SCREEN-L Archives

August 2007, Week 5

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

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
Subject:
From:
Robert Weiner <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:09:05 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (169 lines)
Call For Papers:
    
    From the Grindhouse to the Arthouse: Films of Transgression,
     Exploitation, and
    Art
    
    Edited by John Cline and Robert G. Weiner
    
    In an essay published in Screen magazine some ten years ago, Jeffrey
     Sconce inaugurated the study of what he termed “paracinema.”  Paracinema,
    according to Sconce, is a broad category of film that exists outside  the mainstream of commercial filmmaking.  For this project, we are  looking for submissions that deal with a few particular issues under  the umbrella of  “paracinema.”  Primarily, as the title of the volume  indicates, we are interested in
     gathering together essays that deal with the   “art of transgression” and the
       “transgressive in art.”  More specifically, we hope that—taken together—the
    essays will form a cohesive argument about the relationship between the  “high” and the “low” of cinematic expression as articulated through  films that “push the
     envelope to the point of tearing it,” i.e. films with transgressive elements in
     them. These films are sometimes disturbing in tone, but part of the argument
     that we want this book to make is that they have a significant value both as
     cultural artifacts and as aesthetic objects.  In other words, the drive-in
     screen andthe gallery wall are both up for grabs.   Certain horror films could be
    considered “transgressive.” One could also put some experimental or
     avant-garde films in this category, the same as you could the work of a few
     “auteur”directors.  Consequently, we believe that there is aesthetic legitimacy
     to befound in exploitation   cinema.  (For   example the excellent
    cinematography and inventive narrative tropes in Ruggero Deoadato’s  Cannibal Holocaust justifythis movie as an artistic achievement,  despite dismissal by critics as a trashy, borderline snuff film.)   Conversely, we also believe that the
    transgressive elements in art-house or experimental cinema shouldn’t
    immediately be considered separately from their low-born cohorts.  This
    assertion is a lot like asking whether there’s a difference between I
     Spit on Your Grave and Salo—and then actually trying to find an answer.  In
     each case, we hope that the essays will try to tackle the question of just what
    “transgression” is, and how it works in film.  Overall, we would  like
    submissions to work from a solid historical context and offer a mixture
     of both art-critical and cultural studies approaches.
    
    Though by no means exhaustive, the following is a list of some
         filmmakers to consider:
    
    *Erich von Stroheim/F.W. Murnau/Salvador Dali/Luis Bunuel/Jean Cocteau
    
    *Dwain Esper/Edgar G. Ulmer/Ida Lupino
    
    *Ed Wood/Herschell Gordon Lewis/Russ Meyer/Roger Corman/Jack Hill/Jesus
    Franco/John Waters/Wes Craven/Tobe Hooper/George Romero
    
    *Maya Deren/Kenneth Anger/Jack Smith/Ken Jacobs/Ron Rice/Andy
     Warhol/Paul Morrissey/Andy Milligan
    
    *Federico Fellini/Pier Paolo Pasolini/Rainer Maria Fassbinder/Werner
     Herzog
    
    *Mario Bava/Ruggero Deodato/Lucio Fulci/Dario Argento/ Umberto Lenzi/
     Bruno Mattei/Joe D’Amato/
    
    *The Vienna Aktionists/Kurt Kren/Otto Muehl/Herman Nitsch/Genesis P.
     Orridge and Psychic TV
    
    *Nick Zedd/Richard Kern/Beth   and Scott B/Abel Ferrara/Lizzie Borden
    
    *Pete Walker/Alan Clarke/Guy Maddin/Peter Greenaway/Jane
     Campion/Michael
    Haneke/Gaspar Noe/   Jörg Buttgereit/ Jan Svankmajer/Monika Treut
    
    *Mary Harron/Kathryn Bigelow
    
    *Matthew Barney/Craig Baldwin
    
    *Takashii Miike/Eli Roth/Rob Zombie/Darren Lynn Bousman/
    
    Although it’s safe to assume that this book’s final shape will be
     defined organically according to the submissions we receive, we have laid out
     somebroad guidelines and subject headings under which we hope to determine
     a submission’s acceptance.  There are three major areas that we’d
     like to fill. Each of these sections is intended to be a (partially) discrete
     discussion, but they are also aimed at fulfilling the overall purpose of the project.
    
    The Aesthetic and Cultural Legitimacy of Grindhouse/Exploitation Cinema
    
    This section can include essays   about a specific film or a single
     director’s style.  It can also include pieces that survey a subgenre of
     exploitation film and offer a series of specific and general critiques   about that
    subgenre.  We are particularly interested in submissions that pay close  attention to cinematography, editing, and art direction.  In general,  we’d like
     this section to run the gamut of exploitation films, from silents to
     straight-to-video.These can include “educational” scare films, sexploitation, biker
     films, rape-and-revenge films, psychedelic cash-ins, gialli, and all manner of
     horror flicks.  There is an artistic value to many of these films that needs
     to be discussed and justified.  After all, people didn’t watch Psycho the
     first time around because it was the work of a great “auteur,” and the DPs on
     The Sadistand Cockfighter didn’t go on to win Oscars for nothing.  We also
     don't think it's much of a stretch to say that nearly all exploitation cinema is
     worth studying for its cultural   significance.  Papers that consider the
    social-historical context of exhibition and audience reception are strongly
    encouraged.
    
    
Transgressive Elements in “Art-House” and
Experimental/Avant-Garde Cinema
       
          
In the book Hollywood Babylon, Kenneth Anger revels in imagining what
kind of depraved strips of celluloid might have been left on the cutting room
floor after the studio got a hold of Erich von Stroheim’s not-so-subtly S&M
fantasy films.  Since that time, films at the “high art” end of cinematic
production have continued to test the cultural limits of acceptability and taste.
  But for both “art-house” movies (i.e. feature-length films with real
budgets) and experimental/avant-garde films, the exact relationship between what
they do with   controversial material and how their plebian brethren handle the
same material is rarely clear.  In this section, we would like to see
submissions that deal with both “art-house” directors like Pasolini, as well as
the more strictly “underground” work of directors like Jack Smith.
   Specifically, we are looking for essays that focus on directors or  individual films that explore their subject matter in a “transgressive”  way.  In addition, we
would like to see essays that deal with the manner in which “art”   cinema
interacts with “low” culture.  This could include topics as diverse as the “found”
cinema of Craig Baldwin, the apprenticeship of art-house directors in B-movie
production (i.e.Roger Corman’s protégés), and the exploration of mass culture in
Kenneth Anger and Andy Warhol’s  films.  We would also like to see submissions that explore the process  of legitimation that goes on for films shown in galleries,
museums, and “high-brow” independent theaters.  Alternately, but in keeping
with our interest in social-historical context, we are interested in seeing
articles that examine how “art-house” films coexisted—sometimes in   the
same theater—with exploitation fare.

Transgression in Documentaries and “Realistic” Educational/Scare
Films

          Michael Haneke has said that, contra Godard, “A feature film is 24
lies per second.”  Pithy as that quote may be, the relationship between
“transgressive” cinema and “reality” is not quite so simple.  In this section, we
would like to see submissions that interrogate the relationship between cinematic
transgression and “real” life.  Essentially, we see   approaches to
this subject as falling into one of two categories.  The first is analyses of films
that are marketed as documentaries.  These can include films that are
“legitimate”  or award-winning, but their subject matter should explore some aspect  of transgression.  This can also include films that might be described  as
“Mondo” movies, or films that assemble shocking or bizarre footage   (sometimes
documentary, sometimes simply edited segments from films like the
Italian “cannibal” cycle) for exploitation purposes.  The infamous Faces of
Death series are a good example of these films.  The second category is a bit
more fluid.  Essentially, what we’re looking for are papers that examine
exploitation films that—although they are clearly fictional
narratives—purport to be “representative” or “recreations” of real events or
sociologicalproblems.  These films typically couch their exploitive purposes in   a
moral message, and they can include everything from the barnstorming
sex-and-drug “education” films of the ‘30s and ‘40s to the juvenile
delinquent  scare films of the ‘50s, and from the alarmist  psychedelics-and-motorcycles ‘60s counterculture movies to the  pseudo-educational Scandinavianpornographic films of the 1970s.  Some  of these films may, like the “Guinea  Pig” series, blur the line between fiction and reality so thoroughly  that audience isconvinced that what they’ve just seen requires  notifying the police.  In general, this section probably requires the  most explicit use of a cultural studies approach, since the contrast  between the true and the titillating is so dependent on the audience.   However, critiques on aesthetic grounds are strongly encouraged. 
           
          By covering a long historical   sweep of filmmaking, examining a broad
variety of films, and utilizing a number of different methodological approaches,
we hope that the articles we accept for this project will constitute a
compelling volume and a significant contribution to the scholarship in this
still-developing field.
           
          Submissions will be peer reviewed.  Please send abstracts of   250-500
words to
the editors by October 31st.


John Cline:

The University of Texas

[log in to unmask]
        
  
  Rob Weiner:
  
  [log in to unmask]

----
To sign off Screen-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF Screen-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]
  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2