Re: David Tetzlaff's rant

From: Marilyn Brakhage (email suppressed)
Date: Tue Feb 07 2006 - 09:55:10 PST

On Tuesday, February 7, 2006, at 09:06 AM, Jonathan Walley wrote:

> I purchased a copy of the "by Brakhage" DVD from Criterion (I also
> had the Denison Cinema Department and the Denison Library each
> purchase a copy), which had Brakhage's "seal of approval." Since this
> video was made with the artist's permission and was purchased (and not
> duped from someone else's copy), I'm not sure either of the
> above-mentioned issues applies. yes, I would prefer to show films in
> 16mm, but given the circumstances of the "by Brakhage" release, is it
> really problematic if I show the DVD versions instead?

Yes, it is problematic. Stan's approval of this DVD was as a
supplement -- for home use and individual study purposes. He reasoned
that he had benefitted from a personal library of paintings in
reproduction, and so why not provide something similar of his films?
But he still tried to see original paintings when he could. -- And I
don't think a painter who approved of a book of reproductions of their
work could then be presumed to have approved the use of those
reproductions to replace actual paintings on gallery walls! . . . What
some film professors have done in this case is to show a few rented
film prints and then to assign or direct their students to the DVD for
further study. Recommended viewing, like recommended reading, could
include a DVD like this. But it is not intended for public screenings.
  . . . And it would not be the same, in my opinion, as an Art History
class using slides of paintings. In that case, nobody is going to
mistake one thing for another. But many students who are taught with
the DVD may think they've seen the films, not really fully
understanding the differences.

Marilyn Brakhage
Victoria, BC, Canada


For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.