Clayton George Wickham - final thesis

218
interpretation. (http://www.davidbordwell.net/essays/zizek.php; accessed
26-04-2013) [parentheses in original]
This is one extreme example of the manner in which Post-Theorists are consistently
defending their methodologies against attack from theorists.
Let’s use the example of an essay written by Barry Salt (2009). Before he
can establish his argument about contemporary Hollywood aesthetic trends, he must
point out the fact that writing to date on P. T. Anderson’s Magnolia (1999) failed to
acknowledge the uniqueness of the film’s form, specifically in its use of long takes.
Berliner’s Hollywood Incoherent (2010) dedicates the entire first chapter, and
the bulk of the first part of the book, defending his methodology and directly
responding to theorists and interpretive critics. In fact, as I have already
demonstrated, Berliner’s entire academic platform is founded on his vociferous
denunciation of theory and interpretive criticism. This, again, is taken from Stephen
Booth 2 who similarly denounces such approaches, in defence of his own
methodology. However, Booth’s defence is also framed as an attack on theory,
which theorists defend by making aggressive attacks on formalism, resulting in what
can be politely termed a dialogue.
Importantly, we find the same arguments repeated without being directly
addressed. Terry Eagleton, in his textbook Literary Theory (2008), dedicates only
five pages 3 in explaining, and summarily dismissing the Russian formalist movement
without demonstrating how this approach has evolved and developed since the turn
of the twentieth century. His opposition is founded on the argument that meaning is
2 See Booth (1990) for an example of his work.
3 Admittedly, references to formalism are later dotted throughout the text, but the bulk of engagement
with the method are contained within pages 2-7.