Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 178 items :

  • "modern media" x
Clear All
Opera, Orchestra, Phonograph, Film
US Presidential Elections of the 1890s
Celebrity, Masculinity, and Stunt Performance
Approaches, Applications, and Implications
The Industrialization of Time and Space in the Nineteenth Century

“unheralded” or “unsung” about bridge jumpers, human flies, lion tam- ers, and aeronauts in the decades before cinema. Some rose from obscu- rity to entertain Queen Victoria; some were pioneers of modern media publicity, appearing on the front pages of national newspapers and in early motion picture newsreels; and some performed before thousands of awestruck fans at state fairgrounds and aviation meets. These “thrill makers,” as they were sometimes called in the press, were part of a 2 | Introduction largely forgotten cast of media celebrities who developed the

doubling for Hollywood stars. Rose began his career in entertain- ment as a Wild West and carnival performer, performing trick riding, high dives, parachute jumps, and airplane stunts.1 Rose’s career tra- jectory encapsulates the ways in which the film industry repackaged the spectacle of the thrill makers, even as the modern media did much to marginalize them. Lucky Devils broaches the subject of stuntwork through a series of revelations, and so forms a convenient bookend with the 1916 New York Tribune report on the “unsung” and “anonymous heroes” of the Stunt Men

keying the relationship between performer and auditor in the context of the modern media. Recall that keying is the communicative process whereby participants are made aware of the nature of a situation or interaction (Goffman 1974, 44). In Goffman’s terms, media performance features a certain ambiguity concerning how “participation status” should be keyed: is the media consumer an audience member, a ratified participant in an intimate one-to-one exchange, an overhearer, or an eavesdropper? This ambiguity can be felt in the slipperiness of the terms used to describe

, transferring audio recordings to modern media, allowing me to borrow old film footage. The Brown Papers are a massive collection—more than one thousand cartons—and much of the material had never before been used by researchers. Navigating such waters was a challenge, and I could not have asked for more or better assistance. I cannot name everyone at the Bancroft who helped, but my particular thanks to Emily Balmages, William Brown, Iris Dono- van, James Eason, Franz Enciso, Amy Hellam, David Kessler, Jenny Mullowney, Erica Nordmeier, William Roberts, Theresa Salazar, Dean

–53, 57, 97, 112–13, 117, 173–74, 210–11, 276–77; benefaction, 29–30, 44; death, 54–55; emotions, 56–60; family, 41, 171, 210; gender, 52–56, 59; life of, 1, 4–5, 38, 171, 189, 208; and martyrdom, 113–14; miracles, 71, 113, 178; in modern media, 249–53; as modern model, 262–67; motherhood, 74; mother- hood, spiritual, 76, 80, 196; orthodoxy/heresy, 172, 180, 189–91, 194–95, 197–98; patronage, 193–94; ritual, 225; senatorial rank, 23; travel, 213–14, 260; wealth, 52, 54, 173–75, 210, 277–79 metaphor, 87–88 migration, 207–8 monasticism, 136–40; and gender