Posted by Lou Pilder on January 16, 2007, at 23:12:55
In reply to My thoughts on book/film recommendations » one woman cine, posted by ClearSkies on January 16, 2007, at 20:39:34
> Isn't it wonderful how we can help enrich others' points of view by merely suggesting that they read a book or watch a film? If one is housebound, or unable to travel, being able to read or watch about another's views and experiences becomes invaluable, irreplaceable.
>
> > I must respectfully disagree with Joy Luck Club...
> >
>
> Have you read a book that might flesh out the author's story? Something that has resonated with you, perhaps?
>
> >
> >
> > By extension of Auntie Mel's and Kath's "Joy Luck Club" -
> >
> >
> > For understanding groups we don't understand, read book "XYZ"
> >
>
> Or, maybe, "for insight in trying to understand groups we don't understand, read book "XYZ" ."
>
> >
> > watch (or read) One Flew over the Cuckoo's nest to understand the mentally ill.
> >
>
> I'd also suggest reading Sylvia Plath's "The Bell Jar", and also "The Noonday Demon", and "An Unquiet Mind". All excellent books, all with their own stories to tell.
>
>
> > watch the Lone Ranger to understand American Indians...
> >
>
> I liked the movie "Smoke Signals" for its take on modern reservation life. ("Don't laugh so much," says one character. "You're supposed to look stoic.")
>
> > read (or watch) Huckleberry Finn or the Color purple to understand african americans...
> >
>
> Hmmm, Olivia Butler? Maya Angelou? How about a Spike Lee film?
>
> > To understand the South, read Flannery O'connor or Tennesee William's "streetcar named desire"
> >
> > Watch the Sopranos to understand Italian americans.
> >
> > & on it goes.....
>
> Indeed, on and on it goes... reading, watching films, exposing ourselves to literature and art from cultures foreign to ours is what sparks enquiry; leads to understanding, revelation, compassion....
>
> I did read a certain tone into your post, one woman cine. I interpreted it as less than supportive of another poster's suggestion. Perhaps that's because of our personal styles. I tend to be informal and often flippant - though I'm dead serious here. It is impossible to "read" intent in the posts here.
>
> That's my 2 cents. Thanks,
> ClearSkies
>
> Friends,
It is written here,[...I did read a..tone into your post, one woman cine...less than supportive of another poster's suggestion...]
Let us look at the grammatical structure os OWC's post:
[...For understanding groups we don't understand, read book "XYZ"...]
The grammatical structure here has a qualifier for a challenge,(A),{for understanding groups we don't understand}, and then the offerd solution is to (B), read book "XYZ".
This is different from reading a book that is {about people} such as John Stienbeck's {...Grapes..Wrath...}. The book was about, on one level, the plight of those forced from their land in Oklahoma because of the environmental disaster of the {dust bowl} in the depression era of the 1930's. I don't think OWC is saying to read that book to find out about what is typical of people from Oklahoma today.
In Merideth Wilson's,{...Music Man....}I do not think that watching the play is suggested to be a way to know what is typical of people from Iowa today.
The grammatical structure of OWC's post is about sterotyping a group of people in a book that is different from Stienbeck's novel of Wilson's musical. If a book is sterotyping a group, it depicts selective inferrences to catagorize them with generalizations about them. These are often invalid assumptions and in many cases designed to defame the group, but not always.
Looking at the grammatical structure of AM's post that one woman cine was referring to,[...your mom is old school Chinese..typical mainland..from her generation...sounds like the mom in the book...], I wonder if those inferrences could apply to {mom} here or not. What if {mom} was not like those perceptions?
Lou
>
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:721248
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20070112/msgs/723054.html