Dear All,
I know the discussion seems to have subsided, but here is
an interesting view from another colleague, Professor Alan
Clarke (Univ. of Derby), that might be of interest.
Raoul Bianchi
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Reply-To: Alan Clarke <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Raoul,
I think it is worse than you portray it!
The Beach itself cannot be incorporated into public discourse and the process of production be neglected.
It might be one small stretch of white sand and however many palm trees this year - but what next? Not to mention the impacts of film crews, generators, set construction on the ecosystems of the National Park. Film production is just as much production as anything else - let us suggest the next film being The Tyre Factory and build one of those on protected land.
The film itself panders to the very worst of the myths surrounding tourism consumption. Leaving aside how the pallid son of corporate American capitalism finds his way to Thailand in the first place, the image is not postmodern ironic... its a straight forward paradise myth, dressed up to look like ClubMed.
The thing that got me was the racial stereotyping - the only good Thai is a drug growing bandit or hotel cleaner with an electrical death wish (The one I cant pace is the woman in the bar who has to play pool with the Boss Lady). As for the black Daily Telegraph reading cricket fan - even I have difficulty reading so many stereotypes into one character.
The under lying moral of the tale is that the 'adventure' is still out there but - and the echoes of Vietnam are very specifically placed - you need to know when to get out - it is then time to return to the safe world of the known. Leonardo Di Krippendorf it is not!
My other problem with it as a text is that I cannot see where the impending doom comes from - given the willingness to let the Scandinavian shark victims die rather than risk them revealing where they have come from , the logic of the four incomers is simple - you kill them after gruesome interrogation. It might even have made a better film !
Alan
>>> Raoul Bianchi <[log in to unmask]> 02/09/00 11:25am >>>
Dear Ian,
I don't recall advocating the banning of anything, quite
the contrary. My point is that films cannot be considered
as just throwaway pieces of entertainment but rather
communicate a complex array of meanings which are
mediated by the context of their production. Why
do people like Pierre Bourdieu campaign vociferously
to highlight the ability of the market to coerce and
regulate the parameters of thought if these products
of consumer capitalism are so benign?
Maybe I am just jaded by London's increasingly vacuous,
postmodern, ironic, consumer culture that I still think we
need to take culture seriously in terms of its ability to
'produce consent'. Marxist-Leninists were as frightened of
a critical culture (witness Fidel Castro's treatment of
homosexuals and Tomas Gutierrez Alea's critical response
in the film 'Strawberry and Chocolate') as indeed are the
owners of our mega-cultural industries. All we need do is
continue to highlight these contradictions, not ban or
define any alternative worldview.
yours,
Raoul
On Wed, 09 Feb 2000 22:09:27 +1100 Ian McDonnell
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Raoul
>
>
> Just out of curiousity, what sorts of films should we watch that fit your view of the world?
>
>
> Are you advocating that American (or any other) films that portray 'contemporary consumer capitalism' should be banned?
>
>
> best
>
>
>
> At 06:23 PM 2/8/00 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >The refrain 'it's just a movie' always worries me somewhat
>
> >given that it tends to ignore the politico-cultural
>
> >configurations of contemporary capitalism within which
>
> >such commodities are 'produced' and 'consumed'. Of course
>
> >this doesn't mean to say that there should not be room for
>
> >pure entertainment value, yet we cannot ignore the fact
>
> >that films, leisure pursuits, the media etc constitute an
>
> >ideological terrain upon which the dominant values of
>
> >consumer capitalism are subtley yet powerfully reinforced.
>
> >
>
> >To paraphrase Stuart Hall here, the media (cinema) are key
>
> >actors in the production of consent - they regulate the
>
> >context within which think about the world around us. Thus,
>
> >we are talking about power rather than 'authenticity'.
>
> >Films are important, the more we say they are not only
>
> >reflects the conservative currents flowing through our
>
> >times and the success of the 'culture industries' in
>
> >appropriating the terrain of autonomous/radical cultural
>
> >expression. The film tells us more about the production
>
> >and exchange of audiences than it does about tourism in
>
> >Thailand - should we be surprised at that?
>
> >
>
> >Ironically however, it is probably only thanks to the media
>
> >coverage of the film that the press reported the success of
>
> >local pressure groups in Goa to crack down on the
>
> >rave-scene (Mon 7th Feb)!
>
> >
>
> >Incidentally, I would be more concerned about the portrayal
>
> >of war than I would back-packers in the context of cinema.
>
> >One only has look at the centrality of war films in
>
> >western, particularly American, cinema to see how they
>
> >serve reproduce the prevailing configurations of power and
>
> >values of militarism/conquest in recent history.
>
> >
>
> >regards,
>
> >
>
> >Raoul
>
> >
>
> >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> >Dr. Raoul Bianchi
>
> >Research Fellow Tourism, Culture & Development
>
> >Centre for Leisure & Tourism Studies
>
> >Stapleton House
>
> >University of North London
>
> >277 Holloway Road
>
> >London N7 8HN
>
> >###################
>
> >[log in to unmask]
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >On Tue, 08 Feb 2000 11:54:45 -0500 Tim Wallace
>
> ><<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >> >Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 10:35:40 EST
>
> >> >Sender: [log in to unmask]
>
> >> >From: "Shawn Ellis Murphy" <<[log in to unmask]>
>
> >> >To: [log in to unmask]
>
> >> >Subject: The movie "The Beach"
>
> >> >
>
> >> >Ok I have to say this. It is just a movie. It is meant to entertain. I
>
> >> >doubt if the reputation of respectable Back-packers will be in any way
>
> >> >affected by this film. Lets talk about the film "Three Kings". I am a Gulf
>
> >> >War Veteran and I can tell you that Film was a joke, but I can survive the
>
> >> >misrepresentation. Lets not forget writers are allowed some poetic
>
> >> >freedom. They can't all be good ethnographers.
>
> >>
>
> >> Shawn Murphy
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >______________________________________________________
>
> >> >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
> >>
>
> >> Tim Wallace
>
> >> Box 8107, Dept. of Sociology & Anthropology
>
> >> North Carolina State University
>
> >> Raleigh, NC 27695-8107
>
> >> 919-515-9025; fax: 919-515-2610
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >Tel. 0207 607 2789 Ext.3308
>
> >
>
> >
>
> <bold><fontfamily><param>Comic Sans
> MS</param><color><param>ffff,0000,0000</param><bigger><bigger>Ian
> McDonnell
>
> </bigger></bigger></color><color><param>8080,0000,0000</param>Course
> Director BA (Tourism Management)
>
> </color></fontfamily></bold>School of Leisure Sport and Tourism
>
> University of Technology, Sydney
>
> PO Box 222 Lindfield 2070
>
> NSW, Australia
>
>
> Phone 2 61 99187369 home
>
> 2 61 95145499 office
>
> http://www.uts.edu.au/fac/business/leisure_tourism/leisure.htm
>
>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dr. Raoul Bianchi
Research Fellow Tourism, Culture & Development
Centre for Leisure & Tourism Studies
Stapleton House
University of North London
277 Holloway Road
London N7 8HN
###################
[log in to unmask]
Tel. 0207 607 2789 Ext.3308
--- End Forwarded Message ---
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dr. Raoul Bianchi
Centre for Leisure & Tourism Studies
University of North London
277-281 Holloway Road
London N7 8HN
###################
[log in to unmask]
Tel. 020 7607 2789 Ext.3308
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|