In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Arizona Journal of Hispanic Cultural Studies 309 national culture and identity. The Hollywood institution attempts to claim ownership of cinematic commodities by internalizing and assimilating foreignness or difference , for instance when it appropriates the signifier of Renoir's authorship. But ironically this claiming of ownership, instead of assuring a coherent articulation of a homogenous American culture, displays the cultural specificities of Hollywood and French national cinema, thus creating an overdetermined text. As the author himself admits, the strong points of the book are the textual analyses which, well written and interesting , combine a blend of deconstruction, cultural critique and psychoanalysis. The examinations of Sunrise (Murnau, 1927), Scarlet Street (Lang, 1945), and Petulia (Lester, 1968) are particularly well-developed . However it is precisely the dependence on deconstruction as a method that at times keeps Morrison's argument in a perpetually in-between space, victim of an undecidability that never finds a determining force for the referent. Marsha Kinder, in her highly influential work Blood Cinema, has already discussed the notion of "transcultural réinscription ." This refers to the borrowing from Italian neorealism and Hollywood classical cinema by Spanish film directors to create a "dialectical interplay" between these two institutions, generating codes which consequently contributed to developing the language that characterized the New Spanish Cinema. Kinder also discusses the Spanish diaspora during the Franco regime and its effect on both Spanish and world cinema. She argues that the condition of exile has contributed to the hybridity and heteroglossia in rhe work of Spanish filmmakers such as Buñuel. Although Morrison never cites Kinder, one wonders whether he had ever looked at her book which came out in 1993. Morrison's ideas, however, are useful for discussions of Spanish and Latin American cinema particularly of the 1930s and 40s, an underexposed field of investigation. In light ofthe regular exchange of Spanish and Latin American artists across the Atlantic as well as their exposure and exploitation in Hollywood studios, the possibilities for cross-fertilization were ripe. The exchange taking place between Latin America, Spain and other nations could provide an interesting context for theorizing the influences of otherized discourses on national cinemas characterized as ideologically impermeable, e.g. cinema during Franco. Also relevant would be the analysis of the development and evolution of star systems and individual star personas. Some work has already dealt with the case of Antonio Banderas, but the study of cinema stars and celebrities of the 30s and 40s in both Spain and Latin America remains untouched and untheorized. Eva Woods State University of New York, Stonybrook Race, Rhetoric, and the Postcolonial SUNY Press, 1999 Edited by Gary A. Olson and Lynn Worsham This new collection of interviews constitutes a very innovative and exciting contribution to the ongoing discussion on race, ethnicity, colonialism, gender, sex, class, and cultural studies. The editors interview some of the leading figures of each field: Homi Bhabha, Gloria Anzaldúa, Michael Eric Dyson, Ernesto Laclau, Chantai Mouffe, and Stuart Hall. By bringing such a wide 310 Arizona Journal of Hispanic Cultural Studies array of thinkers to discuss the issues of rhetoric and politics, the editors show the livelihood of critical theory at the turn of the millennium. The book also demonstrates that rhetoric, a field traditionally known for its conservative tendencies, as acknowledged in the book, is nevertheless inhabited by people who have the sufficient historical imagination, political commitment , and editorial bravery to gather a cast of academic starts under one textual roof. It would be interesting to know whether these six authors have ever been together before in any other forum or text. As with any collection which does not automatically create widespread recognition and excitement (Foucault's PowerlKnowUdge and Spivak's The PostcoUnial Critic come to mind), the risk of disappointing any ofthe different constituencies addressed by the text is high. Even I am not exempt from this effect. Furthermore, unlike memorable interview collections centered on one author , this work does not have one single unifying and easily recognizable theme or subject. The complex dialogue between the editors, coming from the field of rhetoric, and the above six cultural theorists, themselves hailing from different fields, gives the book its strength as well as...

pdf

Share