so here, it seems, we have this drama  - a  closet drama perhaps that, perhaps,

should come out of the closet - with stavis and pomerance on one side and frank

on the other and the jugement that it's getting a bit "flamey" . . . i'm new

enough at this kind of exchange so that while i've seen the term a few times

i'm not sure either what it means or what weight it carries but i surmise that

the point is to put an end to these exchanges by referring to a kind of

democratic principle of taste; to wit: some people prefer to think of films as

texts, others do not, and there's nothing to be argued about

 

i was going to object strongly that there is a great deal to be argued about .

. . that there is a truth of the matter somewhere in this discussion and it's

not just a matter of taste . . . but then i realized that it's precisely my

notion that there IS a truth of the matter in discussing meaning, affect,

value, and the like that makes me want to talk about films as being, among

other things, texts . . . while those who prefer not to do so make that choice

precisely on the grounds of there not being a truth of the matter at all to

discuss in the first place . . .

 

i hope it's not "flamey" for me to say that i find this cul-de-sac immensely

frustrating for it seems that there is no possible discourse that would provide

an adequate meeting ground for the two views being offered

 

mike frank

 

----

To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L

in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]