SCREEN-L Archives

November 1993

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:
Harriet Margolis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 12 Nov 1993 07:23:02 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (36 lines)
Well, the antagonism generated by the topic of silent films has seemed
"petty and slightly ridiculous," yes.  Those who've spoken lovingly and
longingly of silent films have not exactly written off the sound era.
Those who don't know the silent era are not only missing a potential
treat--de gustibus . . .--but lack a context for understanding what
followed in film history as well as an important chapter of cultural
studies, history of narrative, history of the arts, twentieth century
experience, etc.
No, of course, we can't know everything.  The more we do know, the larger
our frame of reference for understanding what we experience.  It isn't
that we can't understand the sound era without the silents, but we
certainly understand the sound era differently with the silents.
Do I enjoy being on the soap box.  Not particularly.  Do I enjoy what
looks a little bit like generational warfare?  Not particularly.
  One point of my posting on personal experience was that generational is
a relative concept with documents like films.  My mother's friends didn't
want to acknowledge their age, so they pretended not to recognize Ronald
Colman's name.  I thought he was pretty cool when I was 16, and also
now that I'm more than twice that.
  Do I like Springsteen?  Some of it--I'm not sure when what I like
appeared in his oeuvre.  I don't study Springsteen.  But I've listened
politely to academic discussions of his rhetorical practices--and
learned and enjoyed it.
Harriet
[log in to unmask]
PS There's more to be said about nostalgia, of course.  Rick, I tried again
to post to you separately re Jameson.  Perhaps the list would care to
pick up on Rick's reference--is the self-referentiality of SHERLOCK JR,
for example, difference from late-twentieth century self-referentiality?
How does nostalgia affect our perception of self-referentiality, etc?
Would nostalgia be a factor in the commercial success of WAY DOWN EAST in
its own time?  (And, Garth, from our late-twentieth century perspective,
we can only speculate on such questions, such that speculating on the
ways we might do so becomes useful--taking into consideration what contem-
porary info might be available, but taking it with a grain of salt.)

ATOM RSS1 RSS2