NP Re: article: Leni Riefenstahl: Ethics of an Auteur

[Otto]

Why? At least that guy is trying to understand what it's all about. I'm
still looking to things bridging the gaps. But I agree that J. Bottum has
much more insight. And I would like to hear something from Doug about the
three first "paradigms" premodern, modern and postmodern, which de Quincey
describes quite correctly. I'm not yet familiar with the names (Griffin) in
his fourth paradigm, have to look for them & to read first.

Peter or Paul, where's the real difference? Saul/Paul is such a fine binary
figure, turning from prosecutor to defender of the new religion.

Contrary to the Pope I'm not error-free. But I admit that my personal
interest in the Bible is focused now on the Old Testament, such a fine
fiction.

Thanks for your interest in my posts.

Otto

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Mackin" <paul.mackin at verizon.net>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2002 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: NP Re: article: Leni Riefenstahl: Ethics of an Auteur


> Otto: i'm surprised that you are quoting from the deepspirit website,
which
> belongs more to the crackpot world of Doug Millison than anywhere else. If
you
> had included this guy's fourth "paradign" which he calls "constructive
> postmodernism" the true nuttiness of his formulations would have been
> immediately apparent.
>
> On your pope comment, it was St. Peter, not Paul, who  started the line of
> popes and the infallibility idea come into being much more recently.
>
> P.
>

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Möchten Sie mit einem Gruß antworten? http://grusskarten.yahoo.de