Scan barcode
chirson's review against another edition
3.0
3.5 stars? I suppose. I thought the author's definition of postfeminism made her arguments more rather than less murky, and I think she gives short shrift to several of the series she describes. I also wished she'd actually engaged with the post-9/11 programming shift (her omission of 24, a perfect illustration of the move away from female-centric drama, could serve as an example). It's also interesting as an artifact of the time it was written: before the Difficult Men re-dominated the silver screen and before likability of female characters stopped being expected.
I thought Lotz's arguments against role model analysis (or at least, against role model paradigm being the dominant mode of feminist criticism) could have used more depth. Granted, all she wrote about its roots and uses was awesome and some of the most interesting content, for me (something I'll be able to use in my own work. A lot). Still, her argument that:
doesn't quite hold water when considering how overwhelmingly uniform those stories could still be (by her own admission). Before this model can fade into obscurity, we still need to monitor representation - and this doesn't necessarily mean only role-model representation (as she usually simplifies it). But this is something to discuss in more depth than the review allows.
That said, I really appreciate the breadth of her critique, bringing into my attention shows that *have* been all but forgotten and which sound fascinating. The Division, in particular, but also Third Watch (and I've never heard it mention in any analysis of depictions of abortion on tv!). And Any Day Now, Judging Amy and Family Law are all shows I have a passing (or more than passing) acquaintance with, but I wish I could get hold of them in their entirety. And I thought the focus on how transformations in the media and advertiser pressures contributed to the transformations in formulas was very enlightening.
All in all, a very decent, well-researched piece of television criticism. (Even if I remain unconvince about Ally McBeal's nuances! ;))
I thought Lotz's arguments against role model analysis (or at least, against role model paradigm being the dominant mode of feminist criticism) could have used more depth. Granted, all she wrote about its roots and uses was awesome and some of the most interesting content, for me (something I'll be able to use in my own work. A lot). Still, her argument that:
"The presence of a previously unimaginable multiplicity of stories about women decreases the utility of this model, particularly when other frameworks remain obscured by its centrality."
doesn't quite hold water when considering how overwhelmingly uniform those stories could still be (by her own admission). Before this model can fade into obscurity, we still need to monitor representation - and this doesn't necessarily mean only role-model representation (as she usually simplifies it). But this is something to discuss in more depth than the review allows.
That said, I really appreciate the breadth of her critique, bringing into my attention shows that *have* been all but forgotten and which sound fascinating. The Division, in particular, but also Third Watch (and I've never heard it mention in any analysis of depictions of abortion on tv!). And Any Day Now, Judging Amy and Family Law are all shows I have a passing (or more than passing) acquaintance with, but I wish I could get hold of them in their entirety. And I thought the focus on how transformations in the media and advertiser pressures contributed to the transformations in formulas was very enlightening.
All in all, a very decent, well-researched piece of television criticism. (Even if I remain unconvince about Ally McBeal's nuances! ;))
More...