Mike Frank writes: >...that he interviews constance penley--whom he treats quite fairly--and >visits a class by branigan, to whom he is less fair I didn't think Penley came out of it in a particularly positive light either. The article gave the impression that she was an aloof academic, more interested in French cultural activism of the 1960s (e.g. likening her enthusiasm for Metz like a teenager's idolisation of a pop singer) than helping her students forge successful careers; an impression which is reinforced by emphasising the fact that the students from her department who have been successful were there before Penley and Branigan turned the programme's emphasis toward theory. I wonder what she thought about the way the article turned out, or even if she knew that Weddle was doing a demolition job? But the detailed description of Branigan's personal appearance in order to portray him as a loony leftie extremist social misfit was a cheap shot, and furthermore it was an unnecessary one. Personally I believe that there are very powerful, evidence-based arguments to suggest that the ways in which cultural, literary, Marxist and critical theories are used in an attempt to understand the production and consumption of cinema are fundamentally invalid and have had their day. So there's no need to resort to personal character assassination to do the job, because there are much better tools available. Leo Dr. Leo Enticknap Curator, Northern Region Film and Television Archive School of Arts and Media University of Teesside Middlesbrough TS1 3BA United Kingdom Tel. +44-(0)1642 384022 Fax. +44-(0)1642 384099 Mobile: +44-(0)7739 412022 Web: http://www.nrfta.org.uk/ ---- Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite http://www.ScreenSite.org