Dear All,
Stanley Fish opined this morning that HOWL is worth going to see (and
viewers should definitely buy the book) because it functions as
literary criticism, even though the common consensus among the critics
is that it is a mediocre film.
Hi Elizabeth
Well, although I haven't seen the film yet (I will--I'm a HUGE AG fan), I
doubt that it (or ANY feature film) can be said to be effective literary
criticism. The narrative and cinematic structure of features and their
ultimate goal (box office receipts, always) generally put these
Gary,
I had a personal close encounter with critical theory in graduate
school which was very scarring, so for me it is not a recommendation
that a weak film is redeemed because it is elevated beyond narrative
to critical theory. I actually took a seminar with Zizek back in the
day, which
Thanks, E.
Listening to Zizek always makes me feel as if I've been through a couple
of rounds of electroshock therapy.
I was a Gitanes smoker also, for a short period, until all my friends
abandoned me (although I do still have a proclivity for hipster black)
Sartre never rattled my existential
