Jorgen Leth
8 1/2 x 11 (1977)
James Benning
Some questions to mull over:
Some things brought up in the debate:
Is Leth's use of stereotypes and American 'tourist' towns problematic?
Do Americans become a 'spectacle'?
Does the narrative quality of Benning's film take away from it functioning as a documentary?
Simply, is his film boring?
Other questions:
How does Leth's NYC compare to Glawogger's?
How do we feel about Leth using Warhol's film?
We could move away from these films and discuss whether Warhol's film functions as a documentary on its own, and how it changes (if it does) when it is put in the context of another film.
With Warhol and Benning we start to get into the discussion of the durational documentary. A whole conversation could be sparked around this genre. These filmmakers take the physical limits of film (the 3 minute roll, ext) and let that dictate the time structure within their film. What does it mean to do this as a documentary filmmaker? Is durational filmmaking somehow more of a document? Or less?
As always feel free to discuss any other ideas or questions you may have. Or go off on a tangent! Let's just get the blood flowing somehow.
Blah I've typed this response three times! Safari HATES THIS BLOG.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, the first movie: I didn't want it to be boring, but I didn't even get there was a narrative quality because I couldn't pay attention that consistently through the whole thing. I think my own mindset is partly to blame for that... day of classes, 2nd movie of the night, Thirsty Thursday... so I think in another time and place, maybe I would have a better appreciation of such a "demanding" (<--- really enjoy that description to whoever came up with it last week) film. It was beautifully shot, and I generally like the idea of making a documentary that way, but yeah... strenuous film there.
Second movie: I think the "spectacle" quality of it, particularly since it was shot during a time when typical American fashions were really indicative of that time, made it more watchable. The slideshow quality of it got kind of repetitive, so I was glad there were those kind of offbeat moments where he'd label the scene in kind of an unpredictable way, as an outsider.
I wanted to comment on Benning's movie a little bit. I thought the passivity of the camera was the most interesting part for me, especially when something maybe "exciting" would happen. I would get so frustrated with the fact that at these moments the camera would be far away. I think the fact that Benning chose to remove me from the action was very effective. In terms of the visuals I dont know if I always agreed with the article. I appreciate Benning's tediousness and structure, but I wasn't always interested in each shot whether it was long or not. Some of the highway scenes just weren't as visually pleasing as the article describes it. I want to know if I'm missing something?
ReplyDeleteI also started to think about durational documentary. I think that even though we are allowed to look at one shot for a very long time we have to work harder for the information contained. It is an accomplishment to finish a two hour long film where the only thing that happens is oyster shucking, for example. Not only is it challenging because of its pace but there is much more in all the little details of the film, because nothing is edited out. For me that's where the interest lies because I am not exactly presented with anything. Its too passive to be for an audience. its more like an observation that you share with the filmmaker and you either commit to watching the whole entire film or you don't.
I want to continue the conversation we started in class about some of the uncomfortability of Leth's essentialist eye on the United States. I think what was exciting for me about this postcard-esque portrait of the U.S from Leth's perspective was the way in which it returned the images that Hollywood produces of the U.S itself and in the way in which it looks at/essentializes other places in the world. In the 80's, when 66 views was made, some of the most popular Hollywood films were Raiders of the Lost Ark and Indiana Jones. Thinking of what those films produce of the places they inhabit and the way in which Leth enters the U.S with a confrontational stillness (postcardness) is worthwhile. Also I think I can take a lot from the title in the awareness that he is only offering 66 views. P.S: Jorgen Leth returned to the U.S in 2002, to make a post-9/11 "sequel" to 66 views called, New Scenes from America.
ReplyDeleteIn Benning's film, the treatment of the camera, and thus the viewer, was so passive it was almost mean, to me. Like he didn't care if I as the audience was seeing the full picture or he was playing keep-away or something. There were moments I really enjoyed, really vivid, luscious images of farmland and houses and people and etcetera, but that "I don't really know you but I'm going to be polite and pretend I wanna include you in our group" camera work coupled with the dodgy yellowish brown fade-outs/ins really rubbed me the wrong way. But maybe it's supposed to do that. Or maybe I just need to watch it again. I'm open.
ReplyDeleteI'm a big fan of Jorgen Leth. I'd only seen 66 Scenes once before so I was very excited to see it again. Just now, I found "The Perfect Human" on Vimeo. It was made in 1967 and it shows similarities in the soft-handed nudging play at the image, the narration, the viewer and what you'd expect of any of the above. The dialogue and the body language is key to the work of his that I've seen so far and I find it a really interesting and effective approach to a subject. I enjoyed the postcardyness of 66 Scenes and found it appropriate for the world at the time.
It's interesting too how the other week we were taking about film of yesteryear serving as almost a kind of historical documentation and in several of the shots, there were there two huge buildings standing nonchalantly in the background. I wonder what the "New Scenes" look like.
Unfortunately, I wasn’t there to experience “The Front Line” in class, but the article by Rosenbaum brought up many qualities of Benning’s film that reminded me of several other artistic and philosophical points of view on filmmaking. It was very interesting to me how Rosenbaum likened Benning’s formal compositions to classical paintings in the “sense of absence” the shots could convey. This, plus the vague context and “hinting” narratives (which become overshadowed or “consumed” by the imagery and form of the film) make Benning’s films unconventional in the sense that they are more about visual impressions than the content of the message. Also, the way he spoke of Benning recycling his own material by re-contextualizing and re-editing pieces of works into one another, reminds me of one of my favorite photographers, Wolfgang Tillmans, who reuses his photos (from both his “amateur” and “professional” times) in each of his artists books. His philosophy is that the juxtaposing images-- reworked and re-contextualized—allow for the viewer to become aware of the infinite possibility of interpretations for any given piece. That there is more than one “meaning” or “truth” to an image, which we inscribe upon it, depending on its presentation. Self-referencing in this way, as Rosenbaum pointed out, provides further insight and layers of understanding, making the personal and cultural influences that the artist has interlaced “more legible” (Rosenbaum, 3). Interestingly, this interweaving of familiar fragments of work could equally suggest an overall implied narrative that interrelates meanings between all things, or it could suggest the arbitrariness and meaninglessness of everything.
ReplyDeletesorry this is coming so late. trying to catch up from my surgery. I was really interested in Jorgen Leth's film, 66 Scenes from America, which touched me in a personal way. I am in a weird way a double outsider. I moved from Switzerland to the US when I was three years old, never truly connecting with my "homeland" while also being somewhat an outsider in the US/ experiencing the frustrating immigration process firsthand (it took me 15 year to become a citizen). I didn't grow up with the traditional American childhood and formed a weird outsider perspective of "Americans" through my parents. My father is a musician, and in the past (around the time my parents moved to the US) wrote songs about this dream to travel west, which is a very dramatized stereotype of America that goes way back. But the sites and framing that Leth places the viewer is exactly this. When my parents first came to the US they had 10,000 dollars, starting in Florida, started to drive west in the hope of ending up in California. They only made it to Louisiana.
ReplyDeleteLeth really captures this super American landscape that floods the country and becomes the postcards of America. I find it really interesting how the camera can turn the powerful to powerless and the observers into the observed. (on the same lines of our discussion in class about Leth turning the tables on the rich white who usually look at the poor less fortunate).