10 History

This week we dealt with the notion of history and once again Kirsten Dunst was the protagonist. This week, however, Sofia Copella was giving us her interpretation of Marie Antoinette ‘s (2006) life. The two different concepts to debate this week are history on film and aesthetic.

What is history? Habits determine perceptions: food, architecture and language. This is vernacular history and shows a certain period. It can also reflect how one can date the film’s construction. Could one argue that a melodramatic or period drama, although obviously more dramatic, is, in some cases, more faithful to history? Institutional histories rely heavily on dates/legal/governmental/family events. When represented through a media outlet are they an attempt a realism or simply a concept mediated through a set of ideals or perceptions. To say that anyone doesn’t have preconceived ideas about a certain subject is an alien idea. All subject matter has some way of invoking a feeling. One could look at historical bodies, how people we have never met due to distance in time yet there is usually a “conceptual personae- the historical concept of a person or figurehead” (Robert Young White mythologies: writing, history and the West).  This leads to aesthetics and how contextual context will affect the lens that shapes the film.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0422720/

Copella’s subject matter is first an interesting point. It is almost semi autobiographical. She is hollywood royalty; even the film itself is proof as the family play vital roles: Jason Schwartzman her cousin and her husband plays a musician. 2006 was around the time Paris Hilton and other millionaire heiress were flaunting their inheritance around L.A. So already we see that Copella is effected by her contextual context as we all are. The film remains in Versailles and thus we are trapped in this safety net of enormous wealth along with the young princess. Copella’s aesthetic doesn’t really remain true to the period of time 1776-1793. She has used the influence of some artists yet there is an obvious hybrid between the vestiges of preRafaelita artists and her teenage angst/punk rock/converse style rebellion. Elisabeth Vigee-Lebrun meets Adam and the Ants. Does Copella ever claim to want to represent the history of this Autrian princess’ fall from power. Is this her interpretation of a life worth living? This is what teenage royalty do. Vibrant colours and a 40 million dollar budget go some way to reflect how these super rich live. From this one can deduce that it is almost impossible to make a film without influence any opinion made from either the audiences’ own history or the director’s cultural contexts and own preferences/views. One could ask the question why bother to represent an historical realism at all?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2uspRqElks

.  

8 & 9 Samson and Delilah (Warwick Thornton 2009)

This week the topics revolve around love and community/colonialism. Last week we looked at how colonies were effected by foreign rule. This week has a similar feel as we arrive in Australia and the story of a young couple is told, with added pathos from the off set. The interesting thing that one should note about Australia is that there are two alien groups that perceive the third-party as sub-human. The settlers and criminals/exiles when they first landed stated that the land was terra neuralist (unoccupied) yet the indigenous where of a high volume; many different tribes. In 1901 the aborigines were not part of the Human rights acts but instead placed under the flora and fauna act. The film Rabbit proof fence depicts how this white invasion sought to breed out the recessive gene; this meant if a child was under the age of 16 it no longer belonged to its own parents. So before the film has even began we notice how misshapen the relationship between these communities is. We have a bias to side with the down trodden society; Thornton himself being of indigenous birth. In this film I feel it is his prerogative to give us the Affect of this western takeover to his native people. With regards to problems faced when the colonists return home one can reference the troubles arisen in the film La Bataille d’Alger (Gillo Pontecorvo). This deals with a country as the French are on their way out. One could take from both of these films that colonialism is a European concept.

• “Europe undertook the leadership of the world with ardour, cynicism and violence.” (Franz Fanton, 1961 The Wretched of Earth)

These are both negative portrayals of the effects of western influence and I am struggling to find an example of positive portrayal of an invasion. This is disregarding colonial propaganda. Perhaps the Mission (1986) or merely Jeremy Irons’ character; one could argue as being an almost positive representation of western culture in a foreign land, although I would hasten to add that it is more a crusade than an invasion.

Love in this film is dealt with in a native way. There are many gestures and little speech that allow Delilah to be wooed by Samson. He seems resilient in his pursuit and although their activities are very physical their actual relationship seems very innocent. I am unsure as to whether this is due to the western biblical (Christian) set of morals brought by the settlers or an indigenous custom. I mention this as the names both reflect an old testament influence. They are “star-crossed lovers” forced together as they are both outcasts forced out of their community and also exiled by the white Australian population. This is where Warwick uses the bridge as a metaphor, they are stuck in limbo with a man fallen from grace. Samson is still able to maintain his first love of petrol sniffing that he slowly finds himself sharing as Delilah is forced to solvent. Driven to the bottle by the lack of compassion from her fellow Australians.   

7 Sound

This weeks screening was on Jean-Luc Godard’s One plus one (1968). The film itself is hard one to catorgorize but I shall deal with that aspect later on. The film aims to show the process of how a song is made, it takes an entire thought and manufactoring process and mediates it. It is shot in the style of a documentory which is typical of Godard and the French New wave film makers. The Rolling Stones’ are the featured band so the whole thing would have been all quite cosmopolitian. It is not the easiest thing to watch although we were told there were two different edit; one more commercially viable and the other the directors own complete aesthetic. I am not aware which one I was watching as I found it very difficult to watch. The constant cut aways to other scenes reflecting what was occuring in the main linear narrative; I imagine the semiotics were there but they completely eluded me in some cases.

Godard is typical of his situation really. He moved to Paris from his Swiss comfort and thus was exposed to an array of new excitement. I think this is an important affect that he is able to put in his films; often the subject matter is alien or the protagonist is a foreigner. He is with the audience as a spectator looking in, through the eyes of a voyeur. I say Vvoyeur as most of his films are shot with th Bill Nichols-esque type of realism:

• Expository
• Observational
• Interactive
• reflexive

The films take a quite naturalistic documentary format. I believe Godard plays into Cashiers aesthetic somewhat, “The director’s role (new Wave) was to manipulate conventions and formulas to place their personal and artistic stamp on film.” This could be translated to read as viewing the world through Godard tinged glasses. The aesthetic is a familiar one yet somehow the affect is one of an alien nature. What I find odd is that, even with the Italien neo-realists, one could create realism; surely an oxymoronic statement.

 Godard was a result of the culture he was quickly educated in. he started as a film critic and thus was able to look back on past masterpieces to create his own work. He was also educated in a way that all his references were of merit. He was learning around the time of the “art et esaai” revival it would seem that Paris was “a somewhat unorthadox standpiont.” I feel this to be reflected in his work. If i was asked about the relevance of Godard’s work I would answer, it had its place. He was a creation of the culture he adorded and the avant-garde work he produced stands today as it helpped shape the films/aesthetics of todays cinema. His most recent film would probably account for his lack of touch although if one gave a modern audience one plus one they might think it too post modern. His films are very difficult but have both political and artistic benefit/merit. He plays with hot issues such as the black panther movement.  Godard was at the forefront for a time yet culture will always react and thus change even against itself.

5 Screen Semiotics

To start answering the this question one must first define what is meant by semiotics. Simply put it is the study/science of signs.  For myself the easiest explanantion I could arrive at was this; double (or more) meanings to how certain objests/systems/words/sounds can represent something else. This is the understanding at its most basic level. As with all the topics the more one dives into a conceot the more confusing it becomes. Saussure states that the basic elements of language is called semiotics. With this in mind it would seem that the core of semiotics is all inclusive, applicable to almost anything. Another way I understood semiotics is by looking towards the art world. Much of what is painted/drawn/created/molded has both a surface and another meaning. The Best modern examples are probably the Goldsmiths artist, Hirst and emins group.Hirst’s Shark is a visual specticle. This is only a surface reading. When the artist, himself, comments on the piece “The physical impossiblity of Death in the Mind of Someone Living” he describes how the shark represents death. The semiotics are all their for the audience to see, the affect is clearly about death. The shark is dead though looks to be alive; how could it be it is motionless?

With this explained is semiotics enough to explain how cinema is understood. Film makers nd cinema itself are able to create concepts that are unable to be recognized by the normal signs. How can we understand signs when they are given their own reality and aethetic? Add to the complications by remembering that cinema can be motion/sound/light/language and special effects all at once and the simple semiotic arguement seems dated. To settle this film writers started to update the semiotic study by looking at “cognitive film theory” .

Rebecca E. Miller: ” Cognitive film theory seeks to explicate the mental processes and knowledge that underlie a viewer’s capacity to percieve and understand film. Cognitive film theory views film semiotics as an irrecondible and obsolete theory of how we understand film.”

Warren Buckland: “comnination with linguistics and semiotics to form… cognitive semiotics.”

With these definitions in mind it allows us to understand how limited semiotics was. Cognitive film theory seems to break down every aspect to its core to allow one to interpretate all signs. This allows us to explore more difficult subject matter; Time from last week. La Jetee doesn’t use any recognizable metaphor when showing the time travel; yet a chronological order of photographs followed with an voice overlay describing the unfolding events; yet these are symbols enough. There isn’t a need for a clock or an indication of time passing through obvious means.

Can we understand these surreal and conceptual ideas fully? Is cinema fully crafted or are their naturalistic elements able to create original conceptual thoughts? Are we slaves to the directors affect and merely told what to feel? Or in some cases is the affect able to inspire orginal critics/ideas/thoughts? I will try to answer these questions by using this weeks screening Melancholia(2011). Lars Von Trier is a very bold film maker that relys heavily on metaphor; Dogville (2003) is a film where the audience is taken inside an alternate reality yet one very familiar. The set is very odd; a metaphor as we the audeince are voyeurs in this world without walls. Nicole Kidman is turned into the town’s prisoner to devasting and almost unwatchable effect. Meloncholia is of a similar ilk in its pathos. One could argue that the symbols and semiotics used by Von Trier are contrived and obvious. The affect and aethetic created are baltent and thus the audience is led to his conclusions, I still believe there is merit here though. In some films it would seem a cliff hanger is little more than a lazy finish (my own personal opinion Shutter Island). Von Trier uses conflicting themes to highlight certain allergorys or double entundree. The boredom and depression of one sister (here we see the obviousiness of the title choice). while Kirsten dunst’s character is liberated. This liberation is short lived as her world of freedom is ended with an almost arranged marrige to Skarsgard. The planet Meloncholia is a symble of the impending boredom that will end their familar worlds.  

Semiotcs: concept/affect/aethetic representation and thus interpretation.

4 Chronos

This week the lecture focused on the concept of time and how the media/film is able to represent such a perplexing idea. Here are some quotes from the research that have helped me understand.

• Deleuze: “Time is invention, or nothing at all…”
• Adrian Pipper “indexical present”
•  Maya Deren”in this sense {ritual} is art, and even historically, all art derives from ritual. Being a film ritual, it is acheived not in spatial terms alone, but in terms oftimecreated by camera.”

Time it would seem, from these quotes, is a passive concept, held togther by the actions or between them. Space is defined by boundrais perhaps time is a result or exists between two or more actions. In a linear direction? According to Newton, before Einstien’s theory of relativaty, Abosolute Time was how all percieved the direction of time. Unlike our circular motion that is respected as the best theory, a theory after all. Paul D. Miller highlights the enormaty of time; we cannot begin to imagine the transnational discrete invisble simultaneous transactions. A film that highlights this butterfly effect is Babel (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449467/). This is taken to be that everything is happening at the same time, this is an idea that is odd… could one place be slower?

The idea of linear time is one often represented in media; in the lecture we were given the exmples of graphic novels: Here and Watchmen. We see how Dr. Manhatten has experienced all time at once, is he folly to where time puts him or does he choose? All the same he is able to see his middle beginning and never ending. Here shows how a plot of land is subject to vast amount of time but percieved in a relative fashion. Mr. Nobody (Jaco Van Dormeal 2009) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0485947/ is a film that takes place over two centuries. It disscusses how time is not the factor it is choice, we see how multiple possibilities arise as the protagonist makes a desicion. We then see his future, though, not nessacarily in that order. These are not the films I enjoy I find them hard to watch due to the content. They leave you with a feeling of insignificance.  

The screening this week was “Le Jetee” (Chris Marker 1962). It is a combination of audio and stills, reminding me of films made for museums; similar to historical documentaries. The photographs show how time can be captured in an instant, yet the picture has more than one thing to divulge. The film itself was remade under the title Army of the twelve monkeys starring Bruce Willis and a young Brad Pitt. We see a future where men are forced to live underground and to save themselves they must try and salvage the past.  This image displays how they believe time travel to be possible. One could argue that this film is not at all sci-fi as it is not clear whether or not the man is simply dreaming. Time travel becomes his desires. This is a metaphor for time as time itself is travelling without motion.

Sergei Eisenstein: “The hieroglyphic language of cinema is capable of expressing any concept…”

3 Economic mediation

This week we looked at the structures of community under all kinds of regimes and cultural shifts. The film this week was “Les Glaneurs et la Glaneuse” (Agnes Varda, 2002). Her understanding of community is as follows, “The acceptance/ modification/ refusal of social structures/political and economic structures and the affects of those decisions upon other structures and people.” She decided to follow a movement in France that has been revived due to laws on food imposed by corporate businesses. It is a documentary but as this course has tried to show a documentary is one person’s affect upon another. The shots/angles are chosen and the subject matter- she is French new wave but not dogmatic. The film pays homage to a once celebrated tradition (through art and community) and tries to infuse it with a new similar practice. The ideas are the same, picking up free stuff for art or food. They exist in this country as well although the name is less romantic, freegans, the principals are the same. One could argue that it is an attack on global companies but ironically it is these companies that have brought these mini factions together. One could argue that the affect of the riots on the people of London was that they brought towns together in the same way. 

Basically we are trying to establish how groups and communities are formed. Is there one particular formula? I would argue that culture has an integral role, as groups are formed for or against it. The skate culture of last week shows how a sub group is formed in a grass-roots manner, self-made boards. This is then scooped up by corporations and mass-produced; Astroturf community. Communities outside geographical limitations can be formed on the internet or a rally against something, occupy for example. This community was separated in itself as the rich and poor with the same ideals then separated. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRjKnHvvwXg This would counter Paul Rieouer (1986) ideology that all one needs for intergration is merely the same viewpoint. “integration ideology plays a mediating role in the social realm.” Our pasts shape our feelings, we can share an emotion over viewpoint and form a sub group but ultimately we must be of similar ilk before this begins, our affects will be similar. Groups are drawn together then regardless of outside influence? Probably not as culture seems to play a vital role in placing people together.

2 Concept: Dogtown

This weeks lecture was on the theme of concept. 

• Consider the notion of culture and how is it defined and communicated as commodity, classified and sold.
• How has open source media and P2P processes re/de-formed commodity culture?
• What are commodity fetishes and how does the media engage, perpetuate and create them?

To answer these points one must first define the word concept. To do this we were given the documentary “Dogtown and Z-Boys” (Stacey Peralta, 2002). The film follows the renaissance of skating culture through the lives of young Californian surfers. It explains how their elitist attitudes (Locals only) and street aesthetics secured them into skate-cultures’ history. This led to financial gain in the case of Peralta, thus in this instance we are investigating how one is able to market this anarchic way of life for everyone to buy.

The way I understand this to work is that if the concept is “the wave” and the movements these surfers made on the skateboards; then the commodity is ultimately the merchandising at the other end. Concepts need mediators. Whether, in this case, it was skate shows, magazines or photographers. These are the bridges between something as simple as a wave and financial gain. I should add that luck or drive must play some part in the financial or commercial success of a product. Peralta was not the only member of the Zepher crew. Right place-right time perhaps? Peralta it would seem from the documentary and Hollywood film to be the most reliable Z-boy as he had an urge to escape his life. This is ironic as the lifestyle (concept) he was so eager to escape was the one funding his exit. Marx described this to be a hinderance on communism: while here in Manchester. He noted how natural selection and competition force men to strive above the rest. Once above the working/worked man will not share the wealth with his starting equals thus funding a machine that they were once so eager to escape. This is slightly off topic though it does bring me into Marx’s explanation for man’s want for commodity. I will also reference Sigmund Freud’s nephew Edward Bernays who completely exploited man’s irrational want for things. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZ8ZvYNlxiM describes in detail as to how public relations managed to change the world and seemingly normal people’s behaviour, I learnt everyone is suggestible.) 

Marx’s explanation of concept is straightforward; to make a table one uses wood and at no point does the concept of wood change. When do people stop referring to it as wood and simply as a table? Wood+ culture or design aspects= table.  This is the most basic and fundamental explanation one can give to how a commodity is created. This doesn’t warrant the irrational need by man for such items, enter Bernays.

The best example to show how Bernays’ public relations, thus media hype, could control the masses is women smoking. By enlisting newspapers and some actresses he was able to create a campaign that had stemmed out of thin air. He discovered that the reason woman didn’t smoke was due to the symbolism of the cigarette; phallic and reserved for men. He made this into a suffragette movement “light your torches of freedom”. The one resounding factor that I took from all this is that media is able to make man become irrational for commodity. Case in point, the idea that simply buying a skate board turned you into an anarchic poor Californian surfer. To most of the commentators in the film it made sense, how can this be true or make sense? The magazines and photographs gave them the want and the newly designed boards the commodity. One should also point out that once these boards had been bought (as I spoke about in week 1) culture had already shifted. The Board becomes a cultural statement/artefact which to all intense and purposes is a fabrication; you weren’t there; you were visiting and here’s your mass marketed board proving you weren’t there.

1. Affect and aesthetics

This week we discussed the notions aroused by culture and discourse. The reading gave insight into how themes and aesthetics are formed. The definitions, I found, to be very confusing as even Foucault states that “discourse the word is used but no where adiquetly is it defined.”

From “culture” I discovered that (according to Stuart Hall):

• Never was one regulative notion of culture
• Culture is a “whole way of life”.

These ideas were later opposed by Williams and other writers who found that culture was not in fact one way of life. It was a production of practice, “…everything is expressive over everything else.” Culture is picked at any point in time has already changed; it is constantly changing either against itself or pushing itself ever forward.

Affect is still an idea that I have difficulty with. Since many writers seem to disagree with the definition I will thus give my own interpretation, however lacking in merit. Frederic Jameson described post-modern culture as the “waning of affect.” Wheeler describes affect to be emotions. As time has progressed more and more writers have started to disagree with this surface explanation. Spinoza translated by Deleuze & Guattari suggests that in fact “Affect/affection neither word denotes a personal feeling.” This is then elaborated by Mussumi, showing the exact difference between the three words; “feelings are personal and biographical, emotions are social, and affects are prepersonal.” The resounding argument by all seems to be that this word cannot be fully realised in language (perhaps a nod to film). I still find this all very muddled and after googling the definitions (for a while) I came across a baby analogy: babies have no preconceived conceptions both to life and langauge; thus they are forced to perceive language/tone/facial expression of parent/colour with a prepersonal notion; this is affect. The parent and child then share an emotion but if the parent were to say “the child is feeling happy/sad…” this would be wrong as the child cannot yet feel, it can only share its emotions. I still find this all very  difficult to comprehend and am still wary as to whether or not the actual definition eludes me. Affect in my definition is how one is able to create an idea where the audience is told something new, yet reacts in a way that seems natural. The mise-en-scene helps create affect along with different aspects. I still find it difficult to separate feelings from affect as surely everyone has preconceived ideas about almost everything. Affect (in my opinion) equals the most natural reaction; the most truthful.  

Coffee and Cigarettes (Jim Jarmusch 2004). The film is linked to this topic as Jarmusch is depicting a cultural documentation with celebrities and highlighting what he feels is relevant in this new world. There are no real preconceived ideas as the title is an exact match to the content. Mise en scene is a natural one and thus we simply have a truthful experience that has been falsely created for us.

Online Creative C.V.

Email: rolloaiscott@googlemail.com · Date of Birth: 01/03/1990

Rollo Scott

“Rollo is able to approach ideas like a helicopter. He will bring a completely new set of ideas to it; unlike most creatives who are like vending machines. Only capable of reproducing the same material.” Senior Design Lecturer, Camberwell.

 Education

2010-2013                               Manchester School of Art

                                                Film and Media studies B.A. (Adobe)

2009                                        The Met Film School, Ealing Studios

                                                Introduction to filming and editing (Finalcut Pro)

2008 -2009                              University of the Arts, London

 Foundation year; Art and design diploma (graphic design)

2003-2008                               Shrewsbury School, Shropshire

                           A-levels: Classical Civilization (B); Art (A);History of Art (D)         GCSEs: 2 A*s, 4 As and 3 Bs

Head of House

 

Employment

December-May 2011               Blue Arrow, Manchester: Waiter, barman and porter

March 2010                             Menai Holiday Cottages: Painter Decorator

• Form this I was also able to negotiate a contract to design a map of Anglesey along with its history for the building in question along with another graphic designer.

April-June 2010                      Behrens Group, Manchester: Forklift truck driving 

June 2009                                Royal Ascot

• Silver service skills used to serve parties of up to 15 in their                                                       boxes.

June -August 2008                  Whitebridge Wines, Staffordshire: Receptionist

• Answering the phones and taking messages.  I also sold stock, stock taking and sent mass e-mails. To invite new clients to purchase products.

Freelance                               

The sound of C logo http://www.soundofc.blogspot.com/ This logo has been used for posters and parties. It has even featured along side the ministry of sound logo

 Various Invitations and Posters, theatres or functions.  Portrait Art. These are examples of some of my work:http://www.flickr.com/photos/rolliepig/

A keen interest in video editing and filming: http://www.youtube.com/user/rolliepig/videos

Week 8 PR Brian Beech

This weeks lecture was on PR. I have always found it difficult to distinguish the difference between PR and advertising. This was immediately corrected by the charismatic Mr. Beech when he made the point that PR is driven by news. Every morning at work was filled with basically an hour or two given to reading every newspaper and watching the days news to discover the different angles on which to take. How things were being represented and how one might push for a different news slant; playing different angles. I must admit my only knowledge of PR had come from a radio 4 Mitchel and Webb sketch about the uselessness of the profession, this was quickly corrected.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD0gVRI_kEQ

He made the point that advertising is set within its own sphere. Advertising is known. PR is there to establish and maintain a brand. He discussed the difference in newspapers: if you want to gauge the nation’s opinion read the Sun and to focus on the fears of middle England read the Daily Mail. These are not merely newspapers but opinion formed together. In an age where anyone can be a journalist; Twitter, Youtube, blogs etc.. it makes a PR’s job harder and harder.

The digital age means that a PR’s job is instantaneous. He made the point about A.A. Gill, a writer for GQ and The Times, while critiquing a restaurant he tweeted about a lack of water service and within one minute he was being served water. Which in my eyes is completely absurd. Although this isn’t necessarily that in twined with the lecture it did make me think of the damage that Tripadviser has done to a lot of holiday companies purely through throw away comments that in some cases still haven’t been amended.

The next part consisted of various photographs that were at the top of the spectrum for newspaper features and some that should never have made it. It would seem that PR is shallow but in an honest way, children and attractive people make for a better picture. Ribbon cutting looks weak and always try a flattering angle.

PR seems like a fast paced job that is quiet exciting and he left with this piece of advice for C.V.s always remember the name of who you are writing to and be cautious of clients’ input; the costumer isn’t always right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FOpQRTcZnE