The opening thirty seconds of A Tight Thirteen Minutes made me laugh. It was two brushes with no ink or paint, brushing on a blank white piece of paper in a rhythmic pattern with a narrator describing what was happening. After I quickly pulled myself together I realized that the sixty second film was actually interesting. The narrator talked about how the rhythmic sound and the motion of the brushes produces a landscape that is visible to the eye, and I actually started to see an image appear on the paper. Just by hearing a repetitious sound and seeing a repetitious motion made an image appear in the brain. This was the perfect opening film because it raised my interest for the rest of A Tight Thirteen Minutes and A Commissioned Works.
All the artists’ of the short films tried to manipulate the representation of time in a different way in either a 60 second film or a four minute film. The film that most affected me in representing time in a different way is John Fernie’s four minute Old Fort Piece. The filming takes place inside a single room of an eighteenth century castle. The camera pans around the perimeter of the room and stops at every window, or opening, then zooms out the window to show the outside. The narrator of the film describes how the single room feels like a place of solitude, and while he is in the room time seems to slow down. It makes him feel completely relaxed and all his anxiety goes away. He expresses his experience of time by stating that someone could “marry a turtle” in a room like this. His experience of time inside the room is slower than outside. This is actually strange to me because when he zooms out the windows there are scenes of nature, which makes the walls of the room a barrier between him and the natural world. Usually time slows down for me when I am immersed in nature, not separate from it, but I guess he feels differently about nature.
The film that ended up being the most disappointing was William Wegman’s four minute Dog/Ball. This film featured a dog sitting in the same spot with a cup in front of it. The dog would catch a golf ball and then drop it. Every time the dog dropped the ball a man would move the cup to the spot where the ball hit. For almost the entire film the dog did not drop the ball in the same spot two times in a row. This shows that everything changes in time and that everything is random. I think Bergson would like this dog because it proved that nobody can really predict the future, no matter how hard they tried. Unfortunately, the dog ended up dropping the ball into the cup, showing that there is some chance to predict the future, even though everything is still random. This film actually engaged the audience the most. Whenever the dog dropped the ball near the cup the audience let out a disappointed moan and when the dog finally made it in the cup the audience cheered. The audience made the film feel like a live show and maybe that was the intention of the film, to show that past actions and time can be refreshed again and again. That the past can be experienced as the present.
Some of the other films in Commissioned Works showed different ways to measure time. In John Baldessari’s 4 Minutes of Trying to Tune Two Glasses a kitchen timer is used to represent the time passing. In Robert Watts Snowflakes, time is measured by the layers that thicken as snowflakes fall. In Eleanor Antin’s The Little Ballerina time is measured in the rotation of a wind up ballerina that revolves at a constant rate. In Siah Armajan’s Skylight at Monticello time is measured by the motion of a bar of light that rotates as it moves forward at a constant rate. I thought that using motion to represent time in films was interesting.
Johnny Mendoza
Friday, February 16, 2007
MIDTERM PAPER
Alfred Stieglitz took photographs of clouds from the 1920’s through the 1930’s. He printed hundreds of these, all with the title “Equivalent.” Some of these are currently in the Measure of Time show at BAM. How are they related to the “measure of time”? Is this a kind of chronophotography? It is a serial project but how is it similar or different from the serial photographs of Muybridge; what about from the images of Marey? What is suggested by the titles? What do you make of the fact that Stieglitz made hundreds of these photographs, over at least ten years? How would you describe the temporality of this project? What is interesting about taking ‘portraits’ of clouds? They are certainly not the traditional subject of a portrait but are they even objects? Are they actions? Is Stieglitz photographing things or ideas, spaces or moments? What concepts from Bergson could you use to think about these problems? Choose one of the Stieglitz photos to analyze in depth. What is in the frame; how does the composition work; what does the light and shape suggest? Is Lessing useful in thinking about the image—is this ‘juxtaposition in space’ or a ‘pregnant moment’? What could be the ‘virtual’ dimension of this image? Are these photographs “dynamisms,” do they show the essence of something, or what Bragaglia calls a “physical transcendentalism”? What ideas from the course so far can you use to think about the temporality of one of these images, and what might this image suggest about the temporality of photography?
Because the measure of time exhibit has been unexpectedly closed, you may write your paper on one of the Equivalents photographs available online at (be sure to indicate which you have chosen): http://www.phillipscollection.org/american_art/artwork/Stieglitz-Equivalent_Series1.htm
Your paper should be 4-6 double spaced pages (see Course Policies handout for more details). It does not need to answer every question raised in the prompt or address all of the texts we have read. It does need to engage Bergson and at least one other text from the course, carefully interpreting specific (quoted and cited) passages from these texts in order to build concrete arguments about the images you discuss. These images jump forward in time so you don’t need to consider the historical context but you will need to consider your image in the larger context of the ideas and themes we have discussed, situating your image in the conversation we have had up to this point. But, you will also need to develop your own argument, using the texts we have read as tools to actively think with as you work out your own interpretation. Read your paper as you write it; when you feel finished give it one final read (not just a spell-check) and fine tune the details. Your grade will be based on the following:
-- careful attention to the image, thoughtful and detailed analysis of the image and its context in the project
-- demonstrates strong grasp of themes and problems we’ve discussed related to time and art
-- draws upon relevant ideas, arguments, terms, and specific quoted passages from texts we have read
-- connects specific details with broader arguments and insights, rigorous thinking, genuine ideas
-- clear, communicative, and intelligent prose; standard academic style and tone; well organized and edited
Schedule and Due Dates for Midterm Paper:
2/21 ‘10-on-1’ due: (20 points)
Read chapter 5 of Writing Analytically on analysis and do the ’10-on-1’ exercise on the image
you chose for the midterm. Start rereading these texts and identifying key passages you want to work with in your paper. (If you feel a little lost facing the assignment, read the other materials in the reader up to and through Chapter 5; the earlier chapters have a lot of tips about getting started.)
2/26 Passages due: (30 points)
Select four to six passages from Lessing, Bergson, and/or Bragaglia that help develop your observations or offer interpretive and argumentative frameworks for thinking about the things you noticed. Type these passages out (with correct citations). After each passage briefly paraphrase it in your own words.
2/28 Read Chapters 6-8 of Writing Analytically on structure as you put your paper together
3/5 Midterm paper due (100 points)
3/7-3/21 Read Chapters 10, 11, and 14 of Writing Analytically on style and revise midterm essay
3/21 Revised Midterm paper due (150 points) (*note change, typo had said 200pts)
Because the measure of time exhibit has been unexpectedly closed, you may write your paper on one of the Equivalents photographs available online at (be sure to indicate which you have chosen): http://www.phillipscollection.org/american_art/artwork/Stieglitz-Equivalent_Series1.htm
Your paper should be 4-6 double spaced pages (see Course Policies handout for more details). It does not need to answer every question raised in the prompt or address all of the texts we have read. It does need to engage Bergson and at least one other text from the course, carefully interpreting specific (quoted and cited) passages from these texts in order to build concrete arguments about the images you discuss. These images jump forward in time so you don’t need to consider the historical context but you will need to consider your image in the larger context of the ideas and themes we have discussed, situating your image in the conversation we have had up to this point. But, you will also need to develop your own argument, using the texts we have read as tools to actively think with as you work out your own interpretation. Read your paper as you write it; when you feel finished give it one final read (not just a spell-check) and fine tune the details. Your grade will be based on the following:
-- careful attention to the image, thoughtful and detailed analysis of the image and its context in the project
-- demonstrates strong grasp of themes and problems we’ve discussed related to time and art
-- draws upon relevant ideas, arguments, terms, and specific quoted passages from texts we have read
-- connects specific details with broader arguments and insights, rigorous thinking, genuine ideas
-- clear, communicative, and intelligent prose; standard academic style and tone; well organized and edited
Schedule and Due Dates for Midterm Paper:
2/21 ‘10-on-1’ due: (20 points)
Read chapter 5 of Writing Analytically on analysis and do the ’10-on-1’ exercise on the image
you chose for the midterm. Start rereading these texts and identifying key passages you want to work with in your paper. (If you feel a little lost facing the assignment, read the other materials in the reader up to and through Chapter 5; the earlier chapters have a lot of tips about getting started.)
2/26 Passages due: (30 points)
Select four to six passages from Lessing, Bergson, and/or Bragaglia that help develop your observations or offer interpretive and argumentative frameworks for thinking about the things you noticed. Type these passages out (with correct citations). After each passage briefly paraphrase it in your own words.
2/28 Read Chapters 6-8 of Writing Analytically on structure as you put your paper together
3/5 Midterm paper due (100 points)
3/7-3/21 Read Chapters 10, 11, and 14 of Writing Analytically on style and revise midterm essay
3/21 Revised Midterm paper due (150 points) (*note change, typo had said 200pts)
Thursday, February 15, 2007
PFA Showing 2/14 - "Commissioned Works"
Normally when I experience abstract art, nine times out of ten I won’t understand anything and become easily frustrated by it. But after watching “Commissioned Works,” I think it’s sometimes better not to totally scrutinize and make sense of everything, and rather, just experience the art as a form of entertainment more than anything else. I was continually reminded of Bragaglia’s accusation that if I cannot understand his art, then I’m probably just too stupid. Well if not understanding why a man in a mask danced around naked with his junk tucked between his legs for exactly 4 minutes makes me stupid, then I’d be the first to admit it.
Immediately following the masked nude was another clip much more relaxed and pleasing to the eye, titled “Please Stand By.” A series of quiet landscapes and sceneries were displayed one by one, almost as if with the purpose of helping the viewer to mentally erase the image of the naked dancer. However, neither of the clips were made in reference to another, which suggests that the commissioner of all these short films, James Melchert, had his own artistic touch in the final compilation. Because the films were so diverse and varied, any order in which Melchert put them together could easily have a very different affect on the audience.
Ultimately, my favorite was the clip of William Wegman throwing a ball to his dog over and over. The goal was for the dog to drop the ball and make it into a tin can, which took a series of repeated failures before the dog finally, and unknowingly, made the shot. What I enjoyed most about the clip was that it was easy to relate to considering we’ve all had a pet of some sort that can be a trick in itself to train, but also the film had deep-seated meanings that artists can appreciate on that Bragaglia level. Perhaps the dog resembles ourselves as humans, doing tricks for a goal we’re completely unaware of, such as getting an education when we don’t even have a remote idea of a career in mind. Or maybe the repetition of catching the ball but missing the shot conveys the frustrations of striving for a goal, getting so close, but only missing by a few millimeters. The point is I have no idea because one, Bragaglia thinks I’m stupid and two, there really is no one answer. This compilation of films illustrates that the real meaning of modern art is to make your own interpretation regardless of what the artist originally had in mind. While many of these clips stumped me completely, I like to think there are at least two different interpretations even if I can’t think of one.
Anthony CastanosWednesday, February 14, 2007
PFA 2/14 Screening: Together Again: Collectively Created Compilations
The screening included two separate compilations, A Tight Thirteen Minutes and Commissioned Works, 1976. The first part included 60-second films by various Bay Area artists that included scenes of paint brushes acting as a drums on paper and resonating a sound and ultimately building an image out of “nothing.” All the portions were very different and in each individual way questioned time and what could be done in a short amount of it. The next screening included 15 four minute visual art projects that were made again by Bay Area artists with an assignment of depicting ways time is measured. The intention of this assignment was to see what would happen when similar instructions are given to different artists but obtain different responses from each. What happened was a unique compilation of completely unique short films that at first glance might seem to have nothing to do with time, or how it is measured; however, they each show a different perspective on an eternal question of what signifies a moment in time.
One of the first films was Robert Watts’ Snowflakes which depicted time in layers with snowflakes falling down and layering on top of the camera screen until all we can see is a blurry white image. In his interpretation, time is a continuous process that begins with nothing, builds on top of itself, and ultimately ends in nothing—for us. From another perspective, the snowflakes keep falling and falling with no beginning and no end; however, if we are underneath the snowflakes we can only experience the moment from the time we open our eyes and until the snowflake layer blocks the view from our eyes. David Askevold’s An Excerpt from the Ambit, on the other hand, had no beginning nor end—signifying that time is immeasurable since we can never know when “the clock” started ticking and when it stopped.
Dennis Oppenheim depicted time as being in a circular motion in his short film called Spinning Knives. In his piece, a person is throwing knives at a spinning board and watching it “cut” up the board with its shadow. I believe this knife can represent clocks and how it cuts up time into “random” intervals established by someone outside of nature—just like “someone” is throwing the knife; it does not fly down by itself. Lastly, one more work by Les Levine, The Selling of a Video Artist, reminded me of Bergson’s argument that “time is invention” (115), because the commentator spoke about visual art as the only way of feeling absolute time, compared to TV programming which is just a way of making us buy things. If time is used properly, as these video artists are trying to do—creating something completely new, unique, and significant in their work, then this time is much more than just measured intervals, it is their creativity, and invention.
Alina Goldenberg
One of the first films was Robert Watts’ Snowflakes which depicted time in layers with snowflakes falling down and layering on top of the camera screen until all we can see is a blurry white image. In his interpretation, time is a continuous process that begins with nothing, builds on top of itself, and ultimately ends in nothing—for us. From another perspective, the snowflakes keep falling and falling with no beginning and no end; however, if we are underneath the snowflakes we can only experience the moment from the time we open our eyes and until the snowflake layer blocks the view from our eyes. David Askevold’s An Excerpt from the Ambit, on the other hand, had no beginning nor end—signifying that time is immeasurable since we can never know when “the clock” started ticking and when it stopped.
Dennis Oppenheim depicted time as being in a circular motion in his short film called Spinning Knives. In his piece, a person is throwing knives at a spinning board and watching it “cut” up the board with its shadow. I believe this knife can represent clocks and how it cuts up time into “random” intervals established by someone outside of nature—just like “someone” is throwing the knife; it does not fly down by itself. Lastly, one more work by Les Levine, The Selling of a Video Artist, reminded me of Bergson’s argument that “time is invention” (115), because the commentator spoke about visual art as the only way of feeling absolute time, compared to TV programming which is just a way of making us buy things. If time is used properly, as these video artists are trying to do—creating something completely new, unique, and significant in their work, then this time is much more than just measured intervals, it is their creativity, and invention.
Alina Goldenberg
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Futurist Photodynamism - Laura Wood
1. According to the article photodynamism “analyses and synthesizes movement.” However, there is never really a clear definition given for “photodynamism” in the reading; since it is the title and the main focus of the article I thought beginning with a more concrete definition would be helpful. I will attempt to create one here. “Photo” sometimes means the reproduction of an event in time and “dynamism” (according to dictionary.com) is “the activeness of an energetic personality.” Thus, photodynamism can be considered the active and energetic reproduction of an event in time. It seems from the article that it is more a combination of philosophy or perception of photography and a distorted visual image of movement. This may seem very similar to art forms such as photography, chronophotography, cinematography, however, photodynamism appears to try to stay separate from the different forms of are that attempt to reproduce motion. This is because photodynamism “despise[s] the precise, mechanical, glacial reproduction of reality.
2. In an analogy using a clock it is stated that one sees little with chronophotography (only the “quarter hours”), a little more can be viewed with cinematography (the “minutes”), but with photodynamism you can see all the “intermovemental fractions… between seconds.” They are basically stating that Photodynamism is the most in depth way of viewing and thinking about motion. The strange part about using this analogy is that everything about a clock is mechanical which seems to be what photodynamism is trying to stay away from. In addition, a clock is an attempt to represent time, which can be considered something in constant motion or continuously changing. To me this analogy just seems contradictory to the ideals of photodynamism.
3. “For photodynamism, it is desirable and correct to record the images in a distorted state, since images themselves are inevitably transformed in movement… we prefer to see everything in motion, since as things are dematerialized in motion they become idealized, while still retaining, deep down, a strong skeleton of truth.” With these types of images it would be difficult to see what is/was actually there; however, if this is truly the best way of viewing things (as photodynamism argues) than maybe our minds are tricking us into believing that we see things still when we don’t. This type of argument reminds me a lot of Bergson in that photodynamism wants us to take a deeper look into the idea of motion and both (photodynamism and Bergson) are critical of film and different art forms of representation. Does this mean that photodynamism can be considered more accurate than our eyes? Since we can’t see the blur or “transformation in movement” maybe our eye work too slowly, or maybe this is intentional so we can make sense of the images that appear ‘clear’ to us since they “retain… a skeleton of truth.” Similar to what Bergson said, if everything were moving and we thought too much about motion we would probably go insane.
4. Throughout the style of writing appears to follow a pattern: most paragraphs begin by criticizing what one form of representation lacks (i.e. photography only allows the viewer to “move abruptly from on state to another”) and then does one of two things 1) describes how photodynamism does it better or 2) shows how photodynamism avoids doing the same thing (i.e. with photodynamism you can see the “intermovemental fractions… between seconds.”). By doing so, photodynamism proves how desperately they do not want to be grouped with the other art forms. However, aren’t they still creating a representation of movement even if it is not in a “precise [and] mechanical” way? Aren’t they just trying to understand motion better in order to create better representations of motion? “Now a knowledge of the paths traced by bodies in action and of their transformation in motion will be indispensable for the painter of movement.”
5. Another thing that I thought about was that Zeno would disagree with the entire paper simply by stating that motion does not exist.
2. In an analogy using a clock it is stated that one sees little with chronophotography (only the “quarter hours”), a little more can be viewed with cinematography (the “minutes”), but with photodynamism you can see all the “intermovemental fractions… between seconds.” They are basically stating that Photodynamism is the most in depth way of viewing and thinking about motion. The strange part about using this analogy is that everything about a clock is mechanical which seems to be what photodynamism is trying to stay away from. In addition, a clock is an attempt to represent time, which can be considered something in constant motion or continuously changing. To me this analogy just seems contradictory to the ideals of photodynamism.
3. “For photodynamism, it is desirable and correct to record the images in a distorted state, since images themselves are inevitably transformed in movement… we prefer to see everything in motion, since as things are dematerialized in motion they become idealized, while still retaining, deep down, a strong skeleton of truth.” With these types of images it would be difficult to see what is/was actually there; however, if this is truly the best way of viewing things (as photodynamism argues) than maybe our minds are tricking us into believing that we see things still when we don’t. This type of argument reminds me a lot of Bergson in that photodynamism wants us to take a deeper look into the idea of motion and both (photodynamism and Bergson) are critical of film and different art forms of representation. Does this mean that photodynamism can be considered more accurate than our eyes? Since we can’t see the blur or “transformation in movement” maybe our eye work too slowly, or maybe this is intentional so we can make sense of the images that appear ‘clear’ to us since they “retain… a skeleton of truth.” Similar to what Bergson said, if everything were moving and we thought too much about motion we would probably go insane.
4. Throughout the style of writing appears to follow a pattern: most paragraphs begin by criticizing what one form of representation lacks (i.e. photography only allows the viewer to “move abruptly from on state to another”) and then does one of two things 1) describes how photodynamism does it better or 2) shows how photodynamism avoids doing the same thing (i.e. with photodynamism you can see the “intermovemental fractions… between seconds.”). By doing so, photodynamism proves how desperately they do not want to be grouped with the other art forms. However, aren’t they still creating a representation of movement even if it is not in a “precise [and] mechanical” way? Aren’t they just trying to understand motion better in order to create better representations of motion? “Now a knowledge of the paths traced by bodies in action and of their transformation in motion will be indispensable for the painter of movement.”
5. Another thing that I thought about was that Zeno would disagree with the entire paper simply by stating that motion does not exist.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Futurist Photodynamism
by anton giulio bragaglia 1st july 1913
http://www.391.org/manifestos/antongiuliobragaglia_futuristphotodynamism.htm
(***This is the reading for Wed. Please print it out, mark it up, and bring it with you to class.)
To begin with, Photodynamism cannot be interpreted as an innovation applicable to photography in the way that chronophotography was. Photodynamism is a creation that aims to achieve ideals that are quite contrary to the objectives of all the representational means of today. If it can be associated at all with photography, cinematography and chronophotography, this is only by virtue of the fact that, like them, it has its origins in the wide field of photographic science, the technical means forming common ground. All are based on the physical properties of the camera.
We are certainly not concerned with the aims and characteristics of cinematography and chronophotography. We are not interested in the precise reconstruction of movement, which has already been broken up and analysed. We are involved only in the area of movement which produces sensation, the memory of which still palpitates in our awareness.
We despise the precise, mechanical, glacial reproduction of reality, and take the utmost care to avoid it. For us this is a harmful and negative element, whereas for cinematography and chronophotography it is the very essence. They in their turn overlook the trajectory, which for us is the essential value.
The question of cinematography in relation to us is absolutely idiotic, and can only be raised by a superficial and imbecilic mentality motivated by the most crass ignorance of our argument.
Cinematography does not trace the shape of movement. It subdivides it, without rules, with mechanical arbitrariness, disintegrating and shattering it without any kind of aesthetic concern for rhythm. It is not within its coldly mechanical power to satisfy such concerns.
Besides which, cinematography never analyses movement. It shatters it in the frames of the film strip, quite unlike the action of Photodynamism, which analyses movement precisely in its details. And cinematography never synthesises movement, either. It merely reconstructs fragments of reality, already coldly broken up, in the same way as the hand of a chronometer deals with time even though this flows in a continuous and constant stream.
Photography too is a quite distinct area; useful in the perfect anatomical reproduction of reality; necessary and precious therefore for aims that are absolutely contrary to ours, which are artistic in themselves, scientific in their researches, but nevertheless always directed towards art.
And so both photography and Photodynamism possess their own singular qualities, clearly divided, and are very different in their importance, their usefulness and their aims.
Marey's chronophotography, too, being a form of cinematography carried out on a single plate or on a continuous strip of film, even if it does not use frames to divide movement which is already scanned and broken up into instantaneous shots, still shatters the action. The instantaneous images are even further apart, fewer and more autonomous than those of cinematography, so that this too cannot be called analysis.
In actual fact, Marey's system is used, for example, in the teaching of gymnastics. And out of the hundred images that trace a man's jump the few that are registered are just sufficient to describe and to teach to the young the principal stages of a jump.
But although this may be all very well for the old Marey system, for gymnastics and other such applications, it is not enough for us. With about five extremely rigid instantaneous shots we cannot obtain even the reconstruction of movement, let alone the sensation. Given that chronophotography certainly does not reconstruct movement, or give the sensation of it, any further discussion of the subject would be idle, except that the point is worth stressing, as there are those who, with a certain degree of elegant malice, would identify Photodynamism with chronophotography, just as others insisted on confusing it with cinematography.
Marey's system, then, seizes and freezes the action in its principal stages, those which best serve its purpose. It thus describes a theory that could be equally deduced from a series of instantaneous photographs. They could similarly be said to belong to different subjects, since, if a fraction of a stage is removed, no link unites and unifies the various images. They are photographic, contemporaneous, and appear to belong to more than one subject. To put it crudely, chronophotography could be compared with a clock on the face of which only the quarter-hours are marked, cinematography to one on which the minutes too are indicated, and Photodynamism to a third on which are marked not only the seconds, but also the intermovemental fractions existing in the passages between seconds. This becomes an almost infinitesimal calculation of movement.
In fact it is only through our researches that it is possible to obtain a vision that is proportionate, in terms of the strength of the images, to the very tempo of their existence, and to the speed with which they have lived in a space and in us.
The greater the speed of an action, the less intense and broad will be its trace when registered with Photodynamism. It follows that the slower it moves, the less it will be dematerialised and distorted. The more the image is distorted, the less real it will be. It will be more ideal and lyrical, further extracted from its personality and closer to type, with the same evolutionary effect of distortion as was followed by the Greeks in their search for their type of beauty.
There is an obvious difference between the photographic mechanicality of chronophotography -embryonic and rudimentary cinematography - and the tendency of Photodynamism to move away from that mechanicality, following its own ideal, and completely opposed to the aims of all that went before (although we do propose to undertake our own scientific researches into movement).
Photodynamism, then, analyses and synthesises movement at will, and to great effect. This is because it does not have to resort to disintegration for observation, but possesses the power to record the continuity of an action in space, to trace in a face, for instance, not only the expression of passing states of mind, as photography and cinematography have never been able to, but also the immediate shifting of volumes that results in the immediate transformation of expression.
A shout, a tragical pause, a gesture of terror, the entire scene, the complete external unfolding of the intimate drama, can be expressed in one single work. And this applies not only to the point of departure or that of arrival - nor merely to the intermediary stage, as in chronophotography - but continuously, from beginning to end, because in this way, as we have already said, the intermovemental stages of a movement can also be invoked.
In fact, where scientific research into the evolution and modelling of movement are concerned, we declare Photodynamism to be exhaustive and essential, given that no precise means of analysing a movement exists (we have already partly examined the rudimentary work of chronophotography).
And so - just as the study of anatomy has always been essential for an artist - now a knowledge of the paths traced by bodies in action and of their transformation in motion will be indispensable for the painter of movement.
In the composition of a painting, the optical effects observed by the artist are not enough. A precise analytical knowledge of the essential properties of the effect, and of its causes, are essential. The artist may know how to synthesise such analyses, but within such a synthesis the skeleton, the precise and almost invisible analytical elements, must exist. These can only be rendered visible by the scientific aspects of Photodynamism.
In fact, every vibration is the rhythm of infinite minor vibrations, since every rhythm is built up of an infinite quantity of vibrations. In so far as human knowledge has hitherto conceived and considered movement in its general rhythm, it has fabricated, so to speak, an algebra of movement. This has been considered simple and finite (cf. Spencer: First Principles - The Rhythm of Motion). But Photodynamism has revealed and represented it as complex, raising it to the level of an infinitesimal calculation of movement (see our latest works, e.g. The Carpenter, The Bow, Changing Positions).
Indeed, we represent the movement of a pendulum, for example, by relating its speed and its tempo to two orthogonal axes. We will obtain a continuous and infinite sinusoidal curve. But this applies to a theoretical pendulum, an immaterial one. The representation we will obtain from a material pendulum will differ from the theoretical one in that, after a longer or shorter (but always finite) period, it will stop. It should be clear that in both cases the lines representing such movement are continuous, and do not portray the reality of the phenomenon. In reality, these lines should be composed of an infinite number of minor vibrations, introduced by the resistance of the point of union. This does not move with smooth continuity but in a jerky way caused by infinite coefficients. Now, a synthetic representation is more effective, even when its essence envelops an analytically divisionist value, than a synthetic impressionist one (meaning divisionism and impressionism in the philosophical sense). In the same way the representation of realistic movement will be much more effective in synthesis - containing in its essence an analytical divisionist value (e.g. The Carpenter, The Bow, etc.), than in analysis of a superficial nature, that is, when it is not minutely interstatic but expresses itself only in successive static states (e.g. The Typist).
Therefore, just as in Seurat's painting the essential question of chromatic divisionism (synthesis of effect and analysis of means) had been suggested by the scientific enquiries of Rood, so today the need for movemental divisionism, that is, synthesis of effect and analysis of means in the painting of movement, is indicated by Photodynamism. But - and this should be carefully noted - this analysis is infinite, profound and sensitive, rather than immediately perceptible.
This question has already been raised by demonstrating that, just as anatomy is essential in static reproduction, so the anatomy of an action - intimate analysis - is indispensable in the representation of movement. This will not resort to thirty images of the same object to represent an object in movement, but will render it infinitely multiplied and extended, whilst the figure present will appear diminished.
Photodynamism, then, can establish results from positive data in the construction of moving reality, just as photography obtains its own positive results in the sphere of static reality.
The artist, in search of the forms and combinations that characterise whatever state of reality interests him, can, by means of Photodynamism, establish a foundation of experience that will facilitate his researches and his intuition when it comes to the dynamic representation of reality. After all, the steady and essential relationships which link the development of any real action with artistic conception are indisputable, and are affirmed independently of formal analogies with reality.
Once this essential affinity has been established, not only between artistic conception and the representation of reality, but also between artistic conception and application, it is easy to realise how much information dynamic representation can offer to the artist who is engaged in a profound search for it.
In this way light and movement in general, light acting as movement, and hence the movement of light, are revealed in Photodynamism. Given the transcendental nature of the phenomenon of movement, it is only by means of Photodynamism that the painter can know what happens in the intermovemental states, and become acquainted with the volumes of individual motions. He will be able to analyse these in minute detail, and will come to know the increase in aesthetic value of a flying figure, or its diminution, relative to light and to the dematerialization consequent upon motion. Only with Photodynamism can the artist be in possession of the elements necessary for the construction of a work of art embodying the desired-for synthesis.
With reference to this the sculptor Roberto Melli wrote to me explaining that, in his opinion, Photodynamism 'must, in the course of these new researches into movement which are beginning to make a lively impression on the artist's consciousness, take the place which has until now been occupied by drawing, a physical and mechanical phenomenon very different from the physical transcendentalism of Photodynamism. Photodynamism is to drawing what the new aesthetic currents are to the art of the past.' . . .
Now, with cinematography and Marey's equivalent system the viewer moves abruptly from one state to another, and thus is limited to the states that compose the movement, without concern for the intermovemental states of the action; and with photography he sees only one state. But with Photodynamism, remembering what took place between one stage and another, a work is presented that transcends the human condition, becoming a transcendental photograph of movement. For this end we have also envisaged a machine which will render actions visible, more effectively than is now today possible with actions traced from one point, but at the same time keeping them related to the time in which they were made. They will remain idealised by the distortion and by the destruction imposed by the motion and light which translate themselves into trajectories.
So it follows that when you tell us that the images contained in our Photodynamic works are unsure and difficult to distinguish, you are merely noting a pure characteristic of Photodynamism. For Photodynamism, it is desirable and correct to record the images in a distorted state, since images themselves are inevitably transformed in movement. Besides this, our aim is to make a determined move away from reality, since cinematography, photography and chronophotography already exist to deal with mechanically precise and cold reproduction.
We seek the interior essence of things: pure movement; and we prefer to see everything in motion, since as things are dematerialised in motion they become idealised, while still retaining, deep down, a strong skeleton of truth.
This is our aim, and it is by these means that we are attempting to raise photography to the heights which today it strives impotently to attain, being deprived of the elements essential for such an elevation because of the criteria of order that make it conform with the precise reproduction of reality. And then, of course, it is also dominated by that ridiculous and brutal negative element, the instantaneous exposure, which has been presented as a great scientific strength when in fact it is a laughable absurdity.
But where the scientific analysis of movement is concerned - that is, in the multiplication of reality for the study of its deformation in motion - we possess not merely one but a whole scale of values applied to an action. We repeat the idea, we insist, we impose and return to it without hesitation and untiringly, until we can affirm it absolutely with the obsessive demonstration of exterior and internal quality which is essential for us.
And it is beyond doubt that by way of such multiplication of entities we will achieve a multiplication of values, capable of enriching any fact with a more imposing personality.
In this way, if we repeat the principal states of the action, the figure of a dancer - moving a foot, in mid-air, pirouetting - will even when not possessing its own trajectory or offering a dynamic sensation, be much more like a dancer, and much more like dancing, than would a single figure frozen in just one of the states that build up a movement.
The picture therefore can be invaded and pervaded by the essence of the subject. It can be obsessed by the subject to the extent that it energetically invades and obsesses the public with its own values. It will not exist as a passive object over which an unconcerned public can take control for its own enjoyment. It will be an active thing that imposes its own extremely free essence on the public, though this will not be graspable with the insipid facility common to all images that are too faithful to ordinary reality.
To further this study of reality multiplied in its volumes, and the multiplication of the lyrical plastic sensation of these, we have conceived a method of research, highly original in its mechanical means, which we have already made known to some of our friends.
But in any case, at the moment we are studying the trajectory, the synthesis of action, that which exerts a fascination over our senses, the vertiginous lyrical expression of life, the lively invoker of the magnificent dynamic feeling with which the universe incessantly vibrates.
We will endeavour to extract not only the aesthetic expression of the motives, but also the inner, sensorial, cerebral and psychic emotions that we feel when an action leaves its superb, unbroken trace.
This is in order to offer to others the necessary factors for the reproduction of the desired feeling. And it is on our current researches into the interior of an action that all the emotive artistic values existing in Photodynamism are based.
To those who believe that there is no need for such researches to be conducted with photographic means, given that painting exists, we would point out that, although avoiding competing with painting, and working in totally different fields, the means of photographic science are so swift, so fertile, and so powerful in asserting themselves as much more forward looking and much more in sympathy with the evolution of life than all other old means of representation.
http://www.391.org/manifestos/antongiuliobragaglia_futuristphotodynamism.htm
(***This is the reading for Wed. Please print it out, mark it up, and bring it with you to class.)
To begin with, Photodynamism cannot be interpreted as an innovation applicable to photography in the way that chronophotography was. Photodynamism is a creation that aims to achieve ideals that are quite contrary to the objectives of all the representational means of today. If it can be associated at all with photography, cinematography and chronophotography, this is only by virtue of the fact that, like them, it has its origins in the wide field of photographic science, the technical means forming common ground. All are based on the physical properties of the camera.
We are certainly not concerned with the aims and characteristics of cinematography and chronophotography. We are not interested in the precise reconstruction of movement, which has already been broken up and analysed. We are involved only in the area of movement which produces sensation, the memory of which still palpitates in our awareness.
We despise the precise, mechanical, glacial reproduction of reality, and take the utmost care to avoid it. For us this is a harmful and negative element, whereas for cinematography and chronophotography it is the very essence. They in their turn overlook the trajectory, which for us is the essential value.
The question of cinematography in relation to us is absolutely idiotic, and can only be raised by a superficial and imbecilic mentality motivated by the most crass ignorance of our argument.
Cinematography does not trace the shape of movement. It subdivides it, without rules, with mechanical arbitrariness, disintegrating and shattering it without any kind of aesthetic concern for rhythm. It is not within its coldly mechanical power to satisfy such concerns.
Besides which, cinematography never analyses movement. It shatters it in the frames of the film strip, quite unlike the action of Photodynamism, which analyses movement precisely in its details. And cinematography never synthesises movement, either. It merely reconstructs fragments of reality, already coldly broken up, in the same way as the hand of a chronometer deals with time even though this flows in a continuous and constant stream.
Photography too is a quite distinct area; useful in the perfect anatomical reproduction of reality; necessary and precious therefore for aims that are absolutely contrary to ours, which are artistic in themselves, scientific in their researches, but nevertheless always directed towards art.
And so both photography and Photodynamism possess their own singular qualities, clearly divided, and are very different in their importance, their usefulness and their aims.
Marey's chronophotography, too, being a form of cinematography carried out on a single plate or on a continuous strip of film, even if it does not use frames to divide movement which is already scanned and broken up into instantaneous shots, still shatters the action. The instantaneous images are even further apart, fewer and more autonomous than those of cinematography, so that this too cannot be called analysis.
In actual fact, Marey's system is used, for example, in the teaching of gymnastics. And out of the hundred images that trace a man's jump the few that are registered are just sufficient to describe and to teach to the young the principal stages of a jump.
But although this may be all very well for the old Marey system, for gymnastics and other such applications, it is not enough for us. With about five extremely rigid instantaneous shots we cannot obtain even the reconstruction of movement, let alone the sensation. Given that chronophotography certainly does not reconstruct movement, or give the sensation of it, any further discussion of the subject would be idle, except that the point is worth stressing, as there are those who, with a certain degree of elegant malice, would identify Photodynamism with chronophotography, just as others insisted on confusing it with cinematography.
Marey's system, then, seizes and freezes the action in its principal stages, those which best serve its purpose. It thus describes a theory that could be equally deduced from a series of instantaneous photographs. They could similarly be said to belong to different subjects, since, if a fraction of a stage is removed, no link unites and unifies the various images. They are photographic, contemporaneous, and appear to belong to more than one subject. To put it crudely, chronophotography could be compared with a clock on the face of which only the quarter-hours are marked, cinematography to one on which the minutes too are indicated, and Photodynamism to a third on which are marked not only the seconds, but also the intermovemental fractions existing in the passages between seconds. This becomes an almost infinitesimal calculation of movement.
In fact it is only through our researches that it is possible to obtain a vision that is proportionate, in terms of the strength of the images, to the very tempo of their existence, and to the speed with which they have lived in a space and in us.
The greater the speed of an action, the less intense and broad will be its trace when registered with Photodynamism. It follows that the slower it moves, the less it will be dematerialised and distorted. The more the image is distorted, the less real it will be. It will be more ideal and lyrical, further extracted from its personality and closer to type, with the same evolutionary effect of distortion as was followed by the Greeks in their search for their type of beauty.
There is an obvious difference between the photographic mechanicality of chronophotography -embryonic and rudimentary cinematography - and the tendency of Photodynamism to move away from that mechanicality, following its own ideal, and completely opposed to the aims of all that went before (although we do propose to undertake our own scientific researches into movement).
Photodynamism, then, analyses and synthesises movement at will, and to great effect. This is because it does not have to resort to disintegration for observation, but possesses the power to record the continuity of an action in space, to trace in a face, for instance, not only the expression of passing states of mind, as photography and cinematography have never been able to, but also the immediate shifting of volumes that results in the immediate transformation of expression.
A shout, a tragical pause, a gesture of terror, the entire scene, the complete external unfolding of the intimate drama, can be expressed in one single work. And this applies not only to the point of departure or that of arrival - nor merely to the intermediary stage, as in chronophotography - but continuously, from beginning to end, because in this way, as we have already said, the intermovemental stages of a movement can also be invoked.
In fact, where scientific research into the evolution and modelling of movement are concerned, we declare Photodynamism to be exhaustive and essential, given that no precise means of analysing a movement exists (we have already partly examined the rudimentary work of chronophotography).
And so - just as the study of anatomy has always been essential for an artist - now a knowledge of the paths traced by bodies in action and of their transformation in motion will be indispensable for the painter of movement.
In the composition of a painting, the optical effects observed by the artist are not enough. A precise analytical knowledge of the essential properties of the effect, and of its causes, are essential. The artist may know how to synthesise such analyses, but within such a synthesis the skeleton, the precise and almost invisible analytical elements, must exist. These can only be rendered visible by the scientific aspects of Photodynamism.
In fact, every vibration is the rhythm of infinite minor vibrations, since every rhythm is built up of an infinite quantity of vibrations. In so far as human knowledge has hitherto conceived and considered movement in its general rhythm, it has fabricated, so to speak, an algebra of movement. This has been considered simple and finite (cf. Spencer: First Principles - The Rhythm of Motion). But Photodynamism has revealed and represented it as complex, raising it to the level of an infinitesimal calculation of movement (see our latest works, e.g. The Carpenter, The Bow, Changing Positions).
Indeed, we represent the movement of a pendulum, for example, by relating its speed and its tempo to two orthogonal axes. We will obtain a continuous and infinite sinusoidal curve. But this applies to a theoretical pendulum, an immaterial one. The representation we will obtain from a material pendulum will differ from the theoretical one in that, after a longer or shorter (but always finite) period, it will stop. It should be clear that in both cases the lines representing such movement are continuous, and do not portray the reality of the phenomenon. In reality, these lines should be composed of an infinite number of minor vibrations, introduced by the resistance of the point of union. This does not move with smooth continuity but in a jerky way caused by infinite coefficients. Now, a synthetic representation is more effective, even when its essence envelops an analytically divisionist value, than a synthetic impressionist one (meaning divisionism and impressionism in the philosophical sense). In the same way the representation of realistic movement will be much more effective in synthesis - containing in its essence an analytical divisionist value (e.g. The Carpenter, The Bow, etc.), than in analysis of a superficial nature, that is, when it is not minutely interstatic but expresses itself only in successive static states (e.g. The Typist).
Therefore, just as in Seurat's painting the essential question of chromatic divisionism (synthesis of effect and analysis of means) had been suggested by the scientific enquiries of Rood, so today the need for movemental divisionism, that is, synthesis of effect and analysis of means in the painting of movement, is indicated by Photodynamism. But - and this should be carefully noted - this analysis is infinite, profound and sensitive, rather than immediately perceptible.
This question has already been raised by demonstrating that, just as anatomy is essential in static reproduction, so the anatomy of an action - intimate analysis - is indispensable in the representation of movement. This will not resort to thirty images of the same object to represent an object in movement, but will render it infinitely multiplied and extended, whilst the figure present will appear diminished.
Photodynamism, then, can establish results from positive data in the construction of moving reality, just as photography obtains its own positive results in the sphere of static reality.
The artist, in search of the forms and combinations that characterise whatever state of reality interests him, can, by means of Photodynamism, establish a foundation of experience that will facilitate his researches and his intuition when it comes to the dynamic representation of reality. After all, the steady and essential relationships which link the development of any real action with artistic conception are indisputable, and are affirmed independently of formal analogies with reality.
Once this essential affinity has been established, not only between artistic conception and the representation of reality, but also between artistic conception and application, it is easy to realise how much information dynamic representation can offer to the artist who is engaged in a profound search for it.
In this way light and movement in general, light acting as movement, and hence the movement of light, are revealed in Photodynamism. Given the transcendental nature of the phenomenon of movement, it is only by means of Photodynamism that the painter can know what happens in the intermovemental states, and become acquainted with the volumes of individual motions. He will be able to analyse these in minute detail, and will come to know the increase in aesthetic value of a flying figure, or its diminution, relative to light and to the dematerialization consequent upon motion. Only with Photodynamism can the artist be in possession of the elements necessary for the construction of a work of art embodying the desired-for synthesis.
With reference to this the sculptor Roberto Melli wrote to me explaining that, in his opinion, Photodynamism 'must, in the course of these new researches into movement which are beginning to make a lively impression on the artist's consciousness, take the place which has until now been occupied by drawing, a physical and mechanical phenomenon very different from the physical transcendentalism of Photodynamism. Photodynamism is to drawing what the new aesthetic currents are to the art of the past.' . . .
Now, with cinematography and Marey's equivalent system the viewer moves abruptly from one state to another, and thus is limited to the states that compose the movement, without concern for the intermovemental states of the action; and with photography he sees only one state. But with Photodynamism, remembering what took place between one stage and another, a work is presented that transcends the human condition, becoming a transcendental photograph of movement. For this end we have also envisaged a machine which will render actions visible, more effectively than is now today possible with actions traced from one point, but at the same time keeping them related to the time in which they were made. They will remain idealised by the distortion and by the destruction imposed by the motion and light which translate themselves into trajectories.
So it follows that when you tell us that the images contained in our Photodynamic works are unsure and difficult to distinguish, you are merely noting a pure characteristic of Photodynamism. For Photodynamism, it is desirable and correct to record the images in a distorted state, since images themselves are inevitably transformed in movement. Besides this, our aim is to make a determined move away from reality, since cinematography, photography and chronophotography already exist to deal with mechanically precise and cold reproduction.
We seek the interior essence of things: pure movement; and we prefer to see everything in motion, since as things are dematerialised in motion they become idealised, while still retaining, deep down, a strong skeleton of truth.
This is our aim, and it is by these means that we are attempting to raise photography to the heights which today it strives impotently to attain, being deprived of the elements essential for such an elevation because of the criteria of order that make it conform with the precise reproduction of reality. And then, of course, it is also dominated by that ridiculous and brutal negative element, the instantaneous exposure, which has been presented as a great scientific strength when in fact it is a laughable absurdity.
But where the scientific analysis of movement is concerned - that is, in the multiplication of reality for the study of its deformation in motion - we possess not merely one but a whole scale of values applied to an action. We repeat the idea, we insist, we impose and return to it without hesitation and untiringly, until we can affirm it absolutely with the obsessive demonstration of exterior and internal quality which is essential for us.
And it is beyond doubt that by way of such multiplication of entities we will achieve a multiplication of values, capable of enriching any fact with a more imposing personality.
In this way, if we repeat the principal states of the action, the figure of a dancer - moving a foot, in mid-air, pirouetting - will even when not possessing its own trajectory or offering a dynamic sensation, be much more like a dancer, and much more like dancing, than would a single figure frozen in just one of the states that build up a movement.
The picture therefore can be invaded and pervaded by the essence of the subject. It can be obsessed by the subject to the extent that it energetically invades and obsesses the public with its own values. It will not exist as a passive object over which an unconcerned public can take control for its own enjoyment. It will be an active thing that imposes its own extremely free essence on the public, though this will not be graspable with the insipid facility common to all images that are too faithful to ordinary reality.
To further this study of reality multiplied in its volumes, and the multiplication of the lyrical plastic sensation of these, we have conceived a method of research, highly original in its mechanical means, which we have already made known to some of our friends.
But in any case, at the moment we are studying the trajectory, the synthesis of action, that which exerts a fascination over our senses, the vertiginous lyrical expression of life, the lively invoker of the magnificent dynamic feeling with which the universe incessantly vibrates.
We will endeavour to extract not only the aesthetic expression of the motives, but also the inner, sensorial, cerebral and psychic emotions that we feel when an action leaves its superb, unbroken trace.
This is in order to offer to others the necessary factors for the reproduction of the desired feeling. And it is on our current researches into the interior of an action that all the emotive artistic values existing in Photodynamism are based.
To those who believe that there is no need for such researches to be conducted with photographic means, given that painting exists, we would point out that, although avoiding competing with painting, and working in totally different fields, the means of photographic science are so swift, so fertile, and so powerful in asserting themselves as much more forward looking and much more in sympathy with the evolution of life than all other old means of representation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
