oh there's always time for mail on this show...

So this is a bit of my thinking on letters and mail and Briefwechsel generally. I know i have previously made a motion toward this thinking previously, but i want to lay out a bit more in depth what i'm thinking and would appreciate any feedback.

First off, there's something in the physicality of the letter that i'm interested in.

Letters are both boring and interesting... They are ephemeral, but when looking at them from a distance in time, they lose immediacy and meaning. Reading an old letter can still hold an emotional bite, but there is no narrative in it (the 'what next?' is gone).

Which makes a story like Frankenstein incredibly interesting (or Dracula)... and modern variations on them might become even more interesting... Nothing much to say here, though...

Sincerely,

RNJ

is good will hunting the prequel to Mad Max?

I was watching Good Will Hunting tonight on TNT, and considering a conversation i'd had earlier in the week with friendINthePROGRAM, Ron, about how we both seemed fairly sure that we hoped for (or at least weren't against) fundamental, global economic collapse... At least then things wouldn't be boring (which, at least according to Effi Briest, is the worst thing you can encounter).

I think i've come to a point in my life where i'm comfortable admitting, Good Will Hunting is my favorite movie... without all the hemming & hawwing of depending on situations or crowds... It is, quite simply, my favorite movie...

But mostly, i'm wondering... are we ok with complete economic (& therefore social) breakdown? We're taught (if we are taught) that we should set up delayed gratifications, in the form of "retirement", a program where we are taught to NOT live the live we want to or are able to live, and instead, give away a portion of that money to (theoretically) inherit later.

Having no research or information in this area, but being interested in it from afar, i will now claim that large portions of the folks who put their money away for this 'systematic delayed gratification' never get to experience it, or, if they do, they're old... so it's not as fun enjoying it, as it might have been when they were younger...

Ok, that's the basic argument... discuss... (soon, you'll have an opportunity to talk about letters...)

some thoughts on genre...

In the opening chapter of Film/Genre (a fundamental texts on genre films), Rick Altman tracks the history of genre theory from Aristotle through to contemporary accounts. Fundamental to this history for Altman is the distinction between historical genres (genre established by tradition) and genre theory (development of genres through criticism). In large part, this distinction turns on who defines genre, the producer, the viewer, or the critic.

Deciding how to define genre (or a genre) hinges upon what genre is for, what its purpose is, or what function it serves. If defined by (or for) the viewer, we might thing of genre as a sorting system, a way to categorize films in terms of content. For critics, genres might be thought of as a way to organize meaning and providing a system for talking about film. What Altman (as well as Linda Williams & Thomas Schatz) seem to ignore (at least early in their books) is the idea of defining genre in terms of the production of the films.

Looking at genre from this perspective makes the idea of genre primarily about profit, about money. Generic conventions provide a basic structure for filmmakers to construct a film off of. For filmmakers, genre provides market predictability, an established audience to consume the films. Of course, discriminating fans want variation and reinvention in their genres of choice, but genres make for a quick, easy formula for profitable movies.

Another aspect of genre theory that goes mostly unremarked in Williams and Altman is the assumption that determining or defining genre relies mostly on content. When Williams proposes pornography as a genre her early attempts to define all focus on the content of the films in searching for a definition.

I’m not entirely sure what these slight oversights amount to as of yet and am interested in seeing Williams and Altman hopefully explore them, these strike me as possibly underexplored lines of inquiry in genre theory.

I've decided to begin a new project on Roman Numeral J, in which, i try to get my site as the top google search (or at least on the top page) for various phrases/ideas/words/questions that come to my mind.

Just moments ago, i searched the terms 'is money real' (not in quotes) and was directed to a site called the street, the American Patriot Friends (or fax) Network, and the Liberty Dollar...

So, here's the deal... what if we just decide money doesn't exist? Some doof asked Michael Moore (via Larry King on Friday) why young voters aren't more moved by the fact that their generation is being sold out by the current political generation... Moore answered it in the only way he could, serving as a political activist, that of course the youth should be pissed at how their 'future money' is being spent, and how they'll have to pay for it, but that, like most youngins, they don't think it'll really matter...

But more importantly, what if we just decide we no longer recognize money as a realistic trade mechanism... Sure our nation owes $9.6 trillion to... somebody.

But, the reason a young generation & my moderately middle-aged generation shouldn't care is that we could decide to just stop keeping score... I'm not the first to suggest that modern bank accounts & finances are just new ways of keeping score...

*** Update 1/15/2011 ***

Unfortunately I have no idea what my plan was.  But some of this sounds marginally interesting, so I'll publish this in the interest of the start of some good thinking.

Is Money Real?

I've decided to begin a new project on Roman Numeral J, in which, i try to get my site as the top google search (or at least on the top page) for various phrases/ideas/words/questions that come to my mind.

Just moments ago, i searched the terms 'is money real' (not in quotes) and was directed to a site called the street, the American Patriot Friends (or fax) Network, and the Liberty Dollar...

So, here's the deal... what if we just decide money doesn't exist? Some doof asked Michael Moore (via Larry King on Friday) why young voters aren't more moved by the fact that their generation is being sold out by the current political generation... Moore answered it in the only way he could, serving as a political activist, that of course the youth should be pissed at how their 'future money' is being spent, and how they'll have to pay for it, but that, like most youngins, they don't think it'll really matter...

But more importantly, what if we just decide we no longer recognize money as a realistic trade mechanism... Sure our nation owes $9.6 trillion to... somebody.

But, the reason a young generation & my moderately middle-aged generation shouldn't care is that we could decide just not...
Just not to play, i guess...