• Haystack

    You guys notice the protester in the background being herded away? *g*

    The latest from CNN is that Imam Rauf in NYC isn’t up for making deal:

    “I am glad that Pastor Jones has decided not to burn any Qurans. However, I have not spoken to Pastor Jones or Imam Musri. I am surprised by their announcement. We are not going to toy with our religion or any other. Nor are we going to barter. We are here to extend our hands to build peace and harmony.”

    This story is getting interesting as different factions try to influence the direction of the narrative what it winds up saying about “who we are.” If we wind up burning Qurans on 9/11, it says something ugly unless another group can cancel it out with an action of their own (“Quran Buying Day”), or successfully appeal to this crazy pastor’s better angels. If Musri gets his deal, it would kinda-sorta wind up as a story of Christians and Muslims shaking hands and having a beer, at least in the minds of the general public. The problem is that that wouldn’t be fair to Rauf & co, who should be able to worship where they please, and shouldn’t have to change their plans every time a nutty pastor threatens to burn some books.

    It would be nice if all this ugliness came to some kind of happy, uplifting conclusion on 9/11 where Christians and Muslims all hold hands and sing, but I’m pessimistic.

  • Haystack

    You guys notice the protester in the background being herded away? *g*

    The latest from CNN is that Imam Rauf in NYC isn’t up for making deal:

    “I am glad that Pastor Jones has decided not to burn any Qurans. However, I have not spoken to Pastor Jones or Imam Musri. I am surprised by their announcement. We are not going to toy with our religion or any other. Nor are we going to barter. We are here to extend our hands to build peace and harmony.”

    This story is getting interesting as different factions try to influence the direction of the narrative what it winds up saying about “who we are.” If we wind up burning Qurans on 9/11, it says something ugly unless another group can cancel it out with an action of their own (“Quran Buying Day”), or successfully appeal to this crazy pastor’s better angels. If Musri gets his deal, it would kinda-sorta wind up as a story of Christians and Muslims shaking hands and having a beer, at least in the minds of the general public. The problem is that that wouldn’t be fair to Rauf & co, who should be able to worship where they please, and shouldn’t have to change their plans every time a nutty pastor threatens to burn some books.

    It would be nice if all this ugliness came to some kind of happy, uplifting conclusion on 9/11 where Christians and Muslims all hold hands and sing, but I’m pessimistic.

    • Gira Gibbets

      Interesting idea, but if different factions attempt to control the hyperspatiation of the narrative (e.g., Koran burnings as a form of direct action against the hegemony of multiculturalist pluralism in contemporary America), we can clearly see the influence of neosemioticist cultural theory; one is therefore faced with a choice: either accept modernist/realist reading of the text’s narrative, or, on the contrary, conclude that discourse is a product of the collective unconscious. However, Lacan’s analysis of cultural postdialectic theory suggests that truth is capable of significance. The subject is contextualised into a neosemioticist cultural theory that includes reality _as a totality_.

      It could be said that Lyotard promotes the use of cultural subtextual theory to read and modify class, re: an invented “clash of cultures” as posited by Said. The subject is therefore interpolated into a Baudrillardist hyperreality that includes culture as a paradox. But a close reading of Foucauldian “force relations” can be interpreted as supporting the supremacy of discourse to analyze sexual identity, even when sexual identification is masked by (ostensibly) more important features (i.e., Koran burning).

      But as Zizek asks, “What is the Absolute?” In this Hegelian sense, it’s vital to interpret the Koran burnings in light of Lacan’s mirror stage, thus renormalizing the phenomenology of narrative space and requiring the naturalization of the intersubjective cognitive strategy, and thereby resolving the dialectics of metaphorical thoughts, each problematic to the other, collectively redefining and reifying the paradigm of the parable of the model of the metaphor.

      Unless, of course, you can explain why I might be mistaken…
      the model of the metaphor.

      • Haystack

        Thank you for obfuscating that. *g*

      • gemmarama

        wow, somebody just started the new term at uni. second-year film theory, right?

        • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

          I’m betting post grad philosophy…employed to sarcastic overkill lending the subject a complexity it barely merits.

          Which is why I’m banking on Your Mom to have a developed yet another ID…because he’s the only one I’ve seen reference the Hegelian dialectical properly while being an ass at the same time. Kinda ups the odds that the same fella is involved.

          You can change the screenname…but you cannot change the tone and vibe.

  • Gira Gibbets

    Interesting idea, but if different factions attempt to control the hyperspatiation of the narrative (e.g., Koran burnings as a form of direct action against the hegemony of multiculturalist pluralism in contemporary America), we can clearly see the influence of neosemioticist cultural theory; one is therefore faced with a choice: either accept modernist/realist reading of the text’s narrative, or, on the contrary, conclude that discourse is a product of the collective unconscious. However, Lacan’s analysis of cultural postdialectic theory suggests that truth is capable of significance. The subject is contextualised into a neosemioticist cultural theory that includes reality _as a totality_.

    It could be said that Lyotard promotes the use of cultural subtextual theory to read and modify class, re: an invented “clash of cultures” as posited by Said. The subject is therefore interpolated into a Baudrillardist hyperreality that includes culture as a paradox. But a close reading of Foucauldian “force relations” can be interpreted as supporting the supremacy of discourse to analyze sexual identity, even when sexual identification is masked by (ostensibly) more important features (i.e., Koran burning).

    But as Zizek asks, “What is the Absolute?” In this Hegelian sense, it’s vital to interpret the Koran burnings in light of Lacan’s mirror stage, thus renormalizing the phenomenology of narrative space and requiring the naturalization of the intersubjective cognitive strategy, and thereby resolving the dialectics of metaphorical thoughts, each problematic to the other, collectively redefining and reifying the paradigm of the parable of the model of the metaphor.

    Unless, of course, you can explain why I might be mistaken…
    the model of the metaphor.

  • Haystack

    Thank you for obfuscating that. *g*

  • DeepCough

    Wasn’t Westboro gonna burn the Qur’an anyway?

  • DeepCough

    Wasn’t Westboro gonna burn the Qur’an anyway?

  • gemmarama

    wow, somebody just started the new term at uni. second-year film theory, right?

  • peacemaker

    I don’t agree with burning the Koran even though I don’t agree with it. But I can’t get over the guy’s comment that he’s concerned that someone could get hurt if the Koran was burned. Hmm… I understand respecting God and His Word (the Bible). But if someone burned the Bible it would upset me but I wouldn’t hurt or threaten to hurt someone over it. The God I serve is long-suffering and is very capable of handling stuff by Himself.

  • peacemaker

    I don’t agree with burning the Koran even though I don’t agree with it. But I can’t get over the guy’s comment that he’s concerned that someone could get hurt if the Koran was burned. Hmm… I understand respecting God and His Word (the Bible). But if someone burned the Bible it would upset me but I wouldn’t hurt or threaten to hurt someone over it. The God I serve is long-suffering and is very capable of handling stuff by Himself.

  • emperorreagan

    I don’t understand what’s sacred about mass produced paper. I also don’t think there’s anything sacred about a property 2 blocks away from a chunk of land that I also don’t see any reason to consider sacred.

    I do like burning things, though. I propose making a huge pile of copies of every sacred text from every culture at ground zero, putting all of the talking heads that are fueling this stupid debate on stakes in the midst of the pile, and dropping a napalm bomb on them.

    • anon

      “I propose making a huge pile of copies of every sacred text from every culture at ground zero, putting all of the talking heads that are fueling this stupid debate on stakes in the midst of the pile, and dropping a napalm bomb on them.” YES! I want to live in that world :)

  • emperorreagan

    I don’t understand what’s sacred about mass produced paper. I also don’t think there’s anything sacred about a property 2 blocks away from a chunk of land that I also don’t see any reason to consider sacred.

    I do like burning things, though. I propose making a huge pile of copies of every sacred text from every culture at ground zero, putting all of the talking heads that are fueling this stupid debate on stakes in the midst of the pile, and dropping a napalm bomb on them.

  • Ironaddict06

    Should the Pastor burn the Koran or should the Pastor not burn the Koran? Probably not. But can the Pastor do it? YES! The Pastor has the Constitutional right to burn the Koran. His freedom of speech is protected by the Constitution. People have burned American flags, have dipped a Cross in urine, the Virgin Mary covered in poop. Since we are all equal here in the U.S., the Pastor has every right to burn the Koran.

  • Ironaddict06

    Should the Pastor burn the Koran or should the Pastor not burn the Koran? Probably not. But can the Pastor do it? YES! The Pastor has the Constitutional right to burn the Koran. His freedom of speech is protected by the Constitution. People have burned American flags, have dipped a Cross in urine, the Virgin Mary covered in poop. Since we are all equal here in the U.S., the Pastor has every right to burn the Koran.

  • anon

    “I propose making a huge pile of copies of every sacred text from every culture at ground zero, putting all of the talking heads that are fueling this stupid debate on stakes in the midst of the pile, and dropping a napalm bomb on them.” YES! I want to live in that world :)

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    I’m betting post grad philosophy…employed to sarcastic overkill lending the subject a complexity it barely merits.

    Which is why I’m banking on Your Mom to have a developed yet another ID…because he’s the only one I’ve seen reference the Hegelian dialectical properly while being an ass at the same time. Kinda ups the odds that the same fella is involved.

    You can change the screenname…but you cannot change the tone and vibe.

  • Synapse

    It’s funny. I don’t remember the media making it a big deal when Muslims were celebrating 9/11 by dancing in the streets and burning American flags.

  • Synapse

    It’s funny. I don’t remember the media making it a big deal when Muslims were celebrating 9/11 by dancing in the streets and burning American flags.