 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.1.163.157
In Reply to: RE: These three Dreyer films had a profound affect on me. posted by Harmonia on February 06, 2008 at 19:09:01
stuff and it is amazing.
Total agreement about Dreyer. He's as "modern" as anyone today, or the past twenty years, including the New Wave Asians, Tarr, or Tarkovsky.
BTW, have you seen the Brasilian classic, "Vidas Secas," yet? I tend to forget these things...
Follow Ups:
Or gal. Lady. Old broad. Whatever. ;-)Yes, my film history professor at the School of the Art Institue of Chicago was Stan Brakhage. (How nice someone here recognizes his name.)
His students were the beneficiaries of one of the most original film minds of the century, alas, some of it not fully appreciated by me at the time. I was extraordinarily lucky to have had him for a teacher (for two years in the mid seventies).
I used to wonder how Brakhage The Avante Garde Legend came to be at the Art Institute, if only to teach one day a week (he didn't live in the Windy City). Much later in life I realized that Brakhage was probably in desperate need of funds and glad to have the gig. He was also a "name" to add to the 'tute's already illustrious faculty.
I was initially a little wary of this semi-famous, intellectual personage who had been written up in Art In America and interviewed in the Village Voice. From afar, Brakhage seemed to be a brash, opinionated iconoclast. But the man himself dispelled all such apprehensions. Not that he was warm and cuddly (he was not). He was highly opinionated and he was indeed an iconoclast. But more importantly, he was passionate and articulate. And generous. And witty. And extraordinarily bright.
Brakhage proved to be a marvelous and enthusiastic pedagogue. He loved movies, and he conveyed this love for film every Monday at 11am in the Museum Auditorium. Stan didn't suffer fools gladly but he handled his students generally with patience and humor - the class format allowed him to interact with students quite gently. He could be provocative, he could get exasperated, but he was never rude. As I recall, Stan lectured without notes and was open to questions, during or after class. Discussion was often necessarily short - too much gab cut into movie time. But what there was was likely to be lively. Stan Brakhage loved to talk. I wished I'd recorded it all.
Brakhage had a wide knowledge of the visual arts, history and literature. He made connections between life and culture and film and art that seemed to us both profound and immediate. And he also showed us his own films, including works in progress.
The Art Institute's grading system was pass/fail at the time - if you came through the door most Mondays (and why woudn't you?) Stan passed you, no written papers required. (He had no time or inclination then to grade term papers. I don't know what his class routine was in latter years.) You showed up, you watched great movies for 2+ hours, you listened to Stan and engaged in discussion when requested. His only other stipulation was that no student could sit in the back of the auditorium - he commanded us to sit up close to the screen or (at minimum) in the middle rows of seats, so that "the entire movie screen fills your frame of vision".
"Don't hide in the back, don't try to be objective," he would bark at us. Stan wanted us within eyeshot and fully engaged. Getting us closer to the screen was his way of shaking up our normal viewing habits, in hopes of awakening our minds to new ways of looking at movies, so that we might - eventually - literally "see the light". He wanted to knock the cliches out of our heads. He wanted us to see what was there, not what we expected to see.
Stan taught us not only about the language and grammar of narrative cinema. He also opened our eyes to the idea of film as a medium in and of itself, a medium full of possibilities that could be manipulated for self expression just like paint or clay or paper or charcoal. He used to say most movies (Hollywood entertainment to classics to art films) were novels, but that his own films were poems.
Brakhage was interested in exploring the subjective, the metaphorical, the non-literal. He saw film stock the way a painter sees a blank canvas, as an open ended medium. Stan's goal was to get the non-representational on film - to express his inner life, to imprint the vision of his imagination and his subconscious onto the frame.
Film is unique in that, unlike a canvas, it can show movement, but it can be perceived only when light passes through it. Light is essential to vision and perception, so examining the very nature and meaning of "vision" was a key aspect of Brakhage's work, an exploration Stan saw not only as intrinsic to himself as an artist but also as deeply elemental to us all.
Although he was dismissive of what he called "filmed plays", Brakhage wasn't opposed in the least to more conventional, narrative films, even popular ones. In fact he showed us movies of many genres, countries and eras, all the great classics from silents to the latest works of the avante garde (it was in Stan's class that I first saw Kenneth Anger's "Scorpio Rising" and Keaton's "Sherlock Junior"). His highest regard, naturally enough, was reserved for films he felt achieved a strong and deeply felt personal vision.
But I know now what I only suspected then, that Brakhage was perpetually frustrated at the constant struggle to both earn a living and to get his work seen. Even experimental filmmakers crave some kind of audience, albeit a small one. No one wants to create in a vacuum. Alas, the digital/DVD age came a little too late for him.
Brakhage didn't always use a camera to create his films. A favorite method was to use various media to draw, scratch and paint directly into the film emulsion itself, frame by painstakingly slow frame (the reason why so many of these films are shorts). Brakhage wasn't the first artist to use this technique but he certainly took it farther and to greater effect than anyone else. Employing this technique through the years often involved exposure to toxic chemicals, substances that probably led to the cancer which ended his life. It's a sobering realization that during those exciting days when Stan was showing us his films in progress he was simultaneously hastening his own death.
It seemed like just as esteem and greater recognition finally started to come his way, Brakhage was diagnosed with cancer. He had for some years established himself as professor of film studies at University of Colorado. He apparently found happiness in his second marriage. I doubt if he was content with his designation as "the grand old man of the avant garde" - he was entirely too restless and intelligent for that. I do know that he worked as hard as he could, for as long as he was physically able.
The Criterion DVD set is a wonderful tribute to Stan and an excellent introduction to his films. I like to think that these DVDs have brought him the new audience he longed for in life - they've certainly preserved much of his work, saving it from obscurity in dusty academe. If you're tempted, I have no hesitation in saying Brakhage is probably not for everyone. The unitiated should sample his works in small doses. But all serious students of film should give him a look at least once in their lives. You may be amazed. Or perplexed. But you will not be indifferent.
It's ironic to me that Brakhage's legacy is most apparent in commercial applications - many of his experimental techniques have become commonplace in music videos and TV commercials. Not surprisingly, he has been highly influential among animators. Brakhage's most obvious popular film descendant is David Lynch, although you can observe traces of his influence every now and then in main stream filmmakers as disparate as Martin Scorsese, David Fincher and Oliver Stone.
Stan Brakhage was a personal hero of mine. He changed the way I see and feel about movies. He wasn't the first guide I had into the world of film art, but he was by far the most important. I can't always follow him into that heady realm where much of his best work resides. But I know I see far more in life and in movies for having been taught by him.
I'm not ashamed that the afternoon I heard on NPR that Stan Brakhage had passed away, I pulled the car over and bawled like a baby.
That's probably much more than you ever wanted to know about Stan Brakhage.
Vidas Secas...yes, I saw that quite some time ago, as part of a South American restrospective...I remember it reminded me quite a bit of
the Italian neo-realists...and I will never forget the dog. The circumstances of that part of Brazil, which prior o seeing the movie I had no idea existed, came as quite a surprise - if this is on DVD I'll have to revisit it.
a debt of gratitude for such a special sharing of your film experience with Brakhage. Several months ago, I watched the DVD of his short works and realized the genius. As you mention, it's hard to watch to watch "leading edge" video artists now and not see his hand.
Like Duchamp, he's important more for his formidable impact on the art form rather than any specific work of his (though Nude Descending and the urinal are well-known).
"Vidas Secas" can appear quite similar to the Italian movement but, in several ways, it's very different. I'll leave that for another time after I've had a chance to revisit it. As a Brasilian, I find it's a very difficult film to watch.
I'm sure you're also familiar with the short, experimental film work of Maya Deven: did Brakhage ever mention her?
Finally, I very recently saw, "Scorpio Rising." Brilliant. Absolutely amazing imagery.
With sculpture, music, painting, opera, ballet and other art forms operating at less than the artistic levels of yesteryear, it's exciting that film seems to remain vital, superlative, and vibrant.
I think this who you mean...and yes, we saw her "At Land" and "Marshes Of The Afternoon"- she was of special interest to me because of her focus on dance - she collaborated with choreographer Antony Tudor for one short, the name of which escapes me now. A very underrated, hypnotic filmmaker, beautiful, dreamlike imagery. There is a DVD compilation of her work I keep meaning to get, it's rather hard to find now though it's on VHS from Facets. Or it was.
I'm embarassed to admit I can't remember all the experimentalists we were exposed to - there was a lot of historical territory to cover each semester and Brakhage was wont to intermix preiods based on conceptual themes rather than strict chronology. I do remember some pieces by Stan Vanderbeek, Kenneth Anger and Jonas Mekas. Scorpio Rising was, of course, amazing then and its still amazing now. Hugely hugely influential.
The time period I was in school and the a decade thereafter coincided with the "dance boom". Martha Graham was still active, Balanchine was still creating works of genius (til 1981 anyway) and the NYCB was at the height of its powers - Jerome Robbins was a potent force there too, stars abounded at ABT if you cared about that rep (Baryshnikov, Kirkland, Makarova), creativity was rampant uptown and downtown - Paul Taylor, Twyla Tharp, Meredith Monk, Paul Taylor, Merce Cunningham, Mark Morris and many others. It's very thin pickins' nowdays. ABT packs em in to endless repeats of 19th century classics and NYCB is a pale shadow of its former self. Merce and Martha are gone, Twylas' in Europe, Mark Morris and Paul Taylor companies It's telling when soldier on, although everyone is struggling for funds.
Although it''s sometimes hard to hear in concert, I actually think contemporary classical music is in better shape now than it's been for quite some time...new opera, not so much, as the methods and forms pioneered in the 20th century are so inhospitable to "tunes" and human vocal chords. There are exceptions (e.g. Admas, Glass) but the money makers at opera houses are still Verdi, Puccini, Rossini, Strauss and Mozart. Which reminds me...I wish to God someone would release John Corigliano's Ghosts of Versailles on hi def DVD - my laser disc player is long gone.
But in general I agree that filmmaking still feels vital and exciting in a way that other arts don't quite (theater being a notable exception, and I'm sure there are curmudgeons who will lament to current state of cinema, especially experimental cinema.) It's telling, isnt' it, that NY's favorite artist Julian Schnabel is far more accomplished and interesting as a filmmaker than he ever was as a painter/sculptor/collage artist. I'm sure there's brilliant painting, sculpting and printmaking going on somewhere, but I just don't seem to care as much.
Meanwhile the avante garde cinema branch appears to have largely migrated to video, which is much cheaper and quicker to use than film, and lends itself to self distribution more easily. It's also easier to implement in mixed media installations.
Brakhage used to emphasize that film was a very young art form that would continue to evolve. I don't know what he thought of the possibilities of HD video and other tools because that became practicable long after I had contact with him. He felt story movies would always be with us as entertainment, because these were now apart our shared history, as stories told around the fire used to be. I don't follow the experimental filmmakers so much anymore, but so much of the pioneer's techniques have been approprited by the mainstream it gives a a twinge and a chuckle.
I didn't know you were Brasilian. Do you have any other recs for must-ee Brasilian/South American film?
I was very lucky to have lived in Minneapolis in the 70s and there was very good dance there as well as lots of visits from the folks you mentioned.
And, there was Chicago not TOO far away, at least it didn't seem that far to drive, back then.
Nowadays, I'd rather watch ballet than any other performance art; I guess it's because I never got my fill and because our young daughter is very enthusiastic: her teacher is a former principal with NYB (Lindy Roy).
I also concur with your overall view of the current "serious" art world.
Sometimes I wonder if I'm just an old fogey, criticizing the contemporary and reminiscing about the "good old days" but then I actually list artists and... it's not close.
Heck, even European "conspiracy" art critics that like to hammer the post-WWII ascendancy of American painters as some sort of Jewish (Greenberg and the other guy) plot can't mention too many of their own that are vital, fresh, novel, or shocking.
Well, the good news is there's so much that came before that appreciation hardly will come up lacking, at least for my lifetime.
Plus, youtube and the DVD have made appreciating so much great material which otherwise would remain in the shadows.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]