Re: 3 texts, essential cinema & women and etc ...
('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)
> These recent NYTimes articles sound more promotional &
> positive, like ads?
> While Cecile Starr's was very critical of influential
> people, the type we see less of these days.
True there's a difference in kind. But if the NYT printed an article -
or a letter that read - Robert Beavers at The Whitney, so when do we
see an Abigail Child retrospective there, or at MOMA.... I mean it
would mean nothing the readership knew who they in fact were !
Whereas the NYT readers knew what the NEA and NEH were in 1977.
Promotional and positive notices on AG/Exp cinema ? Heaven help us !
;-)
Really, what's to complain about a positive notice / review of these
works ? As for positive well they're fucking great artists.
When the NYT starts running ads disguised as reviews of Robert Beavers
films, I won't be complaining on the Op Ed page, cause I'll have been
struck dumb from shock ;-)
-Sam
For the record, I thought the article on Phil Solomon's show was really great! Positive coverage of experimental/avant-garde film events is always appreciated and needed, especially in a much-read paper. An amusing side story: I just now- two years after my screening- saw that I, too, was "written up" by the Times! Oh happy day! I would have clipped the article (after I printed the cached google file off of the Internet, of course) and sent it to my folks, but the writer simply said that my films were "difficult to watch" and left it at that. Deflated, I put my scissors down. While I won't really argue with him, ;) I certainly wouldn't complain about a positive review (or at least a less dismissive one)!
I was thinking more of the spirit of the times (uh, that'd be the 60's-70's not "The Times," specifically)- the "stirring things up," that John alludes to, and not just in film. Not that it never happens nowadays. I just feel like I get lost in it all- everything seems to get diffused and buried faster than you can click "refresh!" I guess newspapers have it kind of rough these days with the competitive media and the advertising pressure (please don't upset McDonald's, they take out a full-page ad once a week). It leads to silliness like the outrageous prices for the papers (which is why I didn't get to read the other Times articles- it's about $10/week even if you live in New York), the severe cutting of content for ads (The Village Voice in particular, since I guess that is the only way they can stay free), and those annoying, yet amusing, New York Times television commercials: "The only thing better than doing the crossword puzzle is actually finishing it." $10/week for a crossword puzzle, huh?
http://dcsob.smorgasblog.com/archives/000404.html
Hmm, lots of parentheses up there...
Parenthetically,
Courtney
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <(address suppressed)>.
