a mysterious visitor has toasted the grave of Poe on his birthday, every year since 1949; 2010 is the first year he didn't show up.
the Cyclopes were sons of Uranus.
Stefan Edberg- a highly successful tennis player of the late 80's and early 90's. Many interesting facts and tidbits: he was a major proponent of the serve-and-volley style of tennis, he was the first player to win the junior Grand Slam (all four of the major events in the juniors league) and he was the childhood hero of Roger Federer. He's considered one of the top ten greatest men's tennis players ever; he appeared in the final for each of the four Grand Slam tournaments; the only won he never won was the French Open (losing in 1989 to the youngest men's Grand Slam title winner ever, 17-year old Michael Chang.) (Also, this match looks like good watching.)
J Dilla- one of the most respected producers in hip hop, whose legend has grown in the wake of his 2006 death from a blood disease. He seems to have been the sort of hip hop artist I'm interested in exploring- that hip, grimy, spacey style. Some of his works and collaborations that could be worth listening to: The Shining, Welcome to Detroit, Champion Sound, and Fantastic, Vol I.
Lake Mendota- a lake on the northern bordern of Madison, Wisconsin.
Phil Mahre and Steve Mahre- twin brothers former Olympic alpine skiers. Phil is considered one of the greatest American skiers of all time; Steve was pretty good too. They finished 1-2 in the slalom 1984 Sarajevo Olympics. Phil retired with 27 World Cup race victories (3rd all time among Americans, behind Bode Miller and Lindsey Vonn); Steve finished with 9.
GTE- once upon a time the largest of the 'independent' U.S. telephone companies in the days of the Bell System (the AT&T monopoly, 1877-1984.) Later they merged with Bell Atlantic to form Verizon.
Bennett Cerf- publisher and cofounder of Random House, their leader in their glory days; seems like he was a pretty smart, cool guy. He pushed for and won the court case that allowed for the U.S. publication of Ulysses, a landmark case against government censorship (the opinion is often published in editions of the book.) He was also famous for his jokes and puns (a treasury of tame, anachronistic midcentury humor) and his appearances as a panelist on the classic CBS game show What's My Line?
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
album #7
freedom of choice (devo)
I like it better than Q: Are We Not Men?… They've got this minimalist techno punk thing going on, it's not my favorite sound but it's all right. "Girl U Want" is a good opener, "Whip It" is a good one; my two favorites are "Freedom of Choice" and "Gates of Steel"- they both combine these sounds of emptiness, ominous bass, metallic voids, subtle movements- and a controlled passion in the vocals that really takes these songs to the next level. They sound like undangerous versions of Joy Division songs; cleaner, more programmed. They're catchy, cool, futurist. The second half of the album is all right but it kinda blends together.
I like it better than Q: Are We Not Men?… They've got this minimalist techno punk thing going on, it's not my favorite sound but it's all right. "Girl U Want" is a good opener, "Whip It" is a good one; my two favorites are "Freedom of Choice" and "Gates of Steel"- they both combine these sounds of emptiness, ominous bass, metallic voids, subtle movements- and a controlled passion in the vocals that really takes these songs to the next level. They sound like undangerous versions of Joy Division songs; cleaner, more programmed. They're catchy, cool, futurist. The second half of the album is all right but it kinda blends together.
Friday, February 12, 2010
film #4
The Royal Tenenbaums
I like the details… when the trunk pops open, after Royal's been stabbed, when he asks to go to the Y- as if he's a dead body. Breaking the news to his young children across the long table… a coldly awkward, businesslike distance. The shot of Clue and Risk as Royal smirks about wedging Etheline and Henry- it's a game. "Immediately after saying this, he realized it was true." There's something to the way that half the songs on the soundtrack float omniprescently, like a normal soundtrack, but several others are controlled by the characters- they come from phonographs, from radios. "I wish you would've done this for me when I was a kid." "But you didn't have a drug problem then." There's a grace to the last scene… a powerful and unspoken fact here- if not for the events of this film, the funeral would have gone unattended.
It's a film with a very strange sense of time… there was only one place where I could even tell this story was set in the present day, and that's at the cemetery… only on the (1965-2000) headstone for Chas's wife, and Royal's headstone at the end. In their fashion, in the appliances they use, in the references they make (Royal's brand of racism, for instance), this film feels like a creature of the '80s or the late '70s. Which indeed must be the point- this is a defeated family, and they ache silently for the past by physically remaining there.
"Are there a lot of low-voiced questions with monotone, one worded answers?" …… "Yes."
I felt like I was 2/3s of the way to feeling these characters. They're interesting, in some cases there's a lot of detail, but they're all so reserved… there's a cautiousness to so many of them, they don't let eachother in and they don't necessarily let the viewer in either. I felt hungry for one or two more scenes with each of them. Royal and Richie are probably the characters I felt closest to, understood most clearly. Even Royal is tough to read… possibly because I took a brief intermission, but I'm not totally sold on his emotional switch at the end, from curmudgeonly jerk to curmudgeonly jerk fully giving back and letting go. Likewise I'm not sold on Margot's "I'm in love with you." I must say though, the romantic and sexual tension, the two of them sitting in that glowing tent… it's a particularly moving and captivating scene, because it's such a recognizable life moment… the passionate crush on the verge of breaking through with the slightest acknowledgement… the glance of her thigh, the shoulders touching as they sit.
I liked the opening sequence a whole lot, and many of my feelings for the film from that point on are determined by how well the characters are justified in the opening sequence. The more clearly Royal's destructive influence is conveyed, the more deeply I feel invested in his negative effect on his children. It's most effectively rendered with Margot- the hilarious and cruel review he gives to her play, on her birthday. With Chas, I recognize how he failed as a father, but I don't see how his cruelty would poison the root of Chas's genius, as he poisoned Margot's.
One more scene I gotta acknowledge: even though I'm not 100% sold on the process of getting there, the montage of Royal joyously romping and making chaos with Ari and Uzi, "Me and Julio Down by the Schoolyard…" classic and engaging.
I remember the previews, and the sense I got from this film, just osmotically in the culture, and I assumed that the story really was about this dying man coming home to repair the damage he inflicted on his family. It's funny and kinda smart how that plot is really a bit of a MacGuffin- he's not dying, and the director never even tries to convince the viewer that he's dying- pretty much as soon as he says it, I knew he was just saying it to get in. It would've been a pathetically obvious twist, had Wes really tried to hide it at all.
Sweet, a little dull, a little obvious and at the same time a little confusing from time to time. Likable but not an instant classic (though the beginning and end are both beautiful).
I like the details… when the trunk pops open, after Royal's been stabbed, when he asks to go to the Y- as if he's a dead body. Breaking the news to his young children across the long table… a coldly awkward, businesslike distance. The shot of Clue and Risk as Royal smirks about wedging Etheline and Henry- it's a game. "Immediately after saying this, he realized it was true." There's something to the way that half the songs on the soundtrack float omniprescently, like a normal soundtrack, but several others are controlled by the characters- they come from phonographs, from radios. "I wish you would've done this for me when I was a kid." "But you didn't have a drug problem then." There's a grace to the last scene… a powerful and unspoken fact here- if not for the events of this film, the funeral would have gone unattended.
It's a film with a very strange sense of time… there was only one place where I could even tell this story was set in the present day, and that's at the cemetery… only on the (1965-2000) headstone for Chas's wife, and Royal's headstone at the end. In their fashion, in the appliances they use, in the references they make (Royal's brand of racism, for instance), this film feels like a creature of the '80s or the late '70s. Which indeed must be the point- this is a defeated family, and they ache silently for the past by physically remaining there.
"Are there a lot of low-voiced questions with monotone, one worded answers?" …… "Yes."
I felt like I was 2/3s of the way to feeling these characters. They're interesting, in some cases there's a lot of detail, but they're all so reserved… there's a cautiousness to so many of them, they don't let eachother in and they don't necessarily let the viewer in either. I felt hungry for one or two more scenes with each of them. Royal and Richie are probably the characters I felt closest to, understood most clearly. Even Royal is tough to read… possibly because I took a brief intermission, but I'm not totally sold on his emotional switch at the end, from curmudgeonly jerk to curmudgeonly jerk fully giving back and letting go. Likewise I'm not sold on Margot's "I'm in love with you." I must say though, the romantic and sexual tension, the two of them sitting in that glowing tent… it's a particularly moving and captivating scene, because it's such a recognizable life moment… the passionate crush on the verge of breaking through with the slightest acknowledgement… the glance of her thigh, the shoulders touching as they sit.
I liked the opening sequence a whole lot, and many of my feelings for the film from that point on are determined by how well the characters are justified in the opening sequence. The more clearly Royal's destructive influence is conveyed, the more deeply I feel invested in his negative effect on his children. It's most effectively rendered with Margot- the hilarious and cruel review he gives to her play, on her birthday. With Chas, I recognize how he failed as a father, but I don't see how his cruelty would poison the root of Chas's genius, as he poisoned Margot's.
One more scene I gotta acknowledge: even though I'm not 100% sold on the process of getting there, the montage of Royal joyously romping and making chaos with Ari and Uzi, "Me and Julio Down by the Schoolyard…" classic and engaging.
I remember the previews, and the sense I got from this film, just osmotically in the culture, and I assumed that the story really was about this dying man coming home to repair the damage he inflicted on his family. It's funny and kinda smart how that plot is really a bit of a MacGuffin- he's not dying, and the director never even tries to convince the viewer that he's dying- pretty much as soon as he says it, I knew he was just saying it to get in. It would've been a pathetically obvious twist, had Wes really tried to hide it at all.
Sweet, a little dull, a little obvious and at the same time a little confusing from time to time. Likable but not an instant classic (though the beginning and end are both beautiful).
Thursday, February 11, 2010
crossword #6
aqui- Spanish for "here"
diez- Spanish for "ten"
oban- a single-malt Scotch whiskey brewed in the Scottish town of Oban.
oxalis- a genus of flower, some species of which are colloquially called "false shamrocks." (actual shamrocks are genus trifolium.)
S. Epatha Merkerson- actress best known for playing
href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKr3j0cXjoE">Lt. Anita Van Buren on Law and Order (and record holder for most appearances by an actress in a single show); best known by me for playing Reba the Mail Lady on Pee Wee's Playhouse.
Bela Fleck- the most famous banjo player in the world.
Irene Cara- actress/singer most famous for starring in the movie Fame (1980), and also for the title song for Flashdance, "What a Feeling."
Igbo people- (sometimes called Ibo) an ethnic group in southeastern Nigeria. Some of the monumental historical/culture forces that have affected them over time… the slave trade, British colonialism (they are overwhelmingly Christian as a result); they seceded from Nigeria form the tragically fated Republic of Biafra (1967-1970). "Things Fall Apart," one of the most famous African books, is written about the Igbo people.
Naha- capital city of Okinawa, and once upon a time the location of the capital of the Ryuku Kingdom (15th-19th centuries.)
Sabrina-the 1995 remake of a 1954 classic; the latter starring Audrey Hepburn and Humphrey Bogart; the former starring Harrison Ford (one of his few major commercial flops.)
Starman- a sweetly poetic and weeeeird 1984 scifi/fantasy film.
Lon Nol- leader of Cambodia's Khmer Republic (1970-1975). He originally took power after a situation that unraveled, beyond his intentions, into a coup. As leader he was erratic, emotional, mystical and increasingly authoritarian, and his regime relied heavily on American aid. The notorious Khmer Rouge took over after the collapse of Lon Nol's government.
runic alphabets- starting around 100-200 AD, until the adaption of the Latin alphabet (which followed in the wake of Christianization, 700 AD central europe, 1100 AD northern europe), the Germanic peoples used runic alphabets, the characters of which are called runes.
diez- Spanish for "ten"
oban- a single-malt Scotch whiskey brewed in the Scottish town of Oban.
oxalis- a genus of flower, some species of which are colloquially called "false shamrocks." (actual shamrocks are genus trifolium.)
S. Epatha Merkerson- actress best known for playing
href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKr3j0cXjoE">Lt. Anita Van Buren on Law and Order (and record holder for most appearances by an actress in a single show); best known by me for playing Reba the Mail Lady on Pee Wee's Playhouse.
Bela Fleck- the most famous banjo player in the world.
Irene Cara- actress/singer most famous for starring in the movie Fame (1980), and also for the title song for Flashdance, "What a Feeling."
Igbo people- (sometimes called Ibo) an ethnic group in southeastern Nigeria. Some of the monumental historical/culture forces that have affected them over time… the slave trade, British colonialism (they are overwhelmingly Christian as a result); they seceded from Nigeria form the tragically fated Republic of Biafra (1967-1970). "Things Fall Apart," one of the most famous African books, is written about the Igbo people.
Naha- capital city of Okinawa, and once upon a time the location of the capital of the Ryuku Kingdom (15th-19th centuries.)
Sabrina-the 1995 remake of a 1954 classic; the latter starring Audrey Hepburn and Humphrey Bogart; the former starring Harrison Ford (one of his few major commercial flops.)
Starman- a sweetly poetic and weeeeird 1984 scifi/fantasy film.
Lon Nol- leader of Cambodia's Khmer Republic (1970-1975). He originally took power after a situation that unraveled, beyond his intentions, into a coup. As leader he was erratic, emotional, mystical and increasingly authoritarian, and his regime relied heavily on American aid. The notorious Khmer Rouge took over after the collapse of Lon Nol's government.
runic alphabets- starting around 100-200 AD, until the adaption of the Latin alphabet (which followed in the wake of Christianization, 700 AD central europe, 1100 AD northern europe), the Germanic peoples used runic alphabets, the characters of which are called runes.
album #6
streethawk: a seduction (destroyer)
It feels strange to review a Destroyer album for this yearly project because it's one of the bands I know better, one of the key musical presences of my college years. And I listened to this particular album at least a few times in summer '07, but I've never owned it until recently and haven't heard it a Whole lot, so it felt reviewable. "Virgin With a Memory" and "Beggars Might Ride" are melodic, acoustic, contemplative classics. "The Sublimation Hour" is a great, Bowiesque number with a fierce electric guitar lick- I still remember hearing it for the first time, when Destroyer opened for the New Pornographers, sophomore year. (Damn would I love to see those guys live again…)
Other good tracks: "Streethawk I," "Streethawk II" (awesome, low burning synthesizer makes this song), the piano-driven "The Very Modern Dance," and the catchy lament "Helena."
I don't love it as much as Rubies, and I think I got a little too used to it- not sure if I would listen to the whole thing several times in a row- but that Beggars-Sublimation-Virgin trifecta is so, so spectacular.
It feels strange to review a Destroyer album for this yearly project because it's one of the bands I know better, one of the key musical presences of my college years. And I listened to this particular album at least a few times in summer '07, but I've never owned it until recently and haven't heard it a Whole lot, so it felt reviewable. "Virgin With a Memory" and "Beggars Might Ride" are melodic, acoustic, contemplative classics. "The Sublimation Hour" is a great, Bowiesque number with a fierce electric guitar lick- I still remember hearing it for the first time, when Destroyer opened for the New Pornographers, sophomore year. (Damn would I love to see those guys live again…)
Other good tracks: "Streethawk I," "Streethawk II" (awesome, low burning synthesizer makes this song), the piano-driven "The Very Modern Dance," and the catchy lament "Helena."
I don't love it as much as Rubies, and I think I got a little too used to it- not sure if I would listen to the whole thing several times in a row- but that Beggars-Sublimation-Virgin trifecta is so, so spectacular.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
lecture #1
Television: Culture and History
CROSSFIRE: Does TV Kill?
Does it have an actual impact on people's life? Class starts with a 20-minute debate between students representing the Pro and Con.
• Pro… A test by Herbert Krugman indicates a significantly high level of endorphins in the brain of high-TV watchers… a heavy TV watcher exhibits six symptoms affiliated with substance abuse: (1) they use it as a sedative, (2) they use it indiscriminately, (3) they feel a loss of control when watching, (4) they feel angry at themselves for watching too much, (5) they are unable to stop, (6) they're miserable when they're not doing it.
• Con… Does watching TV violence have a causal effect on real world violence? No. The correlation does not prove causation. (These two sides have opened with arguments that completely talk past each other: chemical addiction vs influence on violence. Rest of the debate follows the latter issue.)
• Pro: so many correlations!
• Con: they don't prove causation.
• Con: (interesting point)- hypothetically, if watching TV violence does influence aggression, we should infer a cumulative effect (the more you watch, the more aggressive you get). So to prove the causation, the aggression should rise in the teenage years over time- but the longitudinal studies do not see this effect. Justification Theory- People will watch TV because it justifies their own violent actions.
• Con: (best argument of the day)- Let's set aside aggression and look at actual violent crimes. The violent crime rate dropped 61% from 1993-2005. Since the violence on TV has not decreased in that period, we need to assume that, to prove causality, the violent crime numbers would increase or stay constant in that period. But that hasn't been the case at all. According to Nielsen, violence on TV is higher… violence among kids though is precipitously lower. TV violence can't induce people to Kill.
• Professor: If you argue that we are impervious to to these negative messages, you can't argue for positive impacts either (rebutting Con girl who mentions learning English from Sesame Street.)e are impervious to these negative messages, you can't argue for positive impacts either (rebutting Con girl who talked about learning English from Sesame Street.)
• Professor: Remember Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions- Science is discourse, it is an argument made by people with an interest. We think that science is free from human bias, but that is not the case. Let's not buy into the data as if it carries universal truth.
• student: Japanese TV is crazily violent but it's a nation without much violent crime- if TV violence was causal Japan would be much more violent to live in.
• Pro: We're not saying TV is the cause of all violence, we are saying it is A cause.
• student: TV can be an influence but it needs to be coacting with other factors.
• Con: it's about the relationships at home, not the TV.
• a thing or two I'm thinking about now: we need to examine TV's ability to influence violence, not by showing mere violence, but by demonization… I'm much more interested in learning about how likely that Obama would be assassinated by someone whipped into a frenzy by Fox News and other sources. Also, which is the most immersive media? Is a Film, a newspaper, TV, internet- which source is the most individually persuasive and worldview-changing?
Professor's Lecture
If we say that TV does not kill, then we risk letting it off the hook- letting it run amok. There are vulnerable people who can't filter… we do not want to unleash TV from the checks and balances. So should there be censoring? Then there's the danger of social control and propaganda. A challenging line.
Why has TV become a public enemy, moreso than the web, film, radio? Why is TV the most feared? TV is the most prevalent, the most accessible. It is ubiquitous, and it recognizes no age differences or demographic differences. We have to see media as Ecology- as a part of culture. TV is symbolically chosen to demonize the media system as a whole.
Let's not be deceived by the notion of 'representation,' as in, 'TV is a fiction, it's just entertainment.' To separate representation from lived experience is a flawed concept, because representation has such a deep effect on How we live (eg, you learn romantic behavior/standards from TV and film.) Life is not Immune from representation. School and Government are not outside of TV [reminds me of the Yglesian point of how relatively few people watch cable news, but it shapes the beltway discussion intensely]… We cannot hold parents solely responsible for kids watching violent TV, because the violence is exciting, deliberately alluring.
We can trace the villainization of TV into the 19th century. In the 19th century, the population of cities surges. These large groups of strangers form a mass. This is the era of Mass (Production, Media, Society.) A mass is huge in quantity but lacks cohesion- it is unpredictable, unruly.
A lot of 19th century sociology examined the mass as mobs, as an animal herd. There is a Contempt for the masses. The concept of 'Mass' is a mythology cultivated by the elite crowd, by aristocrats. 19th century thinkers write about mass as a Threat. It's only in the last 20 years that 'mass media' and the perjorative attitude towards the masses has tapered off.
'Mass culture is non-culture, it is the enemy of civilization'- this idea lasted until the 1980s. Before the 1980s, TV was deeply studied and deeply attacked, and this was shaped by resistance to the masses, this philosophy reaching back to the 19th century.
Vaudeville was prototypical to TV (1945-1951.) 1951 is when the new era begins… Networks grow, the distribution ratio goes over 50%, NBC and CBS move to California to join forces with Hollywood- to use the studio system, the mass-manufactured structure. It's before this point, in the early organic days of TV, when it's looser. Vaudeville is truly hodge-podge. No strict structure to it, it's whatever entertains. Vaudeville is family entertainment; it does not discriminate- ethnic entertainment was embraced; it was a culturally cosmopolitan media. It celebrated exoticism. The Vaudeville era: roughly 1880-1930. Radio began to eclipse Vaudeville… Visuality was the dividing line between Vaudeville and Radio. Oral talent was the key to radio success. Radio is more orderly and well organized; Vaudeville is speedy and slapdash. The rise of TV gave a second chance to Vaudeville entertainers whose talent was based on physicality and visuality. TV at this time was transmitted live, and it was disorganized and spontaneous.
video segment: the history of Vaudeville
If people wanted to watch it, you could make a living doing it. Enthusiasm was a big key to success, so was stage personality, and frivolity. Ukulele is a very popular instrument in Vaudeville.
The Palace Theatre- the most famous Vaudeville Theatre. In the wake of this movement, acting and dance schools flourished (to get training that could then be used to earn money in Vaudeville.)
June Taylor… Julian Eltinge… Eva Tangoye… Joe Frisco… Billy Barty… Violet Carson… Morey Amsterdam… Studs Terkel… A. Robinson, the banana man (pulling out an entire set of furniture from underneath his big black coat… WC Fields knew he couldn't juggle as well as other jugglers, so he created an interesting persona to accentuate the act, the man always beleagured… Haj Ali, the great regurgitator… Arthur Tracy (it's fascinating seeing him as an old, decaying man, lip synching to his glamorous old records, a romantic, mysterious young man once… Al Jolson in blackface… Eddie Peabody (very 'Kennth')… Harry Rose (almost certainly gay), sandwiches song… Carl Ballantine… Frisco, a fun dancer…
If people were famous for any reason, people wanted to gawk at you, and you were invited to appear in Vaudeville revues. Babe Ruth singing a song where he's just reciting a pitch count. “Ball Two!” (hilarious.)
lecture
People want amusement- they gravitate towards sensations, towards the phenomenal. The daily experience of life is defined by unnatural stimuli- tall buildings, waves of strangers, exhausting work- hectic, overwhelming city life. The elites might have thought vaudeville was weird and awful, but the masses enjoyed it. The birth, the heritage of TV, is based in mass culture, amusement, escape from the day of work. Rather than condemn, why don't we embrace the roots and tradition of TV as something for the _____?
In the early years of TV, distribution is 10-15%… and so the rich have the TVs, but the art is based on broad, silly, mass tastes. It's an era of a Lot of complaints- letters to the editor about spending $500 on a TV and then watching this trash. It's an interesting contradiction of the early years.
TV had an omnivorous appetite… in the last twenty years we have seen the evolution of 'mass culture' into 'pop culture.' This matters because mass is a class term. Mass culture is no longer a culture for the masses, it is a culture for all. The change in nomenclature accompanies this change in attitude… by becoming 'pop culture,' it is no longer class culture. That's the key.
video segment: Texaco Star Theater
opens with the Texaco song by the "merry Texaco men," pretty catchy, charming song… introduces Milton Berle, arriving on a chariot, dressed in a Roman skirt and wig. He is pretty god damn charming; his impromptu silliness and mid-joke ad libbing is funnier than his act (Conanesque.) Charming as hell. Rambling, funny monologue, big smile, rich voice, charismatic… next act: the Luscatos. 3 acrobats in suits. Pretty fucking awesome. Wow. Pretty mesmerizing to watch (I guess this is that alluring passive lull that televised spectacle incurs)… "introducing Mr. George Van Dorn, modeling this year's men's spring suit." A pudgy man steps out in a suit covered with springs. Berle fucking rules… Key Luc. Berle speaks in a halted, stereotypically Chinese voice; Luc responds in eloquent, unaccented English. Some fun back and forth banter, and then 'the most popular television show in China'- the Texaco guys sing a Chinese minstrel-show song, dressed garishly, leading then to Miltie pulling a rickshaw with Key inside.
lecture
It's organic, liberated by accidents, it's fun, it's open- Milt makes himself the clown, Key Luc can play charmingly, with grace. The racist aspects are so audacious, as the Professor points out, almost enough to become harmless parody (you can read into it what you want, like Archie Bunker- on one level, fans can agree with him; on a different level, a different set of fans can laughingly reject him.) The whole show really feels like the ancestor of the Talk Show- the combination of charismatic host, spectacle, comedic monologue, special guests, and so on- before it gets homogenized, processed by the Hollywood machine, made regimented.
We see in the early history of film, the founding fathers (George Melies and the Lumiere Brothers) two different traditions, different uses for the medium. The Lumieres are interested in the every day- unembellished, unexaggerated, the documentary, actuality. Melies is interested in tricks, fantasies, the unreal, spectacles and magic. TV likewise has these twin legacies, these competing genres- Information and Entertainment. "Infotainment" is one of the hybrids; another hybrid comes from the audience's personal perspective- what entertains you, you might find informative.
Marshall McLuhan- "cool" Media (it invites you in, you participate actively… newspaper, novels, radio) and "hot" Media (like a fire, it is frightening and overpowering, you instinctively pull back from it. TV and TV News… you watch passively- not, as the Professor emphasizes, that this is always a bad thing.)
Can TV ascend to the level of the newspaper? The Professor's opinion: You can't expect the turtle to be as fast as a rabbit. TV's information level is limited by the form. It is pictorial journalism, similar to yellow journalism in that it's information but it must pander to certain aspects (the visual, in this case).
TV News is much more similar to Newsreels than to Radio News. In documentary and news coverage, radio is not a particularly strong influence on television. Newsreel was a vital force… delivering war news, disseminating information about new laws and practices; it was like the microphone of the Government.
video segment: history of the Newsreels
The Newsreels were disposable, fun, silly. They loved beauties and babies, and anything exotic. The Dionne Quintuplets were a Newsreel sensation… crazy stunts were hugely popular (lady dancing on a tightrope over a city; a man fired out of a cannon, clearing two ferris wheels… a man taking a cannonball shot to the stomach ["he's the only man who can do this stunt; then again he's the only man who Wants to do this stunt"].) Crashes and disasters were also popular- the Hindenberg was the most successful story of the decade. As the critics jokes, the Newsreels were "a series of catastrophes ended by a fashion show."
The disaster the Newsreel avoided, though- the Great Depression. They avoided it entirely; they only presented what they thought the public wanted to see. They created a false world with no suffering, no controversy; anything that might provoke a guilty conscience was ignored.
Leo Seltzer filmed the Depression. There's a lot of astonishing footage that never made the Newsreels… demonstrations in Union Square Park, riots against the Ford Motor Company. Footage of steel plant riots outside Chicago- the Memorial Day Massacre. Stunning. Crazy. Police firing on protestors as they run away. They also mention the On-To-Ottawa Trek, "one of the biggest stories of the Depression"- interesting… I've never heard of it.
The March of Time- 1935- this was the series that showed the world, showed real news. They covered spectacular stories, the rise of fascism in Europe, for instance. Louis de Rochemont was the driving force behind MoT- he had the idea, Time Inc's Ray Larsen had the resources. Their breakout story- an embarrassing piece on Huey Long. Another story- Gerald L.K. Smith. De Rochemont wanted to bring action, drama, controversy.
Ironically, much of their footage was staged- “fakery in service of the truth,” dramatizations of the news. (I love the story of the Insurance Salesman pulled downstairs to film a part in a Newsreel. Adis Ababa hotel. “Hey you guys, listen to this news.”) INSIDE NAZI GERMANY 1938- an astonishing film. Much of it real footage- but for the scenes De Rochemont wanted to show but couldn't get footage for (Hitler brooding before a fire, censorship, sodliers taking money from citizens), they filmed cooperate Germans in a New Jersey town.
video segment: early history of Television News
Camel News Caravan… John Cameron Swayze… anchor was required to smoke onscreen, and they couldn't show pictures of men holding cigars (an exception made for Churchill)… for the audience it was sometimes hard to tell what was news, and what was a commercial (social events and awards galas and brand new cars, all stories about a car company- the one that promotes the news show)…
The defining moment of broadcast news: when Murrow brings his radio reporters to television and creates "See it Now," the first prestigious television news program. Murrow saw the power of television to bring the world into people's rooms. He wanted serious news, news with integrity. Murrow saved television news from basically remaining/becoming the equivalent of supermarket tabloid news. He did so by setting a standard.
One thing we can take from "See it Now"- TV is not beholden to its origins- just because it came from a simplistic, mass culture, vaudeville perspective, does not mean it must permanently be this way. Different people, different institutions, different organizations, can create changes.
History of the Academic Perspectives on TV
(1) Hypodermic- TV gets in under your skin and changes our way of thinking- it is alarming; the audience are victims, dupes.
(2) Use and Gratification- People feel comfortable with TV, people use it for their own purposes, to satisfy their needs. The audience is smart and savvy.
(3) Agenda Setting- (Chomsky) TV does not dictate what to think, but it does insinuate what to think about. It's not about the content of TV, but the issues they highlight vs the issues they neglect to mention [as in the newsreels]- that's how they convey this middle class yuppie worldview.
(4) Cultivation- (Gerbmer) Mean world syndrome- if you're exposed to certain concepts again and again, you begin to cultivate the fictitious worldview of the television. [eg- you see CSI and Law and Order, you grow to believe the world is full of crime and violence, because the TV cultivates the 'reality' that it is like this.]
The media is not categorically wrong or right, but it can be dangerous if it is not checked and balanced with the real world.
CROSSFIRE: Does TV Kill?
Does it have an actual impact on people's life? Class starts with a 20-minute debate between students representing the Pro and Con.
• Pro… A test by Herbert Krugman indicates a significantly high level of endorphins in the brain of high-TV watchers… a heavy TV watcher exhibits six symptoms affiliated with substance abuse: (1) they use it as a sedative, (2) they use it indiscriminately, (3) they feel a loss of control when watching, (4) they feel angry at themselves for watching too much, (5) they are unable to stop, (6) they're miserable when they're not doing it.
• Con… Does watching TV violence have a causal effect on real world violence? No. The correlation does not prove causation. (These two sides have opened with arguments that completely talk past each other: chemical addiction vs influence on violence. Rest of the debate follows the latter issue.)
• Pro: so many correlations!
• Con: they don't prove causation.
• Con: (interesting point)- hypothetically, if watching TV violence does influence aggression, we should infer a cumulative effect (the more you watch, the more aggressive you get). So to prove the causation, the aggression should rise in the teenage years over time- but the longitudinal studies do not see this effect. Justification Theory- People will watch TV because it justifies their own violent actions.
• Con: (best argument of the day)- Let's set aside aggression and look at actual violent crimes. The violent crime rate dropped 61% from 1993-2005. Since the violence on TV has not decreased in that period, we need to assume that, to prove causality, the violent crime numbers would increase or stay constant in that period. But that hasn't been the case at all. According to Nielsen, violence on TV is higher… violence among kids though is precipitously lower. TV violence can't induce people to Kill.
• Professor: If you argue that we are impervious to to these negative messages, you can't argue for positive impacts either (rebutting Con girl who mentions learning English from Sesame Street.)e are impervious to these negative messages, you can't argue for positive impacts either (rebutting Con girl who talked about learning English from Sesame Street.)
• Professor: Remember Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions- Science is discourse, it is an argument made by people with an interest. We think that science is free from human bias, but that is not the case. Let's not buy into the data as if it carries universal truth.
• student: Japanese TV is crazily violent but it's a nation without much violent crime- if TV violence was causal Japan would be much more violent to live in.
• Pro: We're not saying TV is the cause of all violence, we are saying it is A cause.
• student: TV can be an influence but it needs to be coacting with other factors.
• Con: it's about the relationships at home, not the TV.
• a thing or two I'm thinking about now: we need to examine TV's ability to influence violence, not by showing mere violence, but by demonization… I'm much more interested in learning about how likely that Obama would be assassinated by someone whipped into a frenzy by Fox News and other sources. Also, which is the most immersive media? Is a Film, a newspaper, TV, internet- which source is the most individually persuasive and worldview-changing?
Professor's Lecture
If we say that TV does not kill, then we risk letting it off the hook- letting it run amok. There are vulnerable people who can't filter… we do not want to unleash TV from the checks and balances. So should there be censoring? Then there's the danger of social control and propaganda. A challenging line.
Why has TV become a public enemy, moreso than the web, film, radio? Why is TV the most feared? TV is the most prevalent, the most accessible. It is ubiquitous, and it recognizes no age differences or demographic differences. We have to see media as Ecology- as a part of culture. TV is symbolically chosen to demonize the media system as a whole.
Let's not be deceived by the notion of 'representation,' as in, 'TV is a fiction, it's just entertainment.' To separate representation from lived experience is a flawed concept, because representation has such a deep effect on How we live (eg, you learn romantic behavior/standards from TV and film.) Life is not Immune from representation. School and Government are not outside of TV [reminds me of the Yglesian point of how relatively few people watch cable news, but it shapes the beltway discussion intensely]… We cannot hold parents solely responsible for kids watching violent TV, because the violence is exciting, deliberately alluring.
We can trace the villainization of TV into the 19th century. In the 19th century, the population of cities surges. These large groups of strangers form a mass. This is the era of Mass (Production, Media, Society.) A mass is huge in quantity but lacks cohesion- it is unpredictable, unruly.
A lot of 19th century sociology examined the mass as mobs, as an animal herd. There is a Contempt for the masses. The concept of 'Mass' is a mythology cultivated by the elite crowd, by aristocrats. 19th century thinkers write about mass as a Threat. It's only in the last 20 years that 'mass media' and the perjorative attitude towards the masses has tapered off.
'Mass culture is non-culture, it is the enemy of civilization'- this idea lasted until the 1980s. Before the 1980s, TV was deeply studied and deeply attacked, and this was shaped by resistance to the masses, this philosophy reaching back to the 19th century.
Vaudeville was prototypical to TV (1945-1951.) 1951 is when the new era begins… Networks grow, the distribution ratio goes over 50%, NBC and CBS move to California to join forces with Hollywood- to use the studio system, the mass-manufactured structure. It's before this point, in the early organic days of TV, when it's looser. Vaudeville is truly hodge-podge. No strict structure to it, it's whatever entertains. Vaudeville is family entertainment; it does not discriminate- ethnic entertainment was embraced; it was a culturally cosmopolitan media. It celebrated exoticism. The Vaudeville era: roughly 1880-1930. Radio began to eclipse Vaudeville… Visuality was the dividing line between Vaudeville and Radio. Oral talent was the key to radio success. Radio is more orderly and well organized; Vaudeville is speedy and slapdash. The rise of TV gave a second chance to Vaudeville entertainers whose talent was based on physicality and visuality. TV at this time was transmitted live, and it was disorganized and spontaneous.
video segment: the history of Vaudeville
If people wanted to watch it, you could make a living doing it. Enthusiasm was a big key to success, so was stage personality, and frivolity. Ukulele is a very popular instrument in Vaudeville.
The Palace Theatre- the most famous Vaudeville Theatre. In the wake of this movement, acting and dance schools flourished (to get training that could then be used to earn money in Vaudeville.)
June Taylor… Julian Eltinge… Eva Tangoye… Joe Frisco… Billy Barty… Violet Carson… Morey Amsterdam… Studs Terkel… A. Robinson, the banana man (pulling out an entire set of furniture from underneath his big black coat… WC Fields knew he couldn't juggle as well as other jugglers, so he created an interesting persona to accentuate the act, the man always beleagured… Haj Ali, the great regurgitator… Arthur Tracy (it's fascinating seeing him as an old, decaying man, lip synching to his glamorous old records, a romantic, mysterious young man once… Al Jolson in blackface… Eddie Peabody (very 'Kennth')… Harry Rose (almost certainly gay), sandwiches song… Carl Ballantine… Frisco, a fun dancer…
If people were famous for any reason, people wanted to gawk at you, and you were invited to appear in Vaudeville revues. Babe Ruth singing a song where he's just reciting a pitch count. “Ball Two!” (hilarious.)
lecture
People want amusement- they gravitate towards sensations, towards the phenomenal. The daily experience of life is defined by unnatural stimuli- tall buildings, waves of strangers, exhausting work- hectic, overwhelming city life. The elites might have thought vaudeville was weird and awful, but the masses enjoyed it. The birth, the heritage of TV, is based in mass culture, amusement, escape from the day of work. Rather than condemn, why don't we embrace the roots and tradition of TV as something for the _____?
In the early years of TV, distribution is 10-15%… and so the rich have the TVs, but the art is based on broad, silly, mass tastes. It's an era of a Lot of complaints- letters to the editor about spending $500 on a TV and then watching this trash. It's an interesting contradiction of the early years.
TV had an omnivorous appetite… in the last twenty years we have seen the evolution of 'mass culture' into 'pop culture.' This matters because mass is a class term. Mass culture is no longer a culture for the masses, it is a culture for all. The change in nomenclature accompanies this change in attitude… by becoming 'pop culture,' it is no longer class culture. That's the key.
video segment: Texaco Star Theater
opens with the Texaco song by the "merry Texaco men," pretty catchy, charming song… introduces Milton Berle, arriving on a chariot, dressed in a Roman skirt and wig. He is pretty god damn charming; his impromptu silliness and mid-joke ad libbing is funnier than his act (Conanesque.) Charming as hell. Rambling, funny monologue, big smile, rich voice, charismatic… next act: the Luscatos. 3 acrobats in suits. Pretty fucking awesome. Wow. Pretty mesmerizing to watch (I guess this is that alluring passive lull that televised spectacle incurs)… "introducing Mr. George Van Dorn, modeling this year's men's spring suit." A pudgy man steps out in a suit covered with springs. Berle fucking rules… Key Luc. Berle speaks in a halted, stereotypically Chinese voice; Luc responds in eloquent, unaccented English. Some fun back and forth banter, and then 'the most popular television show in China'- the Texaco guys sing a Chinese minstrel-show song, dressed garishly, leading then to Miltie pulling a rickshaw with Key inside.
lecture
It's organic, liberated by accidents, it's fun, it's open- Milt makes himself the clown, Key Luc can play charmingly, with grace. The racist aspects are so audacious, as the Professor points out, almost enough to become harmless parody (you can read into it what you want, like Archie Bunker- on one level, fans can agree with him; on a different level, a different set of fans can laughingly reject him.) The whole show really feels like the ancestor of the Talk Show- the combination of charismatic host, spectacle, comedic monologue, special guests, and so on- before it gets homogenized, processed by the Hollywood machine, made regimented.
We see in the early history of film, the founding fathers (George Melies and the Lumiere Brothers) two different traditions, different uses for the medium. The Lumieres are interested in the every day- unembellished, unexaggerated, the documentary, actuality. Melies is interested in tricks, fantasies, the unreal, spectacles and magic. TV likewise has these twin legacies, these competing genres- Information and Entertainment. "Infotainment" is one of the hybrids; another hybrid comes from the audience's personal perspective- what entertains you, you might find informative.
Marshall McLuhan- "cool" Media (it invites you in, you participate actively… newspaper, novels, radio) and "hot" Media (like a fire, it is frightening and overpowering, you instinctively pull back from it. TV and TV News… you watch passively- not, as the Professor emphasizes, that this is always a bad thing.)
Can TV ascend to the level of the newspaper? The Professor's opinion: You can't expect the turtle to be as fast as a rabbit. TV's information level is limited by the form. It is pictorial journalism, similar to yellow journalism in that it's information but it must pander to certain aspects (the visual, in this case).
TV News is much more similar to Newsreels than to Radio News. In documentary and news coverage, radio is not a particularly strong influence on television. Newsreel was a vital force… delivering war news, disseminating information about new laws and practices; it was like the microphone of the Government.
video segment: history of the Newsreels
The Newsreels were disposable, fun, silly. They loved beauties and babies, and anything exotic. The Dionne Quintuplets were a Newsreel sensation… crazy stunts were hugely popular (lady dancing on a tightrope over a city; a man fired out of a cannon, clearing two ferris wheels… a man taking a cannonball shot to the stomach ["he's the only man who can do this stunt; then again he's the only man who Wants to do this stunt"].) Crashes and disasters were also popular- the Hindenberg was the most successful story of the decade. As the critics jokes, the Newsreels were "a series of catastrophes ended by a fashion show."
The disaster the Newsreel avoided, though- the Great Depression. They avoided it entirely; they only presented what they thought the public wanted to see. They created a false world with no suffering, no controversy; anything that might provoke a guilty conscience was ignored.
Leo Seltzer filmed the Depression. There's a lot of astonishing footage that never made the Newsreels… demonstrations in Union Square Park, riots against the Ford Motor Company. Footage of steel plant riots outside Chicago- the Memorial Day Massacre. Stunning. Crazy. Police firing on protestors as they run away. They also mention the On-To-Ottawa Trek, "one of the biggest stories of the Depression"- interesting… I've never heard of it.
The March of Time- 1935- this was the series that showed the world, showed real news. They covered spectacular stories, the rise of fascism in Europe, for instance. Louis de Rochemont was the driving force behind MoT- he had the idea, Time Inc's Ray Larsen had the resources. Their breakout story- an embarrassing piece on Huey Long. Another story- Gerald L.K. Smith. De Rochemont wanted to bring action, drama, controversy.
Ironically, much of their footage was staged- “fakery in service of the truth,” dramatizations of the news. (I love the story of the Insurance Salesman pulled downstairs to film a part in a Newsreel. Adis Ababa hotel. “Hey you guys, listen to this news.”) INSIDE NAZI GERMANY 1938- an astonishing film. Much of it real footage- but for the scenes De Rochemont wanted to show but couldn't get footage for (Hitler brooding before a fire, censorship, sodliers taking money from citizens), they filmed cooperate Germans in a New Jersey town.
video segment: early history of Television News
Camel News Caravan… John Cameron Swayze… anchor was required to smoke onscreen, and they couldn't show pictures of men holding cigars (an exception made for Churchill)… for the audience it was sometimes hard to tell what was news, and what was a commercial (social events and awards galas and brand new cars, all stories about a car company- the one that promotes the news show)…
The defining moment of broadcast news: when Murrow brings his radio reporters to television and creates "See it Now," the first prestigious television news program. Murrow saw the power of television to bring the world into people's rooms. He wanted serious news, news with integrity. Murrow saved television news from basically remaining/becoming the equivalent of supermarket tabloid news. He did so by setting a standard.
One thing we can take from "See it Now"- TV is not beholden to its origins- just because it came from a simplistic, mass culture, vaudeville perspective, does not mean it must permanently be this way. Different people, different institutions, different organizations, can create changes.
History of the Academic Perspectives on TV
(1) Hypodermic- TV gets in under your skin and changes our way of thinking- it is alarming; the audience are victims, dupes.
(2) Use and Gratification- People feel comfortable with TV, people use it for their own purposes, to satisfy their needs. The audience is smart and savvy.
(3) Agenda Setting- (Chomsky) TV does not dictate what to think, but it does insinuate what to think about. It's not about the content of TV, but the issues they highlight vs the issues they neglect to mention [as in the newsreels]- that's how they convey this middle class yuppie worldview.
(4) Cultivation- (Gerbmer) Mean world syndrome- if you're exposed to certain concepts again and again, you begin to cultivate the fictitious worldview of the television. [eg- you see CSI and Law and Order, you grow to believe the world is full of crime and violence, because the TV cultivates the 'reality' that it is like this.]
The media is not categorically wrong or right, but it can be dangerous if it is not checked and balanced with the real world.
Monday, February 8, 2010
exhibit #4
Klimt to Klee: Masterworks from the Sabarsky Collection
this exhibit pays tribute to the Neue Galerie's cofounder (the other: Richard Lauder.) Serge Sabarsky, a Vienna native, saw his mission as giving a home to this German modern art; to save the reputation of this culture, so damaged by the political situation of the 1930s and '40s. Ah, I didn't realize until just now, looking it up, just how new the Neue Galerie is; and also that Sabarsky died before the museum was established. Makes the whole exhibit feel somehow sweeter and more compelling.
One of the points they make about Sabarsky was his conviction that art was meant to be looked at, uncluttered and unmuddled by interpretative text, in the museum setting… that might be a misreading of his words, but the main point I think is that he wanted people to be able to look at the painting and enjoy it and interpret it their own way, without the text directing them. This is a concept put into action in this exhibit- there's the optional audio guide, and there are a few explanatory plaques on the floors of the museum, but none of the artworks or the rooms are accompanied by analysis.
Also, it's fascinating in the post-show reflection, to learn more about the way these artists were treated, the specific ways they suffered in the wake of Nazism (holy hell, I'd never heard of this 1937 exhibition until now but it sounds a little bit hilarious and a lot of horrifying.) This is the sort of context that exhibit shies away from delving into, but it helps me appreciate Sabarsky's mission a little more.
first room
Mostly artifacts from Sabarsky's life- pictures of him in the war, honors he received, books he wrote (primarily one about Klimt, Kokoschka and Schiele, the Austrian Expressionists.) There's some furniture in the room, and some intense-looking Kokoschka oil portraits. I like Two Girls, the color and the intensity.
second room
Klimt- The Dancer, beautiful springtime color, flat perspective. Egon Schiele- Town Among Greenery (The Old City III)- I like the density, the geometry, the colors… lots of garden landscapes in this room. Adele Bloch Bauer I, one of those pretty-woman-golden dress-golden background-flat but intricate-feminine Klimt pictures. I vaguely suspect that this room does not directly relate to the Sabarsky exhibit, it's just an exhibition space for some of the gallery's star pieces. Very pretty and in tune, at least.
drawing room
one wall by Alfred Kubin, one long wall by Gustav Klimt, 1 1/2 walls by Egon Schiele, 1/2 wall by Oscar Kokoschka.
Kokoschka- emaciated naked girls and a few color scenes.
Kubin- very vividly rendered, finely drawn… dark, strange, haunting imagery. The Last King, a long, giant, emaciated, delicate, sad white King, a horde of black hooded subjects moving about below him. Guilt, a defeated, naked man standing in a desolate lake, bent over, a walrus resting on top of him. Earth: Mother of Us All, a naked pregnant woman, sprinkling seeds, a dark parade of heads laid out behind her… Back to the Womb, coffins floating down a river towards a woman- she is cut in half, and the river ends in the cave of her womb. Female Suicide, a dead, frail, pregnant woman floating down a river, a large catfish following her like a reflection; Turkish Call to Arms, the Turks assembling, Couplet, a cabaret/burlesque woman singing, with two men passed out (dying?) before her… The Devil as Stallion, a black horse looking out on a desolate landscape. Every single one of these drawings is dark, well rendered, imaginative… like illustrations in some nightmarish Alice in Wonderland. This man is a Tim Burton character come to life… a weird, smallish, morbid and melancholy guy. "From 1906 until his death, he lived a withdrawn life in a small castle on a twelfth century estate in Zwickledt, Upper Austria."
Klimt- all nineteen of these relatively large drawings are single-subject portraits of women and girls. (In fact, every drawing in this room besides Kubin's take just a single subject; the overwhelming majority are portraiture.) The girls are smiling; the women are beautiful, slim, refined, well dressed (though a few get more intimate… reclining nudes, laid out on the bed, touching or clearly indicating themselves.) I particularly like Design for 'Tragedy,' a busy and interesting preparatory sketch; the subtle, demure beauty of Young Girl Gazing Downward, and Seated Woman Facing Front, so confident and modern.
Schiele- I really like his drawings. He draws in such a specific way- dark lines, detailed, expressive faces. Stern, businesslike Robert Müller; Woman with a Hat and Veil and Portrait of Dr. Hugo Koller, upper class and weary… wow, one of his drawings is The Dead Gustav Klimt- damn… it's a good picture and also compellingly strange to see the passive, balding, beaten face, across the room from his elegant, sexual pictures of high society women- like the wizard behind the curtain, the vulnerability so utterly exposed. My two favorites are Wally in Red Blouse with Raised Knees and Striding Torso in Green Blouse, I love both of these for the sexual energy… they're seductive and hip, you really feel like Egon slept with them right after they were drawn. It really takes me to this romantic fantasy of the starving Bohemian artist, smokey, sexual, penniless and young and brilliant. I also like Office in the Mühlig Prisoner of War Camp- a clean, spare picture… his way of drawing just makes everything seem livelier. I knew he served in the war, and I thought he died in action in 1918- he actually was claimed by the influenza epidemic. He was respected by the officers and never faced combat- just light duty watching after Russian prisoners.
fourth room (upstairs)
Phenomenal. An extraordinary array of smart, hilarious, devastating drawings, depictions of that fascinating Weimar Republic social chaos.
Max Beckmann- sort of cartoony, sort of realistic… lots of hash marks on the faces… several stark, noirish self portraits… my favorites of his are "I.B. Neumann and Martha Stern," an elegant cafe picture; Disillusioned I and Disillusioned II are both claustrophobic, angular pictures of society- fantastic use of strong lines, phenomenally interesting and well drawn faces.
Otto Dix- a few paintings of nude prostitutes. A few Astonishingly dark and vivid drawings… Sex Murder is Shocking- a woman laid out on a bed, her flash a saggy, scratchy mess, blood oozing out of her mouth, stomach and vagina (and randomly, a black dog passionately humping a mildy confused scruffy dog.) Maude Arizona (Suleika, the Tatooed Wonder), a mostly-nude woman dancing onstage, her body covered with tatoos. Nightly Apparition, an amazing picture… inky, smudgy, chaotic background, a woman in a black shawl and black feathered hat, a horrifying black face- empty black eyes, Jackson nose, a big, crooked, skeletal grin, like a face that has been burned off… mesmerizing. Sketch, 1922, a dazzlingly crazy picture. A demonically grinning little man, waving guns in the direction of a very tall and inexpressive man-giant. There's an ax in his head, a screw driven into his heart, a huge ball and a chair thrown at his shoulders, he is toppling over without reacting, like a dummy, not even putting his limbs in motion.
George Grosz- Extraordinary. I love his stuff- cartoony, political, smart, striking. Pacification Politics- little roachlike, silly men sitting around a table, making their statements and sorting their papers, but they're all in the ugly, brutish arms of the gas-masked soldier. Ballot Box, a sheepish looking Ass man drops his ballot into a big, chipped, steaming tea cup; Holy Picture- Jesus inexpressive as snickering, medieval barbarians burn, whip and saw him… it looks like a pitch black Mad magazine cartoon. It's striking, the way the name and the image play off of eachother- is it sacrliege to see such a gruesome depiction of Jesus labeled 'holy,' or is the ugly irony in the fact that this Is an acceptable 'holy' picture, or (considering the torturers seem to come not from Christ's era but from the Middle Ages) is it a picture about the history of religion, a message distorted to permit and advocate violence and torture?
Also on display by Grosz, a very pretty set of water colored line drawings of characters from Caesar and Cleopatra, the George Bernard Shaw play. Two other larger water color Grosz pictures are striking… his Stage Depictions for 'The Drunken Ship' by Paul Zech… one, a scarred, deformed, clueless Priest with a besmirched cross on one side; on the other side, a snearing, green, ghoulish soldier (blue coat and red pants- French?) holding prison keys and a bloody sword, and in the middle, a circle of gray, inexpressive prisoners, pacing… the other stage depiction: slaves chopping away in the hot yellow glow of the sun, a sinister soldier in blue light with a menacing dog, drinking booze and grinning smugly as he watches after them, ready to punish them at the first sign of fatigue.
This is my favorite room overall- really great, caustically satirical drawings.
hallway
I love the exhibition posters in the hallway. They're all beautiful, clean and detailed in their own way. Particularly I like Schiele's 49th Secession Exhibition; Klimt's 1st Secession Exhibition; Roller's 14th Secession Exhibition, and the linear, primary colored, cartoon faces of Löffler's Cabaret Fledermaus Vienna. These exhibitions apparently refer to the Vienna Secession. Kinda reminds me of the Salon des Refuses.
fifth room
Very pretty paintings by Erich Heckel (particularly Girl with Doll)… colors reminiscent of Gaugin. I also like his drawings- Dancers and White Horses are great… visually they remind me of internet animations. Most of the artists in this room, maybe all of them, belonged to Die Brücke.
Ernst Ludwig Kirchner has some great woodcuts here. His Portrait of Oskar Schlemmer is delightful, it reminds me of something I'd make- his face springs off of his head like a paperclip, the slight smile, everything tied together in a few lines. I love the black-white-red color and the urbane subtlety of Gentleman with Lapdog at the Cafe… amusing double meaning, perhaps, in the title.
Hermann Max Pechstein's woodcuts are pretty intense. My favorites of his are Self Portrait in the Studio (black and white, forcefully cut, engaging detail) and the vibrantly colored cultural snapshot Dancer in the Mirror. Any German picture relating to vice or the cabaret piques my interest- as I wrote earlier, I love the chaos of the Weimar Republic, the libertine artistic and cultural spirit. What an incredibly unique slice of human history.
Karl Schmidt-Rotloff, his woodcuts are stylistically similar to Pechstein's except that they feel younger and more dynamic. I love Girl with Cat, I also like the drama and sense of energy in Woman in Forest and Saint Francis. It's interesting- the intensity of the lines, the expression of the face, make St. Francis look like a young revolutionary, like a hip college rebel. Interesting to think of Saints that way… as young troublemakers.
Otto Mueller's Portrait of Eugen… handsome boy. I like his subtly defiant expression.
sixth room
a big room, mostly with mid/small drawings and watercolors.
Ah, I like Schlemmer's Ornamental Sculpture, interesting layers of silver shape, like an X-ray of a wondrous machine.
A wall of Lyonel Feininger… muted drawings of harbor towns. Gray blues, lots of sailing ships. None of them entrall me in particular. Quimper is cool- blue, subtle, thin lines, the shapes are determined by the color tones. A wall of Emil Nolde- eh, okay. I like his more colorful pictures- Portrait of a Man, Couple. Nolde's an interesting case- the only Nazi among the major artists on display. Also it looks like his work is prettier and more interesting, in general, than what's on display here. There's also a pair of Franz Marc woodcuts and one by Kandinsky.
A wall of Klee drawings. Some of them are extremely simple (though playful, anthropomorphic even.) His work is sweet and childlike… I really like Come On, Then- reminds me of me and mom, the silly little characters marching around the page. A postcard he made for the Bauhaus is on display, appropriately (a few little characters.) The Sick Heart is the prettiest piece in the room, a milky/creamy/orange pastel background, with figures simultaneously bright and pale, blue, the heart with a small and precise black hole… it's a pretty and busy picture, I've always appreciated the perfect pastel blend of his color, though the drawings on display are somewhat more alive, more animated. Overall this is a nice but unremarkable room.
There's some cool stuff in this exhibit… that fourth room is a real treasure, and the Kubin/Schiele drawings were pretty fascinating. Overall I wish there were more paintings, I was disappointed not to see more of those. And the title was a bit of a MacGuffin; the best work in this exhibit came from the guys in between Klimt and Klee.
this exhibit pays tribute to the Neue Galerie's cofounder (the other: Richard Lauder.) Serge Sabarsky, a Vienna native, saw his mission as giving a home to this German modern art; to save the reputation of this culture, so damaged by the political situation of the 1930s and '40s. Ah, I didn't realize until just now, looking it up, just how new the Neue Galerie is; and also that Sabarsky died before the museum was established. Makes the whole exhibit feel somehow sweeter and more compelling.
One of the points they make about Sabarsky was his conviction that art was meant to be looked at, uncluttered and unmuddled by interpretative text, in the museum setting… that might be a misreading of his words, but the main point I think is that he wanted people to be able to look at the painting and enjoy it and interpret it their own way, without the text directing them. This is a concept put into action in this exhibit- there's the optional audio guide, and there are a few explanatory plaques on the floors of the museum, but none of the artworks or the rooms are accompanied by analysis.
Also, it's fascinating in the post-show reflection, to learn more about the way these artists were treated, the specific ways they suffered in the wake of Nazism (holy hell, I'd never heard of this 1937 exhibition until now but it sounds a little bit hilarious and a lot of horrifying.) This is the sort of context that exhibit shies away from delving into, but it helps me appreciate Sabarsky's mission a little more.
first room
Mostly artifacts from Sabarsky's life- pictures of him in the war, honors he received, books he wrote (primarily one about Klimt, Kokoschka and Schiele, the Austrian Expressionists.) There's some furniture in the room, and some intense-looking Kokoschka oil portraits. I like Two Girls, the color and the intensity.
second room
Klimt- The Dancer, beautiful springtime color, flat perspective. Egon Schiele- Town Among Greenery (The Old City III)- I like the density, the geometry, the colors… lots of garden landscapes in this room. Adele Bloch Bauer I, one of those pretty-woman-golden dress-golden background-flat but intricate-feminine Klimt pictures. I vaguely suspect that this room does not directly relate to the Sabarsky exhibit, it's just an exhibition space for some of the gallery's star pieces. Very pretty and in tune, at least.
drawing room
one wall by Alfred Kubin, one long wall by Gustav Klimt, 1 1/2 walls by Egon Schiele, 1/2 wall by Oscar Kokoschka.
Kokoschka- emaciated naked girls and a few color scenes.
Kubin- very vividly rendered, finely drawn… dark, strange, haunting imagery. The Last King, a long, giant, emaciated, delicate, sad white King, a horde of black hooded subjects moving about below him. Guilt, a defeated, naked man standing in a desolate lake, bent over, a walrus resting on top of him. Earth: Mother of Us All, a naked pregnant woman, sprinkling seeds, a dark parade of heads laid out behind her… Back to the Womb, coffins floating down a river towards a woman- she is cut in half, and the river ends in the cave of her womb. Female Suicide, a dead, frail, pregnant woman floating down a river, a large catfish following her like a reflection; Turkish Call to Arms, the Turks assembling, Couplet, a cabaret/burlesque woman singing, with two men passed out (dying?) before her… The Devil as Stallion, a black horse looking out on a desolate landscape. Every single one of these drawings is dark, well rendered, imaginative… like illustrations in some nightmarish Alice in Wonderland. This man is a Tim Burton character come to life… a weird, smallish, morbid and melancholy guy. "From 1906 until his death, he lived a withdrawn life in a small castle on a twelfth century estate in Zwickledt, Upper Austria."
Klimt- all nineteen of these relatively large drawings are single-subject portraits of women and girls. (In fact, every drawing in this room besides Kubin's take just a single subject; the overwhelming majority are portraiture.) The girls are smiling; the women are beautiful, slim, refined, well dressed (though a few get more intimate… reclining nudes, laid out on the bed, touching or clearly indicating themselves.) I particularly like Design for 'Tragedy,' a busy and interesting preparatory sketch; the subtle, demure beauty of Young Girl Gazing Downward, and Seated Woman Facing Front, so confident and modern.
Schiele- I really like his drawings. He draws in such a specific way- dark lines, detailed, expressive faces. Stern, businesslike Robert Müller; Woman with a Hat and Veil and Portrait of Dr. Hugo Koller, upper class and weary… wow, one of his drawings is The Dead Gustav Klimt- damn… it's a good picture and also compellingly strange to see the passive, balding, beaten face, across the room from his elegant, sexual pictures of high society women- like the wizard behind the curtain, the vulnerability so utterly exposed. My two favorites are Wally in Red Blouse with Raised Knees and Striding Torso in Green Blouse, I love both of these for the sexual energy… they're seductive and hip, you really feel like Egon slept with them right after they were drawn. It really takes me to this romantic fantasy of the starving Bohemian artist, smokey, sexual, penniless and young and brilliant. I also like Office in the Mühlig Prisoner of War Camp- a clean, spare picture… his way of drawing just makes everything seem livelier. I knew he served in the war, and I thought he died in action in 1918- he actually was claimed by the influenza epidemic. He was respected by the officers and never faced combat- just light duty watching after Russian prisoners.
fourth room (upstairs)
Phenomenal. An extraordinary array of smart, hilarious, devastating drawings, depictions of that fascinating Weimar Republic social chaos.
Max Beckmann- sort of cartoony, sort of realistic… lots of hash marks on the faces… several stark, noirish self portraits… my favorites of his are "I.B. Neumann and Martha Stern," an elegant cafe picture; Disillusioned I and Disillusioned II are both claustrophobic, angular pictures of society- fantastic use of strong lines, phenomenally interesting and well drawn faces.
Otto Dix- a few paintings of nude prostitutes. A few Astonishingly dark and vivid drawings… Sex Murder is Shocking- a woman laid out on a bed, her flash a saggy, scratchy mess, blood oozing out of her mouth, stomach and vagina (and randomly, a black dog passionately humping a mildy confused scruffy dog.) Maude Arizona (Suleika, the Tatooed Wonder), a mostly-nude woman dancing onstage, her body covered with tatoos. Nightly Apparition, an amazing picture… inky, smudgy, chaotic background, a woman in a black shawl and black feathered hat, a horrifying black face- empty black eyes, Jackson nose, a big, crooked, skeletal grin, like a face that has been burned off… mesmerizing. Sketch, 1922, a dazzlingly crazy picture. A demonically grinning little man, waving guns in the direction of a very tall and inexpressive man-giant. There's an ax in his head, a screw driven into his heart, a huge ball and a chair thrown at his shoulders, he is toppling over without reacting, like a dummy, not even putting his limbs in motion.
George Grosz- Extraordinary. I love his stuff- cartoony, political, smart, striking. Pacification Politics- little roachlike, silly men sitting around a table, making their statements and sorting their papers, but they're all in the ugly, brutish arms of the gas-masked soldier. Ballot Box, a sheepish looking Ass man drops his ballot into a big, chipped, steaming tea cup; Holy Picture- Jesus inexpressive as snickering, medieval barbarians burn, whip and saw him… it looks like a pitch black Mad magazine cartoon. It's striking, the way the name and the image play off of eachother- is it sacrliege to see such a gruesome depiction of Jesus labeled 'holy,' or is the ugly irony in the fact that this Is an acceptable 'holy' picture, or (considering the torturers seem to come not from Christ's era but from the Middle Ages) is it a picture about the history of religion, a message distorted to permit and advocate violence and torture?
Also on display by Grosz, a very pretty set of water colored line drawings of characters from Caesar and Cleopatra, the George Bernard Shaw play. Two other larger water color Grosz pictures are striking… his Stage Depictions for 'The Drunken Ship' by Paul Zech… one, a scarred, deformed, clueless Priest with a besmirched cross on one side; on the other side, a snearing, green, ghoulish soldier (blue coat and red pants- French?) holding prison keys and a bloody sword, and in the middle, a circle of gray, inexpressive prisoners, pacing… the other stage depiction: slaves chopping away in the hot yellow glow of the sun, a sinister soldier in blue light with a menacing dog, drinking booze and grinning smugly as he watches after them, ready to punish them at the first sign of fatigue.
This is my favorite room overall- really great, caustically satirical drawings.
hallway
I love the exhibition posters in the hallway. They're all beautiful, clean and detailed in their own way. Particularly I like Schiele's 49th Secession Exhibition; Klimt's 1st Secession Exhibition; Roller's 14th Secession Exhibition, and the linear, primary colored, cartoon faces of Löffler's Cabaret Fledermaus Vienna. These exhibitions apparently refer to the Vienna Secession. Kinda reminds me of the Salon des Refuses.
fifth room
Very pretty paintings by Erich Heckel (particularly Girl with Doll)… colors reminiscent of Gaugin. I also like his drawings- Dancers and White Horses are great… visually they remind me of internet animations. Most of the artists in this room, maybe all of them, belonged to Die Brücke.
Ernst Ludwig Kirchner has some great woodcuts here. His Portrait of Oskar Schlemmer is delightful, it reminds me of something I'd make- his face springs off of his head like a paperclip, the slight smile, everything tied together in a few lines. I love the black-white-red color and the urbane subtlety of Gentleman with Lapdog at the Cafe… amusing double meaning, perhaps, in the title.
Hermann Max Pechstein's woodcuts are pretty intense. My favorites of his are Self Portrait in the Studio (black and white, forcefully cut, engaging detail) and the vibrantly colored cultural snapshot Dancer in the Mirror. Any German picture relating to vice or the cabaret piques my interest- as I wrote earlier, I love the chaos of the Weimar Republic, the libertine artistic and cultural spirit. What an incredibly unique slice of human history.
Karl Schmidt-Rotloff, his woodcuts are stylistically similar to Pechstein's except that they feel younger and more dynamic. I love Girl with Cat, I also like the drama and sense of energy in Woman in Forest and Saint Francis. It's interesting- the intensity of the lines, the expression of the face, make St. Francis look like a young revolutionary, like a hip college rebel. Interesting to think of Saints that way… as young troublemakers.
Otto Mueller's Portrait of Eugen… handsome boy. I like his subtly defiant expression.
sixth room
a big room, mostly with mid/small drawings and watercolors.
Ah, I like Schlemmer's Ornamental Sculpture, interesting layers of silver shape, like an X-ray of a wondrous machine.
A wall of Lyonel Feininger… muted drawings of harbor towns. Gray blues, lots of sailing ships. None of them entrall me in particular. Quimper is cool- blue, subtle, thin lines, the shapes are determined by the color tones. A wall of Emil Nolde- eh, okay. I like his more colorful pictures- Portrait of a Man, Couple. Nolde's an interesting case- the only Nazi among the major artists on display. Also it looks like his work is prettier and more interesting, in general, than what's on display here. There's also a pair of Franz Marc woodcuts and one by Kandinsky.
A wall of Klee drawings. Some of them are extremely simple (though playful, anthropomorphic even.) His work is sweet and childlike… I really like Come On, Then- reminds me of me and mom, the silly little characters marching around the page. A postcard he made for the Bauhaus is on display, appropriately (a few little characters.) The Sick Heart is the prettiest piece in the room, a milky/creamy/orange pastel background, with figures simultaneously bright and pale, blue, the heart with a small and precise black hole… it's a pretty and busy picture, I've always appreciated the perfect pastel blend of his color, though the drawings on display are somewhat more alive, more animated. Overall this is a nice but unremarkable room.
There's some cool stuff in this exhibit… that fourth room is a real treasure, and the Kubin/Schiele drawings were pretty fascinating. Overall I wish there were more paintings, I was disappointed not to see more of those. And the title was a bit of a MacGuffin; the best work in this exhibit came from the guys in between Klimt and Klee.
Friday, February 5, 2010
album #5
a night at the opera (queen)
This is a pretty fun record. A nice balance between metal, a vintage English daintiness, and Zeppelinesque druidry. There's a versatility in the band's personality that really accentuates their appeal. "Death on Two Legs" is a great track, ominous, angry, defiant. I love the kinda-silly but passionate bravado of "I'm in Love With My Car"- the elements of that song work together really well. "You're My Best Friend" is my favorite track on the album and possibly my favorite Queen song… the synthesizers, the rolling, sweet chorus. My favorite of the jaunty English tunes (in general I didn't love these ones)- "Seaside Rendezvous." One of the prettiest songs on the album is "Love of My Life"- a very lovely, sad, and deeply sincere song; it sounds so much like a Broadway ballad.
"Bohemian Rhapsody" has entered a certain cliche realm, but hearing it in the context of the album makes it easier to appreciate- as I said, the album is a blend between metal, daintiness, and druidry… but mostly the songs are clearly one or the other. But this track truly fuses elements of all three. It's the most complete and most astonishing song on the album- clearly more sophisticated and strange than the ditties or the rockers; one of the slowest builds of the songs on the album. This really is the sort of song that needs to come at the end of an album- it's very much a culmination- it would just be embarrassing and overwhelming to the rest of the album to have a song with this intensity and versatility up front.
This is a pretty fun record. A nice balance between metal, a vintage English daintiness, and Zeppelinesque druidry. There's a versatility in the band's personality that really accentuates their appeal. "Death on Two Legs" is a great track, ominous, angry, defiant. I love the kinda-silly but passionate bravado of "I'm in Love With My Car"- the elements of that song work together really well. "You're My Best Friend" is my favorite track on the album and possibly my favorite Queen song… the synthesizers, the rolling, sweet chorus. My favorite of the jaunty English tunes (in general I didn't love these ones)- "Seaside Rendezvous." One of the prettiest songs on the album is "Love of My Life"- a very lovely, sad, and deeply sincere song; it sounds so much like a Broadway ballad.
"Bohemian Rhapsody" has entered a certain cliche realm, but hearing it in the context of the album makes it easier to appreciate- as I said, the album is a blend between metal, daintiness, and druidry… but mostly the songs are clearly one or the other. But this track truly fuses elements of all three. It's the most complete and most astonishing song on the album- clearly more sophisticated and strange than the ditties or the rockers; one of the slowest builds of the songs on the album. This really is the sort of song that needs to come at the end of an album- it's very much a culmination- it would just be embarrassing and overwhelming to the rest of the album to have a song with this intensity and versatility up front.
crossword #5
Pelle Pelle- urban clothing brand.
JoS A. Bank- classic menswear line.
Esso- the name used for ExxonMobil internationally. Deriven from the pronunciation of "S.O," Standard Oil. Interesting… Esso is the primary brand name for ExxonMobil outside the USA; it's only in the USA that their gas stations are called ExxonMobil.
Alaina Reed Hall- she played Olivia, one of the human characters on Sesame Street.
The Owlery- a room in Hogwarts Castle.
ete- French for 'summer'
Gibson SG- a solid-body electric guitar model, introduced in the 1960s, thinner and lighter than other Gibson Les Pauls. Les himself didn't like the guitar and wanted his name off the product; it was then renamed the SG (solid guitar.)
La Paz- the capital and cultural center of Bolivia. Among other things, the city is known for its thriving informal economy, with vendors and markets throughout the city, their highly successful football teams, and their status as the topographically highest capital city in the world.
myna- it's a type of bird. They are so fucking cool. Some of the species, as indicated, can mimic human language. Pretty adorable.
S*P*Y*S- a 1974 CIA spoof.
Stu Ungar- Absolutely fascinating character. A poker legend with a tragic penchant for self destruction.
orgone- probably the most bizarre concept that I've learned from these crosswords. A hypothetical form of energy, strongly associated with libido… like a sort of intensely sexual living energy. Articulated by psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich in the 1930s (including the sale of orgone accumulators), viciously denounced by the mainstream postwar United States, a subject of fascination among the beat poets and '50s counterculture, dismissed as an utterly fake science today. The article is far more fascinating than this description can muster.
NGOs- Non-Governmental Organizations, such as grassroots organizations or social movement organizations. They've played an important part in Globalization. Various categorizations/dichotomies of NGOs include advocacy vs. operational; and (among operational NGOs) relief-oriented vs. development-oriented; service delivery vs. participation; religious vs. secular; public vs. private oriented.
Aisha- Muhammad's favorite wife. After his death her father, Abu Bakr, was elected Caliph. Shi'ites believe that Muhammad wanted Ali to succeed him; Sunnis argue that Abu Bakr was elected by the public, in accordance with Muhammad's wishes. Aisha is revered as a role model and a great scholar, whose narrations contributed greatly to Shariah (Islamic Law.) She is beloved by Sunnis and held in a negative light by Shi'ites. This stuff is deeply fascinating and complicated and requires much more study.
Ali- the cousin (and son-in-law) of Muhammad. He ruled over the Islamic Caliphate from 656-661. Sunnis consider him the last of the four Rashidun (rightly guided Caliphs); Shi'ites consider him the first Imam and consider him and his descendants the rightful succesors to Muhammad. This disagreement led to the original split of the Muslim population (when it was time to pick Muhammad's successor, the Shi'ites saw only Ali as holding a legitimate claim.) He was assasinated, stabbed by a poisoned sword. He was a hugely influential man, deeply respected as both a warrior and an eloquent writer. I'll need to read a lot more about this guy and learn more about Islam in general.
JoS A. Bank- classic menswear line.
Esso- the name used for ExxonMobil internationally. Deriven from the pronunciation of "S.O," Standard Oil. Interesting… Esso is the primary brand name for ExxonMobil outside the USA; it's only in the USA that their gas stations are called ExxonMobil.
Alaina Reed Hall- she played Olivia, one of the human characters on Sesame Street.
The Owlery- a room in Hogwarts Castle.
ete- French for 'summer'
Gibson SG- a solid-body electric guitar model, introduced in the 1960s, thinner and lighter than other Gibson Les Pauls. Les himself didn't like the guitar and wanted his name off the product; it was then renamed the SG (solid guitar.)
La Paz- the capital and cultural center of Bolivia. Among other things, the city is known for its thriving informal economy, with vendors and markets throughout the city, their highly successful football teams, and their status as the topographically highest capital city in the world.
myna- it's a type of bird. They are so fucking cool. Some of the species, as indicated, can mimic human language. Pretty adorable.
S*P*Y*S- a 1974 CIA spoof.
Stu Ungar- Absolutely fascinating character. A poker legend with a tragic penchant for self destruction.
orgone- probably the most bizarre concept that I've learned from these crosswords. A hypothetical form of energy, strongly associated with libido… like a sort of intensely sexual living energy. Articulated by psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich in the 1930s (including the sale of orgone accumulators), viciously denounced by the mainstream postwar United States, a subject of fascination among the beat poets and '50s counterculture, dismissed as an utterly fake science today. The article is far more fascinating than this description can muster.
NGOs- Non-Governmental Organizations, such as grassroots organizations or social movement organizations. They've played an important part in Globalization. Various categorizations/dichotomies of NGOs include advocacy vs. operational; and (among operational NGOs) relief-oriented vs. development-oriented; service delivery vs. participation; religious vs. secular; public vs. private oriented.
Aisha- Muhammad's favorite wife. After his death her father, Abu Bakr, was elected Caliph. Shi'ites believe that Muhammad wanted Ali to succeed him; Sunnis argue that Abu Bakr was elected by the public, in accordance with Muhammad's wishes. Aisha is revered as a role model and a great scholar, whose narrations contributed greatly to Shariah (Islamic Law.) She is beloved by Sunnis and held in a negative light by Shi'ites. This stuff is deeply fascinating and complicated and requires much more study.
Ali- the cousin (and son-in-law) of Muhammad. He ruled over the Islamic Caliphate from 656-661. Sunnis consider him the last of the four Rashidun (rightly guided Caliphs); Shi'ites consider him the first Imam and consider him and his descendants the rightful succesors to Muhammad. This disagreement led to the original split of the Muslim population (when it was time to pick Muhammad's successor, the Shi'ites saw only Ali as holding a legitimate claim.) He was assasinated, stabbed by a poisoned sword. He was a hugely influential man, deeply respected as both a warrior and an eloquent writer. I'll need to read a lot more about this guy and learn more about Islam in general.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
film #3
Barton Fink
This reminds me of the other Coen Brothers films I've seen (to be fair, I haven't seen many) particularly A Serious Man… compellingly enigmatic characters, a hint of warmth and coldness and strangeness in them that defies categorization. I particularly liked Charlie and his scenes with Barton were some of my favorites. Particularly their conversation when Barton is getting more and more animated about discussing his belief in art for the common man, while he keeps interrupting Charlie- "I could tell you stories"- blatantly missing the genuine stories of the common man right in front of him, too obsessed with his high, glorious rhetoric. (wow, just now it's hitting me that Charlie's stories were perhaps no more genuine- he seemed like the realest character in the film and yet he ultimately is the most blatantly, literally false of all.) Another thing I liked about that scene was the expression of Barton's passion- he seemed so frustratingly pent up, awkward, stunted- until that conversation, when he truly expressed the intensity of feeling for his art- the whole 'art of the common man' theme seemed very false and unrelatable, like it was just stuck in there to give this character something to suffer with.
Generally the characters were very well conveyed- I liked that fast, hostile, old Hollywood vibe, Geisler and Lipnick, the Detectives. The dapper Southern charm of Mayhew with a sense of darkness and devastation very thinly under the surface (gotta say- although well acted, I overall considered this character kindof weak and obvious- we get it, he drinks to escape).
I'm not sure if I truly liked Barton until the end of the film… for too long he just seemed stuck in a way that went beyond my ability to sympathize… instead of sharing or empathizing with his crushing anxiety and discomfort and stiltedness, I felt somewhat angry and exhausted watching it. There were times when I really liked him and times when the character got on my nerves. I think it's the result of my improv instincts, or maybe just a personal bias, but his writer's block annoyed me. MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN DAMNIT! TAKE ACTION! When he finally started writing, the release of the tension was very satisfying as a viewer. I will say that it's a satisfying film to watch as a writer- I'm not much of a writer anyway, but something about experiencing the story puts me in the mood to create, to commit work to the page- not just because it's, for so long, a story of not writing- but the characters and the scenery are just engaging to the mind in a way I can't quite convey. That this story comes from a writer's perspective is, I would bet, one of the key reasons why this is Becky's favorite.
I liked the cinematography- so many long, slow, track shots… a nice quiet tension there. An interesting palette, a lot of grays and browns it seemed. The Hotel Earle- what an extraordinarily uncomfortable place. Desolate, sticky, eerie, sad. In a way it was very satisfying to watch it burn. To see all those constricting forces basically get destroyed… there's a relief in that. The contrast between the grotesque misery of the Hotel, and the glamour of the various other settings- certainly a noticeable and interesting element in the film. One random detail I liked was the contrast of Barton's writer's block with the quick, relentless typing of Geisler's secretary. Also I'll add that Audrey's fate genuinely shocked me- one hell of a twist, man. Charlie is an amazing character. Even after all of his villainy, he gets out of this movie as my clear favorite. He's a force of action and relief, there's a depth of humanity to him. He saves Barton, after all. (Then again, he gets him in it in the first place.)
I love the unresolved loose ends- the box, the parents, Charlie… There was an awkward meta level when Lipnick angrily lectures Barton about how people don't want to see a man wrestling with his soul, they wanna see action- I almost felt embarrassed, judged in a way, for feeling like that while watching. The last scene is so cool- the bird is an intriguing, strange touch. The whole film is a reflection on true vs false… to a certain extent, everything that happens is a lie, the characters are either duplicitous, or they're committed to shallow, sham opinions, and even in Barton's case he seems more interested in what he can say about the common man than what the common man can say for himself.
Ultimately this reminds me of A Serious Man because of the very experience of watching it- quirky, intriguing characters, a deep spiral of discomfort and misfortune that gets harder and harder to watch, almost bleak, and reaching the end with more of a feeling of relief than of satisfaction… but in retrospect, immediately interesting to think about and examine and discuss. More fun to study than to watch.
This reminds me of the other Coen Brothers films I've seen (to be fair, I haven't seen many) particularly A Serious Man… compellingly enigmatic characters, a hint of warmth and coldness and strangeness in them that defies categorization. I particularly liked Charlie and his scenes with Barton were some of my favorites. Particularly their conversation when Barton is getting more and more animated about discussing his belief in art for the common man, while he keeps interrupting Charlie- "I could tell you stories"- blatantly missing the genuine stories of the common man right in front of him, too obsessed with his high, glorious rhetoric. (wow, just now it's hitting me that Charlie's stories were perhaps no more genuine- he seemed like the realest character in the film and yet he ultimately is the most blatantly, literally false of all.) Another thing I liked about that scene was the expression of Barton's passion- he seemed so frustratingly pent up, awkward, stunted- until that conversation, when he truly expressed the intensity of feeling for his art- the whole 'art of the common man' theme seemed very false and unrelatable, like it was just stuck in there to give this character something to suffer with.
Generally the characters were very well conveyed- I liked that fast, hostile, old Hollywood vibe, Geisler and Lipnick, the Detectives. The dapper Southern charm of Mayhew with a sense of darkness and devastation very thinly under the surface (gotta say- although well acted, I overall considered this character kindof weak and obvious- we get it, he drinks to escape).
I'm not sure if I truly liked Barton until the end of the film… for too long he just seemed stuck in a way that went beyond my ability to sympathize… instead of sharing or empathizing with his crushing anxiety and discomfort and stiltedness, I felt somewhat angry and exhausted watching it. There were times when I really liked him and times when the character got on my nerves. I think it's the result of my improv instincts, or maybe just a personal bias, but his writer's block annoyed me. MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN DAMNIT! TAKE ACTION! When he finally started writing, the release of the tension was very satisfying as a viewer. I will say that it's a satisfying film to watch as a writer- I'm not much of a writer anyway, but something about experiencing the story puts me in the mood to create, to commit work to the page- not just because it's, for so long, a story of not writing- but the characters and the scenery are just engaging to the mind in a way I can't quite convey. That this story comes from a writer's perspective is, I would bet, one of the key reasons why this is Becky's favorite.
I liked the cinematography- so many long, slow, track shots… a nice quiet tension there. An interesting palette, a lot of grays and browns it seemed. The Hotel Earle- what an extraordinarily uncomfortable place. Desolate, sticky, eerie, sad. In a way it was very satisfying to watch it burn. To see all those constricting forces basically get destroyed… there's a relief in that. The contrast between the grotesque misery of the Hotel, and the glamour of the various other settings- certainly a noticeable and interesting element in the film. One random detail I liked was the contrast of Barton's writer's block with the quick, relentless typing of Geisler's secretary. Also I'll add that Audrey's fate genuinely shocked me- one hell of a twist, man. Charlie is an amazing character. Even after all of his villainy, he gets out of this movie as my clear favorite. He's a force of action and relief, there's a depth of humanity to him. He saves Barton, after all. (Then again, he gets him in it in the first place.)
I love the unresolved loose ends- the box, the parents, Charlie… There was an awkward meta level when Lipnick angrily lectures Barton about how people don't want to see a man wrestling with his soul, they wanna see action- I almost felt embarrassed, judged in a way, for feeling like that while watching. The last scene is so cool- the bird is an intriguing, strange touch. The whole film is a reflection on true vs false… to a certain extent, everything that happens is a lie, the characters are either duplicitous, or they're committed to shallow, sham opinions, and even in Barton's case he seems more interested in what he can say about the common man than what the common man can say for himself.
Ultimately this reminds me of A Serious Man because of the very experience of watching it- quirky, intriguing characters, a deep spiral of discomfort and misfortune that gets harder and harder to watch, almost bleak, and reaching the end with more of a feeling of relief than of satisfaction… but in retrospect, immediately interesting to think about and examine and discuss. More fun to study than to watch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)