#layalmerhi

[photographyatmit]

Blogpost #11

Early on in the film Waste Land, Vik Muniz questions if art can change people. It evidently can – in perpetuity. It’s certainly easy to disregard art as aesthetic and equate it with beauty. The film proves an opposite point all together. It is not the art, but the people who are beautiful. And what is art if not the process of creation and the drive for change? What’s interesting about this kind of project and initiative is that it creates change across time. It created change during its inception, upon its execution equally as it does today. Not only doe the film inform and educate, but it also promotes introspection: two worlds colliding, activism and humanitarianism.

The change that art incentivizes here is reflected on the artist, the community and individual the art addresses, the environment, and the viewer at once. By escaping the exclusivity of fine art and inviting the art to come to life by people taking control over the art being produced about them, art comes alive. It is indeed Art and a social experiment at once. In fact, the social experiment becomes the art itself.

It was eye opening to recognize the community as human beings, able to dream, raise families, have ambitions and have culture and education. Referencing the likes of Machiavelli and finding knowledge in garbage on one hand while holding beliefs of recycling in support of the environment at a time when that was a topic on the backburner certainly causes one pause. Perpetual change indeed; with a library being established, power gained and joy found anew, I cannot but quote Zumi when he said “That’s not garbage, that’s recyclable material. That’s money; a lot of money”.

From an idea of a product, to a translation in film, to showcasing a lifestyle, to curating a process all of which to only be translated back to product, the concept of art certainly expands.

[photographyatmit]

Blogpost #10

La Jetée, evidently a piece meant to question the notion of temporality in cinema, was a captivating watch. The themes of time and memory used in the film seem to hint at the demise of any attachment to the past. This makes me think of the fine line that separates nostalgia and melancholy.

What I found interesting about the use of still images is twofold: 1- the drama and dynamism captured in each frame, and 2- the way in which the format elevated the storyline. What I mean by that is the use of still images which leaves room for some temporality and movement to be imagined, paves the way for ambiguity which allowed the loop in time to remain hidden throughout the film until its peak revelation within the last few moments. The imagined stitching together of what remains between the frame is what really makes this genre in my opinion: when some things are left to be directed so to speak by the audience, which calls into the question if the cinematic work then is ever finished. I’d argue that it remains in perpetual motion via the viewer.

The fact that the movie is a sci-fi created in 1962 was also surprising. I can see how the film must have been a revelation for it time. Even watching it today was quite moving. The threshold between reaching back and looking to the future is one we all come across which is why it felt quite easy to relate to the film, fiction withstanding.

[photographyatmit]

Blogpost #8

Daisies was a fun watch. I couldn’t help but wonder while watching if I was sensing the progressiveness of the film for its time correctly; the sentiment was validated and explained Camera Obscura’s text. Understanding how to situate the film in the political landscape of the time was an interesting “step back” from the micro to understand the narrative in a macro scope.

The film is crude, rude and offensive in the best way. What I mean to say is that watching today, in this day and age, I almost felt devilishly glad of the Maries’ trickery. In all honestly, it felt like a f*ck you to society across the ages. The fact that the Maries were clearly portrayed as dolls from the opening scene of the film and that they acted in opposition to what a doll does or is expected to do was freeing to watch. I wouldn’t say that I agreed or enjoyed their pranks, but the fact that they were even done was indicative of choice and very telling in its criticism of gender roles and expectations – clearly targeting the patriarchy. I was however surprised to read that Chytilová seemed to describe the film as a “what not to do” manual so to speak – though she does acknowledge the double entendre of feminism that the film evokes, she seems to not focus on it – even after if had been banned for screening for quite a while.

The scenes that struck me most in the film were the flashes of color that seem to appear when the Maries were mischievous and the collaging that occurred towards the end of the film when “the piece of meat” becomes themselves. This draws a parallelism between their insane consumption of food and the idea that themselves are being consumed by society. In referencing the scissors, cutting food, paper, and themselves, though phallic was effective. In fact, the ultimate form of consumption, after ravaging their way through a feast – which was very clearly meant for official use – they become the feats only after they show remorse. And even when that is done, they still get consumed by society – in a rather morbid sense this time around – with the chandelier drop.

[photographyatmit]

Blogpost #7

1-      Adam Pendleton’s WE ARE NOT works

I was interested in Pendleton’s work for quite a few reasons, the medium, the abstraction and the simplicity I among them. Though I don’t have personal experience with silk screening, it seems to me that both the purpose and the medium play into each other’s hands. The expression of the subject matter entangled with political messaging and the ambiguity and inaccuracy of the process of silk screening offer a place for imagination and leave room for subjective analysis much needed to most themes – specifically in art. Scale is another aspect that fascinated me, perhaps because of how bold of a message it lends to issues. Pendleton’s interest in race, identity and history seems to be the perfect fit for – and in much need of - a bold message.

2-      Glenn Liggon’s FIGURE, 2021

Perhaps a bit reminiscent of Andy Warhol, Liggon’s Figure series – also in silk screen – tends to thread the same line of abstraction that stroke my interest in Pendleton’s work. Specifically, in works such as Figure #52, blurring the line between product and message – so to speak – is a theme that I seem to be drawn to. The use of text and its application with coal dust sheds light on the meaning of the words used not only although but maybe because of its unknown origins. The resulting abstracted painting and - id argue - reappropriated text is visual language that’s captivating in its intangibility.

3-      Morehshin Allahyari’s THE RECITATION OF SOLILOQUY, 2012

Although I must admit that I wasn’t automatically drawn to Allahyari’s works, her film construction together with a very personal and familiar subject matter – er mother – is what piqued my interest in looking at The Recitation of Soliloquy. Her mother’s narrative is really put en relief with the seeming static use of text, the pace in which the text is introduced (word by word) and the sound juxtaposed that suggest the artist hearing her mother’s words from the womb. The introduction of the figure with her back turned to the projected film is also powerful for its unknowing identity. Is it the artist? Is it her mother? Is it oneself? Even if at one point, the artist’s face is recognizable, the zooming into her face and zooming out of it accompanied with a blurring effect again introduces my (and the artists) affinity to the theme of ambiguity and intangible matter is interesting to watch. One last element worth of note for me is the use of modern tools with historic matter and primitive means (the human body). The experimentation of the marrying timelines together in its various forms is what intrigues me most.

[photographyatmit]

Blogpost #6

Watching two meeting and a funereal and knowing that I’m watching the image of colonialism, I can’t help but be struck by the irony of me almost not needing subtitles to follow the film thanks TO colonialism: Knowing the languages because of it.

The film has been most difficult to follow so far. It was interesting however that the events of the film were narrated in a tripartite frame of existence, seemingly narrating history on three distinct frequencies. The Third-Worldism introduced in the film is highlighted by the shift from Socialism to Islamism.

The mise en scene was also quite unexpected and intriguing within the storytelling. Oscar Niemeyer’s architecture seemed to be a character in the film embodying the traits of Socialism all the while the text showed differently with the political shift portrayed.

[photographyatmit]

Blogpost #5

Watching I Am Not Your Negro and having read some of James Baldwin’s writing in the past, I expected the film to resonate, but perhaps not quite as it did. The juxtaposition of Baldwin’s words (narrated by Samuel Jackson) from the 60s and 70s onto footage and stories from today hit different. I couldn’t quite fathom the gravity of what I was watching – I was shocked and disappointed in myself because of that very fact.

The film is essentially a documentary narrating 4 different lives at once. Baldwin himself as well as the three men whose lives and deaths he witnessed: Malcom X, Martin Luther King and Medgar Evers. The timelessness of the film is striking. Though condition may vary the gist of mobilizing people and them evading change persists. It was interesting to witness the difference amongst these men and what is more interesting is what unites them. Though Baldwin does seem like the odd man out in some instances for his “civility” in addressing the white man – perhaps most different from Malcom X – I could notice a subtle but powerful shift in his position specifically after the death of these men. Though I know some of this history, and though it isn’t mine, watching it I was infuriated. It is sometimes easy to forget, disregard or turn a blind eye from things that are “unpleasant” to speak of in society. But this is where our fault lies. Choosing civility and social niceties, opting for being correct and walking on eggshells while tying everything in a big pink ribbon is where we are at fault.

Be it happenstance, coincidence or deliberate, it was certainly more significant to me to watch this film in February and on the anniversary of Malcom X’s assassination. February 21st could not have been easy to people of color then and people of color now. The anger and fear that Baldwin talks about it in his writings is not only warranted but essential. Baldwin’s words ring just as true today as they did back then – dare I say truer today. But watching him deliver those words was remarkable. I recall the scene where he gives a talk in Cambridge and receives a standing ovation, the seeming shock on his face – even as a by then established writer and scholar – was heartbreaking: A black man among a sea of white.

On another note I thought the use of cinematic and TV references throughout the film were a great and insightful tool to stitch events together and trace the shift in values that the American people have experienced – willing or unwilling. I must admit that I found myself pausing the film on several occasions to find composure. It is not an easy matter to reconcile, nor should it be.

[photographyatmit]

Blogpost #4

The panning of the camera in The Battle of Algiers stood out for me, especially in the opening scenes of the film. Ex: panning from one street to the other showing the dichotomy that is seemingly separated by a single street. Perhaps the scene that stood out to me most however, was highlighted by the stillness of Ali la pointe’s face when captured and behind bars vs the chaos happening around him.

While the movie’s timeline is quite prolonged – unlike La Haine – it still felt very slow; I actually found it difficult to follow. Perhaps it was because narration is limited while the music took over that the film felt more emotive than sequential to me although a lot of events were taking place.

I was able to recognize patterns of visual expression somewhat easier than I did in La Haine. Techniques of zooming in and out, of varying pace and speed where quite telling, perhaps specifically so in the scene where the Algerian was pointed at from the balconies and the cop cars. Another thing worth mentioning about this scene is the seeming parallelism – in both angle and theme - drawn between that and the scene where French troops were conducting their musical spectacle: the abundance of French citizens on balconies vs the hiding out of Algerians, etc. The difference between quarters in attitude and expression is staggering.  

The voice over is yet another interesting aspect to the film specifically because it seemed to me that the narrator switches and so the voice of authority shift as well as the perspective from which the message is received.  

A final quick thought about the film is triggered because of the conversation we had in class last week (referring back to our readings): Is the violence more ethical to show here because of it presumed fiction/acting (although based on true events)? Do we deem this okay then?

Following The War of Algiers, this week’s readings very much reinforced the film’s message as well as its very reason of creation. Imperialism is a theme that dominates this week’s content. Drawing the connection between Imperialism, underdevelopment and capitalism seemed to be a natural next step. And given Imperialism as enemy, showcasing the varied forms of dependency it enforces, the idea of using cinema as a Mass weapon against it is an interesting – though at times questionable - thought.

Given that warfare and conflict are but a natural consequence of social inequity, which is very well portrayed in the differences of living standards seen in the film, an interesting notion of resistance was added through the reading that gives merit to resistance by warranting it in and of itself. 

Other themes such as deculturation and acculturation are expected to follow when referencing colonization and developing countries. The cultural vacuum of the dominated population in favor of the dominator is quite telling in the film as well specifically with the use of language. Ex: Using Arabic in living quarters vs the assumed expectation of using French elsewhere. The result is alienation par excellence.

[photographyatmit]

Blogpost #3

Beirut is home; and it’s no surprise that I’d feel an intrinsic necessity to relate to a home I no longer recognize. Though still incubating, my idea consists of reshaping the faces of my community vis a vis the events that city has witnessed. By using video as a primary medium, I plan to conduct interviews with people from my intangible home – one that I’ve designed free of space, borders, color and ecology. Would that still be called home? I’m challenging my idea of home and bridging it back to the individual rather than the place. I’ve always attached my identity to Beirut and I call this exercise a challenge quite intentionally for I find myself in an inward struggle of reaching out while still cutting cords from the edges that trace Beirut.

Peers, parents, professionals, nationals and aliens alike would be the subjects of my study, and a single datum would unify them as a whole. With video being my weapon of choice, I’d use it to document my interviews as well as my own reflections. The conditions/norms of the interviews would be as such:

1- A single questionnaire will be presented to all of my subjects. As such, the first exercise would be to formulate my questions. This requires setting a spatial boundary (is there a specific area of the city I’m addressing?), a time span (am I referencing a specific event and/or time period), an audience (who is this intended for?), as well as other conditions that I cannot quite figure out yet.

2- Interviews will be timed to (a.) ensure equity amongst my subjects and (b.) record the time it takes each subject to answer a given question and analyze why.

3- The videos will be exempt of faces. My focus will be the mannerisms of my subjects vis a vis the language they use: my core variables are hand gestures, posture corrections and words being used.

4- Recording queues: (a.) A taxonomy of actions will be pre-designed/pre-determined and (b.) the actions will be noted, analyzed with their correlated terms/words and transcribed as a “stroke” (depending on the taxanomy designed) on a paralleled canvas.

The purpose of this exercise to blur the line between individual and space – namely Beirut – and therefore drawing a series of conditioned portraits of emotive responses to events rather than tangible matter of person or structure.

5- An added element to this process would be introduced through my personal reflections. This could take form as either taking part of the exercise as a subject myself or recording my reactions to people answering my questions in real time. The same earlier taxonomy would be applied where a mirrored response to each portrait would be introduced.

NB. (A.) The selection process of the subjects is still something to be qualified. (B.) The taxonomy itself requires further research and exploration. This is perhaps where the use of archives and references would be useful and is something to still be determined.