Take One (Jan 1979)

Why not Crist? You recently printed lists of well-known film critics’ favorite films of the last ten years. I thought you had covered just about everyone, until I realized you did not include former New York Post and Saturday Review critic Judith Crist. Well? She certainly has some kind of following, and her love of movies cannot be denied. Thomas Sacco Nutley, New Jersey Ed. note: As James Monaco pointed out, the choice of critics was bound to be a subjective one. It’s all in how you look at it In his introduction to “Woman in Porn’—an interview with Roberta Findlay — Gerald Peary states that I “concluded” my psychoanalytic study of Angel on Fire / Angel Number 9 “by claiming that this movie was made by a man...” | claimed no such thing. Peary’s statement is a willful misreading of the following words: “Angel on Fire is written, produced, directed and photographed by Roberta Findlay. Although this name is possibly a pseudonym, we are confronted by a feminine persona as a creator of a fan tasy for a predominantly masculine audience.” The Velvet Light Trap, No. 16, p. 42. This passage occurs near the beginning of the analysis and in no way serves as a con clusion. My point was that the sex of the filmmaker is ultimately irrelevant as long as Ms Findlay works within the conventions of a genre calculated to appeal to masculine desire, male fantasies. One of the most intriguing characteristics of mainstream pornography (made for men) is that the protagonist is often a woman. These films are presented as “the woman’s story,” and the male spectator is expected to both desire the woman and to identify with her—to ‘take her place’ in the story and on the screen. When Ms Findlay says, “I defy anybody to think that they [her films] are made by a woman,” she indirectly confirms my argument that pornography is usually created from a male 4 TAKE ONE /JANUARY 1979 point-of-view which fantasizes (or pretends to take) the female point-of-view. I read with much interest Findlay’s comments on her difficulty in filming a “sexually realistic” scene. The scene (in which Jamie Gillis “abuses” the girl) is unusual—precisely because it appears as a ‘reality’ which ruptures the fantasy-sex of normal pornography. Finally, although Peary claims that my analysis of the pornographic fantasy is “Lacanian,” the work of Jacques Lacan is nowhere mentioned in my text. Dennis Giles Cleveland, Ohio Dementia The “Woman in Porn” article in the September issue was so disgusting that I can’t believe it was actually in a “serious” film magazine. It was almost enough for me to cancel my subscription, but I’m not that sort of person. Roberta Findlay is demented. I could see absolutely no point in your publishing the article. Ruth Nadel Schafran San Anselmo, California Not kosher I seem to be that true rara avis —a person who has seen Snuff. (Take One, September). And a truly dreadful picture it was too, though one could see that everybody tried hard. As Ms Findlay says, “it was very confused,’’ seeming to change direction from time to time. But I would also ask whether a nice Jewish girl like Ms Findlay can eat a non-kosher pickle without making a face. That is, she has chosen to enter the field of erotica—an “unclean” subject—without really knowing what erotica is all about. It is as if she tried to cook for a non-Jewish family without knowing the first thing about non-kosher food. Lybrand P. Smith Torrance, California The whole truth? In regards to your article about Roberta Findlay, entitled “Woman in Porn,” by Gerald Peary —I should most appreciate your clearing up the point about the alleged murder of a woman in Snuff. Does the actress who took the part still exist? And how is it that Ms Findlay is so “la de da” about the whole episode—vis 4a vis her very uninterested comment about the “distributor” (who remains unnamed) adding the last murder scene and the seemingly weak statement about a donkey being substituted for the corpse of a woman—quite a bit of makeup and illusion to make such a feat acceptable. All I know is that all the material I read on this subject seemed to point to the fact that a woman actually was murdered before the camera. Can this be irrefutably denied? Erik A. Oppenheimer Myconos, Greece Ed. note: The lady lived. The one that got away It might be of some interest to Mr Parent (Technical Notes, July ’78) and his readers to know that at one time it was possible to obtain a Super-8 camera that employed an incamera pressure plate. The camera was manufactured by Canon, and was available as recently as two years ago. I have a copy of the specifications filed away, but can't really put my hands on them. The model number DH-105 comes to mind, but I am not sure of this. The camera used a 100’ 16mm roll, perforated for Super-8. The film was run through the camera twice, in Regular-8 fashion, to give you a 200’ filming capacity. The film had to be special ordered from Kodak in Rochester and none of my regular photographic stores were interested in handling it, even those that stocked 16mm stock. My recollection of the camera is that it loaded something like a 16mm Bolex. It had perfect viewing through the lens, and electronic exposure. I'm sorry now that I didn’t get one, as what I would like to see is a rollfilm loaded version of a Bolex 16mm, with a 3040’ spring wind motor and non-electronic, non-automatic exposure. Dave Williams Columbia, Maryland Publisher Peter Lebensold Editor Phyllis Platt Art Director Kirk Kelly Circulation Manager Lynette Stevens Contributing Editors Michael Goodwin Joe Medjuck James Monaco Book Editor Gerald Peary Assistant Editor Will Aitken Correspondents London: Jan Dawson New York: Bob Cowan Paris: David Overbey Rome: Gideon Bachmann Singapore: Arthur Hullett Assistant to the Editor Anacleto Pellegrini Assistants to the Publisher Linda Maislin and Laird Stevens Production Larry Black, Alison Hall Terence Quigley Associate Publisher Alan E. Bennett TAKE ONE is published monthly by Unicorn Publishing Corp., Box 1778, Station B, Montréal, Québec, Canada H3B 3L3 (514843-7733). Subscription Rates North America, 12 issues for $9.00; Overseas, 12 issues for $15.00. Airmail: Add 75 cents per issue (North America) and $1 per issue (Overseas). Subscriptions sent free to individuals at prison addresses. Change of Address Notice of change of address should include your old address as printed on a recent issue—please allow five weeks for processing. Editorial information Please retain a photocopy of your ms. All manuscripts, drawings and photos submitted must be accompanied by a selfaddressed stamped envelope (or International Reply Coupon). While editors will take all reasonable care, they will not be held responsible for the loss of any such submission. Copyright © 1978 by Unicorn Publishing Corp., all rights reserved. No part of this magazine may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and not necessarily those of the editors of TAKE ONE. U.S. Postal Indentification Number 317750. Canadian second class mail registration Number 1899. Printed at Toronto, Canada. Dewey Decimal Number 791.43. International Standard Serial Number CN ISSN 00399132. Postmaster Send address changes to TAKE ONE Magazine, P.O. Box 4932, Manchester, New Hampshire 03108. Postage paid at Montréal. Second Class postage paid at New York, New York and_ additional mailing offices. Printed in Canada. This is a Wintario project. Volume 7, number 2, Published November 30, 1978.