I was expressing personal frustration at how the mailing list is being used.
I had not realised it was a boys only debate, and stand corrected.
Helen
On Tue, October 23, 2012 9:26 pm, Warren Buckland wrote:
> Helen -
>
> why don't you let your Bristol university colleague Alex Clayton speak for
> himself.
>
> Over 800 people have downloaded my original review essay in the last few
> weeks, so many film scholars have expressed an interest in it.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Warren Buckland
> Reader in Film Studies
> Oxford Brookes University
>
> New Book:
> *Film Theory: Rational Reconstructions:*
> http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415590983/
>
>
>
> On 23 October 2012 21:15, Helen Piper <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Personally I find it quite extraordinary that you should think it
>> appropriate to copy in the entire BAFTSS mailing list on your
>> solipsistic
>> postings.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, October 23, 2012 6:22 pm, Warren Buckland wrote:
>> > Dear colleagues
>> >
>> > For anyone interested in the 'Solipsistic Film Criticism' debate, you
>> may
>> > like to know that I have posted a reply to Alex Clayton and Andrew
>> Klevan
>> > on my webpage:
>> >
>> > http://warrenbuckland.com/announcements.html
>> >
>> > Here are the opening paragraphs, to give some context (all references
>> are
>> > to be found on the website):
>> >
>> >
>> > Revisiting 'Solipsistic Film Criticism': Reply to Clayton and Klevan
>> > Warren Buckland
>> >
>> > Alex Clayton and Andrew Klevan (C&K) have written a 'Reply' to my
>> review
>> > essay 'Solipsistic Film Criticism', published in the 'New Review of
>> Film
>> > and Television Studies'. My essay, a review of their edited book 'The
>> > Language and Style of Film Criticism', presented the opportunity to
>> > discuss
>> > in some detail the different assumptions underlying textual analysis
>> and
>> > film criticism. However, to consider further these differing
>> assumptions,
>> > we also need to address a few of C&K's errors.
>> >
>> > C&K ask in the opening paragraph of their 'Reply': 'It is difficult to
>> see
>> > why a reviewer (who is also the journal s editor) devotes ten pages to
>> > criticising, polemically, what he takes to be three ineffectual, and
>> > sometime incompetent, essays'. In other words, C&K are wondering why a
>> > reviewer would be disappointed with their book. At the end of their
>> > 'Reply,' C&K recommend the reader consult a different review of 'The
>> > Language and Style of Film Criticism', by Nicholas Forster. It is easy
>> to
>> > see why. Forster writes: 'each essay elegantly dances with unique
>> style';
>> > 'rarely does a thought fade into the ether', etc. I must admit I
>> failed
>> to
>> > praise C&K's 'elegantly dancing style' in my review essay. Instead, I
>> > critically interrogated and engaged with their arguments and
>> underlying
>> > assumptions. ...
>> >
>> >
>> > Warren Buckland
>> > Reader in Film Studies
>> > Oxford Brookes University
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------------------------
>> > BAFTSS mailing list
>> > --------------------------------------------------------
>> > To manage your subscription or unsubscribe from the BAFTSS list,
>> please
>> > visit:
>> > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=baftss
>> > -------------------------------------------------------
>> > This mailing list is a free service and is not restricted to members
>> of
>> > BAFTSS.
>> > --------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr Helen Piper
>> Dept of Drama
>>
>>
>
--
Dr Helen Piper
Dept of Drama
--------------------------------------------------------
BAFTSS mailing list
--------------------------------------------------------
To manage your subscription or unsubscribe from the BAFTSS list, please visit:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=baftss
-------------------------------------------------------
This mailing list is a free service and is not restricted to members of BAFTSS.
--------------------------------------------------------
|