> am i the only one of the list who finds the adulation of the person
> godard--as opposed to his work--an adulation that verges on idolatry, more
> than a little troubling . . .
Since this posting picks up on a message I mailed to the
list--same title, I feel somehow implicated, so I am trying to reason
with my colleague and friend Mike Frank.
First off, I posted my message to Screen-L because I am throwing
a Godard b-day party for my students on 12/3 and I wanted to know where I
could reach the man. Which--obviously, ties in with Mike's suspicion of
adulation & idolatry, I guess. I would like to disclaim such a reading,
though and simply say that I taught Godard extensively last semester, so
I thought it would be interesting to create a space where my students&I
could mingle and rethink some of our thinking on Godard--if only because
I asked them to bring a Godard signifier to the party. I believe that
teaching extends beyond the bounds of the classroom and this looks like
an opportunity to see how much they can tell me back about what we have
to turn into a heroic figure
someone whose work
> is, both in itself and in the political/cultural sea change it epitomizes, a
> deconstruction of the idea of the heroic individual
No question there.
seems at best wrong headed
You are implying that Godard himself would not like this? And I am
saying to you: who cares what the author thinks? The author is dead--as
*you* pointed out. > . .
i thought we had moved past the romantic interest in the teller to a
> concern with the implications of the tale . . .
Of course, *we* (who's we?) have. I am also trying to meet some
people who are still alive and whose work shows up in my own work. Does
that also mean I am guilty of adulation? Susan Kohner and Lena Horne, to
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]