films no doubt change the world (and people), but that
there's a considerable element of unpredictability about this (the failure of
instrumental logic). Benjamin, Adorno/Horkheimer? If I recall correctly,
Rossellini after his didactic films made for French tv (the best known of which
is 'La prise de pouvoir par Louis XIV', 1966), came to the conclusion - as did
Francesco Rosi in Italy a decade later - that if you want to make films, make
films. If you want to do politics, don't make films but go into politics.
for better or worse, what’s so interesting about screen
theory is that it explores the ideological work done by cultural forms that are
NOT didactic, that to all appearances are innocent of ideological and political
impulse . . . much work on the sexist ideology of certain hollywood conventions
seems compelling and has, i think, changed our view of the role of gender is
very valuable ways
it probably goes without saying that the most interesting ideological
indices are to be found in the work of those who are totally unaware that they
are doing anything but telling a story . . . i hardly want to jettison this mode
of analysis – but at the same time i think it necessary to be as critical
of it as we can, to be sure that it does not simply impose its own ideological
agenda
* * Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon. After hitting
'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to. To
leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask] Or
visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html For help email:
[log in to unmask], not the salon. * Film-Philosophy online:
http://www.film-philosophy.com Contact: [log in to unmask] **