Market Reforms, Nationalism, and War Films: A Case for Historical Continuities. Budha, K. In Kim, S. D. & David, J., editors, pages 163--183, October, 2006. The Executive Agency for Culture Cities, The Ministry of Culture & Tourism. abstract bibtex Film criticism in the media has played a key role in sustaining Indian cinema. Indeed, in the absence of journals such as Cahiers du cinéma or sustained academic study, journalistic criticism and reporting has helped shape the industry. Higson places film criticism as one of the ways to explore national cinemas. Furthering this approach, Darrell William Davis has proposed three “models of reflections” – or criticism – about a national film industry. These are: the reflectionist model, which evaluates a national film industry in relation to national politics; the dialogic model, which examines the similarities and differences between a national cinema and other national cinemas; and the contaminated model, which considers national cinema to be a compartment of a larger international institution. The study of national cinemas in an age of globalization is considered essential to examine perceived threats of assimilation within larger transnational systems of entertainment, culture, and economics. It has been argued that Indian economic deregulation, ushered in the early nineties, has impacted the media industries to cause historical disjunctures. It is in the above-mentioned contexts that this paper examines discussions of the war film in English-language newspapers between 1997 and 2006. The public space is a rich site to understand the collective of interest groups. These discussions reveal in various nuances the concepts, concerns, and themes about the war film in industrial, aesthetic, ideological, cultural, and political terms. Thus, through a discursive analysis of statements and journalistic criticism published in newspapers, this article reveals three major themes: nationalism; state, economics, and cinema; and aesthetic criticism of form and style. The discourse substantiates historical continuities in cinema’s relationship with dominant sociocultural formations, late capital’s inability to formally subsume cinema, and journalistic criticism obsessed with western realism. It is suggested that the film industry needs to put forward an institutionalized class of texts by setting rules and expectations about the concerns of the genre, instead of letting the vagaries of India’s relationship with Pakistan prevail on film production and aesthetics. This would require working closely with journalist-critics, who are well placed to counter dominant political discourse.
@inproceedings{kim_market_2006,
title = {Market {Reforms}, {Nationalism}, and {War} {Films}: {A} {Case} for {Historical} {Continuities}},
abstract = {Film criticism in the media has played a key role in sustaining Indian cinema. Indeed, in the absence of journals such as Cahiers du cinéma or sustained academic study, journalistic criticism and reporting has helped shape the industry. Higson places film criticism as one of the ways to explore national cinemas. Furthering this approach, Darrell William Davis has proposed three “models of reflections” – or criticism – about a national film industry. These are: the reflectionist model, which evaluates a national film industry in relation to national politics; the dialogic model, which examines the similarities and differences between a national cinema and other national cinemas; and the contaminated model, which considers national cinema to be a compartment of a larger international institution. The study of national cinemas in an age of globalization is considered essential to examine perceived threats of assimilation within larger transnational systems of entertainment, culture, and economics. It has been argued that Indian economic deregulation, ushered in the early nineties, has impacted the media industries to cause historical disjunctures. It is in the above-mentioned contexts that this paper examines discussions of the war film in English-language newspapers between 1997 and 2006. The public space is a rich site to understand the collective of interest groups. These discussions reveal in various nuances the concepts, concerns, and themes about the war film in industrial, aesthetic, ideological, cultural, and political terms. Thus, through a discursive analysis of statements and journalistic criticism published in newspapers, this article reveals three major themes: nationalism; state, economics, and cinema; and aesthetic criticism of form and style. The discourse substantiates historical continuities in cinema’s relationship with dominant sociocultural formations, late capital’s inability to formally subsume cinema, and journalistic criticism obsessed with western realism. It is suggested that the film industry needs to put forward an institutionalized class of texts by setting rules and expectations about the concerns of the genre, instead of letting the vagaries of India’s relationship with Pakistan prevail on film production and aesthetics. This would require working closely with journalist-critics, who are well placed to counter dominant political discourse.},
publisher = {The Executive Agency for Culture Cities, The Ministry of Culture \& Tourism},
author = {Budha, Kishore},
editor = {Kim, Shin Dong and David, Joel},
month = oct,
year = {2006},
pages = {163--183}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"bqh3cx3Qifhuy4Tpo","bibbaseid":"budha-marketreformsnationalismandwarfilmsacaseforhistoricalcontinuities-2006","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2016-05-13T06:07:08.864Z","title":"Market Reforms, Nationalism, and War Films: A Case for Historical Continuities","author_short":["Budha, K."],"year":2006,"bibtype":"inproceedings","biburl":"http://bibbase.org/zotero/accacri","bibdata":{"bibtype":"inproceedings","type":"inproceedings","title":"Market Reforms, Nationalism, and War Films: A Case for Historical Continuities","abstract":"Film criticism in the media has played a key role in sustaining Indian cinema. Indeed, in the absence of journals such as Cahiers du cinéma or sustained academic study, journalistic criticism and reporting has helped shape the industry. Higson places film criticism as one of the ways to explore national cinemas. Furthering this approach, Darrell William Davis has proposed three “models of reflections” – or criticism – about a national film industry. These are: the reflectionist model, which evaluates a national film industry in relation to national politics; the dialogic model, which examines the similarities and differences between a national cinema and other national cinemas; and the contaminated model, which considers national cinema to be a compartment of a larger international institution. The study of national cinemas in an age of globalization is considered essential to examine perceived threats of assimilation within larger transnational systems of entertainment, culture, and economics. It has been argued that Indian economic deregulation, ushered in the early nineties, has impacted the media industries to cause historical disjunctures. It is in the above-mentioned contexts that this paper examines discussions of the war film in English-language newspapers between 1997 and 2006. The public space is a rich site to understand the collective of interest groups. These discussions reveal in various nuances the concepts, concerns, and themes about the war film in industrial, aesthetic, ideological, cultural, and political terms. Thus, through a discursive analysis of statements and journalistic criticism published in newspapers, this article reveals three major themes: nationalism; state, economics, and cinema; and aesthetic criticism of form and style. The discourse substantiates historical continuities in cinema’s relationship with dominant sociocultural formations, late capital’s inability to formally subsume cinema, and journalistic criticism obsessed with western realism. It is suggested that the film industry needs to put forward an institutionalized class of texts by setting rules and expectations about the concerns of the genre, instead of letting the vagaries of India’s relationship with Pakistan prevail on film production and aesthetics. This would require working closely with journalist-critics, who are well placed to counter dominant political discourse.","publisher":"The Executive Agency for Culture Cities, The Ministry of Culture & Tourism","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Budha"],"firstnames":["Kishore"],"suffixes":[]}],"editor":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Kim"],"firstnames":["Shin","Dong"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["David"],"firstnames":["Joel"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"October","year":"2006","pages":"163--183","bibtex":"@inproceedings{kim_market_2006,\n\ttitle = {Market {Reforms}, {Nationalism}, and {War} {Films}: {A} {Case} for {Historical} {Continuities}},\n\tabstract = {Film criticism in the media has played a key role in sustaining Indian cinema. Indeed, in the absence of journals such as Cahiers du cinéma or sustained academic study, journalistic criticism and reporting has helped shape the industry. Higson places film criticism as one of the ways to explore national cinemas. Furthering this approach, Darrell William Davis has proposed three “models of reflections” – or criticism – about a national film industry. These are: the reflectionist model, which evaluates a national film industry in relation to national politics; the dialogic model, which examines the similarities and differences between a national cinema and other national cinemas; and the contaminated model, which considers national cinema to be a compartment of a larger international institution. The study of national cinemas in an age of globalization is considered essential to examine perceived threats of assimilation within larger transnational systems of entertainment, culture, and economics. It has been argued that Indian economic deregulation, ushered in the early nineties, has impacted the media industries to cause historical disjunctures. It is in the above-mentioned contexts that this paper examines discussions of the war film in English-language newspapers between 1997 and 2006. The public space is a rich site to understand the collective of interest groups. These discussions reveal in various nuances the concepts, concerns, and themes about the war film in industrial, aesthetic, ideological, cultural, and political terms. Thus, through a discursive analysis of statements and journalistic criticism published in newspapers, this article reveals three major themes: nationalism; state, economics, and cinema; and aesthetic criticism of form and style. The discourse substantiates historical continuities in cinema’s relationship with dominant sociocultural formations, late capital’s inability to formally subsume cinema, and journalistic criticism obsessed with western realism. It is suggested that the film industry needs to put forward an institutionalized class of texts by setting rules and expectations about the concerns of the genre, instead of letting the vagaries of India’s relationship with Pakistan prevail on film production and aesthetics. This would require working closely with journalist-critics, who are well placed to counter dominant political discourse.},\n\tpublisher = {The Executive Agency for Culture Cities, The Ministry of Culture \\& Tourism},\n\tauthor = {Budha, Kishore},\n\teditor = {Kim, Shin Dong and David, Joel},\n\tmonth = oct,\n\tyear = {2006},\n\tpages = {163--183}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Budha, K."],"editor_short":["Kim, S. D.","David, J."],"key":"kim_market_2006","id":"kim_market_2006","bibbaseid":"budha-marketreformsnationalismandwarfilmsacaseforhistoricalcontinuities-2006","role":"author","urls":{},"downloads":0,"html":""},"search_terms":["market","reforms","nationalism","war","films","case","historical","continuities","budha"],"keywords":[],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["JZehJmYD9wvXdShW5"]}