SCREEN-L Archives

October 1992

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Tom Benson 814-865-4201 <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 14 Oct 1992 09:53:00 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Subject: Re: For "soup" read "soap"
In-Reply-To: James.D.Peterson.4 AT ND.EDU -- Wed, 14 Oct 1992 08:41:23 CST
 
 
     I certainly second the motion to have a
look at Cal Pryluck's wonderful essay--it really sets a
standard.
 
I apologize for the self-promotion, but in two books on
Fred Wiseman's documentaries Carolyn Anderson and I
also try to treat the issue of responsibility to subject
(see Benson & Anderson REALITY FICTIONS (1989) and
Anderson & Benson, DOCUMENTARY DILEMMAS (1991).
Wiseman's films raise -- as Cal Pryluck has argued --
some difficult questions of documentary ethics. On that
issue, I'd also recommend Gross, Katz, and Ruby, IMAGE
ETHICS, an interesting set of conference papers with an
extensive bibliography by Lisa Henderson.
 
Wiseman's TITICUT FOLLIES has recently been released;
the forthcoming FREE SPEECH YEARBOOK will have an essay
on the final (?) legal resolution of the ethical issues
that have hovered over this film since 1967.
 
Tom Benson
Penn State [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2