"Today's art world...

is made up of a very diverse population of artists. Many people stick to the good old forms of art, but it seems that experimentalism is creeping ever-furthermore into the scene. People use experimentation as a way of expressing themselves, rather than always concentrating on a narrative in film."

Robert Beavers

The final article i chose to discuss is an article from July 2007 on Robert Beavers. Link here: http://www.afterall.org/onlinearchive.html?online_id=27

This article about Beavers' work screening at the Tate Modern last year starts with a quote from Robert that seems like it can relate to any filmmakers process, "I think of filmmaking like architecture". From what it sounds like, his films are definitely something that needs to be built up not only by the maker himself, but also by the audience. The key to Beavers's films is in their construction: he edits by cutting out frames from the reel and pasting them onto white paper. He then shuffles these fragments, and it is only when run through the projector that they trade the physicality of film stock for the immateriality of images flowing through time. This is an interesting way of constructing a work and leads to audience participation in coming up with meanings and paths of imagery in the work. I think this is a very interesting idea; scrambling frames (mostly at random) to come up with an end result that is new to not only the viewer when projected, but also the maker. The make should always have the ability to set up the shots as he wishes, but i think this "mixing" of images brings a new meaning to experimenting with your work. You know the content that you have produced, but you don't know how the outcome will be until you view the scrambled version. I have never really heard of a process such as this before in film making. This process must take tons of time and dedication in editing to get the results that the maker is shooting for.

Stop. Look. Listen. Sound Art today.

Aaron Zimm (a field recording artist) described sound art as using sound to strive for a higher level of meaning and provide more than just the level of comfort that comes from familiar sounds and universal musical structures in film. Stop. Look. Listen. The exhibit that is currently showing at the Haggerty Museum is a compilation of video works from some of today's top artists in the field of sound art. The exhibit is made up of many different kinds of works that use the power of sound to amplify and bring further meaning into the video. Sound art is different from the other “normal” forms of sound in film/video. Sure, there has been sound in films since the early 20^th century now, but these artists use it in very precise ways to stimulate different responses from the viewer. The sound, or lack of, is that is used in conjunction with images in the pieces by Johanna Billing and Patty Chang work in ways that force the viewer to think of what meaning the artist is attempting to portray.

In Patty Chang's “The Fountain”, she uses sound to amplify the feeling of claustrophobia that seems to be very apparent in the piece. Patty’s “The Fountain” was created by laying a mirror covered with a thin layer of water on the floor. Chang then positioned herself over it and began to sort of peck and slurp at the pool. The frame shows only her shoulders, part of the mirror, and her face and head. The camera is immobile throughout the piece. The only audio in the piece is the sounds that Chang makes; this includes the pecking, smacking of lips, and the gulping of the water. There is no music or ambient to make it seem like a more “normal” situation to the viewer. This use of sound buffs the feeling of claustrophobia found in this video. This sort of sound use also forces the viewer to concentrate hard on the form of the work, and not much else, once again returning to Marcel Duchamp’s idea that the viewer finishes the artwork. Another interesting this about this piece is that the viewer gets their own set of headphones. The headphones also add to the claustrophobia by completely blocking out all sounds that are going on around the viewer.

In Aaron Zimm’s article, he mentions that music can draw in an audience and lead them to discover other more complex aspects. Johanna Billing in her work entitled “Magical World” uses the song with the same title as an entry, into her piece. In the video the song is being sung and preformed by a group of children in Croatia. They are singing in English, which is not the children's first language, which gives it an interesting sound. Listening to this American pop song sung by small children from a different country who probably don’t even know English makes the viewer think more deeply about the song and identify themselves with these children. As with Chang's works, the sounds we hear in the piece are natural, but they are musical. Once the viewer is pulled in by this song, they will begin to think deeper into the meaning of the video. This normal American pop song has been subtly changed, but it has also been transformed. Having these distant voices sing it brings a whole new line of thought to the listener that wouldn’t normally be there if it was some pop star singing it. Billing's ability to change the feeling and meaning that this familiar song brings moves her work from simple sound or video into sound/video art.

When defining what sound, art, and music mean to him, Aaron Zimm touched on what it means to make a higher level of art; art that appreciated by a certain “well versed” audience. When looking at the way Zimm outlines his theories it seems apparent why these works by Patty Chang and Johanna Billing were chosen to be displayed in a museum, which is traditionally a more high art arena. Both The Fountain and Magical World are working on complex levels that engage the viewer raising thoughtful and physical reactions These works do this not mainly through their images, but through the use of sound as an huge part in their creation and underlying meanings.

Afterall, Online Art Journal

The first Article that I would like to introduce from this online source is about Haris Epaminonda, a video artist who is currently working in Berlin, Germany. The interview was conducted by Sonia Campagnola.

Haris is a contemporary video artist who works with three-channel video installation pieces that are comprised of re-edited found footage. She uses simple optical effects, along with collage techniques and differences in color to come up with work that is highly engaging to the viewer. Her work is shown as installations in galleries and at festivals. Being that Haris works with found footage, the work is definitely international, including films and images from all around the world. The main approaches to making that are discussed are her inspirations for work. The interviewer questions her about how growing up in Cyrus affected her work, as well as going to school in London. Epaminonda talks about how a professor in the Humanities department helped her realize that printmaking was not for her, so she started to experiment with video. Her most recent work is driven by images and books, and connects the two by using different associations between true and fictional stories.

Link: http://www.afterall.org/onlinecurrent.html?online_id=35246344

The second Article I looked at was By George Clark about an influential 1960's avant-garde artist named Tony Conrad.

Ever heard of someone frying or drilling holes in to film then immediately throwing it in to a projector to see the results? Tony Conrad is that man to read about if these zany ideas are what you like to hear about. Conrad is an artist who has been making films, videos, and all sorts of wacky pieces of art for over 40 years. He is also a musician and a teacher. Many of his works include live musical performances to accompany the images being projected. He used to work in various art forms including film, but in the 1970's he moved over to video and made many collaborations with other artists. His work was usually performed live as an installation in galleries such as the Tate Modern, for which he opened with many acts such as his film "The Flicker". His work is described in the article as "a series of fragments, intersections and collaborations, rather than as a totality...". I think that this sort of work can, once again, bring us back the the old idea that the viewer completes the work.

Link: http://www.afterall.org/onlinecurrent.html?online_id=60

Field Report #2, Act/React

This past weekend i finally got off of my lazy butt and decided to go check out what the new exhibit, Act React, at the Milwaukee Art Museum had to offer. I had only been to the Art museum once before for a Digital Arts course so i was anxious to see how that visit would compare to this one. The exhibit that I had previously gone to had been called "Foto" was was basically a brief overview of photography in the 20th century. Act React was MUCH different from the traditional style of an art exhibit. Normally the viewer can interact with works in a few ways; mainly pondering motivation for a work and such, but this exhibit brings the interactivity to a whole new level.

The first installation that I would like to talk about is Brian Knep's "Healing Pool". If you're looking for a piece of artwork that not only invites you, but almost essentially NEEDS you to finish its presence, this is it. The work consists of a 20x30 ft. floor with a projection coming down on it that looks like a bunch of cells or something. As one walks out on to the floor the "cells" will disappear where they walk, and eventually begin to reappear in the empty spaces. If you stop moving in the middle of Healing Pool, the cells will form around where you stand, sit, lay, and will not overtake you. This is the reason that I believe that this work is a good example of interactive art that NEEDS someone to complete it. The other amazing thing about this work, as the artist, and the curator McKinnen implied, is that this work will bring people together and cause them to act in ways that they wouldn't normally act in an exhibit or public place. When I was there, people began to jump in simultaneously and attempt to clear the whole floor of the cells. People of all ages were running around frantically and laughing as they tried to complete this task. I really enjoyed this work.

The second Piece i would like to go over is Janet Cardiff's sound table entitled "To Touch". This work stood out from the rest in that it was mostly a sonic experience, not a visual one. There is a large, old-looking wooden table with some lights shining on it. One who had no previous knowledge going in to this room would probably be highly confused as to what they were looking for in the piece. I, however had seen clips of this work in class so I dove right in. This installation can cause all sorts of different reactions from the viewer(listener?). I began at a corner of the table and moved my hands very slowly. The sounds began to emerge from around the room according to my movements. After experimenting with To Touch for a few minutes I began to move faster and receive the information more and more quickly. I watched as other people interacted with the work and decided that this piece really can't be the same for any two people. No one navigates the table in quite the same way, which I thought was very intriguing.

All in all this exhibit blew the previous visit to the Art Museum(for me at least) out of the water. The idea of actually being able to infinitely be a part of the work in so many different ways is just amazing to me. This sort of art seems to really be emerging and engaging many people's interests. Many people are getting somewhat bored of the old white wall exhibit; this is a great way to break away from the same-old and experience something completely new.

Field Report #1, Kevin Everson

“The Golden Age of Fish”, a 70 minute feature by filmmaker Kevin Jerome Everson, was a very interesting mixture of imagery, sound, and personal background as well as the background of a specific place, Cleveland. Kevin Everson himself, when asked if he sees his piece as a documentary, responded by calling it a “document”. Everson also explains that a lot of this footage is influenced by events that took place during his childhood in Ohio, giving the film a sense of autobiography. When I heard about this aspect of the film, I instantly started relating this film to “What the Water Said” which we talked about earlier in class. These films are very different, but they are also similar in that they are both seen as autobiographical, and in my eyes, biographical, in their own ways.

Kevin Everson talked about living in a small town between Columbus and Cleveland. The news would always seem to portray Cleveland as a dangerous place, showing images of murders and murder/suicides over and over again. Columbus was never showed having tragedies as such occurring there, it was seen as a safe haven compared to the chaos of Cleveland. With “The Golden Age of Fish” Kevin recreates a story in biographical form, seen through the eyes of a geologist, which re-lives the stories of these murder/suicides. Using found footage as well as his own footage shot in many different mediums, Everson combines his own style of filmmaking to real-life occurrences to bring out a part of his own past. “What the Water Said No. 1-3” by David Gatten was discussed in class as possibly being autobiographical too. We read that Gatten spent a lot of time near water in his childhood which could have been what pushed him to do an experiment such as what he has done in this film, and the upcoming parts 4-6. Both films have this element of autobiography that is sort of hidden if you don’t know the background of the maker. They also seem to me that they both have a strong element of biographical meaning.

The subjects in these two pieces seem to have they their own way of creating a story, even though neither of the works is really a straight-forward narrative. In Everson’s work the woman who basically narrates most of the film and appears throughout is the subject of biography. We see her in many different aspects of life ranging from work, to errands, to play. We gather that she is a geologist who works very hard during the days, seems to walk nearly everywhere, and also does Public Service Announcement commercials. The images of her life are weaved in through the images of Everson’s memories of his childhood. The biographical sense that I gather from Gatten’s work is that this was not, in a sense, made under the pure control of the filmmaker. Film was crumpled up and thrown into the water and cages and the creatures and liquid were able to do as they pleased with it. The final product could be seen as an authentic view on the way that the water its creatures live. They have no idea what the film is, so they were just acting the way that they normally would have, which produced very interesting results.

In conclusion, I would like to state once again that I see both Everson’s work and Gatten’s piece both work in biographical and autobiographical ways to portray their imagery. Though the films are very different in their process and message, they are similar in their backgrounds. The makers are really putting themselves, and their pasts into these pieces, as well as trying to portray different messages to us, the viewers.

Journal

I will be following the Afterall website for my monthly thingydingy