"At Home," with John PhillipsJohn Phillips, is an artist and professor living in Philadelphia, best put he is an "sound and vision," artist (in my own words). He has worked extensively with sound as a medium and in multimedia looking at intersections and "collaborations" between sound and vision (again my own words). His work spans the spectrum from live musical and video performance to complex multi channel audio and video installations. His work has been well received on an international level form China to San Francisco and he has been a resident artist at the Experimental Television Center in Oswego New York.
(Still on this page: from a video performance with perpetual mvmt<>snd at Mascher Dance Coop , Philadelphia, PA)
LINK to John's website
http://terragizmo.net/
LINK to Experimental Television Center
http://www.experimentaltvcenter.org/
11 comments:
This weeks lecturer was John Phillips, and this lecture was probably one of my favorites to date. I took the chance to see the guest speaker's work before we had the lecture and I really liked it. As a guitar player I was hoping for a little more rhythm to his work, but after I saw it in motion, it made more sense to me. I listened to the audio section first, wondering if it would be something that had a rhythm but was still experimental, like Radiohead. Then when I saw the video with the audio in it too, everything became more clear to me.
I also thought it was cool that he and his wife made the installations together and they each had their own part. Lately I've been giving more thought into creating an installation and for some reason this lecture inspired me to create something.
My only wish is that we could have gone over what he does with audio more than we did. I would have really liked to know the process, the equipment, and technique that he used in creating his pieces, both with the audio and video aspects. I would have really liked to know how he did everything.
I will begin by saying that I agree with Kory about the lecture with John Phillips and that these talks (as we are getting more comfortable with this form of interaction) are getting more and more easy as well as fun.
I particularly enjoyed John's information about how it is that he is able to create his work when many of us may find it hard to comprehend working in this medium without having some sort of funding.
I personally enjoy working on a shoe-string budget when it comes to creating things, specifically interactive pieces that use technology.
My first time using sensors is when myself and Bemis (David Smith) wanted to create an interactive music dance piece. Being fans of music and child-hood friends, we used that connection as a focus for our piece in discovering of music in a child-like playful manner.
I failed to mention (due to lack of time and that I felt it wasn't necessary) the technical work that went into the piece. We used a Dance Dance Revolution Video game pad and connected the main board to a computer- through many observations we learned how it worked and built it to our specifications. With many hours (and trips to Home Depot) spent, we created an effective piece. Of course we could have bought sensors but that would have cost us hundreds of dollars instead of 40 dollars. If we hadn't of been so poor (and maybe cheap) we would not have discovered something new, which later influenced our other works.
With what John Phillips said, I look at funding as a blessing and a curse- it seems that money can close the door to creativity. It also comes down to the idea behind any medium you use. Art is subjective but never passive- it's just a degree on how well you connect with your audience.
Unfortunately, I do not think we really experienced John Phillips work without being there. But it was great to have it broadcasted for us to comment or question what we did see.
But great class anyway! And I like to see some professors reactions to this method of teaching- you can tell that when they are trying to speak that it's almost foreign to them.
(responding to my own post and fixing last paragraph) When I said "Professors" I meant the guest speakers in the online-lecture. It may be just me, but it seems that the way they deliver has changed. Does it seem more intimate or distant? Maybe it's more difficult for them to read us and our responses to the information they are giving?
The lecture was very interesting I too have found that as the course progresses we are more and more capable of having productive class times. I found that the information that John had to share with us was information that I found was relevant to things I like to do. He talked a bit about the process of working with his wife on the installations that they do. I found that the way that they work to collaborate with one another on the installations is very nice, and its good to see that there are people out there who can do this still. I feel that in our major we don’t have enough collaborative work with the projects that we work on, or at least not until the upper level courses, and ever then its can be difficult because people aren’t used to working with other people so no one really knows how to work with people o n a large scale project.
John talked a bit about his concept of what makes a narrative, in his idea, he states that a narrative is really and sort of movement over time. The idea that a narrative is as simple as something happening over time. This is true in its purest abstract form, a square falling through the frame is a narrative, it is really simplistic but it is complete in its idea of what the process is. Overall the work that John showed us was intrinsically intoned with the sculptures and fit well, the projection work complemented the sculptures and the sculptures the projections, and everything was tied together by the sound, the work that they did together is great and I find myself drawn to want and see more or to do some myself. Installation art is very interesting to me and I think that the work that they are doing works because of the way they the pieces work as a whole but also as separate pieces as well.
I very much enjoyed this week's lecture, and even though the hour was early, I still was very glad that I got myself up and actually went to class, because John Phillips was a very interesting and charismatic speaker, and very knowledgeable about the media in which he works. While viewing his installation pieces in class, I really was awed by the amount of work and preparation that must have gone into making them. When he spoke about it to us, he made it sound so easy, but watching the light shows, for me, was really fascinating.
As someone who has worked previously in theater, I've done some tech work and have worked as a lighting technician, and I know that there are many things one must consider when lighting a stage - the same thing goes for film. It is not a simple thing to decide where to place a light, because you have to think about what you want to accentuate, what color you want to use, etc. I thought that in his pieces the use of light and images from his projector was great. I also was impressed by his use of sound, and how he told us that he uses everyday sounds as a base, and then plays around with them, mixing and distorting them, until they become something entirely different. In response to something Kory wrote, I too would have liked to hear more about the audio editing process. The only real bit of audio editing software I have been exposed to are Soundtrack pro (GarageBand too, but that is too simple for me), and WireTap Pro, and I would love to hear more about the methods he used. Overall, great lecture!
Well it looks like I can agree along with everyone else in that this weeks lecture was very interesting along with being more productive than ones past. That's not to say the other lectures have been so much less productive, but rather the overall atmosphere has become more comfortable and laid back.
What I thought was most successful about this lecture was that John Phillips not only talked about his work, but showed us video footage of his installations in their final stage WHILE he was talking/describing it. In addition, his work was very unique and appealing to me, in particular his very versatile use of projectors because I have been lucky enough to experiment with projectors and their capability through a VJ course taken in the past.
What also made the lecture was John's laid back personality. He created an atmosphere that did not make me feel uncomfortable about speaking up. Although I did not speak much during the lecture, he kept my interest through it all. Through describing how he does mostly all of his installations with his wife as well as how he gets his work and funding was interesting because you truly got a feel for how he lives his life.
With all my interest focused on John's installations, I'll have to agree with Kory in that I wish John could have maybe described step by step on how he made his installations into reality. I was extremely impressed with John's work which only made me more interested in how he made such creations.
I have had little, if any, chance to see installations. Our main book for this class really exposed me to the possibilities of the installations provide when they take on the role of an interactive space as opposed to being a static image or video that you observe. One thing the book did not provide, however, was the audio found at some installations. Watching this lecture was fun for me because I got to get a better idea of the sounds that you hear at installations such as John's, and they only intensified my perception of how truly immersive installations can be.
I agree with Kory (and others) that it is cool how he and his wife collaborated on these projects. Many of the projects I personally work on are independent because I have such a specific idea of how I want them to be done, and also like to be able to say that I did everything, but I admire John for being able to collaborate so well with his wife on these installations. There are many advantages to doing this that I often fail to acknowledge:
1.) More work can get done within a given timeframe
2.) The work will be more diverse because of the varied mindsets that are brought to the table.
3.) There is more opportunity for "peer review" in the sense that those you are working with can give you an outsider's perspective on your work as you go.
There are probably many others, but I think it's great that John and his wife have done so much work together.
Back to what I was saying about appealing to different senses, later on in the lecture John mentions a piece that was done at a penitentiary that also focused on the smell and feel of the place in addition to the other senses. Unfortunately this is something that cannot be very effectively experienced in a virtual way, but I really hope I can check out an installation similar to some of the ones John has worked on before too long. I am very intrigued to further explore what possibilities they offer beyond basic sights and sounds.
John seemed like a very laid back, unpretentious guy to me who truly loves to create art. In a world full of stuck up art types who are just out to con people for a quick buck, it was really refreshing to see a man of his talents show up in flannel and get excited about the things he was showing us.
First of all, I loved John's work. It was some of the best audio/video/sculpture work I have ever seen. Ok. So I have only actually seen a handful of other examples but it still impressed and inspired the crap out of me. The thing that I found most interesting about his work however, was the overall... um... spookiness of the environments he set up. Even the Children's interactive installation that he was commissioned to set up in China had a very creepy feel to it. I have no idea if that was his intention, if it appears different in real life or if it is just my own Western, violence saturated mind reading in to things that are not there but as a life long fan of the horror genre, seeing scary and art together was amazing. It has opened up a whole new world to me. By combining audio, video, lighting, sculpture and interactivity, I can create installation pieces designed to create powerful emotions. like Ken Kesey and the Acid Trips of our forefathers, we could bring the audience on a journey that pulls them through intense fear, into extreme vulnerability and finally brings them to a kind of joy and appreciation for their own lives. It would be a little hard to accomplish what Kesey did without acid, but after seeing Johns work I am sure it is possible.
John also briefly mentioned something that got me thinking. At what point does an installation piece cease to be art and start to be nothing more than an interesting "science museum" exhibit? Is there really a difference at all? Many of the interesting, interactive installations at the Bangor Children's Museum use a high level of interactivity but are these truly art?
The only complaint I have about the class setup (which is getting better) is that I could not really hear John commentary on his work when the piece was being played. I could kind of hear him talking in the background but the loud sound of the video over it mostly drowned him out.
As always, Raph has brought us a truly exceptional guest speaker. Very, very inspiring.
The book for this class was hands down one of the most inspiring text books I have ever read for a school. Despite my new interest in installation pieces however, I had not even considered the fact that the work presented in it was incomplete until Eric mentioned our inability to hear the audio while reading it. For a lot of installation art, the audio and the way it works with video is crucial.
I don't often work with sound, so usually when I see really interesting things dealing with sound, I am impressed (I guess that's the cardinal rule that if you can't do it, that it is impressive). Plus, I enjoy "different" sounds, probably because I like experimental everything ; video especially. Also, it was interesting to see some installation work after we read the Installation in the New Millenium book. Though I have seen installations before, it was intriguing to put some of the concept work and ideology together.
I think the most interesting thing to note is experimentation. Of course, you can go into a project having an idea and setting it up according to carefully planned storyboards, but experimenting is about discovery, and with any time based media, discovery is provacative due to the obvious fact that views will experience something new as well. I think John is doing things like that, engaging in a new way. UI think it has something to do with what we talked about with Ken, about the unexpected. Listening to some of his soundscapes, you get some really crazy pitches and noises, which aren't "normal" expectations. (esp. Synopera)
One thing I will say (which I thought about while watching Anaclitic) is that everyday people may not relate well to experimental video such as these. I see them being background videos, strange concoctions. I think there is a "setting" for such forms of media, and people must go about it in a way they will expect to see something out of the ordinary. For instance, if I rented a movie and saw some of the video I watched, I would be weirded out, it's about context.
One of the most interesting things during the lecture is when John is talking about Memory Palace and narrative. One of my previous comments was about how we define time within our culture, but in the same light of that comment (which John explains very well) is that narrative is just as mailable when it comes to concept. Just like a square coming into a screen and changing directions, that is a story, a sequence of events. That is why I feel everything we do is a type of narrative. Of course, the mundane aspects of life like turning on your computer monitor only become a "story" (that we would tell friends) if we got shocked or it was broken. We look for "out of the ordinary" and assign that to be a narrative, but the fact remains, that narrative is everything we do, and we just call it a story if it is interesting enough to retell.
Great lecture, good to hear some more about narrative and time structures and see someone elses work.
Commenting on what Kroy said, which is more of a socially inspired comment (i like sociology just as much as new media!) is about John and his wife working together. I think this is interesting because gender patterns in new media are very weird (and something i want to research in grad. school), and I've only really heard about a few other artists that do such things. Jodi for example works together. I always find there to be an interesting piece of how that works mainly because the way gender is socialized, I think men and women interpret narratives differently (just as any two people would), but keeping in mind that gender construction. I think I would have to spend more time with John's work to see any of this, but an interesting point for sure.
Kory- What kind of installation are looking into creating? Are you looking into creating an audio installation? A video installation? Perhaps even some new wave installation that no one has seen before?
Rhythm in regards to video is definitely a symbiotic relationship. Without video the audio means nothing, and without the audio, the video is also meaningless. I feel that this is true for installations and narrative film alike. I have always struggled to make it through silent movies, for a lack of being fully involved in the experience. I as I mentioned before, need the symbiotic relationship between the audio and video.
As far as methodology is concerned, I am not so much interested in the process of achieving the end result, but seeing if I can create a method completely oblivious to his, and manage to do something similar, or progressive. Budget permitting, of course ;)
Post a Comment