Jeff states:
 
>So both Cocteau and Disney play this same myth out, and a viewer can hardly be
>blamed for feeling a sense of loss when the beast changes into a man.  But the
>story of that change is a pretty old story in mythological/archetypal
>terms, and
>the problem I have with the "reactionary, patriarcahal" tag is that it's just a
>tad too facile.  I mean, if you are out to destroy patriarchy, fine.  But I
>think if you are, you do need to deal with the sticky question of why people
>across the ages have tended to tell similar stories. .  .Maybe it's genetic, in
>which case good luck tearing down "patriarchy".  Or maybe it's just the myths
>developed by "the West", in which case you still have your work cut out for you
>and have, addtionally, the risk of throwibng babies out with bathwater.
 
 
I never stated that I was out to destroy patriarchy.  I merely referenced
the views of many critics of "Beauty and the Beast."  I don't appreciate
Jeff sticking words in my mouth (or modem).  If Jeff is so convinced of the
entrenchment of patriarchy, then why is he so defensive of a threat (one
dreamed up by him and attributed to me) to it?
 
Jerry
 
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]