<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Can we say Gay Studies Bible????
Review: For too long, straight men have controlled how we watch and analyze film and video. Then, Laura Mulvey gave us an idea how women view things/use their gaze. Finally, a group of academics are theorizing how gays and lesbians "ga(y)ze". This book has great representation from men of color and women. At the end of every essay, experts debate articles with the authors, so you get an even broader discussion of the work. When I was in college, professors had this book on their reading lists all the time. I found myself being able to quote from this book all the time. Even activists and other academics quote from this book all the time. And I love the title with its campiness and double entendre. The name of the editors is equally clever. Anybody who is truly interested in gay and lesbians studies must buy and read this anthology!
Rating:
Summary: Can we say Gay Studies Bible????
Review: For too long, straight men have controlled how we watch and analyze film and video. Then, Laura Mulvey gave us an idea how women view things/use their gaze. Finally, a group of academics are theorizing how gays and lesbians "ga(y)ze". This book has great representation from men of color and women. At the end of every essay, experts debate articles with the authors, so you get an even broader discussion of the work. When I was in college, professors had this book on their reading lists all the time. I found myself being able to quote from this book all the time. Even activists and other academics quote from this book all the time. And I love the title with its campiness and double entendre. The name of the editors is equally clever. Anybody who is truly interested in gay and lesbians studies must buy and read this anthology!
Rating: 
Summary: theory heads from outer-space
Review: Okay, I admit: the title sounds like a cosmetics manual. But it's really a collection of essays from a NYC conference about 10 years ago. For some reason, the men (Kobena Mercer, Richard Fung) are much better. They seem to know more about work being made. The women (DeLauretis, Judith Mayne) are interesting, but maybe too academic: too much theorizing based on too little material, focus on not-so-good historical (Dorothy Arzner) and more recent (Sheila McLaughlin) filmmakers makes it seem out of touch. Totally misses any of the more recent queer/grrl media, which had begun to surface by that time.Some of the discussions add a bit of "grit" otherwise missing from the all-too-polished talks. You'd never guess, from the volume, much of anything about the queer media explosion about to happen.
<< 1 >>
| 
