Drew writes, re dumb films, that >i enjoy nothing more than pure escapism. it > helps to put my mind at rest and allows me to clear my head of > "important" things and to revel in inane stupidity. I appreciate his candor but honestly wonder what "inane stupidity" really means as he is using that term. That is, I recall as a child sometimes being fascinated by watching ants at work. By human standards, that seems to me stupid, but the fascination wasn't in the stupidity but in the effectiveness with which constant, focused effort could accomplish large ends even without vaunted intelligence. I don't for a minute believe that Drew or most of us would find a violent confrontation on the street with a mentally incapacitated person entertaining and, indeed, in our major cities many citizens complain that they need to escape such people rather than praise their presence as an opportunity for escape. Whatever "inane stupidity" is, it has to do with _art_ and something about the construction of art. And what I believe some of us are objecting to is the thinness of that construction these days, a willingness to go for the FX home run, the guaranteed box office draw, the hot subliminal prejudice button, and nothing more. Sure, this was done before, but I can't help but think that our capacity to do this effectively and relentlessly has done something regrettable. I, for one, feel an enormous difference between _The Perils of Pauline_ and _The Evisceration of Pauline_. Eric Eric Rabkin [log in to unmask] Department of English [log in to unmask] University of Michigan office : 313-764-2553 Ann Arbor MI 48109-1045 dept : 313-764-6330 deptl fax : 313-763-3128 voice msgs: 313-763-3130