2008
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-8315.2008.00090.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Film Essay Saying yes to dirt, desire and difference:Yes(2004)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
(10 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The transformation of her body from idealized goddess to contemptible and dirty temptation aligns with the film's more general association of dirt and its disposal with psychic boundary-making: abject others are expelled to the margins to secure the "clean and proper body" of the symbolic subject. 24 As He speaks, dirt becomes a metaphor for political disavowal. It belongs to the Other and must be cleansed to establish the masculine subject's mastery of the woman's body: "What can I do to purify your mind?…”
Section: Idealization and Its Othersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The transformation of her body from idealized goddess to contemptible and dirty temptation aligns with the film's more general association of dirt and its disposal with psychic boundary-making: abject others are expelled to the margins to secure the "clean and proper body" of the symbolic subject. 24 As He speaks, dirt becomes a metaphor for political disavowal. It belongs to the Other and must be cleansed to establish the masculine subject's mastery of the woman's body: "What can I do to purify your mind?…”
Section: Idealization and Its Othersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some of the shared preoccupations these papers deal with are: memory, history, and reconstruction; experiences of loss, mental growth, and creativity; facts linked with the passage of time-childhood, youth, maturity, and old age, as well as the inevitability of death; perception, desire, pleasure, and love; intimacy, identity, individuality, and difference; dialectics between inside/outside, language/action, individual/society, and reality/ illusion; the experience of listening, reading, or beholding; the value of thinking, relating, and helping; the consequences of new technologies for our ways of thinking and relating; and the complexities of violence, destructiveness, fundamentalism, and trauma. (See Abella 2008Abella , 2010Anderson 2009;Ashur 2009;Baudry 2001;Blum 2001;Civitarese 2010;Diena 2009;Frosch 2009;Goldstein 1975;Golinelli 2003;Jones 1999;Mandelbaum 2011;Minerbo 2008;Paul 2011;Petrella 2008;Poland 2003;Sabbadini 2009Sabbadini , 2011Schaub 2008;Schiller 2008;Schwartz 2009;Szajnberg 2010;Tylim 2010;and West-Leuer 2009. ) The style adopted by these papers comes nearer to what we usually call a dialogue: listening to the way others tackle the same questions with which we ourselves are dealing; confronting models and exploring different answers; receiving/learning instead of only giving/teaching; trying not to demonstrate but to listen to the way that others use our suggestions and their echoes on our own thinking; putting to work our constructs and questioning our ideas; accepting that we may be destabilized in our certainties and being willing to deconstruct our truths in order to allow them to grow and be enriched.…”
Section: A More Unsaturated Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%