PelleNotes
Achievable aims for next session (12-1-23): Pelle will make start on thesis following the outline below. send to Steve on the 10th January 2023. Steve gives written feedback and we discuss material which will provide inspiration for the next session. We go through what Pelle has written and Steve's response.
9-2-23
Notes from Emm
She went through the text and noticed there are points that could be unpacked. The central issue of how important this meeting is and you do not make clear what 'the heart of the film' is. Make more of the diary as a connecting tissue for the text. It makes clear that the thesis is working out a text. Questions and doubts in the diary part are powerful. The diary could structure the text. Nostalgia- talk a lot more about how important that is - talk through the process of how you changed your mind on that issue. About the movie More detail on the film;How is it put together; what kind of vibe does it have? The common thread could go at the beginning. Clearer about what the central issue is; how this type of narrative relates to your life in a family of artists and how that influences your film making activity. On theory: the issue of the other can be unpacked; it is central to the movie; bring in work from others about how the issue of the 'other' is explored. If you question your practice; try to answer questions you raise, , speculatively, the diary is a great place for this.
- Is the encounter with the other a focus moment? It seems to be.
- Possible to make the films correspond with the 'speeds' of the principle characters.
- Interesting to place your own presence in the film, so you do not render yourself 'invisible'
Pelle replies: would like to spend extended periods in the location; want to get more sense of the structure H lives in.
Em: the diary for could be useful here. The slow cinema section is nice but needs unpacking, along with the idea of several screens. This needs to be described further, along with the possibilities (maybe work with the different speeds you talk about. To be true to the story of the people in the films= how could this be done; how have you dealt with this in the past? This is a positive way of discussing past work; in relation to the work you want to do now.
Notes from Steve
describe your previous and current work more, more precisely
lean into this as a process text. plan the thesis carefully and have dedicated session.
more physical descriptions, how did you film it and edited? more about the protagonists, just give more information --> describe the process even in the introduction
be honest that you are in a stage of sewing, you are trying things, how do you articulate this messy process? full of questions? describe it
previous work: same things, how did you film it and edited? why people are so central for you? methodology how what why
remember your central question: how to visualise caring? what happens when you encounter the other?
diary notes, how can you answer all these questions? just try out ideas
henk is slow, how do you want to convey that slowness of henk in the movie --> "it's missing now, i tried with tripod, it's less hardcore documentary. it worked seeing as a fiction staged performative piece, where henk is not so fragile, if it's a collaboration he can also feel less vulnerable"
Henk has more agency
talk about the medium you're using (what is the distance between you and the character, separating from the subject)
Henk is enjoying the camera, your presence, is this a way of caring?
the attempt to care in a visual way, how to do it?
previous notes
Thesis in the form of a report on practice...
outline for first draft (4000)
intro (500)
Current work (500) describe work and describe choices made
everything that needs to be said (500) describe work and describe choices made
my sweet failure (500) describe work and describe choices made
Anemoia (500) describe work and describe choices made
related work by others (larger context) Compare and contrast methods used by them and yourself.(1000)
conclusion(500)
Chapter on reading material
Synopsis; summery (200)
Discussion (200)
method for chapters:
Use "what , how, why" method.
PLEASE USE MATERIAL FROM TEXT ON PRACTICE AND YOUR PROJECT PROPOSAL (AND MATERIAL, NOTES &C FROM YR1).
Notes: 26-1-23
[Steve: Great to see the outline you sent. I look forward to discussing it tmrw. There are a lot of points in there that will be useful as you get into your thesis more. Below I have made an edit of the outline text and your text on practice. I suggest you begin with the text from your proposal and work with that (you have 2000 + words already:-).
I will help tmrw by asking you questions about your work which we can then translate to thesis material.
The proposal has a strong ‘red line’ running through it which centres on your responsibility toward the artistic legacy of others and your own artistic responsibility. The other projects speak of how we make stories and idealise our life histories (nostalgia), how we wish to control how we will be remembered. There isn’t too much of this in the outline and I suggest we discuss bringing it back in. How you negotiate the legacy of others is the substance of three of your films, your proposed graduation project. The way you articulate your own doubts and reservations is very strong in the proposal. Please give yourself permission to talk about your own work.
I’d like to draw your attention to the plan we made on the PelleNotes wiki page (this page):
https://pzwiki.wdka.nl/mediadesign/PelleNotes
outline for first draft (4000)
intro (500) Current work (500) describe work and describe choices made everything that needs to be said (500) describe work and describe choices made my sweet failure (500) describe work and describe choices made Anemoia (500) describe work and describe choices made related work by others (larger context) Compare and contrast methods used by them and yourself.(1000) conclusion(500) Chapter on reading material Synopsis; summery (200) Discussion (200) ]
Thesis
Intro [This thesis discusses my recent video work, which…] Nobody Knows Many Things About Me a film or film installation in which we
enter the lives of two friends who devote their lives to art. Each in their own way they struggle with mortality and the meaning of legacy. Just as their lives run, the two storylines intersect and sometimes run simultaneously (on multiple screens).
At the heart of the film is a place where we often come back to: Henk’s dilapidated house full of belongings and paintings. Daily he waits for his dear friend Rinke who brings his groceries and joins for small talk, or sometimes a heart-to-heart. On the other hand Rinke struggles with a burn-out and is challenged in his role as caregiver. The garden seems to give him some redemption, but winter is coming and the question arises: what needs to be cared for? The protagonists: Henk van der Ploeg (73) lives close to my parents and I have known from many brief encounters over the last 15 years. Rinke Nijburg (58) is my father. During the past years their relationship evolved as Henk’s health has declined and my father sometimes struggles with his mental health. It made me wonder: what drives my father to go there every day to bring the groceries? Their situation makes me reflect on how my own life is organised, as well as my position as an artist. How do we meet the Other? The other human-being, the animal, the planet? I have touched these themes before in previous films but they were never so close to home as this piece. The challenge for me as a filmmaker is how to translate this everlasting struggle: the attempt to care in an audio-visual piece - this time on a hyper personal level. My documentary [‘Alles wat gezegd moet worden’ Everything That Needs to be Said (2021) is] about the two Dutch sisters: Froukje and Jetske Visser, daughters of a dear friend of my father (also called Henk!). In the documentary ‘Alles wat gezegd moet worden’ (ENG: Everything That Needs to be Said) they organise a solo exhibition for their father: artist Henk Visser (1953 – 2019) who recently passed away. This is the first time Henk will get his long cherished but dreaded stage. This is a project quite close to home since I know the girls from way back and their story relates to my own - my parents are both artist and made a lot, (a lot!) of paintings and drawings in their lives, still stored in their studio’s. The question about the legacy of an artist often becomes the responsibility of their children. [This theme carries over to my current work. ] Last year I made a documentary for the Eye Research Lab program, a initiative from Eye Film museum Amsterdam & Master degree: Lens-based Media. The documentary is about retired filmmaker Sacha Barraud whom is looking back on his so called ‘failed’ feature film from 1989, which was never finished. In My Sweet Faillure (2022) he’s looking back at the rushes of his feature Sweetly Continental, in cinema setting. Despite he’s very contagious view – he’s not shy with self-critic and likes to make fun of his own ego – he still seems to have hope the film will be finished. In 2019 I graduated from the University of the Arts in Utrecht with a short film called Anemoia which is a hybrid, essayistic film about the phenomenon of nostalgia. The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows from John Koenig introduced me to the term ‘Anemoia’ means something like: nostalgia for a time or place one has never known. Anna, the main character is only at the beginning when we see some photos through a viewfinder. She visits several places that seems nostalgic to her and make her reflect on her thoughts. In the meantime, daydreams keep occurring and a life in the ‘here and now’ seems unreachable. If we sum up these subjects we can draw a clear red line, it’s about human legacy and taking a look in the past to try to make sense of the present.
My Sweet Failure (2022) This film is about filmmaker Sacha Burraud who shot a feature film in 1989 called ‘Sweetly Continental’. He saved all of his money for it, (even got in debts for it), and asked a lot of people to participated. The film was never finished - It lay on his shelf for almost 30th years. He just couldn’t finish the edit at the time because he said he suddenly saw it was a failure. More than 20 years later, he tells me this story on the day I first met him, while we’re having lunch to wait for the digital copy of a Dubbel 8 film roll I found on the flea market. I didn’t plan to make a film about him, but I was instantly triggered by his story, because I have experiences, people don’t advertise to much with there biggest ‘failures’ – and so it happened: I made a film about Sacha and his failure. [<<which is his legacy]
When I look back, for me it was always a battle between don’t rush and script well enough before you shoot, and don’t start to late: you might miss something. [Again, the film is about legacy. To speak of my sweet failure says a lot about how a work in the present is confined to the past. It is a very nice title, but it speaks to something at the heart of your work, a consideration of what we will leave behind and whether it will, indeed, be sweet. Legacy is a double-edged thing.] Doubts and certainties The common threat is exactly the point at which the doubt pops up. Do I really want to continue this theme of looking back, looking into the past? Is there a way to stay close to the present, and look in the future? Or are these concerns mostly my own projection? “I feel like this film about Henk and my father is telling me to “slow down” in a sense.” Henk is physically very slow for one of the reasons his lifestyle always included a lot of red milk: alcohol, cocaine and tabaco. Also, time seems to stand still in his house. Paintings, objects, furniture seem to have been there forever. For these reasons you could draw the conclusion that the perfect “shape” for this film project heads towards slow cinema. But is this really the right move for this project? I feel like this specific shape could set the ‘wrong’ tone. I’m much more eager to catch the madness and complexity of life in a decoupage/montage that translates that feeling. Is there a way out of the slow cinema for Nobody Knows Many Things About Me? Is there a way to search for a shape that will make it a film about today’s modern life? Is there a way to stay true to Henk’s story but not make a film about a man in decline that seems to live in the past rather than the future? Though I want to be true to the story of the real human beings in my films. I’d rather not paste something on it, which maybe does not fit. It’s going to be a challenge but I’d like to figure it out!
[Here there needs to be a lot more description of your process. We can work on that tmrw] New directions And now something completely different? Previous films I made together with other creatives were always intended for the big screen. I’ve always enjoyed thinking about scenes and playfully ordering them into stories and I’ve had a little experience with audio-visuals as installations in an exhibition space. They tend to stay away from a storyline. Funny enough, through the input of this Master degree at Piet Zwart and also because of the characteristics of this project, I feel like I want to challenge myself by thinking of this project in another setting than cinema. Part of the answer lies in the fact that this is a very personal story set in my own family. It could be that I feel the complexity of the reality happening around me more than ever. Working with several screens can be interesting for the perception of time and place in this project. Events happening at the same time in a different place or room can be seen side by side in an installation setting. Luckily for me there are enough people connected to the Master degree Lensed-based Media, with experience in installation films who can give advice such as filmmaker Stefanos Tsivopoulos from whom we had and have a Thematic Seminar called: Video Installations. So I’ll not hesitate to dive into some great, or failed, examples to learn from. Though I’m not sure yet if this is the correct medium, this way of thinking can definitely bring me new ideas. Methodologies My thesis will result in an essay called An Attempt to Care in which I will reflect on the process of making: all the things influencing along the way, the everyday observations I make, including the doubts and uncertainties that come along with filmmaking. Then there’s the theory. I’m gathering books, essays, films and lectures that talk about a lot of different themes. Dutch writer Roxanne van Iperen wrote ‘Own well-being first’ an essay in which she explains how the Dutch midclass lost her liberal values. It’s a critic and explanation about why and how this could have happened. This kind of essay could help me see Henk’s story in a bigger context while a book like ‘Anders Zichtbaar’ and a film like ‘Ne Me Quitte Pas’ could help me think and reflect of the potential shape of the film: about how to and how not to (audio)visualize this specific story. Filmmaker, writer and tutor Steve Rushton will guide me through this process of writing. The practical approach towards this project will not be so different from other projects. Shooting and editing will alternate constantly which will make it easier to get a little distance now and then which will help me get back to the core of things. I’m making this project as a one-man crew for the second time in my life, therefore it will be good to get a lot of input and feedback from classmates and teachers during the process. Feedback on camerawork but also on the decoupage. My mentors, filmmakers Sabine Groenewegen and Laura Huertas Millan will play a big part in the feedback. Furthermore I’d like to follow the advice of guest tutor and filmmaker Etienne Kallos and not forget Henk & Rinke themselves - I’m very curious what they think the film should be like. The Common Thread It’s a fact that I come from a family of artist. I can’t deny where I come from. My own love for making has brought me to several different places, but my background and probably my gut feeling, often brought me back to the subject that concerns the struggles that come with (and from) making art. The film (installation) and the essay will be seen through the question: what does ‘caring’ look like? I’ll not be shy to approach this subject in a broader view: I’m interested in how we meet the ‘Other’ - and like mentioned before - the ‘Other’ can also be something other than a human-being. Although my collection of readings and observations will not be literally in the final film, they well nevertheless influence the outcome and probably change my view on the project Nobody Knows Many Things About Me. DIARY NOTES ON THE PROJECT
(DIARY NOTE 04/01/2023) Today I'm making some test shots at my parents studio (where they paint and store there paintings), to see if this is something that could be part of the film. [describe what you shot, how are they useful; what works? What doesn’t? [50 words]
(DIARY NOTE 06/01/2023) Today I'm collecting courage to edit again. FEW HOURS LATER: What strike me was the amount of footage I had already collected. This notion makes me nervous. [unpack this. What are you filming?] Also, I’m looking for a focus in the shots, but I can’t find it. It’s the same feeling I had while shooting: What am I doing exactly? What am I looking for at Henk’s place? I can’t find the answers yet.[Tomorrow we will describe this process in more detail]
(DIARY NOTE 08/01/2023) I have to be aware of the fact that the films I collected to inspire my for this project, are almost all feature films, that probably took a long time to make.[is it about working with a lot of material?] Maybe it’s a good idea to collect one or two short films that have been made in a few months, I feel that can let me see clearly what’s realistic and what not. Maybe the graduation film of Dutch filmmaker Inge Meijer is a good one watch as well. [Why what is that and what is attractive about it for you?]
Also, I feel like I tend to get lost, and I’m not enjoying the making of this film fully. Was it a good choice to start this project? Or is it the fact that a lot of things are unclear that makes me insecure about it? [Isn’t this doubt and insecurity part of your process? Is it part of the way you learn to go forward?] At this point I feel it’s a good thing to make a little script based on the research/test material that I’ve shot. The idea of dividing the film in chapters could be a good starting point to get some grip on the structure of a script/scenario: Nobody Knows the phase which in 'the other' is still unknown to us. About Me the point where we share or show what’s most important to us. Many Things: about what we leave behind when were no longer there.[Great to see the diary form working well here, you are describing the process of making choices.]
Another thing I want to try, make some test shots for my (initial concept idea): which evolved into a film concept with the title: Where did you came from dear? So before we go into this idea: why make some test shots for another project when I’m already busy enough with my graduation film? Since I’m not sure if my current project, at this point, is finding its shape. I feel like there are too many question marks in this project: (1) the missing answer concerning my exact motivation for this project [the thesis is a good medium for sorting this issue out.] [ (2) The shape (3) The personal aspect the thesis - again, the thesis is the perfect forum for this (4) Henk’s vulnerability.[this needs to be described; how is Henk vulnerable? In fact, the way you choose to deal with people and the ethics of your engagement as a film maker is worth discussing; you have particular methods and ways of working with people which needs to be described…] Thereby this idea of making a film about our relationship with animals is stuck in my head for many years now.
Where did you came from dear? is a poetic, essayistic film about a long-postponed meeting between a human and an animal. [what animal?] The roads and forests in the Netherlands form strictly defined areas, but there are game grids and holes in fences - a fatal encounter is not excluded. In the meantime, various people tell (off screen) about a collision with an animal. Let’s see if some test shots and a test edit for Where did you came from dear and a script for Nobody Knows Many Things About Me can make things clear: what project to continue with? [great if you just describe the process of making both and charting the decisions you make along the way]
NOTES ON BOOKS
The ethical consciousness of a filmmaker. What is that actually? And what does that look like? 'Anders zichtbaar' is translated as: ‘Differently visible’ a book with several chapters of different writers that talk about meaning and humanization in our Capitalistic, Western image culture.
In the chapter: We zijn allemaal filosofen. Ja, maar hoe? (NL) We're all philosophers. Yes, but how? (ENG) Belgian mathematician, philosopher and emeritus professor of logic and philosophy of science Jean Paul van den Bendegem tries to figure out how to life a good humanistic life. He tries to clarify his options by giving himself several 'solutions': 1. Don't worry, you don't live your life, it's getting lived'. 2. Don't try too hard, trust yourself. 3. Challenge yourself, trust the Other. 4. Don't trust anybody, including yourself. 5. Solution 2, but then try to complement with enough scientific proof. So in the end he figures all solutions are all incomplete. Van den Bendegem then concludes:
"Moreover, let's not forget one thing: the more science will develop, the more knowledge we will have, the more compelling my analysis will be applicable, in other words, it will be even more difficult to make decisions. You would start to understand that the one who knows everything, does nothing anymore. Unfortunately, this excludes the good life."
It makes me think about my project: maybe, at the point where things aren't clear, or figured out yet, it's the best to sometimes just start doing something.
(DIARY NOTE 01/01/2023) So at 22:00 on New Year's Eve I decided to ask Henk if Rinke and me could celebrate New Year's Eve at his place. He said that was fine by him, but I must know he wears a skirt. I said that was fine by me and when we arrived he there we found him with a guitar in his hand, he was planning to play some Blues for us, and so it happened.
NOTES ON FILMS
In the chapter: "Intersubjectief wandelen met het landschap: nomadisch denken in Agnes Varda's Sans toit ni loi (1985) en Chantal Akermans Les rendez-vous d'Anna (1978)" Walking intersubjectively with the landscape: nomadic thinking with Agnes Varda's Sans toit ni loi (1985) en Chantal Akermans Les rendez-vous d'Anna (1978) (ENG). Writer Christel Stalpaert analyses these films through a humanistic view. What does her way of seeing these films, tell me and can learn me something about the approach towards my project?
Agnes Varda's Sans toit ni loi (1985) Sans toit ni loi is a Lyrical drama about a young female nomad who is frozen to death and found by a Moroccan farm worker. The film consist of several different memories that show encounters Mona had with people she has met along the way. In the chapter of this book, writer Christel analyses the film by pointing out several different choices Agnes Varda made, that try to stay away from the then (and now still) prevailing Western narrative film culture.
2. "The first thing that strikes us about the narrative plot structure of Varda's film is that little happens, in the sense that Mona performs few actions that are purposeful and substantially contribute to building tension within a dramaturgically constructed line."
"Because the perception of the character is no longer directly linked to a goal-oriented action, it breaks the traditional Hollywood model..." "It is important here that the identity of the characters is no longer built from his/her actions and achievements, but from what he/she sees, hears and feels during moments of waiting, 'doing nothing' and walking."
These quotes make me think about Engel van Doel from Tom Fassaert, which has a clear plot structure if you ask me. https://www.hln.be/beveren/engel-van-doel-op-87-jarige-leeftijd-overleden~ae7fcf46/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F. I’ll get back at his film later in the thesis.
2. "Already at the beginning of the film, the viewer is misled. The opening scene shows how Mona's body is found and the viewer, sitting relaxed in the plush cinema seats, mentally prepares for a detective film that reveals the mystery Mona's unrevealed murder. He/she hopes to find the perpetrator or at least find out the cause of her death. To his/her great surprise, the police officer comes to the conclusion that Mona died of natural causes, despite the camera overdetermined clues in the mise-en-scene, namely the traces of blood and the girl's tattered clothing. In the end the viewer's expectations are not fulfilled as well."
3. "The camera itself starts to roam around the landscape and returns to Mona after a while."
Subsequent Christel mentions this is a travelling shot that usually moved from the left to the right, but this time is the other way around: from right to left, which goes against the Western culture of reading. Something that fits the character Mona since she's a nomad and not really socially adapted.
The Western film culture, which you could say is very much, mostly unconsciously (and maybe also inescapable) focussed on the average audience. This is mostly resulting in films which are plot driven, focused on action and certain level of suspense. This given, it's not something which I think is bad, but it's good to be aware of these mechanisms. Of course Henk is totally different from Mona, first of all Mona is fictional, she's a woman, and not alive anymore. Henk is not a nomad, but resembles Mona because he is also a sort of outcast.
Chantal Akerman's Les renez-vous d'Anna (1978) In progress!
Tom Fassaert’s Engel van Doel (2011) In progress!
Sabine’s Lubber Bakker and Niels van Koevorden’s Ne me Quitte Pas (2011) In progress!
Chantal Akkerman’s Jeanne Dielmann In progress!
- Notes from
Interested in radical empathy (a privileged position to be in).
What does caring look like?
How is caring expressed through the actions of the camera? the camera lingers; a feeling of place is established, through the pace of the editing (how?)
How is caring expressed through the actions of the main protagonists in your work?
Henk expresses affection more easily; dad through giving gifts
- RED THREAD? Legacy and inheritance...
Nobody Knows Many Things About Me is a graduation project which will result in a film or film installation in which we’ll enter the lives of two friends who devote their lives to art. Each in their own way they struggle with mortality and the meaning of legacy. Just as their lives run, the two storylines intersect and sometimes run simultaneously (on multiple screens).
At the heart of the film is a place where we often come back to: Henk’s dilapidated house full of belongings and paintings. Daily he waits for his dear friend Rinke who brings his groceries and joins for small talk, or sometimes a heart-to-heart. On the other hand Rinke struggles with a burn-out and is challenged in his role as caregiver. The garden seems to give him some redemption, but winter is coming and the question arises: what needs to be cared for?
The protagonists: Henk van der Ploeg (73) lives close to my parents and I have known from many brief encounters over the last 15 years. Rinke Nijburg (58) is my father. During the past years their relationship evolved as Henk’s health has declined and my father sometimes struggles with his mental health. It made me wonder: what drives my father to go there every day to bring the groceries? Their situation makes me reflect on how my own life is organised, as well as my position as an artist. How do we meet the Other? The other human-being, the animal, the planet? I have touched these themes before in previous films but they were never so close to home as this piece. The challenge for me as a filmmaker is how to translate this everlasting struggle: the attempt to care in an audio-visual piece - this time on a hyper personal level.