to adam, and onlookers, a subversive question:



for all i know there may be a powerful connection between cinematic

excess and consumer wallets . . . but why BEGIN a research project by

presupposing this and then asking whether there's any evidence to

support it? . . . the whole point of scholarship [in any field] should

be to determine what counts [within a given discourse] as an acceptable

answer to a significant question . . . the point is not [or certainly

should not be] to posit an answer and then search in obscure places for

whatever shreds of information  might count as evidence



i hate to pick on adam, who as a ph.d. student is no doubt simply

emulating those whom he sees as defining proper procedure for his field

. . . it's precisely the discursive premises of the field itself that

this query calls into vivid question -- a question that i find extremely

embarrassing



thoughts?



mike  









-----Original Message-----

From: Film and TV Studies Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

On Behalf Of Adam Fish

Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 4:40 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: [SCREEN-L] Class in 50s Cinema



Film Scholars,



I need to make connections between the late-1940s-1950s rise of the

consumerist class, the class of the producers/directors of the

musicals/epics/spectaculars of that era, and/or a class explanation

for what appears on screen in the 1950s. I am connecting 1950s class

to cinema production culture and/or screen events. Can you recommend a

book or person to talk to? Was all the musical and spectacular excess

of the period an accurate representation of buying power or

aspirations for future commodity excess?



Yours,



Adam Fish

UCLA: Anthropology, PhD student

Current TV, VC2 Producer



----

For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives:

http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html



----

Learn to speak like a film/TV professor! Listen to the ScreenLex

podcast:

http://www.screenlex.org