From: Raha Raissnia (email suppressed)
Date: Mon Oct 19 2009 - 21:48:27 PDT
if Khosravi does a smallest amount of research on Brakhage he will quickly find out that that Brackhage himself referred to his work as "visual thinking ", never as "musical thinking " man !!
therefor I agree with tony and also find khosravi's project as "ignorant or (more kindly put) jejune"
raha
> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 23:23:57 -0400
> From: email suppressed
> Subject: Re: Stan Brakhage Copyrights _Experimental sound-art
> To: email suppressed
>
> Hi Flick---------
>
> I'm surprised at you! You're the one who is being snippy now, and without even a
> whiff of substance. You must be one of those liberal thinkers who detect an
> opinion and feel it needs some balance, "just because". But be careful lest I
> actually agree with you! I don't know what you meant in saying that artistic
> responses to canonical works are (or as you put it, you "always thought they
> were") de rigeur, but I will go so far as to agree that artistic responses
> SHOULDN'T be jejune-- and this precisely is where the problem arises in the
> instance at hand.
>
> As it happens, yes, I AM opinionated. So fair enough; here's an amplification of
> my earlier comments.
>
> Khosravi introduces her or himself, from the first words, as “a PhD student at
> City University London.” Not: “Hey, I happen to be thinking about these topics,
> and…” The project is contextualized ab ovo as an effort to credentialize its
> author; as a “truth” finding mission; as virtually germane to a thesis defense,
> in some regard. Frankly, I am pissed that people are setting themselves out with
> university teaching credentials (that’s what a PhD is) on the basis of projects
> as flip as this one. This project shows little awareness of the art historical
> context of the film, little respect for the literature or practice of cinema, and
> little appreciation for the complexity of film/sound relationships (which were
> the subject of a whole conference I attended just last month at the Bolzmann
> Institute in Linz).
>
> Those with the patience to plumb Khosravi’s published article will perhaps see,
> as I do, that she or he pursues an approach that should by now be numbingly
> familiar: a reflex Enlightenment-like aim to “rationalize” cultural reception by
> using (what I think of as Helmholzian) mensuration of physical and physiological
> variables. Personally, I feel that this approach is absolutist, universalizing,
> retrogressive, bankrupt, and repugnant; this is a socio-political standpoint that
> will evidently find me and Khosravi hopelessly divided.
>
> Beyond that, Dog Star Man is not simply a “spectral space” with which to gauge
> some metaphorical construct in sound. Brakhage was especially strident at this
> stage of his work in asserting film’s autonomy from music, and in particular that
> his films should be watched without music. Strangely, Khosravi actually stretches
> Dog Star Man so far in the opposite direction as to assert that "the work already
> contains and represents a very pure form of musical thinking" and even that
> "Brakhage is one of the most ‘musical’ filmmakers and working with his films
> would be like re-interpreting a piece of Bach." This rash comment about something
> called "musical thinking", which Khosravi apparently claims as privileged
> territory, along with his or her attendant privileging of Bach (and then, the
> implication that Bach too is wide open turf) simply makes me wonder about
> Khosravi's depth of analytical experience.
>
> As a visual construct, Dog Star Man is of course open to analysis. In particular,
> the film’s strong affinities with Abstract Expressionist thought and practice may
> make it attractive for Khosravi to consider quantizing its various aspects with
> respect to diagonalization or other formalist algorithmic methods. However, it is
> at least equally (and almost certainly more) apt to see Dog Star Man as Sitney
> does: that is, as a mythopoeic expression, steeped in late romanticism and
> crypto-symbolist image relationships.
>
> My assertion is not that Khosravi is “wrong” or “shouldn’t” be playing around
> with Dog Star Man. My assertion is rather that Dog Star Man is so overdetermined
> as a cultural marker that it can’t possibly stand in as a neutral vehicle for the
> study of image/sound relationships. Is ANY film better suited to this study,
> though? I would say that perhaps EVERY film is suited for the study of film/sound
> relationships, and even (going further) that every SOUND is suited for the study
> of film/sound relationships. In fact, to a substantial degree the problematic
> relationships that obtain between images and sounds is what filmmakers in general
> concern themselves with, and in that measure Khosravi’s “project” is both
> reductivist and insultingly dismissive of our field, another way of saying which
> is that the project is ignorant or (more kindly put) jejune.
>
> -----------t0ny
>
>
>
> On Mon 10/19/09 1:40 PM , Flick Harrison email suppressed sent:
> > Tony,
> > If indeed you have such a scathing critique at hand, perhaps you
> > should figure out where to begin, and begin.
> > What you've posted, however informed and considered the source of
> > your outrage, is simply insulting and critical without much
> > substance.
> > Perhaps everyone who is as smart and educated as yourself already
> > knows how to read your mind, but that won't do much good for poor
> > Peiman, since, as you seem aware, he's not as smart or educated as
> > you.
> > ;-)
> > Artistic responses to canonical works are jejune? I always thought
> > they were de rigeur.
> > -Flick
> > On 19-Oct-09, at 07:58 , Tony Conrad wrote:
> > Hi Peiman-------
> >
> > This is such a misbegotten project that I hardly know where to begin.
> > If as you
> > say you are actually a PhD student (of something), and this is "part
> > of my
> > research/creative interest in transmodality (multi sensual
> > perception) of musical
> > experience, particularly with regard to the creation of musical
> > space" and "part
> > of my composition portfolio, and discussed in my thesis", your
> > project certainly
> > impugns the credentials or advisement capabilities of your thesis
> > adviser.
> >
> > Riding this jejune project on Brakhage's back does no credit to
> > either of you.
> >
> > --------------t0ny
> > On Sat 10/17/09 9:21 AM , Peiman Khosravi sent:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > This is my first post here so apologies if this is not the place for
> > it.
> > I am a PhD student at City University London, focusing my research
> > and
> > practice in studio based Electroacoustic music composition. At the
> > moment I am exploring audio/visual relationships as part of my
> > research/creative interest in transmodality (multi sensual
> > perception)
> > of musical experience, particularly with regard to the creation of
> > musical space. As a result I am interested in creating an acoustic
> > counterpart to part II of Brakhage's "Dog Star Man". Once
> > completed this will be part of my composition portfolio, and
> > discussed in my
> > thesis. It may also be played in presentations/concerts.
> >
> > This will not be a conventional soundtrack, nor does it intend to be
> >
> > in anyway representative of -or remain true to- Brakhage's original
> > work, which I understand and agree that should be watched in
> > silence.
> > The project will be my attempt to create a new work born out of a
> > network of audio/visual relationships. Naturally this will
> > reinterpret
> > the original film, acoustically magnifying certain visual aspects
> > that
> > are formally dominant in my experience of the work.
> > As it happens I have come to realize that Brakhage is one of the most
> >
> > "musical" filmmakers and working with his films would be like re-
> > interpreting a piece of Bach: the work already contains and
> > represents
> > a very pure form of musical thinking. For this reason it will no
> > doubt
> > be a challenge and may prove impossible for me to complete, or
> > arouse
> > other's criticism. However, I cannot avoid a challenge when I see
> > one!
> >
> > In short I am writing here with two questions:
> >
> > 1- Could someone please clarify for me the issue of copyrights with
> > Brakhage's works and point me to the right direction for getting
> > permissions for this project.
> >
> > 2- Any ideas and suggestions are more than welcomed... as I am not a
> >
> > filmmaker your ideas will for sure be very helpful to me.
> >
> > Many thanks in advance.
> >
> > Best,
> > Peiman
> > __________________________________________________________________
> > For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at om>.
> > __________________________________________________________________
> > For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at .
> >
> > * FLICK\'S WEBSITE & BLOG: http://www.flickharrison.com [4] *
> > FACEBOOK http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=860700553 [5] *
> > MYSPACE: http://myspace.com/flickharrison [6]
> >
> > [7]
> > __________________________________________________________________
> > For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at .
> >
> >
> >
> > Links:
> > ------
> > [4] http://www.flickharrison.com
> > [5] http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=860700553
> > [6] http://myspace.com/flickharrison
> > [7] http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ZeroForConduct/~6/1
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
_________________________________________________________________
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222985/direct/01/
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.