> On Apr 2, 2018, at 8:00 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > I suspect that there's an element here of things that > seemed passionate and committed to one generation now seeming outrageous to > another.* - Scott MacDonald
Is there a moment in film history when that wasn’t the case? Isn’t the point of many the films we hold dear the disruption of the status quo (sometimes to redefine it, sometimes to just destroy it)? I certainly remember films and videos that led to (comparatively mild) confrontations in classrooms when I was an undergrad 20 years ago in a relatively conservative university. Certainly seeing films like Flaming Creatures, Nitrate Kisses and Un Chien Andalou confronted me and disrupted my own more conservative plans for my future. And they were definitely more provocative in their time. There were also confrontations of what constitutes appropriate art and how one should talk about art one dislikes when I was a grad student 10 years ago at a relatively liberal art school. In that case, those confrontations also led to firings of tenured track professors by those that ultimately held the power, the administration. If this case really boils down to has Saul has framed it—as blowback for what he showed in his class (and by the testimony of his supporters, it wasn’t uncommon for him to show these two films), then it is a terrible bellwether but it is also more of the same. I don’t think we can define it as a “difference” between generations, as much as it seems a continued difficulty of showing this work—even to other artists. Isn't that their point? Chris _______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list [email protected] https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
