The Oscars

Unless, you are Patrick Star and you live under a rock, you probally know that the Oscars were last night. It is a magical 20 or so hours event where the majority of the telecast is dedicated to pauses, hesitations, jokes and pre-recorded looks of joy and disappointment. But, what I really want to focus on in this post, is Seth MacFarlane as the host of this grand event. While prominent news sources say that he was too provocative and his jokes were plainly offensive, I happened to like him. Both I and MacFarlane knew he was going to get bad reviews as the host.  In the opening spoof, MacFarlene comes out swinging against himself, taking the first punch in a made up headline,  "MacFarlane is the best host ever says everyone except Entertainment weekly".

 I think MacFarlane's jokes  were made not to impress the boring adults but to appeal to the younger crowd. Not everyone can be Tina and Amy, but his song about "b**bs" and his sock puppet summary of Flight had me falling on the floor. MacFarlane showed that he can also be classy.   His Sinatra song dance with Joseph Gordon Levitt and Daniel Radcliffe was nice so I am sure most people liked it. 

Maybe this is what life is going to be for me as an artist. I will put something out there for people see, (like this blog) and it will be critiqued. I know for a fact that my work will not be liked by most people, but I will continue to work and work and whoever likes my work, I will find excellent, and those who do not, well that's ok too. I will listen to what everyone has to say and perhaps incorporating constructive criticism will make me a better artist.

i imagine MacFarlane  knew he was going to be skewered, as he had so many many times before.   undaunted, he made his jokes and did his skits not caring what anyone else thought of him as shown by the fact that he joked about this throughout the entire night of the show. I know that he will not get as much praise as Tina and Amy, but he sure does have guts. I also, like how he pokes holes in his work and makes fun of it, even if he probably worked hard on it for months. 

For me, the point is that I should stop worrying about what others think about my work, though constructive criticism is fine, I can only get better, (after all 10,000 hours, right?). 

Sound and Vision: A Classic Song With A Modern Twist

So, yesterday in STAC, the stacies watched David Bowie videos, in celebration of his new album, The Day After, which could be considered a sequel to Heroes. To see the evolution of Bowie was incredible. From a spaceman, to an alien to a manequin, Bowie time and time again shows he can amaze his audience and try something new. What really took me was a video, not of Bowie, but of an artist named Beck (remember the song Loser). He was sponsored by Lincoln Motor Company, and performed a concert filled with 160 musicians in a dome, to blast sound 360 degrees. The song Beck performed was the 9 minute epic, called Sound and Vision (as you can see by my title). He took every mainstream instrument ( I am sure I saw a musical saw), and performed the song. This is one of the most interesting things I found out about the song. All of the players played the same song which produced sound from all directions. Beck made the song seem more active and alive to create a more modern approach to a song thought dead or non existent by most teenagers nowadays. Prior the video, the concept of having every conceivable instrument playing at the same time was inconceivable to me. I thought that, to have every instrument playing the same song would make the song one uniform sound. To my surprise this was not the case. For starters, all of the instruments played at different times. Secondly, some groups of instruments were played and heard more than others such as the the brass, and the string instruments, which caused the song to have a better harmony. Also, Beck's voice was less synthesized and more realistic than Bowie's original recording of the song. I thought the song enhanced by this because Beck's voice complemented the crisp sounds of the instruments more than Bowie's synthesized computer generated 1970's harmony.

Fiction Black Box

I will be discussing the book Fiction Black Box by Jennifer Egan. This book is about hypothetical’s, using animalistic style of writing and what the character WOULD say/do instead of what you think the character says/does.  For example, the runner says to another runner that it is hot. Instead of this I would write that the runner wiped the sweat off of his forehead inferring that it is hot. In the book it made me think about envisioning various scenarios ie outside of my body. This made me think about the different perspectives in my work. I should write more in the first person perspective to make my writing more specific instead of the third person narrator.

Writing minimally is something that does not come naturally to me. In classes,.nstead of writing one good page of work, I am encouraged to write fluff for multiple pages. I am used to writing in this perspective. This story made me think about the quality vs the quantity of my writings. One page of reflections is worth more than three pages of fluff. 

Headhunters Parts 1 and 2

First, my initial impression of Morten Tyldum’s Headhunters (based of the book Headhunters) was that the movie was great. The movie had me leaning forward in my seat, ready to run from the danger and jump from the excitement on to the screen.  It was an action packed thriller which had my personal three “must haves” in a film. First it had a great script, with believable dialogue.  Second, the actor’ s performances were true to life and believable without over acting (even though in certain situations that works, see Captain Kirk). Third and lastly, the cinematography, provided camera angles and shots which were unique and assisted in the telling the story. 

Let’s take look at the script. The Script: (no, not the band) What makes a good movie is a script with stimulating dialogue and a swirl of humor. Headhunters, not only fulfilled this standard, about exceeded it.  For example, I specifically liked the opening monologue of the protagonist Roger.  In his monologue, he describes his life, his problems and his job. This method brought the viewer right into the action with a knowledge of the  main character’s motivation and personality. It gave me some perspective on Roger’s back story and so unlike many other movies I did not have to go through 60 minutes of the movie asking myself, “why is this going on here?” “Why are the characters acting this way?”  An example of the humor in the film that I also appreciated, is when Ove accidently sat on his gun, it went off, and it randomly hit a carton of milk causing it to explode on Roger and everywhere else. The spontaneous randomness of this moment in time was funny to me.  Another example of humor in the script that kept my attention was when Roger was being chased by Clas  (the main antagonist and a killer in the movie). To avoid being killed, Roger hid in an outhouse, down the poop hole.  I cannot get enough poop humor in my movies. The sense of action and humor is similar to the  mainstream movie, the Avengers.  Hulk and Thor defeated all of the bad guys and then Hulk punches Thor because of a pre existing feud from earlier in the movie. Again, I applaud the recurrent theme of spontaneous randomness.

END OF PART I

The actors:

It was evident to me that the actors in the movie, actually devoted a significant amount of time to learning about their character’s personalities, likes, dislikes and motivation  (oh the horror, gasp)!!!! Seriously, it was clear that practice mattered,  (or at least multiple takes) because the for the most part, the main characters were believable in their parts. Their mannerisms were consistent with my interpretation of the characters.  For instance, Aksel Hennie, (Roger) , a previously unknown actor to me,  portrayed his character well. He went from a hot shot art thief executive to a more humble family man. Ordinarily this type of intense transformation is not readily believable, however Hennie developed  this character throughout the movie to credibly portray that his past experiences effected his change in character.  Although this change in his character, could be related to the mono myth (I will blog about this later).

END OF PART II

Writer's blog reply:

"If I have something to say, once I say it, will I be out of things to say or will I have something else to say?"

Does this scare you?

I really never thought about this in terms of fear… but yes, actually it does scare me, not like Friday the 13^th type of scare, but I know that one of the things I need to work on in my writing is to be more descriptive. For instance, my first instinct would be to write something like, “he opened the door and walked inside”. But what I really should say is something like, “He walked slowly over to the door, not knowing what was going to be on the other side, cautiously, he reached out, gently grasped and twisted the doorknob in his hand. Hearing the click of the lock, he pushed it open and stepped inside.”  I think that sets a much better mood and setting.  So it’s not as much that I will run out of things to say but that I won’t effectively say it. The run out of things to say comment was more for dramatic effect.

"can I write well enough that someone else would pay to read it?"

Does this scare you?

Yes, kind of, I worry that I don’t write well, as for the payment part, I am 15 so I am not as worried about that….

"Please don’t tell him that he had an influence on me, I will never hear the end of it."

Why does this bother you?

I have actually gone out of my way to be different from my brother.  Despite this, I really respect and like him. Most of the STAC kids knew him, and I prefer not to be compared to him, because we are different people, with different interests and strengths.  I respect his opinion on shows and stuff but he would torture me, with the big brother stuff .

"I find myself laughing at something hours or even days later. "

Why does this happen to you? Why is the show connecting with you, beyond the humor?

As I said in the blog, I love the random and unexpected. I really find this type of humor very funny.  In one episode of Community, the character Abed wearing a Dracula cape runs into the cafeteria where one of his friends is sitting. He knocks over his drink and runs off. Instead of the friend going crazy at this, he just yells, “the show is going to last 3 weeks” to which Abed responds, “six seasons and a movie” this is a recurring theme on the show and the randomness unanticipated response is hysterical to me.  I will go around during the day and response to any question is “six seasons and a movie”. If you google “six seasons and a movie” you will see the video. Not great art but very funny to me.  The meaning of life is “six seasons and a movie”, and 42.

My questions aren't rhetorical.

Hmmm or are they…………..

Writer’s Blog

        

               It’s a new year with new thoughts and new challenges. It is a time to start with a clean slate. So, in this light I want to blog (“blog” what a fun verb to say out loud, try it “blog” J) about some very basic questions.  Let’s start this blog with the question, can I a write?  Well, I know I can write, but can I write well enough that someone else would pay to read it? Is the measure of a good writer someone who gets paid to write poems, or articles or books? Is that the measure of a good painter? Sculptor? Musician? Do I have something to say? If I have something to say, once I say it, will I be out of things to say or will I have something else to say?  Can I stop writing these rhetorical questions? Are ideas like reloadable ammunition or is it a one shot deal? Sometimes my gibberish makes sense, and sometimes what I think makes sense is all gibberish. Sometimes I write, not knowing where it will end up (like now). What will happen in the future with my writing is uncertain, but I do know that right now I do like to write and that is good enough.

               I love the unexpected, the new and the different. I think one of my goals this year will be to try to incorporate the “new” the “different” and the “unexpected” more in my writing. I am actually partially inspired by the tv show “Community”. Don’t judge it based upon the fact that it is on a major network, NBC (probably not for long). I am impressed by the writing which is definitely new and unexpected.  I started to watch Community after my brother said how great it was. Please don’t tell him that he had an influence on me, I will never hear the end of it. Anyway he does have a knack for finding off beat things that only a few, but die hard, viewers like. Anyway, I saw one episode and knew I had to go back to the beginning and see them all.  Unfortunately, I was hooked. 

               For those of you who don’t know, as NBC does not advertise Community, (I have only seen one commercial and that was very recently) it is about a group of very, very, eclectic people who form a study group, and friendship, at a community college named Greendale. Actually, it is in some ways like STAC despite the extremely diverse personalities, they find a way to be friends and support each other despite their differences. The writing and actors are really unique. It is definitely an acquired taste, but once you get it, you really like it. Unexpectedly, I find myself laughing at something hours or even days later. After several episodes, you actually get used to start to expect the unexpected and get used to the weird and very quirky characters.  My favorite character is Abed, who at first seems insane, but, *SPOILER ALERT *is actually the only sane one of this group. Anyway, after a long absence, it was brought back to NBC because ( I am told) its fans demanded it. The really funny part is that it was supposed to be back on October 19^th but NBC kept moving the date.  The cast and writers of Community finding this amusing made their own commercial saying that, any day Community comes back on the air will be October 19^th, so Thursday is not February 7^th but October 19^th.  I have to admit that I have been waiting to see the misadventures of the “Greendale 7” and what these talented writers have in store for these actors, and I wonder, can I do that?

ITSA volume 10 issue 2

            Inside the Starving Artist ©

                         Volume 10 Issue 2

Like the cruel friend she is, inspiration never seems to be there when I need her. Never arriving when I call, she keeps me waiting, abandoned, floundering, and staring off into space, and wondering why I volunteered to write this column. Slowly but surely, she arrives, usually well after midnight, knowing that there is nothing left to watch on tv and so my attention must be completely focused upon her. Today, however, I refused to be ruled by her poor sense of timing and so off I went looking for her, searching for something to fill up the emptiness of the white page I have been staring out these past few hours. Fortunately, my old pal hunger, which never ventures too far from me, showed up and caught my attention. We decided it was time for some food, so off we went to my favorite spot, a back, dark table at Charlie’s Chamber of Cheeses. I ordered a huge hunk of cheddar and a root beer. Devouring my food I was distracted from the stress of waiting on inspiration. While biting into a chunk of orange deliciousness, I noticed something odd, something new, something interesting on the wall right in front of me, a poster advertising an art show for sculptures, paintings and drawings currently taking place a few blocks away. Without anything else to do, and refusing to wait on inspiration any longer, I finished my cheesy goodness and off I went. As I entered the big brick building, the familiar smell of paint and clay grabbed me like a calculator at a calculus exam.  As I explored deeper into the gallery, I was informed that theme of the art show was “Inside Outside”. Disturbingly, in the middle of the studio a movie screen was set up and Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window was playing. Two unfamiliar people were part watching, part debating with each other about intent of Hitchcock’s cinematography with respect to certain selected scenes. While not violent, you could tell that these two people had definite and distinct views on the subject, neither one willing to yield to the other. I was intrigued. As I cautiously approached these two individuals it also became clear to me that each of them had created pieces of art on display in the gallery. Being the shy guy that I am, I approached these artists, and told them that I had overheard some of their conversation and asked if I might be able to ask them some questions and possibly settle their dispute. Despite looking at me like I had two heads, they agreed.

The first artist that I interviewed was Michelle Li. Her slight stature proved a sharp contrast to the power of her art. She directed me to the sculpture she created.  Visually, it was difficult to find the right words to describe it. Suffice it to say that it was a traditional house with its exterior in as the interior and interior out as the outside. The change in perspective was different for me and interesting. Linking these two perspectives was the wall in the middle.   

I was fascinated by this inside/outside concept. As you may recall (and I hope that you do) I spent considerable time discussing this concept in my last issue using the works of Marc Chagall and Alfred Hitchcock as examples. To me, inside outside art changed from my initial perspective of voyeuristic creeps peering around corners into and out of windows.  It is a powerful way to visually represent introspection and outside perspective within one piece of art.   

Michelle told me that as a child she was an exclusively a washable watercolor’s girl, mostly because she wanted to beautify ever inch around her with paint.  This did not really sit well with her parents as she beautified their living room couch!  Now that she is growing up, her art did as well.  She said that as her values and morals have changed, so have her symbols and styles of art. When she was younger it was all manga and anime, now it is more realism and sculptures.  But I am off the topic and I wanted to get back to this inside outside concept. Michelle admitted that she had to push herself to be motivated to do her inside outside piece for the art show, and that she even fell asleep during Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window (she lost some credibility with me on this).  As Michelle opened up to me, I began to understand.   Michelle admitted that art is an evolutionary experience involving both physical and emotional effort.  Michelle explained that she sometimes struggles to balance both her Asian and American identities both as an artist and a person, a struggle between herself on the inside and on the outside. As she struggles with for her identity as a person and artist she uses this as a significant influence in her artwork. 

When I asked Michelle what she wanted her audience to experience when they viewed her art, her answer was simply, “that’s up to them”. Sorry Michelle, I don’t buy that. An artist must communicate something through their creations. It is not acceptable to me to passively say, “it is up to you”. This really undermines the power of persuasion and passion of art.  I believe that an artist has a responsibility to communicate through their art. An artist should have something to say and communicate that to the world. Sometimes that communication may be difficult to see or comprehend but art should have a message or a statement, even if that message is “I won’t conform to your view of art and so my art is without a message”.

            Michelle then left in a hurry. I either insulted her or I think I heard her muttering about something called Comicon, but I could not make it out.  Standing alone, again, I wandered toward the second artist who Michelle had been speaking with earlier. Her name was Sarah Robinson.

            Sarah had painted a picture of herself as a lion and it was on display at the art show.  My initial reaction was that this was a little Wizard of Oz ‘ish, but nonetheless this painting made me curious to find out more about the artist.   I asked Sarah why she painted herself as a male lion inside a room. She said, “I just liked lions“.  While that may be true, I think that this initial response was based upon her unwillingness to candidly discuss her work, as much as it was about her affection for lions.  Was the lion an inward reflection of herself or an outward statement as to how she perceives herself or how she wishes other perceive her? These are questions that will for the moment go unanswered, but in using Michelle’s theory, “its up to you”. I see the lion as a sign of strength and confidence. I also see her painted lion as a visual representation of her inner self or at least the inner self that she wants the public to believe she has. 

Just like Michelle who said her art continues to evolve, Sarah sees her own art as an ever changing process of self discovery tied directly to her emotions. Interestingly, I never considered the possibility that the more information you know about an artist the more you can learn and discover from their art.  For example, Sarah did not fall asleep during Rear Window, but embraced the film.   She said that she constantly tries to incorporate the Hitchcock concept of surprise and spontaneity into her art. Although the depth of Sarah’s responses to my questions was relatively limited, the depth of her images in her art was in sharp contrast to this. Sarah incorporates different perspectives and planes, instead of one flat image. She said that believes that “we should incorporate ourselves in our art and that her art is a reflection of herself or her inner perceptions about herself.  In admiring her recent painting, I think she communicates this very effectively, more effectively in fact, than through her spoken words.  As I thanked Sarah for her time and answers, she apparently forgot all about her recent disagreement with Michelle and bounded of with her to some Comicon thing…At this point I realized it was also my time to venture off, still in search of my illusive inspiration.  My friend hunger telling me it was time for me to go back to Charlie’s Cheese Chamber, for a late afternoon snack.

Until next time.

                                                                                    Adios,

                                                                                    AU5TIN