Thursday, December 17, 2009

Reflections on the times we spent together



In this class I learned that digital media uses many of the artistic
principles and means of communication that have never shared quite a
unity and parallel to a human's mode of processing information.

Not only did I learn the joys and challenges of blogging and digital
design as enhancement of a virtual experience, but acquired new means
to express myself. I think hypertext is one of the most exciting
developments in digital media and an incredible way to communicate. When I
read something or see an art work- I am instantly curious about the
piece's sources, influences, and connection to further thought. If
computers are making us less reliant on our memories to absorb
information - hypertext is encouraging our minds beyond their physical-
social capacity so that we are more connected and informed
than we would normally be by simply relying on our immediate surroundings. I love that by reading a digital text one can actually follow the thought process of the author by following their hyptext tangents.
I can imagine David Foster Wallace - RIP- who enjoyed lengthy and
gratuitous footnotes to his fiction -using hypertext to birth a web of
spiralling thoughts from each sentence – had he have had the chance.

I enjoyed the sampling of different approaches to digital expression, and definitely felt that we scratched the surface of many interesting media; This class has definitely moved me one peg closer to realizing an interesting and artistic sense of journalism using sound clips, hypetext, photogrphy and video - as in an opportunity to create and entire DIY media center!
I look forward to continuing exploration of these new programs and html coding, while using the design and artistic lens that we were exposed to with Prof Anderson and Prof Lucas..and the awesome TA's and computer lab helpers!

Thank you everyone and enjoy the break!

Sunday, December 6, 2009

Reel Dialogue: Engaging and Entertaining



On Friday the 13th last November, I attended
"Real Dialogue" : the first (of many, I hope) Hunter College Department of Film & Media and the IMA/MFA Program, documentary film screening and discussion forums.

This evening’s films shared in the topic(s) of LGBT's: current media representation ("NO MORE LIES: a portrait of a filmmaker" by Sam Feder (hunter student); familial relationships to traditionally heterosexual parents and siblings ("DON’T BRING SCOTT" by David Pavlosky (hunter student); and today's labor laws and rights in the U.S. ("OUT AT WORK" by Kelly Anderson and Tami Gold (hunter professors).

Each filmmaker stayed after the screenings to answer questions about their films and to participate in an open discussion on some of the issues brought up by the provocative selection of social activist's films. The evening’s moderator opened the Q&A with a question for the audience: "Where do you place yourself being a part of the progression of change? (+ in terms of some of these issues).

I thought much about this question when viewing David’s film “Don’t Bring Scott” as he attempted to capture an ongoing confrontation with his conservative Midwestern parents and his three brothers of varying generations on his relationship with his partner Scott and whether or not Scott was welcome at family gatherings.
What seemed to be initially a tearful maybe even an indulgent personal journey for David, who invited us into a home video (many hand held shots – what has become a reality T.V. visual aesthetic), ended up building in emotion and intimacy with his family and the audience, effectively revealing very honest and varied opinions on David’s “lifestyle” in a hugely compelling way.

His family represented a microcosm of the current American social climate – fear, tolerance, acceptance, and indifference. By David's patience and silence during these interviews with his family these incredible point of views were explored and proved that it is important to ask why one holds certain values and if they are important when they hurt and others.

It raised the question for me as an audience member and a filmmaker “Why do we care?” and why does David care? Why not live and let live?
Again, the moderator's question to the audience was where we saw ourselves in relation to activism and again I wondered – what makes someone push themselves in a path to instigate change and push others to change with them? David’s film was a very successful portrait and journey from “Don’t Bring Scott” to family gatherings to Scott taking family portraits with all the Pavlovskys at Christmas time, and this change was possible because he dared to ask hard questions and listen for the answers. Once explored, these harsh barriers once firmly erected, fell down everywhere and the film triumphantly ended with Scott meeting David's family and being included in the holiday portrait.

The moderator's question coupled with the miraculous change in David's film, prompted me to ask the question of David: "What drew you to social and personal activism, especially in your own home?"

To listen to David’s response click here.

In short, David needed to complete a project for his documentary film class, but it was his longing "to have a life" that made him push through the restrictions of who he was formerly able to be with his family in contrast to who he was independent from them with his lover.
He said that change doesn't come quickly - that it takes time and patience.

And so, I will patiently await the next scheduled “Real Dialogue” screening and forum as each film was not only entertaining, educational and provocative, but a great way to inspire fellow filmmakers and artists attending Hunter – and beyond.

Friday, November 20, 2009

Design I Like: “How good design can effectively camouflage bad music”




I remember when Lady Gaga came out with “Just Dance,” (barely a year ago); It sounded like many other female vocalists on radio Disney that come and go – I couldn’t put my finger on who it was, but the music was predictable and uninteresting - so I dropped it. The music video looked like it was shot in Urban Outfitters, so I again, didn't take much notice.

Since a year has passed, and queens across the city are calling her "legendary" as if she could be Grace Jones without batting an eye, I am intrigued by the visual impact and the engineering of her presence as an entertainer when a plethora of lingerie is paired with music that is lyrically safe and simple, if not offensive in its arbitrary nonsense.


Release date: April 2008
Initial impact


Released Date: January 2004


Release date: September 2009

I can say that while she catches up to European/Alexander Mcqueen/Balmain and Bjork pop culture and imagry - what has been hot and growing visually for the past 5 or so years, she is using it to brand herself and design herself as a performer. These images are getting old for me but just becoming in style to the next pop icon.

The use of sexual and American cultural music video visual cues to intrigue and brand are most apparent in Beyonce's new video featuring Lady Gaga: “Video Phone.” The lyrics are on crutches, pathetically saying “You say you like my bag and the color of my nails/You can see that I got it goin' on.” - pretty typical of a boring love affair with capitalism.



While she robotically dances to her melody lacking “Video Phone” song, the cold moves and scowls Beyonce serves, separates the viewer from potential connection or intimacy and makes what could be sexual (her breasts and crotch pumping) into something flat, bossy, and mildly pornographic. Her outfits are amazing - the colors fantastic - but the overall impact empty - even bewildering.

Again, I don’t like this design as much as I am drawn to it as a visual taste maker dominating the pop music scene - POP ie: the loudest voice, role model, and music industry influence (of the moment) - threatening every day the extinction of substantive musical artists.

Beyonce’s “Video Phone” lyrics go on to say "Tape me on your video phone/I can handle you”; The next visual step, after Beyonce has flattened herself to a video vixen on a dude’s cell phone, is to turn around and dominate him with guns. The majority of the video is of Beyonce with guns, giving a violent visual image paired with her body's sexuality - designed to make viewers turned on and violent, a great psychological space if you are meeting a shorty in the club or going off to war.













The over all effect is disturbing. I think these girls like to disturb and alienate and dominate after they have had to roll around and flex their signature pop looks and lingerie stylings for their male(?) fans.

As design in architecture, art, fashion and music [videos] continues to evolve, visual influence on what consumers will support is especially powerful as seen in the building of Lady Gaga’s marketed image and her continued success. Beyonce and Lady Gaga’s music is less about the song’s experience – if it gives you chills or tells a story when you listen – and more of a thing to listen to with your eyes.

Sunday, November 8, 2009

What I See: "Kandahar"



This weekend I had the pleasure of watching “Kandahar” (2001), a beautifully shot film starring Nelofer Pazira, as Nafas, based on her true life story of returning to Afghanistan to find her sister 10 years later, after she had fled to the United States in 1989 during the Soviet Union’s occupation and the mujahideen’s rebel take over.


The film opens with a view from a hand held camera in a helicopter following the rich, red, jagged mountain tops of Afghanistan, and the camera’s movement mimics the jaggedness of these peaks. The motion is not shaky as much as it lends itself to simulating the experience of walking along the mountains from a bird’s eye view.

Immediately thereafter, the camera’s gaze (positioned from the helicopter, and then from the ground) smoothly and slowly tilts down – following white parachutes – falling from the sky against a light blue sky as women’s voices fill the landscape with a song. The opening is simple and poetic, the significance of the parachutes is not clear, but the transition from mountains to windy dessert is intriguing with the simple equipment the director chooses.

The camera, again hand held, walks through crowds of little school girls, visually establishing the residents of rural Kabul, walking through the crowd shooting straight on, with close ups of each child’s face. The shear volume of people is overwhelming, perhaps touching on a westerner's point of view of Afghanistan as a world a part, a group of unknown peoples. The view swiftly cuts to a walking pan of close up shots of their faces, so gorgeous and unique, making for an intimate feeling and revelation of each child’s individuality. The removed feeling, the irresponsibility that many post 9/11 westerns may have, is effectively replaced by this visual technique.




In contrast, we are introduced to the young boys of Afghanistan - a walking pan across the back of their heads – mimicking the pan of the young girls’ school lines from the previous scene, yet the young men are all in white hats chanting scripture, and we do not get to initially know them by their faces, rather a distant and anonymous symbol of scholarship and a future military arm.



When we do see a young man’s face, the teacher has shouted “silence” - the chanting is broken and we cut to a medium shot of a boy’s head obediently raising up to recite the attributes of a Kalashnikov or “semi automatic weapon, with gunpowder and repeat. It kills the living and destroys those already dead.”



The visual hints, and absence of narration speak volumes to generations raised in war and spiritual devotion. The clever compound of visuals of empty landscapes and children's roles, speak clearly of isolation and the roots of a misunderstood culture with dignity and urgency for peace.


In this simply shot part-memoir, part-drama, there are two other effective camera choices that lend to the visual story.
A wide depth of field captures in the foreground burkha covered, prayer wailing women around a pile of rocks that appears to be a grave, while simultaneously along the horizon, men are fiercely digging the earth to bury another community member lost. The women’s rocking parallels the men’s raising of their shovels, as separated by gender but connected by death.




As Nalas travels toward Kandahar, she visits a camp of men with blown off limbs from the surrounding land mines (a common problem). A great wind is felt, the men begin running with their crutches and the image of the white parachutes return, whose significance is revealed as the viewers and men draw closer realizing that the white parachutes are artificial legs courteously of the Red Cross. The closure of the film's opening scenes turned what was once beautiful and mysterious into a harsh reality and works really well in surprising the audience with emotion.







The final visual choice is a meditative tie of the people and the land, by a perfectly divided into thirds, wide shot that zooms in, maintaining the thirds ratio as Nalas' traveling group walks along the desert’s horizon.











I enjoyed “Kandahar” as a powerful visual invitation to explore other countries’ communities and sympathize with them as fellow humans undoubtedly deserving a life of understanding and peace.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Museum Trip




Going to see Charles Musser’s 1982 documentary:
Before the Nickelodeon: The Cinema of Edwin S. Porter




Edwin S. Porter (b. 1870 – d.1941), famous for making the earliest moving image in the US – such as “The Burlesque Suicide (1902)," “Two Chappies In a Box (1903)," “Life of An American Fireman (1903)," and “Nervy Nat Kisses The Bride(1904),” amongst nearly 200 others, was originally hired by Thomas Edison’s company to utilize their, and THE, newest film technology.



The first commissioned works were reenactments of news stories such as: “Columbia Winning the Cup (1889),” about a horse race; and the “Execution of Csologosz with Panorama of Auburn Prison (1901),” where scenes of the assassination of U.S. President Mckinley by Leon Cszolgosz, are followed by the astonishingly real electrocution of the assailant with spasmodic details of the convicted being fried to death. Seemingly heavy voyeurism was the subject for a fledgling film medium.

As the popularity of the nickel film phenomena grew, Edwin departed from news subjects, to create fictional crowd pleasers, such as the “Interrupted Bathers (1902," “The Great Train Robbery (1903," and “The Gay Shoe Clerk (1903),” in which a man fits a woman for a shoe, a close up depicting the intimacy of his hand on her shoe, and the clerk spontaneously leaping up to kiss his customer. The crowd went wild.








Edwin’s skill gained as he operated the camera, directed the actors, and assembled the images for final print. There was no written dialogue for the story, because the films were silent, and it was up to the projector operator to create on the spot narration.

The lack of sound pushed Edwin to use and explore the visual narrative capacity using newly editing tricks. Porter reached beyond the one shot method of keeping the mis-en-scene the ONLY scene, by experimenting with filming the same action from two different perspectives seemingly simultaneously to heighten the drama.
In the “Life of an American Fireman,” he cut a shot of a fireman scooping a woman from her burning apartment out her window down a latter from the apartment’s interior, and an exterior shot of the rescuer and survivor descending the latter outside the building. This “jump-cut” or “parallel editing” technique was radical and is still often used today.







Edwin’s only rival was French filmmaker, George Melies (1861 – 1938), who was an expert in lavish set design and imaginative story lines. His visually dazzling films, generally stuck to one perspective shots, as in “La Voyage Dans La Lune”, (“A Trip to The Moon”) but have been referenced several times for their strong visuals. Highlights include a rocket landing in the eye of the man in the moon (modeled after early kinetiscope imagry) and its little martian men who’s faces emerge from the stars.






Rock band, Queen, used these clips in their 1995 music video “Heaven for Everyone,” and The Smashing pumpkins drew inspiration from this films as well to make their own trip to the moon for 1996 music video “Tonight, Tonight.”




From "Heaven For Everyone"





From "Tonight, Tonight"

Edwin S. Porter enjoyed the challenge Melies provided, and never considered himself an artist, but accepted himself as a master craftsperson contributing to many films techniques used time and again over 100 years later.