“The suffering black male body and the threatened white female body": ambiguous bodies in Candyman

This article explores the roles of monster and victim as experienced through the body, and considers how the relationship between violence and the body affects the presentation of these roles through close analysis of performance in Candyman (Bernard Rose, 1992). I aim to demonstrate that commitment to such a detailed approach, offers a more intricate and rewarding critical interaction, reflecting the complexity of narrative film. Consideration of the particulars of performance is crucial, in its affect on our engagement with the performer and their physical presence. Through this attention I intend to demonstrate how the seemingly fixed role of monster is in fact more fluid than first apparent, that monster and victim can co-exist in the same body. Candyman’s physicality and the way it is presented foregrounds the oscillations between violence and suffering, the relationship between the body and the violence inflicted on and by it, ambiguities which are also found in the heroine’s development, thus enhancing the film’s striking preoccupation with the shifting parallels between monster and victim.

The reception of T. S. Bayer’s 'Historia Regni Graecorum Bactriani' (1738)

Theophilus (Gottlieb) Siegfried Bayer (1694-1738) is usually credited as the first person in modern times to address the history of the Greeks in Bactria in a serious way. Bayer’s Historia Regni Graecorum Bactriani, brings together numismatic and historical research. He describes two Graeco-Bactrian coins which he was able to examine first hand, and collects and comments upon the Classical historical sources on the Greek kingdoms of Bactria and India. It was published in St. Petersburg in 1738, where Bayer, a German, held an academic position. In this short article, I am interested in two questions surrounding the Historia Regni Graecorum Bactriani. First (and relatively briefly), how Bayer conducted his research without first hand access to source material and without himself travelling in Bactria – or indeed further east than St. Petersburg. Secondly, the way in which Bayer’s scholarship was received by some of his contemporaries and by later writers, outside the field of Bactrian studies.