 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here are her credentials. She is obviously far more brilliant than I. I don't even understand half of the names of the projects she's been involved in.
HER BOOKS:
Academic Articles, Chapters & Translations
HER ACADEMIC REVIEWS:
HER ENCYCLOPAEDIA ENTRIES:
HER INTERVIEWS:
HER MAGAZINE ARTICLES & BOOK CHAPTERS (including online publications):
HER OTHER REVIEWS:
HER OTHER PROJECTS:
HER RADIO APPEARANCES:
I bet she's a riot at parties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Apr 7, 2010 - 1:52 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
TomD
(Member)
|
I don't disagree with the "bottom line," but, as an academic opinion, it seems poorly substantiated. The attitude is very cynical, and there is little acknowledgement or discussion of the useful functions music in film. Without some clear examples about how music can function, or ought to function, it comes off more like a fan rant than an academic opinion.
The writings of Royal S. Brown, brought up in this topic as fodder for an anti-intellectual stance often seen hereabouts, have always been better grounded, with clear examples to illustrate his points. No matter how much one might disagree with his opinion on the merits of a particular film score, his writing clearly recognizes and promotes the art of film music. He also seems to be one of the few academics who actually listens to film music away from the films.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's interesting how many academics listen to film-music.
The awful Camille Paglia often cites Golden Age composers as her favourites. Is there a pattern here? Or did she begin the trend amongst feminist commentators?
(I do not call Paglia 'awful' because she is a feminist, but rather because she has a self-serving brutality in her arguments that belies most of what she claims to care about.)
At least we can agree with Nina's general thrust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
