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]