Sprint3_Week6#Beyond the Visual – About Blue
01
From the artwork ‘BLUE’, I remember a sentence which touched me a lot.
Your body is the whole ocean. My body is the droplet, or the spark, forming below your tongue.
The auditory comes to replace the visual; with Blue there is a sensory tussle as we are forced to listen.
Reflecting on your own experience of watching Blue, do you agree? Why/why not?
In fact, I think I can not agree this point, I don’t think it is a sensory tussle as we are forced to listen. It may be a fusing instead.
When we watch the BLUE, we were ‘feeling’ than just seeing or listening. The Blue is more like a pic collage of sounds or talking-pieces. The screen was showing a BLUE block, it took our imagination to think and create a scene in our mind. You may create the world that have connection with the story that the speaker told, or may not. The world in our mind has a trajectory, even linear, and is more diverse than the film’s multiple narrative methods. I’d like to call BLUE an artwork was showing time and feelings. So the process we enjoyed Blue is more like a fusing but not tussling.
Blue a film, it actually separated the images and the sounds (includes music and talkings). From the reading article, the writer said that to produce the cinematic image of infinity via almost no image at all is Jarman’s most elegant of acts. I agreed. I thought the brilliant part of the work was that his thought of ‘Opening up’. As the writer’s example, it a behavior from a biological unconscious. To some extent, Blue reflects views of symbiosis and collectivization. Through sensory resource sharing, our feelings are both divided and coexist in the same block.
02
Consider this work in relation to González-Torres’ Untitled (A portrait of Ross in L.A.). How do these works engage the senses of the viewer to create a relationship with the subject of the work?
As visitors take candy, the configuration changes, linking the participatory action with loss—even though the work holds the potential for endless replenishment.
According to BLUE and the Untitled, they all combined the idea about deconstructivism and constructivism. In Blue, it remixed the sight and hearing by creating a world covered by blue shadows so that someone may think it combined or separated. And in the Untitled, the work showed the relationship between ‘coming-taking-leaving’. It was a process of social integration, as the artist of the work said that it consisted of an ideal weight of 175 pounds of shiny, commercially distributed candy, and linked the participatory action with loss in AIDS. In fact, both of the two work, to some extent, there is a metaphor for AIDS. But equally, these two installations are reflections on collectivism.
Recent comments