![]() |
News in BriefFor the RecordCalendarJobsArchived ScarletsScarlet Info |
|
|
|
|
For more information and long and short-term forecasts from across the state, check out http://www.hprcc.unl.edu/nebras ka/. The High Plains Regional Climate Center is affiliated with the School of Natural Resource Sciences within NU's Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources. |
Stephen Buhler,
associate professor
of English, has published his first book,
Shakespeare in the
Cinema: Ocular Proof.
By Kim Hachiya, University Communications
Steve Buhler has been fascinated by filmed adaptations of Shakespeare's works since, as he puts it, an "absurdly early age." He remembers seeing a 1950s MGM version of Julius Caesar, starring Marlon Brando and James Mason, on late-night TV when he was teen-ager. And as a high school teacher in California, he liked using films to enhance his teaching.
That fascination with Shakespeare on film has led to the publication of Buhler's first book, Shakespeare in the Cinema: Ocular Proof, by the State University of New York Press. The book is part of the SUNY Series Cultural Studies in Cinema/Video, edited by Wheeler Winston Dixon, Ryan Professor of Film Studies at UNL.
In the book, Buhler, an associate professor of English, looks at a few of the more than 2,000 known films of Shakespeare's works with an eye toward how filmmakers have approached the task of adapting works to film and how those decisions affected the films.
This is an unusual approach, he notes, because most studies of Shakespeare on film look at how "truthful" the adaptations are to the plays' scripts, examine the actors' performances or analyze how much the films reveal or obscure Shakespeare's original intentions.
"Shakespeare in one of the most adapted writers," Buhler said. "He was grandly unoriginal himself, often borrowing plots. What's ingenious is how he brings them all together, the juxtapositioning of characters, the creation of language that allows all these elements to come together."
Buhler, who's been known to grace the stages performing in local Shakespearean productions, notes that plays are very intimate performances with actors relating to the audiences. A play is a verbally dominated performance art, he said, and a movie is visually dominated. When filmmakers adapt the plays, they need to find ways to replace that lost intimacy between the stage performer and the audience, he said.
"Lots (of filmmakers) have made the transition brilliantly and created very powerful experiences for audiences," he said. "It's a difference experience than that felt in a theater, but still powerful."
Buhler said he also tries in the book to place Shakespeare films in a cultural context that shaped their production. For example, two Soviet-era films made in the 1950s were laden with overtones of political thawing that had occurred with the death of Stalin. Integrating films into historical context help illumine understanding of the filmmaker's vision, Buhler said.
Looking at the social, political, economic and historical factors that affected filmmakers help enrich the context for teaching beyond reading and understand the text as a script or piece of literature, Buhler said.
Buhler hopes the book has appeal to people who teach Shakespeare because it offers a fresh way of presenting material. He also thinks it might appeal to filmmakers who are interested in how other filmmakers approach screen adaptations. And he hopes it appeals to a general audience of readers interested in Shakespeare and movies and the conjunctions between then.
This book, for the most part, looks at straight-forward adaptations of the plays to screen. Buhler is mulling another book that would look at films, such as Disney's The Lion King, which take some themes from Shakespeare (in this case, Hamlet), but are not direct adaptations.
And he also has a book in progress on the role of music in the poetry of John Milton.
Note: UNL Chancellor Harvey Perlman sent the following email message to the university community Dec. 7.
Dear Colleagues:
I have placed on the Web site the temporary expenditure reductions we are taking in this fiscal year to respond to the revenue shortfall.
Again, these reductions are only temporary. The more challenging effort lies ahead as we reduce the base budget of the university by 2.5 percent for the next fiscal year. A summary of the reductions this year is as follows:
I recognize that these reductions do not fully describe the consequences of the budget reduction we face. Many units have wisely cancelled or delayed searches that do not appear on this list and have otherwise started to make budget adjustments in preparation for the base budget reduction next year.
Finally, I apologize that the budget reductions were reported in the press before I was able to share the plan directly with you. Our plan was to release the budget reductions first to the Board of Regents, next to faculty and staff and third to the media. Obviously, that plan went awry.
There will be a budget reduction of $1.8 million at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. There will be a delay in filling about 20 positions, elimination of some summer school courses, a $150,000 reduction in library expenditures, and additional college-based reductions that include hiring temporary instructors in place of regular faculty, reducing travel and eliminating other expenditures.
| Delay filling two academic administrators, one managerial/professional, and one office/service position | $135,769 | |
| Office Expenses | $ 50,684 | |
| Subtotal | $186,453 |
| Summer Session, 2002 - reduction of about 40 courses | $275,000 | |
| Library Materials | $150,000 | |
| Information Services - delay replacement of equipment | $150,000 | |
| Extended Education Grants and one-time academic program enhancements | $245,000 | |
| Delay filling 12 vacant positions and equipment replacement in colleges | $200,000 | |
| Subtotal | $1,020,000 |
| Delay filling eight vacant positions | $430,000 | |
| Delay replacement of equipment | $ 77,000 | |
| Subtotal | $507,000 |
| Delay building maintenance and equipment replacement | $100,000 | |
| Subtotal | $100,000 |
TOTAL BUDGET CUTS $1,813,453
Budget cuts of $8.26 million in FY2001-2002 will be shared across the University of Nebraska's four campuses and central administration, according to L. Dennis Smith, NU president. The list was presented in a news release issued Dec. 5 by central administration.
The bulk of the cuts - $4.77 million - will come from universitywide funds that were held back earlier in the year when Gov. Mike Johanns advised the university to be prepared for budget reductions.
Had these funds remained available they would have been used as follows:
"There is no question that these reductions, coupled with cuts made on each of the four campuses, will slow the university's momentum in building top-quality programs that attract the best students and faculty," Smith said in the release. "In addition, they will reduce educational opportunities and resources available to students, delay significant services, including health services, to rural Nebraskans, and delay needed repairs and replacement of equipment."
Smith said that cuts for FY 2001-2002 will be handled primarily by delaying planned programs and using one-time sources. Cuts for FY 2002-2003 will go much deeper and have much further-reaching effects at the campus level.
"We cannot afford to sacrifice the Excellence Fund a second year; the effect on our priority programs would be difficult to overcome. In addition, we will not take funding away from need-based aid or diversity programs. The burden, therefore, will fall to the campuses."
He added, "Managers on all four campuses are already delaying future commitments to prepare for the base budget reduction for FY 2003, including postponing dozens of position searches."
Each campus will be asked to trim at least three times as much in 2002-2003 as they've been asked to cut this year - more than $11 million total.
Specific impacts of the 2001-2002 cuts include:
"These cuts are short-term decisions, not permanent reductions in the base budget," Smith said. "Over the next three months we will be seeking faculty and staff input and working through the shared governance process to determine exactly where cuts will be made for the next fiscal year. Those recommendations will be made to the Board of Regents in April as part of our annual budgeting process."