Re: [Frameworks] The Participatory Camera
Possibly Brakhage's Blue Moses (1960) might fit what you're looking for, or in another way, Made Manifest (1980) Marilyn Brakhage From: "John Powers" To: frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 10:53:42 AM Subject: [Frameworks] The Participatory Camera Hi Frameworkers, Sorry to hit the list with one of those periodic crowd-sourcing requests, but I'm curious if anyone can recommend experimental films from the 1960s-80s, especially overlooked or under-appreciated, where the camera could be said to "participate" in the actions depicted, rather than simply to "observe." I understand that these distinctions are not so black-and-white, and, construed broadly, any instance of shooting film could be called "participatory." But I'm thinking more of examples like Carolee Schneemann's FUSES, where the camera is integrated into Carolee and Tenney's sexual life, and they pass it back and forth; or Brakhage's WEDLOCK HOUSE: AN INTERCOURSE, where Stan & Jane pass the camera back-and-forth during an argument. CHRISTMAS ON EARTH is another candidate. Anyone have similar examples of camera-sharing/participation/interaction with the instrument, however you want to construe such a thing? Thanks for your assistance! best, John ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Forwarded from Massart Faculty
Fred, Yes, I have no real opinion about this particular case either, because I don't know enough about it. Neutrality can be a good choice sometimes, I guess. Or at least being initially cautious -- as a person can start to feel like one often does these days, when listening to the news, for example, when different "realities" are competing with each other, as various purposes are being pursued by different players trying to accomplish their own particular ends, intentionally sowing confusion in what often seems a rejection altogether of any attempt at rational thought! (But insofar as the discussion became more general, there are definitely important issues to consider. And I agree, of course, that true sexual harassment and real bullying are destructive and intolerable.) ... Francisco, I definitely do agree with you, also, that the world of academia is absolute anathema to some artists, and they probably do need to avoid it altogether. It's definitely not the best environment for everyone. (Stan used to imagine himself sometimes as some sort of "spy" in alien territory -- in various life circumstances. I guess that worked for him to some degree.) Marilyn Brakhage From: "Fred Camper" <f...@fredcamper.com> To: "Experimental Film Discussion List" <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 9:10:14 AM Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Forwarded from Massart Faculty Marilyn, I don’t disagree with anything you wrote. Five people agreeing are not always right. My post was colored by the fact that I believed the initial story, finding it frightening that an instructor would be pressured out of a job for showing a film. I don’t know of any films I have seen the showing of which should ever be judged as sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is very serious and very bad, and the term should not be demeaned by application with speech acts not directed at a particular person. I taught in the same school as Stan Brakhage for quite a few years. Perhaps he could be a little difficult at times, but he is not even remotely like the unnamed person I was referencing. I was pleased to sometimes try to smooth out small conflict between Stan and the administration. There are intense and dramatic personalities; then there is the occasional abuser, and that is the person I was referring to, someone who in the course of what should have been an objective conversation routinely resorted to frequent personal insults – among many other bullying tactics. One year I got a grant that allowed us to bring in fifteen different filmmakers from the US and abroad. As the list came together, I was warned that this or that filmmaker would be very difficult. In every case but one, they were not. Kenneth Anger was gentle, even sweet, and did exactly what he had agreed to do. A few had special requests, but they were not hard to meet. One of the fifteen was difficult. When he met with his student projectionist in advance of his public show, the projectionist suggested, from the projector deck, that they needed to agree on a signal between them if the filmmaker felt a film was out of focus. The filmmaker said something like, "Why don’t I just call out, 'Hey, you fuck, focus it. '" The projectionist took exception to being referred to as a "fuck," and almost walked out. To me, this is not a matter about which reasonable people can disagree; it is bullying. That is not to say that I have any idea what the five were referring to. Maybe I would agree; maybe not. Remember too that I was responding to someone who was taking sides, apparently accepting the initial narrative, suggesting that the artist in general is so abused that he should teach dishonestly. Maybe in a totalitarian dictatorship? We are not there yet, thankfully. I don’t know what I would think about the MassArt situation if I had been there. It is just that I was embarrassed to be thinking ill of MassArt from having heard and accepted one side of the story. Now I am neutral. I always did admire Switzerland for not having been in a foreign war since 1515. Fred Camper Chicago On 4/16/2018 3:31 AM, MARILYN BRAKHAGE wrote: I don't know all the details of this story (and it doesn't sound as if anyone else in this thread does either), but I just wanted to make a few observations about the conversation generally: "Are the five signatories lying?" you ask. One might also ask, are the five signatories engaging in a sort of 'group think'? And/or is it possible that both sides of the tale are telling "the truth" from their own perspective and chosen emphasis? ... My (admittedly sketchy) understanding is that Saul Levine received a student complaint about the content of a film, a student feeling "unsafe" perhaps, or "sexually harassed?" (as is increasingly the charge that is
Re: [Frameworks] Forwarded from Massart Faculty
I don't know all the details of this story (and it doesn't sound as if anyone else in this thread does either), but I just wanted to make a few observations about the conversation generally: "Are the five signatories lying?" you ask. One might also ask, are the five signatories engaging in a sort of 'group think'? And/or is it possible that both sides of the tale are telling "the truth" from their own perspective and chosen emphasis? ... My (admittedly sketchy) understanding is that Saul Levine received a student complaint about the content of a film, a student feeling "unsafe" perhaps, or "sexually harassed?" (as is increasingly the charge that is made, it seems, when someone is presented with something of a sexual nature that makes them uncomfortable.) Any such complaint would necessitate that the administration investigate it. They would be obliged to do that. This chain of events taking place within a backdrop of long standing contention between Saul and other faculty members and/or administrators may have led to an encounter that caused Saul to decide that all things considered he'd rather just quit. Thus, they can say that he was not forced to quit because of his film, that leaving was his choice -- yet he still has a story to tell about what led to his decision to leave. The administration says he was not forced to quit, and paints him as an ongoing problematic personality who is now "bullying" them. I don't know precisely what they mean by that, but he has his story to tell, from his point of view, and has every right to tell it. I don't think that telling your story of a contentious relationship with others, and even naming the people you were in argument with, should necessarily be considered "bullying." And in a five versus one argument it is not necessarily true that the five must be right and the one must be wrong. They have their experience and views and he has his. ... As for the longstanding conflicts, no doubt an ability to compromise and to 'get along' with people is helpful in any walk of life -- but on the other hand, there are some things that people of integrity will not compromise on. They may fight for awhile, they may decide to move on, and they may also have an argument they'd subsequently like to present to a larger audience. So be it. But the idea that artists are likely to be particularly and uniquely difficult, self-absorbed people who are impossible to get along with is a cliché that I reject. There are, of course, a lot of horribly difficult artists. And there are a lot of horribly difficult non-artists. And academic institutions are also fairly notorious for their petty, territorial squabbling, which has nothing to do with art whatsoever. As a raised example of an artist teaching, Stan Brakhage did, yes, show his own films as a part of his teaching practice, but he never taught film making . This is because he considered his method of making films, which involved deep dives into the unconscious, not "teachable" in the ordinary sense, and potentially dangerous, and probably because he wanted to keep his filmmaking practice generally separate from his teaching. ... I don't recall Stan "getting into trouble" with the school over the nature of his completed films, though I do recall some students complaining, after he showed Kenneth Anger's Scorpio Rising, that he was showing them "pornography." And on another occasion when a university colleague (not a filmmaker or artist of any kind) filled in for Stan during an absence, she told his Film History class that Stan's idea of film history was only about what mattered to him in his own filmmaking (which was totally untrue; as many know he was a voracious consumer of films of all sorts, and his film history classes were extremely varied and fabulously illuminating). But academics often have very narrowly focussed areas of interest also, and can be just as competitive and controlling in their personalities as anyone else. Without going into any further specifics, it is also generally true, I think, that people with large, passionate, or dramatic personalities or temperaments are very easy to target for blame when tempers flare and disagreements become intense. People will find it easy to believe that it must have been that person's fault. But there are times when that is not the case. So who knows? Fred, you also say that we should take care to make accusations about the abridgment of academic freedom only when it has really occurred. True, but it might also be worth noting that such abridgments can creep in in insidious ways and we need to be vigilant about the effects of any dominating agenda of any particular group of people, and the increasingly narrowing notions about what is and is not acceptable and open for discussion, let alone viewing, in our academic institutions.
Re: [Frameworks] FrameWorks Digest, Vol 94, Issue 20
Stan Brakhage's "Fifteen Song Traits" is "a series of individual portraits ... all interrelated" (about 29 minutes); other short Brakhage portraits include "Two: Creeley/McClure," "Hymn to Her," "Jane," "Worm and Web Love" -- and for a longer one (54 minutes), "The Governor" (Governor Lamm of Colorado). Also, "Sirius Remembered" (mentioned below) is a reflection on the decaying corpse of the family dog. But for some live animal portraits you might want to look at "The Domain of the Moment." Marilyn Brakhage From: "robert harris" <lagonab...@gmail.com> To: "Experimental Film Discussion List" <frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 2:50:51 PM Subject: Re: [Frameworks] FrameWorks Digest, Vol 94, Issue 20 oh, to name but a few: Mr. Hayashi, by Bruce Baillie Jonas Mekas has many portraits embedded within his longer works Shigeko Kubota has portraits (see EAI) of George Maciunas, George Maciunas With Two Eyes 1972, George Maciunas With One Eye 1976 ; her own father ( My Father ); and of Nam June Paik. Brakhage’s Sirius Remembered The Flower Thief might be called a portrait On Mar 26, 2018, at 1:38 PM, Katherine Bauer < kittylitter...@gmail.com > wrote: HI Frameworkers I was wondering if anyone could give some titles of films that are "portrait films" I am teaching at Hofstra U, and I am feeling stumped after assigning the kids to make a portrait film, on examples of what to show them. Just juggling so much, thought I would reach out for some help on at least on of my 100s of to dos! Anything, narrative, experimental, avant-gaurd, structuralist, montage... just that tells the story of a person. preferably SHORT FILMS! But CAN also be features too. Thanks. xoK -- ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Christopher MacLaine
Brakhage has an essay about MacLaine in his book, Film At Wit's End, available from https://www.mcphersonco.com/ Marilyn Brakhage On 5-Jul-17, at 3:45 PM, Christian Bruno wrote: Hello Gene, Along with talking to Lawrence Jordan, he should also talk to Brecht Andersch: he was the person who conducted the interview with Brakhage in Radical Light discussing Maclaine. Brecht---along with Brian Darr---conducted a massive, multipart examination of Maclaine's The End for the SFMOMA's blog Open Space. (https://openspace.sfmoma.org/2010/09/in-search-of-christopher-maclaine-the-end-tour-1/ ). It is a totally enjoyable, exhaustive autopsy of the film as they try and identify the locations throughout the Bay Area, and the folks who were in it, triangulating fragments of data, and providing tons of fascinating historical context. I know that Brecht has spoken extensively with many people who knew Maclaine personally, including about his poetry. Your friend should most definitely reach out to him. I can provide his email address off list. best Christian Bruno From: FrameWorks <frameworks-boun...@jonasmekasfilms.com> on behalf of Gene Youngblood <ato...@comcast.net> Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 1:40 PM To: Experimental Film Discussion List Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Christopher MacLaine Thanks Andy. I’ve passed these on. G. On July 5, 2017 at 8:38:48 AM, Andy Ditzler (a...@andyditzler.com) wrote: Gene, has your friend tried contacting Lawrence Jordan? I believe Jordan knew Maclaine and worked with him on The Man Who Invented Gold (but I could be wrong). J.J. Murphy and Fred Camper have done the most extensive writing I know on Maclaine; perhaps they have some leads. There's a transcription of a conversation with Brakhage about his time with Maclaine, published in Radical Light. Andy Ditzler Founder and curator, Film Love: www.filmlove.org Co-founder, John Q collective: www.johnq.org On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Gene Youngblood <ato...@comcast.net> wrote: Frameworkers, a friend of mine is researching the literary life of Christopher MacLaine. He sent this yesterday: "You may know that [MacLaine] was also a poet and editor. (Jordan Belson was the art editor for the first issue of Contour Quarterly, the magazine that MacLaine and his wife Norma edited, which ran for four issues in the late forties.) I've been very interested in that side of his work, which has completely vanished from any public view or awareness, and I've been working for a few years on assembling the writings, and trying to learn more about the context. Have had a very hard time finding anyone still alive to talk to who knew him, or much on record about his life. Any suggestions you might have in that regard would be very welcome. Any leads on this? Steve? Scott? ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Eulogy Films
Dear Margaret, Some Stan Brakhage films in homage to specific individuals include "Water for Maya" [i.e. Maya Deren], 2 min, 25 sec.; "Visions in Meditation #4: D.H. Lawrence," 17 min. 41 sec; and "Last Hymn to the Night - Novalis," 17 min. 18 sec. Also, the fifth and final section of his "b series," subtitled "Sorrowing" (and by extension the entire film) was dedicated to Gregory Markopoulos, 12 minutes. ... Homages to larger groups of people might include "The Dead" (10 min. 21 sec., filmed in Paris/Père Lachaise cemetery), and "In Consideration of Pompeii," 4 min. 35 sec. ... Someone else mentioned "Sirius Remembered" (in homage to a family dog). Along those lines would also be "Pasht" (in honor of a cat). "Sirius Remembered" was also thought of as part of a trilogy, with "The Dead" and "Burial Path" (in part, I believe, in consideration of a late illness of Stan's friend, the literary critic, Donald Sutherland). Marilyn Brakhage On 18-Mar-17, at 8:43 AM, Margaret Rorison wrote: Dear Film Friends, I am curious about film eulogies and would love to know more films that have been made to honor someone. For example, Nathaniel Dorsky's August and After I am looking for short films in particular. Poetic gestures of goodbye, final notes, odes... thank you, Margaret Rorison --- http://margaretrorison.com/ http://sightunseenbaltimore.com/ ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] experimental cinema and the anthropocene
Some of Brakhage's animal studies might fit -- such as "The Domain of the Moment" or "The Presence" Marilyn Brakhage On 7-Dec-15, at 8:37 AM, Marco Poloni wrote: Dear Frameworkers, I am writing you to ask if you could indicate me some films that are connected to the concept of the anthropocene (the geological time when the activity of the human species started to have a significant impact on the living system of planet earth). I am giving a workshop in Finland end January about cinema in the anthropocene. The concept is not so much about how to narrate the anthropocene (i.e. classical narrative in a new cultural framework) than about trying to tell stories or represent life from a point-of-view that is not anthropocentric: a point of view that rethinks or goes beyond the dualism between human and non-human agency. In simple words, as absurd as it sounds, is it possible to make films from the point of view of non-human agents? (even if, in the end, humans made them) A couple of examples that come to my mind are “Leviathan” by Castaing-Taylor, “Intrepid Shadows”, the Navajo film made by Alfred Clah which presents an animistic view of life, but this is a short list... I am trying to avoid films that somehow merge humans with mother earth, like in some shots of Tarkovski or Malick, and any romanticizing of system earth. Any suggestions would be great! Many thanks, Marco Poloni -- Marco Poloni http://www.theanalogueislandbureau.net Usedomer Strasse 8 D – 13355 Berlin gsm de +49.163.6294080 gsm ch +41.78.6322028 skype marcopoloni ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] High-definition frame grabs
Dear Dave Tetzlaff, It would be nice if you would stop attributing positions and opinions to people that those people don't have, or suggesting, by implication, that they do things they don't do. You have no idea who I charge and who I don't charge, or whether I ever "demand" anything at all. And one thing you are leaving out is that all people, in various walks of life, not just in the art world, but including in the art world, do have a "right" to charge other people for services provided. If time and money is being spent to provide a service, one has a "right" to charge for the service given (if one so chooses). If expertise and advice is wanted, one has the "right" to charge for that expertise and advice (if one so chooses). Fred Camper and I (sometimes) collect fees for a service that we provide. This has nothing to do with copyright law. However, as to the separate question of copyright and fair use, what is "fair use" is obviously determined in part by whether or not the use is "of a commercial nature" (vs research, criticism, teaching purposes), as well as by the nature of the work, the amount used, and "the effect of the use upon the . . . value of the copyrighted work." The original discussion here began over someone who was inquiring about how to obtain "high resolution images . . . for a book". Obviously there are sources and methods that are better or worse, for various reasons. But "permission" is another matter. -- People sometimes do, but often don't, ask my "permission" to use images. They are more likely to contact us simply to ask if we can provide them. However, while there are, of course, many things that one does not have to ask any permission for, I do appreciate the consideration of those people who do ask for permission for various different uses of Brakhage work. And if you are really of the general opinion that "asking permission of anyone for anything is ideologically regressive, and frankly irresponsible" -- well, I guess you live in a different universe than I do. No more time for this conversation I'm afraid. Much too busy (providing mostly free services). Marilyn Brakhage On 3-Oct-15, at 11:38 AM, Dave Tetzlaff wrote: If Marilyn deems it appropriate to charge 'small' fees that go to Fred for his labor in providing "high quality images to represent the films", that seems fair, but her 'small' could be a struggling PhD student or fan-blogger's bridge-to-far, and she has no right to exclude their ability to participate in discourse around the films by using any fee, or a demand for any aspect of reproduction, as a gateway obstruction. ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] High-definition frame grabs
Well -- yes. That's probably true too. Marilyn On 30-Sep-15, at 8:58 PM, Chuck Kleinhans wrote: However, you don’t have to spend much time in the experimental film community to run into artists who have a vastly inflated opinion of themselves, incredible insecurities, and just plain nuttiness. They may never answer you, insist on reviewing everything you are saying about them for pre-approval, or want to gouge you. ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Titles of scratch films
Some other Brakhage films that employ scratching: earliest example (briefly) is in Reflections On Black (1955); later, more substantially, in He was born, he suffered, he died (1974); and later yet, several films with words scratched over image, I . . . Dreaming (1988), For Marilyn (1992) and Night Mulch and Very (2001). And there was the Ellipses series of so-called scratch and stain films : . . . Reels One to Five (1998). Marilyn Brakhage On 25-Aug-15, at 12:08 PM, Tess Takahashi wrote: I'm doing something on films that employ scratching directly on celluloid like Brakhage's Chinese Series, David Gatten's Fragrant Portals..., Dona Cameron's World Trade Alphabet, Barbel Neubauer's work, Pierre Hebert's work, Storm DeHirsch's Peyote Queen, and Len Lye's Free Radicals. What am I missing? Old and New? Bonus points it it's set to African drums... ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] animals and human-animal relationships on film
We Mammals Pushy by Rick Raxlen MB On 23-Apr-14, at 8:05 AM, sarah browne wrote: Dear Frameworkers, I'm looking for some help in compiling a list of films that feature animals or human-animal relationships on film. Rather than wildlife documentaries (with some exceptions!) I'm more interested in the animal presence as an a kind of distancing tactic that allows for reflection on inter-human behaviours (ethics, empathy, violence). Arthouse or experimental material more than Babe. Any tips very gratefully received! Best wishes, Sarah Browne www.sarahbrowne.info www.kennedybrowne.com Hand to Mouth CCA Derry-Londonderry until 24 May 2014 ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Turner and Film
More evidence for Brakhage, if needed, on our book shelves at home; especially the two volume set, The Paintings of JMW Turner by Martin Butlin and Evelyn Joll, published in 1977 by the Tate Gallery and Yale University (for when he couldn't see the works directly). He often spoke publicly about Turner's importance to him. Also spoke of wanting to go to Petworth -- but never got there. Marilyn Brakhage On 27-Feb-14, at 12:55 AM, Chuck Kleinhans wrote: Moire evidence for Brakhage. About 15 years ago he had a show at the University of Oregon. Part of his lecture and presentation involved him talking about Turner and showing at least one slide to make his point (about light and sky, as I remember). At a meal afterwards the conversation returned to Turner and Stan was quite clear and detailed about which London museums had which Turners, which collection was better, etc. etc. Clearly it wasn't just a casual knowledge but one deeply thought about, knowledge gained in those galleries by directly encountering the art work. Which sort of summarizes what he himself stood for, I think: directly confronting and experiencing an artwork in all its full presence. Certainly the best pathway into any of his films. Chuck Kleinhans On Feb 26, 2014, at 11:47 AM, Fred Camper wrote: Not less known perhaps, but Brakhage is key here. He cites Turner as an influence in a list of influences, as someone mentioned, in my Criterion liner notes. It might be worth recounting how that list was composed. I asked him on the phone for his most important influences from writers, painters, and composers, and added, You only get two of each. For painters he chose Turner and Pollock as the two most important. (He also added, on his own, an additional art, dance.) The Text of Light would be the most important film here. Not only did he look at Turner, but the variability of light in Turner is deeply inscribed in that film. He also spoke of The Text of Light in terms of landscape. This aspect of light was explored even more radically in the Romans, Arabics, and Egyptians. The imagery in those films is far more removed from ideas of landscape. Fred Camper Chicago Quoting Aaron Juneau aaron.jun...@tate.org.uk: Dear frameworks members, I'm contacting from Tate Etc. Magazine, London in the hope that somebody at Frameworks might be able to help me with some research I'm undertaking with regard to an article we're publishing in a couple issues time. Essentially the article will focus on J.M.W Turner's influence on film. I was wondering whether somebody at Frameworks could advise on some interesting, perhaps less known filmmakers who have been influenced by him? I'm really looking at hard fact and solid evidence as opposed to conjecture. Any assistance you can offer would be greatly appreciated. My very best, Aaron Juneau Editorial Assistant TATE ETC. magazine 20 John Islip Street Millbank London SW1P 4RG T: +44 (0)20 7821 8606 F: +44 (0)20 7887 3940 E: aaron.jun...@tate.org.uk www.tate.org.uk/tateetc follow us on Twitter: @TATEETCmag ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks Chuck Kleinhans chuck...@northwestern.edu ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Turner and Film
Also, in print: In Stan Brakhage's book Telling Time: Essays of a Visionary Filmmaker (McPherson and Company, 2003), he writes about Turner in his essay An Inner Argument, and also in the first section of the longer essay, Space As Menace in Canadian Aesthetics: Film and Painting. (And there are probably more examples elsewhere.) Marilyn Brakhage On 27-Feb-14, at 2:26 AM, marilyn brakhage wrote: More evidence for Brakhage, if needed, on our book shelves at home; especially the two volume set, The Paintings of JMW Turner by Martin Butlin and Evelyn Joll, published in 1977 by the Tate Gallery and Yale University (for when he couldn't see the works directly). He often spoke publicly about Turner's importance to him. Also spoke of wanting to go to Petworth -- but never got there. Marilyn Brakhage On 27-Feb-14, at 12:55 AM, Chuck Kleinhans wrote: Moire evidence for Brakhage. About 15 years ago he had a show at the University of Oregon. Part of his lecture and presentation involved him talking about Turner and showing at least one slide to make his point (about light and sky, as I remember). At a meal afterwards the conversation returned to Turner and Stan was quite clear and detailed about which London museums had which Turners, which collection was better, etc. etc. Clearly it wasn't just a casual knowledge but one deeply thought about, knowledge gained in those galleries by directly encountering the art work. Which sort of summarizes what he himself stood for, I think: directly confronting and experiencing an artwork in all its full presence. Certainly the best pathway into any of his films. Chuck Kleinhans On Feb 26, 2014, at 11:47 AM, Fred Camper wrote: Not less known perhaps, but Brakhage is key here. He cites Turner as an influence in a list of influences, as someone mentioned, in my Criterion liner notes. It might be worth recounting how that list was composed. I asked him on the phone for his most important influences from writers, painters, and composers, and added, You only get two of each. For painters he chose Turner and Pollock as the two most important. (He also added, on his own, an additional art, dance.) The Text of Light would be the most important film here. Not only did he look at Turner, but the variability of light in Turner is deeply inscribed in that film. He also spoke of The Text of Light in terms of landscape. This aspect of light was explored even more radically in the Romans, Arabics, and Egyptians. The imagery in those films is far more removed from ideas of landscape. Fred Camper Chicago Quoting Aaron Juneau aaron.jun...@tate.org.uk: Dear frameworks members, I'm contacting from Tate Etc. Magazine, London in the hope that somebody at Frameworks might be able to help me with some research I'm undertaking with regard to an article we're publishing in a couple issues time. Essentially the article will focus on J.M.W Turner's influence on film. I was wondering whether somebody at Frameworks could advise on some interesting, perhaps less known filmmakers who have been influenced by him? I'm really looking at hard fact and solid evidence as opposed to conjecture. Any assistance you can offer would be greatly appreciated. My very best, Aaron Juneau Editorial Assistant TATE ETC. magazine 20 John Islip Street Millbank London SW1P 4RG T: +44 (0)20 7821 8606 F: +44 (0)20 7887 3940 E: aaron.jun...@tate.org.uk www.tate.org.uk/tateetc follow us on Twitter: @TATEETCmag ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks Chuck Kleinhans chuck...@northwestern.edu ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Films/Videos looking at concepts of work
Variations on a Cellophane Wrapper by David Rimmer MB On 7-Jan-14, at 2:33 AM, Insa Langhorst wrote: Dear Frameworkers, I would like to build a list of video art and films which look at aspects, concepts and realities of work. One piece I came across recently is Johan van der Keuken's Temps/Travail (1999). Does anyone have any other suggestions? Thanks, Insa www.insalanghorst.com +44 778 93 8 22 84 (UK) +49 176 86 74 83 45 (D) insa.langho...@gmail.com ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] films/videos using/made up of text
You might be interested in a current exhibition, Script Films, showing in Karlsruhe, Germany (which includes a few of the filmmakers already mentioned in this discussion as well as a number of others): http://on1.zkm.de/zkm/stories/storyReader$8560 The Brakhage film included in this exhibition is I. . . Dreaming. Others of his: Untitled (For Marilyn), From: First Hymn to the Night, Novalis, and Night Mulch and Very. Marilyn Brakhage On 14-Nov-13, at 9:42 AM, Shelly Silver wrote: dear collective knowledge base folks: i'm compiling a list of works using text/made up of text. i'm especially interested in works by women. thank you! best, shelly ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] abstraction and politics
While they probably wouldn't normally be considered political, some Stan Brakhage films are short, abstract works that can be seen, at least in part, as meditations on certain cultural histories. For examples: Unconscious London Strata, In Consideration of Pompeii, b Series (containing Retrospect: The Passover, Blue Black Introspection, Blood Drama, I Am Afraid: And This Is My Fear, and Sorrowing), Three Homerics, The Egyptian Series, Persian Series and Chinese Series. . . . And of course, 23rd Psalm Branch, perhaps his most political film, does have significant abstract passages. Marilyn Brakhage On 6-Oct-13, at 7:59 PM, Kelly Sears wrote: Dear frameworkers, I would love to pick your collective brain about some film/videos that use abstraction to address political, social, or cultural histories. I would double love it if anyone had any suggestions of writings on this topic as well. I'm interested in learning more about how this visual strategy and lack of the figurative or representational could be used in a political/critical way. Many thank yous. Kelly ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] experimential film in the art world
I don't know much of her story either, though yes, she apparently had art world connections. She seems to work mainly in film, but is represented by a gallery. Some people on the list must be familiar with her work? . . . However beautiful or interesting her films may be, there are certainly many others equally worthy, I should think, so presumably it has something to do with the networks she is in, in addition to whatever inherent value her work has. I could engage in a little cynicism of my own (not about her specifically, but about art world choices in general and what drives them), but perhaps that's easy enough for anyone to see -- and I have to get back to work now, so am signing off for awhile . . . MB A little of my own cynicism: There is a certain degree of spectacle, and of an accessibility of ideas that can be talked about that influence On 5-Mar-12, at 11:33 PM, John Woods wrote: This really does seem a little too cynical. No one is suggesting any such thing. I'm just trying to represent the work of someone who is already well-known and presumably taken seriously. And I guess what it takes is being clear about one's expectations and sticking to it. Yes, that was a dumb, cynical remark I made. But I do have a genuine question as to what were the circumstances that allowed those artists to achieve their special status in the art world presenting film in a gallery setting? I'm mainly familiar with Stan Douglas's work of the past decade which includes film photography (which have sometimes been photos related to a film), so he's got the art school and artist from another field thing in his support but what of Tacita Dean? I havn't seen her work but from my quick study online (ok just wikipedia) she seems to be a filmmaker who happened to be associated with a group of traditional artists who got some notoriety in the late 80s. Clearly she's had a great career, but would the galleries have called if she didn't have famous friends? ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] experimental film in the art world
I don't know how many museums have dedicated theatres with well maintained projection equipment. That would be good to try to find out. But for gallery inclusion, it sounds as if this Conner exhibition sets a good standard that at least gives others some reference then, as to how it should be done. It is a struggle though, to get these things to happen -- as Steve and Adam also point out. It still takes a Bruce Conner apparently. Marilyn On 5-Mar-12, at 9:29 AM, Myron Ort wrote: Right, I see that point. btw, One only has to read Stan's chapter on Bruce to get an idea of the price he paid for that art world notoriety and the consequences on his health! In any case, the L.A. museum for that retrospective had special darkened rooms built in the gallery where you could sit down and watch the films. There was a nice separation in those spaces from any other distractions. The whole retrospective had a tone of high respect for Bruce and all his work, it was one of the best shows I had seen that (at least) included film presentations. The usual presentations of videos in museums have never had quite the same impact, maybe because other people sitting there watching are as if they were home watching tv. Are we talking of film shows within a museum's gallery space as opposed to museums which also have dedicated film theaters separate but on the premises, or even something like the juxtaposition of Pacific Film Archive with the Berkeley Museum? I am a bit out of touch, how many major museums in the country have such theaters with well maintained projection equipment? What is the current state of these museum film theaters generally? Myron Ort On Mar 4, 2012, at 11:30 PM, marilyn brakhage wrote: I didn't see that exhibition, unfortunately. But Bruce Conner also had a gallery/art world history and connections for his work in other media, aside from film. It's the people who are only filmmakers who sometimes have more of a struggle with getting their work shown as it should be. Marilyn On 4-Mar-12, at 6:31 PM, Myron Ort wrote: all I know is how impressed I was with the Bruce Conner retrospective in Los Angeles at MOCA a many few years ago. All of his modes of working were well presented. Bruce Conner! Myron Ort On Mar 4, 2012, at 6:19 PM, marilyn brakhage wrote: Thanks for the feedback. It would be interesting to hear more on the subject from people around at the time -- as well as the latest experiences other people are having. Marilyn On 4-Mar-12, at 2:45 PM, Chuck Kleinhans wrote: I thought Marilyn Brakhage's response to the Erika Balsom essay was outstanding, and I hope it will be reprinted in Moving Image Arts Journal so it circulates more directly where historians and scholars might find it in the future. Greybeards like me on the Frameworks listserv can easily add to the main points Marilyn makes about Stan Brakhage per se and about the commercial and gallery and museum art world of the time. I vividly remember a dinner with Stan Brakhage (and others) at the University of Oregon perhaps 20 years ago when he was screening some of his films. The discussion got into the matter of Turner's paintings and light, and Brakhage was quite passionate about which museums had which paintings and had displayed them to best advantage. The next morning I ran into him on the main campus quadrangle, camera in hand, filming what interested him, while he was waiting for the University Art Museum to open. Two points that others might be able to develop more in dialogue with Balsom's thesis: a. animation, particularly drawn animation, has always had a more ambiguous relation to the traditional format/materials art world, perhaps mostly because almost all its artists have drawing skills and craft, which is more easily understood. Most art schools (used to) have first year drawing course requirements. b. there was a discussion c. 1970, and I think in Canyon Cinemanews, about establishing the rare value of film and its collectability, by making things such as unique editions of films (such as S8mm copies that collectors could buy and presumably view at home) or by making single unique films which would then be sold to collectors or museums. Of course this was also part of an art world discussion/quandary at the time when another mass reproduceable art--photography--was entering the art market (and museum collections). Chuck Kleinhans ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https
Re: [Frameworks] experimential film in the art world
David, I agree with you that some films definitely need to be seen in the traditional cinematic context of dark theatre/auditorium and large projection. (Though I don't think that 'big' is ALWAYS a necessary cinematic experience. Some of my most profound aesthetic experiences of films have taken place in a living room on a relatively small screen.) I am also not endorsing gallery-type film installations for all films, only for some films. And I am trying to advocate for it being done well (which, as Myron's description of the Bruce Conner show demonstrates, is possible). I agree that some film installations (including Brakhage) have been awful. For me, this has been a learning process as to what, exactly, I've had to spell out and ask for. One can't assume anything, and it's a constant struggle. The increased availability of film works on DVD that you support is also something I'm fine with, just as long as we do have SOMEWHERE it will still be possible for the films to be seen in their original form. That is what I think (and what Erika Balsom was also suggesting, I believe) may become the proper role of the museums, then -- with some films shown in galleries (and they can sometimes be isolated in sections of galleries, in quiet and darkened spaces) and some shown in museum auditoria. The difficulty is in getting the museums and galleries to approach this in a serious and respectful way, not just presenting us with more of, as you describe it, the available AV distraction of everyday life. Marilyn On 5-Mar-12, at 3:54 PM, David Tetzlaff wrote: IMHO, the real battle is not 'film vs. digital', but 'cinema vs. iPod'. My personal experience is that the experimental films I value most highly do not suffer much from slight image degradations, but do suffer greatly when withdrawn from the context of cinema: i.e. display on a large screen in a darkened room. You have to concentrate to 'get' a lot of this stuff. It NEEDS a certain scale, needs to trap you in your seat without the available AV distraction of everyday life, to force you to deal with it's otherness. As such, I find Marilyn's endorsement of gallery-type film installations disturbing. I've seen a number of them (including Brakhage) and I thought they all were awful, basically reducing the work to 'TV': small screen, too much ambient light, people wandering in and out distractedly... (The one exception being an Anthony McCall piece where the constant influx of people in and out of the room, figuring out the sculptural nature of the thing, then playing with the beam seemed just right.) If anybody has the responsibility to present the material in a way that maximizes it's integrity, it's museums. But they don't value the work in that sense, because they can't value it in the other sense, so maybe we'd get better screenings under a regime of purchasing and ownership. (???) ___ ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] experimential film in the art world
Well, yes. That is, I think we really do all 'get' the basic political economy of art, as David put it, and as you reenforce here. But Erika Balsom's essay was about the increasing integration of these two worlds that you describe -- 'Art' and film. It was, in part, about the current interest of the museum world in all things cinematic. And so given that this interest currently exists, the question becomes what to do with it, and how to ensure that works in film -- from all artists working with it -- are equally valued and given equal respect regarding their presentation. While the major museums of the world are certainly exhibiting works that have commercial value on the art market, they are also often government supported, as well as privately supported, cultural institutions charged with preserving, curating and exhibiting cultural history. Certainly they do like to own objects. And some do buy film prints, and have for quite awhile. But film prints, of course, wear out. So some filmmakers have turned to selling limited-edition internegatives of their films, giving the museums the means by which they can make future prints as needed, something which at least some museums are pursuing. But there is still the necessity of advocating for how best to exhibit these works. I personally feel that a museum or art gallery should strive to show work in its original format, with careful attention to the viewing environment, the details of which depend, in part, on the particular work in question. . . . But none of this, as far as I can see, should in any way prevent a continued, wider distribution of the works in digital reproduction. I can't speak to the Lichtenstein work you refer to because I don't know it, but certainly different works will require different solutions. Marilyn On 5-Mar-12, at 6:37 PM, Damon wrote: I am in very deeply in agreement with both the frustration and the appraisals. I'll start by saying that Stan Brakhage is an Artist working in the medium of film. What I would observe in answer to this dilemma, in total agreement with David, is so simple and straight-forward that it seems ludicrous: paintings, drawings, sculpture are things that get collected first and foremost for their unique, one-of-a-kind nature. But also as within the continuum of the visual tradition associated with other ritually-based institutions (Monarchy and Clergy). Graphic arts, engravings and lithographs, were always cheaper reproductions without the auratic cache of original works of art. The introduction of photography and cinema only complicated this formula in favor of the Art, not of the film. Hollywood's position in the culture industry only furthers the problems. Now to back away from the original/copy issue, the next layer of the onion tends to be about the Art being placed into museum collections and finding its audiences through exhibitions, while the films are placed into archives and given screenings to attract their audiences. The goal of the Art is to be collected while the film operates at the other end of continuum seeking screenings. And the museum collection is conceived as a cultural history which needs to be preserved, while an archive maintains holdings awaiting future uses, but not fully integrated into an existing cultural history. I think to compare the operations of FMC, Canyon, etc. with the Castelli/Sonnabend project in the mid-1970s is instructive. Castelli/Sonnabend sought to place works into collections, although it was also willing to facilitate screenings, and they were about producing symbolic value for the work, while it seems that the coops have served many functions, but the production of symbolic value falls way down the list. In the spirit of this question, I've wondered how the elements of this debate, and the other film/digital debates, might change if we re-conceived of the frame in terms of projection versus monitors? This might allow a middle position recognizing the material need to preserve a print, while also seeking a manner to exhibit a film/ projection outside the cinema screening format, and to be placed into an on-going presentation within the gallery space--possibly resulting in the film being more readily perceived as Art. I was recently told the Roy Lichtenstein Three Landscapes (1970-71) installation at the Whitney Museum in New York was wearing out the 1:00min long 35mm loops daily. Eventually the museum converted to digital for the remainder of the installation. (http://whitney.org/Exhibitions/RoyLichtenstein ) While the work was fundamentally different, the sound of the three film projectors lost to the barely perceptible whir of the LCD projectors, the images could be said to haver maintained scale and the aura of the Art--if we grant the orig. 35mm prints that aura. Damon. On Mar 5,
Re: [Frameworks] experimential film in the art world
This really does seem a little too cynical. No one is suggesting any such thing. I'm just trying to represent the work of someone who is already well-known and presumably taken seriously. And I guess what it takes is being clear about one's expectations and sticking to it. If, on the other hand, you mean how does one get taken seriously, or 'known,' to begin with, I guess how one got known back in the 60s and 70s was quite a different matter from how it might happen now. . . . But fortunately, there are a lot of good film festivals, with a lot of good curators and programmers who show interesting selections of both new and old films. Right? And there are some really good museum curators who go to a lot of these festivals and see the work. Granted, it can be hard to get noticed in a crowded field. But I guess people continue to use both old and new networks for sharing their work. However, this is an entirely different conversation, and one that many other people can address better than me. MB On 5-Mar-12, at 8:41 PM, John Woods wrote: Balsom rightly points out that in the museum world there is a double standard “whereby experimental film-makers are treated with less respect than ‘artists working in film’ – such as Tacita Dean, Stan Douglas or Matthew Buckingham – whose work is never subject to such transpositions.” She goes on to say that “recent exhibition practices have demonstrated the persistent And what was it that put the work of these people into their vaunted status in the museum world? Gallery representation? Art school cred? Press manipulation (publicity stunts, etc.)? Is that what a filmmaker needs to do to be taken seriously? I guess that seems to mostly work for Hollywood. ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] experimential film in the art world
Awhile back, Chuck Kleinhans posted a link to an essay by Erika Balsom, about the place of experimental cinema within the museum/art world context, which I did find interesting and wanted to make some response to. Sorry for the length. I assume all uninterested can just delete now! Marilyn Brakhage A Response to: “Brakhage’s sour grapes, or notes on experimental cinema in the art world.” Erika Balsom’s essay, her “notes on experimental cinema in the art world,” explores the place of what she calls “experimental film” within a museum context, and how to successfully integrate this body of work into the institutions of the art world. This is a really important issue for the future of film. And she both raises important questions and arrives at some interesting and valuable conclusions. However, I think she also bases her understanding of the historical situation on some questionable premises. Her essay itself reveals (to me) some obvious contradictions in her argument about the how and why of the historical exclusion of “experimental film” from the art world establishment (and its sometimes half-hearted inclusion now), even while coming to some astute assessments of the current situation. She does insist upon maintaining, from beginning to end, the questionable terminology that maintains the false distinction of “experimental cinema” and “artists’ cinema.” I know, of course, what she is referring to, historically. But maintaining this vocabulary becomes problematic. “Artists’ cinema” seems still to be understood by her as cinema made by people who are artists in other media, and “experimental filmmakers” are (apparently) assumed not to be “artists.” That is to say, she never really questions the validity of the terminology. And as she uses Stan Brakhage as a prime example of the so-called experimental filmmaker’s “hostility” towards the art world, I feel it necessary to point out that 1) Stan never considered himself an “experimental” filmmaker, 2) Stan absolutely and without question considered himself an artist, 3) he did not want his films reserved for “a closed and impenetrable community,” he wanted them to be seen by everyone, and 4) the hyperbolic Brakhage quotations she references should be understood in a larger context of sometimes conflicting thoughts, emotions and issues – which I think she does somewhat misrepresent. The history of artists (i.e. painters and sculptors) who made forays into filmmaking is a problematic one – not so much in the early decades of the 20th century, and not so much now, perhaps, but in the decades in between. Perhaps it was really those artists from other media who were often “experimenting” with film. (It is more RARE than not, I think, for an artist who excels in one medium to also excel in another.) So some very great painters, so I’ve heard, made some rather bad – or, at least, not very interesting -- films. But good, bad, or indifferent -- it was their films that would be accepted by the art establishment. (I can remember, when studying Art History in the 80s, professors who would tell students it was only okay to write about film if one wrote about “a film made by an artist” -- meaning a painter or sculptor, for example. They would never say that you could only write about a sculpture made by a painter! But film, as a single medium of choice, was not a recognized art form by the academy. Someone who ONLY made films could not possibly be a true artist, in this view.) Brakhage’s warnings to Sharits (and others) about the supposed “poison” of the museum/art world may have been, in part, a reaction to these exclusionary attitudes of the “art world,” and to the dubious choices that were being made by the establishment in regard to film; they also would have been due, in part, yes, to a fear of loss of ‘life,’ as it were, from official enshrinement, perhaps; and probably also due to his fear of fellow filmmaker-artists being threatened with a loss of integrity, of their not being true to the art of film (the dangers of fame and money and institutional pressures, etc.), as he frequently witnessed the perhaps understandable desire of many to ‘escape’ from the hardships of being an independent filmmaker and to find a more successful alternative. He likewise warned against the ‘evils’ of Hollywood. But Stan didn’t really hate museums and art galleries; he did not engage in “totalizing rejection” of the art world, as she puts it. He certainly went to museums and art galleries whenever he could. And he considered himself a part of a long, visual art tradition. In fact, while there might be something to the avant- garde artists’ suspicions of the establishment – an honorable enough tradition – contributing to their insistent independence, it was certainly not a rejection of any true “art world
Re: [Frameworks] experimental film in the art world
Thanks for the feedback. It would be interesting to hear more on the subject from people around at the time -- as well as the latest experiences other people are having. Marilyn On 4-Mar-12, at 2:45 PM, Chuck Kleinhans wrote: I thought Marilyn Brakhage's response to the Erika Balsom essay was outstanding, and I hope it will be reprinted in Moving Image Arts Journal so it circulates more directly where historians and scholars might find it in the future. Greybeards like me on the Frameworks listserv can easily add to the main points Marilyn makes about Stan Brakhage per se and about the commercial and gallery and museum art world of the time. I vividly remember a dinner with Stan Brakhage (and others) at the University of Oregon perhaps 20 years ago when he was screening some of his films. The discussion got into the matter of Turner's paintings and light, and Brakhage was quite passionate about which museums had which paintings and had displayed them to best advantage. The next morning I ran into him on the main campus quadrangle, camera in hand, filming what interested him, while he was waiting for the University Art Museum to open. Two points that others might be able to develop more in dialogue with Balsom's thesis: a. animation, particularly drawn animation, has always had a more ambiguous relation to the traditional format/materials art world, perhaps mostly because almost all its artists have drawing skills and craft, which is more easily understood. Most art schools (used to) have first year drawing course requirements. b. there was a discussion c. 1970, and I think in Canyon Cinemanews, about establishing the rare value of film and its collectability, by making things such as unique editions of films (such as S8mm copies that collectors could buy and presumably view at home) or by making single unique films which would then be sold to collectors or museums. Of course this was also part of an art world discussion/ quandary at the time when another mass reproduceable art-- photography--was entering the art market (and museum collections). Chuck Kleinhans ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] experimental film in the art world
I didn't see that exhibition, unfortunately. But Bruce Conner also had a gallery/art world history and connections for his work in other media, aside from film. It's the people who are only filmmakers who sometimes have more of a struggle with getting their work shown as it should be. Marilyn On 4-Mar-12, at 6:31 PM, Myron Ort wrote: all I know is how impressed I was with the Bruce Conner retrospective in Los Angeles at MOCA a many few years ago. All of his modes of working were well presented. Bruce Conner! Myron Ort On Mar 4, 2012, at 6:19 PM, marilyn brakhage wrote: Thanks for the feedback. It would be interesting to hear more on the subject from people around at the time -- as well as the latest experiences other people are having. Marilyn On 4-Mar-12, at 2:45 PM, Chuck Kleinhans wrote: I thought Marilyn Brakhage's response to the Erika Balsom essay was outstanding, and I hope it will be reprinted in Moving Image Arts Journal so it circulates more directly where historians and scholars might find it in the future. Greybeards like me on the Frameworks listserv can easily add to the main points Marilyn makes about Stan Brakhage per se and about the commercial and gallery and museum art world of the time. I vividly remember a dinner with Stan Brakhage (and others) at the University of Oregon perhaps 20 years ago when he was screening some of his films. The discussion got into the matter of Turner's paintings and light, and Brakhage was quite passionate about which museums had which paintings and had displayed them to best advantage. The next morning I ran into him on the main campus quadrangle, camera in hand, filming what interested him, while he was waiting for the University Art Museum to open. Two points that others might be able to develop more in dialogue with Balsom's thesis: a. animation, particularly drawn animation, has always had a more ambiguous relation to the traditional format/materials art world, perhaps mostly because almost all its artists have drawing skills and craft, which is more easily understood. Most art schools (used to) have first year drawing course requirements. b. there was a discussion c. 1970, and I think in Canyon Cinemanews, about establishing the rare value of film and its collectability, by making things such as unique editions of films (such as S8mm copies that collectors could buy and presumably view at home) or by making single unique films which would then be sold to collectors or museums. Of course this was also part of an art world discussion/quandary at the time when another mass reproduceable art--photography--was entering the art market (and museum collections). Chuck Kleinhans ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] more on the Academy
On the other hand, he has given some support to Bruce Baillie, I believe. On 29-Feb-12, at 9:03 AM, Francisco Torres wrote: George Lucas was a big admirer of Arthur Lipsett since his days at USC citing him as an influence yet when he made millions in 1977 he did not offer one penny to him. Lipsett died destitute some ten years larter. That is Hollywood to you. ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Travelogues
There's the Brakhage film Unconscious London Strata -- perhaps a little more abstract than you're looking for? -- but also another little Brakhage film, not often screened, though one I've always liked (for whatever that's worth), is Other (3 minutes, 1980), described as: A film photographed in Amsterdam but dedicated to capturing a quality of mind engendered there -- not, certainly, alienation (as often in travel) but rather some heightened sense of being other. Marilyn Brakhage On 10-Nov-11, at 9:41 AM, Adam R. Levine wrote: Hello you, I am trying to pull together a list of experimental films that either fall directly under the category of travelogue or bear witness to travel and distance from a point of origin on the part of the filmmaker. These would not be so much ethnographic works which are part of a sustained cultural exchange, but films made as a result of the filmmaker passing through and acknowledging the looming spectre/problem/pleasure of the tourist film. Warren Sonbert, perhaps John Smith's The Hotel Diaries? I'm sure there are others...but can you name them? Thanks/Grazie/Kiitos! ARL ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
[Frameworks] unsettling possibilities
Interesting article with complex social, biological, as well as aesthetic implications into the future. . . . Obviously, capturing imagery is a far cry from understanding the complexities of 'thought,' and it's still very futuristic, but as we conceivably 'think' to each other, or project our thought/images, there would have to be resultant changes in consciousness, and the role of the artist would necessarily be re-defined along with everything/everyone else. Direct visual art? Ultimate loss of the artisanal? And/or a revitalizing of same? I realize this has little or no immediate relevance to anyone here (probably), but it showed up in my email and I just thought some frameworkers would possibly find it interesting as well: http://gizmodo.com/5843117/scientists-reconstruct-video-clips-from-brain-activity Marilyn Brakhage ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] 35mm experimental films
Brakhage films available in 35 mm (from Canyon): Eye Myth The Garden of Earthly Delights The Dante Quartet Nightmusic Rage Net Interpolations Night Mulch and Very Chinese Series Marilyn Brakhage On 27-Oct-11, at 2:15 PM, Christopher Harris wrote: Hello all, I'm looking for recommendations of 35mm experimental films for a program I am planning. I have already thought of some titles like these but I could use plenty of other recommendations: Trees of Syntax, Leaves of Axis - Daichi Saito Coming Attractions- Peter Tscherkassky Instructions for a Light and Sound Machine- Peter Tscherkassky Arnulf Rainer- Peter Kubelka Strips- Felix Dufour-Laperriere Ouverture- Christopher Becks The Decay of Fiction- Pat O'Neill Domashnyee Kino/Home Movie (and other films)-John Price Thanks in advance. CH ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
