<?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 > Ray Sawhill</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/writer/ray_sawhill/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 09:00:00 +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>The gleeful contrarian</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/11/03/dutton/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/11/03/dutton/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Nov 2000 20:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadsheet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Language Police]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/technology/view/2000/11/03/dutton</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not content with pushing buttons at Arts &#038; Letters Daily, Denis Dutton now plans to shake up the publishing industry.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Denis Dutton, editor of the popular Web site <a target="new" href="http://www.cybereditions.com/aldaily/">Arts & Letters Daily,</a> has the kind of damn-the-torpedoes, strapping intellectuality that figures like Camille Paglia, Robert Hughes and John Searle do. Over dinner with him, trying to keep up with his knowledge and ideas about wine, Glenn Gould, Kant and evolutionary psychology, you can feel like Boswell invigorated by the company of Dr. Johnson. </p><p>Dutton, 56, grew up in Los Angeles, got his Ph.D. from the University of California at Santa Barbara, spent time in India with the Peace Corps (he still twangs away at his sitar on occasion) and eventually accepted an appointment to the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand. A gleeful contrarian, he edits the academic journal Philosophy and Literature, and in 1996 founded the Bad Writing Award. A thinker who prefers to measure his thoughts against what actually exists, he once took time out to live with the wood carvers of the Sepik River region of New Guinea to learn what art, craft and beauty mean to them. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/11/03/dutton/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/11/03/dutton/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Art for politics&#8217; sake</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/10/12/munson/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/10/12/munson/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2000 07:21:00 +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/2000/10/12/munson</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A critic of the NEA and Harvard talks about the narrow-minded, shock-obsessed contemporary art scene.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lynne Munson's "Exhibitionism: Art in an Era of Intolerance" is unusual in its use of the word "intolerance," which refers not, as one might expect, to <a href="/news/feature/1999/10/02/giuliani/index.html">Rudy Giuliani</a> and <a href="/directory/topics/jesse_helms/">Jesse Helms,</a> but to the atmosphere of political correctness that prevails in the art world itself. It's unusual too in not being polemical, scholarly or comprehensive. Munson's goal is clearly to avoid scattershot opinionating. She wants instead to focus on describing what has become of the art world -- and to explain how it got that way. </p><p> To do this, Munson has put together a collection of journalistic portraits of some of the institutions -- the National Endowment for the Arts, museum bureaucracies, art history at Harvard -- that characterize the contemporary art world. The result is a small book of surprising weight and substance, provocative in the best sense. You might draw different conclusions than Munson does from her reporting, but you'd be hard-pressed to find a swifter, more fact-chunky short treatment of the framework within which the contemporary arts operate. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/10/12/munson/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/10/12/munson/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A movie called &#8220;Nashville&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/06/27/nashville_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/06/27/nashville_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/feature/2000/06/27/nashville</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Twenty-five years ago, it looked like Robert Altman's freewheeling cinematic tapestry would change movies forever. What happened?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>1. 1975</b></p><p>Robert Altman's "Nashville" was released in 1975. We'd only recently pulled out of Vietnam; the energy crisis was upon us; Nixon had just resigned; and hardly anyone had heard of an oddly ambitious Southern governor named Jimmy Carter. </p><p>The world of filmmaking and filmgoing circa 1975 seems just as remote. The idea of studying movies in college was new and exciting; the filmmakers of the French New Wave still had some vitality; screenplays and collections of movie reviews were regularly published -- indeed, a film critic, <a href="http://www.salonmagazine.com/bc/1999/02/09bc.html">Pauline Kael,</a> was one of the country's most argued-over intellectuals; the annual summer onslaught of action-adventure extravaganzas was as yet unanticipated. Repertory houses showing older and foreign films could be found in many cities, and colleges were the homes of competing film series. </p><p>Most of the big hits of the 1970s were as square as they've always been, but there was always something for movie buffs to quarrel about. Had <a href="/people/rewind/1999/08/07/godard/index.html">Godard</a> blown it by embracing Maoism and video? Were Bertolucci and Bellochio really the equal of Antonioni and Fellini? Why were so few people aware of Ichikawa? </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/06/27/nashville_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/06/27/nashville_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The tantric moviegoer</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/05/10/eroticismii/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/05/10/eroticismii/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2000 16:00:00 +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/health/sex/urge/2000/05/10/eroticismii</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[New media has hurt sex on film,  but there are  ways to watch movies in an erotic frame of mind. Second of two parts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>P</b>erhaps one explanation for the current near-absence of what we might call traditional movie eroticism is the preeminence of TV, video and the Web as media forms. TV used to aspire to be like the movies. Now the effort is going in the opposite direction, into making movies more like TV, ads, rock videos and Web sites. There's a big difference between new-media sexiness and movie eroticism.</p><p>Video tends to make everything literal and raucous. Tasty bits aren't just brought to the surface, they're made ultrabrite, and actively go after your nerve endings. This is sex as special effects and packaging, all tweaked and Photoshopped. It's sex for kids, the kind of sex you run out of energy for at about the age of 30 -- around the same time, perhaps not coincidentally, many people lose interest in new pop music. (Has anyone yet made a movie that has intriguing sensual qualities using this new pumped-up, one-blast-after-another, nonlinear language? Some would say <a href="/ent/movies/review/1999/10/15/fight_club/index.html">"Fight Club,"</a> others have made a case for <a href="/ent/movies/review/1999/06/18/lola/index.html">"Run Lola Run."</a> I'd argue for <a href="/ent/movies/reviews/1999/04/02reviewa.html">"The Matrix."</a> Whatever the case, there haven't been many.)</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/05/10/eroticismii/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/05/10/eroticismii/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Movies in heat</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/05/09/eroticism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/05/09/eroticism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 May 2000 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dirty Dancing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/health/sex/urge/2000/05/09/eroticism</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Films used to erotically seduce us; now they tend to sedate instead. First of two parts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>I</b>n a long, charged sequence in "Dirty Dancing," the working-class hunk Johnny (Patrick Swayze) is teaching the pampered teenager Baby (Jennifer Grey) how to dance.</p><p>At one point he's behind her and, with one hand on her bare belly, he uses the other to raise her arm up behind his head in a passionately nuzzling posture. Then he releases her arm and lets his free hand trail down her side, tracing her underarm and the outside curve of her breast. Baby bursts into laughter. And every time he attempts the move, the squirmy, eager girl gets the giggles. She just can't contain herself.</p><p>Finally, after a few stern, almost disgusted looks from Johnny, Baby manages to keep a straight face. Her eyes twinkle softly, and her movements and breathing slow down -- Baby has found her groove. Only now can the dance lesson proceed.</p><p>"Dirty Dancing" is the movie equivalent of a dopey juvenile novel, but it has a number of such primal scenes, and when it opened in 1987 it quickly became a surprise hit. Theaters were jammed with beaming, liquefying women of all ages, many of whom saw the movie over and over. What excited and pleased them wasn't just images of great pecs, fab butts and poppin' energy. It was the movie's portrayal of a young woman opening up to her deep sensations of lust and desire (and perhaps also the fantasy that she could come into her own, sexually, in a matter of weeks).</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/05/09/eroticism/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/05/09/eroticism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Shark stories</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/04/06/geffen_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/04/06/geffen_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2000 16:00:00 +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/feature/2000/04/06/geffen</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bios of David Geffen and Michael Eisner: Stroke books  for the power-and-glamour-hungry.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>I</b>n the world of Tom King's "The Operator," a biography of the music and movie mogul David Geffen, and of Kim Masters' "The Keys to the Kingdom" an account of Michael Eisner's reign at Disney, the media biz comes across as a pixilated moosh. The artists function like businesspeople, the businesspeople are creative, everyone lives in terror of where public taste will go next, and what comes into being around and because of the movies (publicity, gossip, spinoffs, documentaries) is more entertaining than the movies themselves.</p><p>"I'm not Sammy Glick," Geffen protests, referring to the unprincipled subject of Budd Schulberg's 1941 Hollywood novel "What Makes Sammy Run?" Yet of course Geffen <i>is</i> Sammy Glick to a T, although a contemporary, gay variation on the standard grasping, vindictive theme.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/04/06/geffen_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/04/06/geffen_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A nerd&#039;s rhapsody</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2000/03/16/i_like_m2m/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2000/03/16/i_like_m2m/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/entertainment/feature/2000/03/16/i_like_m2m</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In defense of "Mission to Mars."]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>L</b>ast Saturday, after a week of media-free living in Mexico, my wife and I walked into a San Diego movie theater, where we watched a new science fiction picture in the company of a modest crowd. At first I was intrigued by its quiet tone. Some awkward moments made me worry that the film might lose its audience, but the crowd remained attentive. Then some passages of extraordinary beauty and daring took me another step into the film's way of seeing. By the end, I was quite moved. I spent the rest of the evening happily babbling about what the movie had made me feel and think.</p><p>The movie was Brian De Palma's "Mission to Mars," and only when we arrived in New York and I tuned back into the media did I learn what readers who follow the press coverage of movies already know -- that "Mission to Mars" got the year's worst reviews, a spanking almost as severe as that received by an earlier De Palma film, "Bonfire of the Vanities." (See <a href="/ent/movies/review/2000/03/10/mission_to_mars">here</a> for Andrew O'Hehir's pan in Salon, and <a href="/ent/log/2000/03/10/mars_reviews/index.html">here</a> for Salon's coverage of the film's unhappy reception generally.)</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2000/03/16/i_like_m2m/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2000/03/16/i_like_m2m/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Black and right</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/1999/11/10/sowell_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/1999/11/10/sowell_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 1999 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Author Interviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberalism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/int/1999/11/10/sowell</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thomas Sowell talks about the arrogance of liberal elites and the loneliness of the black conservative.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>U</b>tter the words "right wing" to your typical liberal, and he or she is likely to conjure up a Bosch-like inferno of white sheets, helmet-haired blonds and pollution-loving robber barons. Far be it from me, a mere arts journalist, to suggest that this gaudy image, however satisfying, does considerable injustice to a complicated phenomenon. But liberals also do themselves an injustice by remaining content with such a distorted semi-fantasy.</p><p>They deprive themselves of the provocations and contributions of some first-class thinkers and writers who have found a place on the right. Agree or disagree with such writers as Florence King, Richard Brookhiser, James Buchanan, Gertrude Himmelfarb, Francis Fukuyama, Milton Friedman, Kenneth Minogue, James Q. Wilson and Roger Scruton, you're almost certain to find more stimulation from wrestling with their arguments and points than you are from dozing through yet another recital of the familiar old lefty credos.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/1999/11/10/sowell_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/1999/11/10/sowell_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Romance&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/1999/09/17/romance/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/1999/09/17/romance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/review/1999/09/17/romance</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Director Catherine Breillat and star Caroline Ducey follow the urge wherever it leads.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>H</b>ad Catherine Breillat's "Romance" been released 25 years ago, it would have caused an immense fuss in the press, and would likely have been a must-see for the stylish crowd. You'd have overheard people arguing about it in restaurants and bars. Hipsters would have competed to see who could be bored with the whole brouhaha first.</p><p>These days, who knows how it'll be received? It is an art-house sex movie, and that term no longer has the allure it once did. But I found "Romance" to be one of the two or three most potent films about sex I've seen in the last few decades. And I hope to persuade you that it's something more than just some arty turn-on, though among other things it certainly is that, too.</p><p>It's quite different from "Basic Instinct," <a href="/ent/feature/1999/07/23/marcus/index.html">"Eyes Wide Shut"</a> or "Nine 1/2 Weeks." No stars, no melodrama, no rock soundtrack, no flashy cutting. Instead, "Romance" is austere, even clinical. And where such gross-out date movies as <a href="/ent/movies/reviews/1998/07/cov_17review.html">"There's Something About Mary"</a> and <a href="/ent/movies/review/1999/07/09/pie/index.html">"American Pie"</a> suggest food fights at the Burger King, "Romance" is like an evening spent at a four-star restaurant, lingering over the pati and snails.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/1999/09/17/romance/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/1999/09/17/romance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Unrequired reading</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/1999/07/16/pubpros/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/1999/07/16/pubpros/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 1999 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Readers and Reading]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/feature/1999/07/16/pubpros</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Publishing jobs turn the pleasure of reading into a chore. Here&#039;s what editors read in their fantasies.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>P</b>ity the poor publishing professional. She -- and these days, three out of four publishing pros on the editorial side are women -- was lured into the field by her love of books. Yet she spends her work hours as caught up in commerce and bureaucratic politics as any office drone. She hoped to have regular encounters with art, thought and glamour. Yet what she runs into more frequently is the fact that she's earning far less than friends who went into squarer fields. She expected to continue her life as an eager reader. Yet she spends her reading time wading through manuscripts, review copies and buzzed-about but lousy new books. "You hate your work, you wonder why you're doing it, you think you should quit," an editor said to me recently. "And it really does cut into your reading enjoyment."</p><p>Perhaps as a consequence, there's little that makes people in publishing as wistful as talking about what they'd like to be reading. They sit back, they smile a little and their eyes search the ceiling -- this is a question they still really care about. What answers do they come up with? Suspecting that there might be something to be learned here, and with as few preconceptions as I could manage, I asked a dozen publishing people how their reading habits would change if they never had to read out of obligation again.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/1999/07/16/pubpros/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/1999/07/16/pubpros/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>South Of The Border, West Of The Sun</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/1999/02/24/sneaks_128/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/1999/02/24/sneaks_128/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 1999 20:00:00 +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/1999/02/24/sneaks</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ray Sawhill reviews &#039;South of the Border, West of The Sun&#039; by Haruki Murakami.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><font size="+1" color="#000000" face="TIMES, TIMES NEW ROMAN">H</font>aruki Murakami's new novel, "South of the Border, West of the Sun," has little of the deadpan daring of his 1989 "A Wild Sheep Chase," or of such later works as "Dance Dance Dance" (1994) and <a target="_top" href="http://www.salonmagazine.com/books/sneaks/1997/11/24review.html">"The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle"</a> (1997). "South of the Border" is narrated by a successful though vaguely unhappy jazz bar owner named Hajime. Once, as a child, he'd had a perfect friendship, with a crippled girl named Shimamoto. But  he moved away, and he has gone on to break some hearts, marry, prosper and lose his ideals. Then, as in a scene from a movie (Murakami leans heavily on "Casablanca" throughout), Shimamoto walks into one of Hajime's clubs, flourishes a cigarette and asks for a light. Hajime starts to feel whole again -- yet not quite. The passing of time and the shame of betrayal keep getting in the way. And anyway, is this new, grown-up Shimamoto real or a phantom summoned up by need and imagination? It's "Brief Encounter" for the New Age.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/1999/02/24/sneaks_128/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/1999/02/24/sneaks_128/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Architecture</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/1998/10/29/sneaks_35/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/1998/10/29/sneaks_35/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:00:00 +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/1998/10/29/sneaks</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ray Sawhill reviews "Architecture: Choice or Fate" by Leon Krier.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The post-Warhol now isn't a moment when a taste for the quiet, the tender<br />
                            and the modest gets you much credit. People<br />
                            who are fascinated by forms, conventions and<br />
                            codes -- and who see much that's potentially<br />
                            wonderful in them -- have largely given up trying<br />
                            to make a public case for them; there seems to be<br />
                            no way of escaping their association with<br />
                            stuffiness, let alone (ultimate sin) boringness. The<br />
                            polemicist, architect and town planner Leon Krier<br />
                            is one of the few who's currently taking this<br />
                            temperament public -- and his new book, though<br />
                            stuffy indeed, isn't just not boring, it's enthralling.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/1998/10/29/sneaks_35/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/1998/10/29/sneaks_35/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In Praise Of Commercial Culture</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/1998/06/12/sneaks_30/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/1998/06/12/sneaks_30/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 1998 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/1998/06/12/sneaks</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ray Sawhill
reviews &#039;In Praise of Commercial Culture&#039; by Tyler Cowen]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><font size="+1" color="#000000">Y</font>ou probably know that Impressionism couldn't have occurred if it hadn't been for the invention of metal tubes for paints. You may not, on the other hand, have wondered about the technology needed to quarry and transport the blocks of marble that Michelangelo turned into sculptures, or about the kinds of financial organizations a culture needs before it can fund such efforts.</p><p>Tyler Cowen, a young economics professor at George Mason University, writes about many such questions in his refreshing new look at markets and art, managing somehow to steer clear of both esthetic and neo-Marxist high-mindedness. He sets forth two arguments. The first is that, although we like to imagine that artists live and produce in defiance of the market, art has had no better friend than capitalism. Imperfect though they may be, markets have opened up opportunities and promoted diversity; they have sprung artists free from aristocratic patronage, and they have provided artists with ever more, and ever cheaper, materials.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/1998/06/12/sneaks_30/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/1998/06/12/sneaks_30/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hollywood swingers</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/1998/04/22/feature_4/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/1998/04/22/feature_4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 1998 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/feature/1998/04/22/feature</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The heroes of America&#039;s film renaissance were brought down by their excesses, two new books argue -- and they took American cinema with them.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><font size="+1" color="#000000">R</font>emembering the feverish moviemaking days of the 1970s,  writer-director John Milius said, "The stuff that brought it all to an end came from within. Diller, Eisner and Katzenberg -- they ruined the movies." And here's what  producer Don Simpson said about the end of his own go-go years, the 1980s: "The failing of the present-day system is quite simply based on the fact that the studio executives are by and large ex-lawyers, agents, business-oriented people who are fantastic executives and managers who don't have a clue about telling stories." Different decade, same message: The movies are dead, business killed 'em, and things are only getting worse.</p><p>A consensus exists among some of the more serious, informed movie journalists and critics that all American moviemaking passion is spent. This judgment is the  inevitable consequence of a widely shared interpretation of recent movie history, which goes like this: The spirit of the '60s came to Hollywood with "Easy Rider" and "Bonnie and Clyde." The public responded to a new mood; the studios, in confusion, opened their doors; for once, talent poured through the system on its own terms. Then the mood of the country turned again, a reaction set in and -- here come the '80s! -- the producers took over, delivering vacuous if shiny blasts of energy. In the '90s, we have ...</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/1998/04/22/feature_4/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/1998/04/22/feature_4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fair Play</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/1997/12/23/23review/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/1997/12/23/23review/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 1997 20:00:00 +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/1997/12/23/23review</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ray Sawhill reviews &#039;Fair Play&#039; by Steven E. Landsburg.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><font size="+1" color="#000000">O</font>ne of the more transfixing ongoing spectacles the Web offers is Steven E. Landsburg's <a target="new" href="http://www.slate.com/Economics/97-12-04/Economics.asp">"Everyday Economics"</a> column in Slate. Economists writing for general audiences are largely a gentlemanly, helpful lot, channeling ego into explaining ideas and concepts. Landsburg is the great exception, a breast-beating showoff as exhibitionistic and domineering as a bad actor. I read him with horror and exasperation. He's the Gary Oldman of popular-economics writers.</p><p>Landsburg has now filled a book -- his second volume for the general reader -- by expanding some of his Slate columns into essay-length chapters, and framing the package with accounts of conversations he has had with his young daughter, Cayley. Even longtime Landsburg watchers will find a wealth of new delights here. He moves back and forth between his trademark outrageous stands on touchy issues -- ridiculing environmentalism and worrying about the national debt, for instance -- and the passages about Cayley. We're supposed to find her child's sense of fair play a trustworthy guide to economics, specifically Landsburg's own brand, but, as always with this writer, what's really on display is Landsburg.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/1997/12/23/23review/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/1997/12/23/23review/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

