Feeling obliged to post a little more on McLuhan, I thought I would talk about his concept of a tetrad. Here’s the jist of what a tetrad is: a tetrad takes a concept and applies these four laws to it: extension, reversal, retrieval and obsolescence. This can be applied to anything, for example, I’m going to take a stab at it apply it to my own experiences with college food:
College food
Extension: College food is what I begin eating with excitement: no need for stinkin vegetables here!
Retrieves: I just need to eat
Reversal: This food is getting boring and is giving me the shits
Obsolescence: I’m tired of shitting all the time
I don’t know if I got it or not, but the point is, it’s supposed to not start at a specific point: it can start from any point you want it to in McLuhan’s words.
All in all, seeing the examples in my little book for class were pretty interesting and I began to see how brilliant the concept was: it helps to illustrate similarities between different phases of development in regards to concepts and things are usually superseded by technological advances.
Here’s a video from youtube after the jump:
Here is a series of silly videos from what seems like a Spanish language company(using clues in the actual video itself, possibly from Spain). They all seem to revolve around work safety and courtesy. They use no written language in the CGI videos, but they get across their points fairly easily with the body language and situations of the main character in each one of these shorts. Concepts of safety can demonstrated without words, and really gets me thinking about what else can be demonstrated without language.
Reading through my blog, I seem to have completely forgotten to write about McLuhan’s work, and I probably should seeing as it has a lot of do with the media and the way it is today, the man’s predictions came completely true. A little background on McLuhan if you aren’t immediately familiar with his work: Marshall McLuhan was an English Professor and philosopher from Canada. A lot of his work centered around media theory. One of the things I’d like to touch on is McLuhan’s hot and cold classifications of the media. He basically says well defined media that puts the audience in cruise control, doing all the work for them is hot media and media that gives slim amounts of information and requires the audience to hustle for their info is cold. Now even though television is see as cool by McLuhan, these days I personally see it as lukewarm: the amount of information out there on television is mindboggling these days: the amount of channels and the different types of programming that goes on. You want to watch tractor pulling competitions and bull riding: turn it to vs. Want to watch powerful documentaries completely outside of the mainstream, unlike the stuff that CNN says is indepedant and outside the mainstream? Turn it to link tv. We have more information and knowledge on tv than ever before.
However, with the nature of television production, you can on say a mouthful at a time in a program. If a page of a script represents 60 seconds and a program after commercials is only 40-50 minutes, then you’re only getting 40-50 pages of information. And that’s with the formatting with the script, without it would probably be less. We have more out there, warming up the medium of television but the constraints imposed on the medium by it’s need to be financially viable get in the way of it being a truly hot media in the face of technology today. We have the technology to make television hot, but lack the will.
Speaking of a cool medium, I found this interesting video on youtube:
This is a video of a dead mall. Malls used to be the definition of American prosperity and power: people could go and buy meaningless crap on the weekends because they had the budgets. Now, with big box retailers providing everything a mall does for cheaper, as well as anchor stores in the malls seeing no good reason to pay out the nose anymore, we begin to see the end of the American mall. Enjoy.
Weinberg’s fifth and final reading was a very interesting read. I got a front row seat into the history of Tom Weinberg and his long career in television. Unconventional and full of twists, his career was very eventful and says a lot about him as a person. It seems as if his decisions were based partially on the economics of the business, but also grounded in his principles. Tom is a man of his principles, and it seems he’s pretty damn determined to make something of them. His successes with PBS highlight this: he got pretty close to doing what he wanted to do. I don’t think his final reading can really offer any lessons to an individual, but rather offer choices: how much of your dignity are you willing to let someone strip away from you for the “privilege” of being second, third or even fourth potato and if you’re willing to let none of it go, can you live on your wits? Do you have to drive to survive without relative comfort? These are all questions you have to ask yourself going into the business of producing media. Weinberg’s 5th writing presented me these questions, and I’m going to admit they are pretty tough to answer. It really brings things into perspective, how things get produced….. the reality of it all.
I did find the portion on the portapak interesting though, it seemed like an experience similar to my first introduction to the internet.
Speaking of porta-pak video, my video for this blogpost is something silly.
<- this is a video of a terrible dancer. He probably knows this, and doesn’t care. It’s really interesting how many videos this guy has up, and how much he’s produced in spite of his autism. He has all the right instincts about putting things out, his work just lacks a little focus. I don’t know if this particular series of videos involving him dancing is him trying to get famous, but if they are, he’s on the right track. I’m going to get a little beside myself and call this one: he’s probably going to become the next youtube sensation when his videos get discovered, whatever that means anyways.
“When television is good, nothing — not the theater, not the magazines or newspapers — nothing is better.
But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there, for a day, without a book, without a magazine, without a newspaper, without a profit and loss sheet or a rating book to distract you. Keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that what you will observe is a vast wasteland.
You will see a procession of game shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, mayhem, violence, sadism, murder, western bad men, western good men, private eyes, gangsters, more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly commercials — many screaming, cajoling, and offending. And most of all, boredom. True, you’ll see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, I only ask you to try it.” – Newton N. Minow
Last week, I made a promise to myself. I promised to make myself sit down to cable access tv for at least an hour a day in order to more fully understand and appreciate community created content for television. I read Chris Hill’s video art article and paid particular attention to her outlining of the history of public, community television. The folks at WNET and those who were bold enough to go onto television and use it as a venue for public exhibition have made it much easier for anyone else who wants to use television as an expressive medium to be able to use it. These movements paved the way for cable access television as we know it today.
This medium provided a voice for previously unheard artistic voices and allowed them to put their work out there for all to see. However, this medium also allows for public affairs broadcasting and other community related broadcasting. I have no problem with this at all, but my problem lies with the total and utter lack of professionalism and the lack of depth that seems to just ooze through the speakers of my television set whenever I sit down to watch cable access television in this market.
It is a great and powerful way to get messages across, but those who submit their work to cable access television usually are not artists or craftsmen. The result of this goes unsaid: shoddy, sloppy work that only gets on the air because it meets the minimum requirements of the station. When I was watching CAN TV, I sat through an hour of uncut, amateur music video footage. It wasn’t the fact that the footage itself was uncut, but the fact that the production value was so, so terrible. I mean, it was just poorly done all the way around. The next couple of days, I sat through terrible public affairs shows with blatantly racist and bitter African American “Doctors” and church shows. I found a few gems like Democracy Now though and rediscovered the great show We’re geniuses in France.
For the most part, I saw a lot of garbage. It really made me sit back and think: “if I were a cable exec, I sure as hell wouldn’t want this crap on the air, why are we still complying with the cable access rights laws”? The sad part is, is that it is completely avoidable! The solution is for people like me and other sorts of artists and thinkers in the area to get up off of our collective asses and put some serious thought, sweat, blood and tears into some good community programming. Not to just have crummy public affairs shows where fat, sweaty jerks ramble on for hours but to create programs with true relevance. Where people would go out into the street and actually talk to people, document conditions, etc.
People like me need to start making variety shows and standard television shows of high quality instead of making music video shows and terrible talent showcases. The beauty of cable access television is that it allows us to celebrate our local area and allows us to create things for our area, even if it is in the typical Hollywood format. Filmmakers should begin to look at cable access as a viable way to distribute narrative programming instead of saving up money to take it to the gaming table of film festivals. It has a lot of potential to truly entertain and inform, but a lot of people who are current users just aren’t using it to its fullest potential. I see this as ok though: they can express themselves how they want and so can I.
This is why I want to produce programming for cable access: to (hopefully) turn its vast wastelands into a blooming garden in the desert of television in Chicago. As it stands now, it’s power is not being fully realized in this market by those who can really make something of it.
My video(s) for this week is this really strange combination of sound bytes from the Jonestown Nov. 18th death tape and actual footage of the camp before the murdering of Leo Ryan, the NBC Cameraman and the entire camp of 900 plus people. The fact that someone would sit down to make a song out of audio tape collected from the day the second largest amount of American civilians died (9/11 taking the top spot) and add the song to videoclips of the actual Jonestown camp itself is a little bit bizarre to me. It is great rare footage as it relates to the events, but the music really adds a bizarre ambiance to the videos.
I read Weinberg’s fourth paper for our class, and it really got me thinking about the power of television. The
Weinberg’s 4th writing installation is definitely an interesting read and especially for me, seeing as I want to go into television. The crux of the argument in his writing is that even though the internet is seeing massive traffic, especially on video sharing sites, that the main medium is still television. Television is not down and certainly isn’t out. I’ve observed that many people watch TV AND use the internet at the same time. While the distribution model of the internet for media is a very efficient one, it is not the appropriate medium for most people, seeing as most people do not spend as much time online as they do watching tv. TV is still the most powerful medium. The internet is more suited, in my opinion, for smaller; more bite sized pieces of visual media, especially when it comes to videos and film. Copyright issues are also important for new and independent filmmakers: putting films online for sale using an online model makes it much riskier for indie film makers who cannot afford to take blows from pirating losses.
That is why when I get to the point in which I have work to put out there for consumption and purchasing, I will not be using the internet as a main venue, but rather use DVD’s and attempt to get my work broadcasted on independent television networks, public television, or one of the cable television stations that cater to independent film makers. Copyright issues in the age of the internet have complicated distribution and until the kinks are worked out, I do not see any of the more cautious, serious filmmakers releasing their work on the internet to be stolen.
My video for this week is Cry, Freetown. This video was shot in the wake of the civil war in Sierra Leone and is one of the most shocking and violent documentaries I have ever seen in my life. Though it has scenes of incredible brutality, it is very redemptive in showing the situation post war with some of the victims, who have moved on with their lives and have forgiven. The man who shot this footage has said his footage was rejected by news organizations because it was “too violent”. Eventually, the man won many awards for his documentary that truly takes people into the depths of a combat zone and shows the true reality of conflicts. I want to show the first portion of the video in class if I could, because it is simply a must see documentary.
The portion of the Spike Lee Reader that we have as an assigned reading for class is a particularly interesting my point of view. I, as a film and video production major, have taken away some important lessons from the reading. The reading illustrated the way Spike Lee created his brand, Forty Acres and a Mule productions into a commercially viable entity. The reading discusses how Spike Lee combined his entrepreneurial spirit with his big dreams and managed to retain creative control while obtaining funding for his projects and creating a strong enough brand name for him to create mainstream work as well. For anyone wanting to get into the Film and Video field, studying Spike Lee’s business model is crucial. He is an example of how even the most radical and politically outspoken filmmakers can find success in the mainstream industry and secure funding without compromising their vision.
The key to surviving the jungle as I see it is staying resilient, knowledgeable and willing to take on commercial work instead of “artistic” projects. One of the main reasons why many artists, whatever their medium is, never become known to a large audience or never become particularly profitable is the fact that many artists do not see their craft as a product. The fact of the matter is, there is money to be made in the arts, and artists cannot depend on money to fall into their laps from grants: they have to become proactive. They have to be willing to make contacts with the people who are in the business who are creating art for money, people who turn profits with their talents. Some of these people might just be advertisers; others may just make promo videos or wedding videos. However, this does not mean that they have “sold out”: they are merely creating a base for themselves to work with other people that they run into during the course of commercial work. These contacts can come in handy if they should ever need anyone to work on their own personal projects, or if you need them to help you out on your personal projects and etc. It always helps to have likeminded colleagues, and if you have to work making cruddy commercials and shooting weddings in order to make the connections necessary to advance and to create a body of work to market yourself with, you shouldn’t shy away from an opportunity to work on something you don’t really want to work on. After all, a key part of growing up is doing something you don’t want to do, and that applies to growing professionally as well.
This video is disturbing: in it we see a man talking to a panel of former wrestlers, and despite knowing that wrestling is fake, he still believes it is real in his heart. Some people become attached to fictional characters even in films, and when people create characters for the ring of wrestling, people don’t see it as a stage show but rather as some sort of reality. It is real to children, and those who want to escape into a world that is touted as our own. This video shows how some people can see fiction as reality, and these sort of people demonstrate how powerful simple entertainment can be: these are the same sort of people who believe that When Harry Met Sally was an accurate and true portrayal of male/female relations and how the messages in the film serve as sort of a sign post for those seeking direction in how to treat others. Hopefully, people like this man are in the minority.
After reading the offering for this week, “The Biz”, I came across a lot of information that I was already familiar with. I had already knew about the massive media conglomerates that own the airwaves and a lot of the content we see online. I already knew how the little guy was being trampled on. But, what I realized is something much scarier than the situation already is: the fact that many blogging empires, the supposed “new media” are entities that can be bought up. They can become affiliates and collaborators with the larger conglomerates and have their “voice” still appear “independent”. It is a far more dangerous reality than the one we face today.
It would provide a medium, a well funded, well polished medium for astroturfing on a scale that we have not seen yet. It does disturb me but on the same side of the coin, I know that I can be a part of the solution as well. We all can be a part, so as long as we recognize what is “fake” and what is “real”.
I came across a very disturbing video on the internet about missionaries in Laos and Thailand and their cruel practices they carry out in the name of the lord and civilization. I won’t get into discussing the video further, but my question is: why doesn’t the mainstream media in the US cover these sorts of stories?
This posting, I’ll be discussing one of the more bizzare videos I’ve seen on the internet and the Wexman reading for class.
The Wexman reading material was very interesting in the context of today, and I find it very relevant for the present day media production landscape. It is true that whenever “the industry” finds that the market is dissatisfied with “the industry’s” stale product, or when the a major political shift is occurring in the Western world, “the industry” will find a way to turn their downturn into an opportunity. As was done in the 60′s-70′s with films like
Easy Rider and The Birds, we see the same thing being done with films like Sideways and The Wrestler. All four of these films have something in common: they all have a different take than the usual formulaic Hollywood film, they explore concepts and present ideas in a much more abstract manner. Though these films tend to have some of an “indy” air about them, they were distributed by larger production companies. These films were release in my opinion, to show that Hollywood is still in touch with the young, and is still “hip” and to other audiences that Hollywood is capable of producing cerebral, serious works.
The International is another film that came out recently, most likely as a reaction to the current recession and economic crisis. Hollywood’s villains and heroes often have the same make of an antagonist, but don the garbs of the most popular heroes and villains that people can relate to. The thing is, Hollywood could ALWAYS be putting out films of work and always putting it’s writers and directors to a higher standard. Sadly, it’s products are a result of what the market demands as with any business and until Americans start demanding higher quality on the silver screen, we are going to be stuck with hollow horror movies and terribly misogynistic romantic comedies.
Also,
I saw a strange video this week of two young adults – dressed as a pimp and a lady of the night, entering offices of the non-for profit organization ACORN. They were asking the staff basically how they could run their prostitution business out of a home. They apparently were given advice as to how they could do it and get away with it. Now the radical right are dancing with glee over this video, thinking it proves that ACORN is a dasterdly and corrupt organization after all, supporting child trafficking and prostitution. Any critical thinker, or student of film and media would ask these questions:
1. Is the video(1) in question legitimate? Do we see all of the other offices they attempted to go into without
2. Do the people they are asking about how to setup a “whore house” think that they are only kidding when they come in dressed in outrageous, typecasted garbs like they were from a bad 70′s blackploitation film? Are they just yanking the two’s chain?
3. When was this video shot, was it shot after the other 5 ACORN offices(2) tossed them out as they attempted this silly video or after?
4.Where is the Raw, uncut footage of this supposed expose?
5.Who paid for them to fly out to the other ACORN offices? Who financed this so called “sting”?
Personally it looks like astroturfing to me, as with the supposed “9-12/teabagger grassroots” movement spawned out of desperation by the fringe on the right wing. They’ve been pulling tricks like this using the internet and are now using direct action campaigns in an attempt to paint themselves as freedom fighters and seekers of the truth, as some sort of bizarre “Silent Majority”.
My video selection for the week of September 7th comes out of the mediaburn.org archive. This particular video was shot by Greenpeace cameramen as a segment of the Global Perspectives on War and Peace Collection. This footage shows a Greenpeace ship being rammed by a U.S. Navy vessel after being told to vacate the 5,000 yard safety zone away from the submarines in the area. The submarine was trying to test launch the new Trident-II missile. This sort of video footage of direct action campaigns against authority is rare. This sort of footage, raw and uncut(to my knowledge) for mass media consumption would never make it on to the commerical air waves in this day and age. This is a perfect example of independent video work, because most likely this sort of event would not be covered by the mainstream media (with cameramen, that is).
This work reminds me much of the sort of film and video that would come out of the Vietnam wars and the wars preceeding it, showing actual violence and movement.
