From: | | [log in to unmask][log in to unmask]
11939 35 30_Re: Reconstructing Film Theory11_david [log in to unmask], 23 Feb 2000 12:29:18 -0000648_ISO-8859-1 On 22 Feb 00, at 16:31, Jeremy Bowman wrote:
> Don’t let slovenly writing get you down: if it isn’t damn clear, it probably > no damn good.
Yes, I know it's not particularly fair to highlight this particular sentence...bit still, I couldn't resist.
I'm also a little concerned about the supposedly easy distinction between clear (=good) and complicated (=bad). On the one hand there is a complaint about grammar and style and on the other an equation between difficulty and obscurantism; an equation which is not, I think, absolutely true. If the logic of this argument were taken to [...]49_23Feb200012:29:[log in to unmask]
11975 40 56_Re: Dreams, Surrealism and Deren - not to mention [log in to unmask], 23 Feb 2000 14:55:56 EST609_US-ASCII In a message dated 22/02/00 15:00:29 GMT Standard Time, [log in to unmask] writes:
<< As opposed to the conventional Freudian direction I am searching for something alternative. I am interested in the semiotic deconstruction of dreams and the way they are constructed and employed in the narrative space of films. >>
I'm not a film studies expert or psychologist, but I wonder whether you have considered a Jungian perspective? IMHO, Jung's anthropormorphic way of 'character-ising' the psyche lends itself to analysing narrative as well as dreams. [...]38_23Feb200014:55:[log in to unmask]
12016 90 51_[Fwd: Response to Celeste on theory and philosophy]13_Anthony [log in to unmask], 23 Feb 2000 15:22:02 -08009_us-ascii 48_23Feb200015:22:[log in to unmask]
12107 53 44_response to celeste on theory and philosophy12_Reni [log in to unmask], 23 Feb 2000 16:19:19 -0500643_US-ASCII Anthony and others,
Thanks for making the effort to clarify your position. You make a lot of good points and I agree with much of what you have said about film, ethics, theory and cultural studies. Leaving aside for a moment the concepts of "theory" and "cultural studies", I wonder what you and others in this conversation think of recent efforts to contemplate film within the larger structures of say visual studies, or media studies? There are many people in my field who predict the end of film studies as an outmoded disciplinary structure that will gradually along with art [...]47_23Feb200016:19:[log in to unmask]
12161 69 48_Re: response to celeste on theory and [log in to unmask], 23 Feb 2000 23:57:47 -0600491_- Film as something other than literary theory:
a) avoiding Aristotlean norms, i.e. plot, character, setting . . . Hence, unethical associations. b) avoiding symbolic interpretations, i.e. thematic interpretations (meta-myths) of plot, character, setting . . . c) rethinking genre: . . . comedy . . . (basis: plot), biography . . . (basis: character), Western . . . (basis: setting), . . . in terms of X genre (for example, movies where John Wayne wears a hat) [...]44_23Feb200023:57:[log in to unmask]
12231 104 48_Re: response to celeste on theory and philosophy12_Reni [log in to unmask], 24 Feb 2000 09:05:26 -0500668_US-ASCII JMC
Thanks ٪ol
|