Critical Hit!!

pop culture (and everything else) explored

Notes on Video Revolutions

I recently finished Michael Z. Neuman’s short book Video Revolutions: On the History of a Medium. It’s a quick read (excluding notes, bibliography, and index, it’s just over 100 pages), but the content is an encompassing look at public reception towards the nebulous medium that is video. Neuman takes a cultural approach to his analysis, noting how reception of video changes as the medium and its cohorts (television, cinema) evolve. It’s a brisk, accessible historical overview of how the cultural force changed over time, and reveals the limitations of our own conceptions of media. Is video a tangible thing, like a VHS tape? What about streaming video? As Neuman illustrates, media is a combination of its physical properties and their surrounding cultural scripts.

Neuman’s book serves a general overview to the medium, and illustrates many places where scholarship could and does flourish, such as the democratization and politicization of the medium in the 21st century. It thus serves not only as a good overview text, but could as a launching point for others to explore.

Blue Velvet

“It’s like saying that once you’ve discovered there are heroin addicts in the world and they’re murdering people to get money, can you be happy? It’s a tricky question. Real ignorance is bliss. That’s what Blue Velvet is about.” – David Lynch

Blue Velvet (1986) is a film that looks at looks at the utter depravity of humanity and realizes the redemptive power of love. It’s beautifully directed by David Lynch, making it a work that overwhelmingly demands discussion.

Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan) is a college student back home in Lumberton due to his father’s illness. He begins tracking a mystery surrounding night singer Dorothy Vallens (Isabella Rossellini) and how the obsessive, sadistic Frank Booth (Dennis Hopper) controls her life through kidnapping her husband and son. While Jeffrey unveils the darkness lurking under this paragon of small town America, he also falls in love with Sandy Williams (Laura Dern), daughter of a police detective, while also having a passionate relationship with Dorothy.

The film opens with a scene depicting the normalcy and beauty of small town life, ending on a zoom into the grass, finding vile bugs underneath. Throughout the film, Jeffrey finds the depravity lurking under the surface of his hometown, acting as a voyeur into the life of Dorothy, and experiencing firsthand the twisted nature of Frank. Later captured by Frank and his gang, Jeffrey is “taken for a ride” as Frank takes Jeffrey to his drug dealer’s den, run by a coded queer character and is posse of oddballs. After this encounter, Frank takes him to an abandoned lot and has him beaten, but not before forcibly kissing him while wearing Dorothy’s lipstick. While an earlier scene depicted Jeffrey witnessing Frank’s rape of Dorothy earlier (mixed with an element of castration), his entire “ride” sequence confrontation adds a strong queer element to Frank’s character.

In a final cat-and-mouse confrontation, Jeffrey initiates his first act of violence within the film, and kills Frank in Dorothy’s apartment. Immediately after he fires the gun, Sandy bursts into the apartment, panting and shouting his name. The film ends with Jeffrey and Sandy together, noting that Robins have come to feast on the bugs. Sandy explained to Jeffrey earlier in the film that she had a dream where Robins were symbols of love bringing light to the dark world. Her prophecy (which to told Jeffrey in front of a church) seems to have come true. A relative of Jeffrey, however, remarks that she wishes she didn’t have to see the disgusting act of the Robin consuming the bug. With deviancy crushed, the film ends with a montage just like it began, beautiful suburbia with its flowers and white picket fences, and with Dorothy finally reunited with her son.

The final act of Jeffrey shooting Frank is coded as an act of heteronormativity, Sandy panting and gasping, shouting his name right after he uses his phallic weapon. It symbolizes a sexual and violent act of normalcy exorcising deviancy. We must consider a queer reading. We see the queer illustrated as evil, perverted, corrupt, disgusting. Their expulsion forms what appears to be a happy ending. In the end, on the surface it would appear true harmony returns to the town. though it looks the same as ever. The ending, while seeming to appear that all is right in the world, still retains an unnerving element, a hint of creeping fear within. A man friendly waving while riding a fire truck feels so normal that it’s weird. Is this film showing what happens when sexuality is confined, that it will inevitably explode? Perhaps it’s this reestablishment of conservative norms that is the root of the problem.

While symbolizing sex, a union of heteronormativity to erase sexual deviancy, the climax also symbolizes a Oedipal killing of the father. As Laura Mulvey notes, Dorothy, Frank, and Jeffrey from a Oedipal family, Frank’s abuse representing domestic violence itself. Various elements of the film help support this notion, from Frank calling out to his mother as he preys on Dorothy, to Jeffrey and Dorothy having sex, falling into the Oedipal notion of sons wanting to sleep with their mothers.

While I am still processing what Blue Velvet ultimately means, I am also grappling with the exploitation of actors for art. Roger Ebert has famously panned the film to its harsh treatment of Isabella Rosselini’s character, a character who undergoes experiences the brunt of the depravity.

I believe that art, like humor, can tackle any subject. I also believe that the torment Rosselini’s character undergoes through is earned throughout the film. But is it exploitative regardless? Exploitation of actors is a question that always proves the most difficult for me to answer. Are there things that are too far for a person to do, even though it’s for the sake of good art? I don’t know. Hopefully I’ll find and answer.

Teaching Film

A collection of essays written by the best in the field, Teaching Film (Eds. Lucy fisher and Patrice Petro) offers a beginner’s introduction to most basic topics of film, from elements of films, to styles, to genres, to theories, to geographic film cultures. Many essays name keys texts in each specific discipline and outline the history of teaching that element. I find it an essential addition to my collection as an accessible text acting as an introduction to many specialties, and as a launching point for my own explorations.

Pantomime in Animation

Pantomime is a reoccurring style in many small animation shorts, especially claymation. Why is this the case?

I believe I have three reasons:

1. Animating lip flaps is time consuming and difficult. Pantomime allows for minimal lip movement and removes the necessity for extensive ADR work, a boon for indie productions short on time and money

2. Pantomime illustrates the dynamic expression possible in animation. Without dialogue, artists must convey all emotion through movement.

3. It may be an inherited sense of humor, a longstanding tradition. One could turn to Wallace and Gromit and other influential creations as examples.

Jodorowsky’s Magic Money

Alejandro Jodorowsky is trying to kickstart a new film, Endless Poetry, finishing sometime in 2016 if all goes well. Jodorowsky brings something different to the table, as always, offering an exchange of your money to his newly developed currency, Poetic Money. The kickstarter page describes the project:

Jodorowsky thinks that all money should be transformed into poetry. And so that is what he will do with this Kickstarter project. No matter what level you pledge at, Jodorowsky will exchange your pledge into his brand new Poetic Money (DINERO POÉTICO) and send it back to you. This money can’t be spent on any material goods — only on the poetry of the universe.

Jodorowsky’s political beliefs reveal the ideological foundation of this project. While Wikipedia notes his interest in anarchism before college,  Senses of Cinema‘s profile of the filmmaker illustrates Jodorowsky’s beliefs further:

Jodorowsky has said several times that he does not care about political revolution (e.g. compared to Godard’s counter-cinema), but rather about spiritual revolution on a personal level. “We can only change our oppressors. It is impossible for people to liberate themselves from oppressors”, Jodorowsky says. “People have to change themselves.”

Poetic Money is a clear reflection of Jodorowsky’s focus on spiritual self-development, though he has dabbled in political critique. The Holy Mountain (1973) critiques consumerism in the first half, but ultimately leaves the realm of critique and focuses the latter half on spiritual self growth. Jodorowsky’s beliefs are self-evident.

Poetic Money fuses his primacy towards spiritual development and the desire towards a spiritual revolution within the cosmos. It also gets at the heart of much of liberalism: trying to improve the world through existing capitalist structures, trying to fix exploitative, oppressive structures when they should be torn down. Co-opting the concept of currency to spread poetry is a politically bankrupt idea, but of course, Jodorowsky isn’t ultimately interested in politics. But only a future without capitalist exploitation will make his dreams a reality.

greg

veltman

Fashionable Tinfoil accessories

Home to writer and critic Vrai Kaiser

degjeneruar

High-Church Marxism

Philosophers for Change

Ideas for a new age

Inner Wilderness

One guy's thoughts on nature, film, theology and anything else.

Sketches From An Album

From Turgenev to Derrida; Somewhere between Modernism and Deconstruction

Animetics

Shine On Till Dawn

Historical Horizons

Calvin College History Department Blog

WAKE UP WEEKEND

Animals! Awareness! Advocacy!

Archaeology and Material Culture

The material world, broadly defined

atelier emily

for me, in full bloom

The Charnel-House

From Bauhaus to Beinhaus

Real Name Brand Lindsay

None of that generic crap

Mara Wilson Writes Stuff

Just another WordPress.com site

being playful

Eric Zimmerman's game design blog

Plastic Bodies

thinking about material identities

The Art of (Overanalyzing) Animation

Hating on Jeffrey Katzenberg since 1986

The Real Banner

banned banner banter, unbanned.

The League of Unpopular Opinion

Long Live Reformation!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 371 other followers

%d bloggers like this: