Rucker vs Einstein it all a illusion

The 4 dimension article talk about the fourth dimension and how we live in 3 dimensional world. Then it goes on to talk about how depending on if you are landbased the 3 dimesion point are not as easily as assessible as it is for a  fish or bird because of degree space. Then further on in the reading Rucker uses a hyper cube as illustrated expample of how the 4 dimension  opperates. The 4 dimension is basically like the 3 dimension except that it has extra dimension and extra degree of space.Then Ruckers uses the con and sphere as character to try to simplify the 4 dimension and these extra degree of space. The 4 dimension you are in all direction and at the still at the same time. The whole 4 dimension concept kinda reminds me of god, how he is everywhere and no where. Then there was a lot of confusion and skimming of the pages. Rucker talks about the universe, sound pretty cool now. Rucker's talks about how the universe has electron and positron and antimatter.Now I know about electron and positron but antimatter as fare as I know it is a part of physic. Antimatter is antiparticles of matter or something?So I guess that Rucker is not only defining the 4 dimension by angles and geometry and space but the man is going deep into the concept of dimensionality it self when speaking about the 4 dimension ? This reading is kinda good to read but it something that has to read a couple of times to fully understand. It can be done im going to reread later on and maybe it will click better then.

Please tell more about the 4 dimension in detail in class, I'm still stuck in the dark and I'm in every direction and here at the same time.

Pierre Huyghe

Pierre Huyghe is french media,film and video artist

 Pierre like to take fragment from literature , event, animation and contextualize it into a video, sculpture or film. The interesting thing about Pierre is that he is always challenging narrative and the illusion that media can create. Pierre doesn't used linear narrative, Pierre gives example of artist Douglas Capland about how Disney is too efficient and seamless. To Douglas Disney film do not give the viewer the chance to explore or wonder, it control the viewer and makes them watch the event at a distance. 

Pierre on the other hand wants the viewer to be submerged and explore this imaginary landscape or world. Pierre use jump cut and vibrating time to create a sense of immediate in the viewer. In other word Pierre used fast cuts and plays with time to catch the viewer attention at that moment! Pierre also created a object and artifact out of imaginary experience and from books. Pierre made a weather room from all the weather mentioned in Edgar Allan Poe and compiled a weather log book.

 Pierre weather room has authentic climate , rain,snow,fog. Pierre is trying to literally submerge the viewer into his imagery world. Pierre does this by using rhythm,music and light to play on the viewers sense. Pierre gives the viewer a chance to create there own narrative, each weather room pierre made is a different scene. Pierre gives the viewer a chance to start from beginning to end or from the reverse. Pierre also make a atmosphere that encourage the viewer to explore there imagination and put there selves in the scene. What Pierre is doing is making a movie or scene without film or video. Pierre is giving the viewer the tools and letting there imagination do the rest. 

Pierre definitely went the extra mile when creating and sinking up the music, video and weather. To create the actual feeling of cold,wet, and fog. To me Pierre is taking the viewer back to when they where a child and didn't have to rationalized everything. Kids just let there imagination and there surrounding take them into a fantasy world where they are free to explore. That is exactly one of the thing that is so appealing about animation and art. That is can create a world and give the viewer a chance to explore or see them selves in it. Basically, to me I Pierre main goal in his art is to make something that make the viewer have complete imaginary freedom to do what ever they want!!!.

Gary Hill Interview

Gary Hill Notes

Visual artist use image and sound that challenge language

Video structure disrupted the screen formal structure by challenging the constraints of representation and language.

The Interview

- Hill tries to keep the image moving 

- doesn't like using image or camera rather be engulfed in the experience and have memory. Be involved in life and not watch one frozen moment on a photo.

- Hill's says imagination is so much better then a  image and there is no fixed position or cropping

-Hill's work has always been about thought and language

-feels that image without though is nothing more that eye candy

-plays with illusion. language and multiple narrative

 Hill's "Still life" piece is made because he want to move beyond the standard subject-object narrative and deal with consumption, reflect on consumption. Hill's uses over a dozens monitors ranging from 4 inches to 25 feet of everyday object that are computer generated. The images are projected on a screen with a wandering camera circulates and changes focal length The camera then shifts back to the screen with matching dimension to show the actual size. 

- Hill's use the image in a more textual way.

- Hill's also talks about how people are obsessed with having every image captured and having the digital copy too!

Hill's "Tall Ships" the setting is intentionally very dark so there is a initial challenge to the viewer to locate themselves in the location. Hill's doesn't make the viewer paranoid because the setting is so dark the viewer doesn't know where they are in the space. Then the viewer meet a stranger who is a reflection of themselves. Hill's talk about how he want it to be like a mirror but instead of seeing yourself as you see, you see yourself as everyone else see you.

Reaction after reading

I really enjoyed reading the Gary Hill interview. I can see the similarity in his method and perspective in comparison to animation. Hill's  is always trying to challenge the formal structure and the constraint of representation and language. To me animation is a  perfect example Hill's goals, in the sense that the only constraint are your imagination and your abilities as a human being. In animation there isn't a real formal structure, animation is an abstraction of reality that isn't constrained by representation and language. Animation can stand by it self with out any verbal language. Hill's also states that imagination is much better then a captured image. Yes, imagination is better then a captured image but that only half the battle to me because you have to have some sort of imagination to appreciate the image or put your self in it. Hill's fell that image without though is nothing more then eye candy. Another statement that is true but at the same may be false because someone is always going to be inspired or give thought into something that someone else deem worthless or eye candy. I really like how Hill's plays with illusion and multiple narratives. In Hill's "Still Camera"  he makes the viewer wander around the screen and how he plays with the focal length before focusing in on one object. Hill's "Still Life" piece reminds me of an idea I had about the whole movie experience being more interactive. I want the screens to cover the viewer in all direction when they are seated, so that they have to search and be submerge in the environment. I want the viewer to get a sense of scale from all direction and I don't want the only screen to be facing the viewer straight a head in front in a fixed position. I know you can create the illusion of depth and scale in one screen and it is very challenge but  i also think it would be very interesting to see that pushed a lot more. Hill's also uses the imagery more in a textual way. Animation uses illusion of shadow and depth for textual effect all the time, kinda wonder if Gary is really a closet animator in disguise. In Hill's "Tall Ship" I like how hills uses the darkness to control the viewer sense of space and reality. When Hill introduces the stranger to viewer in "Tall Ship" he is using it as a mirror that show the viewer how the rest the world see them. 

Aaron Copeland reading

 summary notes

4 elements of music

rhythm, melody, harmony, tone color

Music started with beats of rhythm

We are still unable to pick up on the subte difference added to a performance

When music was first measured it did have even distribution

Measured music started 1150!!!

Much of music was vocal, singing, poetry, chants and tales

Monsieuur Jourdain - help music from it dependance on word, he also had rhythmic structure

of it own and used many voices for his music.

rhythm repeating over and over has a emotional effect, but it can also be monotonous.

variety adds substance to the music and make it more natural

I really like this last paragraph "The lay listener is asked to remember that even the mosy complex rhythms were meant for his ears. They need not be analyzed to be enjoyed. All you need do is to relax, letting do with you what it will." 

Robert Altman Interview

After reading the interview with Robert I really picked up on some key issues he brought up. 

Altman's main goal as a film maker is to get rid of the linearity in film and incorporate multiple narratives in to his piece.

I completely agree with his quote for the most because life isn't a rigid and linear experience, it has multiple path that one can follow in his or her life. Also when a film does have multiple narrative and points of view it attract my attention more because it make curious as to how the director is going to make the character interaction and meet in some way or another in a film.

Robert Altman's also talks about how music is used as a framing device to keep the viewer focused. To me that a pretty obvious statement, using music in film properly can focus and submerge the viewer completely into the film and hopefully arouse there emotion or move them!!! 

Robert Altman's also talks about how a film really doesn't have a happy ending but a happy stopping point. Well yeah most film do have a happy stopping point, but I think the reason why there are the set expectation the viewer has before they even see the film. This set linear script that Altman's goes against is a good and creative way to break the casual american movie goer glass bubble of what a movie is suppose to be like. That is why I can agree with Altman's saying " I don't know what that was about,but man, was it right on" as one of the best things a person can about a piece of art. To me if someone says that it means that they are really thinking about the film and that film has had some sort of impact on them some how.