--- Forwarded Message from Mike Ledgerwood <[log in to unmask]> ---

>In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
>References: <[log in to unmask]>
>From: Mike Ledgerwood <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: #8651.4 (!) "Clean" movies, an apology and explanation.
>Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:41:59 -0500
>To: Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum
<[log in to unmask]>

Hello to all.  I didn't mean to start up a controversy.

Couple of things first:  I do understand the US American law about
this issue.  I know that this is a controversial issue.  I have
looked at the court opinion about the legality of changing a work,
which certainly can interfere with intellectual property rights.  I
have also looked at Congressional legislation that would allow some
kind of right of the individual that would allow some change of works
by individuals within defined limits.  So, please believe that I
understand that this issue can be a very important one.  Please also
believe that I respect intellectual property rights and more elusive
values such as aesthetic ones.

Let me explain the particular case that prompted my question about
technology.  In our version of the Spanish-language film, "El Norte",
there is one scene that has proved problematic.  In the original
Spanish at one point there are words that are mumbled in the
background indistinctly that were translated into the English
subtitles in bold print in the most extreme translation of the
Spanish words.  We had no interest in changing the original work but
rather in softening the English translation used in the subtitles.
To be frank I don't think this would affect a spectator's aesthetic
appreciation of the work in question.  Thus my question about
technology to make this change.  The Spanish faculty and I are
certainly not interested in censoring a work or substantially
changing a work as has been done in many cultures and still is in
many.  In fact, most professors at this institution show work in
class that some students find objectionable as a matter of routine,
although they discuss problems students might have in advance, and,
occasionally, give students the option of not viewing a work.  Works
are certainly shown here that would never be shown in US high schools
a a matter of routine.  Yet if a very minor change to a subtitle
could ensure 100% student participation in an activity and not change
the "flavor" of a work, should we not at least think about this?

An additional thought is that US television will show versions of
controversial works that have been altered to be shown to a general
audience.  These versions can be used in all contexts.  Do they
change the original work in important ways?  Perhaps so. Yet this
type of alteration is permitted.  It would be very interesting to
have access to some of these versions to see if they are suitable for
a University audience and if original aesthetic values are well
enough retained so that they could be used in a classroom.

Hope this helps explain and we can move back to questions about
technology and leave the ad hominem arguments to politicians.

Very best to all.

Mikle D. Ledgerwood, Ph.D.
Professor of French
Chair of World Languages and Cultures
Samford University.