Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Probably Going to have Nightmares...

In the main screen of the Cabinet Magazine Online website, there was a link that sent me to a fake TV trailer by Guy Ben-Ner. The concept was a family sitcom that was filmed in an IKEA during store hours. He and his wife were walking from room to room discussing family problems as if they were in a house of their own. Throughout this, we see actual customers walking through the rooms to examine the price tags that are hanging all over everything. They are walking in front of the camera and acknowledging that something is being filmed. The actors, for the most part, keep to their characters and continue on with the dialogue and actions. I found this pretty hilarious because I know if I were to see this happening while I was shopping, I would stop and watch. The fake television show itself was pretty bland and unintriguing, so the only way I could see myself getting into it is if it were in that setting with all it's spontaneity. This installment in the journal's website contributes to not only the hilarity of some of the things you can find in that page, but shows the making of something that shows the medium of which it's created. For the most part we see this as any basic television show where the family interacts only with each other in their own little made up world. However, every once in a while, we are ripped away from that when outsiders who aren't in on the secret are trying to figure out exactly what's going on. Their reactions give us a little incite on the way it's being filmed. In one case, two women investigate the camera and give off the impression that the camera is not really hidden and is obviously recording. Most times when we see a video that someone has made, especially a "TV trailer," we don't expect to be reminded that there is actually some sort of filming going on and the family we are seeing isn't what they appear to be. They use the rooms as if it were one in their house. The props they use are things that people can just walk right in and put in their shopping carts. The IKEA store is made out to be a smorgasbord of free studios.
Now, what will haunt my dreams for the next night or two is the article I decided to read from this journal. It was in an edition called "Bones" and was entitled "The Museum of the Dead." I'm a huge horror movie fan and can usually handle the weirdest of images. However, as I was scrolling down to finish reading this article, the craziest picture came on my screen. Because I refuse to look at that thing again, I have not read past the picture. I'm not sure why it freaked me out so badly, but it brought out this emotion of fear in me. The article itself is about this church in Palermo that features plaster sculptures from a man named
Giacomo Serpotta. These figures are different types of skulls and bodies that are supposed to represent the unwanted dead. As I was reading it, I found it pretty interesting that such a place existed. That there is a church with art in it that is uncommon to the bright and colorful art I have seen in churches around here. This morbid sanctuary of figures must be a pretty unique and, judging by the pictures, realistic looking place to visit. The two parts of the journal that I looked at have a very interesting connection. Both the pictures and the video consist of things that aren't exactly what they appear. The video's setting is not a house but rather a mock up of a room in order to sell its' contents. The bodies in this church are not real bodies, but rather the resemblance of what a body would look like hung up on the walls. Both forms of media do a good job of displaying both the symbolic meaning of the things displayed as well as the realistic.

The picture that I wish to have extracted from my memory is the third one down if you care to take a gander. Freaky Shrieking Man Face

4 comments:

Carl Bogner said...

Ok, now I have to extract that image from my memory. Am sorry that anything about this class gives you nightmares, but thanks though for the illustration.

response, part 1
I love the description of IKEA as represented in Ben-Ner's video as a "smorgasbord of free studios." 1) That's a nice tilt to IKEA's Swedish origin and 2) it is a most apt way to describe the Ben-Ner's family appropriation.

You say you found the "fake show" bland and unintriguing, but what were they talking about? Or why was IKEA an appropriate place for their conversation? You're right - much of the film video reminds us of its own making. But can we also say that such interruptions or reminders trouble a sense of who "owns" this video? Which is to ask: how do the discussion w/in the "fake show" and the setting contribute to considerations of andthe boundaries of ownership? I'd watch it again - oh, wait, you probably have at this point - but listen to the discussion. How does it define the video?

Carl Bogner said...

response 2
You can't finish the article? Oh come on - isn't that a different sort of maddening - the unread? I can print it and cut out the offending picture, if you'd like? You don't comment on the contents of the article at all. Your discussion of churches and the art that they contain is the start of an interesting consideration. As with your Ben-Ner discussion, I'd wish you take it further. Are not churches full of images of the dead - from sarcophogi to renderings of crucifixions. I think you are right to consider the location of such art, but is it so anomalous? I know you didn't finish the article, but what is the article's take on this art, based on what you read? Is the author just reporting, or commenting? I'd like to hear more about the article. (So far Cabinet doesn't seem to require much reading.)

Carl Bogner said...

FInally,
I do like your efforts to connect the two parts of Cabinet you looked at, and started to consider. Yes, both the video and the article offered the unexpected. To what end? Why so, do you think? And what does this say about Cabinet?

Also, you write: "Both forms of media do a good job of displaying both the symbolic meaning of the things displayed as well as the realistic." What are the symbolic meanings displayed in each? How do you mean? Could you give an example? Maybe that is how you could have started your blog: it may have encouraged you to be more specific (instead of a touch reactive) in your considerations.

Kate, this was a fun blog to read, and I appreciate your starts at considering the material you encountered. In the next round of blogs, I'd like to hear more from you. Your summaries of what you read are fine, but take your commentary further. These entries are descriptive and observational. I'd like them to be more detailed in any analysis they may have.

I look forward to reading your upcoming posts! Get back to me with questions!

Carl

Carl Bogner said...

oh -- and I do hope you don't have any nightmares.