http://blogm05.diggyblog.com/

Pardon me for sounding like a reverse-snob, but stated quite simply, this is not worth the time it takes to allow your eyes to lazily fall on word after word after word as the basis of all words as illustrated by this ponderous, possibly over-rated text. Is it my fault that I understood this text well enough to see through the questionable morsels of pure academia crystal and write a paper about it critically enough that my own credibility was called into question by a supposed “professor” of mine, who felt that any amount of comprehension on the part of a “student” was a “red flag,” and he felt the likelihood was that I had plaigerized? Possibly it is my fault. Possibly I should have anticipated that reading any one of Foulcault’s pedantic primers (bibles of the Self-Described Icoclast population), I was calling into question my own motive for having chosen a book such as this to read. I suppose I should actually thank this “professor” for enlightening me to a glaringly obvious truth about Foucault’s writing and its readers: these elements exist in egotistical symbiosis, and if a person has staked out, say, _The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences_ as THEIR terrain (usually meaning they have attempted to read part if not all of One Unit of Foucault Product) and now wish to possess it as a trophy of sorts, they want to call attention to their active cultivation of worldliness, and unquestionable authority. Foucault’s writing lends itself to deceit in the way it deludes its readers into believing it can be possessed as proof of intellectual worthiness. I have finally learned (possibly well enough to never again repeat my mistake) that by reading Foucault (in however a self-deluded state of innocence) a person runs the great risk of stepping on the toes of someone who wants to know WHY you read Foucault. And let me be the first to warn you: you’d best know the secret handshake. If you go against my advice to not read this book, I assume that disclaimers are worth nothing and that is why, in many instances they do not exist.When one defines order as a sorting of priorities, it becomes beautifully clear as to what Foucault is doing here. With virtuoso showmanship, he weaves an intensely complex history of thought. He dips into literature, art, economics and even biology . read more.

I always found Seeger a bit of a pill. (Anyone who would get angry over Dylan going electric is inherently suspect in my book.) Even when Springsteen did that marvelous tribute album, Seeger couldn’t help grousing that it should have been more political. But a PBS documentary made me like him more and appreciate all he accomplished in the face of tremendous adversity. Blacklisted in the US, he went overseas in 1963 and found a rapturous audience in Australia. This is a rough TV print but perfectly serviceable and it captures Seeger perfectly: he was never happier than when he was in front of an audience, passing along the tradition of folk music and teaching people a new song. Visit me at michaelgiltz dot com.Folk Icons: Pete Seeger is a beautifully filmed 105-minute concert showcasing one of the most provocative figures in music history. In 1963 Pete Seeger, blacklisted and barred from American television, fled the persecution of his homeland and embarke. read more.

Rather disappointed with this lackluster performance. He just never seemed to get out of first gear and entertain the crowd. It just stayed at one level throughout the show, like the Pope at an outdoor mass. I think he was aiming at impersonating Elvis without the hip movement.

I enjoyed Neil more at his recent concert where he did not appear to take himself so seriously. Maybe he had the advantage of time to look at his great body of work and present it in a more entertaining manner. Neil Diamond is an American legend. He is one of the finest and most successful songwriters of the last forty years as well as being a multi-platinum selling recording artist and one of the most dynamic and consummate live performers of his generatio. read more.