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 
<[email protected]> Date: 1/25/26  3:16 PM  (GMT-05:00) To: 
[email protected], Shakespeare at Winedale 
1970-2000 alums <[email protected]> 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:
"[email protected]" 
<[email protected]> on behalf of Michael 
Godwin <[email protected]>
Reply-To: "[email protected]" 
<[email protected]>
Date: Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:13 PM
To: Shakespeare Winedale <[email protected]>, 
Shakespeare at Winedale 1970-2000 alums <[email protected]>
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 <[email protected]> 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

[email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/CAKFh3H-D9Jfg%2B8Rba5vY-7cSRyarcuifYFAX%2B4Rz%3D5RFZMeURw%40mail.gmail.com.








-- 
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/shakespeare-at-winedale-email-list/BYAPR20MB246939F51EE7CC72ABE5DB4EA792A%40BYAPR20MB2469.namprd20.prod.outlook.com.
_______________________________________________
Winedale-l mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to