<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Jonathon Keats</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/writer/jonathon_keats/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 10:39:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Life is out of whack</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2009/07/07/balance_of_nature/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2009/07/07/balance_of_nature/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 10:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/environment/feature/2009/07/07/balance_of_nature</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It may drive ecologists crazy to talk about a balance in nature. But it's more necessary than ever]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aristotle would probably flunk a college ecology class. With tutoring he might overcome the language gap, and even learn how to file his homework by computer. But he'd be doomed to failure for his firm belief in a balance of nature.</p><p>Most ecologists do not like the idea -- still popular more than two millennia after it gained acceptance -- that nature is in balance. Mention the concept and some researchers get downright dyspeptic. A Wheaton College professor named John Kricher has even written a book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Balance-Nature-Ecologys-Enduring-Myth/dp/0691138982">"The Balance of Nature: Ecology's Enduring Myth."</a> "Historically, the notion of a balance of nature is part observational, part metaphysical, and not scientific in any way," he argues, leaving no chance for disagreement: "Any notion of a balance of nature is surely na&#239;ve, given the reality of present climate change and its collective effect on global ecosystems."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2009/07/07/balance_of_nature/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2009/07/07/balance_of_nature/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>96</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Craig Venter is the future</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/12/05/craig_venter/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/12/05/craig_venter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 11:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2007/12/05/craig_venter</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The most groundbreaking science is being done outside academia and government. And the egomaniacal geneticist is leading the way.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As an employee of the National Institutes of Health in the '80s, <a href="http://www.jcvi.org/">J. Craig Venter</a> once found himself trailed by two men in suits. After shadowing him for a day in their brown Ford Fairlane, they appeared unannounced at his lab, where they showed him ID cards from the Department of Defense. The men asked him about his work on receptor proteins, which make cells sensitive to chemicals such as adrenaline. Might those proteins also be used to detect nerve poisons? While Venter had previously organized war protests, he'd also served as a medic in Vietnam, and his current research interests coincided with the military's. The questions they were asking were scientifically pertinent. So he accepted a Defense research grant of $250,000. </p><p>The NIH was not pleased. Administrators looked upon the money with institutional jealousy. Begrudgingly they set up a special account for his nerve poison research -- and bluntly informed Venter that he was "perhaps too entrepreneurial." </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/12/05/craig_venter/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/12/05/craig_venter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>46</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Proust Was a Neuroscientist&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/11/20/proust_neuroscientist/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/11/20/proust_neuroscientist/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/review/2007/11/20/proust_neuroscientist</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Did novelist George Eliot anticipate the ability of the brain to grow new cells? Did chef Auguste Escoffier foretell the science of the palate? Jonah Lehrer thinks so.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The world premiere of Igor Stravinsky's "Rite of Spring," by the Ballets Russes in 1913, featured shouting crowds in fancy dress, and a guest appearance by the French police. While none of that was choreographed, the mayhem was exactly what impresario Sergei Diaghilev sought, and affirmed Stravinsky's ambition to write <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/music/">music</a> "of daring." Made famous by the uproar, "The Rite of Spring" entered the repertory, ever rising in popularity. By 1940, Walt Disney had scored it for "Fantasia." </p><p>Igor Stravinsky is one of eight major artists of the 19th and 20th centuries considered in "Proust Was a Neuroscientist," Jonah Lehrer's earnest attempt to vindicate the accomplishments of art by demonstrating how great composers and novelists and chefs of the past, from Marcel Proust to George Eliot to August Escoffier, anticipated recent scientific discoveries. "I have chosen them because their art proved to be the most accurate," Lehrer writes, "because they most explicitly anticipated our science." Lehrer's thesis would be indefensible even if his examples were convincing: Accuracy is no standard for <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/art/">art,</a> which can fully justify its worth without recourse to peer review. As it stands, even the rationalist lens of <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/science/">science</a> cannot support Lehrer's sophomoric project. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/11/20/proust_neuroscientist/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/11/20/proust_neuroscientist/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Before Paris and Nicole</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2005/06/16/mcmurtry_3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2005/06/16/mcmurtry_3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Celebrity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/review/2005/06/16/mcmurtry</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Buffalo Bill and Annie Oakley aren't just relics of the Wild West, argues "Lonesome Dove" author Larry McMurtry -- they're America's original celebrities.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At the end of the 19th century, Buffalo Bill Cody was arguably the most famous man in the United States, because he looked sharp while riding a horse. And Annie Oakley was arguably the most famous woman, because she looked comely while firing a gun. Commonplace as such superficiality may be -- characteristic of celebrities from Ronald Reagan to Paris Hilton -- the popularity of Cody and Oakley is hard to fathom in our megaplexed, multichannel, celebrity-saturated society. Not only were they, as Larry McMurtry notes in <a target="new" href="http://jump.salon.com/xlink?3108">"The Colonel and Little Missie,"</a> our first superstars. Adjusted for ego inflation and the explosion of media bandwidth, they were also, and will likely remain, our foremost. </p><p>Exactly who Cody and Oakley were, though, becomes less clear with each attempted biography. The greater the scrutiny, the less certain their history. Every detail is questionable. With his novelist's eye and footing in the West, McMurtry is positioned to deliver as good a book on the pair as we're likely to get. He has succeeded for the most part, by telling us all that <i>isn't</i> known about them, that we might more fully appreciate the extraordinary story of their fame. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2005/06/16/mcmurtry_3/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2005/06/16/mcmurtry_3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The king&#8217;s word</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2003/05/30/nicolson/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2003/05/30/nicolson/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2003 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/review/2003/05/30/nicolson</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In "God's Secretaries," author Adam Nicolson tells how James I manipulated 48 translators to   create the supreme achievement in the English language: The Bible.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Never in history has a book been printed in such quantity as the King James Bible, nor has the English language ever produced a volume more influential. That it should also be our finest work of literature, however, despite translation by committee amidst the political instability of early 17th century England, seems, today, almost miraculous. Only if the complicated process of translation and its historical context are taken together, and appreciated for their very incompatibility, do the circumstances explain how the King James translation came to be the standard version of the Bible, and the embodiment of English eloquence. </p><p> Adam Nicolson describes the feat with impressive skill and frequent insight, if at greater length than necessary, in "God's Secretaries." "The age's lifeblood was the bridging of contradictory qualities," he claims. Judging from Nicolson's characterization of the 54 translators, their prickly king, and their precarious era, that may be the understatement of the century. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2003/05/30/nicolson/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2003/05/30/nicolson/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;The Spinster and the Prophet&#8221; by A.B. McKillop</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/11/07/mckillip/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/11/07/mckillip/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Nov 2002 15:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/review/2002/11/07/mckillip</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the 1920s, judges ridiculed a Canadian woman who said H.G. Wells plagiarized her book, but a modern scholar finds her case convincing.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> When H.G. Wells, world-renowned author, was charged by an unknown Canadian spinster with plagiarizing a book that purported to cover all that had happened to mankind since the beginning of time, he didn't take her claims especially seriously. He preferred, on the contrary, to poke fun at the 60-year-old woman for "conceiv[ing] the strange idea that she held the copyright to human history." </p><p> If, on the surface, his dilemma bears a resemblance to that of rogue historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, in another respect the court case against him seems strongly to anticipate such tussles as the lawsuit, recently dismissed, against J.K. Rowling disputing her claim to have created Harry Potter. All of which is to say that the litigation that challenged Wells' reputation some eight decades ago vividly evokes, and may even explain, the reasons for our confusion about plagiarism to this day. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/11/07/mckillip/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/11/07/mckillip/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Not-so-sweet inspiration</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/09/18/muses_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/09/18/muses_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2002 19:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life//feature/2002/09/18/muses</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Francine Prose's new book "The Lives of the Muses,"  the woman who triumphs is the one who refuses to submit.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> What can be said other than that it was over almost before it began? Assisting in the darkroom of Man Ray's Paris photography studio one afternoon, model and muse Lee Miller felt a mouse crawl over her bare foot. In a flash, she switched on an overhead lamp, inadvertently exposing to light the nude picture of her, still in the developer. Almost as fast, though not quite, Ray tossed the photo into the hypo bath, to fix the image. When they looked at it afterward, they found around her figure a strange halo. "The background and the image couldn't heal together," she explained years later, "so there was a line left which he called a 'solarization.'" </p><p>That defining moment in the history of photography -- the discovery of a technique that would become as closely associated with Man Ray as his own shadow -- serves also as almost too perfect a metaphor for his three-year relationship with Miller in the early '30s. But if it can be read as an example of how, by keeping a muse, an artist may directly benefit -- apparently at her expense -- there is to be found a deeper layer at which it isn't so easy to calculate profit or loss, or even who's who. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/09/18/muses_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/09/18/muses_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;You Send Me&#8221; by Patricia T. O&#8217;Conner &amp; Stewart Kellerman</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/08/26/o_conner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/08/26/o_conner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2002 21:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Grammar]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/review/2002/08/26/o_conner</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two former New York Times editors explain how to express yourself correctly when writing online -- but why should we listen to them?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If ever there was an exam tailored to measure future professional success, it's the Graduate Management Admission Test. Graded by a software program called <a target="new" href="http://www.800score.com/gmat-essay.html">E-rater,</a> GMAT essays are given high marks, regardless of content, not only for lengthiness and sentence complexity, but also for unintelligible wording and extensive application of such terms as "since" and "therefore," commonly associated with solid reasoning. To bluff that computer, in other words, you need not be a scholar, but simply must master the tools used to defraud investors. </p><p> It's a formula. As former New York Times editors Patricia T. O'Conner and Stewart Kellerman note, there's no need with E-rater "to sweat over creativity, individuality and style -- the things a real reader looks for in writing." Alas, the advice they dispense in "You Send Me: Getting It Right When You Write Online" can only result in prose equally dull and mechanical. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/08/26/o_conner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/08/26/o_conner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;After Shakespeare&#8221; by John Gross, ed.</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/08/07/shakespeare_5/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/08/07/shakespeare_5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2002 15:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shakespeare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/review/2002/08/07/shakespeare</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Victor Hugo raised him in a s]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Some 250 years after his burial, William Shakespeare took the trouble to visit French author Victor Hugo at a Parisian seance. At first the others in attendance were perplexed that, through a planchette, Shakespeare delivered his message in perfect French. But the bard obligingly explained that, with the wisdom of age, he now found their language superior to his own -- a lucky break as Hugo himself spoke no English. Then Shakespeare went on, in measured verse, to say that he read Hugo's writing regularly up in heaven, often aloud for the benefit of the other immortals. Cervantes silenced Moli&egrave;re, in order to savor every last word. Aeschylus quivered, and Dante wept, at Hugo's emotional depth. "Your voice is sacred!" Shakespeare proclaimed. "Carry on the good work!" </p><p> Few writers before or since have received such a glowing endorsement from their own mothers, let alone from the author of "Othello," "Macbeth" and "Hamlet." Hugo may be unique among writers in his unstinting esteem for Shakespeare, whom he liked to imagine not only in an all-star reading group with Dante and Cervantes, but also in the spiritual company of Isaiah and Saint Paul. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/08/07/shakespeare_5/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/08/07/shakespeare_5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The death of etiquette</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/05/29/etiquette/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/05/29/etiquette/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 May 2002 14:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2002/05/29/etiquette</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For proof positive that "gracious living" is now extinct, look no further than the new revision of Amy Vanderbilt's classic guide.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fifty years ago, for the first time in history, Amy Vanderbilt set in print a clear explanation of how a man ought to behave toward his hat. While the impact of that cultural milestone is self-evident -- Amy Vanderbilt's "Complete Book of Etiquette" has sold more than 3 million copies to date -- few readers have adequately appreciated the depth of her accomplishment. As scientifically grounded as Newton's laws of motion, as skillfully elaborated as Robert's Rules of Order, and as forcefully articulated as Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, Vanderbilt's treatise on hats is the very model of what you ought to get in a book on etiquette. </p><p>Alas, outside a secondhand store, these days you won't find anything of the sort. On her 50th anniversary, poor, dead Amy Vanderbilt has been "entirely rewritten and updated" by a retired White House staff coordinator and a personal-investment financial reporter. In the 786 pages between the revised book's designer covers can be found the rubble of a toppled past arthritically cobbled together without the faintest idea of what it once meant. "The Amy Vanderbilt Complete Book of Etiquette," as authored by Nancy Tuckerman and Nancy Dunnan, won't tell you how to act at an Annapolis hop, and the advice it gives on conversational skills at parties is enough to ensure that you will never again have to worry about being on anybody's guest list, but if you want to understand the demise of etiquette in America, this is the only book you need. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/05/29/etiquette/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/05/29/etiquette/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Return to sender</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/04/17/salinger_5/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/04/17/salinger_5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2002 19:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[J.D. Salinger]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2002/04/17/salinger</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A collection of letters to J.D. Salinger, many from well-known writers, shows how the author of "Catcher in the Rye" went from man to myth.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Virtually everybody has a story to tell about J.D. Salinger. Some can claim once to have seen him on the street while passing through the New Hampshire town where he lives, not stalking him quite, yet drawn, undeniably, to press some unspoken boundary. Others are content to repeat familiar rumors, recalling failed attempts to lure him into a liaison or interview, or speculating about the vault in which he allegedly has confined everything he's written since he stopped publishing in the mid-'60s. But, for the vast majority of readers, the crucial story about Salinger only incidentally involves the author. What most people want to talk about when they discuss the famously reclusive writer is themselves. </p><p> As might be expected, there are almost as many variations on the theme "the first time I read 'The Catcher in the Rye'" as there are copies of the book in print. And in that respect it isn't so dissimilar from how earlier generations must have remembered their initial encounters with the "Iliad" or "Hamlet" or "The Howdy-Doody Show." The difference is that, in the case of Salinger, we seem to have the insatiable urge to share with him our experience of his work. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/04/17/salinger_5/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/04/17/salinger_5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Dracula&#8217;s&#8221; secretary</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/04/17/stoker/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/04/17/stoker/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2002 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/people/feature/2002/04/17/stoker</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The resurfaced manuscript of Bram Stoker's legendary vampire novel reminds us that even a hack can create an immortal tale.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bram Stoker is famous for writing "Dracula" much as John the Baptist is celebrated for anticipating the coming of Jesus Christ. Each can be said to have held a role crucial, albeit peripheral, to the greater play of history. </p><p>There the resemblance ends. While John's revelation was reputedly divine, Stoker's inspiration came, as his son would later explain, "in a nightmarish dream after eating too much dressed crab." Following that gastrointestinally uncomfortable evening, the potboiler writer -- author of such forgettable titles as "The Shoulder of Shasta" and "The Watter's Mou'" -- would spend seven years pouring several millennia of vampire lore into arguably the most familiar fictional character of the 19th century, a figure who in the 20th would become the most frequently filmed as well. </p><p>There would never be another hit for the author after that. While Dracula is not Stoker in either appearance or character, Stoker is pretty much "Dracula" to his readers, and little else. And so the recent reemergence into public view of the original 1897 manuscript -- more than 100 years after the book was sent to the printer -- affords an unusual opportunity to meet the long-dead author. For many decades, the manuscript was presumed lost, thrown away by the publisher as you'd expect would happen with the work of a hack. (Is anybody out there actually archiving the Jackie Collins oeuvre?) </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/04/17/stoker/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/04/17/stoker/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Death and the maiden</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/03/01/corset/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/03/01/corset/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 20:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/sex/gallery/2002/03/01/corset</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Far from an article of bondage, the corset has been an instrument of liberation.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The corset is to nudity what foreplay is to sex. No other garment is so erotic because none has as loaded an effect on the female form. And few garments are so controversial; every century attacks it and appropriates it anew. </p><p>What was once the argument of the gentleman misogynist is now the line taken by the academic feminist: The sexual body is a dangerous thing, best shrouded from sight. That's the line taken in a new book by feminist scholar Leigh Summers, "Bound to Please: A History of the Victorian Corset," an examination of the garment's "role in female objectification" originally written as her doctoral dissertation. In her introduction, she claims that "[t]he corset remains profoundly under-theorized." She then goes on to build a theoretical construct similar to that advanced by those 19th century men who, in the name of morality, sought to suppress women's sensuality. </p><p>While her mind is perhaps slightly sounder than that of Victorian phrenologist Orson S. Fowler -- who warned that wearing a corset excited dangerous "amative desires" by pressing blood to bowels -- her reasoning is largely consistent with that found in such chauvinist classics as "From Ballroom to Hell" and "Where Satan Sows His Seed." Plus, she uses language like "hetero-patriarchal dominance." </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/03/01/corset/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/03/01/corset/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Straight from the heart</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/02/12/love_letters/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/02/12/love_letters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2002 20:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writers and Writing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/sex/feature/2002/02/12/love_letters</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The greatest love letters of all time share some techniques with direct-mail advertising, but the letters had a higher success rate.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The language of love is universal, much like the practice of advertising. Ever since the first frog made his bog sound more appealing by crafting a catchy mating call, endless repetition has been the rule for lovers and advertisers alike, with innovation the exception. So it's reasonable that the 50 greatest love letters would have a lot in common -- and even that they'd function on the same principles as the most brazen junk mail. </p><p>They do. At least that's a conclusion to be reached if the letters in "The 50 Greatest Love Letters of All Time" are in fact the 50 greatest love letters of all time. Selected by autograph dealer David H. Lowenherz, many were penned by notorious lovers like Ernest Hemingway and Henry VIII. On the whole, they've done their job well, whether that's meant wooing a wife, harnessing a husband or just leading a lover into a tryst. </p><p>Ad pros use the term "pull" to denote the response on a mailer, and are thrilled to garner orders from one out of every 100 recipients. Lowenherz's 50 greatest love letters did substantially better, by my own estimated average, pulling a solid 63 percent. Admittedly, these numbers don't take into account long-term satisfaction; from Michelangelo to Anne Sexton, the most alluring lovers are hardly the most stable. Still, they ought to be good enough to make companies from State Farm Insurance to Omaha Steaks reconsider how they bait new customers with their limited-time offers. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/02/12/love_letters/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/02/12/love_letters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Apocalypse made easy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2002/02/07/doomsday/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2002/02/07/doomsday/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2002 21:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2002/02/07/doomsday</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A top-secret U.S. government scenario for the aftermath of nuclear war reveals something truly scary -- cockeyed optimism.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Should you happen to find yourself running a country under nuclear assault, you simply have to expect your national economy to suffer. Your wounded will demand intensive care regardless of their insurance plan, your labor force will be far too busy burying the dead to return to farm and factory, and mass destruction in major cities may hold up postal deliveries for months, even assuming you unearth enough change-of-address slips to go around. But fear not. If the forecasting skills of the United States military are to be trusted, only half of Americans will survive -- a decrease in population almost certainly sufficient to offset losses in goods and services. </p><p> This isn't fiction. On the contrary, it's the story the military told itself back in 1958. For decades after that, journalists heard rumors of an official government "doomsday scenario," yet it wasn't until 1998 that the document was briefly, inadvertently, declassified. Innocuously titled "The Emergency Plans Book," the elusive memorandum was turned over to the National Archives -- together with scores of other previously secret files released by the office of the Secretary of the Air Force in a routine housecleaning -- where military historian L. Douglas Keeney discovered it and had it xeroxed for future reference. When he returned to the archives a year later, he saw that the original was gone; a colonel had ordered it reclassified, and thereafter it was available only to those with top-secret clearance. Keeney found himself with the only copy in civilian hands. Naturally, he decided to publish it. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2002/02/07/doomsday/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2002/02/07/doomsday/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who was Mona seducing?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2001/11/26/mona_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2001/11/26/mona_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/sex/feature/2001/11/26/mona</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What does this Renaissance temptress, seemingly impervious to changing taste, tell us about the enduring nature of our own desire?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the spring of 1959, a doctor named Kenneth D. Keele revealed that the Mona Lisa was pregnant. Don't for a moment imagine that his diagnosis -- first published in a respected medical journal just 440 years after Leonardo da Vinci's death -- was blind speculation. In Lisa's thick neck, Keele detected an enlargement of her thyroid gland and, lest any mere curator question his claim, he drew all eyes to the maternal calm of her smile. </p><p>Who could be surprised? The Mona Lisa, femme fatale, has a sexual history more sordid than Mata Hari. As a seductress, her sustained popularity rivals that of Cleopatra. French kings kept her in their bathing chamber at Fontainbleu. Napoleon shared her company, briefly, in his bedroom. Authors from Jules Michelet to Jules Verne, Stephen Mallarm&#233; to Algernon Swinburne, have made love to her in so many words. William Gibson lent her name to a cyberpunk whore. She's at least twice endorsed contraception -- appearing on the Giaconda Liquid Latex condom in '50s Spain and, more recently, on the Mona Lisa-CU375 IUD. But even both birth control methods combined could hardly be expected to protect her from decades of Parisian striptease personification, or comparison -- in the <a target="new" href="http://www.studiolo.org/Mona/MONA31.htm">New Yorker</a> -- to kinky Monica Lewinsky. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2001/11/26/mona_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2001/11/26/mona_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The opposite of sex</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2001/09/28/andy_3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2001/09/28/andy_3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2001 19:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/sex/feature/2001/09/28/andy</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Andy Warhol, ultimate icon of pop, made painting an orgy and pornography an art form. But you'll never guess what he did between the sheets.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> The public grade school in my neighborhood, like so many around the country, is a preposterous edifice of neoclassical posturing, with a miscellany of famous names inscribed across its facade. Neither arbitrary nor encyclopedic, the list seems to me the lasting trace of a spectacularly capricious selection process. Homer and Galileo and Comte. Pericles and Shakespeare. Pasteur and Moses and Wagner. About the only thing the names have in common is that each overshadows the accomplishments of the man it marks. They are names we know before we know why we know them, and better than we'll ever know the people for whom they once stood: Galileo and Homer are our cultural icons on account of their obliging anonymity, our idols because they embody whatever we desire. </p><p>Andy Warhol also had that. He made himself a name, and vanished in our midst. That was his art. Pity anybody who undertakes his biography: Whatever one claims is questionable, and to catch him whole is less feasible, even, than dismissing him out of hand. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2001/09/28/andy_3/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2001/09/28/andy_3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>For the love of literature</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2001/08/25/fitzgerald_9/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2001/08/25/fitzgerald_9/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2001 19:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Coupling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plagiarism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/sex/feature/2001/08/25/fitzgerald</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Scott Fitzgerald stole Zelda's ideas, plagiarized her diaries and even pushed her into an affair. He was arguably the worst husband of his generation -- and that made him its best author.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When F. Scott Fitzgerald's second novel was published, a newspaper editor asked the author's wife whether she'd consider reviewing it for the New York Herald Tribune. As she read her husband's book with the sharp eye of a paid professional, she recognized not only the autobiographical tenor of "The Beautiful and Damned," but also, cleverly attributed to a female lead much like herself, whole passages authored by her: "It seems to me," she wrote in her review, "that on one page I recognized a portion of an old diary of mine which mysteriously disappeared shortly after my marriage, and also scraps of letters which, though considerably edited, sound to me vaguely familiar. In fact, Mr. Fitzgerald -- I believe that is how he spells his name -- seems to believe that plagiarism begins at home." </p><p>She was being modest. The truth is that Scott used a great deal of Zelda's writing, credited to characters he modeled after her, in every book he completed in his abbreviated life. That Zelda was Scott's muse is hardly news, and it comes as no surprise that her frank sexuality, the wild abandon with which she flaunted her body at parties, gave color to his stories: More has been written about the Fitzgeralds, their antics and affairs, than they can possibly have known about themselves. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2001/08/25/fitzgerald_9/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2001/08/25/fitzgerald_9/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>War paint</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/08/28/femme_fatale/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/08/28/femme_fatale/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2000 19:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/sex/feature/2000/08/28/femme_fatale</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two recent books -- "The Femme's Guide to the Universe" and "On the Trail of the Women Warriors" -- explore femme fatales, latex, the invincibility of waterproof mascara and Amazons.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What makes Marguerite invincible is the waterproof mascara. My dear friend has other personal strengths, too, among them a degree in American literature and the equestrian poise to win, place and show at riding events across the country. And for years I was politic enough to know to emphasize those qualities when I told others about Marguerite-the-Omnipotent. Lately, though, I see it isn't so simple. So many people I know are smart and fit, but hardly formidable. If I'm going to talk about Marguerite, I have to say something about her mascara. </p><p>Her lipstick, too, which turns her mouth into a possible, albeit improbable, kiss. And I can't help but give honorable mention to her wardrobe, which shows off more variations on fur and feathers than there are species in the Galapagos. Marguerite is a femme. A new book by femme-for-life Shar Rednour called "The Femme's Guide to the Universe" gets her type just right when it says, "There is only one moment and that moment is <i>her."</i> </p><p>Rednour's book is to my friend Marguerite what lighting cues are to a Broadway musical. It gives technical information she follows instinctively but would be mortified to know I'd learned. (The reason Marguerite's lipstick doesn't smudge? She applies it after her powder which, by happy coincidence, serves as an anti-skid foundation.) </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/08/28/femme_fatale/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/08/28/femme_fatale/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In between life and death</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/04/06/physician_art/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/04/06/physician_art/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2000 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Academia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/health/books/2000/04/06/physician_art</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The art of medical history shows the precarious position of physicians.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>W</b>e live, and we die. In between those two extremes lies medicine.</p><p>Physicians, rather like diplomats, must be on familiar terms with both human states in order to be effective partisans of either. Doctors must go places we'd ourselves like to avoid. They must keep a certain confidential manner. Tempted as we may be to view the history of medicine as a story of advancement from brute savagery to HMO-facilitated immortality, the evidence left behind over the past millennium -- textbooks,  scalpels and apothecary jars -- suggests, rather, the pains physicians have invariably taken to conceal from their patients what they can't help but acknowledge among themselves: the morbid neutrality of their trade.</p><p>Then along comes the Duke University Medical Center with what looks to be a scholarly exhibition, but in fact is an act of high treason. The curators have innocuously titled it "The Physician's Art," and published on the occasion a book-length catalog handsome enough to mingle on a coffee table with the likes of Vanity Fair.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/04/06/physician_art/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/04/06/physician_art/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

