Posted on 10/26/2007 8:00:03 AM PDT by Stoat
"He's my character," she asserted. "I have the right to know what I know about him and say what I say about him."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20071024.ROWLING24/TPStory/Entertainment
Milner displays no philosophic thought in this critique. Political and literary criticism, maybe.
His books (and, by extension, his ideas) aren't selling, and this is his way of achieving notoriety and perhaps boosting the bank account as well as invitations on the cocktail circuit.
Only one of his titles is currently available as a new book at Amazon US, and it's a Spanish language translation. Everything else of his is only available used
And this Spanish language title is ranked in sales at #5,127,585.
Amazon.com El Paso Filosofico de Roland Barthes Books Jean-Claude Milner
By comparison, Immanuel Kant's major works are all easily available as new books, and his essential Critique of Pure Reason is currently ranked at #53,414 in sales, or almost a hundred times better than Milner's only work that's still in print in the USA.. And Kant has been dead for over two hundred years.
Although I'm sure that Milner is selling better in France, I have no doubt that he would like to become relevant in academia and perhaps he thinks that by expounding upon one of the most popular series of books of all time with an (easily discredited) political theory is his attempt at generating interest. It certainly can't make his sales much worse than they already are.
Barthes. That explains everything. It is literary criticism especially as it pertains to mythology. Barthes at least had the good grace to find contemporary mythologies in the newspaper. Paul Ricoeur is the one to read for the philosophy behind narrative. And Gadamer, of course.
I don't remember her ever saying that either, you must have just assumed that.
I never read anything into the relationship between Dumbledore and Grindenwald, and I daresay many adults didn't, but she is the author so she can write any 'back story' for the character she wants. You can obsess on it all you want, I prefer not to do so. It is FICTION, after all.
I gave you the links, you can read for yourself.
No, thanks. As I said, I don't obsess over petty things like this.
What ever. You mentioned that you thought I made this up then when that facts were presented you go off into the land of denial and act sanctimonious about it.
Good day and good bye.
Not being one to associate with drag queens, I wouldn’t know one way or another.
One does not have to “associate” with a drag queen to recognize the look. Between TV and the movies there are more than enough examples presented all the time.
If that picture was of Ms Bardot, it did not do her justice.
Thatchero-Blairism?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.