Halfway through the minimum amount of blog posts I mean, not for the semester, which is going by unusually fast in my opinion. I’ve been struggling to balance my time between studying full time and working full time in all honesty. But I like writing these blog posts. It allows me to sit and reflect on the work I’ve been doing for this class so far, and it’s giving me a space to write down all my thoughts and ideas for this long project!
I’m extremely excited to talk about Bruce Lee, an idol for me and my family. However, analysing his transnational/global reach makes it difficult to me as I can’t turn this essay into a film analysis or a narrative about how awesome he is. Finding the theory to analyse Bruce Lee is difficult, do I look at him through a transnational or global lens? How do I make this historical analysis in the context of theories? I don’t want to vomit a bunch of theories onto my paper, I think selecting one theory would be good and analysing it through that lens.
For my structure, I would talk about the connectivity between the East and West through Bruce Lee in a cold war context. However, do I call that transnational or global? Especially if I talk about other countries like India (Bollywood cinema) or Japan (Japanese Cinema).
Either way, this seems like a fun and exciting project. BUT I definitely need to research more because I’m just waffling at this point. I think I need to take a page out of Hannah’s book and make a mind map 🙂
Hi Naomi, I’m commenting on this to fulfil my quota for the term, but I also had to do so in order to show my appreciation for the Bon Jovi reference. Just had a wee idea on the questions you were putting forward. As you point out, there is a difficult balance here between exploring Bruce Lee through a biographical lens, and then removing him as an individual agent by examining the global metanarratives which his celebrity contributed to. One area to explore which could bridge the gap between these, and form part of a transnational history, is to not look at either of these in particular detail, but rather to consider the mechanisms by which his celebrity travelled: the institutions which surrounded him and enabled his status to flourish; the editors who printed his fanzines around the world; the market price at which his movie reels went for around the world; even on an underground level, how bootleg “Bruceploitation” become a whole genre in itself, generated and sustained by his fans all the world over. These avenues would contribute to transnational history in a couple of ways because you are looking at the mechanical actions by which knowledge crosses national boundaries, and you are looking at the underground/unappreciated actors who worshipped Lee’s stardom (his fans). Anyway, I know this comment is a week late and potentially past the point of expiry but I hope this offered a potential area to explore in your essay.