Archive program offers diverse
opportunities
We welcome The Bruin’s interest in UCLA’s Moving
Image Archive Studies program. Unfortunately, Nick Rudman’s
article (“UCLA boasts unique archiving program,” dB
Magazine, Feb. 17) contained a number of misleading statements and
factual errors.
To begin with, it is true that “Steve Ricci, director and
current professor in the program, did not return multiple phone
requests.” It is also true that the reporter was informed
multiple times and by multiple sources that I was unavailable due
to illness. Ignoring this fact seems to indicate a regrettable
desire to invent controversy where none exists.
The reporter also tried to create an impression that
UCLA’s program is weakened by its association with major
archives in the Los Angeles area. Instead of understanding that
multiple programs only enrich student choices, he created an
artificial and wholly inaccurate picture of competition instead of
collaboration between these programs.
Quoting Howard Besser out of context, the article says that,
“The main drawback of a program like UCLA’s is that
it’s tied to a particular repository. It teaches students too
much of the UCLA Film and Television Archive’s way of doing
things.” First, UCLA works closely and congenially with
NYU’s program. It also does so with a third such U.S. program
that the author does not include in the article. They were not
contacted for comments, either.
Second, UCLA is tied to a diverse array of programs in the Los
Angeles area, including the Visual Communications, the Getty
Research Center, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences,
Sony Pictures Entertainment, Women in Film Foundation and so on. In
addition, UCLA has established internship sites not only with
diverse institutions in Los Angeles, but students are also able to
work in archives throughout the United States and across the
globe.
Finally, think of our association with the UCLA Film and
Television Archive as anything but a disadvantage. In addition to
its international stature as a standards-setting, pioneering
archive, the UCLA experience has produced many leaders in the
field, including two presidents of the Association of Moving Image
Archivists.
If the worst Rudman can say about UCLA’s Moving Image
Archive Studies program is that it is too closely associated with
UCLA’s own prestigious archive, I imagine this is one of the
article’s distortions we can live with.
Steven Ricci Director, Moving Image Archive Studies
program
Closed border creates tense relations
In response to a misleading Daily Bruin submission,
“Armenian propaganda against Turkey untrue, divisive,”
(Viewpoint, Feb. 10), I want to bring to attention one of the many
false claims. The submission mentions that if you go to Armenia and
Turkey, you will deduce that relations are good between the
countries. Although the author is entitled to an opinion, she is
clearly uninformed about Turkey’s foreign policy. After the
fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Armenia became an independent
nation once more and two years later Turkey imposed a border
blockade.
This blockade still stands till this very day and suffocates the
development of Armenia’s economy. This hindrance has caused
economic developments to be severely strained in Armenia due to the
fact it is a land-locked country and looks to its neighbors for
trade. Armenia’s second largest border (at 268 km) is the one
it shares with Turkey, and this Turkish-imposed blockade has been a
large obstacle for not only Armenia, but for Turkey’s hopes
of gaining admission into the European Union. One of many
requirements for acceptance into the EU (which Turkey does not
meet) is that every applicant must have open borders and friendly
relations with its neighbors. Not only is Turkey in violation of
this, but that violation is by choice. If closing borders and
dialogue to Armenia is Turkey’s way of saying relations are
good, then perhaps the author is correct.
Alex Janoyan Fourth-year, political science and
history