
(This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!)
I do have a couple of things I want to share, though.
(a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.)
(b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title.
------------------------
Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.)
What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.)
But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA.
The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives.
But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.)
So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope.
I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally.
My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally.
But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of.
-----------
That's it! Hope to see you all again soon!
Love,
Mike
Sorry to hear this. Hope his husband is ok.
Sadness comes with all this evidence that he leaves a trail of ongoing love and beauty in many lives.
Love to all. We need all the goodness this ecosystem (and others like it) can muster right now, that’s for sure!
On Jan 26, 2026, at 1:21 PM, 'tlgalloway@aol.com' via Shakespeare at Winedale Email List shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
David was an absolute sweetheart-- immediately warm and welcoming. And so funny. I feel lucky that I got to know him at the reunions and got to see him in action. He tickled me.
I love you guys Terry
On Monday, January 26, 2026 at 11:40:46 AM EST, Anne Smith via Winedale-l winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
As a 90s Winedale alum, I heard many a tale of David, a Plan II genius, which made him the man, the myth, the legend to us. And then having the good fortune to get to know him via Reunions, I understood why. And I then could be in awe of the beautiful human he was. His timing was impeccable. His gift for finding deep moments of play was a joy to watch. Never a showboat, he stole many a performance moment, while (usually!!) staying in bounds of the text and the story. I can still chuckle about all of his “noting” during Much Adonin 2015.
I’m so sad to learn of his passing. We few, we happy few, are quite lucky to have known him.
Anne
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 26, 2026, at 10:43 AM, Mary Collins collinsmary166@gmail.com wrote:
Dearest Jayne,
What an obituary! It captures The mercurial David, and I learned so much about him while reading it. Thank you for sending it. Like you, I send love to All,Mary
Mary Collins 646-554-3076 collinsmary166@gmail.com mailto:collinsmary166@gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 3:08 PM Jayne Mack Suhler <jmacksuhler@gmail.com mailto:jmacksuhler@gmail.com> wrote: For those of you who knew and loved David, his obituary https://www.legacy.com/legacy/david-ziegler?ttm_pid=210749124&ttm_affiliate=legacyremembers&ttm_affiliatetype=standard&ttm_campaign=legacy. This has also been posted on his Facebook page. Love to all, Jayne
From: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" <shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Michael Godwin <mnemonic@gmail.com mailto:mnemonic@gmail.com> Reply-To: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" <shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com> Date: Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:13 PM To: Shakespeare Winedale <shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com>, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums <winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: Welcome to 2026! Plus some content.
P.S. As the prince told Gertrude, "arras me no more questions, and I'll kill you no more guys."
Love, Mike
On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 1:45 PM Michael Godwin <mnemonic@gmail.com mailto:mnemonic@gmail.com> wrote:
A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate.
(This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!)
I do have a couple of things I want to share, though.
(a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.)
(b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title.
Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.)
What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.)
But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA.
The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives.
But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.)
So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope.
I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally.
My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally.
But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of.
That's it! Hope to see you all again soon!
Love,
Mike
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H... https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H-D9Jfg%2B8Rba5vY-7cSRyarcuifYFAX%2B4Rz%3D5RFZMeURw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20... https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20MB246939F51EE7CC72ABE5DB4EA792A%40BYAPR20MB2469.namprd20.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CA%2B8O... https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CA%2B8OBZVPHfED6J4UB78_sbqKZfEXnrGoxar1YiNAKh1eSV8F1Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer .
Winedale-l mailing list -- winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to winedale-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:winedale-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com mailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/3941166... https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/394116662.2650526.1769462504949%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
Jayne & Mary, thanks for sharing this with all of us. It just doesn’t seem fair, but death never is. I had the joy of working with David in the 2005 reunion where he captured my heartfelt friendship. I was thrilled when he married Alan and loved his posts and photos on Facebook from their travels everywhere. Hopefully we can do a memorial for him at Winedale, sometime, and share memories and pay tribute to this “Puckish”, delightful man. I hope the rest of you are doing ok- until we meet again in the forest-love, Lynn 😘 Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 26, 2026, at 4:15 PM, 'carl smith' via Shakespeare at Winedale Email List shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Sorry to hear this. Hope his husband is ok.
Sadness comes with all this evidence that he leaves a trail of ongoing love and beauty in many lives.
Love to all. We need all the goodness this ecosystem (and others like it) can muster right now, that’s for sure!
On Jan 26, 2026, at 1:21 PM, 'tlgalloway@aol.com' via Shakespeare at Winedale Email List shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
David was an absolute sweetheart-- immediately warm and welcoming. And so funny. I feel lucky that I got to know him at the reunions and got to see him in action. He tickled me.
I love you guys Terry
On Monday, January 26, 2026 at 11:40:46 AM EST, Anne Smith via Winedale-l winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
As a 90s Winedale alum, I heard many a tale of David, a Plan II genius, which made him the man, the myth, the legend to us. And then having the good fortune to get to know him via Reunions, I understood why. And I then could be in awe of the beautiful human he was. His timing was impeccable. His gift for finding deep moments of play was a joy to watch. Never a showboat, he stole many a performance moment, while (usually!!) staying in bounds of the text and the story. I can still chuckle about all of his “noting” during Much Adonin 2015.
I’m so sad to learn of his passing. We few, we happy few, are quite lucky to have known him.
Anne
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 26, 2026, at 10:43 AM, Mary Collins collinsmary166@gmail.com wrote:
Dearest Jayne,
What an obituary! It captures The mercurial David, and I learned so much about him while reading it. Thank you for sending it. Like you, I send love to All,
Mary
Mary Collins 646-554-3076 collinsmary166@gmail.commailto:collinsmary166@gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 3:08 PM Jayne Mack Suhler <jmacksuhler@gmail.commailto:jmacksuhler@gmail.com> wrote:
For those of you who knew and loved David, his obituaryhttps://www.legacy.com/legacy/david-ziegler?ttm_pid=210749124&ttm_affiliate=legacyremembers&ttm_affiliatetype=standard&ttm_campaign=legacy. This has also been posted on his Facebook page. Love to all, Jayne
From: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" <shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Michael Godwin <mnemonic@gmail.commailto:mnemonic@gmail.com> Reply-To: "shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com" <shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com> Date: Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:13 PM To: Shakespeare Winedale <shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list@googlegroups.com>, Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums <winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: Welcome to 2026! Plus some content.
P.S. As the prince told Gertrude, "arras me no more questions, and I'll kill you no more guys."
Love, Mike
On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 1:45 PM Michael Godwin <mnemonic@gmail.commailto:mnemonic@gmail.com> wrote:
A couple of people have noted that our message traffic on the big Winedale mailing lists has dropped a lot since Thanksgiving. This is understandable, I think, because 2025 was an eventful, and frequently stressful year, even though a lot of us managed to get together and commune and share time with one another, which I very much appreciate.
(This is where Google AI is suggesting to me all sorts of bromides to finish off this email, which may be a sign of how much progress AI still needs to make in guessing what I might want to say!)
I do have a couple of things I want to share, though.
(a) HAMNET, which I first heard about as a novel from other alums (I think maybe Susan Gayle Todd first brought it to my attention), is now a movie, which I'm dying to see but which isn't yet in anything like wide release. I think maybe I can arrange to see it this weekend--if I do, I'll report back. (I know from second-hand reports that there's more of Shakespeare's text in it than there is in the novel, and my thought is, how can that be anything but good? Not that this is a criticism of the novel, though.)
(b) I wrote a little essay that seems to be getting some traction among those who read me regularly, and so I thought I might share it with you too. See below. Needs a good title.
------------------------
Multiply 260 by 0.667, and you get 173 and change. One year ago, I weighed 260 pounds (about 118 kg). This morning, I weighed very slightly less than 173 pounds. I want to emphasize here that although I’m pleased with this progress, it would be a mistake to say that I’m “proud” of it—the success in getting back down into the 170s is attributable to the American Pharma Industry developing suitable drugs to address (and reverse) problems created by the American Food Industry. (My ultimate goal, if you must know, is probably somewhere around 160–I’m five-foot-eight, about an inch shorter than I was in college, so not too terrible a decline in height.)
What I brought to the table (so to speak) was my willingness to find ways to afford medications that my insurance would not yet cover. It may do so now—will check at refill time. If you want to know what role my willpower and resolve played, it’s this: I made the decision to prioritize fixing a persistent health problem that dates from my early 20s. Although I had been overweight from time to time before then, true obesity itself didn’t start manifesting for me until about 1980. For a long time I thought it was something particular to my own life that had changed. (I had graduated from college, was trying to figure out next steps in work and education, wasn’t always eating the best food, started drinking more—alcohol is a great analgesic, and putting on weight quickly tends to increase one’s daily aches and pains.) Did I exercise? Why, yes, and I also developed significant muscle mass, which was helpful in moving around a much larger version of myself. (It should be noted that the rise in gym memberships in the USA tracks the obesity stats—Americans were investing in working out more *at the very same time* that obesity was on its abrupt rise.)
But what I was slow to recognize was that the same problems I was having (fairly rapid increase in weight, increasing experiments with dietary change in the hopes of reversing the lurch into obesity—experiments that ultimately weren’t successful and that may even have made things worse) were not specific to me, but in fact were accelerating through the U.S. population and then quickly afterwards in most of the developed world. The global stats showed that this was happening everywhere in reasonably prosperous or quickly developing countries soon after this obesity acceleration manifested in the USA.
The chief candidate as a source of the problem seemed straightforward, a quarter of a century after 1980: the industrialized production of food as a product shaped as much by applied chemistry as by agriculture. One reason Michael Pollan’s FOOD RULES and other writing on how to eat have continued to be current for years even as various diet books have fallen by the wayside is that they shift our attention to, inter alia, buying one’s food around the edge of the supermarket—that’s where the more natural, and more recently grown, produce at, e.g., Whole Foods and Safeway, lives.
But while following Pollan’s prescriptions (I’m using the word metaphorically—he’s a science journalist, not a doctor) might help someone avoid the sources of the obesity epidemic, it’s less successful in reversing that epidemic. For someone like me—and here I still hesitate to share that for a long time weighing in the mid-200s of pounds signified success for me, because for one mercifully brief period in the late 1990s I crossed the 300-pound line—more proactive interventions, including medical interventions, seemed necessary. Part of getting my weight to move in the downward direction was bariatric surgery (in late 2004), which certainly helped keep me alive long enough to reach the era of Ozempic et al., but which, as is the case with most weight-loss surgery, was only partially successful in returning to non-obesity … or achieving it in the first place. (Childhood obesity is a major thing now in the USA and elsewhere—earlier in my lifetime, it wasn’t.)
So here I am in 2026, weighing at least a few pounds less than I did when entering college in 1975, trying to make sense of where I am now. The guy I see in the mirror is visibly older, but in most respects better looking and fitter than I have been for most of my adult life. But I also have to wonder what my life might have been like if I had never had this particular health issue … well, “weighing me down” seems like an appropriate trope.
I hope to make up, in the time I have left, the progress in my professional work that I might have achieved had I been healthier over most of the last four or five decades. But I should stress that there have been a few ways in which my path has been helpful to me professionally and personally. First, I really have done an immense amount of avocational academic research to get a handle on the problem—here I credit my undergraduate education at UT Austin for building in me the habit of reading scientific papers on the regular, rather than mere journalistic or other popular accounts of what the research may or may not show. I also acquired a certain amount of persnicketiness when it comes to experimental models, for which I should credit Plan II philosophy (at UT Austin) for introducing me to Karl Popper’s work specifically, and the philosophy of science generally.
My work as a journalist and as a lawyer has also made me more careful about sourcing what I post or publish, which is all to the good, even when the topic in question is not food or medicine or even science generally.
But most important, I think, is that my inability to solve my particular problems through application of willpower/resolve has made me more sympathetic to other people who can’t just willpower their ways out of their difficulties, which may be health-related or rooted in something else. I listen better now, I think. Now if I could just trigger an epidemic of better reading, better listening, and greater willingness to question one’s own theories at least as much as one critically examines those of others—that would be something I could really be proud of.
-----------
That's it! Hope to see you all again soon!
Love,
Mike
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you! --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H...https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H-D9Jfg%2B8Rba5vY-7cSRyarcuifYFAX%2B4Rz%3D5RFZMeURw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you! --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20...https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20MB246939F51EE7CC72ABE5DB4EA792A%40BYAPR20MB2469.namprd20.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you! --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CA%2B8O...https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CA%2B8OBZVPHfED6J4UB78_sbqKZfEXnrGoxar1YiNAKh1eSV8F1Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer . _______________________________________________ Winedale-l mailing list -- winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to winedale-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:winedale-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you! --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/3941166...https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/394116662.2650526.1769462504949%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
-- Be vigitant, I beseech you! --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shakespeare at Winedale Email List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.commailto:shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/8B36A3E...https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/8B36A3E2-E0F4-43DF-9AA3-7772ED0A2481%40mac.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
winedale-l@lists.wikimedia.org