Connect with us

News

‘White Lotus’ Takes On Touchy Subjects. The Southern Accent Is One of Them.

Published

on

‘White Lotus’ Takes On Touchy Subjects. The Southern Accent Is One of Them.

The third season of “The White Lotus” began with gunfire bursting through a lush resort in Thailand. But viewers with affection for a certain region of the United States perked up a little later in the episode, as a privileged, preppy family from North Carolina arrived by boat.

“We flew over the North Pole!”

Advertisement

Right then, Victoria sent an unmistakable signal: “The White Lotus” was taking on the Southern accent.

Or at least that’s what many viewers assumed, judging by the intense response — including many, many memes on social media — that has only grown with each episode. The commentary has focused on whether the accents concocted by Ms. Posey and the actor playing her husband, Jason Isaacs, credibly passed as those of well-to-do (and entirely self-absorbed) tourists from Durham, N.C. — or whether this was yet another atrocious attempt by Hollywood to replicate a Southern dialect.

Advertisement

A torturous track record of accents in movies and television has fostered a reflexive skepticism. Some viewers from the South have said that, at least initially, “The White Lotus” had just that effect on them. But it largely didn’t last, especially when it came to Ms. Posey’s performance. Viewers delighted over her pronunciations — “tsunami,”

“What was that?” her character asks. “That was a convention for con men and tax cheats.”

Was her accent a knowing and loving tribute to colorful Southern women? Perhaps. Campy? Undoubtedly. The performance was nevertheless hailed as a work of modern art. “Hang her accent in the Louvre!” one person suggested on social media. Another said Ms. Posey’s ties to Laurel, Miss., came shining through.

Advertisement

“If you were to put a bunch of lorazepam in the food at the country club in Laurel at lunch, that’s exactly what everybody would sound like an hour later,” said Landon Bryant, a resident of Laurel who has sought to demystify the South on Instagram and in a book, “Bless Your Heart: A Field Guide to All Things Southern,” released this week.

Accuracy and authenticity are very much judged by the ear of the beholder and are difficult, if not impossible, to rate by an objective standard. Even so, plenty of Southerners have been eager to give it a shot.

Advertisement

Lorazepam, an anti-anxiety drug, seems to be having a moment, thanks to Ms. Ratliff’s frequent mentions, where her accent dances along the open vowels.

I don’t even have my Lorazepam
Don’t worry I took a Lorazepam
You should’ve taken my Lorazepam

“Everybody has a right to be an expert about how they speak,” said Elisa Carlson, a dialect coach in Atlanta. “Your speech is personal. It’s intellectual. It’s social.”

Advertisement

The discussion around “The White Lotus” has brought out how accents are quite malleable, reflecting how new generations and new residents can bend dialects in unexpected ways. It has also been a reminder of how hard it can be to hear how you sound — or how others think you sound — played back at you. Southerners are painfully aware that the way they speak often conjures negative connotations in pop culture, like ignorance or prejudice.

“It’s not about the Southern dialect, per se — it’s what the Southern dialect represents for Southerners,” said Walt Wolfram, a linguistics professor at North Carolina State University.

Of course, Southerners do not have a monopoly on feeling sensitive and even defensive about how their accents are portrayed (People from Bah-ston, for instance, have been known to have similar reactions).

Advertisement

But portrayals of Southerners have a particularly long and gnarled track record. Many from the region can instantly name a performance they remember as especially egregious.

In promotional interviews, actors on “The White Lotus” said that Mike White, the writer and director of the series, had encouraged them to draw inspiration from “Southern Charm,” a long-running Bravo reality series based in Charleston, S.C. Mr. Isaacs has said he had studied Thomas Ravenel, who appeared on the show for five seasons, as the actor shaped his character, Timothy Ratliff, a scion of a prominent political family who unravels while vacationing with his wife and children.

Advertisement

Timothy dips into his wife’s lorazepam supply, unable to face the potential fallout from financial misdeeds that his family apparently knows nothing about.

“I am a pillar of the community,” he tells two strangers, wallowing in self-pity. “My grandfather was the governor of North Carolina. My father was a very, very, very successful businessman.”

Advertisement

Mr. Ravenel said in an interview that he was unaware of this when he started watching the third season.

“This sounds very familiar,” he said, recalling watching Mr. Isaacs’s performance. “But once everyone started making a big to-do about it, then I said, ‘That’s not me.’”

Advertisement

Jason Isaacs as Timothy Ratliffe

Oh just just a few months in prison?

Thomas Ravenel

As a part of the plea agreement, I had to resign from office.

He said he thought Ms. Posey’s muse was much clearer: “More so she sounds like Pat than he sounds like me.”

Advertisement

Pat is Patricia Altschul, a socialite who is the soul, if not the star, of “Southern Charm.”

She was not entirely thrilled by the comparison to Ms. Posey’s Victoria.

“I was flattered at first,” said Ms. Altschul, who credits her own lilt to an upbringing in Virginia. “But now, you know, she’s on pills and he’s a sketchy businessman with a gun. So, I’m not quite sure to what extent we should be flattered.”

Advertisement

Parker Posey as Victoria Ratliffe

You’re all gorgeous and you come from money.

Patricia Altschul

well educated, charming, attractive

Advertisement

Ms. Posey has talked about why the accents of Southern women are irresistible to her as an actress. An “emphasis on feeling,” she has said. A musicality. An ability to make the mundane sound dramatic.

“It has this power,” she said in a recent television interview, “and you can’t knock it down.”

In truth, there is no single Southern accent, but rather a regionwide buffet of twangs and drawls. In an interview, Mr. Isaacs said he went for a precise accent from Durham — “It’s not just North Carolina,” he told Esquire — which stumped quite a few people in the city who weren’t aware there even was a Durham accent. (Dr. Wolfram, the linguistics professor at N.C. State, said there was not.)

Advertisement

Some in Durham pointed out they are as likely to hear Spanglish or Hindi as a classic Southern drawl.

“Hell, half your neighbors are from Ohio or New York or New Jersey,” said Garrett Dixon, a native North Carolinian who lives in Durham and works in sales.

Advertisement

Yet some argue that “The White Lotus” has not simply repurposed a tired, clichéd perception of Southerners. Instead, they say, it has captured what in many ways feels like a real Southern family in 2025, one confronted by the tensions between past and present that grip the region as a whole.

The fact that the Ratliffs’ three children don’t seem to have accents rings true, for example, as in-migration and the connectedness brought by technology have diminished accents across the South and in other parts of the country, too.

Ms. Altschul thinks the show has exquisitely nailed Southerners of a “certain elevation” — “the way they look, the way they talk, what they talk about,” she said.

Advertisement

The swagger, the shorts, the sunglasses with the Croakies worn by the oldest son, Saxon, played by Patrick Schwarzenegger: That all checks out. Then, there’s the conniption that Victoria has over her daughter, Piper, announcing her plan to move to Thailand to study Buddhism, during which she refers to Thailand as Taiwan and fears her daughter is joining a cult.

“Don’t look at me like I’m crazy!” she said. “It happens all the time sheltered girls like you are constantly getting brainwashed and turned out!”

Advertisement

That felt real, too, Mr. Bryant said.

“Very small town, very ‘all that matters is where we are,’” he said. “That’s an attitude you see and feel.”

As the finale nears and viewers spin all sorts of predictions about how it will end, Ms. Altschul doesn’t have a theory so much as a wish: that Victoria turns out to be a villain, but a brilliant one.

Advertisement

“I’m hoping that she ends up being kind of savvy,” Ms. Altschul said. “Sometimes there’s the equation that if you sound Southern, you sound stupid. I would like to think that that’s not the case.”

News

US planning to seize Iran-linked ships in coming days, WSJ says | The Jerusalem Post

Published

on

US planning to seize Iran-linked ships in coming days, WSJ says | The Jerusalem Post

The US is planning to board and seize Iran-linked oil tankers and commercial ships in the coming days, according to a Saturday report by The Wall Street Journal.

The report noted that these actions would take place in international waters, potentially outside of the Middle East.

The US “will actively pursue any Iranian-flagged vessel or any vessel attempting to provide material support to Iran,” US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine said. “This includes dark fleet vessels carrying Iranian oil.”

“As most of you know, dark fleet vessels are those illicit or illegal ships evading international regulations, sanctions, or insurance requirements,” Caine continued.

Caine was further quoted as saying that the new campaign, which would be operated in part by the US Indo-Pacific Command, would be part of a broader US President Donald Trump-led campaign against Iran, known as “Economic Fury.”

Advertisement

 White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly told the WSJ that Trump was “optimistic” that the new measures would lead to a peace deal.

The potential US military action comes as Iran tightens its grip on the Strait of Hormuz, including attacking several ships earlier on Saturday, the WSJ reported.

The report cited CENTCOM as saying that the US has already turned back 23 ships trying to leave Iranian ports since the start of its blockade on the Strait.

The expansion of naval action beyond the Middle East will provide the US with further leverage against Iran by allowing it to take control of a greater number of ships loaded with oil or weapons bound for Iran, the report noted.

“It’s a maximalist approach,” said associate professor of law at Emory University Law School Mark Nevitt. “If you want to put the screws down on Iran, you want to use every single legal authority you have to do that.”

Advertisement

Iran claimed earlier on Saturday that it had regained military control over the Strait, intending to hold it until the US guarantees full freedom of movement for ships traveling to and from Iran.

“As long as the United States does not ensure full freedom of navigation for vessels traveling to and from Iran, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz will remain tightly controlled,” the Iranian military stated.

In addition, Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei declared on Saturday in an apparent message on his Telegram channel that the Iranian navy is prepared to inflict “new bitter defeats” on its enemies.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Video: The Origins of the Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket

Published

on

Video: The Origins of the Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket

new video loaded: The Origins of the Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket

Secret memos obtained by The New York Times illuminate the origins of the Supreme Court’s shadow docket. Our reporter Jodi Kantor explains what these documents reveal about the court.

By Jodi Kantor, Alexandra Ostasiewicz, June Kim and Luke Piotrowski

April 18, 2026

Continue Reading

News

What’s it like to negotiate with Iran? We asked people who have done it

Published

on

What’s it like to negotiate with Iran? We asked people who have done it

A Pakistani Ranger walks past a billboard for the U.S.-Iran peace talks in Islamabad on April 12, 2026. The talks, led by Vice President JD Vance, produced no concrete movement toward a peace deal.

Farooq Naeem/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Farooq Naeem/AFP via Getty Images

Despite stalled talks with Iran and a fragile ceasefire nearing its end, President Trump expressed optimism this week that a permanent deal is within reach — one that may include Iran relinquishing its enriched uranium. However, experts who spent months negotiating a nuclear agreement during the Obama administration say mutual mistrust, starkly different negotiating styles make a quick truce unlikely.

Referring to Vice President Vance’s whirlwind negotiations in Islamabad last week that appear to have produced little beyond dashed expectations, Wendy Sherman, the lead U.S. negotiator on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal finalized in 2015, says the administration’s approach was all wrong.

“You cannot do a negotiation with Iran in one day,” she told NPR’s Here & Now earlier this week. “You can’t even do it in a week.” To get agreement on the JCPOA, she said, it took “a good 18 months.”

Advertisement

The talks leading to that deal highlighted Iran’s meticulous style of negotiation, says Rob Malley, who was also part of the JCPOA negotiating team and later served as a special envoy to Iran under President Joe Biden.

Summing up the two sides’ differing styles, Malley said: “Trump is impulsive and temperamental; Iran’s leadership [is] stubborn and tenacious.”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry speaks during a news conference on the Iran nuclear talks deal at the Austria International Centre in Vienna, Austria on July 14, 2015.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry speaks during a news conference on the Iran nuclear talks deal at the Austria International Centre in Vienna, Austria on July 14, 2015.

Pool/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Pool/AFP via Getty Images

In 2015, patience led to a deal

The talks in 2015, led by Secretary of State John Kerry and Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, culminated with a marathon 19-day session in Vienna to finish the deal, says Jon Finer, a former U.S. deputy national security adviser in the Biden administration. Finer was involved in the negotiations as Kerry’s chief of staff. He said his boss’s patience “was a huge asset” in getting the deal to the finish line, he said.

Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran's foreign minister during the negotiations for the Obama-era nuclear deal, speaks on April 22, 2016 in New York.

Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister during the negotiations for the Obama-era nuclear deal, speaks on April 22, 2016 in New York.

AFP/via Getty Images

Advertisement


hide caption

toggle caption

AFP/via Getty Images

Advertisement

“He would endure lectures … ‘let me tell you about 5,000 years of Iranian civilization’… and just keep plowing ahead,” Finer said, adding that a tactic of Iranian negotiators seemed to be “to say no to everything and see what actually matters” to the U.S.

“They’re just maddeningly difficult,” he said. “You need to go back at the same issue 10 or 12 times over weeks or months to make any progress.”

Even so, Finer called the Iranian negotiators “extremely capable” — noting that, unlike the U.S., they often lacked expert advisers “just outside the room,” yet still mastered the details of nuclear weapons, nuclear materials and U.S. sanctions.

“They were also negotiating not in their first language,” Finer added. “The documents were all negotiated in English, and they were hundreds of pages long with detailed annexes.”

Vance’s trip to Islamabad suggests that the U.S. doesn’t have the patience for a negotiation to end the conflict that could be at least as complex and time-consuming. “The Trump administration came in with maximalist demands and actually just wanted Iran to capitulate,” Sherman, who served as deputy secretary of state during the Biden administration, told Here & Now. “No nation – even one as odious as the Iran regime – is going to capitulate.”

Advertisement

Distrust but verify

Iran was attacked twice in the past year. First in June of last year, as nuclear negotiations were ongoing, Israel and the U.S. struck the country’s nuclear facilities. Months later, at the end of February, Iran was attacked again at the start of the latest conflict. This time around, “the level of trust is probably almost at an all-time low,” Malley said.

“It’s hard for them to take at their word what they’re hearing from U.S. officials,” Malley said. The Iranians, he said, have to be wondering how long any commitment will last and “will be very hesitant to give up something that’s tangible” – such as their enriched uranium – in exchange for anything that isn’t ironclad or subject to suddenly be discarded by Trump or some future president.

“Once they give up their stockpile … they can’t recapture it the next day,” Malley said.

Even during the 2013-2015 nuclear deal talks, the decades of mistrust between Tehran and Washington were impossible to ignore, Finer said. “Our theory was not trust but verify — it was distrust but verify,” he said, adding: “I think that was their theory too.”

Malley cautions about relying on the JCPOA as a guide to how peace talks to end the current war might go. The leadership in Tehran that agreed to the deal is now gone — killed in Israeli airstrikes, he says. The regime’s military capabilities are also greatly diminished and “whatever lessons were learned in the past … have to be viewed with a lot of caution, because so much has changed,” he said.

Advertisement

Negotiations have a leveling effect

Mark Freeman, executive director of the Institute for Integrated Transitions, a peace and security think tank based in Spain that advises on conflict negotiations, says several factors shape the U.S.-Iran relationship. Going into talks, one side always has the upper hand, he says, but negotiations have a leveling effect. “The weaker party gains just by virtue of entering into a negotiation process,” he said.

Each side is looking for leverage, he adds.

In Iran’s case, it has used its closure of the Strait of Hormuz to exert such leverage, while the White House has shown an eagerness to resolve the conflict quickly. “If one side perceives the other needs an agreement more … that shapes the entire negotiation,” he said.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending