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