Профиль

Re-posting my piece on the biblical literalism underpinning the posting of the Ten Commandments and a reading of Rabbinic sources with a differing perspective on them: voices.sefaria.org/sheets/24024...

Nationalize Costco Nationalize Amazon

I'm more optimistic (tho' I think to work, it needs to be done at scale, involving the potential nationalization of a major distribution system), but I definitely agree it needs to be tried. Governments need to shake off the spectre of Reaganism & start getting more ambitious again.

I'm surprised and dismayed that no law firm is offering pro (or low) bono services to defend the suit.

Delicious

Jeeves gets to say “fuck” once

Suchhhh a good ep. There was an earlier episode of Game Changer that was all drawing - watch.dropout.tv/game-changer...

On that we can agree

That a director warps source-material to suit their ends is not disqualifying! It's what makes auteur-driven film interesting!

... disagreement over the meaning of the Odyssey is not film criticism. She is arguing that her interpretation is preferable to his, but she is not critiquing the film qua film, as an adaptation *and intepretation* of a canonical narrative.

I may be overly charitable to Harris, as I respect his work as a film/culture critic greatly, but I don't think his argument is that she was either essentially incapable or that she was correct but should have been nicer. Rather, the object of her critique was the substance of the work, but that...

I don't agree but regardless, my point was that was Harris' argument, not what OP paraphrased.

No, it's that her critique engages in a category error. They are both of relatively equal standing as proficient actors in their respective fields, but EW's critique fails b/c she is important inappropriate standards and misjudging the film accordingly.

You'd have hoped, of all people, Wilson would have appreciated the difference between modern, academic textual-critical scholarship and the performative and interpretive practice of storytelling.

Technocracy is bad governance because it moves behind the scenes not only the machinery of government but also the decision-making process that goes into it, rendering the governing officials wizards behind the curtain, a sovereign disconnected from the demos save in punctuated elections.

Ooh, I should read that. I've been thinking (a la a reading of Rawls) that deliberation is essential to democracy, not just in the (alleged) benefits of adversarial debate but also b/c public justification is necessary to ensure a gov't acts as an authorized representative of the people.

Appreciate the good faith response. My argument is that the notion Nolan is a dilettante is a category error. He did not publish the script of the film as a critical edition of the text. He is adapting a canonical story, not as a historian but as a storyteller, which have diff stds & expectations

This is, ironically, an anti-intellectual critique masking as academic. It mixes standards for different generic norms and anachronistically imports modern authorship & editorial standards to an ancient work. It also elides the space for popular adaptations of works never meant for an elite

The film is not an academic treatise making a historiographical claim as to the text qua text (not only that, but the premise that there is a definitive version of the text misunderstands oral textuality profoundly). Rather, it is an adaptation of a story, much in line with the art of Homeric poets

A difference being Starmer deserved all the hate, & PMJT (imo) did not but was rather the victim of a right-wing (US-infused) smear campaign.