Cart
|
|
my account
|
wish list
|
help
|
800-878-7323
Hello, |
Login
MENU
Browse
New Arrivals
Bestsellers
Featured Preorders
Award Winners
Audio Books
See All Subjects
Used
Staff Picks
Staff Picks
Picks of the Month
Bookseller Displays
50 Books for 50 Years
25 Best 21st Century Sci-Fi & Fantasy
25 PNW Books to Read Before You Die
25 Books From the 21st Century
25 Memoirs to Read Before You Die
25 Global Books to Read Before You Die
25 Women to Read Before You Die
25 Books to Read Before You Die
Gifts
Gift Cards & eGift Cards
Powell's Souvenirs
Journals and Notebooks
socks
Games
Sell Books
Blog
Events
Find A Store
Don't Miss
15% off new books on Powells.com!*
Spring Sale
Big Mood Sale
Teen Dream Sale
Powell's Author Events
Oregon Battle of the Books
Audio Books
Get the Powell's newsletter
Visit Our Stores
Powell's Staff:
Five Book Friday: In Memoriam
(0 comment)
Every year, the booksellers at Powell’s submit their Top Fives: their five favorite books that were released in 2023. It’s a list that, when put together, shows just how varied and interesting the book tastes of Powell’s booksellers are. I highly recommend digging into the recommendations — we would never lead you astray — but today...
Read More
»
Brontez Purnell:
Powell’s Q&A: Brontez Purnell, author of ‘Ten Bridges I’ve Burnt’
(0 comment)
Rachael P.:
Starter Pack: Where to Begin with Ursula K. Le Guin
(0 comment)
{1}
##LOC[OK]##
{1}
##LOC[OK]##
##LOC[Cancel]##
{1}
##LOC[OK]##
##LOC[Cancel]##
Customer Comments
Alex Lloyd has commented on (2) products
Feminist Film Theory: A Classical Reader
by
Thornham, Sue
Alex Lloyd
, April 02, 2007
In "Feminist Film Theory - A Reader", editor Sue Thornham presents 22 different "takes" on feminist film theory, each examining a specific aspect of, or perspective on, the genre of criticism. Some of these theses contradict each other, and such a babel of different voices could have torpedoed the work were it not for Thornham's stated intention to examine the impact of feminist film critique on different fields (e.g. deconstructionism, post-modernity, etc.). The style is very readable and well-sourced, although at times a little heavy on original research (sadly, uniformity of academic quality is more or less impossible where so many different writers are brought together). As it stands, "Feminist Film Theory - A Reader" would come highly recommended were it not for its presentation. UOC Press have not done Thornham's work justice, presenting it in terms of cover, layout, and blurb as a light, fluffy, "girl power" piece of pop feminism - the piece deserves far more serious treatment as an academic text, and one can only hope that future editions correct this misguided marketing decision. The verdict: A comprehensive and scholarly collection of essays on the subject of feminist film critique, marred only by bizarre presentational choices on the part of the publisher.
Was this comment helpful? |
Yes
|
No
(3 of 4 readers found this comment helpful)
report this comment
Cracks in the Pedestal: Ideology and Gender in Hollywood
by
Philip Green
Alex Lloyd
, April 01, 2007
In "Cracks In The Pedestal: Ideology and Gender in Hollywood", Green purports to delivers a unique perspective on feminist film critique - both by his neo-Marxist politics and his supposed "male perspective". However, upon opening "Cracks In The Pedestal" the reader is instead presented with a rehash of numerous arguments which have been presented before, and presented better, by previous scholars of feminist film criticism. It appears Green has fundamentally misunderstood the nature of film "criticism" per se, for the book has nothing constructive to say as regards the film industry. Instead, the overarching message is that the medium is inherently "male" (with all the third-wave baggage that carries) and that female directors are degrading their sex by participating therein. Of course, no actual justification is given for this broad and frankly insulting charge. As with much of the new crop of (supposedly) "feminist" film theory, "Cracks In The Pedestal" offers no model for egalitarian cinema, or even a hypothetical "fix" for any of the multitude of supposed sins it finds in every filmic endeavour under the sun. The reason for this is perfectly transparent - having declared every possible permutation of plot and character verboten, Green dare not present any alternate schema for film lest he be torn down by his fellow make-believe-feminist writers as similarly promoting subliminal misogyny. Half-way through, apparently recognising the paucity of actual argument in the work, Green abruptly shifts to a bizarre psychosexual stance which he uses to attack female and feminist directors as subconsciously attacking the female sex. Amongst these putrid offerings: - Placing a woman in any kind of on-screen role draws attention to her "apparent castration" (pg. 154) and suggests the director's castration anxiety/penis envy. To support this inane and misogynistic assumption, he quotes Mulvey, who is talking about the male gaze and the woman as spectacle, which means that the woman is sexually objectified, not, as Green seems to think, that she is simply on-camera. - If a purportedly feminist show's lead is "beautiful" (Green never so much as defines his standard of beauty, let alone gives the slightest hint that it is not objective), she is in fact a "token woman" of the patriarchy and the show "can only repeat the essential relationship of cultural patriarchy" (an assertion I am sure will enchant lesbian scholars and connoisseurs of film, who Green manages to forget altogether in his leaden analysis). One is left with the unshakeable impression throughout this section that Green is browbeating women directors purely for the sake of his execrable politics - which, incidentally, might have salvaged the book if he had made them his focus rather than attempting to appropriate the banner of feminist film critique in an attempt to tap University markets. There is some salvageable material in "Cracks In The Pedestal" - but nothing that cannot be found in the myriad books Green has ransacked to proof-text his thesis. All of it is tainted by Green's misanthropic, mean-spirited Puritanism. The verdict: A deeply unsatisfying polemic which mindlessly regurgitates arguments without the slightest hint of scholarly examination.
Was this comment helpful? |
Yes
|
No
(4 of 5 readers found this comment helpful)
report this comment