Print

Print


Chris Raymond writes:
 
>While I have an Ivy League PhD (sociology)I have not been an academic,
>just a >"regular person." I did take two film
>courses in college, on Hitchcock, and Politics in Film. The former was one =
of
>the best courses I ever had, in any subject. It seems to me that students c=
an
>learn a lot from studying the "best sellers/box office winners"--like what =
do
>their popularity say about the contemporary culture? Students also could
>learn to critically analyze these films for what they "lack" from the
>standpoint of film theory, the same way you can learn about advertising fro=
m
>studying ads that you like, or don't like.
>
>The point is: as my design prof says, a good designer can turn s--- into
>gold. A good teacher can educate (to draw out) with any material. To dismis=
s
>certain materials as too beneath critical thought seems elitist to me. IMHO=
.
 
While I don=B4t have an Ivy League PhD nor a Rolls Royce and while I don=B4t
know if I am just a "regular" person, what I can say is that I am not able
to think at advertising as a form of art, and although studying box office
winners may be of great interest from the cultural or historical point of
view, this falls in an entirely different field from the study of film
aestthetics. And I don=B4t understand what this has to do with elitism. By
the way, what you mean with "s---" is "shit"?
Quintin
 
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]