Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Harry Smith Seance - May 16 7pm @ H'wood Theatre

edited May 2013
Hello friends,

I know there is an important musical show this Thursday, but if you can find time to attend two events, you might consider coming to the Harry Smith Seance at the Hollywood Theatre. The show starts at 7pm and you can find more details here:

http://hollywoodtheatre.org/harry-smith-seance/

Matt Carlson (of Golden Retriever) and Jordan Dykstra (of Jordan Dykstra) will be providing live musical accompaniment for HEAVEN AND EARTH MAGIC. I have attended a rehearsal and it sounds super, super cool. There will also be some live slide projection color and masking effects that will give the event a special performative air.

Also, if you want to go to an afternoon thing instead, there will be a panel on the topic of "Harry Smith in the Pacific Northwest," also at the Hollywood, starting at 3pm:

http://hollywoodtheatre.org/harry-smith-in-the-pacific-northwest/

They are going to be showing the short experimental documentary for which I recently did the sound design: HARRY SMITH OF THE GUIDE: FIELD RECORDINGS AND A LOCATION. It's a very short (7 min.) short, providing an impressionistic account of Harry Smith's time in Bellingham, WA.

Thank you,

Andrew

Comments

  • This sounds awesome.
  • I concur.
  • I will be there.
  • +bump+
  • Wrong thread, but whatever - did anyone go to the Mike Daisy show last night? Curious to hear how it was...
  • Mikey, Zin and I went.

    Entertaining but not very cohesive. Also, kind of intense awkward part addressing the audience and insisting that he didn't care about us or our opinions of him (which is TOTALLY FINE), but it was followed by an hour of self-justification/defense. But I kept falling asleep due to the warm, dark room and 2 pregame ciders, so better to ask the boys.

    Also, Mike was annoyed by the old, goofy audience shuffling around and holding full-on conversations and participating too much and decided to be crotchety about Portland's old art-goers.
  • Sorry guys. There are too many old people everywhere. Not sure what I can do about it. A few of them are ok but mostly they are just the same damn people that made everything mostly shitty for the last few decades. Good luck with that.
  • (Thread rescue) Almost all the Harry Smith nerds (at the super nerdy 3pm session) were 60+. They were pretty alright though. But I probably only thought that because I'm old.
  • Did everyone love the Harry Smith Seance? It was WAY TOO MUCH (or something) for me. But I'm finding that most experimental films I've seen that last longer than 10 minutes are just too much for me. It turns out I am an experimental film wimp of the highest order!
  • You should be safe, as long as you don't date an experimental filmmaker!
  • Yeah, experimental films are mostly boring/inaccessible to me*, I would rather watch dumb jokey mainstream stuff like Austin Powers or Billy Madison or whatever.

    SORRY GARY

    For some reason, experimental music is easier for me to access than film, perhaps because I can just put it on in the background and I don't have to give it all of my attention?

    *Exception: I love George Kuchar because his movies are campy, shitty, and full of toilet humor.
  • MZ, I know. It's amazing we've lasted this long! I keep trying to go because I am generally an open minded person esp. when it comes to art stuff, but there have been times where I've literally told Bill Mc that I'm going to go for a 60 minute walk around the neighborhood or whatever because I literally cannot get through this.
  • I totally made a "Mirror, Father, Mirror" film when I was 16.
  • Daisey was pretty scattered. Having seen several of his monologues, it was interesting to see one in a much earlier stage of development. Honestly, it needs to be much better before taking it on tour or whatever.

    The monologue was all very closely connected to his Apple scandal and various ways that he's dealing with it. He tried tearing down journalism, to bring journalists closer to his level. (They lie through omission, mainly.) But, of course, he adores journalists, he pointed out repeatedly. He educated us on the theater — that audiences understand that what he says on stage is not literal fact. He elicited sympathy from the audience by talking about his suicidal feelings. He connected himself and his career to that of Spalding Gray, something I've heard him do before. He pointed out that the performance was not an apology, but referred us to his previous apology. He said he never should have said things to the media that were untrue.

    In the end, he said he thinks he had a bigger impact than if he hadn't lied. The focus of his work, at this point, is to address the problem that there is no labor journalism, just business journalism. He will go to Bangladesh.
  • edited May 2013
    I used to feel that way about experimental cinema but then I started dating one of Those People and reader, I married him. I don't know how you could go this long without getting into it Flossy!!

    There are some that are too impenetrable or boring or obnoxious or pretentious-in-a-bad-way and almost all of them are too long, but for the most part I am pretty "in" now. Gary watches SO MANY and I watch a lot of them with him and there are so many amazing ones. So exciting to see stuff that challenges you and forces you to think!!! Thinking hard when you aren't given many clues as to what you're supposed to be thinking ABOUT is uncomfortable and I think a lot of the time we can be too quick to write something off that is just asking us to really ponder it. At least, this is what my experience has been--I would find myself resisting being asked to confront my own assumptions about what a movie is supposed to be, etc., and once I stopped resisting I gained a ton of entry into what I had previously found impenetrable and tedious.

    Also I wonder what you really mean by "experimental film." What would be a definition of that term? I would argue that all kinds of films are actually highly experimental, if we're taking as our normative standard some kind of Hollywood narrative structure. "Southland Tales" is very experimental, e.g. Is Guy Maddin "experimental?" He's not popular or mainstream but is that the same thing as "experimental?" His movies tell very straightforward stories but they look very weird, etc. etc.

    Also Alex what experimental music are you talking about? Would love to know details

    Stuff I still can't get into no matter how I try:
    - Hollis Frampton
    - Various orgy documentaries from the 60s (I don't want to see that many cervixes and limp penises and why is everyone in facepaint, god, the 60s are horrible)
    - anything Godard made after he stopped being a young asshole and became a middle aged/old asshole
    - anything along the Mirror Father Mirror lines, which, lets face it, any given "weirdo art scene" is going to have its share of Mirror Father Mirrors

    Then again I kind of love Mirror Father Mirror





  • edited May 2013
    I guess stuff like the following?
    Tim Hecker
    Loscil
    Pete Swanson
    Grouper
    Aphex Twinmans
    Daniel Menche
    Rob Walmart
    Fennesz
    Enya
    Dr Octagon
    White Rimbus
    Peace
    Eats Tapes
    Lloyd + Michael
    Other weird noise/techno/string-based shit I don't remember the name of but I saw at Valentines or Holocene or whatever
  • Also I think Death Grips are still pretty experimental sonically despite their success/broad popularity.
  • what does experimental even mean tho
  • edited May 2013
    Stuff that's not pop? But the Beatles were pretty experimental for their time. With sounds and tape manipulation and stuff.

    Also Olivia Tremor Control are super poppy but also did some very weird sound/tape collage stuff.
  • The Harry Smith Seance had its good parts and bad parts for me.

    I was so excited initially by the disembodied voice we heard welcoming us I thought the whole evening would be very "produced" in a fun way but that soon slipped away to people introducing people introducing people introducing people about the idolotry of Smith but it didn't seem like that much about his actual work was thought about.

    The first two short films were nice.

    The long film was good but long. I thought the music was great. I appreciated that they went to extremes to present it with the extra projections but those were sometimes distracting and I'm just not the best theatre watcher so i dipped in and out of rapt attention. I liked it but didn't love it.

    I much enjoyed some experimental films programs I've seen in the last couple years like the Cinema Projects program last year with 2 nights of experimental films from Los Angeles called Inner & Outer Space (Great!) and Andrew Ritchey's series he put together called Sound, Sound, Sound, Sound, Screen! at YU some months ago. Yet I've still very much an experimental film novice.
  • edited May 2013
    ALEX!!! Ha ha ha ha I thought you were talking about modernism or something. John Cage! Shows what a nerd I am

    Yeah, UBS, so true, re the introducing of introducing and the betrayal of the fun promise of the opening!!

    I loved the movie but it was way too long. Then again I think this about so many movies!! I always feel betrayed by it, because I'm like "I AM LOVING THIS!" but then 3 more hours go by and by the end I am like "HOW DARE A PERSON MAKE SOMETHING THIS LONG"

    The sound and music was wonderful. So good!

    Gary's talk at the all-day event was really fun too.
  • whoa sorry for that link
  • edited May 2013
    I liked Alex's list. Those do seem to fall under "experimental," but when I think of "experimental music" I think of one-off performances of compositions by graduate students that are just plinks and ploinks. Deep academic listening.

    Did anyone ever listen to the band The Gongs? I thought that was pretty listenable experimental music from an academic origin.
  • edited May 2013
    FWIW: This article, that I happened to read more or less contemporaneous to its release, was what turned me on to Harry Smith, particularly his work with music curation. It also gave me great insight to various movements in American and Popular Music: How Lomax(es) & Seeger & Smith represented very different ideological dispositions with respect to their materials; How various impressions of American Folk Mythos informed estimations of Authentic Practice, particularly those of young Pop artists of the 1960's.

    Unfortunately, only the first few hundred words of this piece are out in the public garden. The rest are locked behind a pay wall. Maybe one of the academics among us would consider releasing a copy....

    http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1998/apr/09/recapturing-the-american-sound/?pagination=false

    This article got me imagining parallels between many of the 1960's artist's identification of Authentic Practice in the Hootenany's and rare transcriptions of early 20th Century blues, bluegrass and gospel and the Alternative Generation's identification of Authentic Practice in the networks of punk shows and houses and rare transcriptions of independently produced dystopian social music of the early 1980's.

    I also love that he was transcribing his Lummi neighbors' indigenous language and performance in his mid teens in Bellingham. And then later I imagine him carting home boxes of rare lacquer recordings from his day job at Boeing, such records as were coming from around the country to be melted down for aircraft building materials during World War II.

    It's hard not to make him the super deity of all arty northwest nerd boys. Fortunately his big hand-painted amphetamine dirt leaf batik found filmstock movies are so boring or we'd have all grown up with linoleum kitchen counters based on his imagery IN ADDITION TO all the interminable baby boom careers launched by covering songs from the recordings he collected.

  • the term 'experimental film' is problematic in the same way 'alternative music' is. the word experimental, in this context, has gone from being an adjective to a modifier and in the process loses it's original meaning. while there really isn't a set definition of the term 'experimental film,' it is safe to assume it references a cinematic practice made not only outside of the established Hollywood narrative structure but in opposition to it. Orson Welles, Alfred Hitchock, David Lynch, Quentin Tarantino, etc, have all 'experimented' with narrative structure, but they are not experimental filmmakers. It is not unlike the original meaning of 'punk' in that it is radical/rebellious- if not as much against society itself then against the process of mainstream cinema. But through that process it has become a 'style' of its own. You can no longer just grab a camera and record a bunch of garbly goop and call it experimental. It's become its own language with its own history.
  • also, how else am i to express what it feels like to inhabit my specific skin?
  • edited May 2013
    Externalize the internal, Bill.
Sign In or Register to comment.