-Nostalgia was a unique way of approaching the film medium. This still images on screen were brought to live by their back stories and although the subjects of these photos did not move, motion was created when they were set on fire. I like how Frampton leaves time at the end of each story where his monologue falls silent and the audience is left alone with a destroyed photograph accompanied by the loud projector noise. I felt like this technique allowed time for reflection on the story and photo the viewer was previously presented with. The constant sound of a running camera or projector in the background adds to the "filmic" experience. It makes me wonder if the artist consciously chose to include this on the sound track, or if it just happened to record that way. I'm not a big fan of the title of this work, I feel like it could have been more creative, but I hate coming up with titles myself so I could see why he might have chosen to go with one that obvious. I enjoyed the way Frampton placed the camera so that the smoke would rise up and fill the frame. This created a neat depth effect. His narration strategy ingaged the audience in a form of active viewing, since the stories were about the next picture in line, the viewer has to work to associate the picture with the words that described it previously, as well as focus on the story currently being told.

1. As requested in class, post your response to Carolee Schneeman's Fuses.

-This work was absolutely stunning. Just like Brakhage's work, Schneeman film, in my opinion, can only truly be enjoyed if the viewer first sets aside their preconceived notions about sex and works to enjoy the movie for its beautiful images and editing style. I am a female artist working in what is still a largely male dominated industry, even in the present times I still encounter problems because of it. I couldn't imagine how difficult it must have been for Schneeman to showcase this work during the mid 60s when the feminist movement was just starting to take ground. In her interview she says that her goal was to show the act of "love making" from her point of view and compare it to the ways in which the female body had been represented in art as well as porn. She wanted to see if her representation would be different. I believe that she accomplished this goal. This film was very different from both. It was not voyeuristic; but instead showed the simple beauty which the sexual act entails. The collages she inter cut into this film were visually stimulating as well. The only thing I did not like about this work was the soundtrack, or lack of it. The random wind and bird sounds throughout the film were simply not enough for me. I feel like adding some powerful musical mix would have made it better, but I love music and feel like it adds to the sensory experience; I guess Schneeman agreed with Brakhage in regards to music and chose to exclude it from her work.

2. How is structural film different from the tradition of Deren/Brakhage/Anger, and what are its four typical characteristics?

-The structural film is different because it takes the audience out of the first person perspective of the experience. Instead of recreating all the functions of the filmmakers eyes and the physical movements of his or her body, the structural film engages the mind of the audience, rather then trying to represent how the mind functions. Its four typical characteristics are the fixed camera, the flicker effect, loop printing, and rephotography off the screen.

3. If Brakhage’s cinema emphasized metaphors of perception, vision, and body movement, what is the central metaphor of structural film? Hint: It fits into Sitney’s central argument about the American avant-garde that we have discussed previously in class.

-The central metaphor of structural film is the engagement of the mind it the medium placed in front of it? I'm not exactly sure that this is correct. The structural film focuses more on graphics and their interaction with each other. It has a preconceived structure and is presented as a whole piece with a central theme versus a collage of separate experiences?

4. Why does Sitney argue that Andy Warhol is the major precursor to the structural film?

-Instead of focusing on every frame as an opportunity for artistic expression, Warhol reduced his films to the minimal; he was not afraid to let the camera run as long as what was being filmed related back to his central idea. He was also not concerned with controlling every aspect of his films and did not obsess about every stylistic choice, i.e. lighting, sets, camera movements.

5. The trickiest part of Sitney’s chapter is to understand the similarities and differences between Warhol and the structural filmmakers. He argues that Warhol in a sense is anti-Romantic and stands in opposition to the visionary tradition represented by psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. But for Sitney’s central argument to make sense, he needs to place structural film within the tradition of psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. Trace the steps in this argument by following the following questions:

a. Why does Sitney call Warhol anti-Romantic?

-Warhol was "anti-Romantic" because he went against the grain of previous avant-garde cinema in which the artists worked to bring forth fantastic images through the use of stylistic techniques which asked the audience to decipher their hidden meanings and themes. For example, in his pop art he would present a series of very similar images with variations, and in his earlier works he would present a simple action over a long period of time making his viewers "endure" the same images or actions for a time longer than their brains would naturally be interested in them. He did this with no camera movements or other film manipulations, the opposite of what his Romantic counterparts were creating at the time.

b. Why does Sitney argue that spiritually the distance between Warhol and structural filmmakers such as Michael Snow or Ernie Gehr cannot be reconciled?

-Warhol's works forced the mind of the viewer to create interest after being confronted with something not all that interesting for a long period of time. These films made your mind work to stay entertained, while the works of Snow and Gehr were a contemplation on their subject, which had the possibility to invoke a meditative or spiritual experience?

c. What is meant by the phrase “conscious ontology of the viewing experience”? How does this relate to Warhol’s films? How does this relate to structural films?

-To me this means being consciously aware of the metal processes that are going on while one is watching a film. The experience is manipulated by stylistic choices of the film maker, as well as your own notions of reality. Warhol's films activate the mind by boring it, structural films take his concept of duration and incorporate other techniques to guide one's mind through the film to show a theme or concept which they want you to grasp.

d. Why does Sitney argue that structural film is related to the psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical tradition, and in fact responds to Warhol’s attack on that tradition by using Warhol’s own tactics?

-Like I said before, structural film takes Warhol's methods (his stylistic techniques) and use them to engage the mind by presenting a central concept or theme, rather then boring it with long duration and lack of action. The psychodrama/ mythopoeic/ lyrical films also worked to engage the mind, but did this in a different style, for example using the camera at times to recreate the movement of the eye, while most structural films keep the camera static.


6. What metaphor is crucial to Sitney’s and Annette Michelson’s interpretation of Michael Snow’s Wavelength?

The metaphor of consciousness, the minds ability and some times its lack of ability to interpret what is happening in front of it and relate it back to what it saw in the previous part of the work and what its about to see in the future.