Artist or Not?

I have been a fan of Bansky for years, Bansky is a graffiti artist and activist from Bristol, England. Like most graffiti artists, walls are his canvases. I recently saw an artist documentary entitled, “Roadsworth”. This artist from Montreal, Canada. This graffiti artist uses the road as his canvas. Not only was the documentary interesting as it shows when he is caught by the police on a couple of occasions. His artwork is playful, creative, thought provoking and activistic. Roadsworth’s artwork is pro-nature and against the  urban environment. His use of the  “element of surprise” is whimsical and brings the audience into the thrill of creating artwork.

The most interesting part of the documentary for me was the fact that Roadsworth  does not think of himself as an artist. Too him, his pieces were fun and not “art”. An artist to him was much more theoretical and had a great technique. The documentary also discusses the issue of Commissioned Public Art and Art that is created on Public Space. As a cyclist his art closely correlates with the cyclist culture and nature. Many of his pieces include animals, flowers and the manipulation of street lines.

The documentary is the story of how an artist can be changed as a criminal for painting or vandalizing the street in his home town, yet seen as a hero throughout the “art world”. While he waits to be put on trail he is commissioned to create public art pieces and his art become even more based on his political activist ideals.

Ethnographic Film

The idea and concept of the ethnographic film was completely new to me before entering this class. Having never had a class in anthropology, the idea of who the film makers of ethnographic films are and how their point of view and “gaze” can affect the film. In my studies I have seen ethnographic films that focused on Religion. However the films I had seen previously had been voyeuristic in that anthropologists filmed the religious scenes that they believed to be “odd” or “strange” to their previous beliefs, such as the sacrificial ritual of an animal.

In class we learned that the perspective of the ethnographic filmmakers in the past had looked on their subjects as native people whose rituals and ideals were simple because their culture was believed to be less superior to the filmmaker’s. This made me uncomfortable in the sense that it appeared that the subjects of the films were seen as inferior to the filmmakers. Being of Mexican decent I have always had a great deal of respect for Day Laborers and Factory Workers. My ancestors had been field workers and workers in factories, so it was important that for me that our group was in agreement that the film should be respectful of the community we were filming. I was more than pleased with how we were all on the same page.

Since the group and I were unsure what the fútbol tournament was going to involve and how it would proceed we were all open to film many parts of the event. This included interviews, the fútbol games, the opening ceremony, the families and spectators of the tournament. Although the group and I had different experiences and backgrounds than that day laborers, we all tried to give the people we were filming a certain regard and right to privacy since some players did not want to be interviewed.

After filming, we questioned what we wanted the ethnographic film to be and how we should separate ourselves from it without making it appear like the previous ethnographic films. I believe we were able to manifest the “thesis” in the film by filming ourselves discussing and recognizing the issues of ethics and the risks at stake while making an ethnographic film.

Personification

I have always been fond of the personification of inanimate objects and this commercial was so moving to me I had to share it. I  find it interesting when I show this to different people and notice their reaction to the main character. Most are confused by the reactions of the people tormented by the main character and are angry at the “bowler hat man” for going against the “norms” of society. Not only does it bring about powerful reactions within people, it has gotten me and others to come to the realization that some people and/or things may appear to be insignificant, but everything and everyone is useful.

Seeing Yourself

Grey Gardens has been my favorite documentary since I was in junior high. Having the opportunity to show it in class with Shayda was wonderful. One of my first thoughts since reading the books for class had been that the film was made by two men about two women, an eccentric Mother and Daughter. The idea of the “male gaze” looking at the women in the documentary could be concerning, however there is a trust and collaboration between the two sets of people is playful; for example the scene where Little Edie preforms her patriotic flag dance is one of the most memorable images of the film.

The eccentric lives of the two women living and staying in bed, performing for the camera, their living conditions and their arguments are seen by viewers as a type of spectacle and voyeurism. The example of Big Edie’s birthday best illustrates the difference between the lives of the Edie’s and their guests. The guests are quite, well mannered and wear plain clothes. The Mother & Daughter are both lively and wear colorful clothes.

As the video continues Big Edie and Little Edie discuss how they see themselves. Big Edie says that she is proud of her body and that it is “concentrated ground”. Little Edie, being in her 50s during the filming of the documentary, said that in the house she saw herself as a “little girl”, however if she left to New York she would feel like a woman. This made such an impact on me and it is so endearing that in the home that she has stayed in for a decade Little Edie feels as though she is “mother’s little daughter.”

 

GLOW

What went right:

• I was able to get over part of my fear of hearing my own voice.
• I was able to think in a “objects moving” visual kind of way.
• The video came out (almost) the way I had wanted.

What went wrong:

• The DVDs I used to record 120 mins. of GLOW footage did not format correctly & I was unable to retrieve it.
• My essay subject changed completely after attending GLOW.
• The footage that was available on youtube was rare and the clips were too short.
• The script had to change many times due to the amount of footage I had available to me.
• My work computer that has iMovie would not accept the youtube files that I converted with my PC
• My friend who has a mac that was able to lend me his computer and assistance was only free for one day.
• The remaining footage was edited on the Windows Movie Maker 2007
• After I finished editing the video, it wouldn’t save, nor transfer to youtube.
• I started over on my PC, but Windows Movie Maker 2009 was confusing when it came to saving audio
• A friend offered to let me use her mac, but the video took too long to load (1hr: 9mins of video loaded) and she had to leave.
• The final outcome: I finished the video on Windows Movie Maker 2009 but the first clip would not accept the fade out effect into the next scene.

Framing

“GLOW is an all-night cultural experience featuring original commissions by artists that re-imagine Santa Monica Beach as a playground for thoughtful and participatory temporary artworks. Glow is a production of the City of Santa Monica and the Santa Monica Arts Foundation.” – http://glowsantamonica.org

Framing the scenes and artwork from GLOW was interesting, to say the least. The biggest issue was framing the shot in the way I wanted, while being amongst hundreds of people. Although many scenes were unexpected and unplanned… it seems as though my thesis has changed a bit. Had I been in a controlled environment I would have been able to do what I wanted, but the arts are always unpredictable and often free of inhibitions. And that’s what I love, to be able to get out of my “frame” and move around. I hope the video I captured will be able to illustrate the feeling. Although the works weren’t as moving as I had wished, I hope that their basic premise will translate.

co·her·ence

Reading the book “Film Production Theory” has been quite enlightening. Mainly because I’ve seen most of the films and understand many of the cultural references  the author, Jean-Pierre Geuens uses as examples. While I have been a connoisseur and promoter of the arts I have never seriously attempted in creating or analyzing them.

‘”We must learn to see more, to hear more, to feel more.”… for a work of art, after all, was an experience first…’  is such a powerful statement. The thrill I have when I see a film, go into an art museum or watch a concert is foremost an experience. What I find problematic is putting the experience into a coherent form of expression, be that written or spoken. Why isn’t it enough to feel, see and hear? Granted, I feel I now lack the ability to form my thoughts into verbally coherent prose.

I would prefer to give an example that shows rather than explain, but challenging myself to become more coherent is quite an experience too.