  |
||
|
||
|
Title: Under the skin game Reference: Abstract: Combines images from instructional films, 1950's melodrama, and the nightly news to show how contraceptive implant Norplant is being used as an instrument of social control. Linking Norplant's prescription by state agencies to America's history of forced sterilizations and unethical pill testing, Nerwen argues that a woman's right to control her reproductive destiny is still based on social status. This video is an analysis of the use and abuse of contraceptive technologies and their relationship to the politics of race, class, and gender. Library of Congress subjects: Reviews and Numerical Ratings (2) The images here are provocative, evoking emotional responses…but they don’t fit with the storyline. The images seem to pop up with little explanation. We would prefer to hear about women’s actual experiences with Norplant, instead of seeing these images. The subject needs more contextualisation. Jesse Carlson, Penny Dowedoff & Liz Rondinelli (3) An actual art video. Most educational videos are not at all artistic; this one had good camera, editing techniques though the sound could distract from the text shown on-screen. The images are provocative but potentially disturbing or distracting, but the information provided is very important. What’s underrepresented here are the actual women’s voices, their resistance. Tara Atluri, Elena Chou & Kathryn Scott (2.5) Could be shown in a 3rd/4th year course addressing topics of the body, feminism, and race specifically. The information is scattered and insufficiently focused, provoking more of a personal response than academic discussion, as the imagery is often too distracting. You’d have to make sure the film is very close in topic to the course content; for certain topics, our rating would be higher than our overall one. This video is not necessarily better than a lecture or reading would be. Make sure that your class is responsive & engaged with the course material because a quiet class will just remain quiet. Steve LeDrew, Ian Morrison & Chris Sanders (2.5) Our rating is a compromise. One of us felt that the visuals didn’t enhance the subject of the video at all and would give the video a “0” rating if she could, believing that the information would be better presented as a lecture or reading. On the other hand, another felt that the video had creative use of symbols (the cow etc) that invited multiple interpretations and lead to an interesting discussion of the relation between images and text. To her, the video showed an effective use of images that added to the impact of the material. In general, we agreed that the video had interesting images that might either distract or disturb, that the video would be best suited to a 3rd/4th year class, and that discussion would be needed afterward to provide context and make sense of the material. Kate Hunc, Ann McKerlie, Mandy Nourse & Isabel Sousa (3.5) Clever black-and-white visuals, including crash-test
dummies, rats on a street grate, clips from old movies, and plenty of
injections, made an engaging counterpoint to a grim, succinct analysis.
Norplant is examined in relation to questions of how an underclass is
controlled (e.g., in welfare laws, in sentencing, in relation to racialisation
and sexuality). My only hesitations are that the voice-over was quite
quiet in comparison to the musical track and that some of the print
on the screen could be too small to read at a distance. Kathy Bischoping
About the project | Book a video for class | Enter the Library Catalogue | Send us feedback | Back to main |
