December 3, 2008
Current State of Media
Filmmaking today is flirting with experimentation, but sleeping with the narrative.
The Art of Not Seeing: On Blindness and blindness
http://www.cinema-scope.com/cs36/feat_anderson_blindness.html
In one of the most controversial articles I have encountered on Cinema Scope, Jason Anderson explores various films sharing a common topic- blindness. It is obvious that Anderson has the knowledge and experience with the films he discusses in the article, but unless the reader is familiar with at least one of the films mentioned it might be difficult to follow.
I was also confused by the pace and direction of this article. Anderson begins with an anecdote from “In With Borges” by Alberto Manguel. I was drawn in while reading the opening portion, but started to lose focus when Anderson begins his in depth film discussion. For some reason, many articles I have encountered on Cinema Scope never just provide facts and opinion- I guess that’s not good enough. Instead, I find that many of the authors try to write in a humorous, almost sarcastic tone.
As a reader, I wanted something different out of this article. I wanted Anderson to explore and discuss films about the sightless, but too many words were spent on trying to include so many references. Another aspect of Anderson’s writing that makes it difficult to read was the constant use of hyphens to break up sentences. By chaining together so many different thoughts in one sentence, I found myself lost trying to piece it all together.
However, the biggest positive of the article were the various names of directors to check out. Whenever encountering an article on Cinema Scope, I always try to record the names and eventually watch the work of one of the directors mentioned. This article offers a variety of directors and gives a brief idea of what to expect from their work. Like I said, Anderson is obviously well educated about the films and I respect that tremendously.
This article also works well because of the topic. Films made about the blind or by the blind is a really interesting concept. I had never even considered it, but I am sure many blind people regularly attend the movies. That intrigues me. Early in the article, Anderson talks about Borges impression to the film, “West Side Story.” By paying such close attention to the songs and dialogue, I am sure that Borges experience with the film would be much different than mine.
Mostly, I found this article more inspirational than informative. Instead of reading Jason Anderson’s opinions on these films, I would like to track them down and develop my own theories. Also, this has inspired me to attend a sightless screening and discuss how a film works without the intended visual elements. And I strongly agree with Jason Anderson’s statement at the end of his third paragraph:
“Yes, it’s a small pool, though it may expand exponentially if Iranian director Mohammad Shirvani makes good on a recently announced plan to produce documentaries by seven blind female filmmakers.”
Let’s hope this comes to fruition.
In one of the most controversial articles I have encountered on Cinema Scope, Jason Anderson explores various films sharing a common topic- blindness. It is obvious that Anderson has the knowledge and experience with the films he discusses in the article, but unless the reader is familiar with at least one of the films mentioned it might be difficult to follow.
I was also confused by the pace and direction of this article. Anderson begins with an anecdote from “In With Borges” by Alberto Manguel. I was drawn in while reading the opening portion, but started to lose focus when Anderson begins his in depth film discussion. For some reason, many articles I have encountered on Cinema Scope never just provide facts and opinion- I guess that’s not good enough. Instead, I find that many of the authors try to write in a humorous, almost sarcastic tone.
As a reader, I wanted something different out of this article. I wanted Anderson to explore and discuss films about the sightless, but too many words were spent on trying to include so many references. Another aspect of Anderson’s writing that makes it difficult to read was the constant use of hyphens to break up sentences. By chaining together so many different thoughts in one sentence, I found myself lost trying to piece it all together.
However, the biggest positive of the article were the various names of directors to check out. Whenever encountering an article on Cinema Scope, I always try to record the names and eventually watch the work of one of the directors mentioned. This article offers a variety of directors and gives a brief idea of what to expect from their work. Like I said, Anderson is obviously well educated about the films and I respect that tremendously.
This article also works well because of the topic. Films made about the blind or by the blind is a really interesting concept. I had never even considered it, but I am sure many blind people regularly attend the movies. That intrigues me. Early in the article, Anderson talks about Borges impression to the film, “West Side Story.” By paying such close attention to the songs and dialogue, I am sure that Borges experience with the film would be much different than mine.
Mostly, I found this article more inspirational than informative. Instead of reading Jason Anderson’s opinions on these films, I would like to track them down and develop my own theories. Also, this has inspired me to attend a sightless screening and discuss how a film works without the intended visual elements. And I strongly agree with Jason Anderson’s statement at the end of his third paragraph:
“Yes, it’s a small pool, though it may expand exponentially if Iranian director Mohammad Shirvani makes good on a recently announced plan to produce documentaries by seven blind female filmmakers.”
Let’s hope this comes to fruition.
The Possibility of Music
Instead of being carried away and taken on a mystical journey by an array of images, I have recently turned my attention to the element of sound in various artistic works. Perhaps the most incredible experience I have encountered recently, or ever, was an impromptu jam session featuring Aaron Ximm and the Midwest Phonographers Union. I am still new to the concept of a “soundscape,” but after sampling Aaron Ximm courtesy of Glenn Bach- I was excited for this opportunity.
Prior to the performance, I tried to imagine what sort of instruments or equipment I would see. Except for some decent speakers and (probably) expensive sound software, the equipment was rather basic. Three laptops, each connected to a small soundboard, and one iPod utilized by Aaron himself was all it really took to create this soundscape.
It didn’t take long to figure out what I was in for. Three guys, each with an incredible archive of recordings at hand, attempted to blend and manipulate their recordings to create something random, cohesive, and completely experimental. There were only a few instances when I could connect a single sound to one of the artists, but most of the sounds were lost in the sea of noise.
Like any musical piece, this session included crescendos into louder segments. Even though a large amount of the success is determined by fate, I thought each performer worked to make every contribution an addition to the soundscape. From phones ringing to animal noises, this performance included a wide array of sounds from around the world. I found out after the performance, that Aaron Ximm could connect his recordings to the experience in which he encountered them- that allows his work to double as a memory album.
After the performance there was no doubt in my mind that what I had heard was music. It’s unconventional, unpredictable, and you don’t need a degree in music to understand the theory, but it’s music. After being involved in traditional jam sessions of my own, I remember the smile on the musicians face when the song or piece is working well. I saw that look numerous times during this session.
Another audio experience I found to be immensely inspiring was Martin Arnold’s “Alone. Life Wastes Andy Hardy.” Out of every work I have seen using found footage this semester, this was easily my favorite. Just by looping audio clips from the films of Judy Garland and Micky Rooney, Arnold creates a sound experience that includes rhythm and story.
When the film had finished, it was obvious to me that Arnold is nothing less than a master of manipulation. He was able to craft this piece however he wanted. It could have been longer or shorter, he could emphasize other clips, but the choice was up to him. “Alone. Life Wastes Andy Hardy” is definitely an experimental work, but it is a large contrast to the mission of Aaron Ximm.
Even though a certain amount of editing is done when completing his solo work, Aaron conducts all of his recordings without manipulation, without any say in what the material will be. When he played with the Midwest Phonographers Union that was a total instance of improvisation. No editing or even hearing the sounds before the performance can lead a jam session in difference directions and I doubt the session could ever be duplicated live again.
Martin Arnold is much more methodical in his work. He is putting himself in a position to control the outcome completely. Yes, the sounds and movements of the actors in the film were jerky and sporadic; they never appeared to be random. The most incredible aspect of Arnold’s piece was the use of a story arc with his different clips. I can tell that Aaron Ximm is trying to tell a story with his soundscapes, but he leaves most of the interpretation to the listener.
The two works differ conceptually and in sound genre. Ximm utilizes his recordings and ambient sounds while Arnold took footage from old films. Regardless of where the material came from, each artist was able to create a completely unique experience.
Both Martin Arnold and Aaron Ximm were new to me, but I have taken to both styles and hope to experience more work from them. The most obvious comparison to me is that both artists were able to create music out of material that is so unconventional and uncommon that it is shocking at first listen. The biggest lesson I have learned is that no sound is excluded from the possibility of music.
Prior to the performance, I tried to imagine what sort of instruments or equipment I would see. Except for some decent speakers and (probably) expensive sound software, the equipment was rather basic. Three laptops, each connected to a small soundboard, and one iPod utilized by Aaron himself was all it really took to create this soundscape.
It didn’t take long to figure out what I was in for. Three guys, each with an incredible archive of recordings at hand, attempted to blend and manipulate their recordings to create something random, cohesive, and completely experimental. There were only a few instances when I could connect a single sound to one of the artists, but most of the sounds were lost in the sea of noise.
Like any musical piece, this session included crescendos into louder segments. Even though a large amount of the success is determined by fate, I thought each performer worked to make every contribution an addition to the soundscape. From phones ringing to animal noises, this performance included a wide array of sounds from around the world. I found out after the performance, that Aaron Ximm could connect his recordings to the experience in which he encountered them- that allows his work to double as a memory album.
After the performance there was no doubt in my mind that what I had heard was music. It’s unconventional, unpredictable, and you don’t need a degree in music to understand the theory, but it’s music. After being involved in traditional jam sessions of my own, I remember the smile on the musicians face when the song or piece is working well. I saw that look numerous times during this session.
Another audio experience I found to be immensely inspiring was Martin Arnold’s “Alone. Life Wastes Andy Hardy.” Out of every work I have seen using found footage this semester, this was easily my favorite. Just by looping audio clips from the films of Judy Garland and Micky Rooney, Arnold creates a sound experience that includes rhythm and story.
When the film had finished, it was obvious to me that Arnold is nothing less than a master of manipulation. He was able to craft this piece however he wanted. It could have been longer or shorter, he could emphasize other clips, but the choice was up to him. “Alone. Life Wastes Andy Hardy” is definitely an experimental work, but it is a large contrast to the mission of Aaron Ximm.
Even though a certain amount of editing is done when completing his solo work, Aaron conducts all of his recordings without manipulation, without any say in what the material will be. When he played with the Midwest Phonographers Union that was a total instance of improvisation. No editing or even hearing the sounds before the performance can lead a jam session in difference directions and I doubt the session could ever be duplicated live again.
Martin Arnold is much more methodical in his work. He is putting himself in a position to control the outcome completely. Yes, the sounds and movements of the actors in the film were jerky and sporadic; they never appeared to be random. The most incredible aspect of Arnold’s piece was the use of a story arc with his different clips. I can tell that Aaron Ximm is trying to tell a story with his soundscapes, but he leaves most of the interpretation to the listener.
The two works differ conceptually and in sound genre. Ximm utilizes his recordings and ambient sounds while Arnold took footage from old films. Regardless of where the material came from, each artist was able to create a completely unique experience.
Both Martin Arnold and Aaron Ximm were new to me, but I have taken to both styles and hope to experience more work from them. The most obvious comparison to me is that both artists were able to create music out of material that is so unconventional and uncommon that it is shocking at first listen. The biggest lesson I have learned is that no sound is excluded from the possibility of music.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)