Showing posts with label cultural shifts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cultural shifts. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Can I Just Clarify One Thing Real Quickly Here?

"...one of the problems with women taking full leadership is that it inevitably involves a collapsing of the distinctions between the sexes."

--Thomas R. Schreiner in his conluding statements about contemporary application of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism, edited by J. Piper and W. Grudem. Wheaton: Crossway, 1991.


It's probably irresponsible or lazy for me to just throw this quote out here without offering an in-depth response or critique, but as I sit here reading this text, researching "Male-Headship" readings of 1 Corinthians, I just want to go on record to say that as women continue to take on full leadership roles both in church and society, it will highlight the distinctions between the sexes, not collapse them. That's the whole point, from my perspective. I want women in leadership because they will lead as women, not lead as men. Only then can we experience a reframing/healing/redesign of what we have only been offered from male paradigms.

An egalitarian society does not equal an un-gendered society.


That's all I have to say for now, Messieurs Piper and Grudem.

Monday, October 12, 2009

There's A Whole Chapter On Cannibalism And I'm Not Sure Why

The Hungry Soul: Eating and the Perfecting of Our Nature The Hungry Soul: Eating and the Perfecting of Our Nature by Leon R. Kass


My rating: 2 of 5 stars

Kass's philosophical exploration of the human need and habits around food, seems to depend largely on Western, modernist notions of self-perfection through progress. Kass appears to equate human civilization with virtue, (references to animals always being pejorative) and rarely accounts for the psychological constraints of culture and society that produced much of the manners/customs he seems to praise as progress. The book has intriguing arguments, but only in the context of a larger conversation about food and human/cultural identity. It's often hard to tell if Kass is asserting what he believes or merely reporting trends. As such, I found myself pushing against much of his claims, while not knowing if he was actually claiming the idea I was pushing against.

Perhaps this book is simply exploring questions that don't interest me. A very odd read. Or maybe I really just don't like/get reading philosophy.

View all my reviews >>

Friday, October 9, 2009

The Criterion Caitlin

I don't follow many non-friend Twitters. However, one of my non-friend Twitterers just twittered about my friend and basically blew my mind apart with awesomeness.

I follow The Criterion Collection and get updates on their film releases, etc. Like most non-uber-avant-garde-film-buff people, the only Criterion Collection films I own are by Wes Anderson, but I like getting regular updates about Belgian films from the 70's that I've never heard of. It's my version of CNN.

But tonight, scrolling through my Twitter updates, I saw this,


wherein I little did a double take at the name Caitlin Kuhwald, one of the most talented people I knew in high school, and that's saying something. Caitlin actaully left SCPA (The San Diego School For Creative And Performing Arts) a bit after junior high to go to COSA (Coronado School of the Arts) but she's still a formative member of our ever-aging gang of SCPA class of '98ers, despite the fact that she wore a green gown at her graduation and we wore white.

Caitlin was actually the first (and to some extent, still the only) person I ever went on a road trip with. We drove from San Diego up Highway 101 and spent a bit of time in San Francisco then spent a week with our friend Christa who was staying with her Dad in the awesomely small town of Susanville, CA. While there, Caitlin painted a mural inside Christa's house. We stayed up late at night writing satirical pop songs (I still know most of the words to "90's Girl") and watching "Say Antyhing". (Actually, come to think of it- any Bennington people who remember my "stand-up" routine of fake indie girl band- that song "I'll be True" was written that week- Kim, you know what I'm talking about--oh the history!!)

Also, the only time I've ever been to Chicago was to visit Caitlin at her Dad's house. It's pretty amazing the more I think about it, how many places are marked by Caitlin's presence in my memory and her art in actuality. (Not to mention to full page in the back of my 8th grade yearbook where she drew an unbelievably accurate picture of the guy I like-liked.)

Caitlin has moved on from yearbooks and onto the cover of Criterion's releases of Heaven Can Wait, The Thief of Baghdad and Amarcord. See her Top 10 Criterion favorites here.

Congratulations Caitlin. I'm so excited that your art will grace so many homes- in prized movie collections. Glad I already have some treasured Kuhwald's of my own, and some truly wonderful memories (and trip photo albums- especially the black and whites from the graveyard that day...) .

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Tiny TV Review: Mad Men

Confession- this isn't really a review so much as knee-jerk response. I gave up watching the series after only 2 episodes. When asked why, this was my answer:
"Well- it just didn't grab me, for one. The directing and pacing is really odd. And it seems way too amused by its cultural differences and historical no-nos, like we're supposed to say every five minutes "Oh my, they were so ignorant and inappropriate back then!" and to me, that's not the same as immersing the viewer in a different time/culture or good storytelling for that matter. Seems gratuitously self-indulgent, like someone overusing the f-word once they realize they can say it without being punished by their parents."

Though I'll add one thing: nice to see Christina Hendricks featured on a series. And admittedly, I'll likely give the series another chance eventually. But for now, so long boring chauvinists.

Friday, September 18, 2009

"A" is for "AHA!": The Scarlet Letter as Nathaniel Hawthorne's Biggest Inside Joke

The Scarlet Letter (Modern Library Classics) The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

We all read it in eleventh grade. The language was dense, but we ached for Hester, hated Chillingworth and rooted for Dimmesdale. It all felt so dramatic and deep and dark, like moss on an old oak tree covering up secret messages carved long ago by two star-crossed lovers.

And then you read it as an adult.

Umm...sorry Ms. Vehar, but how did you fail to mention that this books is hilarious? I could practically hear Nathaniel Hawthorne's eyelashes swishing as he winked sarcastically from from behind every page. The faux Puritan prose is just that: faux. While Hawthorne makes grandiose statements about the severity and coldness of those old Puritan days, he is practically bruising the reader with elbow jabs to the ribs saying, "Nudge, nudge, get it? WE ARE JUST AS JUDGMENTAL AND SEVERE TODAY! HA!!"

Despite the mild bruising, I couldn't help but adorn the margins with smiley faces every time I felt my buddy Nathaniel winking at me. But for all the smiley faces, it was a surprise to realize how distant the narrator really stays from the characters. While adaptations of the story focus on the passion of the silenced lovers and imagine a rich thought life for Hester, the book rarely visits the interior worlds of the characters beyond what is symbolically represented by their, well, symbols- her daughter Pearl, the rose bushes, the gallows, meteors, the eponymous scarlet letter, etc. The narrator spends far more time alluding to foreboding symbolic omens of psychological disruption, than inviting the reader to feel what the characters feel, or even know what they are feeling. This book is anything but romantic.

Further, Dimmesdale is in no way a hero to root for. From my reading, Hawthone thinks him the worst kind of cowardly narcissist there is. For all of Dimmesdale's self-imposed chastisement and loathing, he goes about his life feeling rather proud of his status as secret horrible sinner, whereas Hester bears the public shame and maintains her integrity. Dimmesdale's death (oops, spoiler) is his final pathetic act of grandiosity- he begs for Hester to give him her strength, but still chooses the easy way out as a martyr for his own sinfulness. He avoids the real risk, following Hester into a life beyond Salem's black & white punitive moral justice. He disintegrates into the non-person he is, rather than choosing to live honestly as an imperfect man.

I enjoyed my revisit to The Scarlet Letter, especially considering it had been twelve years since I'd read it. It's a short read, and if you can read it as satire, not morose allegory, it really shines with brilliant psychological insights. And no matter how unlikable I found her to be, Hester really is an amazing female character. Hawthorne supposedly based her largely on Margaret Fuller, a woman whom nearly all those transcendentalist fellows were head over heals for. She marched to her own drum, choosing lovers often over marriage, and career over domestic security. It must have been pretty shocking in 1850 to read about the choices Hester Prynne makes, and I bet a lot of Hawthorne's ironical winks and nudges would not have been as humorous if you were the party being implicated. But for 2009, it's an enlightening and entertaining read.


View all my reviews >>

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Reading the Worst the Bible Has to Offer

Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives (Overtures to Biblical Theology) Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives by Phyllis Trible


My rating: 4 of 5 stars




While Trible's literary/rhetorical criticism asks a lot of an ancient, multi-sourced text, the endeavor is still humbling in scope and purpose. Published over 25 years ago now, Texts of Terror is still a shining example of feminist Biblical criticism, as well a work of deep faith, hope and compassion. Trible takes four of the most disturbing Biblical examples of sexual violence against women and exegetes them with a Christological lens. Buried under the violence, subjugation and silencing, Trible unearths the following women:

Hagar: Egyptian Slave Woman
She was wounded for our transgressions; she was bruised for our iniquities
Genesis 16;1-16; 21:9-21

Tamar: Princess of Judah
A woman of sorrows and acquainted with grief
2 Samuel 13:1-22

An Unnamed Woman: Concubine from Bethlehem
Her body was broken and given to many
Judges 19:1-30

The Daughter of Jephthah: Virgin in Gilead
My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken her?
Judges 11:29-40

By reading these texts closely and attending to the subject/object of grammar and the often chiasmic nature of the syntax, Trible finds the people and poetry under the stories, and through them, a glimpse of redemption for these texts of terror as they reveal the brokenness of human violence paired with solidarity in Christ's suffering and sacrifice.

View all my reviews >>

Monday, August 17, 2009

District 9 and the Noble Savage or "Why I Need To Spoil The Film Everyone Loves"

*****Spoiler Alert***** (In more ways than one)


I saw District 9 on opening night. My two concluding statements: "I loved every minute of watching that movie" and "I officially despise this movie"

It took me about an hour to reach the second statement, but there were hints throughout. Though I was completely riveted the whole time, like, jaw-open-eyes agog-throughout kind of riveted, I was continually bumping up against issues of logic, suspension of disbelief as well as character/narrative issues. But I'll leave those for the film critics to parse.

What puts this film officially on my shit-list is that in its attempted exploration of issues about immigration, race, prejudice, oppression, power and privilege, it actually propagates the mentality its presumably challenging. Here’s some of what I saw.

We are faced early on with the blatant human disregard for the alien species, as we see them nicknamed, murdered, abused and displaced with flippancy by the South African community. This exposition part of the film is really quite stunning and disturbing- you see an unassuming paper-pusher of a man explain how the alien eggs (unborn children) burst like popcorn when they're burned, while he oversees the systematic destruction of a whole pod of eggs. He's giddy and childlike--his innocence to the horror he's committing is freakish, and the audience, understandably and appropriately, gasps. The parallels throughout the film regarding the aliens as refugees, slaves or genocide victims are hardly subtle. It's clear that as we watch, we are supposed to shrink in horror at the similarity between the atrocities being causally committed by humans against aliens and our own cultural histories and present tenses regarding outsiders, minorities and the oppressed.

But this is where the film gets dangerous or at least grotesque. The film never leaves the perspective of the oppressors. The aliens (clear stand-ins for oppressed cultures) are helpless, stupid, volatile and violent. In one of the first noticeable non-"archival" scenes in the film, we see two aliens scrounging for scraps. They are noticeably wearing clothes, (cue the viewer: all aliens look alike but this one's wearing clothing so you can recognize it- maybe this will be a main character). Next, a toddler sized alien appears, talking to the boldly dressed alien, (cue the viewer: this alien has a kid, so this is definitely the main character, and you are now going to sympathize with it because there's a little cute alien to go with it). I nearly "ugghhed" out loud when these aliens shortly reappeared in a new scene, confirming the stereotyped character coding.

Next, when the main alien character interacts with the humans, they all notice that he is smarter than the rest of the aliens. As I watched, I waited for when the film would explain that the aliens are intelligent, and it’s just prejudice framing them all as stupid animals. But this never happens. Not one reasonably sentient alien besides "Christopher" and his son ever appears. The film never alludes to why Christopher seems able to survive without killing others over cat-food (another offensive trend in the alien lifestyle- they inexplicably love cat-food (ahem-Crack) and will do anything for it). Christopher is merely the ONE alien who isn't a dumb-insect-riot monger-addict.

In hearing the alien's name, the audience chuckles or is confused by his Anglo name, Christopher Johnson. At first I thought this was appropriately upsetting, and a set-up for when we'd get to learn his true name. But we never learn his non-"Ellis Island" or oppressor-given name. It's never addressed. And maybe that would be an okay element of ambiguity/mystery in the narrative, were it not for all the other disappointments as far as the cultural parallels.

The worst element of all, however, is the fact that after being continually manipulated, abandoned, beaten, threatened and taken advantage of by the main human character, (including his son being essentially kidnapped), "Christopher" then turns to Wikus and refuses to leave him behind. While this reflects well on Christopher's integrity and shows-up Wikus's cowardice, what I really think it reflects is an oppressor's version of the scenario. It's basically a story of a beaten and abused slave turning to save their master from drowning. Of course that's the white people version of the story. To frame the story in such a way that the abused alien risks twenty times more on behalf of the white man than the white man risks for him, creates a self-aggrandized catharsis for us, the powerful and privileged, to get to watch a story of wounded, marginalized people wholeheartedly forgiving our oppression. It is the noble savage thanking us in a pure British accent, for domesticating him and teaching him how to behave. It's horrific.

Further, while the aliens are clearly the more sympathetic characters, the film ends focused on the pathos and tragedy of the human character having been transformed into an alien. We are left with the image of lonely Wikus the now-alien, rather than the victory of Christopher, escaping to free his people. We don’t even get to know if Christopher was successful in his mission. The end made me so furious, that it erased my entire experience of enjoying the previous two hours. Shouldn’t Wikus’s new identity as an alien/outsider, be his literal and figurative character transformation? The story was so clearly headed in this direction. But we never see Wikus repentant of how he’d treated the aliens (of which he is now one). We only see his survival instinct and his guilt. What’s the point of changing the oppressor into the shape of the oppressed if he is never made aware of his violence? Though I’m all for subverting viewer’s expectations in narrative tropes, this is one case where I felt gross when left with the aborted trajectory. If feeling gross at our identification with Wikus was the goal, then the film shouldn’t end with him making a tin flower for his wife. Really.

For a film about exposing the abuses we commit to “the other”, this film only furthers a colonialist view of other cultures, wherein those we conquer and subdue, probably deserve it because they are so uncivilized and, literally in this film’s case, inhuman. I’m pretty shocked and appalled that a film so close to being amazing, got it so, so, so wrong.

Sunday, August 2, 2009

"We will never know how the mind turns the water of our cells into the wine of consciousness"

Proust Was a Neuroscientist Proust Was a Neuroscientist by Jonah Lehrer


My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I was drawn to Jonah Lehrer's book when I saw a light blue paperback with a madeleine cookie on the cover along with the word "neuroscientist". Tasty looking indeed. When I opened it up, I saw that an entire chapter was devoted to George Eliot and "The Biology of Freedom". With little more info than that, I basically took the book to the cash register and had at it.

To quote the description on the back, Lehrer's book explores the idea that "when it comes to understanding the brain, art got there first." Each chapter profiles a 19th-early 20th century artist and how their work revealed an understanding of how our brains function that neuroscience is only just beginning to discover. Most engaging was the chapter on chef Auguste Escoffier and the intuiting of umami- our only very recently canonized new taste- joining savory, sweet and the rest. The chapter on Stravinsky and how our brains learn to enjoy music was also refreshing.

Overall, however, I find I was most alert while Lehrer profiled the artists, particularly as he located them within the scientific atmosphere of their time. Once each chapter switched to descriptions of neurological functioning the writing became dense and hard to connect with. Maybe there's just no easy way to write about neuroscience no matter how many literary references one uses. Lehrer's effort is much appreciated, but still feels only mildly successful. I loved learning about the relationships (or animosities) these artists had to the scientific communities of their era, but the connection to what their art revealed about what we now know of the brain still felt like a bit of a reach. But still interesting. Ultimately, I love Lehrer's goal of fostering dialogue and mutual understanding between science and art.

"We now know enough to know that we will never know everything. That is why we need art: it teaches us how to live with mystery. Only the artist can explore the ineffable without offering us an answer, for sometimes there is no answer...When we venture beyond the edge of our knowledge, all we have is art."

Beautiful.

View all my reviews >>

Saturday, August 1, 2009

Why Publish When You Can Just Twitter?

What's all that tweeting you hear? Oh, just the sounds of my fifteen minutes of fame getting used up. I'm not complaining. The following is proof that Twitter truly is the most powerful benevolent de-centralized (human-made) force in the universe.
It goes like this...

In August, Ian and I start working on a paper about Joss Whedon's series Firefly, to submit to the Whedon panel at the Southwest/Texas American & Popular Culture Association's Annual Conference. Then we write it. Then we go to the conference. We have a great time, we email the paper to a couple people we meet there. We talk about editing it so we can submit it for publication somewhere like the Journal of Religion and Popular Culture. But the re-formatting alone would take major thought, and Kj's still only halfway through a crazy spring term. So we hold onto the paper with an ellipses as to what to do with it next.But in July (last Monday to be exact), we re-deliver our paper presentation along with a film screening at MHGS. Josué suggests we include a write up about the event for the new Experience MHGS website. He goes ahead and makes a paper link in case someone wants to read it. I think, "That's awfully nice, but who that's investigating MHGS is gonna read a 35 page paper about fundamentalism and a cancelled TV show?"

But I go ahead and tweet the link to the EMHGS site.
Then this happens. My initial tweet is way down there on the bottom, then next thing you know, It's on Whedonesque, the ultimate Whedonverse hub for both fandom and academia. So within a few hours, it went from living in my docs file to being accessible to every hardcore Whedon fan on the planet. By the time I got out of bed, it already had a comment stream 30 posts long.

So no more wondering who our audience is for this thing. It's out there. They're reading it, and they're already debating everything from the specifics of taking holy orders, to mind-reading to biblical innerancy, (not to mention finding all our typos).

Oh mighty Twitter. Thanks for getting us out there. You put a skip in my step all day. Tweet tweet tweet.

Monday, July 20, 2009

Well Done, Jimmy Carter

After sixty years, Jimmy Carter has severed his ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, finally, over issues of women's subjugation. While I kind of want to pump my fist in the air and say "Fuck YEAH!!!!"... what I really (want to) hope for is that hearts and minds will be opened to realize the folly of equating gender with spiritual capability, leadership or value, not to mention, the Image of God. May Jimmy Carter's integrity in this act serve not to help others jump ship, but to alter paradigms and ignite repentance regarding the violence (spiritual, emotional, physical, social, psychological) that has been done to women in the name of Jesus. That is not the Gospel.

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Reading from the Outside

Unlike most of the blogging world, I really don't subscribe much to blogs by people I don't know. Even when I do, I end up never reading them. If it's not a friend, I tend to just not be interested.

But one non-aquaintance blog that has become a must-read for me is Tacoma Atheists. I discovered the blog through a Bennington Alum on Facebook. (She friended me but I don't think we've ever met, so it doesn't count as a buddy blog). Tacoma Atheist is a group of local atheists and non-theists who collaborate to promote community and education regarding atheist advocacy and rights.

It's a really amazing collection of people's concern, outrage and passion for freedom of thought, with particular focus on the prejudice, injustice and harm done in the name of religion. While admittedly, the site posts have as much us-them superiour snarkiness as any blog (that is the point of blogs, I think), it's refreshing, humbling and eye-opening to read from the persepctive of the evangelized instead of the evagelizers.

While my own thoughts on evangelism and mission probably align closer with the site members than those they are critiquing, I still find it hugely impacting to read about what's going on in the local and national church as written by those who are enraged by it, rather than inspired.

Most recently, Tacoma Atheists re-posted a Slog article about Mars Hill Church's intentional movement towards Capital Hill. Reading it really made me want to show up at that bar to see how the Capital Hill community would respond to the Evangelical "relational approach" to ministry. While I have my own issues with Mars Hill Church, (and never know if I'm being a jerk or not for my constant disclaimer that Mars Hill Graduate School has nothing whatsoever to do with the church of similar name- except that we're all Christians and that's not insignificant), I think every Chrsitian can learn something from reading people's comments regarding how they feel when they're told that someone is coming to love them intetionally. How can that not sound patronizing? Will you let yourself be loved by the person you're trying to save? And if so, can you do that if you've already decided their fate for them? Will anyone's life ever be changed through agenda'd relationship?

Obviously, I think the answer is no. But it'll be an interesting experiment up there. And I'm thankful for Tacoma Atheists. Not as some Christian spy- or even as a postmodern, post-evangelical wanna-be cool by considering myself more like the atheists than megachurch people- but for the way they reflect myself and my community back to me- For a reminder that if you want to love, serve or help someone, you should never assume you know what they want, need or love. In fact, sometimes the best thing to give is your respect- which may mean leaving them alone.


6/16/09 update: honored to have been quoted by TA.

Monday, April 20, 2009

Sunday, April 5, 2009

Singing What You See

Here's another Jonathan Mann song- it might be my favorite. He's writing a song a day. The Description from his website for the song says "#81! “From My Front Door Vol. 1” Images seen while looking out from my front door set to music and lyrics."

It's pretty much how I feel these days- I'm running on half a battery- and all I can really do is sort of notice things- but can't really engage. Hoping to re-enter the world in two weeks or so. Hopefully. And I'll meet my new niece Freya Kathryn on Monday. It's hard having to see her on Facebook before I see her in person when she's only 15 minutes away. There's the understatement of the year.

Enjoy this simple song.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

When Your Friends Start Getting Famous For Singing Songs About Famous People...

...you must put them on your blog. Apparently my fellow Bennington-ite Jonathan Mann has been making his way up the YouTube charts and even onto MSNBC. I've known for awhile that he's been writing a song a day, I'd just lost track of how awesome they are. Here's his paean to Jon Stewart. It's incredible. Check out his Battlestar Galactica song on Maryann's blog as well.

Go get 'em Jonathan.

Sunday, March 22, 2009

OCD and the Tourism it Brings: A Twilight Experience

(Fan friends- you might want to stop reading at this point)

Okay- this blog post probably needs a lot of background. In fact, I have so much to say on this topic, that I'm overwhelmed at trying to write any of it. Hence, some helpful video clips.

What you need to know:

A) There is a book series referred to as The Twilight Saga, about a girl who gets involved with vampires (The Cullens)

B) Despite worldwide acknowledgment of its horrible wriitng, repressed eroticism and problematic (violent, oppresive) gender roles, these books and the film Twilight are hugely popular.

C) The first book takes place in the small town of Forks, WA

D) The author had never been to Forks when writing the book and the movie was not filmed in Forks

E) Forks is now a tourist extravenganza, equipped with tours, motel packages and Twilight-themed menu items at most eating establishments in town.

F) There is an entire store devoted to Twilight paraphanlia on the main street.

G) Lucy and I decided to go into this store while we were staying in Forks last weekend.

Okay people. If I could, I'd write a dissertation on the experince, but instead, here's some video (SORRY I HELD MY PHONE SIDEWAYS. JUST TURN YOUR HEAD AND REALLY CRANK UP THE VOLUME TOO-AGAIN, SORRY)

The Escape: Lucy and I fianlly leave the store. Note Lucy's facial expression as she comes into view. Also note how she runs out of the store to her car. And my sentence gets cut off...

"the real world's out here and the...fake one's in there..." Not that I'm challenging fantasy as a legitimate expression of truth- but come on people, this stuff is unbeleivable.

The Evidence: This video does some merchandise documenting. It's pretty blurry, but it's worth it for the bumper sticker. If you can't read the first word, it says "Edward"- he's the main character- a superhero vampire who has some self-control issues.


That's a start for now. There's a lot more where this came from.

Sunday, March 1, 2009

SWTX PCA/ACA Panels

Here are the panels I attended Wed-Sat. Each panel had 2-5 paper presentations. You just role out of bed, take the elevator downstairs and go from panel to panel, and if you're lucky, grab a free soda between 12:30 and 2. Good lord it was amazing.

Sci Fi/Fantasy:
Heroism and Villainy in the Whedonverse

Children’s/Young Adult Literature & Culture:
Across the Harry Potter Universe

Literature:
Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight Series

Sci Fi/Fantasy:
“Feel Good Imperialism:” Gender, Race & Colonialism in Star Trek

Experimental Writing and Aesthetics:
Extratextual: The Alchemy of Interdisciplinary Writings

***Sci Fi/Fantasy: Philosophy and Religion in the Whedonverse*** Us!

Religion:
Crossing Boundaries: Film, TV, Literature

Classical Representation in Popular Culture:
Greek and Roman History On Screen

Religion:
Labeling the Other

Sci Fi/Fantasy:
Metaphorical Mythology in the Whedonverse

Film Adaptation:
A Novelist’s Perspective on Literature-to-Film Adaptations

Technical Communication:
Twittering and Gaming: Building Communities

Authors, Journal Editors and Special Contributors Panel

Sci Fi/Fantasy: Double Feature:
Once More With Feeling and Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along-Blog

Shakespeare on Film and Television:
King Lear and The Tempest

Myth and Fairy Tale:
Film Studies

Film & History:
Violence and Genre Cinema