skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I recently had a chance to view Peter Greenaway's latest film, Rembrandt's J'Accuse, an experiment in documentary filmmaking, historical research, and academic lecture, at Film Forum. It embodies all of the cinematic elements that I usually regard with extreme aversion: historical reenactment, numerically defined vignettes, video layers and their subsequent animated entrances and exits through the frame, and shadowed text. And even though this film is laden with these normally distracting attributes, I couldn't help but fall for it completely.
I'm aware that Greenaway's style largely relies on the heavy use of the visual techniques that can sometimes seem cumbersome, even corny, but he also manages to use them stylistically and meaningfully, giving each frame a lush, robust quality that relies on this excess to achieve its impact. In the case of J'Accuse, I grew to enjoy, perhaps admire, his disembodied presence, delivering a professorial, wordy analysis of the famous painting in question, The Night Watch, painted by Rembrandt in 1642. Reconstructions of the events leading up to the creation of this painting are cleverly enacted within elaborately detailed settings.
The film takes an Errol Morris-style investigation into this richly textured painting to which I've never given much thought. The persuasive nature of Greenaway's well-researched findings brings the painting and its history to life, filling its audience with a sense of wonder, mystery, and accusation. And the manner in which he uses the normally distracting intersecting and overlapping imagery give this film a forensics-based credibility, exposing its every detail, proved painterly intention, and logic.
Though I wouldn't recommend this film to the easily distracted or the impatient spectator, Rembrandt's J'Accuse is among the most vibrant of Peter Greenaway's films, excellently combining art, technology, and documentary.
n.
Gearing up for the upcoming U.S. Open, The Times featured a short piece on the sometimes eccentric fashion choices displayed by tennis players over the years. My two favorites are pictured here: Bill Tilden (1930) and Suzanne Lenglen (1919).
I admire these athletes' ability to perform in unbreathable and excessive (though stylish) clothing. And we haven't exactly come a long way from this: Anne White's Lycra bodysuit (1985) fits the same description, while Rafa Nadal's recently retired clamdiggers always seemed distractingly snug.
Tennis players contend with more than their opponents; they are exposed to the elements (heat, wind, sun) and react to them (through sweat, blisters, tears), while warding off potential disasters (wardrobe malfunctions, injury, a cursed serve) that may interrupt their game.
Still, utility isn't the primary function of most tennis players' wardrobes. Personal style tends to be the goal, displayed through ornamentation, embellishment, and an eye for fashion. We've basically seen a little bit of everything on the court: headbands of all shapes and sizes, jewelry that dangles and catches the sun's glare, blindingly bright colors, and tennis dresses that are fit for a night on the town.
While this sport requires a great degree of athleticism, physical and mental strength and endurance, and an unflinching ability to focus, it's refreshing to know that, with the exception of the all-white attire required of Wimbledon participants, tennis players' apparel is, as we've seen, relatively unrestricted. Many players display the attitude that what they wear is clothing, not a uniform, and individuality is essential. This doesn't take anything away from the game; it gives spectators something more to wow about.
n.
It's been a while since either of us has posted. To be honest, we've been spending most of our free time Upstate. It's been a summer of gardening, cooking, reading, relaxing, and enjoying a pleasant life of disconnect. Without a television set, media exposure is based on our weekly Netflix movies, Hulu, and Wimbledon.org. However, the remaining weekends of the summer will likely be very different because this past week we bought iPhones.
This was a bold move for us because we resisted the pull of media technology and managed to survive, for the most part, without cell phones until they became absolutely necessary. (Working in television production in NYC without one just can't happen.) Even then we got by with the bare minimum: we bought clunky devices that allowed us to make and receive phone calls but weren't capable of much more.
Then a while back, I was forced to upgrade after my phone was stolen. My replacement wasn't a smart phone, but it was a step in a more useful direction. Suddenly I could take pictures, but I couldn't download or e-mail them, so my blurry images sat trapped in my phone by way of its limited memory. Though I rarely used text to communicate, the numbers and letters on my keypad were starting to fade. And more recently my battery began to show signs of wear, possibly terminal illness. My power button required a good two or three long pushes to execute the command. This, coupled with work demands that require prompt and frequent two-way communication, meant it was time for another upgrade. And this time it needed to be more adventurous.
As happy Mac users, we knew it was only a matter of time before we made the iPhone purchase. Our reluctance was a result of our not wanting to be connected all the time. Our antiquated phones gave us an excuse to disappear. To not have to answer right away. To not have to answer at all. So this purchase came with a condition: these phones will not change our lives.
But it's hard to deny the inevitable. It turns out they are as handy and fun to use as they are advertised. Their design is intuitive and effortless. Their applications are genius, making simple tasks like reading the New York Times online even simpler. It's clear that we're starting to show signs of healthy dependence.
The life change that we feared involved getting sucked into meaningless texting, downloading absurd applications (the virtual fart, the filled beer glass that clinks, etc.), and developing an inability to choose live company over an incoming message.
The life change we're experiencing so far has assuaged our doubts. Now we just need to buy our phones protective skins -- it could be a while before the next upgrade.
n.
Science fiction is the link between popular culture and modernity. Through it we can engage in fantasies that allow us to imagine ourselves in situations that seem too radical to realistically adopt but offer desirable alternatives to everyday life, at least in small, manageable doses.
Perhaps the most popular of these alternatives are the myriad approaches to artificial life in film, television, and other media. The Jetsons lived in a ubiquitously computed house, which was managed by a robot housekeeper. Likewise, Small Wonder offered a convenient alternative to both hiring a housekeeper and raising a real child. These relationships erase class and social hierarchies, removing things like animosity, disgruntled workmanship, and feelings in general.
Of course, the threat of takeover by these artificially intelligent companions has also been considered. Film classics like Metropolis and Bladerunner offer complex stories that mix elements of the future, the government, and the Underground with trust being a common theme of exploration. (Can we trust machines? Can human-machines be considered beings simply because they were designed in the likeness of humans? Is it unethical to kill one, for example?)
Manga/film combo Ghost in the Shell and The Matrix created additional blur to the distinction between human and machine, suggesting a soul is present in these manufactured objects, capable of feeling and constructing thoughts beyond logical computation. With these and many other varieties, it seems that every possibility has been entertained. What more can we add to the fictional amplified human?
Not much, but luckily the fun isn't over. Dollhouse, a Joss Whedon creation that debuted on Fox this season, gives the human-machine a new setting, operation, and mode of technological function, and leaves viewers with entertaining fodder for surveying the postmodern condition. It combines the ass-kicking vitality of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, clever dialogue, and just enough bite to maintain a sense of humor, despite the heavy theme of human-as-vessel and all of the other areas mentioned above.
Last week marked the season's finale, but all episodes are viewable on Hulu.com and Fox.com.
n.
Today, my latest curatorial project, an online exhibition that features the work of six artists, launched.
Shared Spaces is on view through May 6, 2009 at No Commercial Value, an online exhibition space created and managed by Amir Husak and Prem Sooriyakumar.
Shared Spaces
Curated by Natasha Chuk
On view at No Commercial Value
April 22 through May 6, 2009
Blu
Burak Arikan
Char Davies
Erin Gleeson
Melissa Grey
Yasmine Soiffer
Shared Spaces, presents work by six artists who investigate the expanse of human experiences by considering the boundlessness and overlap of real and imaginary thresholds through media. These artists unite curiosity and fantasy with captured and mediated realities, confronting material and immaterial networks of space.
The imagination knows no boundaries in the private sphere: conflicts can be disabled, scientific mysteries entertained, and time collapsed. Sensations are heightened, space is fabricated, and memory is restored through the discoveries afforded by media technologies. In this public sphere, these conceptual designs invite guests to consider a different way of considering time, memory, personal space, public space, and the relationships that bridge these concepts, valuing the realization of impossibility over reality.
****
NoCommercialValue.org is a showcase of six original works and hyperlinks curated by a variety of international contributors. Featuring artists,journalists, activists, photographers, social scientists, writers, filmmakers and musicians who want to share their creative perspective on the world. NoCommercialValue.org provides a space between user generated content and a traditional art gallery. Moving away from the widespread and often convoluted format of present-day media sharing sites, our objective is to provide a "clutter-free" platform for content that can challenge, entertain, provoke, and inform.
The New York Times: I.B.M. Said to Be Near Deal for Sun at Lower Price
(Hostile Takeover of Moon Could Be Next)
Perhaps the most striking component of The Third Mind exhibition currently on view at the Guggenheim is titled Buddhism and the Neo-Avant-Garde, showcasing some of the most influential work of Nam June Paik, John Cage, Robert Rauschenberg, and Allen Ginsberg.
I single out Paik, in particular, for exploring the many dimensions of process, duration, nonintention, and even the fullness of absence. The latter is most relevant in the work Zen for Film, a live projection of an empty film leader from 1964.
Zen for Film, also viewable on YouTube, is a fluxus film that introduces an emphasis on visual (spatial and aural) rhythms produced through film projection, creating content out of emptiness, and foregrounding light and the rectangular object that lightly flickers on a wall, over convention and expectation. It dethrones the medium and pursues the technology. This is oddly prescient, given our current trend toward creating with data instead of objects.
It's hard to imagine some of the performance artworks of his fluxus days: documentary photographs of these events don't translate the complexity of his work. Eventually this would lead to the birth of video art and the increasing importance of experimenting with TVs and video projections, a Duchampian gesture that would change film and video forever.
n.
Bailout is a new wine from Crushpad out in San Francisco.
Am/Mex bought a bottle last week because we believe in the wine and because of a unique sales pitch that grabbed us by the grapes. They're letting short sellers like ourselves bet that the Dow will go to hell in the next 6 months, and if it does, we get a rebate on the cost of the wine. Here's the rub... on the day we bought our bottle of Bailout, the Dow closed at 7936.75. For every 100 points the Dow falls between last week's purchase date and August 14, 2009 -- when it is bottled -- Crushpad will send us $2. That may not sound like a lot but wait... in these dire times who would bet on the Dow? This gives us a chance to balance our 401K losses with a gain on a nice bottle of wine. Am/Mex will drink to those small victories. We'll keep you posted on how it all turns out.
I once declined the offer to replace my second-generation iPod when its motherboard was damaged and instead asked for whatever surgical requirements were necessary to restore it. To the genius's chagrin, I preferred my tattered and now outdated mp3 player to the newer model he waved in his hand, complete with video capabilities and double the storage capacity.
This affinity we have for media and the technologies that animate them is the subject of Sparks, a smart web-based serial by Annie Howell and Lisa Robinson about humans and their sometimes irrational relationship to technology.
There's a Sara Sparks in all of us: a twinkle of emotion and a connection we feel toward our personal gadgets. We spend so much time with them that they really do become extensions of our bodies, helping us remember phone numbers and birthdays, storing our favorite songs so the ride on the subway doesn't feel so long, and facilitating our work tasks, to name a few. We buy them expensive protective cases, take them on vacations, and, I don't do this, but some people name them.
Sparks is a perfect balance of McLuhanesque humor and contemplation in a well-written, accessible form. At just three episodes into the series, I look forward to the course that our heroine technologist will take in the episodes that follow. A posthumous digital McLuhan cameo would be a fitting next move.
You can also subscribe and take the series with you (if your generation of gadget allows).
n.
As The New York Times reported today, Mr. Kim of Kim's Video -- former home of over 55,000 titles -- conducted a scrupulous search for the perfect inheritor of a film and media collection that had been steadily growing since 1987. He settled on a proposal made on behalf of Salemi, a Sicilian town founded sometime around the fourth century B.C.
For those of us who had the patience to thumb through the vast collection of rare films and music, saying good-bye to Kim's Video suddenly feels pretty good. This covetable collection's successor is a small town that, after a history of crushing blows, is undergoing a unique and impressive change by allowing "prominent artists and intellectuals to assume control of the government". Art critics, photographers, performance artists, and others are taking command of the town, and turning it into an artists-run mecca.
We can only imagine the possibilities: Italian sensibility and cinema have always been a good combination. Add to that a restored 17th-century Jesuit college as this collection's base, a glass of Limoncello, and a planned relationship with the Venice Biennale to make Salemi the perfect destination spot. On the other hand, tourism is only one way of savoring its creative by-products. In an effort to appeal to outsiders and promote the development of this town-in-progress, Salemi houses are available for purchase for one Euro. There are some stipulations to this too-good-to-be-true offer, but it makes nomads like us strongly consider a relocation plan.
Tutto va bene!
n.
The line between work and play -- profession and leisure activity -- is blurry. Sitting in front of a screen doesn't necessarily mean we are laboring away at our jobs. We can easily toggle through the day, switching between putting the finishing touches on a work-related document and updating our online profiles on our social networking site of choice. Most of us are okay with that, not really recognizing a problem with fitting both worlds into a given day. However, we can't deny that the blurry divide between these supposedly disparate sides is only blurry because the labor involved in achieving both is the same.
As Lev Manovich suggests in The Language of New Media, "Today, the subject of the information society is engaged in even more activities during a typical day: inputting and analyzing data, running simulations, searching the Internet, playing computer games, watching streaming video, listening to music online, trading stocks, and so on."
Being a part of the Information Age means keeping up with information flows. No longer bearing the one-way flows of yore, this means our work has significantly increased. Our web footprint alone is evidence of our erratic effort to maintain this lifestyle, one that isn't always a choice. We seem to have crossed the line that divides utility from excess. Our tools no longer help us do more with less effort, they create needs that never existed in the first place. While the work required is simple -- most children today have enviable hacker mentalities -- the amount of work required has brought us back to something that feels more like the Industrial Revolution, when technology was primarily an investment in increased production (electricity extended daylight, the clock regulated efficiency, etc.) We engage in work days that begin early in the morning and spill into our evenings without much of a break in between. We're always plugged in, connected in some way, unable (or unwilling) to unplug.
It takes work to keep up with our leisure activities. And those tools and methods are the same ones I use to draft a lesson plan (generating text-based documents, searching the Internet, pulling images and video, tagging data, posting my findings online) and to stay in contact with friends and family (checking multiple e-mail accounts, generating text-based communication, pulling images and video, posting content online). These shared activities make them easier to do simultaneously, but harder to set limits.
This sharing of work space, tools, and time make it difficult to differentiate between work and play, making us slaves to the activities themselves, not their by-products. Mobility creates or, in most cases, extends the desk job. We are experiencing a revolution in its own right, but without the ability to recognize and practice the possibility of limitation, we are on the brink of fatigue, and there is no concrete reason for it. As Jean Baudrillard affectingly put it, "To become an end in itself, every system must dispel the question of its real teleology... In other words, there are only needs because the system needs them."Sustainability comes through the perfect balance of tolerance (even celebration) of this life and the pursuit of it with caution.
n.
Having the history of new media on my mind these days forces me to confront old texts from great thinkers introduced to me during my jejune (but ultimately fruitful) early years as an undergrad.
Every time I present Benjamin's The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, it is met with hostility and dismissiveness. His Marxist leanings can't be ignored for the sake of his edifying, albeit overly intolerant and slightly smug and moralistic, identification of soulless art. First, I must emphasize the importance of his attributing (certain) art with the notion of a soul -- defined only by a works of art's quality of true originality and non-reproducibility -- as being undeniably illuminating!
Walter Benjamin dared to attack the irreversible rise of technology, not because he was an aging ludite with a chip on his shoulder, though it can be argued that he knew very little about the rogue world of film and photography, except to suggest that its impact could be revolutionary and political in its very inability to resemble works of art that embodied an aura. His arguments in this essay presciently suggest that reproduction itself will take ownership over a work of art. He at once feared and celebrated the idea and metatext of it all: that a work can be stripped of its novelty in the process of reproduction. It changes the way we make, exchange, and define art. It changes the role of the artist, and blurs the clarity behind the creation of the work: its source undefined, all of its parts borrowed or hacked, manipulated beyond recognition, and recycled to infinity.
Perhaps when I first read this text -- before artist and technology became inseparable partners in creation -- these ideas were digestibly unoffensive. And even though I can't imagine a world without photography and film as works of art with recognizable auras, I also can't imagine a world without such mindful antagonists as he. Recognizing the potential and, in his mind, the setbacks of reproduction, Benjamin unknowingly set the groundwork for dialogues about virtuality, space and interactivity, and simulation, all of which rely on technologies of reproduction (data transfer, for example); however their resulting spaces of in-betweenness are the very definition of the soul-defining quality of aura he argued makes a work of art a true work of art, something that only those engaged in exclusive rituals could take part.
Rather than support his claim that art can be distinguished by its nature of non-reproduciblity, I recognize a compromise that allows for a certain porousness in his arguments. Finding the aura -- a definition that has changed since Benjamin penned it in this context -- has become a personal goal to at once cement (or, in some some cases, revive) his ideas and to prove him wrong, both good reasons to keep this text in circulation.
Plus, check out that moustache.
n.
I recently had a chance to view Peter Greenaway's latest film, Rembrandt's J'Accuse, an experiment in documentary filmmaking, historical research, and academic lecture, at Film Forum. It embodies all of the cinematic elements that I usually regard with extreme aversion: historical reenactment, numerically defined vignettes, video layers and their subsequent animated entrances and exits through the frame, and shadowed text. And even though this film is laden with these normally distracting attributes, I couldn't help but fall for it completely.
