This is yet another great film we have had the opportunity to watch in class. The many elements within the movie added depth as well as humor. Johnathan's outragous, obssesive collecting habits were hillarious. The description of all the characters, in addition to the camera work really made the situation complete.
This movie evoked personal feelings in me since I could relate to the situation. Johnathan went back to Russia to trace his roots and collect the pieces which made his family. Being from a bordering country, Bulgaria, made everything within the movie seem so familiar to me. Even the language throughout the movie was a call of home. I could understand the key words within the sentences enough to know what they were saying. This made the movie strangely real to me. It was like I had been to alot of these places. I could relate to the characters and the people they saw along their journey to finding themselves.
One scene which really stood out to me was when the grandfather walked down into the field and looked upon the remains of war. There were ruins and infantry pieces. The foreshadowing effects of this scene are striking.
At this point it was clear that the grandfather had some connection to this land and to the war. The suspense built as the movie continued. I found myself wondering if the grandfather was one of the Germans or if he himself was Jewish.
One of the stark images in my mind was the vast contrast between the two groups' shoes, displayed by an explicit camera shot. The Jews, fearful and defeseless, wore ragged, torn shoes or no shoes at all, while the powerful Germans who held the Jews' fate in their hands wore shined, black boots.
This movie went from laughter to tears and covered a vast array of issues such as ignorance, anti-semitism, death, and suicide. The humerous descriptions were later supplemented by serious undertones. It turned out that Johnathan's habits of collecting things were driven by his fear of forgetting. The grandfathers funny, yet rough manners are later explained by the events he faced in the past. When he managed to walk away from the dead pile of Jews, he threw down his jacket, and with it, his religion. He was hardened by his circumstances and made to forget his true identity.
However, the end of the movie points out that our identity never disappears by means of Alex's interpretation of the term inside-out. Our true self is always on the inside of us looking out.
The grandfather burried his past in the banks of Trachinbrod, like the rest of the ill-fated people whose lives were taken there. The important thing is that in the end he returned home and recognized his true identity. For the first time he was content.
This movie said alot about searching for your roots and coming to know yourself. It is about leaving a part of yourself behind for the world to have. It is about searching for your past. Most importantly, it is about future generations' ability to find the answers to their search, so that they can come to know the inside which looks out.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Friday, March 13, 2009
If that was a pain cry...
The impact of images, in terms of portrying pain, is rather significant in our society. The importance of displays is the conotative meaning they carry. They offer the opportunity for the viewer to interpret the pain and the message being conveyed.
One artist that really made an impact on me was Tracey Emin. Overall her work was really exquisite. Her blanket type tapestries were very detailed and percise. Most importantly, beyond the construction of her works, was the message she was sending. I loved her work because she said what women were afraid to say. Through her work she exposed her feelings for the world to see and created something which will leave a piece of her behind forever.
"Mad Tracey" touched upon many women's issues revolving around women's sexuality. After being raped at the age of 13, Tracey has every right to call herself "Mad Tracey". I like her persective of sex as an adventure and an escape. Power to her for playing the game and turning her sexual life into works which make her rich both socially and economically.
Similarly, Sue Williams touched upon women's issues through her doodles. I feel that these convey more of the pain she must have experianced in her life. Where Emin seems to be pleased with her sexuality and seems to desire sex, Williams seems hesitant and upset based on her experiances.
I found it very amazing to know that the photographer who shot the famous "Napalm Girl" took the subjects in the photo to a hospital after the photo. It takes alot for a photographer to cross the boundary of his lens, a world apart from reality.
One thing which cannot go unmentioned is the artists which chose to inflict pain on themselves as a form of display and call it art. If they say it is art and they have an audience, then surely it must be art.
This brings me to the ultimate question within this whole discussion: WHAT IS ART? I believe there is a clear line between art and display, although both gather audiences. How authentic artists' work is will remain something unknown to the viewer.
I encourage the pushing of limits. Pain is a source for artists to investigate and challenge. All of this may prove the power of people. However I have to wonder if witnessing the artistic act of getting shot in the arm desensitizes us more than the real images on TV? There was a person in the same room as the viewer, who voluntarily took a shot in the arm or cut their body. More importantly, there were people in the room who voluntarily watched this event. What does that say about our society? Perhaps we are all masochists.
Dr. Highberg posed the question of which was the most beautiful image we witnessed within the lecture. My personal favorite area was Larry Clark's work with crystal meth. "Once the needle goes in, it never comes out", he said. I think the most powerful image was the pregnant woman shooting meth. Was it beautiful? Well that is just another level of dementia. We cannot call this beautiful. This is supposed to be art, but in front of the camera lens is a real subject shooting meth while carrying a life.
Pictures documenting actual painful events can never be beautiful for the sole fact that the viewer has no right to look at the event, stripped of its raw power. We see a still image of a pregnant woman with a needle of her arm. We do not see the ugly, disturbing, and raw events which follow. We see the baby in its coffin which is another grim, yet dressed up, portrayl of what took place between the last photograph and the outcome.
The worst part about the picture of the pregnant woman shooting meth is the fact that the fetus inside her never got a chance because her desire and addiction took that away from it. This photograph's purpose is not beauty, but recording. This is an event recorded in history. It has the power to make us feel, like any image of pain. This is an image portraying the hidden pain, dispair, and lost chances - it has more than done its job.
One artist that really made an impact on me was Tracey Emin. Overall her work was really exquisite. Her blanket type tapestries were very detailed and percise. Most importantly, beyond the construction of her works, was the message she was sending. I loved her work because she said what women were afraid to say. Through her work she exposed her feelings for the world to see and created something which will leave a piece of her behind forever.
"Mad Tracey" touched upon many women's issues revolving around women's sexuality. After being raped at the age of 13, Tracey has every right to call herself "Mad Tracey". I like her persective of sex as an adventure and an escape. Power to her for playing the game and turning her sexual life into works which make her rich both socially and economically.
Similarly, Sue Williams touched upon women's issues through her doodles. I feel that these convey more of the pain she must have experianced in her life. Where Emin seems to be pleased with her sexuality and seems to desire sex, Williams seems hesitant and upset based on her experiances.
I found it very amazing to know that the photographer who shot the famous "Napalm Girl" took the subjects in the photo to a hospital after the photo. It takes alot for a photographer to cross the boundary of his lens, a world apart from reality.
One thing which cannot go unmentioned is the artists which chose to inflict pain on themselves as a form of display and call it art. If they say it is art and they have an audience, then surely it must be art.
This brings me to the ultimate question within this whole discussion: WHAT IS ART? I believe there is a clear line between art and display, although both gather audiences. How authentic artists' work is will remain something unknown to the viewer.
I encourage the pushing of limits. Pain is a source for artists to investigate and challenge. All of this may prove the power of people. However I have to wonder if witnessing the artistic act of getting shot in the arm desensitizes us more than the real images on TV? There was a person in the same room as the viewer, who voluntarily took a shot in the arm or cut their body. More importantly, there were people in the room who voluntarily watched this event. What does that say about our society? Perhaps we are all masochists.
Dr. Highberg posed the question of which was the most beautiful image we witnessed within the lecture. My personal favorite area was Larry Clark's work with crystal meth. "Once the needle goes in, it never comes out", he said. I think the most powerful image was the pregnant woman shooting meth. Was it beautiful? Well that is just another level of dementia. We cannot call this beautiful. This is supposed to be art, but in front of the camera lens is a real subject shooting meth while carrying a life.
Pictures documenting actual painful events can never be beautiful for the sole fact that the viewer has no right to look at the event, stripped of its raw power. We see a still image of a pregnant woman with a needle of her arm. We do not see the ugly, disturbing, and raw events which follow. We see the baby in its coffin which is another grim, yet dressed up, portrayl of what took place between the last photograph and the outcome.
The worst part about the picture of the pregnant woman shooting meth is the fact that the fetus inside her never got a chance because her desire and addiction took that away from it. This photograph's purpose is not beauty, but recording. This is an event recorded in history. It has the power to make us feel, like any image of pain. This is an image portraying the hidden pain, dispair, and lost chances - it has more than done its job.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Falling, Floating, Dancing, Fading...
To be honest I was not at all excited about Dr. Pozorski's lecture. "Here we go, another talk about different representations of 9/11..." The picture of the "falling man", which was posted for us to look at before the lecture, made me feel uneasy. Generally, I feel that we are a nation who witnessed 9/11 and wether we were directly touched by it, or not, we all came away with different interpretations of the events that took place. For some reason, I have found that we are all happy with our own outlook on 9/11 and no so much with others'.
The biggest problem with a picture like the "Falling Man" is the fact that once it's published it is up to the viewer to interpret it as they wish. There is no background, no revelation of the person falling. While some are in shock, others are in awe. What was it then, that the man was expressing? Was it willpower, resignation, stoicism, or even freedom?
His fall became a part of history, the photographer made it history. The fact is that the pictur
e froze the falling man as a still object, but the man was falling. Those who can look at this picture and call it beautiful due to the symmetry and the posture of the man's body are turning the subject in the picture into an object. In reality, the picture of the "falling man" features a condemed man. His jump is a brave act caused by fear. That in itself is an oxymoron. This man lost faith. With no way out, he sought his freedom. By making the active choice to jump this man chose the means to his end. He ultimately gained control of the uncontrolable situation. But was he really? I am sure that the 11 shots surrounding this one will reveal that he was not so stoic. While traveling at 150 miles per hour, this man fell just like everyone else, "trying to hold onto th elife he was leaving", according to the Esquire article.
What is this "falling" that we are talking about anyway? There is a gravitational attraction which has an end, but like Dr. Pozorski pointed out, there are no words for such a moment. When something falls, it is usually an accident. This picture of the falling man shows no accident. He was willingly falling. Willingly losing control. Willingly departing this earth. How is it that people who witnessed this horror called it a vision of flight or birth? I suppose that when we witness something like this we must become dellusional in order to make ourselves feel better. To think of "falling well, and entering a world head first; while it is we who are falling" is a bit dellusional, but in the end it makes sense. It connects the falling man to something else. We always do.
For one artist in particular, the terrorist attacks came to be represented by his mural, featuring two blindfolded men, silently screaming amongst ruins and a fallen people. Again this is simply a representation, a dellusion of realtiy. It is art. This is where I would make the argument that history and art, although intertwined often, have no place together. This painting is beautiful. It has silent fury to it. It is sad. However it is not raw and ugly, it is not loud and screetching like the voices of those who witnessed 9/11 or lost someone in its rubble.
I support Dr. Pozorski's mention of a double bind, where people tell the truth in testimonies through figuritive speech. This is the chaotic state of mind that Frank was talking about in The Wounded Storyteller. Our words can never express the pain felt during that time. It is a time remembered and untouched. That is why no piece of 9/11 art should or could make us feel better about what happened. It is simply art, separate from the actual events that took place that day and our individual memories of them.
As for the two men in the mural, blinded and crying out? They are blind, they never saw their terminal fate coming. They are crying, yet they are silent because no one can help them now.
Again, tieing this historical event to something else from the past, the entire thing reminds of the mythical being known as Icurus. Icurus, out of curiousity or vanity, flew too close to the sun. His wings, which were made out of wax, melted and he fell down into the depths of eternity.
I have to ask why the U.S. was attacked on 9/11? There are other powerful nations who are threatening. The answer is unknown, but the fact remains that we are on top of the world. Perhaps we flew too close to the sun and for that, the wax wings of many innocent victims melted, as they fell into the depths of what was soon to be the remains of the World Trade Center.
Because everything is connected and there are different ideas through this lecture I realized that it is worth talking about 9/11 time and time again. The lecture that I was not really looking forward to left me surprised and searching for more. It was presented in a very interesting manner and I look forward to working with the subject and the knowlege I gained from Dr. Pozorski in the future.
The biggest problem with a picture like the "Falling Man" is the fact that once it's published it is up to the viewer to interpret it as they wish. There is no background, no revelation of the person falling. While some are in shock, others are in awe. What was it then, that the man was expressing? Was it willpower, resignation, stoicism, or even freedom?
His fall became a part of history, the photographer made it history. The fact is that the pictur
e froze the falling man as a still object, but the man was falling. Those who can look at this picture and call it beautiful due to the symmetry and the posture of the man's body are turning the subject in the picture into an object. In reality, the picture of the "falling man" features a condemed man. His jump is a brave act caused by fear. That in itself is an oxymoron. This man lost faith. With no way out, he sought his freedom. By making the active choice to jump this man chose the means to his end. He ultimately gained control of the uncontrolable situation. But was he really? I am sure that the 11 shots surrounding this one will reveal that he was not so stoic. While traveling at 150 miles per hour, this man fell just like everyone else, "trying to hold onto th elife he was leaving", according to the Esquire article.What is this "falling" that we are talking about anyway? There is a gravitational attraction which has an end, but like Dr. Pozorski pointed out, there are no words for such a moment. When something falls, it is usually an accident. This picture of the falling man shows no accident. He was willingly falling. Willingly losing control. Willingly departing this earth. How is it that people who witnessed this horror called it a vision of flight or birth? I suppose that when we witness something like this we must become dellusional in order to make ourselves feel better. To think of "falling well, and entering a world head first; while it is we who are falling" is a bit dellusional, but in the end it makes sense. It connects the falling man to something else. We always do.
For one artist in particular, the terrorist attacks came to be represented by his mural, featuring two blindfolded men, silently screaming amongst ruins and a fallen people. Again this is simply a representation, a dellusion of realtiy. It is art. This is where I would make the argument that history and art, although intertwined often, have no place together. This painting is beautiful. It has silent fury to it. It is sad. However it is not raw and ugly, it is not loud and screetching like the voices of those who witnessed 9/11 or lost someone in its rubble.
I support Dr. Pozorski's mention of a double bind, where people tell the truth in testimonies through figuritive speech. This is the chaotic state of mind that Frank was talking about in The Wounded Storyteller. Our words can never express the pain felt during that time. It is a time remembered and untouched. That is why no piece of 9/11 art should or could make us feel better about what happened. It is simply art, separate from the actual events that took place that day and our individual memories of them.
As for the two men in the mural, blinded and crying out? They are blind, they never saw their terminal fate coming. They are crying, yet they are silent because no one can help them now.
Again, tieing this historical event to something else from the past, the entire thing reminds of the mythical being known as Icurus. Icurus, out of curiousity or vanity, flew too close to the sun. His wings, which were made out of wax, melted and he fell down into the depths of eternity.
I have to ask why the U.S. was attacked on 9/11? There are other powerful nations who are threatening. The answer is unknown, but the fact remains that we are on top of the world. Perhaps we flew too close to the sun and for that, the wax wings of many innocent victims melted, as they fell into the depths of what was soon to be the remains of the World Trade Center.
Because everything is connected and there are different ideas through this lecture I realized that it is worth talking about 9/11 time and time again. The lecture that I was not really looking forward to left me surprised and searching for more. It was presented in a very interesting manner and I look forward to working with the subject and the knowlege I gained from Dr. Pozorski in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)