Final Project

At first I thought about doing a piece along the lines of a drawing or a video, but decided against it. I can do those any time. I decided to take advantage of having such an audience. I'm intrigued by projects that mess with the audience, such as that one Fluxus project I mentioned in an earlier post. This kind of stuff tends to stay in the audience's mind because they were essential to it. I don't want to give any details yet about the project - not because I think its so super special but because that will make it less fun and I don't have it all worked out myself yet, just a pretty general idea of what to do. For my Sound Machine project I used cell phones on speaker to echo the audience, and I thought that it had an interesting effect, so I've decided that my final project would be a good opportunity to take that concept further. Each project so far I've tried to do something different, but now is my chance to build off of stuff I tried before and hopefully improve it. By increasing the level of phone echoing, I can up the dissonance, which, in theory at least, will create an interesting soundscape full of conflicting sounds. Maybe Russolo would like it, as I am using interesting sounds besides violins and pianos as a way to express something (although I'm still trying to figure out what I'm expressing). I also plan on incorporating elements of chance, a la John Cage, because one fault my projects have had so far has been being too pre-planned. My thinking style has been product over process. But by using more chance, it can be a simultaneous learning experience between the audience and me.

Destruction Project

When the guidelines for the project were first announced, it seemed rather daunting. Something that had to operate on its own for half an hour without my interference. However, the idea of using melting ice soon came to me. The heat destroying the ice wasn't enough for me, so I decided that I would use the dripping water to destroy a drawing of mine, since I spend a lot of time drawing. So I drew a face, put it onto the ground, and hung a bag of ice with one corner cut open over it. I scanned the face before and after, but my computer seems to have corrupted the files. However, there wouldn't have been much to see anyway. The ink didn't run the way I wanted it to, but the dripping water did punch a hole in the paper, which was an interesting surprise. In that sense, the project succeeded, because instead of just seeing what I thought would happen happen, I made a discovery. The project could be interpreted as a comment on aging, that a face will inevitably deteriorate. Or it could be an acceptance of the impermanence of art, since I set out to destroy my drawing. I have heard about some artist, although his name escapes me, who makes art in nature using sand and stones and sticks and the like, and the art is specifically designed to not last, as nature takes it toll. Instead of trying to fight and delay the inevitable, since even the Mona Lisa will someday begone, he embraces it as part of the process. It is a Buddhist concept - that attachment leads to suffering. Only by freeing ourselves from attachment can we achieve nirvana. This wasn't really my the intention, though. I just wanted to see what dripping water would do to the drawing. 

Situationist Project

Here are the two responses I wrote to the readings on the movement. I chose a very obvious point - the fact that the SI eventually vowed to stop creating art. However, I just find this point fascinating. In my own artistic endeavors, I wrestle with similar questions. Sometimes, if the work I create isn't as good as what I envisioned, I justify it to myself by reminding myself how great my thinking process and ideas were. Is this legitimate? Is the creation of art defined by the ideas in our heads, or the execution of those ideas? Furthermore, I was intrigued when someone in class asked if both the positive and negative responses to the same point, which is what I ended up doing. Understanding both sides of an argument is an important skill, and I figured that learning to think that way would be a valuable skill in life. Now, without further ado, my responses:

Situationist Response 1

In 1961, the Situationalist International decided that the creation of art would no longer be a part of the movement. They saw spectacle as something manipulative, and felt that the removal of art creation would help eliminate that.

Certain artistic statements may seem extreme and even silly, but their innovativeness can not be overlooked. In the art world, taking it too far is an important step towards taking it to the right place. Duchamp’s famous/infamous “Fountain” isn’t remembered for being a particularly compelling work of art in its own right, but for jolting the art world, making us question what it means to look at something, and leading to decades of fascinating experimentation in art that gave the world fresh and compelling works. If the envelope is pushed from Point A to Point B, even if Point B is just too far out, artists now have a newfound space to work in, that is, everything that lies between A and B. In the case of the Situationists, the refusal to make art may be ridiculous in some sense, but it gets people thinking. Certain questions are raised. Can spectacle hide hollowness? Do we value form or ideas? Perhaps I misinterpret the intentions of the Situationalist International, but I think the important debate of style vs. substance is addressed here. 

As a film student, I observe style over substance far too often. Many student filmmakers put all their energy into using fancy equipment and flashy shots and editing, while the rest often falls by the wayside, and the films are left with obvious or uninspired stories and clumsy writing and characterization. In response to Hollywood filmmaking, Danish filmmakers Lars von Trier and Thomas Vinterberg created the Dogme 95 movement. They had strict rules, such as only handheld camera, and no special lighting. Even though I find the specific rules to be too limiting and sometimes arbitrary, I love the principles set forward, putting emphasis on characters and performances. Many non-Dogme films since have been influenced  by putting emphasis on these things rather than the technical. That is, they have found a rewarding middle ground between Points A and B. 

The Situationalists eventual refusal to create art shows that they value the thought process, and without form, a lack of ideas can’t be masked. While we shouldn’t quit creating, an example as extreme as this can be a bit of a wakeup call to the importance of ideas.

Situationist Response 2

In 1961, the Situationalist International decided that the creation of art would no longer be a part of the movement. They saw spectacle as something manipulative, and felt that the removal of art creation would help eliminate that.

This is arrogant rubbish. While its an interesting concept, it also comes off as a massive copout. Yes, the Situationalist International raises some compelling points, especially about people’s preference of images for the things they represent. Many of these points I agree with. However, I don’t think that the Situationalist International took the right course of action against art they felt was false. In the film Ratatouille, the character of Anton Ego, who is a food critic, has a moving speech towards the end of the film, which includes the following passage: “We [critics] risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.” 

As were all the other more avant-garde art movements of the 20th century, the Situationalist movement was a response to the art that had preceded it. However, by refusing to make art, they are talking the talk without walking the walk. This would be all well and good if they called themselves critics, but that is not the case. This is an art movement. If they were unhappy with the use of spectacle in art, they should have created works of art that showed a better way of doing things. This show other artists new ways of approaching things, and therefore they would take their art in new directions. There would be growth. However, by being so stubborn and elitist, they are merely irritating others, and instead of growth, there will be stagnation or devolution. Their ideas are compelling, and they should be admired for that, but true artists would find a solution, rather than a simple “fuck you.”

Sound Machine Project

It was clear to me the moment I read the assignment that at least one of my machine "parts" would have to be a person, since I am less than capable of building a true machine. However, I wanted some nonliving parts, so I scouted the school for whatever items I could find, picking up odd hairbands and teabags off the ground. Eventually, I devised my process. I would start the machine by firing a headband into Person A, who would spill his cup of water and use the water to push a plastic bag towards Person B, who would pick it up and inflate it. I considered having the bag popped to create a noise, but that seemed a bit obvious. Instead, written on the bag was "CALL ME" with an arrow pointing back to Person A, who would call Person B, and both would hold their phones out to the audience. I wanted to subvert the assignment a bit and make the audience wait for a sound, which wouldn't in fact arrive until they created it, as the final sound would be their clapping echoed through the phones. This appealed to me because the back and forth of the sound would create a slight dissonance. Once again I think of John Cage's radio piece. Furthermore, trying to make the audience a part of the show was what many of the people we've studied in various movements tried to do. A more extreme example is the guy masturbating under the stage and speaking to the audience members as they mounted it. Mine probably could have used a little more masturbation, but still, similar idea. I was also inspired by the one in-class Fluxus Project (don't know who wrote it, but Nate Berry performed it), having the class stand on one leg and giving no further instructions, waiting to see how long it would take for them to notice. I also wondered how long it would take the audience to realize that there was nothing left except themselves. They caught on pretty quickly.

Fluxus Project

I was disappointed to see none of the cards I wrote performed. Two of them I made intentionally vague: "show yourself the way others see you" and "show a smaller, meaker force overcoming a larger, small force." I wrote these with absolutely no idea how in the hell they could be physically conveyed, and wanted to watch other people struggle to do so. I admit it was a bit sadistic of me, writing such purposefully impenetrable cards. Maybe that's why they weren't picked. I shouldn't have been that vague. My other card said "play your iPod on shuffle and simultaneously sing the first song that comes to your head." Part of this was just curiosity of what kind of music was on people's iPods and minds, but also, in retrospect, this was inspired by John Cage's radio pieces. The idea of pre-existing music clashing in potentially dissonant ways has intrigued both John and myself.

Surrealism Project - "Burst Bubbles"

I liked the idea of covering one larger object with other stuff (like the fur-covered cup, for example). I thought of the plentitude of cigarette butts strewn around the elephants, and thought they'd make good project fodder. But what to put them on? It must of course be something entirely different, so the piece can have clashing elements. I then remembered a Barbie book that I had picked up from the free section of Ed McKay's some weeks ago, because I thought it would be funny to have. Now its useful. I didn't anticipate the horrible stench of cigarette butts, but I pushed through it as I taped them on. But it didn't seem like enough, so I wrapped bubble rap around it, because I liked the idea of trapping the clashing elements together. I also slapped on a sticker but I'm considering removing it. Anyway, this project could be read as a commentary on body image - Barbie promotes a perfect body to young girls, but many people end up smoking and trashing their health to stay thin. Or smoke because they're distressed about trying to live up to certain ideals. That interpretation was an afterthought, though - the piece can just as well be seen as nonsense, since it's surreal. 

Time Project

For my assignment to fill a minute with three types of time, I initially thought about making a one minute short film, but then decided to go with a medium that wasn't my major (though I do plan on doing films for at least a few of the projects for this class). I decided to draw three different pictures, since I've loved doodling for years.

The first is pretty straightforward - a man goes through the day and grows tired. This is time in the normal, linear sense.

The second drawing deals with reflection on the past, which exists in nostalgic little fragments. Polaroids, with their color and texture, are very evocative of the past as something distant yet incredibly moving, so I drew Polaroids taped to a wall, depicting places and events from someone's childhood. The seashell is a memento from some long-ago trip to the beach (I had a seashell mobile in my five minute film last year - maybe seashells are some sort of recurring theme for me).

And finally, I wanted to capture those dreamy moments in life where time sort of stands still, or just becomes a bit irrelevant all together. I don't think my drawing made it clear enough, but this is a man on a late night train ride staring out the window at the city. Cities at night fascinate me. We recently had a screening of Taxi Driver, and cinematographer Michael Chapman was talking about how they let the city "light itself," which creates imagery I find incredibly beautiful. They say the city never sleeps, but at least at night it calms down, and everything becomes very contemplative and a bit surreal. Moments like the one I drew elevate life from a straightforward timeline into something more complex and fascinating.

After seeing everyone else's project, I wish I had made mine a little more performance-like. I didn't really have a good way to present my work, so I put on some Satie at the last moment (the piece I chose was in the film My Dinner with Andre, during a scene where a character stares out the window of a cab and watches the city at night, much like my third drawing). Next time, also, I'd like to try something a little more experimental. We'll see how that goes...

A Thing of Beauty

For my assignment to find a "thing of beauty," this piece immediately came into my head, because I have been obsessed with it as of late. It has a certain magic to it, and seems to move me whenever I hear it.

"I'll See You in My Dreams" - Django Reinhardt