Alright, I'm sick and my brain's half-dead but I'll give it a shot.

Alright, I'm sick and my brain's half-dead but I'll give it a shot.

Reading Response 7: Due TUESDAY November 23

Please note due date, not due before class this week but by Tuesday of next week (to compensate for the late posting).

1. First, as requested earlier, post your response to Peggy Awhesh's Martina's Playhouse.

I was a little confounded by Awesh's film, because it was hard to shake the feeling that I was watching a perfectly adorable yet not quite "artistic" home video. It seemed to me that I could give the film more credit as a documentary capturing a character (specifically Martina) than an experimental film playing with different forms. I did enjoy the other scenes involving the young woman more, and felt like I was on more familiar ground there, as she set up an engaging dialogue that sort of distorted the distance between subject and filmmaker. That was interesting to me, the part where Martina read the dense reading material to the associative imagery was interesting to me, Martina being adorable was just Martina being adorable. I'll have to watch it again to see if I feel differently/notice a greater complexity there (which there probably is).

Keller and Ward, "Matthew Barney and the Paradox of the Neo-Avant-Garde Blockbuster"

2. What has changed in the gallery art world that allows Barney to describe his work as “sculpture”? In other words, how has the definition of sculpture changed since the 1960s, and why?

The authors state that "the category of 'sculpture' has become unstable. It has moved away from the object based defining elements to a more expanded approach that includes "a whole range of practices that may have little in common, from site specific and media-based works, to performances, to architecture". Essentially, the act of sculpting art has expanded past the tangible. Under these new conditions, sculpture could be expressed through a film, or even by constructing a giant trench in the desert (Michael Heizer's "Rift"). The why is similar to why film had been pushed past modernism in the 60s. People were reaching past the constrictions of the art-form in its pure state, questioning the role of art, watching the lines between artistic mediums blur.

3. Tricky but important question: Why was minimalist sculpture seen as a reaction against the “modernist hymns to the purity and specificity of aesthetic experience”? In other words: Why do they say that minimalist sculpture is post-modernist?

Sculpture "outran both traditional and modernist notions of the relations between viewers and sculptural objects", much the way that Snow's Wavelength impacted the purist modernism of film. The authors state that "[minimalism]...issued a call to understand the expereince of art as public, in the sense that viewers were to discover the meaning of the object in their interactions". Minimalism was taken to the extreme (eg gray painted plywood), to the point where audiences were forced to relate to the art as something they were inherently connected to, and accept and/or question the process of art, which is a predominant trait of post-modernism.

4. Describe the role of the body in the works of Vito Acconci and Chris Burden. You may wish to consult the following links to supplement the descriptions in the readings:

If I'm understanding this right, and god knows if I am... The idea is that Acconci is substituting his own body as the object which the audience interacts with and thereby helps to create the sculpture, the work of art. Through the collaboration, in this case Acconci masturbating to the erotic cues of an unwitting audience, we see a work of art established through this connection, where the performance is shaped by how the audience acts. With Burden, on the other hand, they seem to suggest that he is questioning the idea of whether the body can be viewed as an object of sculpture, almost using his works of art to see if the theory holds water (to use a well worn phrase). Most notably with "Bed Piece", Burden lies in a bed in a museum for 22 days, without giving instructions to the staff, letting the myth of the body as sculptural subject be broken down (specifically how the staff deals with him, forcing them to treat him as an object though he cannot be, thereby forcing a moral dilemma). The article goes on to suggest his work was trying to question the myth of the artist as well.

http://www.ubu.com/film/acconci.html

http://www.ubu.com/film/burden.html

5. In the opinion of the authors, what are the key differences between performance art of the 1960s/1970s and Barney’s Cremaster cycle? What do they mean by the term "blockbuster" in relation to the gallery art world?

They state that performance art of the 60s/70s "set up a tension between presence and absence, between an event and its dispersal through time, the effect of which was to invite us to consider the relations between body and the ways in which it is mediated". They say the authenticity of the initial performance, the 'realness' is integral to how it is processed. What Cremasters does is turn a genuine performance into something of a spectacle, where the body is mythologized, given an abstract representation that lacks the grounded realism of performance art. The word blockbuster hints to the spectacle nature of Barney's films, where the lavishness of the production (read: the cost) along with its self-imposed scarcity of the DVD prints lead to a sort of ironic status for Cremasters: the film is a self-enforced rarefied commodity that comments on the idea that art cannot be seen as a commodity. The film "eschew[s] the last step of the blockbuster formula--in which it makes tons of money at the box office". The idea is that Barney has offered a critique of the blockbuster culture, only he undermines this by using the film to sell "products" associated with the films production, not to mention charging a great deal of money for the rare DVD prints of his work.

Walley, "Modes of Film Practice in the Avant-Garde"

6. What is meant by “mode of film practice”? Give two well known examples of non-experimental modes of film practice. Why does Walley argue that the concept of the mode of film practice can help distinguish between the experimental film and gallery art worlds?

The article states that the term "refers to the cluster of historically bound institutions, practices, and concepts that form a context within which cinematic media are used". In other words, how the film is made, how it is distributed and exhibited, shapes the experience of the film and thereby what mode of film it is. The experimental forms discussed in the article are "avant-garde cinema " and "artist film". However it goes on to state that there are other modes to consider, such as Art House Cinema which has "a set of formal conventions" that are "distinct from classical Hollywood cinema" (Hollywood being the second well known example). This distinction can help define the mode by its "norms of production, distribution, exhibition, and reception". Using these categories, one can emphasize the disparate qualities of experimental film and gallery art, and how each world uses the medium of film.

7. What are some of the key differences between the experimental and gallery art worlds in terms of production and distribution?

-Experimental production has an emphasis on personal projects, the work of one specific author, with limited collaboration. The process of production is headed up largely by the filmmaker, who often stars in the film, shoots the film, edits the film, and so on.

-Artists' Film is far more collaborative, at times approaching the same structural scale of the mainstream filmmaking process (eg Cremaster series). There are often separate individuals responsible for cinematography, editing, sound, composing, costume, set, etc. However, there is still a specific "author" at work.

-Experimental distribution has adopted a small-scale version of mainstream film distribution (set rental costs, share of ticket sales, etc). While this is not profitable enough to allow much financial success, it does help sustain future projects.

-Whereas Experimental distribution is scarce based on a lack of funds, Artists' Film capitalizes on the set conventions of the art world where the scarcity of a product is seen as a contingent element that raises their value in the art world. Therefore, the prints are purposefully limited in order to garner the most money from the product as possible.

Reading Response 6: Due Nov. 3 @ 5 p.m.

Reading Response 6: Due Nov. 3 @ 5 p.m.

Michael Zryd, "The Academy of the Avant-Garde : A Relationship of Dependence and Resistance"

1. What changes in the American avant-garde are associated with the rise of structural film and the creation of Anthology Film Archives in 1970? How does these changes affect:

The changes are of a general shift from the quasi-activist, underground slant of avant-garde filmmakers like Deren and Vogel (who forged ahead into unknown territory by taking risks and subsequently established a niche community), to the academically minded production and classification brought about by the archival system and the mindset that went with that.

a. The participants (filmmakers, critics) in the avant-garde community?

Before this shift, filmmakers were part of piece meal community where there were no real set parameters for showing films or for establishing who was a successful artist. These matters developed in an organic way and were perceived to be more flexible than the more rigid declarations of master filmmakers according to academia. However, academia also offered a certain protection for the filmmakers who sought out teaching positions and adapted to the new way that avant-garde film was being exhibited in the country. After all, the underground cinema had become something popularized and changed through the midnight screening culture. Structural film, and the important filmmakers of the period found their own new niche in the classroom, so it become something of a natural extension for the filmmakers to now exist in that world, to find economic security in that world.
b. Canon formation (which films are considered “important,” and taught in classes).

A group of specific "old guard" filmmakers, along with those who approach avant-garde film in a more academically formal way become the basis for the canon formation in schools. This is at the expense of artists who are still developing, and I imagine it could be said that this process could potentially stagnate the way that avant-garde film grows and adapts within the greater range of artistic voices.
c. Distribution and exhibition practices.
The rapid growth of film studies, and consequently the growth of academic rentals, slowly became the core for avant-garde distribution and exhibition. This has been argued to be a "retreat from the dynamism of the heroic 1960s", and certainly places the films within a completely different, more formal and evaluative audience. Whether that is a help or a hindrance to the genre is probably subjective.

2. Briefly explain the debate between autonomy and engagement within the avant-garde. How does this debate play out in the 1980s?

The idea is that avant-garde film should remain autonomous from a social/formal establishment of any kind, as the express concern of avant-garde cinema is to break hold of the convention of cinema that is prevalent (eg "antibourgeois and/or anti-Hollywood stance"). There is a fear that whatever revolutionary quality the avant-garde holds will be lost to the formation of new conventions imposed by academia. Avant-garde film can also be seen as a way to engage with society, in order to "break down distinctions between art and life". In the 1980s, these arguments lead to the nostalgia of the more democratic system of the 1960s, and created an atmosphere of resistance towards the moves of avant-garde cinema toward academia, and thusly created roadblocks to establishing a more stable economic situation.

3. What are the negative aesthetic connotations of the “academic avant-garde film”? What is the major critique from new filmmakers who emerged in the 1980s?

The negative aesthetic connotations is that the "academic avant-garde film" is something "conventional or formulaic", where the artist goes through the motions of creating an already established form and abandons discovery and innovations. There also seems to be some suggestion that the academic filmmaking becomes too insular, separate from any political or social relevance, separate from authentic life experience, existing more as a "theoretical interest only, with no practical application".

4. What are the five legacies of the academicization of the avant-garde?

The article lists the five legacies of academicization as follows:

1. The maintenance of distribution co-ops (from classroom as dominant sits of exhibition)

2. Regionalization (strong centers of avant-garde beyond the art scene in New York)

3. Publication opportunities for writing/dissemination of history, criticism, and theory of avant-garde

4. Employment for filmmakers (as faculty/technical personnel)

5. Development of new generations of avant-garde film-makers, critics, teachers, programmers, and archivists.

Marc Masters, “The Offenders: No Wave Cinema”

5. Name at least three similarities between the punk music scene and the punk/no-wave filmmaking scene, in terms of technology, style, and community.

In terms of technology, there was an consciously amateur attitude toward the instrumentation of the artform. With music, different people would pick up a guitar even if they've never touched one in their life and see what could be down with it, with film they would do the same with a camera. They also rotated positions in both film and music.

The styles were very committed to avoid staid conventions, to create a raucous and rebellious energy. As Nares said, "We brought this kind of raw energy and devil-may-care attitude that we got from rock 'n' roll". The article goes on to site stylistic choices like "unfocused artiness", "conciously [made] melodramas", and films as spectacles.

The film community was also linked to the music community, as the film screenings would take place at music venues like CBGB's and Max's Kansas City. They also took to storefronts and other venues not associated with avant-garde cinema, trying to connect their community as a more inclusive populace, which is fairly similar to the goals of music scene as well. (note: musicians would also act in the films, further blurring the lines between the music scene and the film scene)

6. What were the exhibition venues for punk/no-wave films such as those by Beth B. and Scott B., and how did the venues affect film content and style?

Well I answered that a bit with my explanation of the community, specifically CBGBs, Max's Kansas City, playing in-between different bands or the storefront on St. Mark's Place in East Village. The venues created an active participation of the audience, where they would engage with the film while drinking, smoking, talking, talking to the screen. It created a solid litmus test for what people liked and what they didn't, and when I film wasn't working the audience let you know fairly quickly.

7. What are some similarities and differences between the American avant-garde we have studied so far and the Punk or No Wave filmmaking in the late 1970s? Address the following areas:

a. Aesthetic similarities and differences (which filmmakers do the cite as influences, which filmmakers do they reject?)

b. Technological similarities and differences

c. Economic similarities and differences

d. Social similarities and differences

You get some similarities in the lower grade quality of film they use (Super 8, 16mm). The cheap film stock offers more control financially and also reinforces the idea of a throwaway film, a film that strives for perfection without being able to attain it (which sort of leads back to the idea of art as performance instead of art as object). There are also minimal plots, and experiments with dialogue that seem very reminiscent of Warhol, where improvisation is used almost as a way to stilt the dialogue and make the audience aware of the blurring line between reality and performance. The enjoy the act of "playing with the camera" but reject standardizations and formal constraints that the discoveries can lead to. Film, in their eyes should be continuing playful discovery with its plotting and form, and also the focus should be less on form than on content. They cite the new wave filmmakers as their influences (Godard, Truffaut, Rohmer) and of course Andy Warhol. There is also the use of non-actors, a film culture outside of the presence of studios and sets but instead out on the street (much like the French New Wave), everything lending itself to a low-fi, do it yourself aesthetic and technical approach.

Janet Cutler, “Su Friedrich, Breaking the Rules”

8. In what ways does Friedrich “break the rules” in terms of mixing filmmaking practices? How have different critics approached her different films? What kinds of avant-garde sub-genres has she explored?

They break the rules by mixing genres (experimental, doc, narrative) and film techniques (scratching, found footage, white leader/ambient sound, silence, spoken word), making up her own guidelines as she goes along, creating a story through context of juxtaposition. This leads to critics seeing her work in different ways, for instance either a reconstructed narrative or an experimental documentary or a "new autobiography" (which is to say that the filmmaker "understands...her personal history to be implicated in larger social formations and historical processes). In terms of subgenres, she has explored the psychodrama, the trance film, the structural film, and the diary film but does not succumb to "the idioms of avant-garde cinema".

9. What are some of the distinguishing characteristics of “Sink or Swim”?

It has a set structure that establishes 26 scenes, each corresponding to the alphabet from Z-A, all linked to some childhood memory. Some are silent, some include autobiographical voiceover, all chronicling the filmmaker's life with and ambivalence toward her father.