Call#: Van Pelt Library PR6045.O72 M736 1993
1 Virginia Woolf / David Lodge 23
2 Figures of Desire: Narration and Fiction in To the Lighthouse / John Mepham 33
3 Mrs Dalloway: Repetition as Raising of the Dead / J. Hillis Miller 45
4 Repression in Mrs Dalloway's London / Jeremy Tambling 57
5 Hume, Stephen, and Elegy in To the Lighthouse / Gillian Beer 71
6 Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? Feminist readings of Woolf / Toril Moi 87
7 Mrs Dalloway / Makiko Minow-Pinkney 98
8 'Cam the Wicked': Woolf's Portrait of the Artist as her Father's Daughter / Elizabeth Abel 112
9 Mothers and Daughters in Virginia Woolf's Victorian Novel / Margaret Homans 130
10 Thinking Forward Through Mrs Dalloway's Daughter / Rachel Bowlby
Lewis, John. Hollywood V. Hardcore: How the Struggle Over Censorship Saved the Modern Film Industry. New York and London: New York UP, 2000. 135-191.Chapter 4, titled Hollywood v. Soft Core, examines arguably the most influential year of film censorship to date. In this year, MPAA president Jack Valenti issued a press release to stating that a new production code/ move rating system would be put into place. The same system is still used today to rate films. The chapter does a good job of outlining the events of how this code came into place. The author explains how the "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" was denied by the PCA but began production anyway, anticipating that change was to come. It talks about the controversy over the language such as "screw" and "hump the hostess" were debated and the issues Valenti faced with content regulation. In the end of the meeting, Warner Brothers appealed the PCA's preliminary ruling to deny Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf and the film was released. Because of the films amazing success, it marked a point in history where the industry was beginning to understand that the Production Code was a dated system. The film was released with a warning stating "for adults only" and ranked third in the box office list in 1966 behind two other mature-themed pictures. This chapter is very useful and entertaining in its explanation of the pressures and challenges that Valenti faced when negotiating the new rating system. It offers a very in depth perspective and takes the reader on a film by film journey of the controversy.
Sarris, Andrew. The American Cinema. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1968. 217-218.
Call#: PN1993.5.U6 S3
In his critical assessment of directors and their pictures in the sound era, Andrew Sarris focuses on directors' ability to totally control a motion picture and manifest their artistic and stylistic ability. He calls this auteur theory. A director is like an author writing a novel - he has complete creative license and direction to create the various characters, setting, tone, and mood of the film. Sarris states that "everything Mike Nichols has touched on stage and screen has turned to gold, if not glory." He says that Nichols' film Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf? preened itself on its honesty. At that time Nichols was trying to bring a subtlety to Hollywood, and he "trascended The Graduate." The actors in the movie had "little marquee value", and Charles Webb's novel on which the movie is based was not well-known. Nichols' neat and eclectic style is what made the film so successful. He is considered to be more a tactician than a strategist. It should also be noted that Nichols is mentioned in other directors' pieces in the book. He is compared to Frances Ford Coppola in his entry. It's clear that Sarris has great respect for Nichols and recognizes him as an auteur.
Throughout The Graduate, it's clear that Nichols has complete control over the film's production. There are many scenes that are extremely creative and very different than what most people were used to seeing in the 1960s. For example, the film begins with Benjamin Braddock's flight home to Los Angeles. He is shown sitting lazily on the plane listening to the monotonous voice of the pilot describing the weather. This scene, both unique and simple, is proof of Nichols' control over the characters and the setting of the film.