Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 24 items :

  • "Enlightenment" x
  • Genres, other x
Clear All

the camera keeps them honest. (These are both, of course, highly debatable proposi- tions.) But both films invoke this figure only to bring him low— to demon- strate the immorality of objectivity and to provide the audience with an identification figure we can follow along the path to political enlightenment. I can’t see any essential difference in methodology between Boat People and Under Fire, but still, Under Fire was praised to the skies by many of the same critics who dismissed Boat People out of hand. I think Hui, in a strange way, has been punished for

commenting as well. Anthropologists turned their observational technique on American culture, and sociologists sought to use media to understand the group dynamics of wartime and postwar society. Other academics, brandishing the tools of what was emerging as “mass communication research,” tried to sample and mea- sure the collective delusions promoted on the radio or the movie screen. Émigrés associated with the Frankfurt School merged these strategies with large doses of post- Hegelian philosophy. Adorno and Horkheimer’s Dialectic of Enlightenment (1944) proposed


sponsored by their local media outlet, the Church, was a true story of local heroes staged for “the edifi ca- tion, honor, utility, and profi t of the city.” 28 Likewise, modern television executives would doubtless profess their sincere journalistic goal to be the enlightenment of the public through the transmission of useful and profi t- able information of direct relevance to daily life; just as the ostensibly more secular American television viewer (reared on at least the appearance of a separation of church and state)29 would be likely to profess that the con

Idea, 103; defi ned, 117; and fact, 131; manual, 121– 22, 124; organization I N D E X 145 of, 127– 28; and resemblance, 113, 119; and sensation, 125– 26, 129– 31, 133– 34; and temporality, 130 Dialectic of Enlightenment (Adorno), 84– 85 Difference and Repetition (Deleuze), 55 digital event, use of term, 64, 128 digital panoramas, 65– 66, 68n16 digital technologies: indexicality, disappearance of, 5, 22– 23, 71; normative image in, 106; ontol- ogy in, 2, 6– 7; representation of time in, 56, 71; 3- D modeling, 101; transition to, 1, 47, 65, 70; and virtual

, 137 Dialectic of Enlightenment (Adorno and Horkheimer), 23, 28, 31 Dieterle, William, 99 Dietrich, Marlene, 121, 123 director- writer pairings, 51 Disney, Walt, 24 Double Indemnity, 124 Dovzhenko, Alexander, 66 Dr. Strangelove, 3 Dumbo, 51, 140 Dunn, Irene, 119 Duras, Marguerite, 138 Durgnat, Raymond, 3 Easy Rider, 3 Ebert, Roger, 2 Eisenstein, Sergei, 69 Eisler, Hanns, 32 Eliot, T. S., 20, 24, 25, 112 Ellington, Duke, 40 Empson, William, 32, 77 Espionage Agent, 36 Evans, Walker, Let Us Now Praise Famous Men (with Agee), 11, 59, 63– 66, 73, 78, 91 experimental

to have demonstrated the tendentious ways a gangster film con- tinued to relay doubts about the terms of social and cultural transfor- mation in 1930s America, even after censorship and historical change ought to have diminished its impact. Specifically, I have attended to how the gangster narrative sets up internal choices for the audience that are aided by alluding to collective memories ofan oppressive state 20. Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno, "The Culture Industry," in Dialectic of Enlightenment, trans. John Cumming (New York: Continuum, 1972) (original

, 1957), remains a useful collection of 1940s pieces. Interestingly, a 1945 ar- ticle by Theodore Strauss declared both Agee and Farber highbrow critics writing “over- complicated” prose. See “No Jacks, No Giant- Killers,” Screen Writer 1, no. 1 ( June 1945): 7. The quotations and summaries pertaining to Adorno come from Adorno and Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment, ed. Gunzelin Schmid Noerr and trans. Edmund Jephcott (Stanford University Press, 2002), 102, 103; Adorno, “On Popular Music,” Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung 9 (1941): 17– 48; and Adorno, “The

Across the U.S.-Mexico Border (New York: Lexington Books, 2000), 4. 6. George Stocking, Race, Culture, and Evolution: Essays in the History of Anthropology (New York: The Free Press, 1971), 232. 7. Though not a political radical, Vasconcelos to a great extent modeled himself on the fi rst commissar of the enlightenment of the fi rst Soviet government, Anatoly Lunacharsky, particularly because he shared Lunacharky’s emphasis on the importance of education to postrevolutionary state formation. notes to pages 15 – 24 : 183 See John Ochoa, “Jose Vasconcelos

Commissar of Enlightenment, in effect the minister responsible for culture and education. 6. Speech delivered to ARRK (the Association of Revolutionary Workers of Cinema- tography) in July 1931. Printed in “Kinematograficheskaia komediia i satira,” Proletarskoe kino, 1931, No. 9, 4– 15, 15. A slightly longer excerpt from this speech is included below in “Film Comedy and Satire” [19]. 7. One copy fortunately did survive (but not a copy with the color sequence). notEs  341 8. For the full review, see “Eisenstein on Medvedkin’s Chaplinesque Genius” [18]. 9. A dig at

, if that same spectator laughs as theatergoer at an unscripted event that is unintentional (and which appears thus to the au- dience), we are faced anew with the moral dilemmas that have long dogged theater. Enlightenment theorists problematized those dilemmas especially pointedly, raising questions about the degree of sympathy or cruelty with which audiences respond not to characters but to other living beings, on stage or off . Imagine, for instance, that when the eighteenth-century actor Whitfi eld exposed the bald pate of Samuel Reddish during some botched