![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Book review: The Dream life: Movies, Media, and the Mythology of the Sixties by J. Hoberman
Hobermen, film critic for the Village Voice, writes about film. A lot. In fact, he wrote such a great book about midnight movies (called Midnight Movies, written in collaboration with Jonathan Rosenbaum) that I now pick up everything with his name on it. I was not disappointed in this case, but this is a different sort of film book.
The Dream Life works less as a piece of film criticism than an attempt to line up film history with “real” history; that is, align the political and social events of the sixties with the films that people were producing and watching at the time. It's a map overlaying politics and movies. Which sounds like a very dangerous prospect
Dangerous in the sense that it could quickly become the sort of pointless exercise that posits an actual relationship between entertainment and real life; one could suspect Hoberman of placing too much emphasis on mere movies if he thinks there's a grand political significance to, say, The Alamo. But he avoids these traps at every turn. Instead of promoting a concrete link between events, he illustrates the social scene at the time significant pictures were made and viewed. He traces the involvement of figures like John Wayne and Elvis in the political arena. He points out the media resources of presidents and would-be presidents. He pinpoints how many times Nixon may have watched Patton; and where it showed up in his speeches and policy. Instead of sweeping generalizations about what The Chase might have been explicitly saying about the political scene, Hoberman contents himself with comparing its implicit views with other, similar films. In short, this book ties together the bizarre words of politics and the media. They mirror each other, though what the reflection says about us is up for interpretation.
I read this book because I was not around for the sixties, and what films I've seen from the period have been, by necessity, out of context. I unexpectedly found this book to be even more helpful than I thought in this area. As a master list of Must-See Films from the Sixties, it falls short. Likewise, it is not a comprehensive history of the decade. But as a guide to understanding what was behind some of the big films of the era, or a primer of where Vietnam or the counterculture showed up in Hollywood, it's invaluable. No aspect of history should be studied in a vacuum; everything it touched by everything else. As an example of how to view culture as continuity, too, this book is invaluable.
The Dream Life works less as a piece of film criticism than an attempt to line up film history with “real” history; that is, align the political and social events of the sixties with the films that people were producing and watching at the time. It's a map overlaying politics and movies. Which sounds like a very dangerous prospect
Dangerous in the sense that it could quickly become the sort of pointless exercise that posits an actual relationship between entertainment and real life; one could suspect Hoberman of placing too much emphasis on mere movies if he thinks there's a grand political significance to, say, The Alamo. But he avoids these traps at every turn. Instead of promoting a concrete link between events, he illustrates the social scene at the time significant pictures were made and viewed. He traces the involvement of figures like John Wayne and Elvis in the political arena. He points out the media resources of presidents and would-be presidents. He pinpoints how many times Nixon may have watched Patton; and where it showed up in his speeches and policy. Instead of sweeping generalizations about what The Chase might have been explicitly saying about the political scene, Hoberman contents himself with comparing its implicit views with other, similar films. In short, this book ties together the bizarre words of politics and the media. They mirror each other, though what the reflection says about us is up for interpretation.
I read this book because I was not around for the sixties, and what films I've seen from the period have been, by necessity, out of context. I unexpectedly found this book to be even more helpful than I thought in this area. As a master list of Must-See Films from the Sixties, it falls short. Likewise, it is not a comprehensive history of the decade. But as a guide to understanding what was behind some of the big films of the era, or a primer of where Vietnam or the counterculture showed up in Hollywood, it's invaluable. No aspect of history should be studied in a vacuum; everything it touched by everything else. As an example of how to view culture as continuity, too, this book is invaluable.
no subject
no subject