Great initial point, John -- and great subsequent point, David. I would only add to the discussion by saying that in all eras of hip hop history, rappers have been political and positive as much as "gangster." And this is not to take the responsibility off of those rappers that perpetuate the brute stereotype, but it's the white-dominated media -- feeding the white suburban boys who became ironically the driving audience of hip hop in the 1990s -- who chose to champion the gangstas while disregarding the other rappers. Just sayin' it's pretty complicated.

Maddie, I think Adele is a great choice, but what you describe in your post is how she is "romantic" in a small "r" sense -- but you still need to make an argument that she is Romantic in the classic, ideological sense.

You clearly are obsessed with Mr. Gabriel, John. Thankfully, he has a body of work that seems to have an appropriate song for every occasion!

This is potentially the coolest (in more ways than one) post in awhile -- but can you explain what characteristics of a rugged individualist Mingus exemplifies?

I got some movie watching to do -- will get back to you.

A Faulknerian blog post -- and in the middle of it all is a very astute point about the diction of "body."

Such cool, interesting people in the world (and that include you, Nora!).

I think you have rhetorically seized back the power from the college application process. And it's over, right? Well, there you go.

Haven't seen that one -- so can't help -- but sounds like a cool camera technique.

The way we define "intelligence" over the years has always supported binary hierarchies. See Howard Gardner: http://howardgardner01.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/faq_march2013.pdf

Sacco and Vanzetti ... what about Joe Christmas?

I used "tree" because it is a pretty value-neutral word in our society (although environmentalists and loggers might not think so!). Let's take the word "man" -- and see how, while certainly there is a "real" biological entity that we identify with "man" -- the word itself is very much what a linguist might call a "floating signifier" -- meaning it implies a bunch of characteristics, different ones for different people, that have little to do with biology. I only say this to indicate that language is not just communication; language is power -- the way we define something defines something, if you know what I mean.

Well, that's a depressing one from Joni, isn't it? Thanks for the honest reflections, Evan.

Many of Freud's premises have certainly been questioned -- and the universality of his psychosexual model has been fairly roundly rejected -- but most of Freud's insights, including the psychosexual model of development, are still seen as "valid" to a great degree -- and certainly as ground-breaking and very helpful to our understanding of the human mind. I only note this to say that the way Faulkner portrays that encounter with the dietician -- which is clearly a Freudian moment, on many levels -- is also insightful. It seems to capture a truth about human development -- and the power of social forces -- in this case, around gender and race -- that shape the individual.

Not a divergence at all -- seems to tie in very well with The Awakening and how gender affects our relationship to society. Thanks!