Hollywood and Genre

Using one film genre as a case study, write a 1000 word position paper arguing either for or against the following statement:

‘Genre is the best approach for the academic study of Hollywood film texts’

The current conventional definitions of genres tend to be based on the notion that they constitute particular conventions of content (themes, setting) and/or form (including structure and style), which are shared by the texts (movies), which are regarded as belonging to them. (Chandler 2000, internet). In this paper I will attempt to show that genre can be used for the academic of study of Hollywood film by using musicals as examples.

One of the main arguments of genre theory is that the themes are inadequate as a basis for defining genre as any theme may appear in any genre (Bordwell 1989, 147). However, the framework of genre can be seen as offering ‘default’ expectations that act as a starting point rather than a straightjacket (Chandler 2000, internet). Running away from the Nazis in the Sound of Music or a discourse of racism in Hairspray are common themes in movies but they are different from other films in the way they are presented (with music and dance).

Stam (2000, 128-129) proposes that defining genres are theoretical minefields. He identifies four key problems that arise from genre theory: the breath/narrowness of labels (Extension), having preconceived ideas for genre membership (Normativism), items belonging to one genre (Monolithic definitions) and genres seen as evolving through a standardized life cycle (Biologism).

In addressing extension (Chandler 2000, internet) proposes that as the generic corpus of text expands, genres will change over time and they form new genres and sub-genres as older genres are discontinued (i.e. Musicals can be sub divided into many labels according to the type of song: Operatic (Phantom of the Opera), Jazz (Chicago) and Pop (Grease)).

To counter normativism Gledhill (1985, 63) suggests that the main genres help to increase the ‘efficiency’ of communication. They may even function as a means of preventing a text from dissolving into ‘individualism and incomprehensibility’. McQuail (1987, 200) says genre may be considered as a practical device for helping any mass medium to produce consistently and effectively and to relate its production to the ‘set of expectations’ (Neale 1980, 51) of its customers. It allows individuals to plan their choices and therefore displaying relations between the two main parties of Mass Communication. So people watching a musical will expect a song-filled film and not see instead an action, stunt filled movie.

Though it can be further debated as the knowledge of the genre would lead to passive consumption by its viewers, Knight (1994) claims that making sense of texts within genres is an active process of constructing meaning. So though watching musicals like Chicago and Marry Poppins might seem similar, they do have different meanings and address different issues (feminism and the stifling of youth respectively).

Concerning the audience’s interpretation of text, Chandler (2000, internet) suggests that how we study genre depends on our purpose. Its definition in terms of social science should be related to its research. If research is carried out to find how readers identify musicals, its focus should be on the identification process instead of what musicals are in theory.

For monolithic definitions, Gledhill (1985, 60-64) offers that there are no rigid rules of inclusion and exclusion of genres; they do not consist of a fixed number of listable items. Because the frame/ground-work for the musical is established, flexibility to work around with different items (issues of acceptance in Hairspray and Grease or the meaning of family in Mamma Mia) is included without any compromise of genre. Steve Neale (1980, 48-50) contributes that ‘genres are instances of repetition and difference and that the difference is absolutely essential to the economy of the genre’. There is also an argument which poses that genres are seen as constraining inhibiting authorial creativity. Gledhill (1985, 63) however notes that some of those who write within a genre work in creative ‘tension’ with the conventions, attempting a personal inflection of them (Gledhill 1985, 63) as exampled above.

As for biologism, Chandler (2000, internet) argues that genres can be studied as historical phenomena, only applicable at that specific moment in time. Haywrad (1996, 50) proclaims that genre conventions change according to the ideological climate of its time. The issues of World War 2 in the Sound of Music, crime in the 40s in Chicago, racism in the 60s in Hairspray are such examples. The boundaries between genres keep shifting and they become more permeable (Abercrombie 1996, 45). Hence it doesn’t confuse the study of genre theory; in fact by tracing it back historically we can understand the current evolution of musicals. Andrew Tudor (1974, 225) claims that there are three main characteristics of evolution; innovations are added to pre-existing elements (evolution of female sexuality in Mamma Mia), the innovations are consistent therefore conservative (music and dance is still a major part of the film) and these processes lead to the crystallization of specialist sub-genres, differentiation (the musical is based off songs by ABBA, making it a pop song musical).

In discussing genre theory and its academic use, Miller (1984) argues that both in writing and reading within genres we learn purposes appropriate to the genre. In relation to the mass media it could be argued that particular genres develop, frame and legitimate particular concerns, questions and pleasures. These relations are discussed thoroughly in ‘Uses and Gratifications’ and ethnography research. Abercrombie concurs that ‘part of the pleasure is knowing what the genre rules are, knowing that it will have to be solve problems in the framework and wondering how it’ll go about doing so’. This means that when a viewer watches a musical, he expects to see how the characters express their feelings of joy and aguish through song, how the plot develops and the final fanfare of the musical which ends on a positive note.

Aristotle (350 B.C) once said that “Every drama, therefore, must have six parts, which parts determine its quality—namely, Plot, Character, Diction, Thought, Spectacle, Song” This in turn evolves into the current conventions of genre, which musicals can be attributed to; Setting: anywhere in a different mode of reality where emotions and instincts are given symbolic expression through music and dance (Telotte 2002, 48). Narrative: Plot is resolved though a “relationship”. Character: Ability to dance and sing. Style: Bright, colorful. Stars: Julie Andrews (Sound of Music, Marry Poppins) and other musically aligned celebrities. The final convention; Iconography would seem like a problem but I argue that it is the music of the musical that makes it unique. No other film breaks out into song, disrupting everyday functions like the musical does.

To conclude I pose these statements that prove genre theory. Derrida (1981, 61) states that a text cannot belong to no genre, there is no such thing as genre-less text and that even if theorists abandon genre theory people will use it in everyday life to categorize texts (Hodge & Kress 1988, 7).

The fanfare I am referring to is the final song of the musical. It is usually lively, inspiring and composed in a way that it intends to uplift the spectator in a ‘happily ever after’ conclusion.

References:
Abercrombie, Nicholas (1996) Television and Society. Cambridge: Polity Press

Aristotle (350 B.C) Poetics http://www.identitytheory.com/etexts/poetics6.html (viewed 2nd July 2008)

Bordwell, David (1989) Making Meaning: Inference and Rhetoric in the interpretation of cinema. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Chandler, Daniel (2000) An introduction to genre theory http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/intgenre/intgenre.html (viewed 1st July 2008)

Derrida, Jacques (1981) The law of genre. In W J T Mitchell (Ed): On Narrative. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Gledhill, Christine (1985) Genre. In Pam Cook (Ed): The Cinema Book. London: British Film Institute

Hayward, Susan (1996) Key Concepts in Cinema Studies. London: Routledge

Hodge, Robert & Gunther Kress (1988) Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity

Knight, Deborah (1994) Making sense of genre. Film and Philosophy 2.

McQuail, Denis (1987) Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction. London: Sage

Miller, Carolyn R (1984) Genre as social action. Quarterly journal of Speech 70; 151-67. Reprinted in Freedman & Medway (1994a, op cit) pg 23-42

Neale, Stephen (1980) Genre. London: British Film Institute.

Stam, Robert (2000) Film Theory. Oxford; Blackwell

Telotte, Jay P (2002) “The New Hollywood Musical: From Saturday Night Fever to Footloose.” Genre and Contemporary Hollywood. Ed. Steve Neale. London: British Film Institute, 2002. 48-61.

Tudor, Andrew (1974) Image and Influence: Studies in the Sociology of Film. London: George Allen & Unwin