Let’s consider a sharp contrast in Strangers on a Train (1951). Miriam Haines as “femme fatale” in opposition to the Senator’s daughter, Anne Morton. What do you think the opposition says about gender and genre in the 1950s? Furthermore, what’s implied by the resolution of the story? Is Hitchcock participating in a type of normative construction of gender, challenging it, simply following genre conventions? Explain.
This is a place to post any questions about the English 245 midterm. It (along with a sample from a previous semester) is posted under “Assignments.”
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington show us the corruption at the heart of the nation’s capital. We see the intertwined interests of government, business, and media outlets on display. We see the cynicism and political theater that Jefferson Smith faces as he tries to work for the people.
It leads to my question:
*Is Mr. Smith Goes to Washington an anti-political political drama?
In other words, do you think the political corruption in the film is normal Washington (“compromise” is what Senator Payne calls it), or can DC politics truly exist along Smith’s democratic ideals?
What is Capra telling us here about the state of democracy? Can it be salvaged? Is he sounding an alarm?
Be sure to reference specific scenes and/or details of the film in your response.
This is an opportunity for us to get comfortable using the course blog. Let’s sound off on any dimension of the Schatz reading and/or my notes on genres. You may react to the course materials thus far. Maybe you want to tell us about your background in cinema, or your favorite genre. Or we can even take it another way–your relationship to Washington, DC. Do you visit regularly? Which films are you looking forward to seeing?
The most important thing here: I want to read something from everyone.