Ryder,
Thanks for writing. In my experience, it is pretty easy to avoid getting
too embroiled here, and i speak as someone who was once part of the
embriolment. Ad hominem attacks are easy to recognize, and avoid. It's
good training in learning what to ignore and stay away from. So do stay.
As for me, I try to restrict my bloviations to Facebook, which certainly
deserves them.
Fred Camper
Chicago
On 11/4/2020 2:07 PM, Ryder White wrote:
Thanks Fred, for more eloquently describing the problem with the email
from Bernie that I took issue with. I mischaracterized it as a
critique, and it wasn’t really...a critique requires, as you pointed
out, detailed study and analysis.
I like this list, and I respect and admire the people who have put so
much into it. I was warned, 11 years ago when I joined it in
university, that there is a strong strain of negativity in
Frameworks...I’ve chosen to ignore it (like you, Fred, thinking better
of myself...) for the most part, but lately I’ve felt myself really
tempted to unsubscribe. But I don’t want to! There is so much good
stuff here! Eric’s efforts to tour the Peter Hutton tribute program
compiled by Mark Street and Jennifer Reeves is just one of many things
that would have flown under my radar otherwise...but because of the
list, we got to have it in Vancouver. I’m at a point in my life where
I can’t be as involved with film art as I might like to be, and
frameworks is one of the things that helps me continue to feel connected.
So that’s my little plug. Critique and discourse are great, necessary
even. But bloviating and ad hominems are not.
Kim, sorry to hijack the thread. Congrats on your book.
Ryder
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 14:46 Fred Camper <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Ryder,
I was going to reply to Roddy's idiotic post, even though I have
generally tried to ignore him based on past experience, and thought
better of it, but now you have (unintentionally) inspired me to enter.
Respectfully, I disagree with you. In fact, I would like to see more
criticism of things posted to FrameWords. Someone posts a video
that you
dislike; tell us what's wrong with it. We are adults; we should be
able
to take it. But don't talk about it unless you view all of it, and
with
care.
The problem instead is that Roddy posted a review of a book based
on the
first four pages. He seems to be proud of himself for having read
four
pages and formed an opinion based on them. The amount of
irresponsible
disrespect inherent in sending such a critique to, what is it, a
thousand people who are serious about film in all parts of the
world, is
mind-boggling. Why would anyone be interested in his opinion of the
first four pages. Roddy, books often start in one place and end up in
another, as you ought to know if you have ever read any. I would
never
post an opinion on the first four minutes of a three hour video,
or even
the first two hours of it. Someone who would write a critique on the
first four pages of a book sounds like someone who is only more
interested in broadcasting their own thinking than in learning
from others.
I have occasionally learned from books I disliked on topics that
interested me, because the process of reading the whole thing
becomes a
process of finding out, through your own objections, what you think.
The distinction I am making is important to me. Read a whole book,
and,
if you disagree with it, construct an answer, a critique, an
objection.
That is showing respect. Commenting on the first four pages is not
only
disrespectful, but moronic.
Fred Camper
Chicago.
--
Ryder Thomas White
SENT FROM MOBILE
ryderthomaswhite.com <http://ryderthomaswhite.com>
Pronouns: he/him/his
--
Frameworks mailing list
[email protected]
http://film-gallery.org/mailman/listinfo/frameworks_film-gallery.org
