Department of English, University of Louisville Phone: (502)852-6770 or (502)852-6801. Fax: (502)852-4182. I think the discussion has pointed out what rare opportunities are missed if one doesn't teach BoaN. One gets a triple hit in teaching it: one can teach what there is to teach about form in it. One can teach a lot about the history of film history itself, on two different points: a) how did Griffith get constructed(& construct himself) as "genius" in such a way as (evidently misleadingly) to take credit for a whole intertextual development? What does this tell us about Hollywood, about the "great man" theory of history, about self-promotion, etc? b) What does it tell us about the history of the aesthetic tradition that this film could be hailed as the first great US film masterpiece (over and over) w/ no address to its context? Finally, it's a wonderful opportunity to teach students about racism (we must remember that this film was lauded by one of the most intellectual of US presidents--Woodrow Wilson--in part as I recall for its historical accuracy). It also opens up the fact that the history of Hollywood film is thoroughly imbricated w/ the history of racism in America. One might say that, yes, there's just too much to teach here. But surely one wouldn't choose not to teach all of this because it's distasteful? It's exactly what students ought to know. I will just add that, given the film's importance to past versions of film history, it's something that students really probably ought to see, even if one does get tired of it. Otherwise they might never know--as I didn't until I decided to teach it--what the film is actually like. bitnet tbbyer01@ulkyvm; internet [log in to unmask] Thomas B. Byers Department of English/University of Louisville Louisville KY 40292