Jeff states: >So both Cocteau and Disney play this same myth out, and a viewer can hardly be >blamed for feeling a sense of loss when the beast changes into a man. But the >story of that change is a pretty old story in mythological/archetypal >terms, and >the problem I have with the "reactionary, patriarcahal" tag is that it's just a >tad too facile. I mean, if you are out to destroy patriarchy, fine. But I >think if you are, you do need to deal with the sticky question of why people >across the ages have tended to tell similar stories. . .Maybe it's genetic, in >which case good luck tearing down "patriarchy". Or maybe it's just the myths >developed by "the West", in which case you still have your work cut out for you >and have, addtionally, the risk of throwibng babies out with bathwater. I never stated that I was out to destroy patriarchy. I merely referenced the views of many critics of "Beauty and the Beast." I don't appreciate Jeff sticking words in my mouth (or modem). If Jeff is so convinced of the entrenchment of patriarchy, then why is he so defensive of a threat (one dreamed up by him and attributed to me) to it? Jerry ---- To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]