[Frameworks] The Participatory Camera

[John Powers]

Dear Frameworks,

 

Thanks to everyone for their suggestions for this admittedly vague request. Alan, I assume that you’re referring to BLUE TAPE, which I haven’t been able to see, but will jump at the chance next time it presents itself. Carl, I also thought of A&B IN ONTARIO, but had forgotten about SWAMP – thanks for reminding me. Marilyn, I must confess that BLUE MOSES never crossed my mind, but I’ll look at it again; MADE MANIFEST is one of the few Brakhage films I haven’t seen, so I’ll have to prioritize it the next time I’m renting some prints. Scott, can’t wait to see your film, and thanks to Albert for the Dan Graham suggestions, which certainly fit.

 

Dave, yes, I think the term “participatory” is the weakness here, which is too general and potentially all-encompassing to have much explanatory force. Of course, we can all think of hundreds of films in which the handheld camera provides evidence of the filmmaker’s subjectivity and seems to represent a first-person physical response to the events depicted – not representing a state but enacting it, on some level. I suppose that in my inquiry, I was thinking of two slightly different things. One might be called a “shared camera” or “dialogic camera” (although I’m not sure I like the literary connotations of the latter term) (the Brakhage, Schneemann examples), where the handheld camera is traded between partners. Another might be a kind of “public camera” or “social camera” or something like that (Scott’s film, maybe the Joe Gibbons films where he shoplifts books), where a social performance or interaction is orchestrated such that the camera’s involvement becomes integral to or even a prerequisite for its realization. What was I thinking with CHRISTMAS ON EARTH? Maybe a “mimetic camera” (I think Ara Osterweil writes about this in Flesh Cinema) where the camera’s movements imitate the onscreen actions or movements of its participants. 

 

All very fuzzy, of course, and not totally developed, but I suppose that my request for examples was in part about trying to iron out or understand some of these differences, so thanks to everyone for giving me things to consider!

 

Best,
John
    On Tuesday, October 29, 2019, 05:45:45 PM CDT, Dave Tetzlaff <djtet53 at gmail.com> wrote:  
 
 It might help if you could be more specific about any difference between your concept of “participation” and the tradition of “first-person camera” or “subjective camera”. Such a technique implies some agent, represented by the camera that does in some sense "participate in the actions depicted, rather than simply observe.” The way you describe your examples though seems to imply we understgand the camera AS a camers, foregrounding the physical act of filming as an element of the pro-filmic event. But the distiction isn’t necessarily that clear. In Fuses, there’s the implication that we’re seeing the perspective of Kitsch the Cat, and the camerawork in the CU reel of Christmas on Earth isn’t obviously intended to be read as “participatory camera” vs. just, say, “psychedelia” in the text itself - ( you have to know extra-textual stuff about Barbara Rubin and the production of the film. Perhaps you could clarify by listing some familair films that would be OUTSIDE the realm you seek. For example, what about Anticipation of the Night? Or what about less experimental examples of cinema verite, where the camera-operator is a participant (e.g. Sherman’s March)?

Either way, Pennebaker’s largely (understandably?) overlooked “One P.M.” might fit...

_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/pipermail/frameworks/attachments/20191031/5f679371/attachment.html>