SCREEN-L Archives

March 1995, Week 3


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 16 Mar 1995 15:26:18 CST
Top 5 Publishing
text/plain (33 lines)
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Ulf Dalquist wrote:
> Look, I really don't want to get into PC hair-splitting when it comes to what
> words you can use, but I oppose the term 'foreign' film.If  even CNN has
> rejected the use of 'foreign' news for 'international' ditto, I think the
> on SCREEN-L could do likewise.  Declaring everything not american 'foreign' IS
> bit chauvinistic,or at least it sounds that way.
I couldn't agree more with Ulf.  The manner in which "foreign"
(or *even* "international") is used on Screen-L seems to indicate
that most American subscribers consider that the cinematic world is
divided into American films and "foreign" films -- that binary
opposition again.  However, to subscribers in New Zealand or Senegal
or the Phillipines, for example, all American films would be
considered "foreign."
Screen-L, although moderated in the U.S., is a GLOBAL list, and we
Americans should keep that in mind.  Terms like "foreign" and
"international" may be convenient, but they are arbitrary and totally
dependant on perspective.  I think referencing a film by its country
of origin might be a more accurate (and less confusing) method.
In anticipation of someone bringing up the fact that the Academy
(which is an *American* institution anyway!) has a category for Best
Foreign Language Film, I submit that we on Screen-L should make
every attempt to set our standards a bit higher than those of the
Academy.  :-)
Christopher White