|
|
|
And although I sent it in last week, it hasn't appeared. I emailed Amazon to ask if it was deleted because it wasn't like those of the premies -- you know, two lines total, no dicussion of actual content, five stars only and , all including the words "touched," "inspired" and "so beautiful." Here's my review: While followers of Mr. Rawat have reviewed this work, mostly with short, "it's-so-beautiful-and-inspiring" generalizations, one cannot help but wonder if an objective reviewer -- one who is not a student of Mr. Rawat -- would reach the same subjective conclusions. Mr. Gallwey tells us this work shouldn't be reviewed objectively, that only subjective reactions matter, but why should that be true? Since the reviews by Mr. Rawat's followers do not tell you much about the actual content of this book, it would be difficult to tell that there is a definite ideology being promoted in the banal verses Mr. Rawat writes. In the Preface displayed above, for example, he says: "For the mind it is more intriguing to be filled with questions. For the heart, it is more intriguing to be filled with answers." This reveals one of the basic ideologies of Mr. Rawat, that there is this duality in every person, in this case, the duality between "heart" and "mind," and it's clear that in Mr. Rawat's belief system, "heart" (whatever that is) is the favored entity. The problem is that this is basically Hindu dualism, something that Mr. Rawat promotes while claiming he teaches no religious principles at all. It's also a belief that many of Mr. Rawat's former followers have come to reject, and further, that it is dysfunctional to live one's life thinking that your own "mind" has to be subjugated and controlled and one needs what Mr. Rawat claims to offer to do that. So Mr. Rawat diagnoses this dualistic problem -- this problem with "mind" getting in the way of being with your "heart" -- and then he claims to be able to provide the solution for this supposed dilemma that humans find themselves in. Obviously, the underpinnings of those ideas should be objectively questioned. But Mr. Rawat has been writing this sort of really bad "poetry" for years, (although to my knowledge he has never tried to peddle it on Amazon before), and if one wants an example of the tautologies and circular emptiness of his verses, one need only go to the next set of lines: "Questions stay questions. Generations come and go. The questions stay, and so do the answers." Well, yes, but then, he isn't really saying anything there, now is he? It is the province of charlatans like Mr. Rawat to make those kind of meaningless, empty, statements, while pretending they are profound, in the hope that the reader assumes Mr. Rawat has some kind of wise insight that the ordinary person doesn't have. It is the province of true believers in charlatans like Mr. Rawat to rave about the profundity of absolutely anything he utters. Finally, it's important to point out that Mr. Rawat is formerly known as "The Lord of the Universe." Anyone interested in finding out about that particular incarnation of Mr. Rawat -- one before he became a published poet -- can purchase "The Lord of the Universe" on video cassette on Amazon.com. It will give you some insight into who Mr. Rawat (and any one of his followers) really thinks he is.
Modified by Joe at Wed, Jan 18, 2006, 15:20:08
|
|
|
|
Very nice review, Joe. When did you submit it? I posted one back over a week ago and it still hasn't shown up. Hm .... Try again?
|
|
|
|
I tried to post it again, and Amazon said I already had a review up, but it isn't there. I also note the following on Amazon, below the description of Rawat's "great work of art." I thought this was interesting. LOTU is not the look Rawat is going for here. And maybe Charles Glasser is plugging his own book -- getting some grist from the premies. Customers who viewed this book also viewed
Modified by Joe at Wed, Jan 18, 2006, 16:16:27
|
|
|
|
In fact, nobody with a negative word to say about LOTU had anything more than a 50% helpfulness rating. (More spamming going on?) But my favourite is from a guy called John Donaldson, who is apparently neither a premie or an ex, who came up with some choice phrases: >Its leader, a young Indian chap with chubby cheeks and a fingernails-scratching-across-a-blackboard voice, dressed in Hari Krishna garb, is interviewed and offers a plateful of jibberish that makes no sense to lay people.
|
|
|
|
Here's my new one: Any reasonable reader will immediately see there's something rather strange about this book. For one thing, it's vacuous, empty of real content. Rawat pushes at words the way an infant plays with the food on his plate, eschewing any real communication for the mere appearance of same. For instance, consider this bit of nonsense:
What I say comes from my heart.
I talk abut life, not because
it is written somewhere but
because it is engraved in our heart.
Only an extremely accepting reader could overlook the empty, tired cliches that, even on their own terms, are misapplied. Only an entirely uncritical and naive reader would even try to make sense of this misshaped drivel. But alas, Rawat knows his audience! They're his cult followers who do indeed bring an uncritical eye to everything he says, no matter how dull and insipid.
The book is meaningless because, in the truest sense, Rawat has no meaning. He doesn't have to. He's not writing for readers who expect any sort of rational content and that's not what he provides. Rather, he offers the security of the sound of the Master's voice.
The book is unintentionally revealing about Rawat himself, however. For example, the passage above reflects a decidedly defensive attitude, as if Rawat's responding to some unstated criticism, vouching for his integrity as if it's always been in question. Alas, one might wonder why, what has happened in this man's life to make him take such a defensive posture, but Rawat's the first person to discourage that or any other honest inquiry. He downright slams questions in "poetry" that seems more a paranoid invective against an operating mind than anything else. Please ask yourself, who else but a cult leader would actually try to "inspire" people to ignore their basic and natural curiosity? Who else but a cult leader would encourage his readers to treat the mind with such mistrust and disdain? Rawat fears the mind like a vampire welcomes sunlight and, like a vampire, he tries to seduce his followers to join him in some better, special, secret place.
In fact, this is the same man who's the subject of the hilarious and damning "Lord of the Universe" video also available through this site. No wonder he's a bit skittish about inquiring minds. Indeed, Rawat's entire life has been one impossibility after another. As a younger man, he paraded himself as God, like Jesus but only more powerful. He called himself the Saviour of Mankind and swore to bring peace on earth in his lifetime. Absurd? Yes, but true all the same. Now he's doing something even stranger, pretending he never made those claims in the first place! Hence the overwhelming fear of questions, any one of which might lead to discovery of his real history and uncover his shameful exploitation of the small flock he's been able to maintain through the years.
"Clarity" is anything but. One should read this book as a cautionary tale, shuddering at the idea that otherwise intelligent people can and do fall prey to cult leaders like Rawat.
Related link: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0974062715/ref=cm_cr_dp_pt/002-6081867-4804827?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=283155&s=books
Modified by Jim at Fri, Jan 20, 2006, 09:45:49
|
|
|
|
It seems that someone didn't like it. Hm .....
|
|
|
|
I don't imagine Jossi Fresco was over-keen to see it there - might even have made some threatening noises in Amazon's direction..? Suggest you repost this this at the top of the forum, Jim - it's likely to go unnoticed otherwise, Saturday night and all that. And also post there the review they deleted. (I have a printout, in the unlikely event of your not having your own copy.)
Modified by Nigel at Sat, Jan 21, 2006, 16:23:17
|
|
|
|
Hi Nige, yes I suspect that Fresco or someone just like him has complained. So I sent Amazon this inquiry: I emailed you earlier about a review of mine for Prem Rawat's book "Clarity". The review never made its way up and I wanted to know why. But while I awaited your reply I tried again, posting a second review. This one was on your site immediately and, in fact, whoever replied to my inquiry noticed and mentioned that in your reply. Today, however, I see that my second review, the one that was posted, was now missing!
Could you kindly explain what's going on here? For your reference, this is the review:
"Any reasonable reader will immediately see there's something rather strange about this book. For one thing, it's vacuous, empty of real content. Rawat pushes at words the way an infant plays with the food on his plate, eschewing any real communication for the mere appearance of same. For instance, consider this bit of nonsense: What I say comes from my heart.
I talk abut life, not because
it is written somewhere but
because it is engraved in our heart. Only an extremely accepting reader could overlook the empty, tired cliches that, even on their own terms, are misapplied. Only an entirely uncritical and naive reader would even try to make sense of this misshaped drivel. But alas, Rawat knows his audience! They're his cult followers who do indeed bring an uncritical eye to everything he says, no matter how dull and insipid. The book is meaningless because, in the truest sense, Rawat has no meaning. He doesn't have to. He's not writing for readers who expect any sort of rational content and that's not what he provides. Rather, he offers the security of the sound of the Master's voice. The book is unintentionally revealing about Rawat himself, however. For example, the passage above reflects a decidedly defensive attitude, as if Rawat's responding to some unstated criticism, vouching for his integrity as if it's always been in question. Alas, one might wonder why, what has happened in this man's life to make him take such a defensive posture, but Rawat's the first person to discourage that or any other honest inquiry. He downright slams questions in "poetry" that seems more a paranoid invective against an operating mind than anything else. Please ask yourself, who else but a cult leader would actually try to "inspire" people to ignore their basic and natural curiosity? Who else but a cult leader would encourage his readers to treat the mind with such mistrust and disdain? Rawat fears the mind like a vampire welcomes sunlight and, like a vampire, he tries to seduce his followers to join him in some better, special, secret place. In fact, this is the same man who's the subject of the hilarious and damning "Lord of the Universe" video also available through this site. No wonder he's a bit skittish about inquiring minds. Indeed, Rawat's entire life has been one impossibility after another. As a younger man, he paraded himself as God, like Jesus but only more powerful. He called himself the Saviour of Mankind and swore to bring peace on earth in his lifetime. Absurd? Yes, but true all the same. Now he's doing something even stranger, pretending he never made those claims in the first place! Hence the overwhelming fear of questions, any one of which might lead to discovery of his real history and uncover his shameful exploitation of the small flock he's been able to maintain through the years. "Clarity" is anything but. One should read this book as a cautionary tale, shuddering at the idea that otherwise intelligent people can and do fall prey to cult leaders like Rawat."
Obviously, Rawat and his followers (who have posted a whole slew of fawning reviews as they were asked to by their cult) wouldn't like a review such as mine but surely that's not enough to warrant its deletion, is it? As far as I can tell, I'm within your posting guidelines. So I'm rather confused and look forward to your explanation. Sincerely, Jim Heller
|
|
|
|
I thought Joe had one also. It's gone, or at least I can't find it. Is Amazon really okay with premies going through the reviews and hitting "report this" on anything with less than five stars? Can't they see what's going on? How much is rawat paying for that "sponsored link", anyway? Must be a crap load of money. Do the premies know they are paying for a link on Amazon to rawat's own site? And, do they care? Obviously, Amazon doesn't mind being spammed by a cult if they get money. I thought Amazon was better than that. Is there a premie at Amazon? There must be.
|
|
|
|
I have trawled all 44 reviews three times and Joe's is definitely not there. It would seem that those less than 100% sincere have to at least pretend a little, with the rest of them. (Even premies can only pretend to like M's Vogon poetry.)
|
|
|
|
Hi Nigel, How can Amazon do this? Two other people e-mailed me after I posted my question below to say their reviews had been removed also. How many is that all together? That we know of? Those two and how many from here? This isn't right. All dissent is silenced? Sure, within the cult, you expect that. But at Amazon? I have absolutely no respect for Amazon anymore. I did, but it's gone.
|
|
|
|
Hi Nigel, How can Amazon do this? Two other people e-mailed me after I posted my question below to say their reviews had been removed also. How many is that all together? That we know of? Those two and how many from here? This isn't right. All dissent is silenced? Sure, within the cult, you expect that. But at Amazon? I have absolutely no respect for Amazon anymore. I did, but it's gone.
Hi, it's certainly worrying - actually more worrying than I realised if other negative reviews have been pulled. Have you got any more details on those? I can only think of two eplanations for an objectively neutral site like Amazon behaving that way: the first is threats of legal action (which is more than Amazon can be bothered to get involved with, whether the action is justified or not), and the other is financial incentive of some sort. (I'm just guessing here - but I it certainly helps that the two forum posters with deleted reviews both work in the legal profession, and are unlikely to just shrug it off and say 'whatever'...)
Modified by Nigel at Sat, Jan 21, 2006, 17:43:56
|
|
|
|
At close of play on Friday 20th there were 46 reviews on amazon. Last night there were definitely only 44 and no sign of yours or Jim's. (premie spouse also noticed this, so I'm pretty sure I didn't miss it.) Now there are 47, including yours and one new one, but not Jim's.
|
|
|
|
Joe's review:QUOTE Meaningless Tripe, January 11, 2006 Reviewer:
J. Whalen (California, USA) - See all my reviews
Despite their juvenile nature, there is a definite ideology being promoted in the banal verses Mr. Rawat writes. For example, he implies in a variety of the verses throughout the book, one of his basic religious teachings,, that there is duality in every person, in this case, the duality between "heart" and "mind," and it's clear that in Mr. Rawat's belief system, "heart" (whatever that is) is the favored entity. The problem is that this is basically Hindu dualism, something that Mr. Rawat promotes while claiming he teaches no religious principles at all. It's also a belief that many of Mr. Rawat's former followers have come to reject, and further, come to conclude that it is dysfunctional to live one's life thinking that your own "mind" has to be subjugated and controlled and one needs what Mr. Rawat claims to offer to do that. So Mr. Rawat diagnoses this dualistic problem -- this problem with "mind" getting in the way of being with your "heart" -- and then he claims to be able to provide the solution for this supposed dilemma that humans find themselves in. Obviously, the underpinnings of those ideas should be objectively questioned. But Mr. Rawat has been writing this sort of really bad "poetry" for years, (although to my knowledge he has never tried to peddle it on Amazon before), and if one wants an example of the tautologies and circular emptiness of his verses, one need only go to any page. It is the province of charlatans like Mr. Rawat to make the kind of meaningless, empty, statements displayed in this book, while pretending they are profound, in the hope that the reader assumes Mr. Rawat has some kind of wise insight that the ordinary person doesn't have. It is the province of true believers in charlatans like Mr. Rawat to rave about the profundity of absolutely anything he puts out. Finally, it's important to point out that Mr. Rawat is formerly known as "The Lord of the Universe." Anyone interested in finding out about that particular incarnation of Mr. Rawat -- one before he became a published poet -- can purchase "The Lord of the Universe" on video cassette on Amazon.com. It will give you some insight into who Mr. Rawat (and any one of his followers) really thinks he is. ENDQUOTE
|
|
|
|
It's no longer on the front page, cq, but it's there - and so are all the others.
|
|
|
|
This is what they said although it doesn't really make sense as my post was already up once before it disappeared -- only to reappear a couple of days later. ??:
Greetings from Amazon.com.
I'm sorry your review of "Clarity" has not yet appeared online. It
appears that the review was inadvertently withheld in processing.
I have now reinstated the review, and it will appear on our web site
soon. We appreciate your patience in this matter, and look forward
to reading your next review submission.
Thank you for contributing to the Amazon.com community.
|
|
|
|
Amazon is now a huge web trading co. Some underpaid office minion probably just filed Jim's email into the 'my-post-isn't-there' folder for a robot to take over. 'Occams razor' (2nd definition) is a foil to all conspiracy theories: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by human stupidity.
|
|
|
|
I think some premies are just hitting the "report this" link for reviews they don't like (or rather reviews that might actually make them think or doubt, which to them is even worse), and Amazon has been removing reviews as the easiest thing to do in response. It may be that Amazon now has the cult's number, though. By the way, Jim, that was a great review. Very well done and right on the money, but then you've had a lot of practice by now. Did you see the link to Glasser's book on the site? Hysterical, I'd say.
|
|
|
|
Hi Premie-Spouse! I just checked Amazon.com (I work in a library) and see there are 39 rave reviews and zero dissenting ones! I don't call that "diversity of opinion" if Jim's and Joe's reviews aren't published too. What's in it for Amazon, one wonders? We know what's in it for the author of the book. Fair play is surely an attribute of clarity. ~Shelagh
|
|
|
|
Two people e-mailed me when I posted this question to say they had posted reviews of the book on Amazon, but they were removed. Apparently the "diversity of opinion" they claim to cultivate is a crock.
The premie e-mail list received a mailing from tprf telling everybody the book was available at Amazon. No wonder everybody rushed to post their glowing praises of the book. They were practically told to. More "service"? So disgusting one can hardly stand it.
Modified by Premie_Spouse at Thu, Jan 19, 2006, 13:39:02
|
|
|
|
Hello, I'm writing to enquire as to why my review of a book you sell, "Clarity" by Prem Rawat, was never posted. I believe I wrote and submitted the review about two weeks ago. In fact, if you look at the book in question, and perhaps cross-reference it to the "Lord of the Universe" video which you also sell, which is about Prem Rawat back when he openly purported to be God incarnate and the Saviour of Mankind, you'll see that Mr. Rawat is a classic cult leader. I know all about the man, as I was once a follower myself. You can learn more about him still by reviewing the site presented by ex-followers, www.ex-premie.org. If you look at the small sample of his book, you'll see that it's merely vacuous, cult-speak, meant to beguile and recruit new members. Indeed, the many rather ridiculous fawning reviews on Amazon are all written by members of Rawat's cult who were urged by the group to post these comments. On the other hand, I understand that several former members of this cult have attempted to review the book like I have but, for some reason, none of our negative reviews have appeared. Could you please advise me why? Thanks very much. Sincerely, Jim Heller
|
|
|
|
I'll be interested to know if you hear back and what they have to say, Jim.
|
|
|
|
How about going over there and saying you found it "helpful?" 
|
|
|
|
I did. Hope it stays up this time.
|
|
|
|
Will and Joe, I read your reviews at Amazon earlier today. They are both gone now.
|
|
|
|
I submitted a review today, Jan. 19, and it was up for an hour or so. In that time, 2 out of 9 people found it helpful, (which certainly was gratifying). That means that there must be premies and exes checking that listing out rather frequently. I had two main comments, (1) all the positive reviewers would not be so effusive about the book if it weren't written by their cult leader Prem Rawat (which is certainly true), and (2) the reviews did not appear spontaneously but happened because of some concerted effort by premies. I believe that my review was probably deemed to break Amazon's rules about not commenting on other people's reviews and about focusing on the contents of the book. I also used the "cult" word, which might be too senstive for them. Who knows?
|
|
|
|
Will, I just put up a review in which I focused only on the content and the author and said nothing about the other reviews. It's entitled "Meaningless Tripe." I think if you do that, Amazon can't take your review down even though the cult will try to get them to. How about doing a revision? There is also a review over there with a fake name that compares Rawat to Dylan Thomas and Robert Frost, which MUST have been written by an ex-premie and I swear it was not me. Was that you? It's brilliant and very funny. By the way, have you seen Brokeback Mountain?
Modified by Joe at Thu, Jan 19, 2006, 19:57:17
|
|
|
|
Here is the standard email Amazon sends out in response to a question about removing a review. If you stick to the guidelines, they won't remove a review: Thank you for writing to us at Amazon.com.
Please allow me to clarify our customer review submission policies. Your review was removed because the comments you submitted did not review the title itself. Instead, your comments focused on other reviewers and were more suited to a chat room discussion.
I would strongly recommend re-reading our Review Writing Guidelines:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/browse/-/14279631/
If you would like to submit a new review of "Clarity" which focuses on its content and follows our guidelines, we encourage you to do so.
Also, if you would like to participate in a discussion with other customers, you may want to check out our Discussion Groups at http://www.amazon.com/board. To join a discussion, simply click on the topic that interests you. If you haven't participated before, we will ask you to register by clicking the "sign up" link on the topic page.
Regarding the other reviews you have referred to, customer reviews are typically removed from the Amazon.com web site for only two reasons: either the review was not within our guidelines, or the
author of the review requested its removal.
Due to our strict customer confidentiality policy, we can discuss the status of a review only with the person who wrote the review. I hope you will understand the importance of our security measures
despite any disappointment this may cause.
While Amazon.com does have a large staff to handle phone inquiries on general topics, there are certain small specialized departments that only use e-mail.
Thank you for your participation in the Amazon.com community.
Best regards,
Amazon.com Customer Service
http://www.amazon.com
|
|
|
|
Modified by Dermot at Thu, Jan 19, 2006, 23:10:00
|
|
|
|
Cheers. That review made my day. I loved the statement that white is the new black, but, actually, I think black is this year's pink, don't you?
Modified by Joe at Fri, Jan 20, 2006, 17:40:52
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Joe. I may give it another try, but my main point was about the other reviewers. I can see why Amazon would want to discourage that. As for the Frost comment - It's difficult sometimes to distinquish ex-premie satire from true-premie satsang, isn't it? It wasn't me. Brokeback - Of course I've seen it. I've followed the project long before it was cast with those two well-chosen actors. My boyfriend Steve and I went to see it and had a good cry. I am surprised that people are embracing this movie, given how sad it is. I've also read a new book out which contains essays by the author and the two screenwriters. I haven't thought of Brokeback in the context of premies and Knowledge, but now I am wondering how a premie would react. Would they encourage Ennis to begin to practice Knowledge at the end of the movie? Or would they have encouraged him to go inside (for the true fulfillment) even before the end? Do premies still deem romantic attachment a big obstacle? Is sadness a bad choice and the peace of the breath the correct alternative? I don't really want to even try to think like a premie at this moment, but I'll just say that we all have the need to mature and self-fulfill, but the idea of recommending Knowledge to Ennis is so absurd because he would have to daily practice those four techniques and tune in to SKY TV for doses of Rawat's lectures. And let us acknowledge that Rawat's appeal is just NOT universal, even though he seems to think so.
|
|
|
|
Will, saw your review, and it's great. Well done. You did what all the premies did, just said your reaction to the book. Loved your comments on the color scheme. But for Ennis Del Mar, yeah, that's a problem. What do you think would be more likely to get you killed in Wyoming in the 60a and 70s: 1) shacking up with your lover who is another guy, or 2) bowing down and kissing the feet of a pudgy Guru, having an altar in your house with Rawat's picture on it, and selling And It Is Divine, door to door? That might be a toss up, actually. l also went to see the film with my boyfriend, then saw it a couple of weeks later with my sister. I actually found it more powerful the second time. Finally, a movie with gay characters that is about love instead of sex. I personally think Jake Gyllenhaal should get the Oscar, just for being adorable and making my mouth water. Below is a great link to a very funny review of the movie by Dave White.
Related link: Straight Dude's Guide to Brokeback
Modified by Joe at Fri, Jan 20, 2006, 12:58:13
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Joe - it's a funny review. But I kind of winced a bit at this sub-Freudian passage: >'But it’s crucial. I was recently at a press screening for another movie and I overheard four guys in the theater lobby talking about “Brokeback.” They were resolute in their refusal to go see it and they couldn’t stop loudly one-upping each other about how they had no interest, were not “curious,” and were, in the words of the loudest guy in the group, “straight as that wall over there.” Oh, the wall with poster for the Big Gay Cowboy Movie on it? That straight wall? Well here’s something that everyone else now knows but that guy: he’s probably gay...' I've no problem with the idea that some guys are reluctant to admit they're gay (who wouldn't be, with the fear of homophobia, career damage etc.?), but not that they're *gay without knowing it* - and there's this Freudian myth that goes with the idea of latent homosexuality, that the louder someone protests they're not gay, the more likely it is that they are... I mean, really, how would the average gay - who knows exactly what their orientation is, and says so in bold terms - like it if people started insinuating they are therefore probably 'latent heterosexuals'? I might be wrong, here, but it's never rung true for me, the idea of 'latent' this or latent anything. Is it any more possible to be gay without knowing it, than be hetero without knowing it? Because I really can't imagine the latter... But, no big deal... Me and Moley are going to see Brokeback Mountain this next week. From all I've heard, it sounds brilliant.
|
|
|
|
Well, I think White is being sarcastic about that -- saying that the conventional wisdom about that more than the fact of it. But having said that, it rings true because most gay men have done it in their lives -- done and said things to try to deflect the idea that they might be gay. I know I did, maybe not that extreme, though. Your reverse argument doesn't make any sense because heterosexuality is not something men (at least) fear for themselves, while being gay, they do. So, I don't think it's they don't know they have homosexual feelings or thoughts, they just work very hard to repress it -- and especially to say things so others won't think they are gay, which is the ultimate fear. Again, I speak from personal experience here. A great and funny essay by David Sedaris I would recommend, called "I Like Guys," about just that (and combined with a discussion of racism) when he was a kid. One interesting study found that a large percentage of people convicted of being gay bashers, are in fact homosexual, or at least they react to homosexual images subconsciously. I don't believe in latent homosexuality, but I do believe -- again just based on anecdotal information-- that many straight men do have homoerotic feelings, and in many cases they are frightening to them, and one of the reasons a movie like this is difficult for them to see. It would be great if we could get to a point where people aren't so defined or put in categories and they are free to feel the way they feel, without thinking that it will affect them negatively, especially with respect to self image. The movie really is great -- but Jack and Ennis don't identify as gay, because what is that? What does that mean? They just love each other and it's just really sad that they can't be together. It's really just the Romeo and Juliet story we have seen so many times. People in love can't be together because of family/society or whatever and it makes people lonely, desperate and sad.
Modified by Joe at Fri, Jan 20, 2006, 13:49:26
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Joe, I understand the 'protest too much' ref, but didn't know about the gay-bashers research info. Interesting, if true. And I do understand the reasons for *consciously* suppressing ones natural responses. All I really meant it has often puzzled me the idea of not knowing what ones hormones are actually telling you - fish gotta swim, bird gotta fly etc. But I guess there could be a continuum of sorts between various shades of sexuality - and why not? What does it matter in the greater scheme? (I guess I've had it in for Freud for so long, I react badly to anything that smells like his influence) And now I wish I hadn't hi-jacked the thread with that small quibble, because of course you're right that there has never been a gay movie that was about love rather than just sex. I guess forty years ago there had never been a straight movie about just sex rather than love...
Modified by Nigel at Fri, Jan 20, 2006, 14:35:17
|
|
|
|
I guess forty years ago there had never been a straight movie about just sex rather than love... Riiiight.
|
|
|
|
Basically, Joe, I'm not that well up on movie history, so I'm not sure whether you're endorsing or chuckling at my inept analysis of it all. Maybe I'll just take two aspirin and go to bed before before I dig myself in any deeper.
|
|
|
|
Like any red-blooded gay man with both movie and Broadway musical genes, I can tell you for certain that 40 years ago, and especially 60-70 years ago before the Catholic Church got Hollywood to put in "the code," there was a whole lot of heterosexual sex in American movies, with not all that much love or romance involved.
|
|
|
|
The reviews are just hilarious !! Sycophants of the world unite, the master has a book to sell!! This is my number one favorite book . I always feel good after reading it and can read it again and again. I keep it by my bedside to read some excerpts before I sleep. Well that’s your reading list sorted out for the rest of your life : )
Not only has Prem Rawat's lovely book been a source of pleasure and inspiration for me - but I found myself giving it to so many people last year that I had to order it in bulk! It's the perfect gift.
Spread the knowledge, baby !
Prem Rawat arrived in the West from his native India at the age of 13. Since then, he has been travelling the world, presenting a message of peace to millions of people. He edited this book, made from excerpts from his addresses, and did the design as well as the illustrations. This book is about finding peace in the heart, letting the heart speak its message of peace. It is poetic, inspiring, original, simple, elegant. It is also very fresh and different. The creativity that it emanates finds its roots in the heart. The book clearly comes from Prem Rawat's heart, and its style is elegant, without pretense, and touches the heart whether one is a sophisticated reader or an uneducated person. I have liked Rumi and Kabir, but Prem Rawat is alive today, his style is contemporary and his words are untainted by translations, and centuries of evolution of language. I keep it on my bed table and read it again and again. A nice and enjoyable way for me to end the day on a note of peace and inspiration. Is it something to do with “ heart” ?
I know some intellectuals might look down their noses at the poetic oevre of Prem Rawat. It is `too simple', they'll say. `Too nice', perhaps, `too lacking in substance'. `Banal', even? No way!
For my money, these criticisms are, in fact, compliments if we only reframe those observations as `devoid of artifice' and `lacking pretension'. But even then we would be doing the poet a disservice. Applying commonplace criteria for the evaluation of these elegantly-hewn short pieces is to miss the profundity: the way so much is said `in the gaps', if you will. There is SO much more said when it is left unsaid: `less is more', to use a contemporary expression. And `expressions' is what we are talking about. White is the new black, and Rawat is the new Rock'n'roll! So let it roll...
The following stanza - probably my favourite - puts me in mind of Blake at his most metaphysical; of Tennyson at his most world-weary, Donne in the arms of a young mistress shouting at the bullying sun; of Keats in a Tuscan meadow; of Shelley after Peterloo; the newly-bereaved Kipling, perhaps? Dylan Thomas's intoxicated visions from a Larne boathouse; Ivor Cutler's `Wooden Tree', Pam Ayres' `Teeth' - or, you name it - all rolled into one:
Questions stay questions
Generations come and go
The questions stay
And so do the answers
But the comparison is probably a bit unfair to Prem Rawat. This verse alone knocks all those more celebrated talents into a cocked hat, in my opinion. No, his style is not reminiscent of Sylvia Plath, Robert Frost or Ted Hughes. Good! For that at least, I for one am very grateful. “ I am not a brainwashed culty philistine, I know good literature when I come across it”
Modified by Dermot at Thu, Jan 19, 2006, 22:32:14
|
|
|
|
Uh Dermot, I think the author of that review had his tongue firmly planted in his British cheek! All the best, Marianne
|
|
|
|
Hi Mar! Good to see you. How's it going?
|
|
|
|
but if you're referring to the longer, final one then that's a relief.I did think about it and wondered if a Premie could actually come up with something like that.Thinking on it again, even a Premie couldn't go that far. Well, hopefully that is. I wonder who penned it then? Anth the literary critter for the Cornish Times, perhaps? Cheers Dermot
|
|
|
|
But I doubt he'll admit it lest the review be struck. But really, Dermot, it's kind of obvious. Sheesh!
|
|
|
|
It's great! I love it. My heartiest congratulations to the author. And to Will, Jim, and Joe...good job! Glad those are up.
Modified by Premie_Spouse at Fri, Jan 20, 2006, 12:19:05
|
|
|
|
True, it's Anth territory but not exactly his sytle. So, Larkin of the Liverpool Echo springs immediately to mind. Style and references ...Donne, Dylan Thomas etc. If I'm wrong ...then double sheesh. Good to see the reviews from Joe, Will,Gerry and yourself. Yours was excellent. You should change careers, perhaps, or take up a second one.How about industrial grease cleaning? : )
|
|
|
|
Modified by Nigel at Fri, Jan 20, 2006, 18:56:38
|
|
|
|
That's a good website and even the old nursery rhymes are more enjoyable than the snippets I've read from " Clarity " : )Btw ...heard a really good narration of Coleridge's The Ancient Mariner the other day. Really brought it to life.Anyone with a spare half hour can still hear it by clicking " Listen to the latest edition " Anyway, yeah, ask no questions....told no lies
Related link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/arts/poetryplease.shtml
|
|
|
