SMU Video Art 2019

Acconci first discusses the tangibility of TV and this leads to the tangibility of stories that are portrayed on these TVs. I believe that people like this because people like control and power, TV provides this for many people: "The viewer and the face on-screen are comfortable with each other; the news from that face, then, is assumed, taken as fact." Vito Acconci then begins to depict the idea of television becoming a "model person" where the person becomes the screen. Is the argument that TV and movies are hard to relate to? Are they too foreign? But isn't TV more accessible and portable than ever? Or maybe this does not matter. I also found it interesting that he pointed out how accessible film equipment and film is in the United States. Although I believe this to be true, I really have not thought about it...maybe that is part of the problem. Does this lead audiences in the U.S. versus other countries to view video art of film differently? And if so, h...

Vito Acconci Response             “Television, Furniture, and Sculpture: The Room with the American View” by Vito Acconci essentially discusses how the television moves between being decoration and art. It is a piece of work that holds the attention of the audience much longer than any sculpture piece could.  Television has the ability to allow people to live vicariously, to be something more or at least  other  than what they are. I have not fully processed Acconci’s discussion of economic and sexual power, though I believe he is saying that the television removes the opportunity for economic and sexual power to be exerted because the box embodies our illusions of it.              Acconci’s argument for video art appears to state that it is the attempt to remain relevant in an industry that is evolving because of the television. He says...

Notes: Horror movies no longer feel as scary because we can separate between tv and reality. VR has now replaced as something we still have a hard time deciphering with the added senses. things can now be behind you. having something projected vs. staring brightly back at you This almost pokes at the idea that the way men watch porn and how it sets expectations and how women watch romantic comedies and setting expectations for relationships. We seek what we want when we watch these things until they become engrained in our heads. raising exceptions for reality when we are watching something theatrical. Like when you hear two actors you loved on screen hated each other off screen. Even the difference between on screen and off screen is interesting, because they are never really "onscreen" until the piece has been edited. There might be footage of them disliking each other, but it isn't considered onscreen. The Tv becoming a sculpture is also interesting with the ne...

I really enjoyed how the opening of this article addressed the way in which we experienced TV screens as children. I remember being a kid and staring at a thick box like TV and trying to decipher how there could be this whole other universe living inside there. One that had no conscious awareness of the universe I was in. I remember knocking on it like I would a fish tank, which is something that is also brought up on the first page. I still feel that screens have this effect on people sometimes. They can have this hypnotic effect on viewers, especially if there is extra influence or when you allow your mind to just zone. This also made me think of the movie , a movie in which someone goes into their television and into a 1950’s rom com type show. I think that the idea of this movie relates in a way to how Vito is talking about the relationships between viewers and the television set, and the comfortability each has with the other. I think it's interesting ...

This reading really focused on how much you get paid, which honestly started to lose me. Though I did like the discussion of theater movies vs. being in an artistic space. The space can really change how the item is viewed. When I see something on YouTube, it tends to feel more like a stream of thought and time. While if I were to watch a movie like Deadpool on YouTube, it feels more like I am trying to see one little bit. This feels a little similar to art exhibits because of how I tend to walk in and watch parts of the feature, but with less control than YouTube. The only time I could honestly say something gets my full attention is when I am in a theater setting. Sitting in a sit in a dark room with multiple people makes me less likely to bring up my phone. It is one of the few times I think this generation is still able to give up a large amount of their attention for a long period of time. Notes: holding attention without taking up any space now doing art with the gallery in...

I've always wondered if our entire existence is sitting on some alien's science project that he got a C on. It's clear by now that Vito Acconci is an out of the box thinker. The idea that "we are led to believe" that the world is in our hands sends chills down my spine! Saying television aggressively "implants" images in our brains is true, but is for some reason a hard pill to swallow. I would disagree with the notion that we are the screen. It is more of a visual penetration than a collaborative process. Because I feel TVs have preceeded my time, I'm forced to agree that a TV is furniture. Perhaps my experience in advertising prevents me from viewing TVs as sculptures, since to me they are nothing more than outdated symbols of capitalist innovation in entertainment.

Thinking back to my experience with galleries, whenever I found myself at one with the purpose of observing paintings or sculpture, there was usually a moment where I would wander into a dark room to watch a video projected on a wall. I never took into account how the artist would want the work to be experienced and instead simply sat on the floor and watched as much as I thought was appropriate. The article mentions a dormant and mobile element to some installations, prompted by the environment, making me think the instances a bench wasn’t offered meant that I was “supposed” to stand. I’ve heard of theatrical screenings of ‘art movies’ and that seemed like a simple enough format to understand considering how familiar it was to anyone who has watched a movie.   Though I’ve never been to one I can still see the advantages of viewers sitting through and entire work as opposed to installations where it is more acceptable to wander in and out without experiencing the video in its ent...

The first part of Acconci's essay that stood out to me was his concept of a television set making the power of the screen handleable. It brought to mind a Bo Burnham interview in which he discusses his film Eigth Grade . In the interview Burnham describes how he felt it was important to release the film on the largest screen possible (as opposed to offers to release it online or reformatting it as a tv show or something) because he felt that a large part of the message of the film was establishing his thirteen year old female protagonist as powerful. He discussed how the audience should be humbled before her and her problems, and that upon rewatching on a TV or a laptop, the viewer could get another unique experience by literally feeling closer to her in proximity and size through the screen. Acconci's point about television sets being initially sort of trojan horsed into the home was also really interesting. I think this is why often times video installation not based on pro...

https://vimeo.com/367535641

https://vimeo.com/user103200068/review/367652839/85c1bd867e Link to my video

I'm even going to pretend to understand how the five segments of this piece conjure a narrative, or even the relationship between them. So instead, here are some moments I found thought-provoking. I. Frampton relates his friend's disturbing, recurring two-part nightmare: he lives two entire lifetimes. But each one feels like half of a whole rather two experiences lived fully. In the first, he is an heiress who must spend every moment of her life being surveilled. In the next, he is the heir to that heiress's fortune, but he must spend his life watching the footage. All of his life experiences are derived through watching those films. This made me consider the two extreme, camera-based lives of the imagined individuals. One, with whom the camera's gaze has been present since birth, and the other, whose entire worldview was informed solely by the camera. II. Mount Fujiyama is apparently visible from any place in Japan. Thus, any perception includes this. Not exactl...

A Pentagram for Conjuring the Narrative Response             The portion about the dream was interesting. The best comparison I can think of is the Truman Show with Jim Carrey. The step further was the child watching the film of their mother’s life, which touched on some socialization concepts. Basically, their take on what would be the effects on a person who spends their life watching someone else’s life play out.              The transition to the mountain in Japan that is visible from every place in Japan served as a real-life analogy of the dream. Something that existence is always in the view of someone else. Where I begin to get lost, however, is with the discussion of equations, shapes, time and space. I understood the concepts independently, but not as a cohesive explanation of storytelling. Their relevance was lost on me.

The opening imagery about the dreams immediately made me think about filming children (or objects/things that cannot consent). I had a professor at SMU who did not allow us to take picture of children, animals, etc. because they could not consent to having their photograph taken. I think in 2019, documenting children/family members on video or photographs is prevalent and not many people talk about this issue of whether or not these kids can consent. Frampton goes onto discuss the center piece of film or art (the focal point). The example that Frampton uses is from Mount Fujiyama in Japan and discusses how it was the focal point across many different artistic forms and is a key to recognizing Japanese work (in some cases). Frampton argues that everything has a focal point (whether it is dialogue/action/non-action) and this leads the piece to have that creative freedom to explore other ideas of cinematography.

Okay Hollis Frampton lets just open this article with a total mind fuck why don't we. As someone who constantly has dreams where I live through weeks at a time the opening story in which his friend is born and dies as two different intertwined persons is a lot. It an interesting story as the woman is born into a life that is being recorded 24/7 until the day she dies, then she is born again as a boy who then watches every second of his previous life as this woman. The boy doesn't have a life outside of these images, and instead lives through the recordings of his past life, almost living the same life twice. Makes me think of movies and how sometimes we live through movies and place ourselves in the position of the characters we relate the most to. Also made me think of this -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szzVlQ653as "A waterfall is not a 'thing,' nor is a flame of burning gas. Both are, rather, stable patterns of energy determining the boundaries of a c...

Hollis Frampton questions narrative by showing examples of story telling and allusive ideas of a center, or focal point. He begins by retelling a story of a friend's dream where they are born to repeat the life of a wealthy famous woman through viewing films of her life. The man adopts the life of the woman through only a screen but continues to live in his own body - eventually passing of poor health with no idea of his own personality. Unfortunately, the man is destined to only follow a rich woman's narrative without the freedom to create his own. Next Frampton gives an example of a Japanese city built around Mt. Fujiyama. From any location of the city the mountain becomes the focal point. The cities that were built would not be the same without the mountain. Meaning, that the mountain has influence over its surroundings. Everything that was built was built in relation to the overarching mountain. Frampton speaks about Duchamp's thoughts on a waterfall and a flame. A ...

Speaking of narratives this had me pretty hooked! I think now more than ever since privacy has been such an issue lately, people would be the most shocked at the "offer" made of exchanging inheriting fortune for have your entire life filmed (this obviously means that she must have been filmed before she could consent which could be a whole discussion in an of itself! I view that as a complete invasion of privacy, but one that would be okay under certain conditions. If only I and who I chose to show had access, then I would strongly consider the offer. It's just hard to imagine people watching every time you've undressed or had intercourse. There's something also odd about being filmed giving birth. Those are sensitive times that would need some clarification as to who and they would be filmed, as well as who would have access to the results. The story took a sharp left turn when it mentioned the detriment of the son. He became obese, ill, barely spoke, and homose...

Hollis Frampton begins by remembering how as a child he noticed Mount Fujiyama in the background of many if not all Japanese landscape photographs and figured it was due to a significant spiritual relevance to the country. He then realizes that Mount Fujiyama is visible from every point in Japan, making it a fixed point in Japan’s perception. The ancient Greek belief that a line drawn through a point can only exist once parallel to the line is not as simple as it sounds as it depends on the line extending infinitely on a flat plane. In Marcel Duchamp’s mind, the relationship between “the waterfall” and the illuminating gas” rests on how they are perceived in space and time. The waterfall exists through its constant motion despite the details or condition of the water itself. The flame exists through its consistent burn, no matter what is burning. Like people, according to Frampton, we all exist because of our burning nature and will eventually die out when there is nothing more to feed...