Clayton George Wickham - final thesis

vii
Introduction
The impetus for this thesis can be credited to three primary sources. In 2001
I attended the opening lecture for an Introduction to Film Studies course taught by
Dr. Todd Berliner at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington. After roll call,
he began the lecture by saying, in effect, “My courses focus on aesthetics, which is
the study of what people in fact value about art (the pleasure it gives them), as
opposed to what people think they ought to value about art (its meaning).” 1
As he
began to explain this position, reactions from students ranged from confusion to
anger to interest. I admit to experiencing all three, in that order.
Although I have not fully adopted his position for the purpose of this thesis, I
did find Berliner’s approach both surprising and refreshing. His argument is that
students of the arts are taught very early on to analyse works and texts to understand
meaning and message, placing importance on subtext, symbolism and allegory.
Berliner claimed that there is no academic value in this sort of interpretive criticism,
and that most students of the arts have been deceived by this type of analysis almost
since the beginning of their education. He concluded that a study of form and
structure tells us more about a work of art than interpretive analysis, which instils
itself with false import. Berliner also stated that searching for meaning in art makes
1 This quote comes from a personal communication. However, it did appear on Berliner’s personal
profile webpage on the University of North Carolina at Wilmington website. Berliner says this quote
is not original, and attributes it to literary scholar Stephen Booth, who taught at the University of
California, Berkeley, where Berliner received all of his degrees. As I can find no references to this
quote, it is reasonable to believe that this came from either personal communication, or appeared in
one of Booth’s course lectures or syllabuses.