Unwatchable by Nicholas Baer

Unwatchable Reviews

• 
  J Earl

  In Unwatchable the editors (Nicholas Baer, Maggie Hennefeld, Laura Horak, and Gunnar Iverson) collected over 50 essays reflecting on what is or is not unwatchable, and even what that word even means in practice.
  
  There are a couple of things that make this volume particularly interesting and effective. Obviously the biggest is simply the timeliness of the topic. The world in which we live, how we treat each other, and what passes for communication makes this an important book.
  
  What makes it effective, I think, is that these are all original essays and are limited to 1500 words each. This is unusual for academic work and is also refreshing. The writers spend their words making their points with minimal elaboration on theory. Make no mistake, the theory is here, but in practice more than in discussion. These pieces are sharp, incisive, and quickly get to what the writers want to say. As you would expect there are citations and quite often links to information. But these essays are accessible to most readers if for no other reason than that they won't get bogged down in a deeper discussion on a topic that does not interest them. At less than 1500 words, reading these many different perspectives and ideas, often at odds with each other, is not only manageable but enjoyable. Yes, an academic work that is enjoyable (in an often depressing kinda way).
  
  Another key is that the editors gave the contributors free rein to define and use the concept of unwatchable as they please. This leads to a wide range of analyses, and a reader will be thinking about these things from so many different perspectives that it will be easy to start seeing things differently. You will agree with some and disagree with some, but you won't likely be left unmoved by any.
  
  The contributors also come from a truly wide range of fields and approaches. That variety could, had the essays been longer, have made it hard to read this as a whole. Yet at their length each essay becomes a wonderful introduction for many readers to very specific idea about the broader topic of unwatchability.
  
  I would highly recommend this to anyone, academic or not, who has thought about what is unwatchable, what it even means for something to be unwatchable, and what one does with something that might be considered (by some) unwatchable.
  
  Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via Edelweiss.
• 
  Michael

  Here's a clip from my review, published recently in Jump Cut media journal #59:
  
  Unwatchable is a very strong collection because it boldly lifts the veil on unwatchable films that most people have only heard about but have never seen for themselves. Yet its strength lies in the way it theorizes the matter, rather than just exploring a catalogue of films that make audiences uncomfortable. Nearly all of the authors explore why such discomfort exists in the first place (while also remaining attentive to the thrills as much as the pains of discomfort, such as in extreme horror cinema, as well).
  
  The book is large at 388 pages, with about 60 contributors peeking behind the curtain of so many films the average reader probably has never seen. Everyone from popular sex journalists (Susie Bright) to familiar film theorists (Vivian Sobchack, Noel Carroll) to specialist projectionists (Bennet Togler) and trans performance artists (Alok Vaid-Menon) come to the table, offering up very brief (750-1500 word) essays on the subject.
  
  Read more at
  https://www.ejumpcut.org/currentissue...
• 
  it's fine to drink hot metal,

  holy shit. the humanities are so fucked man
• 
  Jax

  I'm not going to rate this or add it to my book challenge because I only read it for a handful of the very short essays, which were very good, but I don't have very much of an interest in the rest of the book. That being said, I think that people who are in film/media critique would get a lot from reading this book of very short essays.