From: Gene Youngblood (email suppressed)
Date: Sat Mar 27 2004 - 06:41:18 PST
I appreciate this sensitive and reasoned contribution to our little dialog
over Dorsky. It reawakens my gratitute for both cinematic traditions, which,
over the years, have equally but differently given me so much intellectual
stimulation, spiritual nurturance, and just plain joy.
----- Original Message -----
From: "konrad" <email suppressed>
To: <email suppressed>
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: A book by Nathaniel Dorsky
> The core of this book was originally developed for two courses
> Dorsky taught at Stanford and UC Berkeley. The latter was a
> History of Avant Garde film class, i believe. As a series of
> lectures it bore the title "Film as a Metaphor for Being." The
> Princeton occasion allowed him to develop some further ideas
> relating to 'devotion' in the context of "Religion and Cinema."
>
> So i think the a-g hovers in the background as much as Gene
> senses Buddhism does. But the covert message one could pick up on
> is that "more often" the a-g gets set up as holier than thou
> (purer, more materialist, oppositional, aware, principled, etc),
> so as Marilyn points out Dorsky replies that a-g has one kind of
> vulnerability and narrative another. I see this as Dorsky
> positioning himself outside an allegiance to either wing of
> cinema.
>
> It seems important, if obvious, to also say that this practice
> Dorsky outlines as an approach to attain/regain balance between
> the too solipsistic and the too objectifying, this devotion, is
> not blind. I would just add that what leads to films that "may
> serve as a corrective mirror" draws as much from critical as from
> contemplative traditions.
>
>
> konrad
>
> ^Z
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.