Bibliography for Paper about Lost’s Authorship

Bennett, James and Tom Brown, Film and Television After DVD. New York: Routledge, 2008.

This book will help me form an argument about how authorship was formed, in part, by the DVD sets of Lost, through special features and bonus extras that show behind the scenes work.  It is a series of essays about digital convergence and interactive media.  One article in particular, “Auteur Machines?  Auteurism and the DVD” by Catherine Grant, focuses on the aspects of the DVD that personalize the show to an auteur.

Kaye, Sharon M., ed. Lost and Philosophy. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2008.

In the Lost official podcasts, hosted by Carleton Cuse and Damon Lindelof, the two answer questions and clarify ideas about the show, many of them having to do with the show’s exploration of many thought systems.  This book contains several essays that explore the mythology of the show, which the podcasts have contributed to heavily.

Mittell, Jason. Television and American Culture. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Mittell discusses digital convergence, along with several analyses of the show’s unique storytelling formulas.  He discusses how complex shows like Lost were made possible with the help of external technologies, such as the internet and DVD players.  Without them, the plots might be too confusing and demanding on viewers.

Pearson, Roberta, ed. Reading Lost. New York: I.B. Tauris, 2009.

I have read several other books in this series and have found them very helpful.  I just ordered this book, so I do not know how it will contribute to my research yet, but I am sure that it will.

Priggé, Steven. Created By…Inside the Minds of TV’s Top Show Creators. Los Angeles: Silman-James Press, 2005.

J.J. Abrams, one of the auteurs I will be discussing, contributed interviews to this book that asks several TV show creators questions about their creative processes and style.  This will further give me a sense of what Lost is as a “J.J. Abrams” show.

Vaz, Mark Cotta. The Lost Chronicles. New York: Hyperion, 2005.

This book details the creation of the show, from development of the idea to the pilot and beyond.  This book only deals with the first season, however, placing the author role firmly upon J.J. Abrams.  This perspective will show how J.J.’s authorship was established.

Johnston, Amy and Lachonis, John.  Lost Ate My Life: The Inside Story of a Fandom Like No Other.  Toronto: ECW Press, 2008.

This book talks about the fan’s owner/authorship of the show, as seen in blogs devoted to the show.  The book chronicles how the show changed from a high-stakes commercial gamble to the unique show that lends itself highly to fan interaction.

There are a few sources that I have that I didn’t get to put on here because I had trouble finding all the information to cite. Also, I am still looking for more sources but I have listed seven I plan to use here:
1.
Caldwell, John T. “Welcome to the Viral Future of Cinema (Television). Cinema Journal, Vol. 45, No. 1 (Autumn, 2005) pp. 90-97. Texas: University of Texas Press.

Caldwell discusses how television programs are become more film like, and mentions Arrested Development. I can use this article to show that Arrested Development is more like one long film than a traditional television sit com. The article also talks about HBO, and I can explore how Arrested Development was considered “too high brow” for network television.

2.
Hart-Gun, Lesley. “Arrested Development and the Theater of the Absurd.” Velox: Critical Approaches to Contemporary Film, vol. 2., no. 1, pp. 14-20, 2008.

This article talks about how Arrested Development is absurdist in nature. I can use this article to talk about authorship, as Mitch Hurwitz tends to make absurd television programs. Being so absurd, Arrested Development is a lot different than most sit coms. I can talk about how injecting absurdist theater into the generic family sit com created something quite different from the traditional family sit com that most television viewers are used to.

3.
Jones, Gerard. Honey I’m Home!: Sitcoms Selling the American Dream. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1992.

This book shows how many sitcoms of the past were subtle advertisements for traditional American values. I will use this book to explore how Arrested Development disrupts this tradition of the sitcom. In fact, Arrested Development often directly mocks the traditional American family values. This book will be important to show how Arrested Development really changed the sitcom genre entirely.

4.
Mittel, Jason. “Narrative Complexity in Contemporary American Television.” Austin: Universtiy of Texas Press, 2006.

This article talks specifically about how Arrested Development and other new television series are much more narratively complex than past series. This article will be extremely helpful as Mittell references Arrested Development quite a bit. It will help me in my argument about high-brow tv versus low-brow tv.

5.
Savorelli, Antonio. “The New American Televisual Comedy: Semiotic Inquiry into an Evolution.” Milan: Universita IULM Press, 2007.

This article is poorly translated from Italian to English; however, it is similar to Thompson’s article and talks about how Arrested Development has a much more complex narrative than the typical sit com has.

6.
Thompson, Ethan. “Comedy Verite: The Observational Documentary Meets the Televisual Sitcom.” The Velvet Light Trap 60 (2007) 63-72 University of Texas Press.

This article specifically talks about how the traditional sit com has changed from the single set format to a more documentary style. I will use this article to explore authorship in the series, and how Mitch Hurwitz influenced the style that Arrested Development was filmed. The article mainly discusses the Office and Arrested Development, so it is a pretty good source.

7.
Weight, Alan L. “Families are Forever: The Historical Continuity of Domestic Comedies Through Ritual and Resonance. Iowa: University of Iowa Press, 2005.

This article mentions Arrested Development, but it actually doesn’t fit as well into my argument as I would hope. I can definitely use a few quotes from this source but it was a misleading source.

Annotated Bibliography

1) Hurd, Jud. Cartoon Success Secrets: A Tribute To 30 Years Of Cartoonist Profiles. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 2004.

In this book Jud Hurd presents both cartoon creator interviews as well as his own expertise of the genre for the purpose of demonstrating the nuances of making a “successful” cartoon (which can mean either commercially successful or successful in accomplishing the author’s goal). The book contains a 1996 interview with Aaron McGruder which I believe will be useful in revealing some of the challenges in the early creation of the printed cartoon, as well as serving as a basis for comparison with interviews concerning the later TV series.

2) Mcgruder, Aaron. All the Rage: The Boondocks Past and Present (Boondocks). new york: Three Rivers Press, 2007.

All the Rage was written by McGruder himself and contains his commentary and analysis on his own strips, especially highlighting those episodes which gleaned critical acclaim or scorn, as well as banned strips. This book marks the segway from print to TV broadcast.

3) Moore, D.. The Boondocks cartoon: A social critique of race in America. Diss. University of Southern California, 2009. Dissertations & Theses: Full Text, ProQuest. Web. 28 Oct. 2009.

This dissertation by Diane Moore of Universtiy of Southern California performs an itemized analyisis of American racial & cultural stereotypes as they are presented and critiqued within The Boondocks televison series. The text also provides background information on Aaron McGruder and the evolution from prited strip to television broadcast. This text will be useful primarily in any discussion of the content of the televisual text  and will also be useful in the historical background it provides.

4) Pappademas, Alex. “Can ‘The Boondocks’ Say That on TV?.” Gentlemen’s Quarterly 75.10 (2005): 138. OmniFile Full Text Mega. Web. 28 Oct. 2009.

This interview with creator Aaron McGruder reveals how the mature content of The Boondocks is able to be seen on Televison. McGruder also discusses the Fox network’s reasoning behind passing on the show. This text will be useful especially with regards to how censorship/network television effects authorial choices.

5) Siegel, Lee. Not Remotely Controlled: Notes on Television. New York: Perseus Books Group, 2007.

Author Lee Siegel discusses how the politically and racially charged satire of The Boondocks cartoon functions as a supremely effective critique of our modern cultural and political institutions—moreso, he argues, than most contemporary fiction. This work should be useful in discussing how McGruder’s authorial choices and preference for the cartoon genre accomplish his goal of societal critique.

6) Wapshott, Nicholas. “Black humour.” New Statesman (London, England: 1996) 134 (2005): 43-4. OmniFile Full Text Mega. Web. 28 Oct. 2009.

This magazine editorial, which also contains an interview with Aaron McGruder, disucsses the McGruder’s goals with regards to how The Boondocks will effect the perception and understanding of Black Americans—especially the Black family unit. This piece will be useful in discerning how McGruder’s own personal background as well as his political ideologies have factored into his decisions with regards to the TV series (and comic).

7) Zahed, Ramin. “See Ya in the Suburbs, Suckas!.” Animation Magazine 19.12 (2005): 30-1. OmniFile Full Text Mega. Web. 28 Oct. 2009.

This article discusses the implications of The Boondocks series being syndicated by Cartoon Network in that this will allow the creators to, “fully explore the social and political dimensions of the characters without compromising their original visions.” This article is useful in its discussion of the role of network involvement in series creation. It will also be interesting to see if McGruder himself finds Cartoon Network to be as liberal and light-handed as Ramin Zahed predicts.

In my paper I want to focus on how The Sopranos depiction of Italian-American psychosocial dynamics (life/culture/masculinity/femininity) is affected by David Chase’s authorship as well as it airing on the HBO network. David Chase identifies as Italian-American himself, and also grew up in New Jersey. He claims to base the series off his own experiences. Did Chase have advantages/freedoms in his authorship because of his background? What about in relation to HBO airing dynamics?

(1) Vincent, Christopher J. Paying Respect to the Sopranos: A Psychosocial Analysis. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland, 2008. Print. The author focuses on the psychological progress of Tony Soprano through all six seasons. He also talks about how there are unique representation of modern family dynamics, organized crime, contemporary American society, and mental health. For my research I think this would be a great source for defining specific psychosocial definitions Chase puts into the show, and how they can be interpreted.

(2) Greene, Richard, and Peter Vernezze. The Sopranos and Philosophy: I Kill Therefore I Am. Chicago: Open Court, 2004. Print. Both authors talk about how morals, philosophy, identity, and ethics are constructed in the show. I feel like it would also help in my exploration of what ideas/ideologies of Italian-Americans the show tells the audience, and what further implications those ideas mean in the fact they originated from David Chase’s own perceptions.

(3) Bondanella, Peter. Hollywood Italians : Dagos, Palookas, Romeos, Wise Guys, and Sopranos. New York: Continuum, 2004. Print. The book goes into detail about the history of Italian/Italian-American depiction in cinema and television. I feel like the final chapters of the book (which focus on The Sopranos) could be helpful in putting my research into a historical frame of reference. For example, perhaps David Chase incorporates parts of Italian-American culture that are also dominant in contemporary media but not *past* media because of certain trends.

(4) Levin, Gary. “Stars, creator dish on ‘The Sopranos’.” USA Today 23 Jun. 2008: 03d. Print. The short article has quotes and interesting tidbits from the show’s actors and creator, David Chase. What’s most interesting is that David Chase is repeatedly quoted as being surprised that a lot of his audience disliked the ending, saw it as disrespectful as his characters. He is also surprised that people wanted to see Tony be killed on-screen. I want to investigate why he feels appalled that audiences would want to see Tony die, and why he *didn’t*. Is the last episode a case of authorship where priority was given to what the author wanted? If David Chase was on another network, would the ending of the show been as ambiguous?

(5) Chase, David. “The Sopranos.” Electronic Media 28 Oct. 2002: 23. Print. The short article is a statement by David Chase about his experience in producing the show at HBO. It’s a very positive perspective of the authorial process. For my paper it may be helpful in showing more of Chase’s perspective on producing the series.

(6) Pristone, Joseph. “David Chase.” Time 9 Jul. 2001 : 74. Print. The article talks about how Chase’s own Italian-American heritage makes the show realistic. I think this would give me great backing on Chase’s own *specific* cultural experiences that make the show more ‘realistic,’ and perhaps give me ways to analyze why these specific things are what he found to be most important to show audiences what a real Italian-American family is like.

(7) Lavery, David. ” David Chase, The Sopranos and Television Creativity.” Television Quarterly 2002: 10-16. Print. This review of the show goes into detail about David Chase’s life growing up, as well as his authorial power in producing the show, and how that led to his success. After reading the article, I feel it could offer me more important information about David Simon’s upbringing and authorial power with HBO to back up my paper.

Toplin, Robert Brent. “Hollywood’s D-Day form the Perspective of the 1960s and 1990s.” Why We Fought: America’s Wars in Film and History. Eds. Peter C. Rollins and John E. O’Connor. Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky, 2008. 303-313. Print.

This is an essay comparing the difference between the 1960s WWII film The Longest Day and the 1990s WWII film Saving Private Ryan. The author looks at how two films addressing a similar subject were handled different on account of their era’s perceptions about war. The 1960s (height of the Cold War and so forth) is has a dramatically different outlook on war and Germany and soldiers than the 1990s did. This is big for my paper since I’m looking at public perception of two different wars in a single era. Some relevant quotes:

“Cinematic history from Hollywood is intriguing not only for its perspectives on the pas but also for what it says about the times in which the films were being produced” (303).

“In recent years [2000s], such movies’ [modern cinematic histories] primary contribution to historical appreciation relates to the audience’s emotional connection to another time, place and situation” (311).

Schubart, Rikke. “Storytelling for a Nation: Spielberg, Memory, and the Narration of War.” Politicotainment: Television’s Take on the Real. Ed. Kristina Riegert. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, 2007. 267-287. Print.

The basic thesis of this essay is that each genre has a single specific theme that pervades every film within itself; for the war movie it “is the relation between history and nation” (267). The essay makes a lot of interesting commentary on how war films insert themselves into history and what sort of techniques they use to give themselves legitimacy, especially focused on this idea of eyewitnesses (as in, all of Generation Kill, all of Band of Brothers). There is the question of what is acceptable fact and what is acceptable fiction and how these films/shows are structured. There is also direct interaction with the show Band of Brothers, making this essay doubly useful for me in my paper! Some relevant quotes:

[While talking about the quote “When legend becomes fact, print the legend] “If “legend” stands for myth, then “fact” stands for historical facts. Ford’s [the speakers] point is not, I think, that myth is better than fact but rather that is in the union of fact and myth that we find the spirit of America” (269).

“Texts become recognizable genres when they tell stories that the members of society consider worth repeating again and again. The repeated viewing of genre films is a modern ritual where films function as myths anchoring the individuals of a society to its collective culture” (270).

“The war movie raises the question of the relationship between nation and history as a contemporary debate of “us” versus “them”” (271).

Randell, Karen. “Introduction to Part Two: The Body of the Soldier.” The War Body on Screen. Eds. Karen Randell and Sean Redmond. New York, NY: The continuum International Publishing Group Inc, 2008. 81-85. Print.

This is the introduction to the section of this collection of essays that all deal with the representation of the soldier’s body on screen. There’s just the one quote that I thought was useful, especially with its application to WWII (and, interestingly, its non-application to the Iraq War):

“The film engages with this image of supreme fighter and attempts to connect its audiences back to the stable image of World War II where “A group of men, led by a hear, undertake a mission that will accomplish an important military objective” (Basinger, 2005, 46)” (81).

Hagelin, Sarah. “Bleeding Bodies and Post-Cold War Politics: Saving Private Ryan and the Gender of Vulnerability.” The War Body on Screen. Eds. Karen Randell and Sean Redmond. New York, NY: The continuum International Publishing Group Inc, 2008. 102-119. Print.

The whole essay is about how war films gender vulnerability (skewing it female) and how Saving Private Ryan both fights with and subscribes to this idea. The issue of and differences in vulnerability in Band of Brothers and Generation Kill isn’t something I had considered examining, but it certainly seems worth looking at. What makes modern day soldiers vulnerable? What makes WWII soldiers vulnerable? Where do they mesh and where do they clash? Relevant quotes:

“Carpazo’s emotional vulnerability to the plight of a family in a war zone where the domestic space has been destroyed leads to this body being made vulnerable” (109).

“Where to kill is actually less important in this film [Saving Private Ryan] than how to die, and how the spectacle of male vulnerability affects the ethics of war” (111).

Chouliaraki, Lillie. “Spectacular Ethics: On the Television Footage of the Iraq War.” The Soft Power of War. Ed. Lillie Chouliaraki. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Co, 2007. 129-144. Print.

This essay is more about what it means for news televisions to show footage of the Iraq War, but I think there are some ideas that apply to Generation Kill considering that it was a show about the Iraq War produced while the Iraq War was being fought. There are some thoughts about what television does as a voyeuristic medium that are worth pursuing as well as deeper analysis into basic components of news footage (multi-modality, as in image and verbal narration, space-time, as in perspectives we experience the footage from, and agency, who the figures of pity are). Some relevant quotes:

“The place to look for the pro-war bias in western television footage is not a behind-the-scenes co-ordination between government and journalists, but the assumptions already implicit in the routine professional choices that stage and narrate the war in television” (130).

“The quality of television as a ‘space of appearance’. The term ‘space of appearance’ seeks to define the public sphere of television not only as a space of language and deliberation, but also as a space of image and visibility” (131).

Haggith, Toby. “Realism, Historical Truth and the War Film: The Case of Saving Private Ryan.” Repicturing the Second World War: Representations in Film and Television. Ed. Michael Paris. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007. 177-191. Print.

This essay again deals with the realism of Saving Private Ryan, but this time in comparison to the actual footage that was filmed by the Allied cameramen who landed on the beaches and the truth of war. The question of dramatic liberties comes up and the techniques Spielberg uses are analyzed. There’s something to be played with here in my essay, especially considering the Spielberg as an author had a big hand in Band of Brothers. I’m not sure how much of it applies to my comparison, but some ideas might be relevant.

Suid, Lawrence H. Guts and Glory: The Making of the American Military Image in Film 2nd Edition. Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky, 2002. Print.

This is a monster of a book that deals with, more or less, every single war film up until the 2000s that creates the American military image. There’s a chapter on realism in Saving Private Ryan and the author more or less skewers Spielberg and the hype he created about the film and its realism, as well as his appropriation of scenes from other war films when contrasted against his denigration of those very same films. It’s an amusing read, but maybe not that relevant to my personal paper. Still, it does look at what happens when something is booked as “realism” or fact. In some ways, Band of Brothers was Spielberg’s response to those critiques, so reading the actual critiques might help.

I’m planning to look through interviews with the two shows’ creators and critic responses to the shows, but I haven’t done more than a small glance through what the search has turned up. Any help/commentary would be wonderful. Thanks!