I actually enjoyed the Chelsea girls to some extent. The multiscreen projection was a cool idea, especially for the first guy in the section we saw, because he was talking candidly about how he perceived the world and how he perceived the world to perceive him, and we got to see him in the context of a social interaction. As he sat with the other socialites we could imagine what was running through his mind, in the context of his interview, at the time. And I could ONLY imagine what was running through his mind at the time of his interview. He was a pretty funny guy, like when he said "I'm not gay but sometimes I groove on having sex with guys." If not a cool film in itself, the Chelsea Girls is certainly a timepiece for their era.
It was an overall interesting concept to point a camera at someone for half an hour and see how they would react. It was as if Warhol transformed the camera into an entity in itself. There were parts near the end of the second act where the interviewee wanted to leave but stayed to finish the piece. I don't know how I would react if a camera were pointed at me. The first guy was on acid so he just spat out random thoughts from his racing mind. The second guy was on something...heroin? but whatever it was it wasn't psychadelic so it didn't help his performance at all. Instead of engaging the camera directly, he ignored it and interacted with the elements of his surroundings. I like the concept of the Chelsea girls.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Reading Response 5
J. Hoberman, Jonathan Rosenbaum, The Underground
1. What were some of the venues associated with the early underground film movement in New York City? What were some of the unique characteristics of the Charles Theater and its programming?
Amos Vogel's Cinema 16 was an organization that brought underground cineastes together. The beatnik manifesto Pull My Daisy was premiered at the Fashion Industries Auditorium in New York city; Walter Langstorn and Ed Stein acquired the Charles Theater for film exhibition; other theaters that played offbeat films included the Thalia, the New Yorker, and Bleeker Street Cinema. Mekas tried to present the Film Culture's annual Independant Filmmaker Award to Jack Smith at the Tivoli Theater, but the management canceled the show at the last minute.
2. Which filmmakers did Jonas Mekas associate with the “Baudelairean Cinema”? Why did Mekas use that term, and what were the distinguishing characteristics of the films?
The filmmakers Mekas associated with "Baudelairean Cinema" were Jack Smith, Ron Rice, and Ken Jacobs with the films "Flaming Creatures," "Queen of Sheba Meets the Atom Man," "Blonde Cobra," and "Little Stabs at Happiness." Mekas was trying to legitimize these new filmmakers by applying to them a quality only previously known in literature by the late French poet Baudilaire, whose critics cited him with many of the same sensibilities that modern, "uninformed" critics had called Mekas' proteges, like perverse, uninhibited, and daring. Mekas praised these filmmakers because they were exploring the art of cinema uninhibited by social convention and were thus saving the artistic filmmaker's soul or whatever.
3. Why did underground films run into legal trouble in New York City in 1964? What film encountered legal problems in Los Angeles almost on the same day as Mekas’s second arrest in New York City?
The first legan troubles Mekas ran into were during NYC's preparation for the 1964 World Fair where the city was trying to "clean" itself up. Mekas, Ken Jacobs, and two othes were arrested during a screening of Flaming Creatures, along with the rushes from Normal Love. Ten days later Mekas was arrested for screening Un Chant D'Amour. That same day, Mike Gets was arrested in LA for showing Scorpio Rising in the Cinema Theater. Mekas and Jacobs received suspended prison sentences.
4. What were some of the defining characteristics of Andy Warhol’s collaboration with Ronald Tavel? What were some of the unique characteristics of Vinyl? How does Edie Sedgewick end up "stealing" the scene in Vinyl?
Tavel adapted "A Clockwork Orange" in a matter of a few days, renamed the story as "Vinyl," and the script only followed the bare bones plot points of the novel. Many of Tavels screenplays were like this - bad on purpose. Some of his screenplays that were written for Warhol and were never produced made it to the stage as theater performances which usually chose tabboo subjects for farce. Until Warhol got Edie Sedgewick on camera, the film consisted of an all-male cast. Edie ended up stealing the show with her trance like film presence.
5. In what ways did the underground film begin to "crossover" into the mainstream in 1965-1966? What films and venues were associated with the crossover? How were the films received by the mainstream New York press?
The film that most successfully crossed over into the mainstream was "The Chelsea Girls." It showed all over Manhatten, not just in the undergound basement theaters. The film also played in many other cities like Cambridge, Buffalo, Houston, Atlanta, and St louis, and was banned in Chicago and Boston (how was it banned in Boston...the most liberal city in the US lol). Mike Getz played a crucial role in getting these films shown in conventional theaters due to his uncle owning a string of them. Films include Hold Me While Im Naked, Peyote Queen, and Breathdeath. One New York film critic, Bowsley Crowther, who hailed himself as America's most influential film critic, gave the underground films a wag of his finger, saying that it was okay for them to project their "naugty boy plays" onto basement walls, but bringing their films to "carpeted venues" was going too far. This publication stunted the growth of the underground movement but it survived nonetheless.
6. Why was John Getz an important figure in the crossover of the underground?
Because he (Mike Getz(?)) was able to distribute films through his business contact Louis Sher, who also happened to be his uncle, who owned a string of conventional movie houses.
7. How do Hoberman and Rosenbaum characterize Warhol’s post-1967 films?
Warhol and The Factory took the baser aspects of the successful elements of their previous works and ran with it. Their films became increasingly shocking with their sexual and drug content, with taglines such as "Underground!! ...So You Think You've Seen Everything!" Everything aside, Rosenmbaum and Hoberman mark Warhol as a catalytic firgure in on-screen sexuality. After his attempted assassination, Warhol's influence in the art world and the underground film movement slowly waned.
1. What were some of the venues associated with the early underground film movement in New York City? What were some of the unique characteristics of the Charles Theater and its programming?
Amos Vogel's Cinema 16 was an organization that brought underground cineastes together. The beatnik manifesto Pull My Daisy was premiered at the Fashion Industries Auditorium in New York city; Walter Langstorn and Ed Stein acquired the Charles Theater for film exhibition; other theaters that played offbeat films included the Thalia, the New Yorker, and Bleeker Street Cinema. Mekas tried to present the Film Culture's annual Independant Filmmaker Award to Jack Smith at the Tivoli Theater, but the management canceled the show at the last minute.
2. Which filmmakers did Jonas Mekas associate with the “Baudelairean Cinema”? Why did Mekas use that term, and what were the distinguishing characteristics of the films?
The filmmakers Mekas associated with "Baudelairean Cinema" were Jack Smith, Ron Rice, and Ken Jacobs with the films "Flaming Creatures," "Queen of Sheba Meets the Atom Man," "Blonde Cobra," and "Little Stabs at Happiness." Mekas was trying to legitimize these new filmmakers by applying to them a quality only previously known in literature by the late French poet Baudilaire, whose critics cited him with many of the same sensibilities that modern, "uninformed" critics had called Mekas' proteges, like perverse, uninhibited, and daring. Mekas praised these filmmakers because they were exploring the art of cinema uninhibited by social convention and were thus saving the artistic filmmaker's soul or whatever.
3. Why did underground films run into legal trouble in New York City in 1964? What film encountered legal problems in Los Angeles almost on the same day as Mekas’s second arrest in New York City?
The first legan troubles Mekas ran into were during NYC's preparation for the 1964 World Fair where the city was trying to "clean" itself up. Mekas, Ken Jacobs, and two othes were arrested during a screening of Flaming Creatures, along with the rushes from Normal Love. Ten days later Mekas was arrested for screening Un Chant D'Amour. That same day, Mike Gets was arrested in LA for showing Scorpio Rising in the Cinema Theater. Mekas and Jacobs received suspended prison sentences.
4. What were some of the defining characteristics of Andy Warhol’s collaboration with Ronald Tavel? What were some of the unique characteristics of Vinyl? How does Edie Sedgewick end up "stealing" the scene in Vinyl?
Tavel adapted "A Clockwork Orange" in a matter of a few days, renamed the story as "Vinyl," and the script only followed the bare bones plot points of the novel. Many of Tavels screenplays were like this - bad on purpose. Some of his screenplays that were written for Warhol and were never produced made it to the stage as theater performances which usually chose tabboo subjects for farce. Until Warhol got Edie Sedgewick on camera, the film consisted of an all-male cast. Edie ended up stealing the show with her trance like film presence.
5. In what ways did the underground film begin to "crossover" into the mainstream in 1965-1966? What films and venues were associated with the crossover? How were the films received by the mainstream New York press?
The film that most successfully crossed over into the mainstream was "The Chelsea Girls." It showed all over Manhatten, not just in the undergound basement theaters. The film also played in many other cities like Cambridge, Buffalo, Houston, Atlanta, and St louis, and was banned in Chicago and Boston (how was it banned in Boston...the most liberal city in the US lol). Mike Getz played a crucial role in getting these films shown in conventional theaters due to his uncle owning a string of them. Films include Hold Me While Im Naked, Peyote Queen, and Breathdeath. One New York film critic, Bowsley Crowther, who hailed himself as America's most influential film critic, gave the underground films a wag of his finger, saying that it was okay for them to project their "naugty boy plays" onto basement walls, but bringing their films to "carpeted venues" was going too far. This publication stunted the growth of the underground movement but it survived nonetheless.
6. Why was John Getz an important figure in the crossover of the underground?
Because he (Mike Getz(?)) was able to distribute films through his business contact Louis Sher, who also happened to be his uncle, who owned a string of conventional movie houses.
7. How do Hoberman and Rosenbaum characterize Warhol’s post-1967 films?
Warhol and The Factory took the baser aspects of the successful elements of their previous works and ran with it. Their films became increasingly shocking with their sexual and drug content, with taglines such as "Underground!! ...So You Think You've Seen Everything!" Everything aside, Rosenmbaum and Hoberman mark Warhol as a catalytic firgure in on-screen sexuality. After his attempted assassination, Warhol's influence in the art world and the underground film movement slowly waned.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Reading Response 4
1. Briefly respond to Joe Jones' "Smoking."
Smoking is another super slow motion film in the fluxfilms catalog. Like "Disappearing Music For Face," the frame doesnt quite get all of the image inside, and so the actual lighting of the match, which would be the most interesting aspect of it for me, is lost. The flame burning itself out looks pretty cool. I was a pyro as a child and I appreciated the slow motion flame as much as anyone can haha.
2. Look up “Fluxus” and any of the Fluxus artists in the index of Visionary Film. Why are they not there? Are the Fluxfilms compatible with Sitney’s central argument about the American avant-garde?
Perhaps Sitney doesn't consider the fluxus movement because they don't adhere to any of his six "types" of avant-garde films, and were actually created in opposition to them.
Mary Jordan, Jack Smith and the Destruction of Atlantis
3. Chapter 4. What are some of the reasons suggested for Smith’s obsession with Maria Montez? What are some of your responses to the clips from the Montez films (especially Cobra Woman)?
Jack Smith was known to find people in the streets, bring them to his studio, and turn them into his "creations." Maria Montez was his favorite, perhaps because she was so "beautiful," and became a successful actoress.
4. Chapter 5. What were some attributes of the New York art community in the 1960s, and what was the relationship between the economics of the time and the materials that Smith incorporated in to his work and films? [How could Smith survive and make art if he was so poor in the city so big they named it twice?]
The artists in New york in the 60s were all about revolutionizing their ways of life, centered around the spiritual aspect of love and lovemaking. One commentor in the DVD said that the films Jack made weren't fictions but rather documentaries on their lives. They rebuilt their realities according to the ideal ways they wanted to live. This is why Jack Smith and some of his colleagues were so poor, they resented materialism, capitalism, and commodity-ism. Whatever Jack had was given to him by people who pitied him. This is part of the reason why he resented Andy Warhol, because he was so rich and benefitted from it.
5. Chapter 6. What problems emerged after the obscenity charges against Flaming Creatures in the relationship between Jack Smith and Jonas Mekas? What metaphor emerged from the conflict between Smith and Mekas?
People called the film pornographic. Jonas Mekas took the film and toured with it nationally and by doing so he inadvertently fanned the flames of its controversy. He also took most of the money the film made and didn't give it to Smith or the other people who helped make the film.
6. Chapter 7. What is John Zorn’s argument about Normal Love? How does his argument relate to some of the changes in the New York art world in the 1960s that we discussed in class? What are some arguments made about the influence of Jack Smith on other filmmakers (including Warhol)?
Zorn says that normal love is a documentary on the realities Jack Smith and his friends created for themselves, which discluded materialism and wealth, and involved forming every aspect of their lives into art. This relates to how artists of the 60s endeavored to make art as a way of life rather than as a means to make money or to produce commodities. Some say that almost every rock music video is influenced by Jack Smith, and Warhol took many of Smith's ideas.
7. Chapter 9 and 10: In what ways did Jack Smith become “uncommercial film personified”? What is meant by the slogan, “no more masterpieces” and how did Smith resist commodification (or the production of art products)?
Jack Smith refused to take money for his films or plays. His plays didn't start until 2 or 3 in the morning, which to him weeded out all the people who weren't hardcore for the art. Smith also wanted to abolish masterpieces and art museums because he felt that they only served to influence other artists and therefore limit the range of artistic expression across the board that could be possible if the museums didn't exist.
Here are some helpful links for those interested in the debate about the Jack Smith estate. This is not required, but this is fascinating, frustrating, and crazy (and it will put the documentary in a new light):
http://www.hi-beam.net/fw/fw25/0459.html
http://www.hi-beam.net/fw/fw25/0050.html
http://www.hi-beam.net/fw/fw25/0459.html
And a summary of the debate and legal proceedings. http://www.villagevoice.com/2004-03-02/news/flaming-intrigue/
Callie Angell, “Andy Warhol, Filmmaker”
[I have emailed part one of this article to the class, it is not on reserve.]
8. How does Angell characterize the first major period of Warhol’s filmmaking career? What are some of the films from this period, and what formal qualities did they share? What are some significant differences between Sleep and Empire?
Warhol's early films were linked to the avant-garde, while his later films were more commercial. They often were a single roll of unedited material composed with a tripod-mounted unmoving camera. They sought to reveal personality.
9. What role did the Screen Tests play in the routines at the Factory and in Warhol’s filmmaking?
The 500 or so Screen Tests served as a guestbook of sorts for the various artists who came to see Warhol throughout 66-68. Warhol also learned how to compose, frame, and light his subjects.
10. How does Angell characterize the first period of sound films in Warhol’s filmmaking career? Who was Warhol’s key collaborator for the early sound films? What are some of the films from this period and what formal properties did they share?
Warhol realized that with the introduction of sound recording technologies, he would "need a lot of dialogue." His primary first collaborator was Eddie Sedgewick, a "poor little rich girl." She was found in one of his Screen Tests. One interesting experiment Warhol conducted with his films was in Vinyl, when he purposefully prevented his actors from learning their lines in favor of hold cue cards for them at the time of filming in order to lend to the piece a certain awkward, stilted feeling.
Smoking is another super slow motion film in the fluxfilms catalog. Like "Disappearing Music For Face," the frame doesnt quite get all of the image inside, and so the actual lighting of the match, which would be the most interesting aspect of it for me, is lost. The flame burning itself out looks pretty cool. I was a pyro as a child and I appreciated the slow motion flame as much as anyone can haha.
2. Look up “Fluxus” and any of the Fluxus artists in the index of Visionary Film. Why are they not there? Are the Fluxfilms compatible with Sitney’s central argument about the American avant-garde?
Perhaps Sitney doesn't consider the fluxus movement because they don't adhere to any of his six "types" of avant-garde films, and were actually created in opposition to them.
Mary Jordan, Jack Smith and the Destruction of Atlantis
3. Chapter 4. What are some of the reasons suggested for Smith’s obsession with Maria Montez? What are some of your responses to the clips from the Montez films (especially Cobra Woman)?
Jack Smith was known to find people in the streets, bring them to his studio, and turn them into his "creations." Maria Montez was his favorite, perhaps because she was so "beautiful," and became a successful actoress.
4. Chapter 5. What were some attributes of the New York art community in the 1960s, and what was the relationship between the economics of the time and the materials that Smith incorporated in to his work and films? [How could Smith survive and make art if he was so poor in the city so big they named it twice?]
The artists in New york in the 60s were all about revolutionizing their ways of life, centered around the spiritual aspect of love and lovemaking. One commentor in the DVD said that the films Jack made weren't fictions but rather documentaries on their lives. They rebuilt their realities according to the ideal ways they wanted to live. This is why Jack Smith and some of his colleagues were so poor, they resented materialism, capitalism, and commodity-ism. Whatever Jack had was given to him by people who pitied him. This is part of the reason why he resented Andy Warhol, because he was so rich and benefitted from it.
5. Chapter 6. What problems emerged after the obscenity charges against Flaming Creatures in the relationship between Jack Smith and Jonas Mekas? What metaphor emerged from the conflict between Smith and Mekas?
People called the film pornographic. Jonas Mekas took the film and toured with it nationally and by doing so he inadvertently fanned the flames of its controversy. He also took most of the money the film made and didn't give it to Smith or the other people who helped make the film.
6. Chapter 7. What is John Zorn’s argument about Normal Love? How does his argument relate to some of the changes in the New York art world in the 1960s that we discussed in class? What are some arguments made about the influence of Jack Smith on other filmmakers (including Warhol)?
Zorn says that normal love is a documentary on the realities Jack Smith and his friends created for themselves, which discluded materialism and wealth, and involved forming every aspect of their lives into art. This relates to how artists of the 60s endeavored to make art as a way of life rather than as a means to make money or to produce commodities. Some say that almost every rock music video is influenced by Jack Smith, and Warhol took many of Smith's ideas.
7. Chapter 9 and 10: In what ways did Jack Smith become “uncommercial film personified”? What is meant by the slogan, “no more masterpieces” and how did Smith resist commodification (or the production of art products)?
Jack Smith refused to take money for his films or plays. His plays didn't start until 2 or 3 in the morning, which to him weeded out all the people who weren't hardcore for the art. Smith also wanted to abolish masterpieces and art museums because he felt that they only served to influence other artists and therefore limit the range of artistic expression across the board that could be possible if the museums didn't exist.
Here are some helpful links for those interested in the debate about the Jack Smith estate. This is not required, but this is fascinating, frustrating, and crazy (and it will put the documentary in a new light):
http://www.hi-beam.net/fw/fw25/0459.html
http://www.hi-beam.net/fw/fw25/0050.html
http://www.hi-beam.net/fw/fw25/0459.html
And a summary of the debate and legal proceedings. http://www.villagevoice.com/2004-03-02/news/flaming-intrigue/
Callie Angell, “Andy Warhol, Filmmaker”
[I have emailed part one of this article to the class, it is not on reserve.]
8. How does Angell characterize the first major period of Warhol’s filmmaking career? What are some of the films from this period, and what formal qualities did they share? What are some significant differences between Sleep and Empire?
Warhol's early films were linked to the avant-garde, while his later films were more commercial. They often were a single roll of unedited material composed with a tripod-mounted unmoving camera. They sought to reveal personality.
9. What role did the Screen Tests play in the routines at the Factory and in Warhol’s filmmaking?
The 500 or so Screen Tests served as a guestbook of sorts for the various artists who came to see Warhol throughout 66-68. Warhol also learned how to compose, frame, and light his subjects.
10. How does Angell characterize the first period of sound films in Warhol’s filmmaking career? Who was Warhol’s key collaborator for the early sound films? What are some of the films from this period and what formal properties did they share?
Warhol realized that with the introduction of sound recording technologies, he would "need a lot of dialogue." His primary first collaborator was Eddie Sedgewick, a "poor little rich girl." She was found in one of his Screen Tests. One interesting experiment Warhol conducted with his films was in Vinyl, when he purposefully prevented his actors from learning their lines in favor of hold cue cards for them at the time of filming in order to lend to the piece a certain awkward, stilted feeling.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Reading Response 3
Post your response to Brakhage's Prelude: Dog Star Man.
I was first introduced to Brakhage in FST 200 with his film "Mothlight," along with a very brief synopsis of his work. In my opinion, Mothlight is a poor example to start young impressionable students unfamiliar with the avantgarde on Brakhage. Brakhage's style and philosophical motivations were not explained to us in that class, so inevitably I and some of my classmates formed negative impressions on Brakhage. Thankfully I have since come to know Brakhage better and have immense respect for him. Dogstar's prelude, like most of his other work, is starkly beautiful, strangely curious, and immediately weird, and undeniably creepy. His obsession with vision comes through in all his work. I don't quite make all the connections Brakhage and his critics make between his work and its mythical inspirations, but I can definitely take the work as it is and enjoy it.
Sitney, “Apocalypses and Picaresques”
2. Why does Sitney argue that synechdoche plays a major role in Christopher Maclaine’s The End, and how does the film anticipate later achievements by Brakhage and the mythopoeic form?
Synechdoche, which means when a part stands for a whole or a whole stands for a part, plays a major role in the film in that the destruction of each character in the beginning of the film resembles the destruction of humankind and the world. The pessimism of this film and its foretelling of the destruction of mankind in mythopoeic fashion arguably influenced Brakhage's Dog Star Man and other works.
3. What are some similarities and differences between the apocalyptic visions of Christopher Maclaine and Bruce Conner?
Maclaine's film is made of both found footage and original material whereas Conner's film is purely collage. Conner's film is slightly comical, with the frame containing his name prolonging its duration onscreen in the beginning of the fim to relating the imagery of military guns to human sexuality.
4. Why are the films of Ron Rice (The Flower Thief) and Robert Nelson (The Great Blondino) examples of Beat sensibility and what Sitney calls the picaresque form?
These films involve a misfit protagonist dwelling about in a strange environment. Comparisons betwen these films and The Cage run amuck even though Rice and Nelson were most likely unaware of the parallels. Beat sensibility and picaresque form go hand in hand since both reject mainstream values and vie to explore alternative modes of lifestyle and expression.
Bruce Jenkins, “Fluxfilms in Three False Starts.”
5. How and why were the “anti-art” Fluxfilms reactions against the avant-garde films of Stan Brakhage and Kenneth Anger. [Hint: Think about Fluxus in relation to earlier anti-art such as Dada, and Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain."]
One such example of anti-art as opposed to Brakhage is Dick Higgins' "Invocations of Canyons and Boulders for Stan Brakhage," which parodies Brakhage's obsession with the sense of vision by showing a man chew on something from various angles and played at a loop for hours on end. This film postulates "the act of chewing with one's own mouth." (as opposed to "the act of seeing with one's own eyes). The presumed slight against Kenneth Anger is the play on words in the title of the film, with it beginning with the word invocaton.
6. What does Jenkins mean by the democratization of production in the Fluxfilms?
In the beginning film was heralded solely by those who sought to create from it personal and poetic high art, and was made by trained technicians. By Maciunas' time, filmmaking was more affordable and accessible. By filming a stationary tree with a nonmoving camera for hours, Maciunas dumbed down the medium in an attempt to parody the preseumptuous works of such self-important filmmakers of his time and perhaps tell his viewers what the avantgard filmmakers really were making according to him - meaningless shots of random everyday objects and elevating it to art-status.
7. Why does Jenkins argue that Nam June Paik’s Zen for Film “fixed the material and aesthetic terms for the production of subsequent Fluxfilms”? How does it use the materials of the cinema? What kind of aesthetic experience does it offer?
Zen for Film consisted of thirty minutes of clear leader, adopting a very "zen" approach in which the film literally consisted of blank nothingness. This film fixed the material and aesthetic terms for the production of subsequent Fluxfilms because it embodied the ideological goal of the fluxfilmmakers: it is still technically a film even though it involves none of traditional filmmaking procedures, is very cheap, and is tremendously meaningful in its stance as an alternative to alternative and commercial filmmaking. By its very nature, the film could "invite intense scrutiny and elicit absolute boredom." Despite what it is (and what it isn't), the film embodies the ideals of the fluxfilm as being the ultimate lynchpin for the anti-art of the 50s and 60s.
I was first introduced to Brakhage in FST 200 with his film "Mothlight," along with a very brief synopsis of his work. In my opinion, Mothlight is a poor example to start young impressionable students unfamiliar with the avantgarde on Brakhage. Brakhage's style and philosophical motivations were not explained to us in that class, so inevitably I and some of my classmates formed negative impressions on Brakhage. Thankfully I have since come to know Brakhage better and have immense respect for him. Dogstar's prelude, like most of his other work, is starkly beautiful, strangely curious, and immediately weird, and undeniably creepy. His obsession with vision comes through in all his work. I don't quite make all the connections Brakhage and his critics make between his work and its mythical inspirations, but I can definitely take the work as it is and enjoy it.
Sitney, “Apocalypses and Picaresques”
2. Why does Sitney argue that synechdoche plays a major role in Christopher Maclaine’s The End, and how does the film anticipate later achievements by Brakhage and the mythopoeic form?
Synechdoche, which means when a part stands for a whole or a whole stands for a part, plays a major role in the film in that the destruction of each character in the beginning of the film resembles the destruction of humankind and the world. The pessimism of this film and its foretelling of the destruction of mankind in mythopoeic fashion arguably influenced Brakhage's Dog Star Man and other works.
3. What are some similarities and differences between the apocalyptic visions of Christopher Maclaine and Bruce Conner?
Maclaine's film is made of both found footage and original material whereas Conner's film is purely collage. Conner's film is slightly comical, with the frame containing his name prolonging its duration onscreen in the beginning of the fim to relating the imagery of military guns to human sexuality.
4. Why are the films of Ron Rice (The Flower Thief) and Robert Nelson (The Great Blondino) examples of Beat sensibility and what Sitney calls the picaresque form?
These films involve a misfit protagonist dwelling about in a strange environment. Comparisons betwen these films and The Cage run amuck even though Rice and Nelson were most likely unaware of the parallels. Beat sensibility and picaresque form go hand in hand since both reject mainstream values and vie to explore alternative modes of lifestyle and expression.
Bruce Jenkins, “Fluxfilms in Three False Starts.”
5. How and why were the “anti-art” Fluxfilms reactions against the avant-garde films of Stan Brakhage and Kenneth Anger. [Hint: Think about Fluxus in relation to earlier anti-art such as Dada, and Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain."]
One such example of anti-art as opposed to Brakhage is Dick Higgins' "Invocations of Canyons and Boulders for Stan Brakhage," which parodies Brakhage's obsession with the sense of vision by showing a man chew on something from various angles and played at a loop for hours on end. This film postulates "the act of chewing with one's own mouth." (as opposed to "the act of seeing with one's own eyes). The presumed slight against Kenneth Anger is the play on words in the title of the film, with it beginning with the word invocaton.
6. What does Jenkins mean by the democratization of production in the Fluxfilms?
In the beginning film was heralded solely by those who sought to create from it personal and poetic high art, and was made by trained technicians. By Maciunas' time, filmmaking was more affordable and accessible. By filming a stationary tree with a nonmoving camera for hours, Maciunas dumbed down the medium in an attempt to parody the preseumptuous works of such self-important filmmakers of his time and perhaps tell his viewers what the avantgard filmmakers really were making according to him - meaningless shots of random everyday objects and elevating it to art-status.
7. Why does Jenkins argue that Nam June Paik’s Zen for Film “fixed the material and aesthetic terms for the production of subsequent Fluxfilms”? How does it use the materials of the cinema? What kind of aesthetic experience does it offer?
Zen for Film consisted of thirty minutes of clear leader, adopting a very "zen" approach in which the film literally consisted of blank nothingness. This film fixed the material and aesthetic terms for the production of subsequent Fluxfilms because it embodied the ideological goal of the fluxfilmmakers: it is still technically a film even though it involves none of traditional filmmaking procedures, is very cheap, and is tremendously meaningful in its stance as an alternative to alternative and commercial filmmaking. By its very nature, the film could "invite intense scrutiny and elicit absolute boredom." Despite what it is (and what it isn't), the film embodies the ideals of the fluxfilm as being the ultimate lynchpin for the anti-art of the 50s and 60s.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)