From: Sam Wells (email suppressed)
Date: Sat Jul 08 2006 - 19:38:39 PDT
> battles are in store for us where these economic
> shifts toward a more fluid transmission culture come
> in conflict with efforts to control the availability
> of experimental films?
> Availability is already controlled to a degree; that I doubt will
> change in any significant way from what it is now. Perhaps more
> artists will post work on line, but this is simply an extension of
> the present. If anything, we are shifting toward a less fluid
> transmission culture as the demands for DRM and IP controls
> increase. (ABC is trying to get rid of "fast forward" on the next
> generation of DVRs for example...)
The problem side with fluidity is, things can easily get diluted..
> 4. How can the language of film criticism be altered
> to coincide more closely with changing social issues?
> I'm not sure what you mean by this. It is not so much a matter of
> language, but how that language is used by the critic and the
> assumptions about social issues that emerge from that use. At the
> same time there is a tendency to want to exclude anyone from
> commenting on a subculture that isn't also a member of that
> specific culture--while this view does have some merits, it also
> easily leads to a fractionalization where any criticism is
> Not that Deleuze and Guattari or Hardt and Negri have
> to be continually cited, but surely there is some
> positioning to do here. If it's not cultural studies
> or visual studies, if it's not postmodernism,
> psychoanalysis, or feminism, what is there besides the
> phenomenology of perception?
Howzabout people with serious interest in cinema getting together
(digifluidically or old school being in the same place at the same
time) and articulating that interest ?
(really is gonna channel David Foster Wallace soon :)
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.