Dear Mike and everybody-
Sorry for the delay with my response - I was busy but I was also thinking
about your very good point,
> Eugene. You genuinely surprised me. If I understood you correctly, you
> said that hollywood films could be understood without knowing their
> history and sociocultural context?
Of course, you are right that it is impossible to understand any "text"
(e.g., movies) without understanding their sociohistorical and sociocultural
contexts. Saying that, I still think that many (if not high majority of)
American movies " are out of history, space, and sociocultural conditions -
they are often about individuals [and/or interpersonal relations]" (I'm
quoting myself.) I think that Bakhtin's notion of chronotope is helpful to
reconcile the apparent paradox in my statements. When Bakhtin's argued that
ancient Greek epic occurred in abstract static time and space, it does not
mean that you can't find historical cultural dynamic time in the Greek epic.
However, this historical cultural dynamic time is not a part of Greek epic
chronotope.
The same is about most of American movies. They are ***designed*** to be
self-contained with primary focus on individual or interpersonal relations
(e.g., Woody Allen's movies). American movies are designed to be
intratextual. Again being designed to be self-contained, it does not mean
that they are self-contained.
In my observation, self-containment is achieved through several means. Often
American movies occur in some unidentifiable place in some unidentifiable
time or even who are the people (again, you can make your guess where it was
or historically when it occurs but it is not very important for
understanding the plot or characters). Time, place, and values are generic
in most American movies (again from the point of view of director's
"design").
Another way of achieving self-containment in American movies it to explain
in the movie everything that is important for understanding the plot and
characters about history and culture to the audience. Woody Allen's movie
"Radio City" is a good example of that.
In contrast, many non-American movies are not self-contained. Their "design"
(i.e., chronotope) is actively based on extratextual chronotopes available
to the audience through knowledge of history. They are often multilayered.
British comedies "Are you being served" are good example of that.
Some American movies also have this quality: "Austin Power" (part I and a
bit part II but definitely not part III), "Ice storm" to name a few.
I think American movies are aimed at diverse audience and do not trust to
shared historical knowledge of the audience. This trust is necessary for
extratextual movies. Besides, it is very alien to an idea of "elite movie"
and try to get as big audience as possible (to sell more?). That is one of
the reasons why American movies are designed to be self-contained.
What do you think?
Eugene
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Cole [mailto:mcole@weber.ucsd.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 1:33 AM
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: hollywood's context
>
>
> Eugene. You genuinely surprised me. If I understood you correctly, you
> said that hollywood films could be understood without knowing their
> history and sociocultural context?
>
> Is that what you meant to say? I'll respond depending on answer, but
> I am still experiencing international women's day/week/time. Saw a
> HOLLYWOOD film today without a signal male in it. incredibly interesting,
> ahistorical though, perhaps it will turn out to have been.
> mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eugene Matusov [mailto:ematusov@UDel.Edu]
> Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 11:02 PM
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: RE: end of the International Woman's Day week
>
> Dear Mike-
>
> I think your cross-cultural observation is true about many other contents.
> Many American movies are out of history, space, and sociocultural
conditions
> - they are often about individuals... To understand many Russian movies
you
> have to know historical and socio-cultural conditions but to understand
> American (Hollywood) movies you do not to do that.
>
> Eugene
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Cole [mailto:mcole@weber.ucsd.edu]
> > Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 8:01 PM
> > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > Subject: end of the International Womaen's Day week
> >
> >
> > Last evening, to continue our education and reflectiona about
herrschaft,
> > my wife and I went to see "Osama," an Iranian film about a girl who goes
> > through puberty as the Taliban take over in Iran. It was a very painful
> > experience, but one we both recommend.
> >
> > The ending is not a happy one.
> >
> > We got home early. There was an American movie about a girl who is
> sexually
> > assaulted and murdered.
> >
> > The aesthetics and cultural contexts were wildly different, the fates of
> > the two girls slightly different (the Iranian girl is not killed, but no
> > one reading this message will wish to trade places with her or allow
> themselves
> > to dwell too much on it). But the cultural assumptions underlying the
> > two stories bear some eery similarities.
> >
> > Common, of course, is male violence against females. De facto assumed in
> > the American film, de jure/de facto in the Iranian film. The
supernatural
> > plays an important role in both stories. Ismlamic fundamentalism in one
> case,
> > psychics in the other. But what most distinguishes the films at the
> > ideological level is where responsibility is placed. In the Afghan film,
> > responsibility is at the socio-cultural level. There are individual
> differences
> > and decent men, but overall, the society has condoned/been coerced into
> > accepting draconian, generalized, public herrschaft. In the American
film
> > its a matter of individual personality disorder, as if, an abberation,
> that
> > a persistent mother and a psychic overcome, but require men, using their
> > strength, to pervail.
> >
> > Altogether thought provoking and disturbing. And, although a film, I
> believe
> > excellent material for theoretical analysis of culture, gender, and
> development.
> > mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:42:23 PST