Philip Kaffen- Taking Yakuza Film Seriously: Critique and Consensus in Film Criticism

[Mark Nornes]

This sounds like a fascinating talk. Wish I could go!

But since I can't, I have two questions inspired by the following  
fragment in the abstract:

On Jun 2, 2009, at 4:37 AM, Jonathan M Hall wrote:

> the emergence of new technologies that allow for a proliferation
> of cinematic critique that threatens the privileged position of  
> academic
> experts; and the sense of exigency that we face in the current  
> moment demanding
> the rationalization and legitimation of humanities based knowledge

First, does anyone out there feel threatened by Midnight Eye? I assume  
this is the kind of "cinematic critique" enabled by new technologies  
that Phil is talking about. I for one, have quite the opposite  
relationship to Midnight Eye. This is one of the most precious and  
important developments in Japanese cinema "study" in decades. It's  
authoritative. Creative. Smart. And it's doubly impressive for  
striking an productive interface—or alliance—with academia (indeed,  
editor Tom Mes presented at the recent Evil Twin of SCMS at Josai, and  
the other editor, Jasper Sharp, also appears at academic venues).

If it's not Midnight Eye, for the Japanese cinema case, then what?  
Yahoo's movie fora? Criterion's discussion threads? KineJapan?!? I  
really don't feel any threats out there.

Would it be different for, say, Hollywood? Somehow I doubt it. Aren't  
most film scholars (statistically speaking!) ensconced in the academy  
with no aspirations to writing in Film Comment or the local newspaper?  
The few that do like publishing in popular venues do what they need to  
do to secure their promotions, and then write for the publications or  
websites that suit their particular taste. I don't see the threat here.

Second, no doubt there is an institutional crisis in the humanities,  
but I wonder if film studies is actually benefiting from it. As the  
university increasingly locates value in the hard and social sciences,  
as it becomes increasingly difficult to draw students to classes on  
literature (especially of earlier eras), enrollment pressures have  
schools redefining lines to include moving image media. It's striking  
to see how many jobs there are in film, or history or lit positions  
where they hope someone can include film/tv. OK, maybe not next year!  
But you know what I mean. This is across disciplines and areas, and is  
as true of liberal arts colleges as it is for the major research  
schools (indeed, Harvard closed all but 5 of its 50+ searches last  
fall, and their film position was one of the 5 that went ahead; the  
others were apparently all endowed chairs with donors looking over the  
school's shoulder).

In any case, while the trends in the academy are troubling for we  
humanists, I often wonder if film studies isn't benefiting from them  
when you look at the situation on the ground.

And that said, as someone editing a reader of Japanese film theory  
(with Aaron), the last part of Phil's talk sounds really exciting.  
Perhaps someone who goes (even Phil?) could fill us in on the  
discussion.

Markus