B&B

After taking a course in photography, it easy for me to see how a simple change in a picture’s color can push me to feel a different way. For example:

This picture is my least favorite of the three versions. My sister’s socks jut out in the corner. Although the angle of the shot holds a unique quality, the browns and the bluish-black fur fail to blend well in any aesthetic manner. This contrast creates a distraction to the observer. On the other hand:

This black and white version eliminates the color tension in the previous photo. The assimilation of the colors leads me to look at the dog’s eyes and notice the connection made with the camera. Also, I think that the change allows for the socks to be less prevalent in the picture and they become almost undetectable. Also, the lighting in the show stands out more. The light hitting Biscuit’s head makes him appear almost angelic.

The sepia toning continues to change my feeling about the picture even farther. The photograph automatically seems older to me and evokes almost a nostalgic feeling. The color alterations made are very simple. They can be made by simply clicking a button in my Iphoto program. Yet, by doing so I am not changing the truth per say. The dog remains the same dog. The chair still retains its texture, but I feel differently because of the change. This made me wonder in what ways I am manipulated and pushed into feeling certain emotions caused minute details that are chosen for me and not by me.

André Bazin is just as concerned with the idea of how film and photography to show reality. He says, “the aesthetic qualities of photography are sought in its power to lay bare realities” (FTC, 169). From this desire to see the real, we get cinema. Bazin says, “In their imaginations they saw the cinema as a total and complete representation of reality; they saw in a trice the reconstruction of a perfect illusion of the outside world in sound, color, and relief” (FTC, 172). Yet, at the end of the essay Bazin says that, “cinema has not yet been invented” (FTC, 173). If this is the case, then it seems as though we are not seeing an exact representation of reality but instead, what someone else want to show. In the same scenario, one’s gaze might not be directed towards an object, or attention might now be drawn to a small creak in the floor, even if it does happen.

Advertising executives make conscious decisions to manipulate viewers into desiring their products. They choose camera angles, play with color schemes, and pick music that will achieve the desired results. Also, “reality” shows like those MTV is known for, use many different techniques to emphasize the drama and make their show more entertaining. An effective technique involves adding music to make the scene. Sometimes, I am unable to hear the dialogue of the conversations on the MTV’s The Hills because the volume of the music swallows their voices. There cannot exist a romantic Real World episode without hearing clips of Hellogoodbye’s “This is Love”. Playing this music can make an unromantic moment suddenly transform into the fairy-tale, soul mate experience.

Music can be varied in many different ways. The few that I want to concentrate on are the most noticeable in my mind. First, the volume, loud or soft, can have a huge effect. Horror movies use crescendos to build suspense and to make audiences jump out of their seats. Also, if the music suddenly becomes quiet the audience might wonder when the monster or serial killer will pop out from beyond the characters view.

“Activity” is what I want to call how fast or slow the music sounds. This could be affect by the meter in which the piece is written, like 4-4 time or 6-8 time, or if it has more whole notes rather than sixteenth notes. Jaws makes use of this technique and stimulates the viewer by increasing the tempo of the main musical theme. Alternating between the same chords, the music simply speeds up. After the first two times of hearing this ominous warning, the viewer begins to associate the shark’s presence with the notes and then become nervous as well. This developed into such a phenomenon that this sequence has become culturally recognize and is utilized to create either the same fear or build off of this idea.

Pitch and tone, in general, can be high or low. I am arguing that a higher pitch creates a more positive feeling. When I’m in a good mood, I whistle. It is much higher pitched then my normal singing voice. Also, Disney’s Snow White has an entire song “Whistle While You Work” encompassing the idea that this high-pitched tone creates a positive feeling. Also, in Star Wars the “Empirial March” that we hear in the Death Star and following Darth Vador has a much deeper tone then the theme for Luke and the Rebels.

When music with words is used in film, the words create moods and increase or diminish the involvement of the audience. If the viewer dislikes the song selection of the movie, they may then, in turn, dislike the entire film. Music and songs are crucial in comedies like Happy Gilmore and the recent Blades of Glory. The song choice can create laughter if used correctly. In Groundhog’s Day, the audience hears the same song every morning when Bill Murray wakes up. The audience has connected that song with the events and his reactions when he realizes he is, once again, in the same day. Also, the audience anticipates how he will react and what his actions will be in this version of “today”.

The complexity of the music is the last element I want to consider. Simply, I would like to reduce it down to the instrumental variety and the depth of the chords, like a two note versus a five-note chord. In Merry Christmas Charlie Brown, Lucy asks Schroeder to play jingle bells on the piano. He plays three different versions with three different levels of complexities. This can be applied to create dramatic scenes, like in Jurassic Park. John Williams, the composer, uses a very complex piece when the characters arrive at the park and the impressive, immense gates swing open. As an audience member, I feel the power behind the music and it carries over to the emotions of the moment. At one point, the same main theme becomes simplified when the grandfather sits in his museum lamenting over the fact that all his plans have been ruined and that his grandchildren face grave danger. The lack of complexity, as well as the fact that it is quieter, emphasizes the weakness and sadness he feels.

To synthesize, I want to talk about a clip from Merry Christmas Charlie Brown. Originally I planned on uploading the clip, but after struggling with the computer for a time I decided to just talk about it instead. Charlie Brown, the director of the play asks Schroeder to “set the mood”. Because the play is about the first Christmas, his piece is slow, less complex and softer. Then, while Charlie Brown is talking, the music changes to the up-tempo, increasingly louder, and more complex piece. Viewers know that the cast of the play begins ignoring the directions because the music has changed. This scene shows that the audience can interpret the events and emotions of a scene just by listening to the music.

The soundtrack to Errol Morris’ The Thin Blue Line mimics the idea that a person can be influenced subtly, unknowingly. Morris uses the music to manipulate the audience’s view and perceptions of the “facts”. By playing with this idea, he shows that society can be battered and buttered into beliefs.

About eight or nine minutes into The Thin Blue Line, while Randall Adams, who has been accused of murder, speaks about his interrogation, music begins in the background as we see two police officers pace around him, like lions stalking their prey. The music consists of a lower toned drone, which renews steadily, and repeating notes that are almost like a heartbeat. The separation that we hear between the contrastive long and short emphasizes the separation between Adams and the law. This idea continues even further by the visual aspects on the scene.

The scene begins with the profile of Adams, like the profile of a mug shot. He sits at a table and the two police officers circle him. The first level of division involves the camera. It looks on from outside the building. With the brick wall framing the shot, we see the action occurring through the windows, making the audience feel as though they are spying and unintended to see the events being revealed. The two windows, although adjacent on the same building, are very different. Adams sits behind the larger window, which has four panes, giving it a confining jail cell-esque feel. Also, the window remains open, almost as if to imply that although incarceration has not yet closed on him, it is still looming over his head and will inevitably occur. Yet, the other window is much smaller, unpaned, and closed. Through the smaller window, the police officers are in clear view. The window represents the smaller point of view of the officers, the fact that they are unrestricted, unconfined, as well as closed like their closed, already made-up minds. Also, the clock is prominent peering through the smaller window. This emphasizes the impatience of the law and the obsession with the amount of time it was taking to find and prosecute the culprit. Not only does Adams appear to be waiting more patiently, but also he seems to be the most important force in the scene because he is shown behind the larger pane.

Continuing in the scene, Adams says that he cannot recall how long he waits in the interrogation room. As we hear him say this, we see different cuts of the clock at different positions. Each time the viewpoint changes, time changes, and the camera closes in on the clock, almost as if it is closing in on the truth about how long Adams was confined in the room. While this happens, the music crescendos slightly. This mimics the emotion Adams might have felt sitting in that blue room. We are shown the disjointed time passing as though we are sporadically looking at up at the clock. Also, as time passed, Adams probably felt more and more tense, like the crescendo and building up of the music makes the listener feel. The repetitive pattern of the music pushes the viewer to lose tract of time and how long Adams has been talking, just as time would have slipped from his grasp by being asked the same questions, in the same room.

The repetition of the music, along with a slight increase of speed, mimics the visual of the hand butting out the cigarettes and the smashing out of the ash. It also makes the audience feel nervous. The amount of cigarettes butts shown in the tray implies Adams did feel nervous. The ashtray visually highlights the musical expression and evocation of the presence of discord and separation. Only one white cigarette appears in the black container and it is surrounded by the darkness of the black and by the cigarette butts. The police see the crime as an open and shut, black and white case. Although the hand adds more black and white ash to the tray, it the dark color that resonates. The scene ends with music fading into a black, not white, screen. This demonstrates that although Adams adds reason to support his innocence as well as to support his guilt (lack of and alibi), it is the darkness of guilt and disbelief that resonates and is recognized by onlookers.

Forty-eight minutes or so into the movie, Mrs. Miller, a ‘witness’ to the murder, talks about how she always wanted to be a detective when she was a little girl. From silence, the music starts in a fast, low, repetitive and almost sinister and predictable pattern. The music, in conjunction with the visuals of the scene lead the viewer to lack faith in Mrs. Miller’s testimony and to wonder how anyone could trust her. An old black and white clip, of what I assume to be Boston Blackie, begins to play. The scene shown opens with a shadow, which increases in size and leads the audience to believe what is to follow will be a serious detective story, but it is portrayed as anything but that. The music captures a feeling of a cheap sideshow or a slapstick comedy. This, in turn, trivializes Mrs. Miller’s idea of a “detective”. Also, a symbol and drum combination become more prominent in the score after Mrs. Miller says that she likes to help in any way she can, yet as the clip shows, her idol fails to really help. In the scene, she pushes a cart into the ‘criminal’, who in fact looks more trustworthy then the detective, and while the criminal is down and impaired, the ‘good-guy’ punches him. Then, the female runs out of the room, yet in a time of crisis, she bends over to pet a dog. This woman is implied to be whom Mrs. Miller patterns herself and strives to become.

Also, the music increases in complexity, by adding new instruments and a changing pattering. It seems to do so in direct correlation with Mrs. Miller’s interview statements. She starts off claiming that she “likes to help”, which seems to be a noble statement. Then she states that, “It’s always happening to me. Lots of times there’s always killings”. This encourages a viewer wonder why this type of situation surrounds her continually. Then, seeming to retract her statement minutes before about “helping” she says that she tries to figure out the murder, “before the police do” and tries to beat them, like the whole idea is simply a game. This leaves us wondering if she actually helps at all, and the scene of the Boston Blackie clip ends with the same large ominous shadow that, it seems, the all-powerful, cunning detective failed to stop. Furthermore, when Mrs. Miller finishes her speech, there is a moment of a black screen and then the typed words “Death” and “Witness”. These are shown separately and seem to imply that she was the witness who brought on the death penalty and also those we, as an audience, are witness to her credibility. She, like Dr. Death for who the movie originally was filmed, has a reputation not only for seeing death and murders, but also for being a crucial witness who sends the accused to their death. As the music fades, the sound of the buzzing of a “FasGas” sign where Miller’s story begins becomes the dominating noise.

The importance of the music prevails throughout the film. The sounds fade, rush and swell with the emotions. Sometimes the music is hypnotic and captures the viewer like those following the trial might have been captured. The introduction, which set the tone for the entire movie, has a very eerie feel that the music controls. The lights blink, yet they do so seemingly out of time with the music. They blink red, warning: stop. From the beginning the viewer feels as though something is amiss. This score continues to contrast what sounds like a light flute with a heavy baritone. It is like the contrast between good and evil, light and dark, and the black and white of the newspaper print. Like the blinking lights, the truth, guilty or innocent, is undebatable- on or off.

Although the music captures the mood and toys with the viewer, the silence and conscious decision to avoid the use of this force contains just as much power. Sometimes the music seems to stop, as though to say ‘this is real’ or ‘look at the facts’. The introductory music ends with the date the murder took place. The absence of the music at the end of the movie, which could perhaps be the climax, the most important moment, where David Harris confesses to be the murderer, seems odd in such an emotional time. Yet, the audience hears just what Errol Morris heard, no strings or winds in the background, only the voice of Harris and his own. The truth he shows in untainted, pure and powerful truth.

Now to the blogs:
Serena, in her blog post about manipulation, support the idea that the viewer is in fact manipulated by the movies. She says that it is “part of the film-viewing experience”. If we know that we are always being manipulated and prodded towards some emotional response, then we may always be aware of the elements that make us feel a certain way. I am unsure if that is always the case and I think ideas and emotions need to be taken into consideration, especially when watching a movie that is concerned with the construction and destruction of the truth like The Thin Blue Line.

In her post, Robyn talks about the idea of the death penalty and how Morris provides an argument against it by proving that there exist cases where people are in fact innocent and are waiting to die. I agree that, as she says, “Errol Morris suggests that people become obsessed with the idea of vengeance” and, I think, he also shows the power of obsession in general. When we become obsessed with a truth we will defend it to the death. Like the judge in The Thin Blue Line, whose decision was overturned by Supreme Court, we will stand by our choices even when we know they are wrong. I think that is why knowing which mediums and forces contaminate our views and ideas is important.

Tyler beautifully articulates the question, “Why should we trust Morris” in his post. He says that, “listening to claims of truth [them] sometimes begin to take shape that might be real”. Our “real” then, is changed by the “real” of others. Although we may assume that we live a life unaffected by those around us, we are connected. Also, If Morris carefully chooses shots and only uses ten percent of the footage he shoots, and then he portrays a subjective real. Yet, we believe and I believe.

“The end is where we start from.”
-T.S. Eliot

for some reason i am still stuck on the depiction of women in movies or now i guess it has spilled over to every medium. I am not sure that I know what an ideal woman is or even what makes woman just that. If the ideal female is passive, stay-at-home, barefoot and pregrant then why is Jo a heroine that we relate to? Also, I feel like we are always talking about how males construct what is the ‘ideal’ female, but what about women. what impact do they have? I was thinking that most characters that we say are ‘strong women’ have a lot of masculine characteristics, like Lizzy in Pride and Prejudice or Jo in Little Women. Most people dislike weak, passive Beth and most people don’t remember the names of the quiet Bennet sisters. Is there feminine and masculine or just masculine and non-masculine?

I think I just want to leave it at wow right now.
I am confused by the hotel window scenes. I had a theory about one minute ago (haha no lie) that everything after the psych ward was just in his mind or something a long those lines… but then the hotel window… at first he sees madeline through her hotel window and the lady running the hotel says she wasn’t ever there … but was she? i don’t know. Then when he sees judy through the hotel window it’s a similar shot… but which ‘reality’ or whatever came first? was the second made from the first or the first from the second. i could just already be getting wrapped up in this. I really need to let it sink in for a minute…

Is there a thing as “superficial art”. I am going to say no. First I think I want to touch upon the definition of art. I decided to look it up because I guess I too consider someone else’s words better than my own, but what i found was:

1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
2. the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings

I think “of more than ordinary significance” right away negates it’s ability to be superficial. Also, if an artist would try to be superficial, then his trying would probably equate to a deeper meaning, wouldn’t it? Also, I think that viewers tend to give art or look for a deeper meaning then the artist may have intended. So I could blindly throw paint on a canvas or snap a picture without looking through the lense, and someone could spend hours analyzing it and then get something, some meaning out of it that I didn’t intend. So I guess what I am saying is that I don’t think it’s impossible to have art that is just supposed to be there, look pretty, be superficial, because someone wil always make more of it, especially if it is hanging on a museum wall.
Although I have to go back to a discussiont that we had in some class, probably 295, where we debating on whether or not there are things that are ‘better’ or if the distinction exists between good art and bad art or not art at all. Some days I really hate how everything is connected. I feel like I never make any headway because I always hit the same road blocks of love, art, reality… etc. Sometimes I just want facts, data, and to just get away from the big questions. I wonder if I am killing my love of art, of literature by obsessing over it. I guess, to steal the idea, if you analyze it too much it means nothing.

“And all men kill the thing they love,
By all let this be heard,
Some do it with a bitter look,
Some with a flattering word,
The coward does it with a kiss,
The brave man with a sword”

-Oscar Wilde

This may be a pessimistic idea but I think the Jennie and Eben’s relationship is like a real relationship. From time to time, I volunteer in a nursing home and I really enjoying talking to the residents about love and their life. One time, this cute, little old lady told me that to be in love is to be obsessed with the another person, that it is like an addiction. Upon me asking how one can get that feeling, that obsession to last a life time, she said that you can’t expect it to last. I found that a little sad, at first, but then she went on to say that there is always love and a deep connection, but the obsession comes and goes. I guess that I see a connection in how Jennie grows up and how a relationship grows. Eben goes from desiring her physical presence to knowing that she is there and with him even when she is physically absent. Also, the couple have the revival and rekindling of romance that happens with a real relationship. I think it’s unrealistic to think that once you find your ‘soul mate’ everything is going to be wonderful and perfect.

So I’ve been thinking about the novel for awhile and I can’t seem to decide if i think it has a happy ending or not. I don’t know if I really should be all that concerned with whether it’s happy, but it’s driving me a little crazy. Even though Eben doesn’t seem sad at the end, it still seems upsetting. He says, “It’s still all right”. I don’t think it’s all right though. I think it’s all wrong. If two people are meant to be together and their connection so strong that they defy time, then it seems so pessimistic and negative to write a story that ends with the two still seperated. Also, they don’t both die. We can’t think that they’re together in heaven because Eben is still alive. So where are they together? Jennie says, “we’ll always be together… somewhere…”. I feel like Eben is always left behind. I think I’m just sad that Jennie is without him for her entire life, not sharing her ups and downs with him, and it’s only for a second that they are actually together. Yet, the idea that Eben has justified to himself that the one second they are together actually solitified their passion to the point where it not only defies time but now life itself, is somewhat optimistic or romantic in a way. I think I have gotten to the point where I don’t believe in the disney fairy tale and prince charming, nor do I want it, and these unrealistic notions of love upset me more.

“Art can only mean something to the artist who creates it.”

I found these lines a little unsettling, although i feel like this is a reaccuring issue throughout the semester and that I have heard them before. Where are we all connected, if we are at all? Are we all chained to one another like circus elephants? I’m not sure if there is an inherent connection or point where we all relate. I think that painting move me for different reasons then the person standing next to me, but I think it still means something to me. I love Degas’ ballerinas, probably because I danced for 10 years, but I am touched by them, the details, the colors. Yet, there is something unsettling about a piece that you create yourself. I love the photos that I hand developed and I am forever attatched to the poems that I write. I’m not sure if they will mean something to anyone, but there is a possibility. They could.

So class today made me wonder … why do people hesitate and pause. Being a budding linguist, especially interested in discourse analysis, I find this question very appealing. I haven’t yet had the chance to take Sociolinguistics but… from intro i think i remember having a discussion about pausing in regards to turn taking, creating suspense for a story, a speaker’s nervousness in what he’s about to say, and many other things… but what’s interesting is an article we read about how people interpret these pauses. There was research done and it turned out that if there is a pause, an ‘um’ or whatever, before a statement, some people tend to develop a disbelief in what the speaker is saying. Maybe that’s why some people have a disbelief in the movie, because there are those pauses and then it may lead them to believe that the people are saying things only for the camera.

On another note… this doesn’t really relate at all, maybe a little because we did sort of talk about sound today in class… But last night I decided to go listen to Claudia Emmerson talk about Emily Dickinson (which was absolutely amazing by the way). She posed a question about sound. She asked if sound and syllable were the same. After contemplating this for awhile, I just want to put my thoughts on this down somewhere. I am going to have to say no, but sometimes yes. A syllable is made up of a nucleus, typically a vowel, and then associated consonans. When these seperate phonemes are put in combination they make specific sounds and those in turn make the syllable. In my mind, a syllable is more general then a sound. I’m actually amazed right now that I have so much more to say about this, but considering that it’s not related to class, I’ll stop rambling.

I’ve decided that the subtle aspects of Fast, Cheap and Out of Control are so numerous that I can’t tell if there is a reason that things are there and shown or if it just happened that way. Today in class, Sam pointed out the shadows of the mole rats on the title screen. I think that epitimizes the movie. There is always something deeper, beyond what first appears. I also decided that I like the interviews in this movie just as much as the others because the difference don’t take away, just provide a different prospective. The fact that the people (i almost called them subjects, which seems so distant and reminds me of the mole rats… like i am studying them to find out something more about myself and life just like the guy and his mole rats and the mit scientist and his robots… oh Morris…) aren’t in their natural setting (again like the mole rats), allows me to focus on what they’re saying and how they’re saying it rather then making judgements about what is around them. I think a lot can be told from the eye contact and that’s my favorite part of the movie (at least today). I really like the fact that I can learn a lot about the individuals based on if they are looking directly into the camera and when they choose to look away, look down. That said, I think that I liked Vernon, Florida more, but not because I don’t love FC&OC. I think that Vernon finds truth, meaning, and makes me reflect because of people who aren’t experts. They don’t have all the answers, but they have ideas. It was deep insight, not always articulated in the most formal manner, but so honest none the less. These people who I at first thought were crazy, surprised me. Whereas in FC&OC, I felt like i was surprised by the connection between the people, with their different life accomplishments, but they were all experts. I think that it’s hard to become at the top of a field without believing in the need for its purpose. I think it is this common belief that is connecting them and I almost expected deep thoughts on life from all of them and to be pushed to analyze from their prospective. So… I think i liked the people in Vernon because I felt like they were people and not subjects. In the say breath, I think making the people in FC&OC appear to be subjects could have been a tactic.

I found this interview online… i thought i’d share:

http://www.sonypictures.com/classics/fastcheap/index-i.html