At 03:07 PM 11/15/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Coke may not be better than the authentic fruit ambrosia quaffed by the
>royal family of a particular culture, but that's not what you compare it
>to. Same with Hollywood.
>
>Nathan Newman
-I think my point had more to do with the fact that it doesn't take a lot of -money to make a great movie.
Right, but what constitutes "great" is in many ways a separate issue from cultural imperialism, since mass culture from the US often displaces not "great" local culture but the daily dreak that pervades everywhere most of the time, whatever culture you are part of.
If Indians go to see Titantic rather than the latest Bollywood melodramatic musical, that is a quite separate issue from whether everyone, in the US and India, should be more appreciative of Satyajit Ray. But the critiques often get mixed together, the populist bashing of Hollywood oppressing the third world really being a stalking horse for elitist condemnation of popular tastes in general.
I happen to like both Hollywood films and "highbrow films" because I understand their respective strengths. I am always kind of skeptical of leftists who are so alienated from popular culture that they can't enjoy a good Hollywood film - you can denounce its low nutritional content but a complete allergy to mind candy is not healthy.
-- Nathan Newman