<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Deconstruction</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/deconstruction-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/deconstruction-2/</link>
	<description>falling indelibly into the past</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:30:19 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: KF</title>
		<link>http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/deconstruction-2/#comment-2303</link>
		<dc:creator>KF</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Nov 2002 16:43:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=960#comment-2303</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the sympathy, BT.&#160; Full mobility has been restored.&#160; I think the film is worth seeing&#8212;I think&#8212;but am unsure because I also now think that prescription drugs are indeed the key to the entire deconstructive enterprise.&#160; All was suddenly made clear, in a way that I&#8217;m now at a loss to explain.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
If no other enticements can persuade you to see the film, how&#8217;s this one:&#160; the repeated small shocks of recognition as the Man in Question attends the Biography conference at NYU in&#8212;what?&#160; 1996?&#160; Look for a cameo appearance by a certain Americanist who was shortly thereafter denied tenure&#8230;
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the sympathy, BT.&nbsp; Full mobility has been restored.&nbsp; I think the film is worth seeing&#8212;I think&#8212;but am unsure because I also now think that prescription drugs are indeed the key to the entire deconstructive enterprise.&nbsp; All was suddenly made clear, in a way that I&#8217;m now at a loss to explain.
</p>
<p>
If no other enticements can persuade you to see the film, how&#8217;s this one:&nbsp; the repeated small shocks of recognition as the Man in Question attends the Biography conference at NYU in&#8212;what?&nbsp; 1996?&nbsp; Look for a cameo appearance by a certain Americanist who was shortly thereafter denied tenure&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BT</title>
		<link>http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/deconstruction-2/#comment-2302</link>
		<dc:creator>BT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Nov 2002 05:01:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.new.plannedobsolescence.net/?p=960#comment-2302</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;!!
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Although the production of a neologism is always a silver lining, that sounds like a rather rotten cloud.&#160; Hope things are better.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
As for the film in question, I fear that seeing it might undo a considerable amount of therapy.&#160; But I may have to do it anyway.&#160; Got any of that medication left over?
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>!!
</p>
<p>
Although the production of a neologism is always a silver lining, that sounds like a rather rotten cloud.&nbsp; Hope things are better.
</p>
<p>
As for the film in question, I fear that seeing it might undo a considerable amount of therapy.&nbsp; But I may have to do it anyway.&nbsp; Got any of that medication left over?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
