Another article that caught my attention over the past few weeks on cinema-scope.com, was something very different than the Farber piece. This article was more of what I am doing right, I’m suppose to be writing about what is interesting to me in a piece of art and explain my reasoning. The article was entitled, “The Exiles,” it was written by someone who only refers to themselves as Quintin. The article is talking about a classic film by Kent Mackenzie called “The Exiles.” This was filmed in the late 1950’s but not released until much later and well after the death of Mackenzie. The film has been circulating at screenings around the world due to Thom Anderson using a few clips in one of his pieces. The film is about a group of Native Americans that no longer live on a ranch, but in the city. However, they live in the slums of the city. The two main people are Yvonne and Homer, Homer is a drunk and Yvonne a house wife.
What I found so interesting about this article, was the fact that it wasn’t a review of the film, it was more of a justification of why this was a great and important film. Quintin goes into a great deal of detail about the theme of ambiguity in the film and how he feels about it. He states that it starts out a bit dark with a brief history of the Native Americans but then goes to the a scene of a woman shopping and loving it. And the author just loves it. He talks about how the film shows that the rich and the poor are still together and having a night life. Even though they are poor, they still have a the options to go out and be out on the town. Quintin states “The Exiles shows that the distance between the rich and the poor in the U.S. was immensely smaller that it is now.” It was great to read an opinionated review from someone who actually enjoyed seeing and writing about the film. There is a definite enthusiasm that comes across in this piece. He ends the piece with this, “There are not many films that deal with the obvious, but so important, theme of film: the proletarian class having fun.” He was excited to see this movie and wanted to tell everyone that it is a masterpiece and needs to be seen. That was incredibly refreshing to see in this article. Usually when I read articles, even opinion articles, they seem very dry and bland. They all seem to be written in a monotone voice and lack what it takes to keep me reading. Quintin, who ever he maybe, kept me interested and even got me interested in the movie. I think I’m going try and track it down. I would be very happy to understand exactly all of what he was express in his writing of this article.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Article #1
I have been following a the website cinema-scope.com over the last few weeks and have come across many interesting articles. About a week ago, I read one article that really fascinated me, because I really didn’t understand it at first and needed to read it over a few times. The format of this article is very strange and not conventional at all. The article is called “Manny Farber and All That Jazz,” written by Jean-Pierre Gorin. The article is about how in 2006, Jean-Pierre Gorin held a tribute for the late writer and painter, Manny Farber. This tribute was held at the University of California, San Diego. The article starts off in a very convention way, a description of the night and the events that occurred. Gorin states, “An exhaustive affair, the evening included a panel discussion, live music and excerpts from various Farber films.”
The main presentation of the of the night was something I have never heard of, a 4K technology presentation of 13 of Manny’s paintings. The 4K technology is a military mapping technology and showed these paintings from a digitally created perspective that was the same as Manny’s, as he painted them. That sounds really cool. To be able to experience a piece of art, the same way the painter did, that’s a completely new idea in the world of interactive art and really needs to be build upon and expanded more, in my opinion. Now, as I stated, I was really fascinated by this article because of the format. After this paragraph of introducing what happened that night, Gorin has included what was handed out to the spectators of this tribute. I thought that was an interesting choice because there really only one paragraph in this article, that is like an article. The rest is essentially just a list of what Gorin wants the people to get out of this night and what he is trying to accomplish with this tribute. I’m not sure if I’ve ever really seen that before in a publication and I thought it was a bit confusing, but it worked There are 10 different, as Gorin puts it ‘precepts,’ that he has written for these people. They are written a very interesting way. He repeats phrases a lot to get points across. For example the second precept begins, “Let the paintings be seen. Let the paintings be seen. Let the paintings be seen.” he wants these people to look and enjoy these paintings. He doesn’t want them to just look and be like, oh yeah, that looks nice. He wants them to really look at them. And with the 4K technology, he wants these people to experience the painting and truly get their minds around it. That’s what I really liked about these precepts, was that Gorin would go into a lot of detail about Manny and what we should be looking at in these pieces. However, the way it is written, there is an overriding message of just enjoy these paintings and really look at them and appreciate them for the beauty that they are. Precept 8 really explains this well, “There is a fundamental playfulness and pervading sense of pleasure that every inch of a Farber painting or article communicates. Try to get some of it in the way this evening will function.”
The main presentation of the of the night was something I have never heard of, a 4K technology presentation of 13 of Manny’s paintings. The 4K technology is a military mapping technology and showed these paintings from a digitally created perspective that was the same as Manny’s, as he painted them. That sounds really cool. To be able to experience a piece of art, the same way the painter did, that’s a completely new idea in the world of interactive art and really needs to be build upon and expanded more, in my opinion. Now, as I stated, I was really fascinated by this article because of the format. After this paragraph of introducing what happened that night, Gorin has included what was handed out to the spectators of this tribute. I thought that was an interesting choice because there really only one paragraph in this article, that is like an article. The rest is essentially just a list of what Gorin wants the people to get out of this night and what he is trying to accomplish with this tribute. I’m not sure if I’ve ever really seen that before in a publication and I thought it was a bit confusing, but it worked There are 10 different, as Gorin puts it ‘precepts,’ that he has written for these people. They are written a very interesting way. He repeats phrases a lot to get points across. For example the second precept begins, “Let the paintings be seen. Let the paintings be seen. Let the paintings be seen.” he wants these people to look and enjoy these paintings. He doesn’t want them to just look and be like, oh yeah, that looks nice. He wants them to really look at them. And with the 4K technology, he wants these people to experience the painting and truly get their minds around it. That’s what I really liked about these precepts, was that Gorin would go into a lot of detail about Manny and what we should be looking at in these pieces. However, the way it is written, there is an overriding message of just enjoy these paintings and really look at them and appreciate them for the beauty that they are. Precept 8 really explains this well, “There is a fundamental playfulness and pervading sense of pleasure that every inch of a Farber painting or article communicates. Try to get some of it in the way this evening will function.”
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Field Report #2
Each year the Milwaukee Art Museum hosts a large number of very exciting guest exhibits, and this year is no exception to that. From October fourth to mid-January, the museum will be hosting, one the most exciting shows yet, Act React. The exhibit is comprised of contemporary pieces that call for the viewer to activate, and be a part of the piece. Interactive art is a modern art form in our increasingly digital world, that is based around viewer participation. The artists that gave created these 10 pieces are all pioneers in the field of interactive art and all are very entrancing and fascinating to see. Some of the more notable pieces however include pieces by Scott Snibbe and, possibly the most interesting, Janet Cardiff.
As you walk into the exhibit, a large, square pad is placed on the floor next to the entrance of the exhibit. A large projector is shining down on this pad and as you walk across it, a line appears on the pad in-between you and another person. This pad on the floor is really called a retroreflective floor. The piece only works if there are two or more people on this pad a given time. This is a piece by Scott Snibbe entitled, Boundary functions. As the viewers walk around this pad, the lines separating them, move as they move, while staying an exact distance from the people. The only way to make the line disappear is to reach out and physically touch the person. The piece invites and holds the viewers attention and participation. Just run around and notice that the line is will follow you where ever you may be standing. The movement and non-breaking down of the line separating you and another , also opens the door for some interpretation of the piece, why Snibbe is having you do this? There is a boundary separating you from the others, and is keeping a certain distance from others, could that mean something? Perhaps Snibbe is making a comment on our human society. Maybe we all keep boundaries from others, and the only way to get rid of boundaries are to touch and become one with other beings. The artist isn’t there to offer any enlightenment so its up to a viewers own imagination. This piece would be nothing without the viewer there, it wouldn’t even work to start off with. It needs a person to even turn the thing on. But beyond that, its up to you to interpret this piece. All the he gives you is a line to follow and you are to build off of that and go from there.
Possibly the strangest, but yet amazing, pieces in Act and react is Janet Cardiff’s To Touch. It is a sound activation piece, where you walk into a dark room, with a spot light on an old wooden table. Due to the low light around the rest of the room, the 20 different speakers used, are more like little black shadows and unable to define what they are. Once the table is touched, strange noises begin to a rise from the corners of the room. The sounds become louder and human voices begin saying disjointed sentences like, your skin’s so soft” and “out your hand on my breast.” Unsure of where this is all coming from, a viewer must then listen more closely to comprehend what exactly is going on. But the visual stays the same, just a wooden table. The piece relies on the sound effect and words being said all around the room. You must now paint the picture in your own mind. You are provided with what the picture may sound like, but the exact detail of the setting is up to you. This piece works so well on an artistic level. Lets say we have a painting of the outdoors in spring. Now we have all the detail of the landscape, the sky and the people in the image. However, we are never offered with an idea of what this painting might sound like. This is coming from a whole new direction, and new art form. The freedom to make up an image in your mind and be provided with a sound counterpart to that, is simply an phenomenal experience. Cardiff offers nothing but room for a viewer to be involved with this experience. Its up to you, you decide what the image is and what exactly is going on. Without sight is up to the imagination, however with sound, sight becomes almost unnecessary in art at times due to the fact that we can just make it up in our own minds. We have the ability to be creative, lets use it and see what happens.
While both of these pieces are very much similar, they are also very different from one another. They both are, fundamentally, interactive art pieces that call for the activity and involvement of an audience. Both of these artists want to know what you, the viewer thinks, so they leave room for you to bring in your own interpretations. However, they call upon you in different amounts. With To Touch, Cardiff leaves visual involvement for the viewer. You have to paint the picture in your mind. But she provides an audio compliment to this, so there is some that the artist includes in this piece. I feel that with Boundary Functions, Snibbe has left it all to the viewer. All he provides is a line in between you an another. It’s all up to you at the point, you have to explain this for yourself. With To Touch, the audio is a bit of a clue as to what is meant with the piece, Boundary Functions doesn’t have that. To Touch also has a bit of an emotionally effect on the viewer that Boundary functions doesn’t have as well. With To Touch, the sound effect and voices were chosen to set a mood with the piece. They are similar in tone and the way pitches change. Snibbe’s work has a bit of a mood as well, it is meant to be a fun piece. To get the viewer to walk, run, hop gallop etc. around the piece. Moods being set up in a piece, is something that I’ve only heard in music and it was cool to that other artists, were using a mood in a visual way.
As you walk into the exhibit, a large, square pad is placed on the floor next to the entrance of the exhibit. A large projector is shining down on this pad and as you walk across it, a line appears on the pad in-between you and another person. This pad on the floor is really called a retroreflective floor. The piece only works if there are two or more people on this pad a given time. This is a piece by Scott Snibbe entitled, Boundary functions. As the viewers walk around this pad, the lines separating them, move as they move, while staying an exact distance from the people. The only way to make the line disappear is to reach out and physically touch the person. The piece invites and holds the viewers attention and participation. Just run around and notice that the line is will follow you where ever you may be standing. The movement and non-breaking down of the line separating you and another , also opens the door for some interpretation of the piece, why Snibbe is having you do this? There is a boundary separating you from the others, and is keeping a certain distance from others, could that mean something? Perhaps Snibbe is making a comment on our human society. Maybe we all keep boundaries from others, and the only way to get rid of boundaries are to touch and become one with other beings. The artist isn’t there to offer any enlightenment so its up to a viewers own imagination. This piece would be nothing without the viewer there, it wouldn’t even work to start off with. It needs a person to even turn the thing on. But beyond that, its up to you to interpret this piece. All the he gives you is a line to follow and you are to build off of that and go from there.
Possibly the strangest, but yet amazing, pieces in Act and react is Janet Cardiff’s To Touch. It is a sound activation piece, where you walk into a dark room, with a spot light on an old wooden table. Due to the low light around the rest of the room, the 20 different speakers used, are more like little black shadows and unable to define what they are. Once the table is touched, strange noises begin to a rise from the corners of the room. The sounds become louder and human voices begin saying disjointed sentences like, your skin’s so soft” and “out your hand on my breast.” Unsure of where this is all coming from, a viewer must then listen more closely to comprehend what exactly is going on. But the visual stays the same, just a wooden table. The piece relies on the sound effect and words being said all around the room. You must now paint the picture in your own mind. You are provided with what the picture may sound like, but the exact detail of the setting is up to you. This piece works so well on an artistic level. Lets say we have a painting of the outdoors in spring. Now we have all the detail of the landscape, the sky and the people in the image. However, we are never offered with an idea of what this painting might sound like. This is coming from a whole new direction, and new art form. The freedom to make up an image in your mind and be provided with a sound counterpart to that, is simply an phenomenal experience. Cardiff offers nothing but room for a viewer to be involved with this experience. Its up to you, you decide what the image is and what exactly is going on. Without sight is up to the imagination, however with sound, sight becomes almost unnecessary in art at times due to the fact that we can just make it up in our own minds. We have the ability to be creative, lets use it and see what happens.
While both of these pieces are very much similar, they are also very different from one another. They both are, fundamentally, interactive art pieces that call for the activity and involvement of an audience. Both of these artists want to know what you, the viewer thinks, so they leave room for you to bring in your own interpretations. However, they call upon you in different amounts. With To Touch, Cardiff leaves visual involvement for the viewer. You have to paint the picture in your mind. But she provides an audio compliment to this, so there is some that the artist includes in this piece. I feel that with Boundary Functions, Snibbe has left it all to the viewer. All he provides is a line in between you an another. It’s all up to you at the point, you have to explain this for yourself. With To Touch, the audio is a bit of a clue as to what is meant with the piece, Boundary Functions doesn’t have that. To Touch also has a bit of an emotionally effect on the viewer that Boundary functions doesn’t have as well. With To Touch, the sound effect and voices were chosen to set a mood with the piece. They are similar in tone and the way pitches change. Snibbe’s work has a bit of a mood as well, it is meant to be a fun piece. To get the viewer to walk, run, hop gallop etc. around the piece. Moods being set up in a piece, is something that I’ve only heard in music and it was cool to that other artists, were using a mood in a visual way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)