I genuinely hope we can have a discussion, starting with the question of 'what really matters?' I have my own thoughts, but I want to hear what other people think and see if maybe some new ideas might emerge, you know, in dialogue.
Why is 'experimental film' important? Why does 'the world' need it? What does it do? How are these OUTCOMES special and not served by other art forms? Who comprises the potential audience, the people who might appreciate, love, need this work? Chuck has already mentioned that cinema screenings are significant social experiences. I was thinking more about the cultural properties of 'the texts,' but of course exhibition matters as well. So what social functions or experiences are attendant to experimental screenings that are different from screenings of commercial cinema, or even documentary/art-house fare for that matter? My working assumption is that we have conflated physical forms with the value of the cultural material they have carried, and unwisely focused on the preservation of the former, rather than the preservation and _further dissemination_ of the latter. Even if you think the physical media and the cultural value are inseperable, IMHO it remains a worthwhile exercise, if only in an art historical sense, to clarify why this work matters, what it adds to the world. FWIW, I do not think such a discussion will proceed productively in the typical email mode of jotting off quick, one-line rejoinders. I suggest the signs of the times merit more considered replies. (I mean really, Kodak declares bankruptcy, Canyon declares they might go under, and there's another crisis at Millenium all within the space of a month or so?) _______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks