geb

I must say that this makes me a little uneasy. I felt a shiver down my spine. Brrr...

Here I am. You thought, huh? So: I basically agree with your analysis of the book, even though I don’t share the conclusions you reach. Let me explain: either you don't have a clear understanding of what nihilism means, or your judgment is too closely tied to certain ethical-religious beliefs, since it's difficult to talk about Faulkner as a "nihilist": he is a sharp, ruthless observer of America in the 1930s, that much is true, but he is not a nihilist. Just as he was not the Miller you so despise, an author who (as I’ve already said) celebrated life, the power of man to self-determine. We have to go beyond appearances, beyond the stylistic forms used: otherwise, they're all nihilists. I conclude by saying that you write well, but I don't like your arrogance, your certainty of having the truth in your pocket (in this, the last two lines are disturbingly arrogant; moreover, I think you define "rubbish" things you haven't even read). And I agree with Bartolo's comment wholeheartedly: it’s really sad your attempt to write a review to settle past scores. But then again, you’re used to writing instrumental reviews, aren’t you, Fabiè? ;)

they should explain to us why the 10 billion (which are state funds) need to be spent to pay for the visits of the German shepherd and the exhibition of the remains of padre pio... if the Vatican would pay for it, if they would pay for it. god how I hate them...

that would be me :)

I'm just rereading now: "prova né è" can't be looked at. I apologize.

Welcome back. Have you listened to the latest from Ratt?

Dear Josi, my considerations are by no means superficial, but you, as the good bigot you are, refuse to take them into account. Just look at the fact that you consider the process of secularization to be a "cyclical phenomenon," which is absolutely untrue. It is in fact a process that developed with the advent of modern society (around the late 1800s) and is not yet concluded. Far from being cyclical, then. On the other hand, it is typical of you Catholics to turn things around to suit your own narrative. Secularization as a cyclical phenomenon: now I've really heard it all. Ugh. I’ll also close this, you are really not worth much.

@FABIUCCIA-FABIETTA: Anyway, I see that in response to my accusation of having written a biased review just to have an excuse to talk about your beloved church, you haven't replied anymore... the truth hurts, huh?

said by someone who practically idolizes all the records of Linkous/Sparklehorse: in my opinion, it doesn't hold up very well over time. I mean, at first I found it really good, full of great compositions; it soon slipped away from my stereo without much fuss. It doesn’t have the stature of the first three Linkous albums, no no. 5 stars is too much. I say 3.5.

@JOSI: ugh, how politically correct you are! "Bigoted atheist," you say? No, that's a contradiction in terms. And you’re the bigots, I don’t want to take that away from you. You don’t answer the little questions because you don’t know what to say. Don’t even try, darling. @FABIA: you’re contradicting yourself, dear fabiuccia: first you claim that "the Church is not a temporary institution like a State; it aims at other goals and therefore it doesn’t risk extinction as long as there are believers!" then you add: "Geb starts from the prejudice that the Church is like a joint-stock company, with immediate and worldly goals, and thus in light of this, makes the simplistic equation: decrease in believers = decrease in vocations = end of the Church. That’s not how it is!" I mean, excuse me: the church doesn’t go extinct as long as there are believers, but if there are no more believers, who does the church talk to? Am I the only one seeing the contradiction? Dear fabiuccia, we’re losing our grip, we really are. In the Third World, there are vocations, it’s true: becoming a priest is a way to escape hunger. But that’s not enough, you know it too. Regarding my deliberately vulgar tones: everyone has the tones they deserve. I have no intention of using refinement, nor much less of squeezing my intellect for losers like you. All this said in good humor, of course....