SCREEN-L Archives

September 2001, Week 3


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
Magda Jean-Louis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Sun, 16 Sep 2001 16:12:32 -0600
text/plain (76 lines)
My condolences to the victims of Tuesday's attacks.  I received this notice
on Sept. 6, long before Tuesday's destructive events.  I'm not making
excuses for the coldblooded evil that is too cowardly to take
responsibility, but
I can't help wonder if movies that glorify decimating buildings and cities
and stereotype hi-jackers planted the seed that led to this carnage.

October 2 - Tuesday   "Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People"
The Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding Edmund A. Walsh School of
Foreign Service Georgetown University cordially invites you to an afternoon
lecture and reception with Jack G. Shaheen Professor of Mass Communications
Emeritus Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. Dr. Shaheen will be
discussing his July 2001 publication "Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies
a People" Interlink Publishing Group; ISBN: 1566563887 Space is limited.
Tuesday, October 2, 2001 4-6 p.m. Georgetown University - Intercultural
Center, 7th Floor - Salaam Conference Room R.S.V.P. Requested by
September21, 2001 phone:  202-687-8059 fax:  202-687-8376
email:[log in to unmask]


----- Original Message -----
From: <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 2:54 PM
Subject: tuesday and movies

> in response to don larsson's query about "relevant"
> responses to tuesday's events [as opposed to the
> ideologcial rants that have taken over some related
> lists]  let me offer a thought . . .
> it's been a theme song of our civilization for some
> time that there is a great deal of violence represented
> in our media--and of course in our movies . . . whether
> this is a good or bad or netural thing i leave alone for
> now, noting only that it is often defended on the
> grounds of being "cartoon " violence - - and i suppose
> it's true that the audiences for SPEED or CRASH or
> OF DEATH know, even as they watch the carnage, that
> the actors all get up and brush themselves off after
> the camera stops rolling . . .
> but it occurs to me that we as a culture were able
> to stomach such images of destruction, dismemberment,
> and death because we had not in recent memory seen
> very much of the real thing up close . . . i supect the
> last generation to register images of violence as
> repellant was the viet nam war generation for members
> of which such goodies as body bags, and body counts, and
> my-lai, and napalm, were all too familiar . . . but for today's
> main movie audience violence has ALWAYS been faked
> and never even approached them where they live, either
> literally or metaphorically . . .
> so i find myself wondering whether the kids who today
> are six or eight or eleven years old will find that this trauma
> hits so close  to a raw nerve that images of extreme
> violence may becomes less palatable . . . in short might
> this week's events actually shape a generation of
> movies well beyond the elimination of a narrow range
> of excessively touchy references??
> mike
> ----
> Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
> University of Alabama:

For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: