SO CLOSE, SO CLOSE, SO.... AHHHH

i knw how dis cat feelz

Funny Reaction From Frustrated Cat - Watch more Funny Videos

Just workin

So I filmed the rest of the video this weekend-filming is officially wrapped.  Now Im just editing.  I have about 15 hours in on it, it needs another 40 or so.  Im not worried- it'll get done.  Other than the filming I have to print and frame my photos, finish the drawing, collect two of the other four artists work, and frame her set of work.  Thats it.  I wasn't planning on sleeping anyway.

just something

I can't remember where I got this from (it most likely was sent to me by a fellow artists [Sudak] who sends me a lot of un-ignorable things.  This little conversation was from an interview of Gerhard Richter on his art and his opinion of art.  Though it bares no specific correlation to the themes of my IP, I think it is still relevant.  It struck me suddenly now (instead of whenever it was he sent this) because I [we] am graduating in 6 weeks. We cannot call ourselves art students anymore, we [if we so chose] are now artists, and there's an interesting conundrum between creating and selling.  Creating work, and creating as a job- providing for yourself, via your art.  There is no solution, and Im not going to be silly enough to even offer an opinion about that, I just like what Richter says:

So, I've talked previously about the fact I am working with a collaborator, but I have not expanded that idea yet on this blog. In conjunction with that, it's also important to talk more about the final direction of the exhibition, and how that corresponds to collaboration and the formation of artist-groups.  Its become apparent to me that in order to really talk about these ideas of alienation and the formation of collectives present in the work, my final exhibition cannot only be of my work, but has to include the other artists I work with, and have collaborated with, in order to attack the idea of autonomy in production, and drive home the concept of the collective.  Here is a bit from my thesis where I talk more extensively about these ideas:

The key component to all my work, is addressing that it is not done alone.  Though the concept of Primitivism was meant to break apart traditional hegemonic ideologies, it should also be noted that it was a westernized self-invention of the concept of otherness.  This would be problematic, if the success of the envisionment was not dependent on the creation of the ‘family’ in that otherness.  The characters in the pictures were marginalized and alienated because of their invented otherness, and so they formed a collective- a family in which to thrive.  This is a representation for the artist.  The artist commonly works from a marginalized position, but finds other artists to work with in order to breed ideas, sympathies, and ultimately collaborative work.  I address this familial building relationship in the photos, and again reiterate it in two more films produced that expand on these same ideas of alienation and marginalization and the collective and family that rises from that.  The collective not only challenges the ideas of the autonomous ‘genius-artist’, but also recognizes the collective as fostering an artistic wellspring.  In finality, this concept is brought to full actualization through the final exhibition of work.  In recognizing the collective, I am curating three other artists (two of whom are not in the Art and Design Program) into my allotted exhibition space- all of the work exploring the ideas of alienation, marginalization, and the formation of families or collectives, while conceptualing concreting it in show. 

Update

So the final film is now underway, but it has changed a lot from the synopsis I wrote about earlier.  It is still dealing with the same topics of alienation, marginalization, and the communities or families that form from that alienated position, but it is handling the subject matter differently.   What was problematic with the previous synopsis was that I, as  the filmmaker, was envisioning a completely made up concept of 'otherness', then trying to detail the faulty exploitative nature of the film maker trying to inform an unaware audience of this made-up otherness.  But that's what it is- it is a made up or created otherness that i wanted to pass off as genuine in order to place fault with the filmmaker and that ethnographic type of film making.  But since i had to create the otherness in the first place it  doesn't come off correctly.  Especially with the ending being as it was- the boy, alienated by the civilized world, tries to return to his group but finds hes no longer welcome.  The double alienation results in his death.  In this ending ' the other' bears the persecution, not the filmmaker, or that type of film making.  The camera must be turned more retrospectively on the filmmakers and it must be obvious they have created this vision of 'otherness' for the purpose of the film.