tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10161060.post5198330764635378808..comments2023-11-05T04:31:48.615-05:00Comments on Elusive Lucidity: Contemplative Cinema: Harun Farocki (1)ZChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10211734319629732065noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10161060.post-30810699358177143992008-02-19T10:13:00.000-05:002008-02-19T10:13:00.000-05:00Hello Zach, I've been reading your blog with inter...Hello Zach, <BR/><BR/>I've been reading your blog with interest. <BR/><BR/>I am assistant editor with mute magazine www.metamute.org<BR/><BR/>We are looking for a writer to cover the recent Farocki film collection released on UBU here: http://www.ubu.com/film/farocki.html<BR/><BR/>Please email me if you are interested. <BR/><BR/>Anthony at metamute.orgAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06003635771001882359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10161060.post-20230694315127800512007-05-13T19:44:00.000-04:002007-05-13T19:44:00.000-04:00Zach,Thank you for an introduction to Farocki-I wa...Zach,<BR/>Thank you for an introduction to Farocki-I was not familiar with his work. Have you seen An Injury to One (about Anaconda copper) and would you care to comment?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10161060.post-35696512612858828852007-01-26T22:30:00.000-05:002007-01-26T22:30:00.000-05:00Yeah, that's the one. I may end up reading it but...Yeah, that's the one. I may end up reading it but the real revelation this semester will probably be the seminar on Stanley Cavell and his approach to criticism. How perfect a class is that for my return to school? Anyways, thanks for responding.Ryland Walker Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09233954424885027837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10161060.post-71557569641380862332007-01-25T07:36:00.000-05:002007-01-25T07:36:00.000-05:00Ryland--you mean the book on Godard, no? I haven'...Ryland--you mean the book on Godard, no? I haven't read the whole thing so I don't have much of an opinion, but what I did read was useful ...ZChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10211734319629732065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10161060.post-4703440831710878972007-01-24T02:11:00.000-05:002007-01-24T02:11:00.000-05:00So I'm taking a class with Kaja Silverman and I wa...So I'm taking a class with Kaja Silverman and I was reminded of your post: have you read the book she wrote with Farocki? I have not (just <i>Subject of Semiotics</i>) and was curious to hear what you might have to offer in that arena. She's not quite as fun a writer as, say, Barthes, but her lectures are pretty engaging and <i>S of S</i> is a pretty useful book for the uninitiaed (my classmates).Ryland Walker Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09233954424885027837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10161060.post-67605498880848772772007-01-15T09:45:00.000-05:002007-01-15T09:45:00.000-05:00Harry, I hope to bring the points I've outlined he...Harry, I hope to bring the points I've outlined here into consonance with more recent "art" cinema--perhaps Jia Zhang-ke, for instance. <br /><br />I guess I can't see a way of addressing "contemplative cinema" and the controversy of cinematic boredom ("is it boring because it's art, or art because it's boring," as one contributor wrote) without being in some small way a defense of (potentially) boring material. This first part of my contribution is a way of insisting on the good faith we should extend to artists, especially when we don't quite know what they're doing. (You put it absolutely perfectly: "he doesn't try to persuade through rhetoric, but to surprise our incredulity...") But I'm also trying to build an alternate pathway to the same solution--I'm <i>not</i> trying to bolster an "art for art's sake" argument here. Perhaps this is why I chose an artist as polemical (and "boring") as Farocki. And hopefully in my next installment I'll be able to produce some good points with regard to him and to others.<br /><br />Thanks for reading!ZChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10211734319629732065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10161060.post-55939085058704164392007-01-14T15:10:00.000-05:002007-01-14T15:10:00.000-05:00Thank you so much, Zach, for being part of the blo...Thank you so much, Zach, for being part of the blogathon!<br />What an unexpected entry point into "Contemplative Cinema" indeed, or is it the cynical extreme of contemplation? I like both. At first I was wondering what a very didactic "propaganda" had to do with contemplation, but after viewing it I realize how many steps foward you look at it. ;)<br />This repetition of identitcal footage is very insanely clever : an inversion of the Kulechov experiment. By revealing the meaning of images at the end of the second time we are lulled by the delusion he demonstrates. At the beguining of the second run we think "yeah ok, we already saw that, what's new?" so even the second time, when we should be awakened to the manipulative gimmick, our apathy is perpetuated by the conditioning. Only at the end of the second time does the reality behind the "innocent" boredom comes to light, and our irresponsability exposed. <br />So he doesn't try to persuade through rhetoric, but to surprise our incredulity, which has potentially more chances to swing detractors. The former being more suited to preach and comfort the choir.<br /><br />Now I'm not sure yet what to take from this multiple material to build a case for the Contemplative Cinema. It seems to primarly denounce the effects of boredom as a flaw instead of an enlightment. I hope you will expand on your last three sentences. I'm highly interested.HarryTuttlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10721542203087536185noreply@blogger.com