changes to syllabus and reaction paper topics

I have made a few adjustments to our schedule as listed on the syllabus. Please make note of them. I've also tried to outline the reaction papers a little better and give you the topics (I might tweak them a bit as we go along, but it at least lets you see where we're going)

Reaction paper #4 is due on Wed, 3/5--topic: Battle of China and China films. Question: Both of these films are meant to inform American audiences of the ongoing struggle of our Chinese allies against the Japanese. How do these films broach the difficult question of supporting our Chinese allies, while defiling our Japanese enemies, which is mostly based on race/ethnicity? In other words, how do Hollywood and the OWI make the Chinese into "good Asians," but the Japanese "bad Asians."

Reaction paper #5 is due on Wed, 3/12--topic: Discuss the medium of animated shorts in informing the American public as to the war effort and our enemies. How do they take the very serious and make it into humorous (at times) cartoons? What is the value of these cartoons? Do you see any difference in representation of our enemy between companies (Disney, Warner Bros., etc)? How do cartoons stack up to other moving images that we've seen? What is their purpose?

Reaction paper #6 is due on Mon, 3/31--topic: The film The Negro Soldier is yet another Frank Capra propaganda film. It was shown to both black and white audiences, but, on the whole, both races liked it. How does the film work to instill racial pride in African Americans to convince them to enlist and fight, but not upset white audiences that might be averse to the idea of blacks fighting in the war? How does the film use (but distort) history to tell the story of black accomplishments? Is it an effective piece of propaganda?

Reaction paper #7 is due on Mon, 4/7--topic: Return to our first readings out of History Goes to the Movies that discusses how Leni Riefenstahl denied that Triumph of the Will was not propaganda. Now that you've seen the film, what do you think? If you agree with Riefenstahl's assessment of her film, then support her answer using the film. If you believe that it IS propaganda, then use the film to argue with her. In essence, I want you to tell me whether Triumph of the Will is or isn't propaganda, but make sure you use the readings (esp. History Goes to the Movies) in your response.

Reaction paper #8 is due on Mon, 4/21--topic: The two best examples of anti-Jewish Nazi propaganda are the movies The Eternal Jew and Jud Suss, but while their message is essentially the same, that Jews are a menace that has hurt Germany for hundreds of years, they do so in different ways. The Eternal Jew is presented as a documentary, presenting "fact" on the history of the Jewish people, while Jud Suss is a more Hollywood-esque feature film, with a rather despicable Jewish character as the antagonist. Which one is more effective? If you were a German citizen sitting in the theater watching these films, what impact do you think they would have on you? Warning---I think that you will need far more than 2 pages for this paper. Once you've seen them, I don't think it will take much for you to write, and write, and write (students normally find them VERY interesting, and are eager to discuss), so please don't feel constricted to 2 pages.