TJ Demos

so... Wow. My head is swimming a bit but when i say i enjoyed this lecture im not trying to get in good graces or kiss anyones feet (that would be you Paul). Many of the ideas presented in his lecture are extremely relevant to my interests and the subject matter that i tend to pursue which made what Im sure could have been a long hour into a really wonderful opportunity to discover some reference points and get insights into other artists dealing with social/political issues in different mediums and styles. There are about 100 different branches of thought that I went through as he was talking but I'll stick to some of the main issues that seemed most relevant and interesting for the topics he adressed. The first real hook for me was his qualification of the politics of aesthetics (I believe in reference to Steve McQueen). This resonated with me because it is such an integral part of documentary style film making as well as photography. There are so many different approaches and techniques that can be used when deciding how to handle aesthetics and imagery within one's work and no decision can be taken without understanding its possible impact. I was extremely interested in the use of the ambiguous character versus a more realistic portrayal of the people he encountered because it really does have a large influence upon the audience's perception of the subject and their place within the environment. I tend to be drawn to what is considered a more traditional and straightforward presentation but I like the gray area that comes with combining a very real place, time, and individual with a more abstracted image. This gives the story a different kind of potential than it had before. But again, as TJ mentioned, this also creates the possibility of losing the person within the environment and leaving them without true identification or leverage to become part of a bigger idea or movement which is typically the intention of documentary projects in the first place. It is a fine balance to be able to show the character of a person or group of peoples without injecting too much of anything which might compromise the effectiveness of the work.... which brings me to the second topic that really stuck with me and got me quite worked up towards the end. The discussion of the "success" of these artists who show their work in galleries but deal with subject matter that is considered to be something that requires mass consumption to some degree if it is considered insightful, meaningful, or worthwhile. However, while this could be true to a certain end I think deeming any kind of work such as this as a failure is taking away the very core of its purpose and ultimately letting the kinds of ideas that the work is attempting to question have the upper hand. There is quite an obsession with being a certain kind of art and fitting into its mold. I have experienced a lot of this in my time here at VCU. There are rules and legacies that have been handed down long before many of these people even picked up a camera. What i truly respect and appreciate about work such as this is that it is questioning so many of these conventions that we accept as our own truths. It brings up the connection between artist and audience but is not defined by it's qualified success or failure. I think that if any of the people that were mentioned in the lecture today had any kind of hesitation about whether or not they believed in what they were doing or the value of pursuing the effects essentially that come from globalization they would not have created such relevant and thought-provoking work. They would have their insecurities and questions littered all over their films and they would be unbearable to watch. It is easy to want to define things, it is easy to say that something is understood... but the reason that documentary has such integrity for me is that it is undefinable, there is no right or wrong answer, there are no clear definitions of current thoughts or movements. It is not until we are able to look back at time and understand what we were and what we are becoming. Whether an image is clear enough to show the 10th hour of stubble on a man's cheek or so blurred that we are left with a silhouette against some romantically lit background, the stories are able to build upon one another. I dont believe that any single work will ever stop the negative aspects of globalization for example. At best we can hope that the discussion continues and that people see it is worthwhile to understand the devastating effects that this kind of boldness can have upon an entire continent as it has in the majority of Africa. It frightens me to think that it takes CNN or Headline news to get people to care about something or at the very least to spend time thinking of it and perhaps changing their own actions even in a minor way. As artists we are here to make comments on the society we live in... I would hope that being successful in this aspect is not reliant upon the rigid definitions of success that exist in the exact same society that we are here to question.