Question: Choose one of the works seen today, and discuss authorhip: who do you see as the author of the piece? This isn't a one word answer: explore.
Consider: who or what is responsible for what you find most compelling about the film or video you are considering? To what degree does the artist have complete control - or do they leave room for elements they can't control? Do they sacrificce control?
I wish to analyze and interpret the authorship of the film, "Two Dogs and a Ball."
The scene was comprised of two dogs which sat in a small room in front of the camera.Deadpan was used to make the viewer concentrate on the two dogs in the frame. The only motion that took place was when the dogs responded to the actions of a human, who was positioned behind and to the side of the camera. This person held a tennis ball and moved it around so that the dogs would trace the ball with their heads and eyes. There might have been two individuals involved in this film as there is one part where the dogs look in opposite directions as though they were each focusing on something. One of the dogs then looks back over to the direction the other dog is looking suggesting that there are two people or points of interest for the dogs.
I believe the people with the balls had control over the dogs because they responded to every quick and smooth motion that was made. However, the dogs also displayed "self control" (if such a term can be applied to a dog). They had to sit there and not lunge for the ball, even though at times it looked as if the dogs thought that the ball was actually going to be thrown to them. The dogs had to maintain their positions and concentrate intently on the ball. I believe that had the dogs decided to forfeit their patients for fun that the balance of power would have shifted from the person with the ball to the dogs. I don't think that there was any "sacrifice of control" involved. The dogs did not move, nor did they obtain the ball, making them subject to the teasing and authority of the tennis ball holder but not relinquishing their own control by sitting still. The human(s) had control over the dogs and this was evident by the fact that the dogs sat patiently in anticipation of playing with the ball. Both the dogs and the human(s) held control in their own way, but the human(s) were more dominant and therefore superior in the control they posessed.
I believe the people with the balls had control over the dogs because they responded to every quick and smooth motion that was made. However, the dogs also displayed "self control" (if such a term can be applied to a dog). They had to sit there and not lunge for the ball, even though at times it looked as if the dogs thought that the ball was actually going to be thrown to them. The dogs had to maintain their positions and concentrate intently on the ball. I believe that had the dogs decided to forfeit their patients for fun that the balance of power would have shifted from the person with the ball to the dogs. I don't think that there was any "sacrifice of control" involved. The dogs did not move, nor did they obtain the ball, making them subject to the teasing and authority of the tennis ball holder but not relinquishing their own control by sitting still. The human(s) had control over the dogs and this was evident by the fact that the dogs sat patiently in anticipation of playing with the ball. Both the dogs and the human(s) held control in their own way, but the human(s) were more dominant and therefore superior in the control they posessed.
1 comment:
Mattew,
Excellent post. You mention some interesting points regarding authorship, blurring both in a sense. It seems like both the dogs and the artist maintained an equal level of authorship. You talk about "sacrifice of control" and how there was none, feeding both character identifications.
Post a Comment