Right on, Justin. What I also notice about the show is the lack of connective tissue between the two subjects of each episode [no more chefs, please!!], who often have no more in common than being in the same room together. I think Deepak Chakra and Quentin Terantino [on seperate episodes] were two of the only subjects who even approach "Iconoclast" status. Tarantino has torn down some creative Big Screen boundaries while Chakra has torn down conventional spiritual notions by adding Quantum physics into the mix. We're not getting too literal here, obviously. But these two have come closest. My fav episode, for best pair up, was Sean Penn with Jon Krakauer. For once, the two subjects had a common denominator. And both have stretched settled conceptions in their respective fields. You may not agree as, again, they are not literal iconoclasts. I'm simply talking about what we have to deal with here.

Oh My, CJ, you can't be serious about Deepak being an iconclast... he is just a pseudo-scientific mystic woo-woo who is making piles of money from the gullible by peddling his variation of New Age quantum quackery! Maybe he watched Ramtha's School of Enlightenment's movie - 'What the Bleep Do We Know' too many times and actually started to believe himself.

I don't know enough about Deepak to make a judgement, but I do believe that the "supernatural" or "mystic woo woo" can often be genuine, and it's only labelled as such because science hasn't caught up with it yet...Think of all the inventions we have today, that, if we could go back in time a couple hundred years, they would think we were either insane, or practicing magic...Also, it is quite true that, at the level of quantumn mechanics, particles act in ways that defy explanation...like the fact that particles can be in two places at the same time, and just looking at a single particle of light alters it...as well as the fact that light sometimes acts like particles and at others like a wave. We have yet to understand this; yet it is scientifically demonstrable. It is a fool who thinks he has the world figured out; and many who were thought insane, or killed, later turned out to be right in their theories, as we have seen in our history. Americans have the shortest memories, as citizens, than those of any other country, I believe.

Alan,

Nicely put. You verbalize what I was getting at with the Quantum quotient. I think we'll leave poor Jennifer and her pretty chick-lit sentences out to "Pastor."

What about the Dave Chapelle/Maya Angelou episode?

Didn't see that one unfortunately, but I do think Chapelle is the most innovative comic-actor since Pryor, and that's saying something. The man definitely reshaped Comedy Central and stretched contemporary PC boundaries, big time.

When a production team is ambitious enough to title a series "Iconoclasts," no amount of caution or political correctness could ensure that the entire TV audience would be free from offense. The very subject matter is that of personages assailing something that has over time become ingrained into the cultural consciousness. Simply scroll up and you'll find a knee-jerk reaction or two.
As for the legitimacy of each feature's iconoclasticity (iconoclastique, iconoclassiness, iconoclasticality), once again, we are dealing with a people of clash. A dislike for a person does not delegitimize their credentials. Also, one can be both iconoclastic (really a word) and subtle. In fact, some of the greatest revolutionaries of history have opted for the subversive strategy.