<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Harry Potter and Christianity, part 1&#8211;The Word is a Virus</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelandofunlikeness.com/2007/08/20/harry-potter-and-christianity-part-1-the-word-is-a-virus/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelandofunlikeness.com/2007/08/20/harry-potter-and-christianity-part-1-the-word-is-a-virus/</link>
	<description>Catholic Anglican Reflections on Theology and Culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:20:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Lana Pilogrusa</title>
		<link>http://www.thelandofunlikeness.com/2007/08/20/harry-potter-and-christianity-part-1-the-word-is-a-virus/comment-page-1/#comment-257</link>
		<dc:creator>Lana Pilogrusa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2007 17:32:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thelandofunlikeness.com/2007/08/20/harry-potter-and-christianity-part-1-the-word-is-a-virus/#comment-257</guid>
		<description>This is very interesting and makes me want to try reading Burroughs again, or at least try diving into various parts of Naked Lunch and reading according to the cut-up logic this text embodies.  Does Burroughs explicitly posit the thesis that written language precedes spoken language, or has this thesis been teased out of his writing by good readers?  I wouldn&#039;t mind hearing more about the virus symbolism as well.  Viral meaning contagious and constantly mutating?  Viral meaning an endless possibility for re-writing using the same letters put in different sequences? Viral meaning that the biological mechanisms of the host--our cells and everything that makes us ourselves--are invaded because they&#039;re essential to the reproduction and proliferation of the word?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is very interesting and makes me want to try reading Burroughs again, or at least try diving into various parts of Naked Lunch and reading according to the cut-up logic this text embodies.  Does Burroughs explicitly posit the thesis that written language precedes spoken language, or has this thesis been teased out of his writing by good readers?  I wouldn&#8217;t mind hearing more about the virus symbolism as well.  Viral meaning contagious and constantly mutating?  Viral meaning an endless possibility for re-writing using the same letters put in different sequences? Viral meaning that the biological mechanisms of the host&#8211;our cells and everything that makes us ourselves&#8211;are invaded because they&#8217;re essential to the reproduction and proliferation of the word?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janet Leslie Blumberg</title>
		<link>http://www.thelandofunlikeness.com/2007/08/20/harry-potter-and-christianity-part-1-the-word-is-a-virus/comment-page-1/#comment-256</link>
		<dc:creator>Janet Leslie Blumberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2007 04:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thelandofunlikeness.com/2007/08/20/harry-potter-and-christianity-part-1-the-word-is-a-virus/#comment-256</guid>
		<description>Okay, a virus??  Please say more about Burroughs saying the word is a virus. Whay would he -- being who he was -- say THAT?
     It sounds rather like Dawkins&#039; much maligned and greatly loathed &quot;meme,&quot; which replicates itself in the mind the way genes in nature replicate biological entities. Actually the meme idea doesn&#039;t bother me, as long as it isn&#039;t taken as the fundamental or only way language works.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, a virus??  Please say more about Burroughs saying the word is a virus. Whay would he &#8212; being who he was &#8212; say THAT?<br />
     It sounds rather like Dawkins&#8217; much maligned and greatly loathed &#8220;meme,&#8221; which replicates itself in the mind the way genes in nature replicate biological entities. Actually the meme idea doesn&#8217;t bother me, as long as it isn&#8217;t taken as the fundamental or only way language works.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
