the groundhog day project

If we took Benesh (2011) at face value, then we would have to assume every film in which characters have hands is somehow using those hands to mean something. I don't even think Benesh is all wrong in some of the symbolism she describes in Groundhog Day but she chooses such simplistic things--hands, snow--that the choices are more banal than meaningful. If there were closeups of hands--to be fair, there are one or two--or characters talked about hands or their hands were particularly meaningful in context of the story... except Benesh doesn't want us looking to the narrative; she advises (by way of Izod (2000) citing Hillman (1983 presumably) that we "focus on an image-oriented reading versus one that rushes, as it typical, to narrative conclusions" (p. 63). But, the problem here is when looking at images pushes us not just past the narrative but into an entirely different universe from it. She wants to look at the film in terms of Jungian psychology and dream inter...

I’ve been avoiding reading Julie Ellen Benesh’s dissertation, “Becoming Punxstuawney Phil: Symbols and Metaphors of Transformation in Groundhog Day ,” because if I’m going to use this project and all the research involved to build my own thesis next year I didn’t want her influencing the direction(s) I might take things. But, I’ve decided to start sampling it if not to actually just read it straight through. Sure, Benesh may influence what I do, but she could also a) give me specific things to respond to b) demonstrate things I should avoid, 1) not just because it’s been done but 2) but also because, like with so many of the other pieces I have read for this blog, I may just disagree with her conclusions or her theories. For example, just glancing at the section on the use of Lines and Spheres in the film, I’ve found some things I find questionable. And this may be funny coming from me. First, I don’t know the original location for this quotation from Hemingway, but it’s worth bringi...