todd may reviews on amazon?

Quoted: Amazon.com: Foucault and the Iranian Revolution: Gender and the Seductions of Islamism: Janet Afary, Kevin B. Anderson: Books

A deeply mistaken account of Foucault's interpretation of Iran, June 22, 2005
By Todd May
This book has three elements. A full third is a compilation of Foucault's writings and interviews on Iran. It is a valuable addition to the Foucault literature. Second, there is a historical recounting of Islamism as it pertains to the Iranian revolution. I do not have the expertise to comment on this. The third element, which frames the book, is an extended argument that in Foucault's reading of the Iranian revolution his own larger philosophical perspective is revealed. This element, which I do have expertise in, is comically bad.

The authors claim that Foucault values traditional forms of life over modern ones, and thus embraces (like the radical Islamists) a return to the past. In order to make their case, the authors resort to three strategies. First, they neglect Foucault's own statements about his writings. For instance, the authors insist that he saw ancient Greek sexual life as superior to ours, which Foucault explicitly denies. Second, they engage in egregious misinterpretation. For example, they read Foucault's book on the prisons as a plea for earlier forms of punishment. The first few pages of the prison book, detailing the excruciating torture of an attempted regicide, should be enough to convince anyone of the paucity of that interpretation. Finally, they misread Foucault's own sentences, in one case (p. 16) citing a long quote and then interpreting it as meaning something opposed to what it actually says.

Foucault insisted throughout his life that his work sought to deny the view that history naturally progresses from the worse to the better. The authors seem to think that this means that his view of history was that it moved from the better to the worse. It is harder to imagine a more fundamental mistake in the interpretation of Foucault's work.

All of this is unfortunate, particularly since Foucault, normally an astute observer of events, sorely misread the Iranian revolution. This requires explanation. The authors have provided the resources on which to base such an explanation. However, given their inability to understand even the basics of Foucault's work, the explanation itself will have to await another book.

One of the greatest masterpieces of the 20th century, Sergei Parajanov's "Color of the Pomegranate", a biography of the Armenian troubadour Sayat Nova (King of Song) reveals the poet's life more through his poetry than a conventional narration of important events in Sayat Nova's life. We see the poet grow up, fall in love, enter a monastery and die, but these incidents are depicted in the context of what are images from Sergei Parajanov's imagination and Sayat Nova's poems, poems that are seen and rarely heard. Sofiko Chiaureli plays 6 roles, both male and female, and Sergei Parajanov writes, directs, edits, choreographs, works on costumes, design and decor and virtually every aspect of this revolutionary work void of any dialog or camera movement.

wow.

Basically, the story revolves around two outcast freaks-of-nature: firstly, Tadanobu Asano's character, "Dragon Eye" Jim Morrison (not the dead one - remember, he was the Lizard King, not the Electric Dragon, although considering how closely linked the nature of Asano's role is with lizards, you do have to wonder how tongue-in-cheek Ishii was about giving the character that name), who is a young punk with a troubled history of violence. He was overdosed with electro-shock therapy throughout most of his life to try and eliminate his crazed animalistic tendencies, the effect of which has unfortunately charged his body up with 80,000 volts of electricity instead.In fact, he's so electrically-challenged that he even has to ground himself before bolting himself onto his bed at night. His only outlets for his violent frustrations are his home-built guitar, and his collection of pet lizards. Believe it or not, "Dragon Eye" Jim Morrison is definitely meant to be the hero of this movie, an idea displayed clearly by the fact that he doesn't interact or interfere with anyone at all outside of his job, which is looking for lost pet lizards on the streets of Tokyo.

Masatoshi Nagase's character, The Thunderbolt Buddha, is slightly more well-adjusted (which, honestly, isn't saying much) and yet somehow infinitely more devious and evil, and he is accordingly cast as the anti-hero of the story. Due to an accident he had as a little boy when he was struck by lightning whilst climbing a pylon, he got somehow charged up with 20 million volts of electricity, and entirely half of his body has had to be encased in metal, to earth him. The interesting thing about this is that not only is he divided into two halves physically - the metal and the flesh, very reminiscent of Tetsuo in that manner - his mind is also divided into two halves, which are constantly in schizophrenic battle with each other. In fact, one half wants him to destroy himself completely, while the other half wants him to live.For no apparent good reason, Thunderbolt Buddha decides to pick a fight with "Dragon Eye", and begins a pretty major plan of provocation attacks, to wind him up to a point where he'll come looking for him. My own theory on the reason for this is that possibly poor old "Dragon Eye"'s nightly screaming electrical discharges of electricity are messing with the frequencies of Thunderbolt Buddha's own electrically-charged body, and therefore the situation has come down to the bottom line

good article on israel.

"Other Jewish critics of Israel, including Jamie Spector, Adam Shapiro, Starhawk, Kate and Raphael Bender, and others, have been deported by Israel over the last several years due to their criticism of israeli policies."

Quoted: In the US and Britain, there is a campaign to smear anybody who tries to describe the plight of the Palestinian people. It is an attempt to intimidate and silence – and to a large degree, it works. There is nobody these self-appointed spokesmen for Israel will not attack as anti-Jewish: liberal Jews, rabbis, even Holocaust survivors.

just saw it in the theater. fucking awesome. not much more to say, except heath ledger was brilliant. best batman movie by far.

old article about how goodwill in oregon is corrupt.

if you watch this film, might wanna read something of the historical context, first. i haven't seen it yet, but i will...