SCREEN-L Archives

August 1994


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
Patrick B Bjork <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 4 Aug 1994 23:10:23 -0500
text/plain (30 lines)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 1994 14:23:29 -0500
From: Steven Mintz, U. Houston <[log in to unmask]>
To: Multiple recipients of list H-FILM <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Audience manipulation in recent film
From: priscilla stearns barlow <[log in to unmask]>
Patrick Bjork wrote:
perhaps movie-going, pre-WWII  Americans
were more readerly, more literate and, if so, it may stand to reason
they could more readily appreciate subtlety and nuance, and could also
more comfortably absorb a slower, more dialogue-laden pace. Anyone care
to play around with this conjecture?
I'd add that they also listened to the radio a lot, and therefore were
more accustomed to having stories narrated via dialogue than audiences
are today.
I say this even though I don't want to add to any we're-going-to-hell
in-a-handbasket handwringing sessions.  It's just that it's easy to
overlook those aspects of popular culture that have died out when
we analyse a situation--I'm thinking not just of radio drama, but also
serial publication of novels, movie fan magazines--stuff like that.
Priscilla Barlow   [log in to unmask]   "Beauty like hers is genius."