Elena Rainn

Zach P

Kyrsten Iris

Fede Bonino

_ eshago@uw.edu

Watashi Wa Jigabudesu

Karl Halmos-Westram

lonely loser

Ljsly Bernard

Tim M

Meganalissa Cowan

George Balaskas

The quintessential novel of the Lost Generation, The Sun Also Rises is one of Ernest Hemingway's masterpieces, and a classic example of his spare but powerful writing style. A poignant look at the disillusionment and angst of the post-World War I generation, the novel introduces two of Hemingway's most unforgettable characters: Jake Barnes and Lady Brett Ashley. The story follows the flamboyant Brett and the hapless Jake as they journey from the wild nightlife of 1920s Paris to the brutal bullfighting rings of Spain with a motley group of expatriates. It is an age of moral bankruptcy, spiritual dissolution, unrealized love, and vanishing illusions. First published in 1926, The Sun Also Rises helped to establish Hemingway as one of the greatest writers of the twentieth century.

I could say that I love Dick, but that would be weird. I do very much enjoy Philip K. Dick's writing and though this is not one of his best, the "Pizza and Sex Rule" applies to him; ie. just as even bad pizza and / or sex is still pretty good, bad PKD is as well. And this is not bad at all. The first mistake that a new reader would make is to watch Blade Runner and expect a novelization of that film; it was LOOSELY based upon the book. I'm a big fan of the Ridley Scott film starring Harrison Ford and Rutger Hauer, but the movie diverged from Phillip K. Dick's literature early on. The book is far more bleak than the film, if you can believe that, and much more intricate and complicated. Blade Runner benefits from a simplified storyline. The author was far ahead of his time both in the complexity of his story and the perspective from which he writes. There are elements of Brave New World, I, Robot, and Dune; but the author has a unique voice and the story is an original. It is not an excellent work, as there are gaps and inconsistencies and many loose ends that are never tied in, but the concept and provocation are superb.One element of the book that was completely left out of the film was a sub-plot involving a Christ-like messiah and a faith system based upon what could have been a hoax. First published in 1968, this was one of his more theological based novels, and a trend that would continue steadily becoming more frequent and invasive until the end of his writing.A MUST read for PKD fans as well as SF/F fans period.

John Berger’s Classic Text on ArtJohn Berger's Ways of Seeing is one of the most stimulating and the most influential books on art in any language. First published in 1972, it was based on the BBC television series about which the (London) Sunday Times critic commented: "This is an eye-opener in more ways than one: by concentrating on how we look at paintings . . . he will almost certainly change the way you look at pictures." By now he has."Berger has the ability to cut right through the mystification of the professional art critics . . . He is a liberator of images: and once we have allowed the paintings to work on us directly, we are in a much better position to make a meaningful evaluation" —Peter Fuller, Arts Review"The influence of the series and the book . . . was enormous . . . It opened up for general attention to areas of cultural study that are now commonplace" —Geoff Dyer in Ways of TellingWinner of the 1972 Booker Prize for his novel, G., John Peter Berger (born November 5th, 1926) is an art critic, painter and author of many novels including A Painter of Our Time, From A to X and Bento’s Sketchbook.

Loosely based on the Odyssey, this landmark of modern literature follows ordinary Dubliners in 1904. Capturing a single day in the life of Dubliner Leopold Bloom, his friends Buck Mulligan and Stephen Dedalus, his wife Molly, and a scintillating cast of supporting characters, Joyce pushes Celtic lyricism and vulgarity to splendid extremes. Captivating experimental techniques range from interior monologues to exuberant wordplay and earthy humor. A major achievement in 20th century literature.

Libidinal Economy was characterized by its repentant author as an "evil" book. Why? Like Deleuze &amp; Guattari's Anti-Oedipus, Libidinal Economy can be seen partially as a response to the question: why do the masses desire their own oppression? Lyotard's response is as unequivocal as it is infamous: "the English unemployed did not become workers to survive, they - hang on tight and spit on me - enjoyed the hysterical, masochistic, whatever exhaustion it was of hanging on in the mines, in the foundries, in the factories, in hell, they enjoyed it, enjoyed the mad destruction of their organic body which was indeed imposed upon them..." According to Lyotard, capital neither alienates (as in Marx) nor represses (as in Freudo-Marxists) desire but on the contrary generates innumerable new modes of jouissance. Accordingly, there can be no recourse to unalienated labour on which to found an emancipatory politics, but rather the anarchic jouissance of capital must be taken to its own conclusion. Like Deleuze &amp; Guattari, Lyotard is heavily influenced by Nietzsche. Like Nietzsche, Lyotard sees in communist politics nothing but a secularized version of Christian morality, a politics based on ressentiment. He skewers middle class French communist intellectuals as being patronizing moralists and calls for an end to "commiseration" with the proletariat. Now certainly one can level a critique against middle class French communist intellectuals without much of a problem. But it's ironic coming from Lyotard, who was precisely a middle class French (ex-)communist intellectual. When Lyotard asserts that "we prefer to burst under the quantitative excesses that you judge the most stupid," one has to question who exactly the "we" in this sentence is (surely not the proletariat...)In true Nietzschean fashion, Libidinal Economy is a polemic against the perceived nihilism of Marxism and psychoanalysis. And yet the book seems curiously nihilistic itself. Deleuze won't do, Baudrillard won't do, and Marx and Freud are right out. At its worst, Libidinal Economy is pure accelerationism, advocating for the worst excesses of capital in the name of jouissance. It's frustrating because the themes Lyotard teases us with (especially the deconstruction of the concept of "primitive societies" found in Marx and Lévi-Strauss) are so interesting. As someone who has read Nietzsche, Marx, Lacan, etc., as someone who's interested in the politics of desire, I'm at least potentially interested in the politics Lyotard is putting forward here. But he really was right, this is an "evil" book.

'Venus in Furs' describes the obsessions of Severin von Kusiemski, a European nobleman who desires to be enslaved to a woman. Severin finds his ideal of voluptuous cruelty in the merciless Wanda von Dunajew. This is a passionate and powerful portrayal of one man's struggle to enlighten and instruct himself and others in the realm of desire. Published in 1870, the novel gained notoriety and a degree of immortality for its author when the word "masochism" - derived from his name - entered the vocabulary of psychiatry. This remains a classic literary statement on sexual submission and control.

A French woman and a Japanese man have an affair while she is in Japan making a film about peace and the impact of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, The man, an architect, lost his family in the bombing. She recalls her lover during the war, a 23 year-old German soldier who later died. Despite the time they spend together, her attachment appears minimal and they go forward into the future.

American punk-cabaret songwriter, musician, and performance artist

On the heels of the syndicated success of "

An animated series on adult-swim about the infinite adventures of Rick, a genius alcoholic and careless scientist, with his grandson Morty, a 14 year-old anxious boy who is not so smart. Together, they explore the infinite universes; causing mayhem and running into trouble.

The show revolves around life on a cul-de-sac, focusing on three friends who have nearly identical names: Ed, Edd, and Eddy. Ed is the strongest of the three and the least intelligent, Edd is the smartest and the most socially accepted among others in the cul-de-sac, and Eddy is the de-facto leader of the group and is the meanest of the group. Throughout the show, the trio create numerous scams in order to make money to earn jawbreakers. They also have to deal with numerous misadventures, such as being ostracized from other kids in the cul-de-sac, as well as avoiding the Kanker sisters, who live in a nearby trailer and whom the Eds and the cul-de-sac as a whole despise.

Canadian-American animated comedy television series

Tastebuds