Print

Print


I think Sue Thornham's work for Routledge--The Feminist Film Theory Reader
accompanied by her Passionate Detachments book--allow students a way into
contemporary feminist film issues by analyzing certain well known texts (in the
Reader) and providing cogent analysis of those texts (in Passionate
Detachments).  The books work well together, and I used them for a feminist
film course for non-film academics.  The work is sophisticated, but not
impenetrable.

Dr. Nina K. Martin
Dept. of Film Studies
Emory University



Quoting [log in to unmask]:

> colleagues--
>
> i write again with a question that i first asked two or three years back,
> dealing with a matter i need to address again
>
> some of my students in a first year writing course which takes cinema
> as its topic [but it's an expos course, not a cinema studies course] are
> intrigued by feminist criticism and want to do research papers on some
> aspect of that large and complex area . . .  there's obviously no shortage
>
> of  materials to be found, and they've successfully located a lot of very
> interesting stuff, almost all of which is virtually unintelligible
> to them  . . .  these are kids who know almost nothing about freud or
> marx,  and have never even heard of foucault, lacan, althusser, zizek,
> raymond williams, john berger, or laura mulvey . . . such terms as
> "diegesis," "simulacrum," "apparatus," "repression," "iconicity,"
> "representation," "subject position" and "the gaze" are a foreign
> language  . . .
>
> these are smart and ambitious students, and welcome the challenge
> of reading difficult stuff, but it has to be stuff that they have the
> tools to decipher . . . and most of the stuff we ourselves read every
> day --stuff that may often challenge us--is simply beyond them
>
> there is work that fits the bill -- i think especially of that by molly
> haskell and marjorie rosen -- but it's pretty dated now, and in fact
> one of the reasons that it remains so readable is that it antedates the
> more intensely theoretical turns that cinema studies in general, and
> feminist theory in particular, took after the 1970s . . . because it's now
> so old i'm hesitant to recommend it -- and in any case it does not
> deal with any of the films my students care about
>
> so . . . to get to the point . . . can anyone recommend essays or books
> dealing with feminist approaches to cinema that i might in good
> conscience ask my students to read and expect them to understand
>
> many thank
>
> mike
>
> ----
> Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
> University of Alabama: http://www.tcf.ua.edu
>

----
Screen-L is sponsored by the Telecommunication & Film Dept., the
University of Alabama: http://www.tcf.ua.edu