I'm interested in James Schamus's comment about encouraging and enjoying the use of so-called jargon on the part of students. The appeal of recently developed theoretical and critical tools (which in the historical frames of some students can range from the latest word of last week back 15 to 20 years to ideas about Oudart and suture) is evident in my students. Personally, I value them not only for an enthusiasm and will to take risks that I've long since finished with a veneer of responsibility to a range of thought and literature, but also as a resource for ideas and writings that I know I'll never have the time to read. And we don't have a graduate program at Queen's. What I find myself wary of, however, is when that appeal seems to veer toward seduction. Sometimes the symptoms show up on the most banal and important level of literacy and diction. How many times has the word "interpellation" shown up in student assignments as "interpolation"? How many other similar slips that suggest misspelling less than misunderstanding on the part of bright and adventurous students? Or worse, the willingness of students to rely on misplaced anchors instead of inquiring further to satisfy themselves. A little mystical-sounding, but it's a little late at night. Sometimes these messages seem to me like the transcripts of late-night FM DJs of years past or college stations present. In any case, many of us are teachers and (all of us informally, but many of us formally) students of film, TV, and video. Maybe the area of teaching and learning is one we could keep in mind as a common ground for discussion. Blaine Allan Film Studies, Queen's University Kingston, Ontario Canada