Tuesday April 10, 2007
I am a little behind, so two posts are in order today.
It is my contention that, even though Scott Stark wanted to show the transition of the "we" 60's and 70's into the "me" 80's through the work of Jane Fonda with respect, his representation through context and format overshadowed his respectful message.
Scott Stark attempted to show the shift of people, including celebrity from "we" to "me" by showing Jane Fonda at protests and rallies in the 60's and also doing workout videos in the 80's. He wanted to show that the silly things like workout videos should be overshadowed by the great things Jane Fonda did as a political activist. However, this only becomes apparent if you read the article he wrote about it.
I believe that film should be able to be taken out of context and understood. I believe the meaning should be able to be accessible to anyone willing to watch and discuss. I don't believe the viewer should really have to "go the extra mile" so to speak, and not be met halfway. Scott Stark made his message too ambiguous, and his choice of costume and venue as a part of his performance, to me, negated the intelligent things that Jane Fonda was a part of and made it overshadowed by something as ridiculous as a workout video.
I think this video was meant to say "Yeah, Jane Fonda has done some silly things like plugging a workout video, but she has done this great stuff for the "we" of our country." And to me, whether Scott Stark realizes it or not, this video says "Yeah, Jane Fonda has done some worthwhile stuff, but look at this stupid, pointless shit that she is going to get remembered for." What sticks out is the pointless stuff, rather than the important. And I think that does not give the credit that truly is due.
It is my contention that, even though Scott Stark wanted to show the transition of the "we" 60's and 70's into the "me" 80's through the work of Jane Fonda with respect, his representation through context and format overshadowed his respectful message.
Scott Stark attempted to show the shift of people, including celebrity from "we" to "me" by showing Jane Fonda at protests and rallies in the 60's and also doing workout videos in the 80's. He wanted to show that the silly things like workout videos should be overshadowed by the great things Jane Fonda did as a political activist. However, this only becomes apparent if you read the article he wrote about it.
I believe that film should be able to be taken out of context and understood. I believe the meaning should be able to be accessible to anyone willing to watch and discuss. I don't believe the viewer should really have to "go the extra mile" so to speak, and not be met halfway. Scott Stark made his message too ambiguous, and his choice of costume and venue as a part of his performance, to me, negated the intelligent things that Jane Fonda was a part of and made it overshadowed by something as ridiculous as a workout video.
I think this video was meant to say "Yeah, Jane Fonda has done some silly things like plugging a workout video, but she has done this great stuff for the "we" of our country." And to me, whether Scott Stark realizes it or not, this video says "Yeah, Jane Fonda has done some worthwhile stuff, but look at this stupid, pointless shit that she is going to get remembered for." What sticks out is the pointless stuff, rather than the important. And I think that does not give the credit that truly is due.
posted by Andy Nordstrum at 1:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home