I would like to start this off by saying that I completely regret volunteering to write about this article. I also would like to apologize for posting late, but to be honest it took me a long time to KIND OF understand this. Basically what I got out of this was Marsha Kinder's explanation of the methods used by, filmmaker, Luis BuÒuel. Kinder talks about "surrealistic jolts" which seems to be when something random appears or happens in the film that takes the viewer out of reality. While I find this experimental technique to be appealing and interesting, that may just be due to my fascination for the weird and creative. Most of the time I also don't quite understand the meaning behind BuÒuel's aesthetics descisions, unless I am told. For example, in one of his films there is a cow laying on a bed for, what appears to be, no real reason, but apparently as Kinder explains: "The cow on the bed in L'Age d'or is one of Bunuel's most notorious incongruous objects, helping to transform the heroine's bedroom into a warp zone that transports her directly into the realm of desire." Maybe I'm just being ignorant, or perhaps if I saw the film i would understand it more, but I would never think of a cow as a symbol of desire. What I found most interesting about the whole article was the relation between BuÒuel's techniques and dreams. Because dreams are so spontaneous and are a mix between reality and subconsciousness I find BuÒuel's methods accurate in a depiction of a dreamworld.
-Max Hull
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have always loved Luis Bunuel but never really studied his work, outside of watching his films. I think this article would be difficult to read and potentially boring if one was unfamiliar with his work. I found it a little hard to follow when the author started discussing the work of other filmmakers I had whose work I had never seen, or in some cases, never even heard of.
ReplyDeleteI think there were some ultimate points the author was trying to make, which I agree with. Bunuel and his work is still relevant today, and really has been since he began working in film. Also, I like the way she explained how Bunuel subverted narrative structure, which was by using standard master narrative forms and symbols, and then punctured them. I really liked what Bunuel said in his essay about the glut of information being harmful to society. I immediately thought of the way governments are so interested in making certain everybody has the internet but all people use it for is MySpace and Facebook.
I thought the paragraph explaining database narratives was fascinating because it explains how narratives are based on choices, which are made based on on the nature of knowledge and structure of history, and how they then contribute to perpetuating the same structures which helped create them.
I feel that the author sees a certain possibility which will never be realized though. She can see that new media has the potential to subvert master narratives in the same way Bunuel did, and indeed in someways it has. However, most people do not seem to be interested in the restructuring of society and fail to use the tools given to us. One of the points I agree with is that Bunuel proves that master narratives are not natural or inevitable, yet society continually chooses to use them. This is probably because it is just easier. The video game link is the biggest stretch I think. I do not find much value in video games to begin with and dislike the way she reduces Bunuel's creation of beautiful metaphors.
The article helped me to see far more possibilities in new media and give it more credit than I had in the past, but I still think a lot of the links were a stretch.
I totally did not follow this article and it was really hard to pull things from it. There were a few points that I totally did not agree with 1. BuQuel feels that an actor is born and not made. He values them as objects, I also disagree with the BuQuel when he states that a private individual drama cannot be of interest to anyone in society today. He feels that whatever emotions the character is expressing on film, if the person watching tends to get involved then that person is experiencing exactly what the character is expressing.
ReplyDeleteYea this article was horribly written with odd characters thrown next to words making it hard to read, but what I did get out of it and liked about it, like Max, was the part about dreams, but I must say that dreams are the ultimade model of interactive narrative IF and only IF you have lucid dreams - meaning you are able to control what happens in your dreams. I have lucid dreams and am usually put in a situation when I first fall asleep and start dreaming, but once i realize it's a dream, I can take control and play through the dream/story until I wake up. My dreams are absurd and random and some of them would make excellent films and that's the small part I liked about this article.
ReplyDeleteThe media "jolt" the writer speaks of may as well be that experience of being "taken" by the media if just for but a moment. Max Hull had an interesting comment on data structures/narratives in relation to web based topology. I also can see how these structures given time and a set of users could begin to spread the organizational thought processes among its users. Of course to me, this observation comes as mere common sense. The Idea that a computer application or a database topology can shape the humand mind is universally accepted by many I would think. As I've had quite a few computer classes in my time. Classes on Microsoft Access, Excell,ect ect ect. These applications tend to also shape the way the users think about managing information. This was meant. It is curious for the writer of this article to cover such a broad expanse of topics in his essay. He mentions film conventions "continuity Editing" curiously enough. He seems to by trying to make a connection between this idea of imaging in film and its relation to the web and information management. And society, he makes generalizations which have far reaching implications.
ReplyDelete""Like the avatars in most electronic games, the characters in BuÒuelís films are not unified three-dimensional characters with whom you can easily slip into a comfortably stable identification. Rather they confront us with their absurd inconsistencies..."""
Here I disagree again with "BuOuelis" And with the Author of this article. I feel that this characterization of the nature of computer games in in-accurate and the view of someone who merely has observed the practice of computer games and their use. While having never really been a gamer. He makes a very wrong generalization about games here. While some may fit this mold. He ignores the fact that many games today allow the user to tailor is own avatar to his liking to make himself in the game or a likable companion in the chosen game. Providing a "stable" identification. Think I'm wrong: Try these games.
WOW
NWN1 & NWN2
Elder Scrolls Oblivion
Just to name a few.
The Author may feel this way, as he rambles on for a bit about "objectification" and "Fetishnesh." Arguing that the actors in films are objectified and such.
I do not deny this idealization in film and in online gaming. However, I would also argue that often this "objectification serves a purpose beyond the obvious, eye candy. Take a film like metropolis in this film there is an extreme of exagerated images. And no speech. Here the film relys on these images and objectified behavior as a mode of communication. The web has similar structures which rely on this mechanism.
The conclusion is too broad. And the Article is easy to get lost in. As the wealth of information floods the reader with contradicting conclusions. Obviously a very high level of reading and writing. Not in plain English.
- Crazy -
Unfamiliar with the work of BuQuel, it is a bit diffuicult to comprehend the overall suggestion of the symbolism in his works. However, in reading Marsha Kinder's article it seems that the overall focus is that many people interpret things differently. Whether it is a film, a book, knowledge, or for instance something found on the internet, everyone has their own way of viewing the world and in doing so, finds different meaning in those objects lain before them. People may find no meaning, a hidden meaning, or even find a meaning in something that the creator did not originally intend, but since everyone is different our media effects everyone differently. Therefore helping me to realize that before I post something publically, I must think about the message I am trying to relay, and even if some people never see that message, it's okay, everyone is different.
ReplyDeleteIt is clearly a hard task to make sense of the nonsensicle, and this is the problem that is presented to us in understanding dreams. To emulate the "dreamworld" and be good at it, there is always more room for randomness such as a cow upon a couch. Though the symbols may have meaning and constitute somewhat for a narrative, it still may go un-understood just like dreams, and this is possibly why Buouelis' style is renowned. A hard read though, tough to say anything for sure.
ReplyDelete^^ above comment by pat white^^
ReplyDeletePeople are attracted to dreams naturally because it is an escape from the real world. When we aren't sleeping, art does this for us, and that is what I got out of the article.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Erin about the master narratives comment. I also agree with both Erin and Max about how this article was/ could be hard to understand. Like Max I would like to apologize for being late on the response as well as in advanced for falling behind on assignments. I think I should be able to get back on track this week.
ReplyDeleteI could up load my staff last week in class, but I cant do it now!! WHY WHY WHY!?
ReplyDeleteI still confused that the ideas of this reading.I totally did not know Luis Bunuel. So I researched him, (yes, sorry, wikipedia in Japanese ver,) this said he liked to put Irrational scene into narrative story sequence. He created super realism in his work.
ReplyDeleteI agree his idea,
thepictures_Erin Fitzgerald said "One of the points I agree with is that Bunuel proves that master narratives are not natural or inevitable, yet society continually chooses to use them. This is probably because it is just easier. The video game link is the biggest stretch I think. "
Last class argument about, narrative, realism and game was interested.
People starts to have different reality in virtual space. Before Internet generation, narrative was in books, Tv, Movie,other media like news paper. It was not personal,narrative for many people But internet gave different narrativity, more personal narrative world for people.
I found this author's definition of interactivity to be very interesting. I have never considered myself a respondent when viewing a narrative film, but considering an author's subjective idiosyncrasies, and how how perceive them when reading into a film, I can clearly understand what Kinder is commenting on.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, regardless of how captivating a film may be, I still find it hard to consider myself a participant with out actually interacting with how the story will unfold. Thus, I will always consider myself an observer.
This article was very difficult to read because of the misplaced characters throughout the text, the structure of the paragraphs, and because I have never seen a Luis Bunuel film.