What?

Shutup.

MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO*

*Last line in The Killing of Sister George.

Really? Well now, who said RH wasn’t a huge BIG BIRD CULTURE VULTURE!

Okay?

All right?

Shutup.

I am doing research, not bloody PR. http://larvatusprodeo.net/2005/04/16/cultural-studies-wars/#comment-2196

Still one of my favourite quips. Keep them fires burnin’ Glen

laura, sorry to cause offence. re you first point: i meant ‘text’ in my original comment as in the basic element of a structural semiotics/marxist combo. sure if you do literature studies (or some version there of) then I can understand holding on to ‘text’ as a specific concept, but the grand ‘textual’ conceptions of culture by armchair theorists are surely dead!?!? (there is a neat set of concepts sometimes associated with ‘text’ that are also problematic when understood as ‘textual’, such as ‘commodity’, ‘bodies’, etc.) I am in cultural studies remember, and I am pretty sure that the ‘text’ is dead here. (Thus spoke glen! lol!)

your second point is much more problematic and I am not sure what you have written that contradicts what I have written!!! Firstly, “reviewers who don’t cultivate their independence and their sensibilities don’t keep their jobs” well, this is precisely what I was getting at!!! Jobs in the cultural industry!?!?! By cultivating their independence and sensibilities reviewers also cultivate (individuate) a given population who read/consume their work, in part, for those very sensibilities and independence that the reviewer has cultivated. Such audiences as commodified as, at worst, an audience for the advertising that goes with the review, or, at best, a resource for the cultural capital of the reviewer.

Lastly, it is not a question of “intellectual fashions”, if it were simply a case of keeping up with the intellectual jonezs, then I would be a full blown Zizek/Badiou monstrosity by now, lol! It is a question of ‘what it can do’, and what the various elements of intellectual fashion I engage with enable me to do certain things for my dissertation (REACH in certain ways) that I think are the most productive. I am not interested in carving out a well worn space for myself. I am a mechanic.

hmmm, what is this simplistic wet/dry bullshit? pffft…

David can be a bit of an old fuddy-duddy.

Hmm, yeah. Ya think Ms. Megan has rented “Martin” or “The Crazies”?

Still, it would explain why he is trying to reach for something by throwing it out. Or vice versa. Hard to tell.

I have been thinking about this sort of confrontation, where someone such as yourself jumps in with a multitude of assumptions about what they have read or the person who has written it. I find them so incredibly boorish. My primary gripe is this:

When I write such things I am not primarily worried about the clarity of my expression, so for that, I apologise. Rather, I am trying to reach for something, throw something out there. REACH! Like a discursive toothbrush. If you come along and read what I write and place me in a little box of some out-of-date ‘text’-based conception of culture, or any other gross misreading of what I have written, then do not be surprised when I jump down your throat for having the audacity to be critical of me for something I have not, in fact, written.

The shorter Glen; “I don’t care about writing for my audience. Therefore the audience is stupid when it misinterprets me.”

You’re so advanced, oh great Doctor-to-be, my puny mind cannot comprehend your greatness. For this I am truly sorry.

Please, enough with the elaborate self-justifications already.

And Mr D. Heidelberg. Hello buddy.

The movie show? Finishing? Who cares.
I could never understand a word of it, but Pomeranz, with her teenage hairdo, and old sugar daddy Stratton, were a good laugh.
I could watch them - this grinning pair of cadavers, with the sound off and be enormously entertained. They were like estate agents praising some dirty old wreck; nothing was so bad they couldn’t find something wonderful to say about it.
I never once heard them say a film was no good.
But the truth is, if Movie/DVD production stopped altogether the world would be a nicer place.

David Tiley says SBS are not in fact going to can the movie show altogether, and I believe him over a paragraph in the paper any day:) So that’s a relief.

Owning up to liking George Romero doesn’t prove Megan Spencer (or anyone else) is not engaged in a hipster contest - Romero’s very much on the cool directors list.

I understood very little of what Glen posted, but I have to say I’m disappointed (and to tell the truth, kind of offended) to be told that textual criticism is outmoded and passe, and that reviewing is just a tool of the culture industry. Regarding the first point I don’t know why anyone should care about keeping up with intellectual fashions; re the second, reviewers who don’t cultivate their independence and their sensibilities don’t keep their jobs.