<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lost in Translation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ceerock/2004/03/07/lost-in-translation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ceerock/2004/03/07/lost-in-translation/</link>
	<description>Cynthia Rockwell</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:40:24 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: LL</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ceerock/2004/03/07/lost-in-translation/comment-page-1/#comment-7160</link>
		<dc:creator>LL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2004 19:24:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/httpblogslawharvardeduceerock4/2004/03/07/lost-in-transl#comment-7160</guid>
		<description>&lt;a&gt;&lt;/a&gt;

I&#039;m a little late to this, but I&#039;m so happy that, with all the to-do over whether the film&#039;s fair to Asians, somebody&#039;s brought up the poor lounge singer. The race issue is its own conversation, but I think the lounge singer epitomizes the class issue. She&#039;s presented as vulgar and laughable, a foil for Scarlett&#039;s delicate sensibility and unassailable fashion sense... but she&#039;s just one of the few characters in the movie who, like most of the world, is stuck in a kind of shitty job that she probably had to swallow some integrity to do, but it pays the bills. It&#039;s easy to pay homage to the Scarlett character&#039;s integrity when clearly someone else is putting a (very lovely) roof over her head. And it&#039;s difficult not to extend that thought to the filmmaker.

I didn&#039;t realize I had so much to say about it. I really did love the movie, but that upperclass supercilious streak has come to annoy me more and more.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a></a></p>
<p>I&#8217;m a little late to this, but I&#8217;m so happy that, with all the to-do over whether the film&#8217;s fair to Asians, somebody&#8217;s brought up the poor lounge singer. The race issue is its own conversation, but I think the lounge singer epitomizes the class issue. She&#8217;s presented as vulgar and laughable, a foil for Scarlett&#8217;s delicate sensibility and unassailable fashion sense&#8230; but she&#8217;s just one of the few characters in the movie who, like most of the world, is stuck in a kind of shitty job that she probably had to swallow some integrity to do, but it pays the bills. It&#8217;s easy to pay homage to the Scarlett character&#8217;s integrity when clearly someone else is putting a (very lovely) roof over her head. And it&#8217;s difficult not to extend that thought to the filmmaker.</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t realize I had so much to say about it. I really did love the movie, but that upperclass supercilious streak has come to annoy me more and more.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
