I couldn't help agreeing with Mr Temiz regarding Weddle's attack against the theoretical, one which smacks not only of the new anti-Europeanism, but of the most impoverishing brand of intellectual utilitarianism. It would be easy to put the blame for Alexis' modest mark - by no means a failure, to be fair - at Alexis' feet. But this piece reveals a far more worrying tendency in her father. Indeed, his complaint sounds like sour grapes for money lost. It seems ironic that Weddle holds the heyday of auteurism up as the salad days of film theory when, in fact, Pauline Kael accused of Andrew Sarris of just the sort of theoretical obfuscation of which Weddle accuses the contemporary academy. I'm tempted to see Weddle's complaint as an American anti-theory bias that has always grated in certain European quarters, but for the interesting and downright inspiring evolution of American film theory outlined here. Constance Penley sounds like a fascinating lady, unworthy of Weddle's rather glib description of her meeting with Metz. As for his write-off of Edward Branigan, there were 140 other students in that room whom Weddle didn't notice. They weren't all staring into space.
In my haste, these are cursory impressions, I know, but Weddle's 'pick-n-mix' academic consumerism is too reductive. And considering how difficult some French theory can be, I think Alexis did reasonably well. I hope she's not too disappointed either.
Richard
