Do you develop relationships with your subjects? Do you empathize with them, hate them, want to tell them your opinion?
Did you want to do these studies on humanity because you were not satisfied with the people around you? Did your ideas stem from anger or discomfort, fascination, or just a psychological curiosity?
Response:
The most interesting quote: "Representation of truths is non-existent"
I like when she spoke about her experience with documentaries, and how she realized that the style was overrated, and they do not succeed in relaying the truth because they are effected by the filmmaker's opinions. I had never really thought about film in this way.
Core of Rudelius' practice:
power
emotion
politics
The most interesting thing I learned about the artist I did not know before was that she completely controls and creates these filmed situations. When I first researched her work I thought she used a documentary style to relay her message, when in fact she does exactly the opposite.
I know the answer to my second question. Her earlier work came from anger and frustration. As she grew older, she mellowed out and made more complex work that wasn't so angry.
I found the Forever series most fascinating. I've always been interested in high society for similar reasons Rudelius is. I love that rich and powerful people seem to have no concern with the opinions of others concerning their behavior. I've always thought it was the key to their success.
I don't necessarily have any new questions, but I would really love to see her films in their entirety, and in the gallery setting with multiple screens. I was really disappointed she kept stopping her films during the lecture. It was our chance to see them, because they aren't online, and I felt it was wasted.
No comments:
Post a Comment