im_mobile

Posted by Jess Loseby | Wed Sep 21st 2005 8:02 a.m.

hello. I don't seem to know any of you these days.

trying to get reconnected around ongoing ill health. im_mobile is a flash video mix as
part of the "without permission" series to try and get back to work.
1000 mobile phone vid and stills.
may make you feel a little off-colour
(I'm still kind of into force-fed cathasis:)

DO NOT view if sensitive to strobe or have light sensitive epilepsy!!!!!

http://www.rssgallery.com/im_mobile.html

[firefox users please follow link there]

jess.
  • Michael Szpakowski | Wed Sep 21st 2005 8:53 a.m.
    Nice to have you back Jess!
    I really like this piece- I love the care with which
    the images have been mixed so that sometimes we are
    seeing an almost abstract examination of certain
    shapes, colours or textures, then at others we see
    near realistic motion sequences struggle to emerge and
    then kind of fold back into the screen ( I don't mean
    the panning stuff but the..is it footballers or some
    sort of sporting event?) .One question though - does
    it need the music? I think it holds up without...( and
    personally I find the music, unlike the work itself,
    somewhat banal)
    warmest wishes
    michael

    --- Jess Loseby <jess@rssgallery.com> wrote:

    > hello. I don't seem to know any of you these days.
    >
    > trying to get reconnected around ongoing ill health.
    > im_mobile is a flash video mix as
    > part of the "without permission" series to try and
    > get back to work.
    > 1000 mobile phone vid and stills.
    > may make you feel a little off-colour
    > (I'm still kind of into force-fed cathasis:)
    >
    > DO NOT view if sensitive to strobe or have light
    > sensitive epilepsy!!!!!
    >
    > http://www.rssgallery.com/im_mobile.html
    >
    > [firefox users please follow link there]
    >
    >
    > jess.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > +
    > -> post: list@rhizome.org
    > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
    > http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    > +
    > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
    > out in the
    > Membership Agreement available online at
    > http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
    >
  • Jess Loseby | Wed Sep 21st 2005 12:54 p.m.
    Hi Michael,

    Tryng to be back slowly, cheers:)

    Re the music - the trouble with using any music generally is it is bound not to be of
    everyones taste but the "without permission" series (that this work is from) is
    deliberately mixed to specific "popular" music. Without it you would only get half the
    story. In this one the story might be the disorientation between domestic and the "space
    boy". Who or what the space boy is up for grabs:)

    I always call these ones mixes rather that artworks because they aren't really supposed
    to stand up on their own without the music (although its nice of you to suggest it does:)

    Trying to catch up with nine months of threads on these lists, I have also seen a lot of
    your short movies in a group recently too. I notice with interest how your "moment
    stories" are developing into much sharper moments than the narrative/allegories that I
    would suggest that they previously had. Is it David Crawford that talks about mirco-
    narratives? is that what you are moving towards...?

    Jess.

    > Nice to have you back Jess!
    .One question though - does
    > it need the music? I think it holds up without...( and
    > personally I find the music, unlike the work itself,
    > somewhat banal)
    > warmest wishes
    > michael
    >
    o
    /^ rssgallery.com
    ][
  • Jess Loseby | Thu Sep 22nd 2005 2:16 a.m.
    Hi Giselle

    cool - cultural entropy you can sing-along to. Nice way to start the day!

    Pixel-rhetoric is a new one on me (another nice name for a cat?)
    explain, please??!!
    jess.

    Send reply to: giselle beiguelman <desvirtual@gmail.com>

    > Jess,
    > very good.
    > i think we are moving towards micronarratives and diving into the
    > pixel rhetoric.
    > try this one:
    > www.pucsp.br/~gb/desmemorias
    > (best viewed with IE6. pop ups unblocked + sound on + broadband.)
    >
    o
    /^ rssgallery.com
    ][
  • Jim Andrews | Thu Sep 22nd 2005 3:46 a.m.
    > > i think we are moving towards micronarratives and diving into the
    > > pixel rhetoric.
    > > try this one:
    > > www.pucsp.br/~gb/desmemorias
    > > (best viewed with IE6. pop ups unblocked + sound on + broadband.)

    that hits the screen really well, giselle. lots of sound and video i hadn't
    heard/seen for a long time, but i know just about all the references. that's
    a wonderfully contemporary time machine of popular mainly american tv. did
    you see all that stuff in brazil growing up? i was running around in my
    pajamas, sitting on the floor watching that stuff in canada. looks like you
    were doing much the same in brazil?

    it streams in very quickly, by the way. quite the job to do that, i imagine.
    are you pushing it to the max with a contemporary broadband connection? it
    seems that way. it's a bit easier to do, i'd think, in flash and director;
    streaming in html, images, video, the occasional flash piece, and sound
    separately, with no coordinating software, that's pretty cool, if it works,
    and it does in desmemorias.

    i watched several pieces today: desmorias, jess's piece, and some of jim
    punk's work. all of them streaming continuously or continually. all of them
    "diving into the pixel rhetoric". all of them much more interesting to me
    than watching tv. all of them using the whole screen in interesting ways. i
    like to see the full screen used. claiming the whole monitor for the art
    piece, not acquiescing to the browser chrome, the typical frame. all of them
    fast paced and making the monitor jump. all of them busting out with energy
    and different ideas of net art that relate to TV and video but are way not
    doing the same thing.

    thanks so much! it's great to come across such strong work.

    ja
  • Michael Szpakowski | Thu Sep 22nd 2005 4:28 a.m.
    Hi Jess

    <stand up on their own without the music
    (although its nice of you to suggest it does:)>

    well...I *do* absolutely think it does.. I suppose I'm
    just cautious ( and I take everything you say about
    the purpose of the series) of the visceral power of
    loud popular music ( which don't get me wrong, I like
    in many contexts) rather overwhelming what seems to me
    quite a delicate and intricate sensibility and piece
    of work. I suppose I've just spent lots of time
    recently thinking about & becoming more and more
    gripped by linear, non interactive, non generative
    sequences of images & moved and absorbed by the
    smallest detail in these - the music feels like it's
    competing for my attention in a rather unfair contest.
    <I have also seen a lot of
    your short movies in a group recently too.>
    thanks for looking!
    < talks about micro-
    narratives? is that what you are moving towards...?>
    I honestly don't have a plan -perhaps this is a
    weakness - I get up in the morning and if I have time
    and an idea I make a short movie, rather like making
    an entry in a diary - at the moment I'm doing stuff
    with found footage & -loosely- "remakes" but I'm not
    interested in plowing a furrow except the bare fact of
    continuing to make the sequence; content wise I try
    just to do something *I'd* like to watch..
    best
    michael

    --- Jess Loseby <jess@rssgallery.com> wrote:

    > Hi Michael,
    >
    > Tryng to be back slowly, cheers:)
    >
    > Re the music - the trouble with using any music
    > generally is it is bound not to be of
    > everyones taste but the "without permission" series
    > (that this work is from) is
    > deliberately mixed to specific "popular" music.
    > Without it you would only get half the
    > story. In this one the story might be the
    > disorientation between domestic and the "space
    > boy". Who or what the space boy is up for grabs:)
    >
    > I always call these ones mixes rather that
    > artworks because they aren't really supposed
    > to stand up on their own without the music
    > (although its nice of you to suggest it does:)
    >
    > Trying to catch up with nine months of threads on
    > these lists, I have also seen a lot of
    > your short movies in a group recently too. I notice
    > with interest how your "moment
    > stories" are developing into much sharper moments
    > than the narrative/allegories that I
    > would suggest that they previously had. Is it David
    > Crawford that talks about mirco-
    > narratives? is that what you are moving towards...?
    >
    > Jess.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > Nice to have you back Jess!
    > .One question though - does
    > > it need the music? I think it holds up without...(
    > and
    > > personally I find the music, unlike the work
    > itself,
    > > somewhat banal)
    > > warmest wishes
    > > michael
    > >
    > o
    > /^ rssgallery.com
    > ][
    >
    >
    >
    >
  • curt cloninger | Thu Sep 22nd 2005 10:35 a.m.
    Hi Michael (and Jess),

    I like the music a lot and wouldn't have enjoyed the piece nearly as much without it. I think that song is very strong in and of itself, and I do agree that it is not background music for the visuals. If anything, the visuals are a sort of background meditation or visual commentary on the music. The piece foregrounds the song, treating it as something important, something worthy of serious consideration, contemplation, and dialogue. In so doing, it recontextualizes the song from yet another Bowie space song and it forces us to take this paraticular one seriously. The song is actually very profound, epic, and sweeping (about death via detatchment). All that import is already resident in the song (masked by pop music connotations). This piece just brings it out and makes us chew on it.

    The piece makes me thing of Roeg's "The Man Who Fell to Earth" because both juxtapose cosmic themes with earthly normalcy. The Man Who Fell to Earth is ostensibly sci-fi, but it's got cowboy music, flashbacks to 1800s settlers, and a lot of normal mid-1970s settings. Bowie's car is a classic pimpmobile. Here's a favorite quote from the film which seems applicable to Jess's piece:

    "The strange thing about television is that it doesn't tell you everything. You see everything about life on earth and yet the true mysteries remain. Perhaps that's in the nature of television, just waves in space."

    curt

    Michael Szpakowski wrote:

    > Hi Jess
    >
    > <stand up on their own without the music
    > (although its nice of you to suggest it does:)>
    >
    > well...I *do* absolutely think it does.. I suppose I'm
    > just cautious ( and I take everything you say about
    > the purpose of the series) of the visceral power of
    > loud popular music ( which don't get me wrong, I like
    > in many contexts) rather overwhelming what seems to me
    > quite a delicate and intricate sensibility and piece
    > of work. I suppose I've just spent lots of time
    > recently thinking about & becoming more and more
    > gripped by linear, non interactive, non generative
    > sequences of images & moved and absorbed by the
    > smallest detail in these - the music feels like it's
    > competing for my attention in a rather unfair contest.
    > <I have also seen a lot of
    > your short movies in a group recently too.>
    > thanks for looking!
    > < talks about micro-
    > narratives? is that what you are moving towards...?>
    > I honestly don't have a plan -perhaps this is a
    > weakness - I get up in the morning and if I have time
    > and an idea I make a short movie, rather like making
    > an entry in a diary - at the moment I'm doing stuff
    > with found footage & -loosely- "remakes" but I'm not
    > interested in plowing a furrow except the bare fact of
    > continuing to make the sequence; content wise I try
    > just to do something *I'd* like to watch..
    > best
    > michael
  • Michael Szpakowski | Thu Sep 22nd 2005 1:59 p.m.
    Hi Curt
    fair enough - I guess we just have different tastes
    here, & again I entirely take Jess's point about what
    she is attempting with this series
    It just feels to me like I'm being shouted at ( and I
    don't care at all for Bowie which doesn't help.)
    I used to teach theatre & the first assignment I used
    to give students was to write & stage fully a short
    autobiographical monologue, the idea being to get them
    thinking practically straight away about the different
    components of performance -speech, gesture, light,
    design, music, sound &c.
    The thing that used to really stand out was how many
    students used popular music as a shortcut to semaphore
    their emotional state - bunging this or that track on
    & quite often doing little else.
    Of course I'm not suggesting that Jess is doing
    anything at all like this, just that she is not
    trusting what is, in my view ( & I know you differ),
    the interesting thing about this piece,her treatment
    of the visuals; small, delicate,subtle.
    I'm not being snotty about popular music -there's much
    of it, as you know, that I love - sometimes though
    it's use in pieces like this feels to me like a sort
    of category error.
    best
    michael

    --- curt cloninger <curt@lab404.com> wrote:

    > Hi Michael (and Jess),
    >
    > I like the music a lot and wouldn't have enjoyed the
    > piece nearly as much without it. I think that song
    > is very strong in and of itself, and I do agree that
    > it is not background music for the visuals. If
    > anything, the visuals are a sort of background
    > meditation or visual commentary on the music. The
    > piece foregrounds the song, treating it as something
    > important, something worthy of serious
    > consideration, contemplation, and dialogue. In so
    > doing, it recontextualizes the song from yet another
    > Bowie space song and it forces us to take this
    > paraticular one seriously. The song is actually
    > very profound, epic, and sweeping (about death via
    > detatchment). All that import is already resident
    > in the song (masked by pop music connotations).
    > This piece just brings it out and makes us chew on
    > it.
    >
    > The piece makes me thing of Roeg's "The Man Who Fell
    > to Earth" because both juxtapose cosmic themes with
    > earthly normalcy. The Man Who Fell to Earth is
    > ostensibly sci-fi, but it's got cowboy music,
    > flashbacks to 1800s settlers, and a lot of normal
    > mid-1970s settings. Bowie's car is a classic
    > pimpmobile. Here's a favorite quote from the film
    > which seems applicable to Jess's piece:
    >
    > "The strange thing about television is that it
    > doesn't tell you everything. You see everything
    > about life on earth and yet the true mysteries
    > remain. Perhaps that's in the nature of television,
    > just waves in space."
    >
    > curt
    >
    >
    >
    > Michael Szpakowski wrote:
    >
    > > Hi Jess
    > >
    > > <stand up on their own without the music
    > > (although its nice of you to suggest it does:)>
    > >
    > > well...I *do* absolutely think it does.. I suppose
    > I'm
    > > just cautious ( and I take everything you say
    > about
    > > the purpose of the series) of the visceral power
    > of
    > > loud popular music ( which don't get me wrong, I
    > like
    > > in many contexts) rather overwhelming what seems
    > to me
    > > quite a delicate and intricate sensibility and
    > piece
    > > of work. I suppose I've just spent lots of time
    > > recently thinking about & becoming more and more
    > > gripped by linear, non interactive, non generative
    > > sequences of images & moved and absorbed by the
    > > smallest detail in these - the music feels like
    > it's
    > > competing for my attention in a rather unfair
    > contest.
    > > <I have also seen a lot of
    > > your short movies in a group recently too.>
    > > thanks for looking!
    > > < talks about micro-
    > > narratives? is that what you are moving
    > towards...?>
    > > I honestly don't have a plan -perhaps this is a
    > > weakness - I get up in the morning and if I have
    > time
    > > and an idea I make a short movie, rather like
    > making
    > > an entry in a diary - at the moment I'm doing
    > stuff
    > > with found footage & -loosely- "remakes" but I'm
    > not
    > > interested in plowing a furrow except the bare
    > fact of
    > > continuing to make the sequence; content wise I
    > try
    > > just to do something *I'd* like to watch..
    > > best
    > > michael
    > +
    > -> post: list@rhizome.org
    > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
    > http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    > +
    > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
    > out in the
    > Membership Agreement available online at
    > http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
    >
  • Jess Loseby | Thu Sep 22nd 2005 4:32 p.m.
    <?xml version="1.0" ?><html>
    <head>
    <title></title>
    </head>
    <body>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Hi Michael,</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><br/>
    </div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">I think bowie is a bit like marmite (either love it or hate it) - I don't think anyone is
    shouting &quot;how dare you not like marmite...&quot;&#160; I admit I adore both bowie and that
    particular album, sorry:)</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><br/>
    </div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">I'm not trying to defend the work (as I don't think you were attacking it) but honestly,
    using the music with the visuals is not about trust. 90% of my work deals with the small
    and subtle which I guess is why I like to dip in and out of &quot;chewy&quot; music (as curt so aptly
    put it) with this series. </span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><br/>
    </div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">The other ones in the series are &quot;rsstango&quot; (Divine Comedy)&#160; </span></font><font face="Arial"><span
    style="font-size:10pt">which is news you can flirt
    with</span></font><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">, &quot;</span></font><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">jellynet&quot;</span></font><font face="Arial"><span
    style="font-size:10pt"> (scissor sisters) which is apathy with you can dance to,&#160; &quot;textual tango&quot;
    (sting/moulin rouge) sexy noncommunication and Lapdance (Pucinni) which is - well just
    that. All of these (visually) are rooted in &quot;the domestic&quot; as I am but&#160; - because of the
    music and lyrics - become something transgressed, something&#160; stolen - as I did when I
    first listened to my fav tunes and forcibly made them applicable to me and my
    circumstances...</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><br/>
    </div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Perhaps montage/mixing (moving or static) is always and emotional takeover bid....?
    Your pelinger archive movs also allow you to step outside of the&#160; {visual] material that is
    immediately available to you normally - but that wouldn't suggest for a second that you
    did not trust your own...?</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><br/>
    </div>
    <div align="left"><br/>
    </div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">cheers,</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">jess.</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><br/></div>
    <div align="left"><br/>
    </div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; Hi Curt</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; fair enough - I guess we just have different tastes</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; here, &amp; again I entirely take Jess's point about what</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; she is attempting with this series</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; It just feels to me like I'm being shouted at ( and I</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; don't care at all for Bowie which doesn't help.)</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; I used to teach theatre &amp; the first assignment I used</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; to give students was to write &amp; stage fully a short</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; autobiographical monologue, the idea being to get thempelinger</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; thinking practically straight away about the different</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; components of performance -speech, gesture, light,</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; design, music, sound &amp;c.</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; The thing that used to really stand out was how many</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; students used popular music as a shortcut to semaphore</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; their emotional state - bunging this or that track on</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; &amp; quite often doing little else.</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; Of course I'm not suggesting that Jess is doing</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; anything at all like this, just that she is not</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; trusting what is, in my view ( &amp; I know you differ),</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; the interesting thing about this piece,her treatment</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; of the visuals; small, delicate,subtle.</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; I'm not being snotty about popular music -there's much</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; of it, as you know, that I love - sometimes though</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; it's use in pieces like this feels to me like a sort</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; of category error.</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; best</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; michael</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">&gt; </span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><br/></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> o</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">/^ rssgallery.com</span></font></div>
    <div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> ][</span></font></div>
    </body>
    </html>
  • Geert Dekkers | Thu Sep 22nd 2005 4:35 p.m.
    Hi all

    Just wanted to let you know I linked the piece to my blog at http://
    nznl.com/blog.shtml

    Actually think of the music as a caption (of course I use captions
    all the time in my own work) -- as a way of taking the viewer by the
    hand, to guide to the unknown using something known.

    Geert
    http://nznl.com

    On 22-sep-2005, at 21:59, Michael Szpakowski wrote:

    > Hi Curt
    > fair enough - I guess we just have different tastes
    > here, & again I entirely take Jess's point about what
    > she is attempting with this series
    > It just feels to me like I'm being shouted at ( and I
    > don't care at all for Bowie which doesn't help.)
    > I used to teach theatre & the first assignment I used
    > to give students was to write & stage fully a short
    > autobiographical monologue, the idea being to get them
    > thinking practically straight away about the different
    > components of performance -speech, gesture, light,
    > design, music, sound &c.
    > The thing that used to really stand out was how many
    > students used popular music as a shortcut to semaphore
    > their emotional state - bunging this or that track on
    > & quite often doing little else.
    > Of course I'm not suggesting that Jess is doing
    > anything at all like this, just that she is not
    > trusting what is, in my view ( & I know you differ),
    > the interesting thing about this piece,her treatment
    > of the visuals; small, delicate,subtle.
    > I'm not being snotty about popular music -there's much
    > of it, as you know, that I love - sometimes though
    > it's use in pieces like this feels to me like a sort
    > of category error.
    > best
    > michael
    >
    > --- curt cloninger <curt@lab404.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Hi Michael (and Jess),
    >>
    >> I like the music a lot and wouldn't have enjoyed the
    >> piece nearly as much without it. I think that song
    >> is very strong in and of itself, and I do agree that
    >> it is not background music for the visuals. If
    >> anything, the visuals are a sort of background
    >> meditation or visual commentary on the music. The
    >> piece foregrounds the song, treating it as something
    >> important, something worthy of serious
    >> consideration, contemplation, and dialogue. In so
    >> doing, it recontextualizes the song from yet another
    >> Bowie space song and it forces us to take this
    >> paraticular one seriously. The song is actually
    >> very profound, epic, and sweeping (about death via
    >> detatchment). All that import is already resident
    >> in the song (masked by pop music connotations).
    >> This piece just brings it out and makes us chew on
    >> it.
    >>
    >> The piece makes me thing of Roeg's "The Man Who Fell
    >> to Earth" because both juxtapose cosmic themes with
    >> earthly normalcy. The Man Who Fell to Earth is
    >> ostensibly sci-fi, but it's got cowboy music,
    >> flashbacks to 1800s settlers, and a lot of normal
    >> mid-1970s settings. Bowie's car is a classic
    >> pimpmobile. Here's a favorite quote from the film
    >> which seems applicable to Jess's piece:
    >>
    >> "The strange thing about television is that it
    >> doesn't tell you everything. You see everything
    >> about life on earth and yet the true mysteries
    >> remain. Perhaps that's in the nature of television,
    >> just waves in space."
    >>
    >> curt
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Michael Szpakowski wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> Hi Jess
    >>>
    >>> <stand up on their own without the music
    >>> (although its nice of you to suggest it does:)>
    >>>
    >>> well...I *do* absolutely think it does.. I suppose
    >>>
    >> I'm
    >>
    >>> just cautious ( and I take everything you say
    >>>
    >> about
    >>
    >>> the purpose of the series) of the visceral power
    >>>
    >> of
    >>
    >>> loud popular music ( which don't get me wrong, I
    >>>
    >> like
    >>
    >>> in many contexts) rather overwhelming what seems
    >>>
    >> to me
    >>
    >>> quite a delicate and intricate sensibility and
    >>>
    >> piece
    >>
    >>> of work. I suppose I've just spent lots of time
    >>> recently thinking about & becoming more and more
    >>> gripped by linear, non interactive, non generative
    >>> sequences of images & moved and absorbed by the
    >>> smallest detail in these - the music feels like
    >>>
    >> it's
    >>
    >>> competing for my attention in a rather unfair
    >>>
    >> contest.
    >>
    >>> <I have also seen a lot of
    >>> your short movies in a group recently too.>
    >>> thanks for looking!
    >>> < talks about micro-
    >>> narratives? is that what you are moving
    >>>
    >> towards...?>
    >>
    >>> I honestly don't have a plan -perhaps this is a
    >>> weakness - I get up in the morning and if I have
    >>>
    >> time
    >>
    >>> and an idea I make a short movie, rather like
    >>>
    >> making
    >>
    >>> an entry in a diary - at the moment I'm doing
    >>>
    >> stuff
    >>
    >>> with found footage & -loosely- "remakes" but I'm
    >>>
    >> not
    >>
    >>> interested in plowing a furrow except the bare
    >>>
    >> fact of
    >>
    >>> continuing to make the sequence; content wise I
    >>>
    >> try
    >>
    >>> just to do something *I'd* like to watch..
    >>> best
    >>> michael
    >>>
    >> +
    >> -> post: list@rhizome.org
    >> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    >> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
    >> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    >> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    >> +
    >> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
    >> out in the
    >> Membership Agreement available online at
    >> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
    >>
    >>
    >
    > +
    > -> post: list@rhizome.org
    > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/
    > subscribe.rhiz
    > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    > +
    > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
    > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/
    > 29.php
    >
  • Michael Szpakowski | Thu Sep 22nd 2005 4:58 p.m.
    I'm a fan of your work Jess as you know ( and I've
    enjoyed the other pieces I've seen in this series; got
    a bollocking here from T Whid in fact for enthusing
    about "lapdance"). It's such a fine point I'm not sure
    how worth pushing it is - I suppose rather than just
    burbling about how great the piece was I wanted to
    state some honest reservations.
    Having said that I can't *resist* one rejoinder & that
    is that the Prelinger archive stuff invariably
    involves me working on the material to transform it.
    For me the parallel here is with the visuals in your
    piece ( I think you said some of it was harvested from
    the web)
    The Bowie just sits there, nothing is done to it,
    *although* I accept and am thinking about Curt's point
    ( which I think you are making as well) about the
    visuals *illuminating* the sound, a kind of
    commentary..(thinks).. OK ... I'm coming round to it
    procedurally; back to *taste* on the actual work of
    Bowie , or marmite; now *that* I do so love.
    warmest wishes
    michael

    --- Jess Loseby <jess@rssgallery.com> wrote:

    ---------------------------------
    Hi Michael,

    I think bowie is a bit like marmite (either love it or
    hate it) - I don't think anyone is shouting "how dare
    you not like marmite...
  • curt cloninger | Fri Sep 23rd 2005 7:39 a.m.
    Hi Michael n' Jess,

    http://playdamage.org is full of pop audio, but the source audio is transformed by lifting tiny, quintessential bits out of context, looping them (sometimes synchopatedly), and compressing their sound quality. So I'd see that more as the equivalent of the prelinger visual remix approach.

    I do hate it when my students just put a full, high quality pop song as the background music for their pieces for no conceptual reason whatsoever. But the thing I like about Jess's piece is that the visuals are in such a weird intentional dialogue with the song. They are very tightly synched to the rhythm of the song, so much so that they almost feel like they are being driven by the audio via a synesthetic MAX/MSP bridge. And yet the content of the images is so un-outer-spacy.

    I freely admit that Bowie is a guilty pleasure. Not just Low/Heroes era with Eno. I even like "China Girl."

    curt

    Michael Szpakowski wrote:

    > I'm a fan of your work Jess as you know ( and I've
    > enjoyed the other pieces I've seen in this series; got
    > a bollocking here from T Whid in fact for enthusing
    > about "lapdance"). It's such a fine point I'm not sure
    > how worth pushing it is - I suppose rather than just
    > burbling about how great the piece was I wanted to
    > state some honest reservations.
    > Having said that I can't *resist* one rejoinder & that
    > is that the Prelinger archive stuff invariably
    > involves me working on the material to transform it.
    > For me the parallel here is with the visuals in your
    > piece ( I think you said some of it was harvested from
    > the web)
    > The Bowie just sits there, nothing is done to it,
    > *although* I accept and am thinking about Curt's point
    > ( which I think you are making as well) about the
    > visuals *illuminating* the sound, a kind of
    > commentary..(thinks).. OK ... I'm coming round to it
    > procedurally; back to *taste* on the actual work of
    > Bowie , or marmite; now *that* I do so love.
    > warmest wishes
    > michael
Your Reply