Hoop Dreams

Well...I was hopeful that one of you would start a discussion thread. But... so...

Rather than talk too much about the story of Hoop Dreams (though that would be interesting in another setting), we will be discussing how it (and other documentaries) make meaning. That is, Sobchack (our author of the week) claims that with documentary we have a "subjective relation to an objective cinematic...text" (pg 1).  What might this mean? Don't merely repeat what she's written but strike out on your own as to how we may have this relationship with Hoop Dreams. How does that film construct itself as an experience? What sorts of strengths and/or weaknesses can you find with the phenomenological model of cinematic identification forwarded in the article? How do our relations differ between fiction and non-fiction films? Don't mere state the obvious here but use advanced vocabulary to understand how these relations differ.

Brazil and Prufrock

I suspect that the poem for next week might present some challenge. That's OK. In class, we will spend some time breaking it down; that is, we will work through much of the poem to discover how it makes meaning (which is similar to the ways we perform cinematic analysis: breaking down scenes in terms of cinematography, editing, etc. to find out how meaning is made). Do be sure to read the poem and try to work through some of it on your own. 

I put it together with Brazil because at some level they both concern the breakdown of society and the individual's attempt to balance his reality and his perceived reality. Whence the (unrealized) expectations in these characters (Prufrock and Sam)? What is it about their societies that prompts such (seemingly disconnected) expectations? Additionally, can you discuss the forces at work on thee characters that prompt such? We know that Brazil is visually rich. Does Gilliam use this texture toward anything more than baroque excess?

Barton Fink and Scanner Darkly

I welcome all the new participants in our class discussions last week. It is always a good thing to reveal your involvement with the material. This doesn't mean that you have to like that material, but that you should show how you are intellectually involved/engaged in it. To that end, we turn to two other texts, Barton Fink and A Scanner Darkly.

These two texts do not at all promote catharsis, that moment when the text comes around in full-circle (regularly with summary, ending/conclusion, bows all wrapped). We leave BF and SD with no real sense of how to "read" them. So, in class, I would like to hear various ways we can receive them. As you can tell from my online notes, I will discuss them in terms of capitalism: how, by working in "Capital Pictures" and a drug culture, these texts explore contemporary capitalism's mass-production, mass-consumption and the forms in which we find such. 

All,

I got bombarded with many written responses in class yesterday, some of which contained good ideas and analyses. This fact also points to some frustrations, though: where were all these comments in our class discussions? Recall a post I made early in the semester about speaking up in class, taking intellectual risks, and voicing your ideas. By showing up for class, doing the standard requirements, and not separating yourself from others (in class or in written form), you will earn a 'C' (the default grade for all college-level work). It is all too obvious that some are still playing on their computers, phones, or doing other classwork (with headphones in ears!). Others sit quietly with no texts, notes, or obvious effort to engage the class in any way whatsoever. 

As for A Woman Under the Influence and "A Room of One's Own": notes are now online. However, I want to encourage you to strike out on your own in terms of analysis, particularly connecting the two texts. Obviously they are both focused on "woman." How (as film specifically) deal with Mabel, her house, and her marriage? How does the camera function? What is the relationship between camera and its subject/object? Don't write merely about story here but about elements that are particular to cinema. How might the ideas that Woolf highlights be seen in the film? How does Woolf see history and the future for woman?

ODYSSEY

Forgot to mention this in class last Tuesday; all apologies.  For next week, you need read only four of the books of The Odyssey. You can choose any of the listed books on the course webpage. Again, sorry.

Alright, alright. I know that Proust is a challenge. I know that it is difficult to make it through; I know that it is even more of a challenge to “do something” with Proust. His narrative style seems to deflect entry. But, I hope that I was able to tie together the beginning and ending of class today in such a way that we can see how Proust narrates and how his narration is the “thing itself.” That is, “the thing itself” and the “knowing the thing” are the same, that the form becomes the content, that the narration is the story. I use Proust in this class because he makes us think about narration so differently (particularly in contrast to the mode of narration we’ve grown accustomed to through Hollywood’s transparent style).

I have fixed the link for The Odyssey on the webpage. There are, however, numerous different translations you can read (online and in print). The version I have linked to is written in prose form (rather than the lined poetic verse). Either type would be fine, as we are not really discussing the poem as poetry, per se. We are looking for evidence of some of the earliest contributions to western formations of narrative (how words are used to construct story). Particularly, we are going to discuss how The Odyssey foregrounds a specific narration of masculinity, a trait that runs throughout western narratives, all the way to Godard’s Contempt. Jack Palance (as the film producer in Contempt) is perfect here.

There are notes on the webpage that outline the conversation we will have concerning Man With A Movie Camera and Proust's text, In Search of Lost Time. These notes are sort of longish, so be sure to print them before class. Moreover, read Proust and reveal you've read him by specifically pointing to the text (whether in class discussions or in blog entries). Talking in class (ie, not in our discussions), texting, and sleeping are all really bad indications of your engagement with the material (specifically) and the class (generally). These indiscretions bother other students, are disrespectful to the class, and are blatantly obvious to all around you. There was far too much of that stuff going on last Tuesday.

Back to Proust...Be sure to engage the text well before Tuesday, as it takes a while to get the flow of his singular writing style. Remember that I have already noted that in the passage "nothing happens," so you don't have to anticipate any sort of "story" to get rolling. But, rather than mere ephemeral Franco-babble, the text does have an interesting narrative frame. And, the connection with the film I am going to make in class concerns the specific socio-cultural moment of early part of 20th century (an era loosely called modernism). The notes on the webpage point to the specifics here.  Don't give up when reading In Search... It just might end up being one of the coolest things you've read; but, you've got to give yourself over to it for this to happen.