this is a video that i made in Final Cut Pro for the Media Practices: Concept course. i used Creative Commons images from Flickr, Karinna Gylfphe's photos, as well as my own.
this short has inspired me to create more. i have set myself a new goal to create a short video of any kind once a month.
5/9/10
4/9/10
Assignment 1: Intellectual Autobiography
Intellectual Autobiography
I am pursuing an MA in Media Studies because I enjoy creating, and in particular I take great pleasure out of the creation of videos. I have an interest in creating visual art as well: in designing advertisements, drawings, organizational design and implementation, knitting/crocheting, and makeup styling. I don’t think about these things as art, but rather as things that I create. Much less do I consider myself an artist- within me are too many negative connotations attached to the term. I find myself creating bits and pieces of art even when I’m not paying attention, though some may argue that art isn’t art unless it is intentional. They are not creations made mindlessly, but I (and I assume others as well) find it very difficult to sit down with the intention of creating art. I’ve found that allowing myself to create spontaneously is the best way for me to take that random creation and turn it into something larger and more meaningful.
I am led to the Media Studies field by many different factors. Perhaps the strongest is my (perhaps misguided) belief that my brain works differently from other people. I tend to take in information from my environment and alter or add to it- I suppose that it is called an overactive imagination. I never realized that my mind works contrary to the norm until I was in my undergraduate program at Appalachian State University. An advisor, Gary Richardson, was a close friend of mine. Gary and I had conversations ranging from ridiculous screenplays (Attack of the Slugs! was one of our most winning) to existential philosophy (I was pursuing my BA in Philosophy). Gary pointed out to me one day that I think differently from everyone else. I replied, "Well, everyone thinks differently, because the way we think is determined by the experiences we have, and no one has the same experiences." Gary laughed and said, "Your response is proof that what I said was true." After this conversation, I thought a lot about Gary's idea, and I still do. My mind is a mix of the rational and the fantastic, a state of permanent cognitive dissonance, and I allow the contradictory to bang around and interpret at will.
I also tend to “frame” my environment, which means that I put what I see visually into a frame or clip inside of my head. My earliest memory of this was riding the school bus in middle school and listening to music and imagining a music video that I would build on for weeks. I went through a period of imagining that I was the subject of a TV show, and a brief period of believing it (this was before I saw “The Truman Show”, which I find strange).
The combination of these two perhaps unique factors does something, though I’m not too sure what. Why does it lead me to this field? I feel like Media Studies is a field that will help me work with what I have and what I am able to do; that my abilities and my downfalls can be embraced together, that there is a place for all of me. I studied Philosophy, and would have continued if I were not so impatient for action. I considered Photography, but I find it limiting, and always want the pictures to move. Music I love, but not enough to devote my life to the pursuit. I feel that with Media Studies, and Film Studies in particular, I can combine my assorted passions and explore the relationships between them.
I want to (and do!) create, and embracing that, I want to create things beyond my own self-awareness. Things that reach into the barrier of individual experience and change it. Long ago I was startled to realize that every single person on this planet, whoever was and whoever is, has a unique perspective based on experience. It’s such an abstruse idea that seems impossible in practice. What is it is like to be in his body, behind her eyes, with all the knowledge of their experience guiding me? To leave behind what I do know, to know what another knows? Even if this is possible, how do I take it with me?
Knowing this, what do I want? I want to experience human existence (what I call “the human experience”) beyond myself. Is this impossible, outlandish? What makes up experience? First, the body; then inputs from the world; interpretation of external stimuli by the eyes, nose, ears; then interpretation of those interpretations by the mind; the settling of all that information into frameworks which become experience; and then more and more inputs and interpretations on top of the frameworks to become an increasingly complex structure of experience. How could I possibly escape my own frameworks of experience, much less replicate the frameworks of another? Perhaps, then, that what I want to know is that there exists other frameworks, other experiences; that understanding is a many-faceted crystal that casts the experienced world into prisms of form and definition. This I can do: embrace my own experiences, and at the same time be aware that what I experience is a far cry from universal.
I want to make contributions to the field of Media Studies in several ways. I feel like I can explore “the human experience” through film/video, photography, and music, and use the research as well as the exploration of these mediums to influence the development of media. I feel that media is in a transitory state at this moment, and the more I learn about media the more excited I am to be involved in it’s development.
I am very interested in avant-garde and film noir, and I am currently learning more about the different genres and styles of film/video. I am exploring avant-garde in particular with my own work as I am working on an independent video series, juxtaposing avant-garde experimentalism with the clarity of high definition video, short 3-4 minute “webisodes”, and a (mostly) clear storyline. I also plan to combine philosophic theory with practice- and explore what that means through research for what may be a thesis. I am still on the fence regarding a thesis because while I am very interested in doing heavy research and production for a larger project, I intend on following the Film Forum track, as well as take as many electives in social change through media and experimental theory as possible. There are far too many options for me at this point, especially with my wide range of interests.
Currently I work at Milano The New School for Management and Urban Policy as a support person. I’ve had many different jobs since my first position at the age of 14- assistant in a special education classroom, bus driver, computer lab operator, manager of a fast food restaurant, assistant manager of a natural beauty store, to name a few. I’ve never followed a career track (although if you consider my six years in food service, you would be misled into believing that I have a planned path in the food management field) and I am relieved to have a better idea of where I want to go in a career. I would like to work in post-production in a large production company after obtaining my MA in Media Studies, create good connections as well as a name for myself, and at the same time build on my own production company until I am able to work for myself. I enjoy post-production work because I find it to be the most definitive and creative part of a video/film, though within my independent work I feel most confident in the combined role of creator/director/producer, and in fact, this is how I usually operate. In ten years I expect to be working in post-production and/or running my own company.
I’ve been in the Media Studies program at The New School for four weeks now. Each day brings new people, works, and ideas into my sphere of experience- it’s a very exciting time for me. I feel confident that the decisions that I have made and am currently making are the best possible for me, even though I must sacrifice other desirable things (i.e., money and having it) in order to be where I am. I can track my great personal growth in just the past four weeks, and I look forward to what may come.
I am pursuing an MA in Media Studies because I enjoy creating, and in particular I take great pleasure out of the creation of videos. I have an interest in creating visual art as well: in designing advertisements, drawings, organizational design and implementation, knitting/crocheting, and makeup styling. I don’t think about these things as art, but rather as things that I create. Much less do I consider myself an artist- within me are too many negative connotations attached to the term. I find myself creating bits and pieces of art even when I’m not paying attention, though some may argue that art isn’t art unless it is intentional. They are not creations made mindlessly, but I (and I assume others as well) find it very difficult to sit down with the intention of creating art. I’ve found that allowing myself to create spontaneously is the best way for me to take that random creation and turn it into something larger and more meaningful.
I am led to the Media Studies field by many different factors. Perhaps the strongest is my (perhaps misguided) belief that my brain works differently from other people. I tend to take in information from my environment and alter or add to it- I suppose that it is called an overactive imagination. I never realized that my mind works contrary to the norm until I was in my undergraduate program at Appalachian State University. An advisor, Gary Richardson, was a close friend of mine. Gary and I had conversations ranging from ridiculous screenplays (Attack of the Slugs! was one of our most winning) to existential philosophy (I was pursuing my BA in Philosophy). Gary pointed out to me one day that I think differently from everyone else. I replied, "Well, everyone thinks differently, because the way we think is determined by the experiences we have, and no one has the same experiences." Gary laughed and said, "Your response is proof that what I said was true." After this conversation, I thought a lot about Gary's idea, and I still do. My mind is a mix of the rational and the fantastic, a state of permanent cognitive dissonance, and I allow the contradictory to bang around and interpret at will.
I also tend to “frame” my environment, which means that I put what I see visually into a frame or clip inside of my head. My earliest memory of this was riding the school bus in middle school and listening to music and imagining a music video that I would build on for weeks. I went through a period of imagining that I was the subject of a TV show, and a brief period of believing it (this was before I saw “The Truman Show”, which I find strange).
The combination of these two perhaps unique factors does something, though I’m not too sure what. Why does it lead me to this field? I feel like Media Studies is a field that will help me work with what I have and what I am able to do; that my abilities and my downfalls can be embraced together, that there is a place for all of me. I studied Philosophy, and would have continued if I were not so impatient for action. I considered Photography, but I find it limiting, and always want the pictures to move. Music I love, but not enough to devote my life to the pursuit. I feel that with Media Studies, and Film Studies in particular, I can combine my assorted passions and explore the relationships between them.
I want to (and do!) create, and embracing that, I want to create things beyond my own self-awareness. Things that reach into the barrier of individual experience and change it. Long ago I was startled to realize that every single person on this planet, whoever was and whoever is, has a unique perspective based on experience. It’s such an abstruse idea that seems impossible in practice. What is it is like to be in his body, behind her eyes, with all the knowledge of their experience guiding me? To leave behind what I do know, to know what another knows? Even if this is possible, how do I take it with me?
Knowing this, what do I want? I want to experience human existence (what I call “the human experience”) beyond myself. Is this impossible, outlandish? What makes up experience? First, the body; then inputs from the world; interpretation of external stimuli by the eyes, nose, ears; then interpretation of those interpretations by the mind; the settling of all that information into frameworks which become experience; and then more and more inputs and interpretations on top of the frameworks to become an increasingly complex structure of experience. How could I possibly escape my own frameworks of experience, much less replicate the frameworks of another? Perhaps, then, that what I want to know is that there exists other frameworks, other experiences; that understanding is a many-faceted crystal that casts the experienced world into prisms of form and definition. This I can do: embrace my own experiences, and at the same time be aware that what I experience is a far cry from universal.
I want to make contributions to the field of Media Studies in several ways. I feel like I can explore “the human experience” through film/video, photography, and music, and use the research as well as the exploration of these mediums to influence the development of media. I feel that media is in a transitory state at this moment, and the more I learn about media the more excited I am to be involved in it’s development.
I am very interested in avant-garde and film noir, and I am currently learning more about the different genres and styles of film/video. I am exploring avant-garde in particular with my own work as I am working on an independent video series, juxtaposing avant-garde experimentalism with the clarity of high definition video, short 3-4 minute “webisodes”, and a (mostly) clear storyline. I also plan to combine philosophic theory with practice- and explore what that means through research for what may be a thesis. I am still on the fence regarding a thesis because while I am very interested in doing heavy research and production for a larger project, I intend on following the Film Forum track, as well as take as many electives in social change through media and experimental theory as possible. There are far too many options for me at this point, especially with my wide range of interests.
Currently I work at Milano The New School for Management and Urban Policy as a support person. I’ve had many different jobs since my first position at the age of 14- assistant in a special education classroom, bus driver, computer lab operator, manager of a fast food restaurant, assistant manager of a natural beauty store, to name a few. I’ve never followed a career track (although if you consider my six years in food service, you would be misled into believing that I have a planned path in the food management field) and I am relieved to have a better idea of where I want to go in a career. I would like to work in post-production in a large production company after obtaining my MA in Media Studies, create good connections as well as a name for myself, and at the same time build on my own production company until I am able to work for myself. I enjoy post-production work because I find it to be the most definitive and creative part of a video/film, though within my independent work I feel most confident in the combined role of creator/director/producer, and in fact, this is how I usually operate. In ten years I expect to be working in post-production and/or running my own company.
I’ve been in the Media Studies program at The New School for four weeks now. Each day brings new people, works, and ideas into my sphere of experience- it’s a very exciting time for me. I feel confident that the decisions that I have made and am currently making are the best possible for me, even though I must sacrifice other desirable things (i.e., money and having it) in order to be where I am. I can track my great personal growth in just the past four weeks, and I look forward to what may come.
Assignment 3: Reaction Paper
Original Work in Fictional Literature: How Important Is It?
“Within bodies of writing, everywhere, there are linkages we tend not to see. The individual document, at hand, is what we deal with; we do not see the total linked collection of them all at once. But they are there, the documents not present as well as those that are, and the grand cat’s cradle among them all” (Nelson, 6)
It is not unimaginable that while writing a fictional story, an author may call upon the ideas and experiences of those before her. After all, what else is fiction but an imagined story? Fiction cannot be mutually exclusive to the lived experiences of an author (that’s called non-fiction), and relies not only on the drawing of one’s imagination, but also on the combination of stories either written or spoken. In fictional literature, how important is originality? Fictional literature’s plots and storylines have boundaries in originality which are insurmountable; however, originality does not make one work better than another.
In the boundaries of fictional literature, what is considered appropriation? Exact phrasing, or similar storyline, or both? It is clear, at least from the standpoint of copyright law, that exact phrasing is protected. The seven rights under the Copyright Act are reproduction, adaptations, distribution, public performance, public display, moral, and digital performance rights (Tune 19). Anything duplicated that is longer than a few words in a phrase is considered appropriation by reproduction (Tune 19). However, ideas themselves are not protected. “Ideas simply cannot be protected under copyright law. Thus, procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles, and discoveries are not copyrightable regardless of the form in which they are embodied. Ideas are free for all to use” (Tune 24). In copyright law, plot falls under the category of idea, and is therefore not protected. But this brings up another question: is it moral or fair to be unoriginal, to use the plot of another story?
If there were an infinite number of plots or storylines in fiction, it would be easy to say that appropriation of plot is immoral and unfair. However, one would be hard pressed to find a story with a plot that is original, or has nothing in common to the plot of at least one other story. Surely there are a limited number of storylines, no matter how complex they are. For example, Georges Polti categorized every dramatic situation that he could find in classic Greek and French stories or performances, and he finds and describes all thirty-six in The Thirty-Six Dramatic Situations (Polti 7). Others identify twenty plots, or seven plots (Adams). Take into consideration the following: an estimated 106 billion people have been born on Earth (Haub 4); with so many lives and many fewer combinations, how can one say that anything we create is original?
To be more specific, let us simplify the storylines of two fictions and compare. The plot of Ursula K. Le Guin’s 1968 A Wizard of Earthsea is boiled down to the following: a young boy discovers that he has magical powers. He goes to school and unleashes a “dark” wizard that is somehow part of him. He discovers that he is the only person who can destroy the “dark” wizard, and through a series of events, he finally vanquishes the “dark” wizard. J.K Rowling’s 1997 Harry Potter series can be simplified in a very similar way” a young boy discovers that he has magical powers. He goes to school and discovers that a “dark” wizard exists that is somehow part of him. He discovers that he is the only person who can destroy the “dark” wizard, and through a series of events, he finally vanquishes the “dark” wizard. The storylines of these two fictional narratives are surprisingly similar; however, they are told very differently, as can be seen in the style, differences in character, time period, location, and duration of narrative. The difference between the two stories is that one is an original idea, while the other is not. As Le Guin said about Rowling, "She has many virtues, but originality isn't one of them" (McCrum 25).
We can see a difference between an original works and an unoriginal work, but that does not mean that an original work is “better” than an unoriginal work. This is a matter of personal preference. Some readers may value Rowling’s series above Le Guin’s story, for the differences listed above as well as accessibility and popularity. Original works may be more interesting, especially to a person who reads much fictional literature, but there are many factors in the retelling of a story that can influence personal preference.
Originality in fictional literature is bound by the constraints of human experience, plot and storyline. While original fiction is indeed more interesting to the reader, it is the personal preference of the reader to decide if an original story or an unoriginal story is “better”.
Works Cited
Adams, Cecil. “What are the seven basic literary plots?” Chicago Reader. Chicago Reader, 24 Nov 2000. Web. 19 March 2010.
Haub, Carl. “How Many People Have Ever Lived on Earth?” Population Today 30:8 (November/December 2002): 3.
McCrum, Robert. “Plagiarism: In the words of somebody else… there’s nothing new in literature.” The Observer (January 17, 2010): 25.
Nelson, Ted. “Proposal for a Universal Electronic Publishing System and Archive.” in Noah Wardip-Fruin, N.M. ed. The New Media Reader, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2003: 441-461.
Polti, Georges. The Thirty-Six Dramatic Situations. Ohio: James Knapp Reeve, 1924. Internet Archive. Web. 7 April 2010.
Tune, Cydney A. “Overview of Basic Copyright Law Principles.” The Licensing Journal 26.2 (February 2006): 18-26.
“Within bodies of writing, everywhere, there are linkages we tend not to see. The individual document, at hand, is what we deal with; we do not see the total linked collection of them all at once. But they are there, the documents not present as well as those that are, and the grand cat’s cradle among them all” (Nelson, 6)
It is not unimaginable that while writing a fictional story, an author may call upon the ideas and experiences of those before her. After all, what else is fiction but an imagined story? Fiction cannot be mutually exclusive to the lived experiences of an author (that’s called non-fiction), and relies not only on the drawing of one’s imagination, but also on the combination of stories either written or spoken. In fictional literature, how important is originality? Fictional literature’s plots and storylines have boundaries in originality which are insurmountable; however, originality does not make one work better than another.
In the boundaries of fictional literature, what is considered appropriation? Exact phrasing, or similar storyline, or both? It is clear, at least from the standpoint of copyright law, that exact phrasing is protected. The seven rights under the Copyright Act are reproduction, adaptations, distribution, public performance, public display, moral, and digital performance rights (Tune 19). Anything duplicated that is longer than a few words in a phrase is considered appropriation by reproduction (Tune 19). However, ideas themselves are not protected. “Ideas simply cannot be protected under copyright law. Thus, procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles, and discoveries are not copyrightable regardless of the form in which they are embodied. Ideas are free for all to use” (Tune 24). In copyright law, plot falls under the category of idea, and is therefore not protected. But this brings up another question: is it moral or fair to be unoriginal, to use the plot of another story?
If there were an infinite number of plots or storylines in fiction, it would be easy to say that appropriation of plot is immoral and unfair. However, one would be hard pressed to find a story with a plot that is original, or has nothing in common to the plot of at least one other story. Surely there are a limited number of storylines, no matter how complex they are. For example, Georges Polti categorized every dramatic situation that he could find in classic Greek and French stories or performances, and he finds and describes all thirty-six in The Thirty-Six Dramatic Situations (Polti 7). Others identify twenty plots, or seven plots (Adams). Take into consideration the following: an estimated 106 billion people have been born on Earth (Haub 4); with so many lives and many fewer combinations, how can one say that anything we create is original?
To be more specific, let us simplify the storylines of two fictions and compare. The plot of Ursula K. Le Guin’s 1968 A Wizard of Earthsea is boiled down to the following: a young boy discovers that he has magical powers. He goes to school and unleashes a “dark” wizard that is somehow part of him. He discovers that he is the only person who can destroy the “dark” wizard, and through a series of events, he finally vanquishes the “dark” wizard. J.K Rowling’s 1997 Harry Potter series can be simplified in a very similar way” a young boy discovers that he has magical powers. He goes to school and discovers that a “dark” wizard exists that is somehow part of him. He discovers that he is the only person who can destroy the “dark” wizard, and through a series of events, he finally vanquishes the “dark” wizard. The storylines of these two fictional narratives are surprisingly similar; however, they are told very differently, as can be seen in the style, differences in character, time period, location, and duration of narrative. The difference between the two stories is that one is an original idea, while the other is not. As Le Guin said about Rowling, "She has many virtues, but originality isn't one of them" (McCrum 25).
We can see a difference between an original works and an unoriginal work, but that does not mean that an original work is “better” than an unoriginal work. This is a matter of personal preference. Some readers may value Rowling’s series above Le Guin’s story, for the differences listed above as well as accessibility and popularity. Original works may be more interesting, especially to a person who reads much fictional literature, but there are many factors in the retelling of a story that can influence personal preference.
Originality in fictional literature is bound by the constraints of human experience, plot and storyline. While original fiction is indeed more interesting to the reader, it is the personal preference of the reader to decide if an original story or an unoriginal story is “better”.
Works Cited
Adams, Cecil. “What are the seven basic literary plots?” Chicago Reader. Chicago Reader, 24 Nov 2000. Web. 19 March 2010.
Haub, Carl. “How Many People Have Ever Lived on Earth?” Population Today 30:8 (November/December 2002): 3.
McCrum, Robert. “Plagiarism: In the words of somebody else… there’s nothing new in literature.” The Observer (January 17, 2010): 25.
Nelson, Ted. “Proposal for a Universal Electronic Publishing System and Archive.” in Noah Wardip-Fruin, N.M. ed. The New Media Reader, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2003: 441-461.
Polti, Georges. The Thirty-Six Dramatic Situations. Ohio: James Knapp Reeve, 1924. Internet Archive. Web. 7 April 2010.
Tune, Cydney A. “Overview of Basic Copyright Law Principles.” The Licensing Journal 26.2 (February 2006): 18-26.
3/26/10
Drux Flux
This short animated film hails from Canada and was inspired by Herbert Marcuse's One Dimensional Man. The music and the pace are very engaging, as are the layering of images.
3/24/10
Article Abstract: “Film Art, Argument, and Ambiguity”
Smith, Murray. “Film Art, Argument, and Ambiguity.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 64.1 (2006): 33-42. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 5 Mar. 2010.
This essay is a response to the book by Stephen Mulhall, On Film, which argues that popular narrative film can be philosophy (or rather, philosophy in action). Smith finds narrative film to be a poor substitute for philosophical writings, and supports his case through dialectical inquiry. Smith reacts to Mulhall’s argument by re-analyzing the ways in which a narrative film could substantiate the territory of human self-reflection in the same way as a philosophical text. The essay explores the ways in which philosophy may be aligned with film through Mulhall’s use of the reductive strategy, which Smith finds unsatisfactory, as the analogy between narrative and argument is weak. Next, Smith expands on Mulhall’s research by exploring the expansive strategy through the comparison of Bernard William’s thought experiment in personal identity to Carl Reiner’s 1984 film, All Of Me, which tells the story of displaced personality. While the two have similarities, the thought experiment’s primary focus is the philosophical concept, while the film is dualistic and sets the philosophical focus as secondary to the comedic focus. Smith concludes that narrative film may have philosophical concepts, but as it ranks the philosophical concept lower and develops the primary focus (which is usually entertainment), it does not create an understanding of the philosophical concept and subsequent human self-reflection in the same way that written philosophy does.
Article Abstract: “Sartre, the Philosophy of Nothingness, and Modern Melodrama”
Kovács, András Bálint. "Sartre, the Philosophy of Nothingness, and the Modern Melodrama." Journal of Aesthetics & Art Criticism 64.1 (2006): 135-145. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 5 Mar. 2010.
This essay proposes that Jean-Paul Sartre’s philosophical concept of Nothingness is illustrated in the film genre of modern melodrama. In the first section of the essay, the author analyzes Sartre’s theory of Nothingness as opposed to the German romantic conception of Nothingness from other philosophers, such as Friedrich Nietzsche and Martin Heidegger. Sartre’s Nothingness is defined as the nonbeing of something that should be, of human expectation for a thing to exist which does not. In the second section, melodrama as a genre of film is explored in it’s various forms (naturalist, classical, and modern) using examples of melodramatic films such as Vittorio De Sica’s Ladri di biciclette and Federico Fellini’s 8 1/2. The author focuses on modern melodrama, which is characterized by characters who find themselves in situations that they do not understand , and react passively to the situation as opposed to emotionally, which is typical of naturalist and classical melodramatic styles. In the third section, Michelangelo Antonini’s L’eclisse, a modern melodramatic film, is explored as an example of the concept of Nothingness in modern melodrama. The suffering of the characters of a modern melodrama is a result of their inability to understand the situation, and thus a realization of emptiness, or Nothingness, as the ultimate power of their situation. The essay follows and employs dialectical research to support the argument.
2/25/10
german expressionism
some background- made in 1920, directed by Robert Wiene. Some regard it as the first true horror film, and an influence on film noir. it is noted for the distorted set design and distinctive mise-en-scene which set a dark, bleak mood (properties of german expressionism). the development story on wikipedia is fascinating.
You can watch Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari on Netflix or at Google Videos.
(i took the top stills from Netflix- two moments that really capture the "feel" of the film. there is a restored authorized version available but the distorted bar at the top of the film is a defect of the master negative.)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
