My Take on Burgin’s ‘Looking at Photographs’

From this week’s reading, Looking at Photographs by Victor Burgin, I got out two major ideas concerning the relationship between people and photography.

Firstly, there was a clear emphasis on the significance of subject and subjectivity. There is a lot of distinguishing between the ‘other’ and the ‘self,’ between the subjects being represented and the viewing subject. Secondly, there were many mentions in the text of how there is a ‘visual language’ in photography and imagery, a sense of there being a semiotic nature to it full of language and symbols.

My interpretation of the reading has led me to understand that these two factors are intertwined and interdependent.

The reading explored how, at a certain age, infants become self-aware; they are able to recognise themselves as a self in the mirror, and can distinguish separate beings as others. This is a trait believed to be unique to humans, and also elephants and dolphins. A product of this self-awareness is, as Burgin argues, the ability to reject reality and indulge the imagination; this becomes significant in the semiotic nature of photography.

This self-awareness gives way to encoding and decoding visual cues based on individual subjectivity. When someone observes a photograph in an album or a gallery, they view or recognise the subjects based on their own experiences and understandings that are unique to them only.

How this connects to the semiotic visual language of photography is that the human mind understands photography on a subjective level, and additionally on a unanimously cognitive level. For instance, Burgin summarised that the reason why composition is important and aesthetically pleasing is because it lets the viewer ‘prolong their imaginary command of the point of view.’

Essentially, on a cognitive level, the rules of composition in photography allow the human mind to become more invested in the subject and reject their reality for the sake of the representation. This is the same for all humans; we unanimously receive and decode representations using the same cognitive formula that is recognised in photographic and cinematic composition.

On a subjective level, our experiences, made more unique due to our self-awareness, shape how we experience the world and absorb visual language, and influence how our imagination runs and shapes our ‘frame of mind’ in which photography is remembered.

The visual language of photography is, as I understand it, a complex intertwining of the cognitive and psychological aspects of the human mind. Our ‘point of view’ or ‘frame of mind’ is a melded combination of how human reception of visual cues occurs and how our self-aware natures allow us to reject reality and substitute our own imagination, whether we are the author of a text or a receiver.

This past week, I went down to Mornington peninsula with 4 other friends on a photography expedition. Armed with a Canon EOS 1200 DSLR and a Nikon FE2 film SLR, it was a nice break from the world to go down south and indulge in the incredible natural world.

There’ll be a follow up post about the developed film, but I gotta say, it was a little daunting. I only had about 25 shots a roll, and neglected to bring more than one. Oopsie! I was also nervous because the night before, I had managed to tear apart my last film roll trying to take it out of the camera. Lesson learned: Read the manual.

The shoot itself was daunting, because the beach (whose name I forget) and rocky rock pools that we visited was the epitome of ‘treacherous nature.’ Clambering up rocks and over agonisingly lumpy stones was exhausting, but worth it entirely as we saw the ocean breathing and crashing so close to us.

Baz Lurhmann’s Use of Sound

I like to think of Australian film director and former music video director Baz Lurhmann as a king of sound design. He uses diegetic sound in a way that is powerful and gripping, creating vibrant worlds that seem to assault the senses with exaggerated noises, foley and sound effects.

A scene that perfectly embodies the Lurhmann use of sound is from his 2001 film Moulin Rouge, early on in the narrative when protagonist Christian (Ewan McGregor) enters the Parisian nightclub for the first time.

Here, Lurhmann’s experience in making music videos is shown clearly; this is essentially an enormous music video. We hear several different songs, all MODERN songs, not of the year the film is set in (1899): Because We Can (Fatboy Slim) Lady Marmalade (P!nk, Lil Kim, Christina Aguilera, Mya) and Smells Like Teen Spirit (Nirvana). Lurhmann often uses contemporary, catchy and rhythmic music in his films regardless of whether or not they fit with the time period; this is seen and heard in the Great Gatsby (2013). The use of modern music, particularly music associated with dancing and partying, creates a surreal atmosphere. It feels surreal in the sense that despite being in a different era and time, we can relate across time periods to the partygoing atmosphere.

Additionally, throughout the scene, the diegetic sound is clearly pronounced; the partygoers stamp in time to the beat, their clothes rustling is exagerrated, and as the scene progresses these sounds become more exaggerated, and emphasise a sense of the wild, rambunctious and unbridled excitement of the club. Additionally, the audience feels sucked into this hypnotic psycadelic whirlwind of the Moulin Rouge, and the use of the modern upbeat soundtracks allow them to relate to the scene; a wild Friday night at a bar or club.

Baz Lurhmann’s unbridled and indulgent use of sound and music sets him apart from other mainstream filmmakers, making him a king of sound design.

A Self Portrait

Our most recent assessment for Media 1 was to craft short film self-portraits. With only a week to make them, I feel a little shy posting mine here but figured hey, why not. I’m still quite inspired by what we’ve learned from experimental filmmakers, and took a kind of associational filmmaking approach; my aim was to juxtapose people with the landscape. My favourite part is showing how we react when we realise we are being recorded.

Jeremy Bowtell on Editing in Media

In our Media 1 class yesterday, we began with a presentation from guest speaker Jeremy Bowtell on editing; specifically, in film. For me, editing a film is the best part of filmmaking. I find it a meditative experience, requiring patience as I go back and forth trying to find the right place to cut. What I found interesting in Bowtell’s presentation was this trifecta that contributes to editing in film: Rhythm, Emotion and Story.

Rhythm refers to the technical aspect of editing; does the cut fit into the sequence in a way that fits with or challenges the rhythm of the score or soundtrack, or has a jarring or subtle effect on the audience?

Emotion refers to whether the style and Rhythm of editing evokes a feeling within the audience. For instance, in the gore-filled ‘torture-porn’ horror, Saw, the style of editing in the flashback of Amanda Young instils anxiety, fear and apprehension in the audience through its face-paced, erratic and frenetic style of cuts.

Story is how narrative within a film progresses based on editing. Bowtell provided us with a quote by Edward Dmytryk: ‘Never make a cut without a positive reason.’ This can be referred back to how Story and Editing are intertwined, as Dmytryk is saying that a cut made through editing should be done to allow the narrative to progress in a relevant and efficient manner.

My Take on What Makes ‘the Lord of the Rings’ Iconic

CAUTION: Spoilers ahead

Earlier today I found myself having a conversation with a co-worker studying a degree in business/commerce about what makes films iconic, and found myself dumbstruck at his curiosity surrounding why the Lord of the Rings franchise is ‘iconic,’ ‘classic,’ ‘awesome’ etc.

So I had a quick think to myself: what would allow it to qualify as ‘iconic’ films? What I believe has Lord of the Rings rooted deeply in the culture of film and media includes its capacity for visual gorgeousness and furthermore its concept and storyline.

Firstly, a disclaimer: I have an incredibly biased view considering that LotR is one of my favourite series of all time and I could never get sick of it.

The story itself surrounds the fellowship of the One Ring; friendship, loyalty, courage and compassion are notions that are heavily evoked throughout the story. This spans from Samwise Gamgee’s vow to protect Frodo Baggins in the beginning of their quest in Fellowship of the Ring, to the cathartic closure of their journey in the scene at the top of Mount Doom, following the destruction of the One Ring, in Return of the King. Friendship, love and compassion are elements in the narrative that overpower forces of evil and corruption, which can be seen in how the army of Minas Tirith sacrifices everything against the overwhelming armies of Sauron, to ensure the successful destruction of the One Ring by Frodo in Return of the King. The timelessness of these thematic concerns that can be related to  consistently through human history, such as a sense of comradeship that can be linked to JRR Tolkein’s time in the armyduring the Battle of Somme, contributes to the iconic and timeless nature of the franchise.

Adding onto this, the visual wow-factor of the films are stunning to audiences, as director Peter Jackson’s influence led to much of the film being shot using practical effects, stunts and actors. For instance, a core moment for me in the entire series is the Battle of Helms Deep (The Two Towers) as the battle sequence is almost entirely shot using practical effects. The visual element of battered armour, ornate swords and weaponry mixed with the ghastly faces of orcs and Urukai provoke for the viewer a sense of thrill and excitement, as we are encouraged further to believe in the fantasy onscreen.

The Lord of the Rings is a brilliant series. Of all the films that I have watched, nothing comes as close to home as the original trilogy does. The Hobbit had so much potential, but really didn’t need such unnecessary expansion and tacky, plastic CGI.