Search results

it's NLR circa 1984, if you have a subscription/access to library. loving the notion of an "'ideological' film"!

i think the jews in question were directly affected by the holocaust (ie uprooted, lost families, etc -- were actually of the generation affected by the holocaust). it's no uncontroversial itself, and it's fair to have qualms (after all, do communists or homosexuals receive reparations from...

oh, dominic! cheer up, eh!

robin carmody kind of does this. but it would involve proper analysis of the entertainment industry (including, obviously, independent labels and the gig circuit) as an industry, which no-one seems very interested in.

why is it insane? i suppose it needs answering. is there a statute of limitations on crimes against humanity? maybe not, but i kind of see this as the 'left' equivalent of enoch powell-bnp 'send 'em back' ahistorical mentalism. ahistorical partly 'cos it's highly selective in who gets payback...

this sounds interesting. totally insane, of course.

dunno who Sinfield & Dollimore are, but i like raymond williams.

during the cold war that definition wouldn't have made any sense.

wot, at s&s? i wz thinking of ms's war on 'influence'.

yes the piece says it's by oo green and refers to durgnat, but it is in fact by durgnat, the old trickster.

among filmmakers and critics p&p were reviled till the mid-sixties, and even then it took a lot of effort to make them atall hot. the minority interest 'motion' (1963)and 'movie' magazines wrote favourable things. this piece by raymond durgnat (1965) is the first major article of praise. i...

i'm not sure why you keep saying 'SE asians'. the families of 3 of the 4 came from pakistan, the 4th from africa (or w. indies? can't remember). the 21/7 bombers mostly from africa. yes, but the historical circumstances are very different. many americans, white and black, identify along...

i have 'something in common' with AQ in that i don't agree with everything george bush does. but my reasons for opposing the war are very different from AQ's. i think the prospect of islamic theocracy in iraq is dire, no better than iraq under bush. i opposed the war, but have no idea whether...

yeah, i was ambivalent about the war: i marched against, but mainly because i thought the chances of peace well slim. i don't have a big problem with interventionism per se. but i'm not ambivalent about al-quaeda, i don't see any grey area there. it's a good question. we don't know enough...

probably perversely, i think i prefer their b/w work: 'the spy in black', 'canterbury tale', and especially 'the small back room'. 'peeping tom' was hated on, not least by the kitchen sink brigade.

iow, the kneejerk, with-us-or-against-us line says that you can't be anti-AQ and anti-war. this is pish. thinking AQ's line on iraq has anything in common with the principled anti-war feeling demonstrated in london is dangerous nonsense.

bite me, sufi. i've had 4 years to reflect on the fact i don't like AQ. "no space for ambivalence or neutrality"? no, there isn't, really. the real kneejerk reaction is surely woebot's, which is that AQ is not the government, so must have some whiff of radicalism. perhaps i'm being unfair, but...

sort of baffled by how much crack you're on. whatkind of tone is appropriate? do you *really* thing being anti-AQ is 'conservative'? why leave the ethics of being mass-murderers aside? AQ may well be government enemies, but they are also enemies of the people. there is nothing in AQ to get...

whenever public enemy get played, i always think it's going to be james brown. does anyone else think they have built their success out of OTHER PEOPLE'S MUSIC OMG.

i might have, but the march was from the off actually a 'stop the war', bring-our-boys-home march. it exploited the death of an innocent man to make fairly doubtful surmises about the bombings ("if we hadn't invaded iraq, this would never have happened, therefore blair is responsible!").