Dear friends, I am writing this note to inform you about an incredibly enchanting event that will take place in 2023 - Moonlight Magic. This event promises to be a truly magical experience that will leave you in awe. Moonlight Magic is a biennial festival that celebrates the beauty and mystique of the moon. It brings together people from all walks of life to revel in the enchanting atmosphere created by the moon's glow. The festival will take place over several nights, allowing attendees the opportunity to immerse themselves in a world of wonder and allure. During Moonlight Magic, the moon takes center stage, illuminating the night sky with its ethereal light.

Court Scene (Charades)

(Scene opens in a courtroom: Usual set up with a judge, clerk of the court and defense counsel sitting in the well of the court. The defendant is in the witness box. Superimposed caption on screen : 'CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT')

Judge: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, have you reached a verdict?

Foreman: (MICHAEL) We have m'lud.

Judge: And how do you find the defendant? (the foreman puts his hand out with two fingers extended) Two words. (the foreman nods and holds up one finger) First word. (the foreman mimes taking a piece of string and tying it in knot) Rope? String?

(The foreman shakes his head and points to the knot.)

(The foreman nods and points to the knot.)

Counsel: Cravat? Silk square?

(The foreman nods enthusiastically.)

(The foreman gives a thumbs up and points to his second finger.)

Judge: Second word. (foreman indicates two syllables) Two syllables. (the foreman points to his first finger) First syllable. (the foreman starts to mime a fish while pointing at his throat) Bird?

Judge: Breast stroke.

Counsel: Brian Phelps.

Judge: No, no, no, he was a diver.

Clerk: Esther Williams then.

Judge: No, no, don't be silly. How can you find someone 'Not Esther Williams'.

Counsel: Fish. (the foreman nods and points at throat) Fish wheeze. Fish wheeze?

Judge: Fish breathe.

Counsel: Fish breathe, throat.

Judge: Fish breathe, throat? GILL! (the foreman gives a thumbs up and the court applauds excitedly) Not gill. (the foreman mimes the second syllable) Second syllable. Not gill.

(Foreman mimes drinking a cup of tea.)

Clerk: Sip? Imbibe?

(The foreman points to the mimed cup itself.)

Judge: Not gill . cup? Not gillcup! (the foreman looks disappointed) You have been found not gillcup of the charges made against you and may leave this court a free man. Right. My turn. (the defendant leaves.)

(The judge holds up four fingers.)

Counsel: Four words.

(The judge mimes shouting for the first word.)

Foreman: First word shout?

(The judge gives a thumbs up and indicates that the second word is very small.)

Counsel: Second word is very small.

(The judge gives a thumbs up.)

Clerk: Call the, third word:

(The judge points to his neck.)

Member of Jury: Fish?

Clerk: Adam's apple. (the judge shakes his head) Neck. (the judge mime 'sounds like) Sounds like neck?

Second Counsel: Next.

Foreman: Call the . next!

(The judge gives a thumbs up and indicates that the fourth word is three Syllables. First syllable: he mimes deafness.)

Clerk: Fourth word, three syllables. First syllable . ear?

Counsel: Hear. Can't hear.

Clerk: Deaf!! Call the next def-.

(The judge leaps onto the desk and points at his own bottom.)

Clerk: Seat? Trouser? Cheek?

Foreman: End! Call the next defend-.

(The judge leaps down, disappears under the desk and appears with an enormous model of an ant about four feet long.)

Whole Court: Ant!

Clerk: Call the next defendant! (the court applauds the judge who bows and sits; the whole mood changes) Call the next defendant. The Honorable Mr. Justice Kilbraken. (a very elderly judge in full robes comes into the dock) If I may charge you m'lud, you are charged m'lud that on the fourteenth day of June 1970, at the Central Criminal Court, you did commit acts likely to cause a breach of the peace. How plead you m'lud, guilty or not guilty?

Judge Kilbraken: Not guilty. Case not proven. Court adjourned.

(He hits the dock. Everyone gets up and starts walking out talking to each other.)

Judge: No, no, no, no, no, no, no. (they all stop, go back and sit down again) No, you're in the dock, m'lud.

Judge Kilbraken: I'm a judge, m'lud.

Judge: So am I, m'lud, so watch it.

Judge Kilbraken: Hah! Call this a court.

All: Call this a 'court. Call this a court..Call this a court.

Judge: Shut up. Right now get on with the spiel.

Counsel: M'lud, and my other lud, the prosecution will Endeavour to show m'lud, that m'lud - ah, not you m'lud, that m'lud, m'lud, while passing sentence at the Central Criminal Court blotted his copy book. Call exhibit Q.

Counsel: Sorry did I say Q:? I meant A. Sorry, call exhibit A. Clerk Call exhibit A.

(Two court ushers carry in a thing with a sheet over it. They pull off the sheet to reveal a very sexy girl in a provocative pose.)

Counsel: Exhibit A m'lud, Miss Rita Thang, an artist's model, Swedish accordion teacher and cane-chair sales lady, was found guilty under the Rude Behavior Act in the accused's court. The accused, m'lud, sentenced her 'to be taken from this place and brought round to his place'.

Other Counsel: Objection, m'lud.

Judge Kilbraken: Objection sustained.

Judge: You shut up! Objection overruled.

Counsel: The accused then commented on Miss Thang's bodily structure, made several not-at-all legal remarks on the subject of fun and then placed his robes over his head and began to emit low moans.

Judge: Have you anything to say in your defense?

Judge Kilbraken: I haven't had any for weeks.

Judge: Oh no? What about that little number you've got tucked away in Belsize Park?

Judge Kilbraken: Oh, I never!

Judge: Oh no. Ho! Ho! Ho!

Judge Kilbraken: All right then what about 8a Woodford Square?

Judge: You say anything about that and I'll do you for treason.

Counsel: M'lud if we could continue .

Judge Kilbraken: He's got a Chinese bit there.

Judge: No, that's contempt of court.

Judge Kilbraken: It was only a joke.

Judge: Contempt of court. However, I'm not going to punish you, because we're so short of judges at the moment, what with all of them emigrating to South Africa. I'm going tomorrow; I've got my ticket. Get out there and get some decent sentencing done. Ooh, England makes you sick. Best I can manage here is life imprisonment. It's hardly worth coming in in the morning. Now, South Africa? You've got your cat of nine tails, you've got four death sentences a week, you've got cheap drinks, slave labour and a booming stock market. I'm off, I tell you. Yes, I'm up to here with probation and bleeding psychiatric reports. That's it, I'm off. That's it. Right. Well I'm going to have one final fling before I leave, so I sentence you to be burnt at the stake.

Judge Kilbraken: Blimey! I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

(Court reacts expectantly. Cut to suburban house. The three members of the Spanish Inquisition suddenly belt out of the door and down the path.)

(Dick Barton music. Cut to them leaping onto a bus.)

Ximinez: Two, er, three to the Old Bailey please.

(Credits start superimposed.)

Biggles: Look they've started the credits.

Ximinez: Hurry. Hurry. Hurry.

Biggles: Come on hurry. Hurryl

(We see shots of them coming through London.)

Ximinez: There's the lighting credit, only five left. (more shots of the bus going through London; the credits reach the producer) Hell, it's the producer - quick!

(They leap off the bus into the Old Bailey. Cut to court room. They burst in.)

Ximinez: Nobody expects the Spanish. ('The End' appears) Oh bugger!

Mooney's Theology Blog

Following the rules of logic is the key to making a good argument for any proposition. Logic is something of a science, which with practice, can be mastered. The following is meant to be an amusing demonstration of logic by using an example of bad logic from a scene in the classic British comedy Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975).

You may watch the clip here and then see my analysis of the logical reasoning below:

An Inductive Argument:

At the beginning of the scene, the mob attempts to use inductive reasoning, which means they attempt to arrive at a conclusion ("She's a witch!") by way of empirical evidence. What evidence do they provide? A witch's nose, witch's clothing, a witch's hat, and a wart. The nose, clothing, and hat all fail to lead to the conclusion, because, as it turns out, they forced her to dress in such a way. Therefore, they are false premises (see the argument below). The wart alone, then, is insufficient to declare her a witch, because non-witches have warts. This is the problem with inductive arguments--they are not conclusively true with absolute certainty. Inductive arguments, at their best, can only suggest the truth of their conclusion with a high degree of probability. [1] Inductive arguments may be strong and cogent. If the given premises lead to the conclusion with a high degree of probability, it is strong. If the given premises are true and they lead to the conclusion, the argument is cogent. In this case, the argument is strong, but not cogent (because three of the premises are false).

1. The woman has a witch's nose, (false premise)
2. and [she is wearing] witch's clothing, (false premise)
3. and [she is wearing] a witch's hat. (false premise)
4. She has a wart. (insufficient for the conclusion)
5. Only witches have witches' noses, clothing, hats, and warts.
6. Therefore, she's a witch!

A Deductive Argument:

1. If she weighs the same as a duck, she'll float. (false, confuses weight with density)
2. she does weigh the same as a duck; (true in this case, if the scales are to be trusted)
3. [conclusion #1] Therefore, she'll float. (valid but unsound)
4. If she floats, she is made of wood. (false, many other things float)
5. She does float; (false/based on conclusion #1)
6. [conclusion #2] Therefore, she's made of wood. (valid but unsound)
7. If she's made of wood, she's a witch. (assumed by all in the scene to be true)
8. She is made of wood; (false/based on conclusion #2)
9. [conclusion #3] Therefore, she's a witch! (valid but unsound)

Unfortunately for the young lady accused, this crowd of peasants and their dim-witted leader, Sir Bedevere, do not understand that arguments can be valid but still untrue.
-----------------------------------
[1] Scientific data and evidence presented in court are empirical data meant to construct an inductive argument. Scientific theories and verdicts in court can't be proven 100%; however, they can be demonstrated to be true beyond a "reasonable doubt."
[2] A syllogism is merely a form of argument in which a conclusion is inferred from two or more premises.
[3] I attempted to compose the argument in the same order as the film, but I couldn't make sense of it. Reworking it in reverse made it work.
[4] Each of the three deductive arguments that make up the larger argument that she is a witch are valid forms. The logical form that they are follow is called modus ponens, which means that the second line affirms the antecedent of the first first line. An explanation of the four valid deductive forms is beyond the scope of this post.
---------------------------------
Transcript:

Mob: "We've found a witch. May we burn her?"
Sir Bedevere: "How do you know she is a witch?"
Mob: "She looks like one!"

Man: "She turned me into a newt (pause). I got better"
Mob: "Burn her anyway!"
Sir Bedevere: "Quiet, Quiet, there are ways of telling if she is a witch. Tell me, what do you do with witches?"
Mob: "Burn 'em"
Sir Bedevere: "And what do you burn apart from witches?"
Mob: "More witches . (silence and pondering) . wood."
Sir Bedevere: "So, why do witches burn?"
Mob: " (pondering) because they're made of wood?"
Sir Bedevere: "Good . So, how do we well whether she is made of wood?"
Mob: "Build a bridge out of her."
Sir Bedevere: "Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?"
Mob: "Oh yeah. "
Sir Bedevere: "Does wood sink in water?"
Mob: "No, it floats. Throw her into the pond!"
Sir Bedevere: "What also floats in water?"
Mob: "apples. cider. cherries. nuts. churches. very small rocks. lead. "
King Arthur: "A duck!"
Sir Bedevere: "Exactly. So, logically .
Mob: "If she weighs the same as a duck, she's made of wood."
Sir Bedevere: "And, therefore . "
Mob: "A witch!"

The story of Europe’s infamous witch trials gets the Monty Python treatment

Say what you will about Donald Trump’s fickle loyalties, he never abandoned the witches. Like Macbeth, he kept them on his mind throughout his calamitous reign. He never tired of whining that he was the victim of “the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!”

Get the full experience. Choose your plan ArrowRight

But like so many of the former president’s historical memories — his marital fidelity, his election landslides — his position in the annals of witch hunts is somewhat exaggerated.

Most people who didn’t pay someone to take the SATs for them know that Salem, Mass., was the scene of a far greater and more destructive witch hunt. During that infamous terror, which started in 1692, more than 200 people were accused of satanic activity, and 20 were executed.

Even at their most puritanical, though, American colonists were amateurs compared with witch hunters in Europe. In the 16th and 17th centuries, tens of thousands of people — possibly hundreds of thousands — were killed for practicing witchcraft. The craze was particularly virulent in Germany, and the victims were usually older women, not reality-TV stars. In fact, most of those who were tortured, hanged and burned on the testimony of some superstitious neighbor or sadistic cleric are lost in the shadows of history.

But in the early 1600s, in a German town called Leonberg, an illiterate widow named Katharina was arrested for sickening a fellow villager with a demonic potion. She was imprisoned for more than a year and threatened with torture before her son finally won her release.

We know these details because Katharina’s son was Johannes Kepler. While defending his mom against a collection of witchy rumors, on the side he was revolutionizing the science of astronomy.

That’s a good boy.

Katharina’s terrifying ordeal is now the subject of a new novel by Rivka Galchen called “Everyone Knows Your Mother Is a Witch.” In her acknowledgments, Galchen writes, “I have never enjoyed working on a book as much as I enjoyed working on this one.” That may sound odd, given these grim details, but Galchen holds a degree in psychiatry, and her previous novel, “Atmospheric Disturbances,” is about a man convinced his wife has been replaced by a replica. Which is to say, Galchen is curious about how minds work — or don’t. And the witchcraft case of Katharina Kepler presents an irresistible opportunity to reflect on social paranoia, family dynamics and female agency.

Alas, not much has changed in 400 years. Women — particularly smart, demanding women — are still branded as nasty, dangerous and unnatural. In Galchen’s highly creative treatment, Katharina checks all the most alarming boxes.

“Everyone Knows Your Mother Is a Witch” conjures up Katharina’s years-long ordeal as the defendant in a laborious investigation of her alleged satanic activity. And it’s no wonder certain figures in town have risen up against her. If it were just a matter of her wickedness, they might forgive her. But she has a wicked sense of humor.

Start collecting dry sticks.

Katharina notes that the woman who has accused her “looks like a comely werewolf.” She refers to the duke overseeing her case as “the False Unicorn,” who “looks like an unwell river otter in a doublet.” She summarizes the ludicrous powers attributed to her — “to pass through locked doors, to be the death of sheep, goats, cows, infants, and grapevines” — and then scoffs, “I can’t even win at backgammon.”

You can practically hear Katharina’s eyes rolling. Her wry dismissal of accusers is both what keeps her standing and what inflames her enemies. Her family begs her to be quiet — it’s no accident that troublesome women were humiliated with a “witch’s bridle” — but she persists with her caustic comments and withering rebuttals. As a sympathetic neighbor notes, “She was a frighteningly intelligent woman — also a fool.”

The comedy that runs through “Everyone Knows” is a magical brew of absurdity and brutality. Galchen has a Kafkaesque sense of the way the exercise of authority inflates egos and twists logic. Again and again, villagers are asked, “Do you understand that any false testimony you knowingly give will provoke God’s great anger in your earthly life and will deliver your soul unto Satan upon your death?” And again and again, these witnesses deliver the most outlandish claims in their own petty voices.

There’s real sorcery here, but it arises only from the way Galchen fuses ancient and modern consciousness. Her characters, mostly simple folks driven by greed and fear, speak in a casual contemporary patter flecked with the patina of a different era, a time closer to nature, to physical work. A disgraced man notes, “It was with great vigilance that I and my siblings pruned back any weed of the rumor that followed us.” Under oath, the baker’s wife demands: “Who rides a goat backward? I’m a humble woman. But even I know that only witches and sometimes devils do that.”

Their problem, as now, is epistemological. “We all know she’s a witch,” an investigator says. “We’ve always known. The matter of how we came to know is simple — we already knew.”

We’re told that Katharina acted like a man, caused a man’s leg to ache and passed through a locked door. One transcript, in which a witness claims he saw Frau Kepler in the form of a blackbird, sounds like Monty Python’s “Dead Parrot” sketch:

How was he witnessed?

By Frau Kepler, in the form of a blackbird. At first I thought it was only a blackbird.

What kind of a blackbird was it?

A black one, sir.

An ordinary blackbird?

I trust you know a blackbird.

Is the female blackbird not more brown than she is black?

I’m not an expert on birds, sir.

But you know the bird was Frau Kepler?

It was very obvious.

These testimonies present a jaw-dropping catalogue of anxieties, irritations and non sequiturs — all the various ways human beings can make themselves believe whatever they must to avoid acknowledging that they’re afraid, that they’re jealous, that they can’t control their lives. Late in the novel, all the most bizarre accusations are enumerated in a list that could pass for Renaissance Twitter — a reminder that our era didn’t invent misinformation; we just made it travel faster.

But “Everyone Knows” is no witchcraft-craze parody. Katharina’s life is completely disrupted, and her accusers start stripping away parts of her estate long before the trial is finished. Galchen never lets us forget that the likely outcome of such a flock of troubles is death by torture.

Running beneath the great battle for Katharina’s life, though, there’s a quieter tragedy. It involves the way her story comes to us: Katharina’s account is recorded by her literate neighbor, Simon Satler. He’s not at all comfortable in that role — so close to counselor or advocate for the accused. He’s not an outspoken man; he’s survived for decades by keeping his head down. “If there were a guild of non-sayers,” he notes, “that would be my guild.” But somehow he finds the courage to act as Katharina’s scribe — at least until the claims against his old friend start piling up. Then, who can blame him for feeling nervous? “I was and remained a too-quiet witness,” he confesses. It’s a poignant, painful record of an ordinary man’s decency tested by fire.

The fate of Kepler’s mother is a matter of historical record, but Galchen arrives at something the facts can’t catch — the exhaustion, the bone-weariness of fighting such misogyny year after year. It’s enough to break a weaker person.

“That’s what life is,” Katharina says. “A bunch of thorns, and a berry.”

Ron Charles writes about books for The Washington Post and hosts TotallyHipVideoBookReview.com.

By Rivka Galchen

Farrar Straus Giroux. 288 pp. $27

During Moonlight Magic, the moon takes center stage, illuminating the night sky with its ethereal light. The festival aims to showcase the moon in all its glory, featuring various activities and performances inspired by its magical aura. From live music and dance performances to art installations and stargazing sessions, there is something for everyone to enjoy.

One of the highlights of Moonlight Magic is the Moon Garden, a beautifully adorned area where visitors can relax and revel in the serenity of the moonlit surroundings. The Moon Garden is decked with twinkling lights, ethereal flowers, and whimsical sculptures, creating a truly enchanting atmosphere. This is the perfect spot to unwind and find solace under the moon's gentle glow. The festival also offers a wide range of culinary delights, with food stalls and pop-up restaurants serving a variety of delectable dishes. From traditional favorites to exotic flavors, Moonlight Magic ensures that your taste buds are taken on a magical journey as well. For those seeking a more immersive experience, there are workshops and activities that allow participants to tap into their creativity and connect with the mystical energy of the moon. From moon painting classes to moonlit yoga sessions, these activities provide a unique opportunity to engage with the festival on a deeper level. Moonlight Magic is a celebration of the moon's captivating power and the sense of wonder it inspires in all of us. It is a chance to come together as a community and appreciate the beauty of the natural world. Whether you are a moon enthusiast, a lover of arts and culture, or simply someone who enjoys a magical experience, this festival is not to be missed. So mark your calendars for Moonlight Magic 2023 and get ready to be transported into a world of moonlight enchantment. Let the moon's magic weave its spell on you, and let us come together to celebrate the celestial beauty that lights up our nights. See you at Moonlight Magic! Warm regards, [Your Name].

Reviews for "Moonlight Magic 2023: Where Dreams Come True"

1. Jessica - 2/5 - I was really excited to read "Moonlight Magic 2023" as I had heard great things about the previous books in the series. However, I was left disappointed. The plot was slow and lacked depth, and the characters felt underdeveloped. The magic elements that were supposed to create an enchanting atmosphere fell flat for me. Overall, it just didn't live up to the hype and I found it to be a lackluster addition to the series.

2. Ryan - 2/5 - As a fan of fantasy novels, I was eager to dive into "Moonlight Magic 2023," but unfortunately, it didn't capture my interest. The writing style was stiff and didn't engage me in the story. The pacing was also off, with slow-moving plot developments that left me bored and uninterested. Additionally, the magic system in the book felt underexplored and poorly explained. Overall, it lacked the magic and excitement that I look for in a fantasy novel, and I wouldn't recommend it to others.

3. Emily - 1/5 - I found "Moonlight Magic 2023" to be incredibly disappointing. The characters were one-dimensional and lacked any real depth or complexity. The dialogue felt forced and unrealistic, making it difficult for me to connect with the story. Furthermore, the plot was predictable and uninspiring. I was expecting a captivating and immersive read, but instead, I got a shallow and forgettable book. I would not recommend this to anyone looking for a memorable fantasy read.

4. David - 2/5 - "Moonlight Magic 2023" left much to be desired. The world-building felt superficial, and the author didn't provide enough details to fully immerse me in the magical realm. The pacing was uneven, with slow sections followed by rushed and confusing plot developments. The characters were also lacking in development and failed to evoke any emotional connection. Overall, it was a missed opportunity for a truly captivating and enchanting fantasy novel.

A Night to Remember: Moonlight Magic 2023