SCPK GRS 2/3
Thesis outline (7 nov)
Background
In this thesis, I move away from usual lens based tools in exchange for a pen, to delve further, in words, about images. I look towards my lens based encounter with a person and place that I literally sat on top of: a sex shop under my apartment, and a man working there named Marty. Through these collaborators, subjects, settings and catalysts for a collective practice I am able explore the realm, the implications, the struggles and the dynamics of documentary and ethnographic filmmaking between maker and made of-er. The thesis will provide a case study on films and processes made in an opposition to traditional cinematic means: with collaboration, participation, sustainability, taking time and non-professionality at it's core. This will be bridged to my own practice- one focused on moving away from my 'industrial' training as cinematographer in search of something more liberating for myself and those I choose to put in frame. It will explore the role of the lens amongst differing people when making film and subverting it. Ultimately, the structures, methods and manners I used in developing my current work in progress Work(ing Together) in Process will be discussed through creative text. I will examine how I as an individual and independent maker with a western background and film-school toolset deals with making film that goes against the traditional form.
Chapter 1 How have images been 'colonized' by professionality, rationality and profit driven motives? Where and how is it programmed, for the programming of the masses? What do we need to make images? (Tools, topics, subjects, knowledge). What are some examples of restitances to this, in cinema and expanded cinema/fine art? This chapter will look at these things while also laying a basis of understanding around ethnographic/anthorpological documentary film and the potential issues around it. Also, what are the contrary or contrasting forms of making to this? ex. Jean Rouch, Third Cinema etc.
Chapter 2 How did my practice break from professional? Looking at Zen and the Art of Street Cinema & Keep It in the Streets, trying to find a way to work within documentary to go beyond it. Mining the streets for stories, and how that also felt extractivist in some sense now in reflection. Then, in Rotterdam, slowly developing a new method of working. How do I use my immediate surroundings as a small, accessible, cheap and mostly rich soil to make films? Dear Moritz, prioritizing the unexpected (making a film out of what wasn't planned to be a film) and prioritizing conversations with many differing voices to understand the images we have/make.
Chapter 3 Meeting Marty, my once stranger turned neighbour turned friend turned collaborator and co-director. The process of our work. How did we start? How did we understand and trust each other enough to bring a camera between us and pointed at us. How did the initial 'fascination' i had of a 'character' turn into a project far from that, one that explores a reconciliation of difference through long term relationship building and letting loose of expectations and control in making. How often do we meet, talk, shoot, edit, or disconnect from the making process. What are our differing reflections on this?
Conclusion
- In looking back at this chaotic process making with Marty, the question is begged: what do we do now? Is the work finished? Is it ever? Is the work the work or is the work the friendship? What was the basis? Has he actually learned anything here? Does he want to? Does it matter? I'm not sure I was ever looking for a solution, but is there one? I believe there are mostly just trade offs.
- Where do films go from here? Do we see more collaborative work free from restraint due to the technological democratization of image making? Or is that phenomena more perceived than actual? Is there a framework to be found within this to pull more stories from less capital, falseness, contruction? Are our surroundings and encounters and interactions enough for all films?
Sam Koopman, Project Proposal, Work(ing Together) in Process. UpdateD (6 nov) [Steve feedback] and suggested edits
[Steve notes: this proposal gets clearer with each version. I have made some suggested edits, mainly at the beginning. There is great material here for the thesis too! Please be more generous with the images, bigger and more of them, show the process. Plenty to chat about on Thursday, looking forward. bst Steve]
What do you want to make?
In 2020, I moved to a new flat in the west side of Rotterdam. Around the same time, I had ordered batteries online for a new camera. I missed the delivery and was left with a note telling me I could get them from the sex shop below me. This had me gritting my teeth for all sorts of preconceived and baked-in conflicts. But without those batteries I couldn't turn the camera on...
Work(ing Together) in Process is a film that will expand into an installation. It explores my relationship as a filmmaker to the man I met behind the counter, Marty, and to the people who pass through this extraordinary place. It will be presented through multiple channels that focus on different themes: our relationship, filmmaking together and the shop.
The work will serve as a document, collage and audio visual proof of a multi-year process in which two unexpected friends from different worlds make a film together. Within this, we battle our own crises - personal and creative, through trying to make a film in such a loaded environment, while understanding the shop is our middle ground, meeting point and safe space.
Throughout the work, we examine the nature our relationship, collaborative filmmaking and what our male bodies mean in such a heteronormative shell of a place. [I would suggest cutting= seemingly from the past]. The roles of documentary director and subject are exchanged for a collaborative process in which we make meaning together.
Methodologies: How the work will be made
The film is comprised of video material collected over the course of last year (this is an ongoing process). I regularly spend days in the shop with Marty. [I suggest cutting a bit here, it is repetitive] These sessions vary, capturing the mundane instances of this quiet shop, the peculiar clinical details of its contents, and thoughts and expressions of Marty, me and the visitors. Free from a 'shooting schedule' or 'script' the camera and subjects are reflexive, but also statically, cinematically and simultaneously 'unprofessional'. [<<let's unpack this on Thursday] A key element of the research this year will be to examine strategies which make this inherently disorderly approach clear to a viewer. [<<I moved this line from previous para]
We build the structure of the project through editing together. We open up the cutting room floor so we can both look at the material; we remove ourselves from the 'set' and reflect upon our narrative, while crafting it. We review the footage (together and individually), and try to understand it; shaping it through discussion and further iteration. In moulding the work, we exchange energies and talents, trading my technical knowledge for his spiritual knowledge. I have the monopoly of skills needed for this project, and over time I share and transfer thiose skills to Marty. This process challenges my strong, and Marty's non-existent, notions of film and failure. Giving Marty this agency does not necessarily solve any problems. Rather, it is a trade off. [<<Let's unpack this on Thursday. The subject of agency is a key problematic in the work.]
Essential to making this work is the simultaneous process of watching and writing. The films I have long been interested in, and now with a refreshed perspective, are those that challenge the western gaze of documentary and explore ways that allow the subjects to also be authors. I have been revisiting the work of Jean Rouch, and in conjunction with the film essays of Jean-Pierre Gorin, I've been trying to build a bridge to my own work. I am also using the texts I have made about since starting this project to develop my thesis. For the thesis I will draw from the words of Edouard Glissant, Trinh T. Minh-Ha and Chick Strand, among others.
On a personal level, when we first met, Marty confided in me that he was struggling with a creative crisis, one he knew he needed to get out of by doing something – but he didn’t know how. I was struggling with similar things and needing a companion to try things, a “subject” (although I hate that word now) and a setting to help make a film that satisfies my need to make work free from commercial or traditional restraints. Marty is in many ways my opposite: he is twice my age, willingly lives without an address, has avoided technology for the most part in the last 15 years, and has no formal artistic training. He challenges me to see things inversely, and acts as an alter ego to me, evident through his constant belief in 'letting go'. I believe this duality of difference we share is powerful, especially when expressed through creative means. [<>]
Why do you want to make it?
In my previous work Dear Moritz, I made use of a filmed encounter in public space to build a larger film around it, thinking through its happenings and implications. This was a first step in authoring my own work, still within the realm of encounters on the 'streets' as I did before Piet Zwart, but not in traditional documentary or 'talking head' format. It had opened up a new method for me of using my immediate surroundings and people as a starting point for asking questions revolved around the lens and employing more critical thought to what I put in frame. I want to continue this, on a larger scale in terms of film length, narrative and presentation but also trying to develop a way to tell stories together with participants of the work.
Workflow
The workflow of this project is inherent to its final result- fragmented, contrasting, confusing, (il)logical. We plan shooting days intermittently, when schedules allow and our energies are open for it. Sometimes I just pass by as a surprise, sometimes we plan it in advance. Often we wait for moments to find us while the camera is rolling, with people coming in the shop or us finding words to describe our workflow. Other times, we plan to interview each other, often about the workflow itself, or our lives or our struggles with this disorderly process. This is continuing as it has for almost a year now, but we as we are transitioning to a greater focus on solely editing the film now, so has that workflow. We are now focusing on more specific scenes and details that we need to complete the edit instead of open-ended shooting. This is representative of a workflow that is in flux, and of Marty's transition into being a filmmaker. He now suggests ideas, scenes we may need etc.
As the project was born out of a shared creative crisis, it will also be laid to rest when that is fulfilled- and that time is approaching. While the workflow started 'fun' and aimless, times of frustration have approached more recently, a frustration of not knowing and losing sight of what we are trying to make. This change is emblematic of the disorder, the conflict that the film actively sought out and finally found. Marty has been forced to confront himself with this film, I have been forced to let go of my preconceptions of what a film is.
Timetable
November & December:
- Prototyping different edits. Inquiries into making a clear representation of an unclear process.
- Using thesis outline/first chapter as a way of more critically reflecting on the process and maybe unturning some forgotten stones
I would also like to have a 'picture lock' at this time. This is a term attached to the traditional cinema process that I am trying to avoid, but it nonetheless maybe useful as giving a deadline for having no more necessary images shot. It would also mark one year exactly since we started filming. I like the idea of this film having been shot over one year. We tend to think of our lives in such terms. And this film is a reflection of that.
January & February:
- Developing those edits further to a point where decisions start to become more final. If needed, plan extra shoot(s) for necessary shots.
This will also be a moment where I will spend time writing, reading and watching heavily. Working on the project through indirect means, gaining perspective and shaping it to be the way it needs to be.
March & April:
- Working in a more practical manner (maybe simultaneously with another Stefanos seminar) start to craft physically how I want to present the work.
- Final, definitive edits.
Who can help you and how?
My classmates and mentors can help immensely by discussing the work with me and providing more perspective as that is what a lot of the work is about, differing perspectives. This is happening continuously in tutorials and mentor sessions. Similarly, I believe it is extremely important that Marty can share and discuss the work with his community of friends and colleagues, for the same reasons. I think theory and literature regarding collective/communal making is important, also deepening my knowledge on the history and current movements on ethnography.
Relation to Previous Practice
I come from a world of cinematography and entertainment-commercial business filmmaking. I have struggled with fascinations of making documentations of people and places, and I want to hold a dear connection to what I put in frame. Marty became a friend first, one I was fascinated with by how he lived his life. But that has fallen much to the wayside now, he has become such an important person to me that I notice this difference less. He endlessly expresses his desire, need to be doing something. Especially something confronting, like putting yourself on screen. This true passion for making as a conscious endeavour, to transcend oneself and share themselves, their(our?) stories has long been missing in my previous practice. I want to experience it, but even more so want to share it with others. Decentralizing the idea of 'directed by' opens up a world of new possibilities for us to work within. Sharing every idea from absurd to serious, this is important to me- to unlearn things, recycle codes an conventions, and so on. [Let's pick up on 'unlearning' and 'recycling codes' on Thursday]
Relation to a larger context
With the speed of visual cultures today, there is a need for something that questions what visual culture is and can be, I think. How can the foundations of 'film' be shaken, by those invested in it themselves (a so called 'filmmaker' like me) and those so distant from it (a self proclaimed rejector of films like Marty). I believe the material of the medium can be challenged within it self, in the questions we discuss through this project and also in the style of the work. Avoiding polished images,(traditional) actors, rigid lines to stay inside. Also, how can representation be explored, collectively? Who is film being made by and for? How can the norms be challenged and groups be accessed who might otherwise be excluded? On a wider more abstract scale, I'm also curious about the footprint of image making on our earth. How can small-scale-local projects prove a creatively lucrative form of expression, rich in story but limited in money, crew, technology, 'talent' and so forth. How can a film listen to the environment around it, and have it also be a part of the authorship instead of being impeded upon within the authoring?
Project Proposal updateD (30 okt/4 nov)
What do you want to make?
In 2020, I moved to a new flat in the west side of Rotterdam. Around the same time, I had ordered batteries online for a new camera. I missed the delivery and was left with a note telling me I could get them from the sex shop below me. This had me gritting my teeth for all sorts of preconceived and baked-in conflicts. But without those batteries I couldn't turn the camera on...
Work(ing Together) in Process is a film that will also be expanded into an installation. It explores my relationship as a filmmaker in regard to multiple encounters of people and place, primarily that of a sex shop and a man working there, Marty. It will be presented through multiple channels that focus on different themes: our relationship, filmmaking together and the space.
The work will serve as a document, collage and audio visual proof of our multi year long process of two unexpected friends from differing worlds making film. Within this, we battle our own crises - personal and creative, through trying to make a film in a loaded space, while understanding it as their middle ground, meeting point and also safe space, the shop.
Throughout the work, inquiry is made about the nature of their relationship, collaborative filmmaking and what their male bodies mean such a heteronormative shell of a place, seemingly from the past. The documentarian roles of director and subject are exchanged in a collaborative, meaning making process. What strategies can I employ to make this inherently disorderly approach clear to a viewer?
Methodologies: How the work will be made
The film is comprised of video material collected over the course of last year, and still being collected. I regularly spend days in the shop with Marty, where we employ differing methods of filming with different motivations as we aim to understand ourselves, the project and the space. These sessions vary, capturing the mundane normalities of this quiet shop, the peculiar clinical details of its contents, and thoughts and expressions of the people within it- Marty, I and more visitors. Freeing itself from a 'shooting schedule' or 'script' it allows the camera and subjects to be employed reflexively, but also statically, cinematically and simultaneously 'unprofessionally'.
In editing, we open up the cutting room floor for us both to peruse the material, to remove ourselves from the 'set' and reflect upon our narrative(s) while crafting it. We individually and collectively review the footage, attempt to understand what it is and how to shape it through discussion and prototyping. Through this, we build the structure of the project through editing together. This exercise in moulding the work, we exchange energies and talents, trading my technical for his spiritual. I have monopoly on the skills needed for this project. With time I am sharing and transferring this onto Marty. This process challenges (my strong and his non-existent) notions of both film and failure. Meanwhile, giving him this agency does not necessarily solve any problems. Rather, it is a trade off.
Essential to making this work is also a simultaneous process of watching and writing. The films I have long been interested in, and especially now with a refreshed perspective are those that challenge the western gaze of documentary and explore ways of allowing subjects to also be authors. Currently I am revisiting the work of Jean Rouch. I am trying to explore that in conjunction with the film essays of Jean-Pierre Gorin, in an attempt to build a bridge in methods to transfer to this work. I am additionally using the continued writings I have made since starting this project and aiming to develop that further in my thesis. Here I am pulling from the words of Edouard Glissant, Trinh T. Minh-Ha and Chick Strand among others.
Why do you want to make it?
In my previous work Dear Moritz, I made use of a filmed encounter in public space to build a larger film around it, thinking through its happenings and implications. This was a first step in authoring my own work, still within the realm of encounters on the 'streets' as I did before Piet Zwart, but not in traditional documentary or 'talking head' format. It had opened up a new method for me of using my immediate surroundings and people as a starting point for asking questions revolved around the lens and employing more critical thought to what I put in frame. I want to continue this, on a larger scale in terms of film length, narrative and presentation but also trying to develop a way to tell stories together with participants of the work.
On a personal level, when we first met, Marty confided in me that he was struggling with a creative crisis, one he knew he needed to get out of by doing something – but he didn’t know how. I was struggling with similar things and needing a companion to try things, a “subject” (although I hate that word now) and a setting to help make a film that satisfies my need to make work free from commercial or traditional restraints. Marty is in many ways my opposite: he is twice my age, willingly lives without an address, has avoided technology for the most part in the last 15 years, and has no formal artistic training. He challenges me to see things inversely, and acts as an alter ego to me, evident through his constant belief in 'letting go'. I believe this duality of difference we share is powerful, especially when expressed through creative means.
Workflow
The workflow of this project is inherent to its final result- fragmented, contrasting, confusing, (il)logical. We plan shooting days intermittently, when schedules allow and our energies are open for it. Sometimes I just pass by as a surprise, sometimes we plan it in advance. Often we wait for moments to find us while the camera is rolling, with people coming in the shop or us finding words to describe our workflow. Other times, we plan to interview each other, often about the workflow itself, or our lives or our struggles with this disorderly process. This is continuing as it has for almost a year now, but we as we are transitioning to a greater focus on solely editing the film now, so has that workflow. We are now focusing on more specific scenes and details that we need to complete the edit instead of open-ended shooting. This is representative of a workflow that is in flux, and of Marty's transition into being a filmmaker. He now suggests ideas, scenes we may need etc.
As the project was born out of a shared creative crisis, it will also be laid to rest when that is fulfilled- and that time is approaching. While the workflow started 'fun' and aimless, times of frustration have approached more recently, a frustration of not knowing and losing sight of what we are trying to make. This change is emblematic of the disorder, the conflict that the film actively sought out and finally found. Marty has been forced to confront himself with this film, I have been forced to let go of my preconceptions of what a film is.
Timetable
November & December:
- Prototyping different edits. Inquiries into making a clear representation of an unclear process.
- Using thesis outline/first chapter as a way of more critically reflecting on the process and maybe unturning some forgotten stones
I would also like to have a 'picture lock' at this time. This is a term attached to the traditional cinema process that I am trying to avoid, but it nonetheless maybe useful as giving a deadline for having no more necessary images shot. It would also mark one year exactly since we started filming. I like the idea of this film having been shot over one year. We tend to think of our lives in such terms. And this film is a reflection of that.
January & February:
- Developing those edits further to a point where decisions start to become more final. If needed, plan extra shoot(s) for necessary shots.
This will also be a moment where I will spend time writing, reading and watching heavily. Working n the project through indirect means, gaining perspective and shaping it to be the way it needs to be.
March & April:
- Working in a more practical manner (maybe simultaneously with another Stefanos seminar) start to craft physically how I want to present the work.
- Final, definitive edits.
Who can help you and how?
My classmates and mentors can help immensely by discussing the work with me and providing more perspective as that is what a lot of the work is about, differing perspectives. This is happening continuously in tutorials and mentor sessions. Similarly, I believe it is extremely important that Marty can share and discuss the work with his community of friends and colleagues, for the same reasons. I think theory and literature regarding collective/communal making is important, also deepening my knowledge on the history and current movements on ethnography.
Relation to Previous Practice Coming from a world of cinematography and entertainment/commercial business filmmaking. I have struggled with fascinations of making documentations of people and places, and I want to hold a dear connection to what I put in frame. Marty became a friend first, one I was fascinated with by how he lived his life. But that has fallen much to the wayside now, he has become such an important person to me that I notice this difference less. He endlessly expresses his desire, need to be doing something. Especially something confronting, like putting yourself on screen. This true passion for making as a conscious endeavour, to transcend oneself and share themselves, their(our?) stories has long been missing in my previous practice. I want to experience it, but even more so want to share it with others. Decentralizing the idea of 'directed by' opens up a world of new possibilities for us to work within. Sharing every idea from absurd to serious, this is important to me- to unlearn things, recycle codes an conventions, and so on.
Relation to a larger context With the speed of visual cultures today, there is a need for something that questions what visual culture is and can be, I think. How can the foundations of 'film' be shaken, by those invested in it themselves (a so called 'filmmaker' like me) and those so distant from it (a self proclaimed rejector of films like Marty). I believe the material of the medium can be challenged within it self, in the questions we discuss through this project and also in the style of the work. Avoiding polished images,(traditional) actors, rigid lines to stay inside. Also, how can representation be explored, collectively? Who is film being made by and for? How can the norms be challenged and groups be accessed who might otherwise be excluded? On a wider more abstract scale, I'm also curious about the footprint of image making on our earth. How can small-scale-local projects prove a creatively lucrative form of expression, rich in story but limited in money, crew, technology, 'talent' and so forth. How can a film listen to the environment around it, and have it also be a part of the authorship instead of being impeded upon within the authoring?
Project Proposal update (Steve Suggests 23 okt.)
[Steve: LOTS of images please! Note on style:you write very clearly and honestly but you seem to be struggling with how to order the information. Below I suggest an edit which reorders some of the things you write and cuts repetition. This comes with practice and with increased confidence in writing, which you will gain over the coming months :-)
What do you want to make?
Work(ing Together) in Process is a film and installation made in collaboration with my friend Marty. Marty and I unexpectedly became friends and collaborators in a sex shop in the west side of Rotterdam. The film explores the making of a film and the making of a friendship. It reflects the crisis of the creative minds behind it: a filmmaker and a non-filmmaker. The piece shows how our co-authorship works, as Marty and I exchange roles as cameraman, actor, director and editor.
Methodologies: How the work will be made The film currently comprises video material collected over the course of last year. This footage establishes a base for the work currently in progress. In addition to this, I regularly visit the shop where Marty works. Together we record our conversations and our encounters with visitors. On these occasions, we focus on the moment and have no pre-conceived plan of how the footage might be used. Later, we edit this material together, molding and rounding it out, establishing an agreed 'structure' and deciding what additional material is needed. The experience of exterminating with forms of co-editing is central to this project. I plan to continually build edits individually and with Marty over the course of making this work. This process is difficult at times, because Marty has shunned films (and all modern technology) all his life, he is unused to the editing platform and to the camera. This collective process challenges both our notions of film (failure) and allows us to be vulnerable on screen. The piece, in the current version, begins as a 'portrait' of an 'other' in a 'peculiar' place. We then traverse our worlds of difference and come closer to understanding ourselves, each other and the work we are making.
Why do you want to make it? When we first met, Marty confided in me that he was struggling with a creative crisis, one he knew he needed to get out of by doing something – but he didn’t know how. I was struggling with similar things and needing a companion to try things, a “subject” (although I hate that word now) and a setting to help make a film that satisfies my need to make work free from commercial or traditional restraints. Marty is in many ways my opposite: he is twice my age, willingly lives without an address, has avoided technology for the most part in the last 15 years, and has no formal artistic training. He challenges me to see things inversely. I believe this duality of difference we share is powerful, especially when expressed through creative means. Working on the film has opened a whole slew of questions regarding sexuality, heteronormativity, violence, pleasure, safe spaces, and more.
Workflow Working on this project has changed from the idea of making a portrait or documentary. I now envisage a free form 'non-film' which plays with the author-subject relationship. Marty maintains he has no idea how films should be made and that he has no expectations, contrary to me. Lots of our discussions revolve around this. How do we make this film together as two differing people with differing intentions? [<<S: the challenge is to make this negotiation apparent without it falling into an incoherent mess (I mean this positively, you can make this acknowledgement in the proposal, that “how do I make this necessarily chaotic method understandible to the viewer?” This is a core research question for the work itself to answer.] In a recent edit we made room for a more definite approach in making a complete work. This might involve writing something like a ‘script’, which maps out 'scenes', to find a way for us both to share our ends of the story we both live. I believe that the process of this non-filmmaking in non-conforming manner is constantly in flux and cannot rely on a certain concrete structure. As the film grows, so does our relationship, in complexity. The workflow will consist of continuing several elements: filming together, editing together, spending time together just discussing the project, spending time together away from the project, spending time individually both with and away from the project. Marty is currently now watching all the 'dailies' and making notes. I am transferring these notes into edits, in conjunction with my notes on the footage and project.
[Steve: <<It is great to have an explanation of the process here. BUT, I think you might get questions on this bit at the assessment. I think you need to think through the possible outcomes of the project more thoroughly. What will the installation look like? Will there be different versions? Different entry and exit points? If so, how so? How can the different approaches you take during the process of making be reflected in the end ? Another question: how ‘complete’ does it need to be? How can an ‘incomplete’ project be best represented? The planning of the project will need to accommodate an provisional end point (you go into this in 'timetable' but specifics about possible outcomes are needed here). By being non-specific, are you making yourself a hostage to fortune?]
[Each of you have something: for Sam: building the engine which make the process visible & which does not look familiar.]
What is your timetable?
October: Meetings to discuss the state of the project, potential 'final' forms it could take (loose script writing) continuing a new edit prototype without voice over, and adding the new footage.
November: Due to the pressure of thesis writing and assessment incoming in this month, I think this can be a time space where writing really becomes a priority. This writing will influence my thesis and project, but also potentially provide inspiration and thought for installation.
December: Have a rough 'picture lock'. This is a term attached to the traditional cinema process that i am trying to avoid, but it nonetheless i smaybe useful as giving a penciled in deadline for when the basis of the final film images are all collected for the most part. It would also mark one year exactly since we started filming. I like the idea of this film having been shot over one year. We tend to think of our lives in such terms. And this film is a reflection of that. The christmas break may also give some space to shoot any extras scenes or shots we may think are still missing.
January/February: A focus on writing and reflection. I hope this time will be used to understand what we have, maybe step away from editing to think more in large about the process. [<<Please do not stop working on project. Timetable writing and reading into your overall plan. The project is an iterative process and requires rhythm and consistency. Avoid abstraction from process at all costs!]
March/April: Final edits. Maybe after the reflection time and space to add another layer to the project, a film or something only done by Marty, to be used in installation.
Who can help you and how? I think my classmates and mentors can help immensely by discussing the work with me and providing more perspective as that is what a lot of the work is about, differing perspectives. Similarly, I believe it is extremely important that Marty can share and discuss the work with his community of friends and colleagues, for the same reasons. I think theory and literature regarding collective/communal making is important, also deepening my knowledge on the history and current movements on ethnography. (Non traditional) masculinity is also a topic that comes into play here and relative theory will be useful considering the location.
Relation to Previous Practice Coming from a world of cinematography and entertainment/commercial business filmmaking. I have struggled with fascinations of making documentations of people and places, and I want to hold a dear connection to what I put in frame. Marty became a friend first, one I was fascinated with by how he lived his life. But that has fallen much to the wayside now, he has become such an important person to me that I notice this difference less. He endlessly expresses his desire, need to be doing something. Especially something confronting, like putting yourself on screen. This true passion for making as a conscious endeavour, to transcend oneself and share themselves, their(our?) stories has long been missing in my previous practice. I want to experience it, but even more so want to share it with others. Decentralizing the idea of 'directed by' opens up a world of new possibilities for us to work within. Sharing every idea from absurd to serious, this is important to me- to unlearn things, recycle codes an conventions, and so on.
Relation to a larger context With the speed of visual cultures today, there is a need for something that questions what visual culture is and can be, I think. How can the foundations of 'film' be shaken, by those invested in it themselves (a so called 'filmmaker' like me) and those so distant from it (a self proclaimed rejector of films like Marty). I believe the material of the medium can be challenged within it self, in the questions we discuss through this project and also in the style of the work. Avoiding polished images,(traditional) actors, rigid lines to stay inside. Also, how can representation be explored, collectively? Who is film being made by and for? How can the norms be challenged and groups be accessed who might otherwise be excluded? On a wider more abstract scale, I'm also curious about the footprint of image making on our earth. How can small-scale-local projects prove a creatively lucrative form of expression, rich in story but limited in money, crew, technology, 'talent' and so forth. How can a film listen to the environment around it, and have it also be a part of the authorship instead of being impeded upon within the authoring?
Thesis outline update (16 okt.)
[Steve: This is a great start! I have some suggestions for the thesis which we can discuss on Thursday :-)]
Introduction In my untitled thesis, I move away from usual lens based tools in exchange for a pen, to delve further, in words, about images. I will examine how I as an individual and independent maker with a western background and film-school toolset deals with making film that goes against the traditional form. Furthermore, the thesis will provide historical context on traditional documentary or narrative means, and and contrast this with those that are made in an opposition to traditional cinematic means: with collaboration, participation, sustainability, taking time and non-professionality at it's core. This will will be bridged to my own practice- about moving away from my 'industrial' practice as cinematographer in search of something more freeing and justified in regards to making films about and with others. It will explore the role of the lens amongst differing people when making film, subverting it, and what sort of structures, methods and manners I used in developing my current work in progress Work(ing Together) in Process.
Chapter 1 How have images been 'colonized' by professionality, rationality and profit driven motives? What does the 'normal' film look like? Where and how is it programmed, for the programming of the masses? What are some examples of restitances to this, in cinema and expanded cinema/fine art? This chapter will look at these things while also laying a basis of understanding around ethnographic/anthorpological documentary film and the potential issues around it. Also, what are the contrary or contrasting forms of making to this? ex. Jean Rouch, Third Cinema etc.
Chapter 2 How did my practice break from professional? Looking at Zen and the Art of Street Cinema & Keep It in the Streets, trying to find a way to work within documentary to go beyond it. Mining the streets for stories, and how that also felt extractivist in some sense now in reflection. Then, in Rotterdam, slowly developing a new method of working. How do I use my immediate surroundings as a small, accessible, cheap and mostly rich soil to make films? Dear Moritz, prioritizing the unexpected (making a film out of what wsant planned to be a film) and prioritizing conversations with many differing voices to understand the images we have/make.
Chapter 3 Meeting Marty, my once stranger turned neighbour turned friend turned collaborator and co-director. The process of our work. How did we start? How did we understand and trust each other enough to bring a camera between us and pointed at us. How did the initial 'fascination' i had of a 'character' turn into a project far from that, one that explores a reconciliation of difference through long term relationship building and letting loose of expectations and control in making. How often do we meet, talk, shoot, edit, or disconnect from the making process. What are our differing reflections on this?
Bibliography
[S: It is FANTASTIC to see an annotated bibliography! This really helps in maintaining a connection between the work you are making and the things you are reading.]
- Poetics of Relation - Edouard Glissant - A seminal work which explores the notion of the 'other', and the how relations are built upon this. This relates to my thesis and practice because my film is a constant effort to reconcile this notion, to subvert the traditional use of lens, and to recognize difference and use it to collectively empower and share (new) narratives.
- Selfless Cinema?: Ethics and French Documentary - This book provides a good case study into the work of several french directors that inspired my initial interest in cinema for aesthetic reasons (nouvelle vague) and my re-born interest in a new form of making throuhg Jean Rouch' ehtnographic film work. Rouch was not trained as a filmmaker and worked from a very different angle in making films that understood French society and people but also attempted to understand Africa and it's relation to France. This will be useful for historical context.
- In Defense of the Poor Image - a parallel to the idea of non-professional cinema. Making something out of what is usually not looked at, the neighbours, friends, differences surrounding us. Also a useful reference in terms of writing style. Maybe I could use this mode of address to discuss a new form I am striving towards of collectivity, much like the manifesto of Third Cinema (following reference)
- For An Imperfect Cinema - Julio Garcia Espinosa
- Displacements—Beyond the Coloniality of Images
- Fractal Levels Of Awareness: Authoring Our Own Story
Project Proposal update (16 okt.)
I wanted to make a film. I had a camera, all I still needed was batteries. Type, click, click, pay. On their way. But I didn't get them. Instead, all I got was this piece of paper, telling me they weren't at my address but another. Knocking on that other address didn't solve it either. Could they be at that shop? The one I really don't want to enter? With that guy behind the counter chain smoking while selling dildos? If I go in there, better make sure my neighbours don't see me. I live above the shop. I'm above this kind of place. Right? But I want to make a film. I just need those batteries...
What do you want to make? Work(ing Together) in Process is a film and installation made in collaboration with my friend, subject and author, Marty. It is an explorative look into the processes amongst making a film that strives to be or not to be a film. A project in crisis, much like the creative minds behind it- two people who unexpectedly became friends and collaborators, inside an unexpected place, a sex shop in the west side of Rotterdam. The film is collectively authored, by both filmmaker and non. Throughout the work we see how this authorship works, exchanging roles as cameraman, actor, director and editor. The project drifts from it's initial roots of a 'portrait' of an 'other' in a 'peculiar' place as it traverses our worlds of difference our in trying to understand what we are doing and what it may mean. Much of this hangs on the confrontation of the self- a the challenge that we recognize as both endlessly difficult and necessary. This involves both of us being challenged by our notions of film (failure) and allowing ourselves to be vulnerable on screen.
How do you plan to make it? The current state of the film is comprised of video material that has (and continues) to be collected, over the course of ~1 year. While we have comprised alot of footage that has made for a base of the work. I regularly visit the shop where Marty works. Together we record in fragmented manners, our conversations, the visitors, he interviews me, vice versa. There is rarely a definite reason or idea that we employ. It focuses on the moment. It has become a pile of footage, that over the past several months we have begun digging into, together, in editing. We now are working together to mould and round out this material to understand what it can become when put together, and potentially shoot in a more goal-driven manner for scenes to fill the gaps. I plan to continually build edits individually and with Marty by experimenting forms of co editing. THis is difficult as Marty is someone who has shunned films all his life, let alone being in one. He also has a completely different skill set than me, one of never having used an editing platform, camera etc.
Why do you want to make it? I am curious about using images and telling stories, contrary to traditional narrative/filmic means. Marty confided in me years ago when we first met, that he was struggling with a sort of creative crisis, one he knew he needed to get out of by doing something- but unsure how. I was struggling with similar things and needing a companion to try things, a subject(although i hate that word now) and setting to help my own issue with trying to make a film that satisfies my need for making free from commercial or traditional restraint. The setting of our work was convenient as it was under my apartment. It also lent its hand to a whole slew of other questions and topics regarding sexuality, heteronormativity, violence, pleasure, safe spaces and more. Marty is in many ways an opposite to me: twice as old, willingly lives without an address, has avoided technology for the most part in the last 15 years, and no formal artistic training. He challenges me to always see things inversely to how my usual reaction is. I believe this duality of difference we share is powerful, especially when brought out in creative means. Reason enough to do this.
Workflow Working on this project has slowly changed from the idea of making a portrait or documentary, to a free form 'non-film' which plays with the author-subject relationship. Marty maintains he has no idea how films should be made and that he has no expectations, contrary to me. Lots of our discussions revolve around this. How do we make this film together as two differing people with differing intentions? In a recent edit we made, room for a more definite approach in making a complete work is arising. This might involve writing somewhat of a script, something to map out so-called 'scenes' in finding a way for us both to share our ends of the story we both live. I believe that the process of this non-filmmaking in non-conforming manner is constantly in flux and cannot rely on certain concrete structure. As the film grows, so does our relationship, in complexity. The workflow will consist of continuing several elements: filming together, editing together, spending time together just discussing the project, spending time together away from the project, spending time individually both with and away from the project. Marty is currently now watching all the 'dailies' and making notes. I am transferring these notes into edits, in conjunction with my notes on the footage and project.
What is your timetable?
October: Meetings to discuss the state of the project, potential 'final' forms it could take (loose script writing) continuing a new edit prototype without voice over, and adding the new footage.
November: Due to the pressure of thesis writing and assessment incoming in this month, I think this can be a time space where writing really becomes a priority. This writing will influence my thesis and project, but also potentially provide inspiration and thought for installation.
December: Have a rough 'picture lock'. This is a term attached to the traditional cinema process that i am trying to avoid, but it nonetheless i smaybe useful as giving a penciled in deadline for when the basis of the final film images are all collected for the most part. It would also mark one year exactly since we started filming. I like the idea of this film having been shot over one year. We tend to think of our lives in such terms. And this film is a reflection of that. The christmas break may also give some space to shoot any extras scenes or shots we may think are still missing.
January/February: A focus on writing and reflection. I hope this time will be used to understand what we have, maybe step away from editing to think more in large about the process.
March/April: Final edits. Maybe after the reflection time and space to add another layer to the project, a film or something only done by Marty, to be used in installation.
Who can help you and how? I think my classmates and mentors can help immensely by discussing the work with me and providing more perspective as that is what a lot of the work is about, differing perspectives. Similarly, I believe it is extremely important that Marty can share and discuss the work with his community of friends and colleagues, for the same reasons. I think theory and literature regarding collective/communal making is important, also deepening my knowledge on the history and current movements on ethnography. (Non traditional) masculinity is also a topic that comes into play here and relative theory will be useful considering the location.
Relation to Previous Practice Coming from a world of cinematography and entertainment/commercial business filmmaking. I have struggled with fascinations of making documentations of people and places, and I want to hold a dear connection to what I put in frame. Marty became a friend first, one I was fascinated with by how he lived his life. But that has fallen much to the wayside now, he has become such an important person to me that I notice this difference less. He endlessly expresses his desire, need to be doing something. Especially something confronting, like putting yourself on screen. This true passion for making as a conscious endeavour, to transcend oneself and share themselves, their(our?) stories has long been missing in my previous practice. I want to experience it, but even more so want to share it with others. Decentralizing the idea of 'directed by' opens up a world of new possibilities for us to work within. Sharing every idea from absurd to serious, this is important to me- to unlearn things, recycle codes an conventions, and so on.
Relation to a larger context With the speed of visual cultures today, there is a need for something that questions what visual culture is and can be, I think. How can the foundations of 'film' be shaken, by those invested in it themselves (a so called 'filmmaker' like me) and those so distant from it (a self proclaimed rejector of films like Marty). I believe the material of the medium can be challenged within it self, in the questions we discuss through this project and also in the style of the work. Avoiding polished images,(traditional) actors, rigid lines to stay inside. Also, how can representation be explored, collectively? Who is film being made by and for? How can the norms be challenged and groups be accessed who might otherwise be excluded? On a wider more abstract scale, I'm also curious about the footprint of image making on our earth. How can small-scale-local projects prove a creatively lucrative form of expression, rich in story but limited in money, crew, technology, 'talent' and so forth. How can a film listen to the environment around it, and have it also be a part of the authorship instead of being impeded upon within the authoring?
Thesis outline quick sketch (5 okt.)
I want to write a thesis that explores two sides. One being a broader context and understanding of the (moving) image, it’s history and current state. The other side will reflects on my current position and practices, of attempting to find fragments, structures, designs, methods, to work with the image in a collaborative, participatory form of authorship. This will connect to the current project I am working on with Marty, a film that is (maybe) not a film. And how the process of that, is very much a ‘film’ as we are trained to know, without needing a heroes journey or script or typical plot. Our lives are filled with films, in the sense of moments, interactions, encounters, peculiarities, paradoxes and more. What does it mean to delve into this, to use the images around us instead of adding to the endless sea and speed of images. The thesis would also reflect on the philosophy of image making and distribution for capitalistic reasons and attempt to build bridges by linking back to the small scale process as a form of fighting back and decentralizing the purpose of images/films and questioning altogether what this is.
In short, the 3 key issues I am currently thinking of exploring within the thesis are:
What do we know as images, what are their types and implied connotations? (genre, categorization, dominance- Professional, amateur, documentary, fiction, commercial etc)
representation, authorship, coloniality of images?
How have and can images been used and explored contrary to this? What/where are the outliers? What do they mean? How is it negotiated
collectively authored works, participatory practices, challenging ethnographic film
How do we make a film about someone, with someone?
Reflections on the process of making a film that is a process of reflection on making a film
the attempts, negotiations, structures used in my practice.
Notes from Arabella, Ada and Marloes
- Collaboration as an act of rebellion against the use of images / active resistance
- Using this process as a case study
- XPub approach to lens based
- Explore something in a collaborative way that is not usually in done in such a way
- Details of methods? Would I?
- Ultimate act of resistance is the detail
- Approach the thesis in the same way of my project
- Use the thesis as the decision making process,
- Using writing to become an element of this process, to think through problems
- There is improv - types of art form. Think about that
- Technique - what are the tools and techniques
- Using the diary or journal and expanding out