?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
shweta_narayan
26 May 2010 @ 11:45 am
charrlesatan is doing a series of exclusive interviews with Beastly Bride contributors -- and the one with me just went up on SF Signal last night.

Answering his interview questions, btw, is part of what sparked my post on betweenness last month, so it's... contentful or something :)

It's got noooo comments, which of course sets off my writerneuroses, but I'll deal :) (ETA: specially since nobody seems to have comments, and there are awesome people interviewed here, seriously. Whatever are interviews with Jane Yolen and Delia Sherman and Gregory Frost and Midori Snyder and and Igiveupherearetoomanyawesomepeoplehere doing without comments?)

Anyway! If you read Pishaach and/or want to see me babble about it, that's the place to go!




*goes back to staring at stufftodo*
 
 
Current Mood: happymeep!
 
 
shweta_narayan
26 May 2010 @ 12:31 pm
I had this notion yesterday, when talking to a friend who was taking a class on Indian film. It's surely overgeneralized and possibly plain wrong, cause wtf do I know about movies? But I think there may be something to it worth talking about anyway, which ties back into defaults & viewpoints & such, I think...

Hollywood movies, I think, have their roots in early 20th century pulp-fiction narrative forms. And because they're the default we expect that & read them as such, and therefore overlook or shrug off or even glorify their more ludicrous and reactionary aspects.

Bollywood movies seem to have their roots not in 20th century pulp but in oral narrative forms, many of which mix speech & song, which is part of why the musical narrative form "fits". (and surely some musicals have this too, but I don't think Bollywood movies are simplistically rooted in Western musicals.)

Corrolary: Either sort seems exotic and lacking simultaneously if read according to the other's default narrative form. And in the West, Bollywood's not the default, so aspects of it that are... genre-specific, I guess, can seem ridiculous, simplistic, but oh so vital-and-colorful. Which is to say primitive.

But that judgment has to do with how the viewer reads 'em, not necessarily what they are.

There's a story I'm struggling with in my Copious Spare Time, one which I really want to play up the Bollywood influence in. But I'm running into accessibility issues, and I think these might be it.

And more generally, I wonder how much "different assumed narrative-form inputs" might have to do with cross-cultural (in)accessibility...

Thoughts/fixes/tangents?
 
 
Current Mood: thoughtfulthinky
 
 
shweta_narayan
26 May 2010 @ 06:40 pm


I may be biased, but I happen to think this reading will be awesome with extra added awesomesauce. So you know you want to go :)