From: Jack Sargeant (email suppressed)
Date: Sun Sep 24 2006 - 15:35:35 PDT
> "I know it's true, oh so true, 'cause I saw it on TV"
> JOHN FOGERTY- "I Saw It On TV" .
I agree that TV puts out a lot of bad and inaccurate information, but
the implication here is that 'we' (as 'fans' of 'experimental' film or
whatever) have a better - i.e more authentic - understanding of the
form because we know TV isn't great, but this is wrong. Firstly an
academic / archivist / experimental filmmaker viewpoint IS NOT better
or more correct than a populist understanding. Moreover there is an
assumption that TV is somehow innately bad, but this is nonsense, there
is a lot of really good TV - especially in Britain (art documentaries
made by Arena and the South Banks Show, or arts programmes on BBC4 etc
etc),but also European TV funds filmmaking (for example ARTE in France).
Also, in my capacity as a lecturer I can tell you that most students
(undergraduates and post graduates) do not watch TV and just believe it
all, rather they filter it through their own knowledge. They understand
it as a series of codes and short cuts, not as an authentic source of
Finally, does anybody here really think that Warhol would give a shit
about his films being cropped on TV and so on? He screened many of them
in multiprojection at nightclubs with strobe lights etc flashing and
performers dancing and the VU playing, so in watching them in an
archival situation is also in some way a 'failure' from the 'original
intent'. After all Warhol was quoted as saying he'd never watch them
(as in sit down and watch them) all they way through...
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.