In Bane’s discussion, she states that Scorpio Rising is “neither fish nor fowl”, a good metaphor saying that it cannot be described solely as avant-garde or kitsch, but rather a mixture of the two. I could not agree more after reading the description of the two styles and her (or Greenberg’s) arguments. First of all, the Kitsch style, according to the reading on pg. 104, is the popular, Hollywood narrative style that is responsible for killing high art and folk art and infected the entire world with its dullness. Like
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
la réponse à la lecture: Week 4
Re-visit Banes's discussion of Scorpio Rising and Greenberg's distinction between avant-garde and kitsch (p. 104-105). Why does she argue that the film is "neither fish nor fowl," meaning somewhere in-between avant-garde and kitsch?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment