Recent orders
Film-Philosophy journal review
Film-Philosophy journal review
Name:
Course:
Presented to:
Date:
Film-Philosophy journal review
Film-Philosophy is a peer-reviewed academic journal which discuses film studies, aesthetics and world cinema from a philosophical point of view. The journal has five editors namely; Dr. David Sorfa, Dr. Greg Singh, Dr. Graham John Matthews, Matthew Holtmeier and Dr. Ben Tyrer. All of these editors work in recognized universities in the departments of film, Media or Cultural Studies. On top of this, the journal has an editorial board comprised of 15 individuals.
Film-Philosophy publishes the works of numerous authors on a broad range of topics and academic disciplines such as cultural studies, film studies, gender studies, philosophy, media studies and the arts. It was founded in 1996 and it is published three times in a year. Its main purpose has always been to provide a philosophical discussion of film studies, philosophical aesthetics and world cinema. It is sponsored by Open Humanities Press and is available online and in print format.
Critical Reflections
The dominant purpose of the Film-Philosophy journal is that it seems to offer a platform for discussions and debates of hot issues related to films and philosophy. The essays published in it examine theoretical issues related to film and philosophy, but which have practical implications. The content of the essays is particularly relevant to students and scholars in film studies, philosophy, media studies, cultural studies and the arts. Though the essays in the journal hardly contribute to other disciplines apart from those listed above, I find the journal to be very helpful to me as a film studies student.
The philosophical position of the essays in the interpretation of films is quite interesting to readers. In volume 15 of the journal, we find for example Imprisoned in Disgust: Roman Polanski’s Repulsion by Tarja Laine, Toward a Poetics of Cinematic Disgust by Julian Hanich, Body Horror and Post-Socialist Cinema: Györgi Pálfi’s Taxidermia by Steven Shaviro and the Introduction: Tarrying with Disgust by Tina Kendal. These articles discuss the presence of disgust in films and movies and the impact that this has in the society. This is one of the highly debated issue topics, especially in film studies. Thus, my review of this journal does not only complement my class work, I have been able to broaden my knowledge on the issue of presence of disgust in films and movies. Informed by the different authors of the essays in the journal, am able to look at this issue from many perspectives. Upon this base, I personally find the journal to be very rewarding to me.
One challenge I faced with the journal is that most of the essays published in it have long paragraphs and lack headings and subheadings. In addition, the authors occasionally use complex sentences and complex language, making the articles a-little-bit abstruse. This is evident in the essays in volume 15 such as Imprisoned in Disgust: Roman Polanski’s Repulsion and the Introduction: Tarrying with Disgust. This particular aspect reduces cohesiveness of the contents and ideas produced in the essays, which might make it difficult for a reader to understand how information is layered and prioritized.
Secondly, most of the essays published in the journal such as Imprisoned in Disgust: Roman Polanski’s Repulsion and Toward a Poetics of Cinematic Disgust offer persuasive ideas to demonstrate how films are filled with disgusting scenes. However, some of their statements in the description of films fail to include research references or acknowledgements that the statements are their own opinions. Example include assertion made in the Toward a Poetics of Cinematic Disgust that “In the last decade phenomenological film theory has emphasized that the film experience does not rest exclusively on the dominant senses of seeing and hearing.” This is a strong point whose source is not acknowledged. Acknowledging such opinions and explaining their reasoning could increase opportunity for persuading skeptical readers to agreement. By failing to provide research findings or personal reasoning, the authors increase reader’s resistance to their arguments.
Another issue is that the essays published in Film-Philosophy journal rarely treat films as objects of aesthetic contemplation. Words such as ‘aesthetic value’ and ‘beauty’ rarely appear in the essays describing films. This is not surprising given that many of the films discussed in the essays such as Terminator II and Back to the Future have little or no aesthetic value. As a result, many of these essays are inclined on revealing the presence anomie and psychological dysfunction in our societies. Unfortunately, much of the investigation of relationship between films and psychological and social matters is unsupported speculation. As noted, some of the ideas brought out in most essays support from lack factual findings or credible sources. However, the journal remains interesting and informative to targeted readers.
Similar to Film-Philosophy journal, this review targets students and scholars in film studies, philosophy, media studies, cultural studies and the arts. I believe that this review effectively meets the needs of the audience by present both the positive sides and negative sides of the journal.
References
Film-philosophy journal, (2012), Retrieved 29 March 2012 from, HYPERLINK “http://www.film
philosophy.com/index.php/f-p/index” http://www.film
philosophy.com/index.php/f-p/index
Father, Family and Work. Contemporary Perspectives
Father, Family and Work – Contemporary Perspectives
Name:
Course:
Presented to:
Date:
Father, Family and Work – Contemporary Perspectives
Fathers in the contemporary world hold different perspectives towards work-family balance. In a study conducted by Lee and Waite (2005), almost half (47%) of the fathers believed that the main role of a father is to provide. However, only 23% of the fathers believed that childcare should fully be a mother’s responsibility. More than half of the fathers (55%) believed that the parent with a higher salary or wage should concentrate more on work, regardless of whether it is the father or the mother. 63% of the fathers believed that fathers should be more involved in taking care of their children. The view of most fathers is that although work is important, a father should spend more time and give priority to their children. They believe that policies towards fatherhood should be designed in a way that allows them to be more committed to their children (Lee & Waite, 2005).
Majority of fathers feel that domestic labor should be divided equally between partners. However, most fathers encounter challenges that hinder them from taking more time doing domestic chores (Clarke & McKay, 2008). Most fathers value jobs that are flexible and that allow them more time to spend with their families. Studies have shown that in most cases, fathers hold similar views towards work-family balance and time to spend in domestic labor. However, they differ on some points. In comparison to mothers, fathers are less likely to believe that taking care of children is the sole responsibility of the mother. More fathers than mothers believe that it is the responsibility of both parents and the parent who is paid more to provide for the family financially. Finally, more fathers than mothers believe that the father should spend more time at work and less time doing domestic chores (Jones, Burke & Westman, 2013).
References
Clarke, H. & McKay, S. (2008) Exploring disability, family formation and break-up: Reviewing
the evidence. London: DWP.
Jones, F., Burke, R. J. & Westman, M. (2013). Work-Life Balance: A Psychological Perspective.
New York: Psychology Press
Lee, Y. & Waite, L. J. (2005). Husbands’ and wives’ time spent on housework: A comparison of
measures. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 328–336
Filming in 3 2 1 and ACTION
Filming in 3 2 1 and ACTION
The most interesting thing about this easy is the revelation of how getting “too busy” sometimes can be dangerous and at the end may affect our daily performance at place of work or school. The true revelation of how “too busy” can be costly is interestingly revealed by the phrase “The common room was a mess, his mess mostly”. Here, the narrator gives a detailed description of the common room which was quite messy. I was especially impressed by how the narrator went about in describing the disorganization of items within the common room. He manages to bring a clear view of the mess such that the reader can envision it. Another interesting issue that arises from this essay is how the narrator manages to incorporate humor throughout the text. For example, in his second sentence within this passage, it appears as if the filled gallon of water was communicating with him. Its presence guarantees that he would not lack water despite that the other gallon contained little water. The narrator also makes the description easier for his readers by using comparisons. For example, he compares the bean bag chair to a lode stone which carries things several items library books and a backpack lay on the bean bad chair. Humor is revealed, to be honest, throughout the essay. I mean the entire essay is humorous. From the way the narrator wakes-up, does the homework and fall asleep while at school. However, I experienced difficulties towards the end of this passage as the writer cuts short the second last sentence. This leaves the reader hanging while the next sentences do not have any connection with the unfinished one. I would suggest that the writer should have adopted a better way of ending this passage without diverting far away from his description.
The couple
This is probably my best essay among the five. Wow! I like the way Hanna’s husband deals with the emotional situation that Hanna is undergoing. Under normal situations the husband could have reacted angrily and even left her on the cafeteria. But he understands that it is not about him or the waitress but the child that Hanna needs badly. However, she understands that the husband is also interested in getting a child just as much as she is. She appreciates how supportive the husband has been through the entire difficult situation. At the end, she comes down and even apologies to him and even starts a “romantic play”. Another interesting factor that reveals itself in the essay is the element of tolerance and patience. If the husband had not been supportive and understanding, then situation could have moved from bad to worse.
I spotted some difficulties in the third passage within the essay, “The Couple”. The writer has used short sentences which do not communicate effectively his perspective. For example, the sentence, “So stubbornly”, does not communicate anything on its own. It would have been more appropriate to join these short sentences in to one continuous sentence. This would have brought out a clearer meaning of the intended view. I would suggest that the writer should use such short sentences when writing dialogues rather than during his narration