装置与动态影像

IF 0.1 4区 艺术学 0 FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION MILLENNIUM FILM JOURNAL Pub Date : 2015-10-01 DOI:10.5860/choice.192998
C. Kennedy
{"title":"装置与动态影像","authors":"C. Kennedy","doi":"10.5860/choice.192998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Installation and the Moving Image Catherine Elwes, Wallflower Press, 2015Since at least the Sixties, there has been a large divide between artists who made film and video for the gallery and those who made it for the cinema. This divide could be broadly characterised as indifference/ ignorance of the gallery artists towards the cinema artists and suspicion/jealousy flowing the opposite way, with side skirmishes between the materialists of film and the pluralists of video. A large frustration on the cinema side has been a sense of the ignorance or even duplication of history and a disregard for the dialogue that has developed over the course of that history on the part of the art market.Catherine Elwes' new book is a helpful corrective for some of these divisions. As a survey of the artist moving image, the most remarkable thing is that she writes a wide path into the history of the installation. Early on in the book, she claims that she is not describing a trajectory that brings everything together, \"arriving triumphant at the high renaissance of today's digital gallery installations\". Rather, anyone approaching this book as a primer on installation art will instead receive a high degree of insight beyond the gallery canon. Elwes first discusses the impact of architecture, painting, sculpture and performance on how artists deal with space, object and time-, which are logical but often underplayed antecedents to installation. This sets the stage for a remarkably extended tour of film history, complete with a thorough discussion of structural film and its connection with expanded cinema-both of which, through their polemics or ephemerality, were originally positioned quite opposite to the gallery project (ironically, expanded cinema- like performance-is often the history that the current art market seems most interested in reclaiming). Most of Elwes' focus is on disciplinary practices, but she devotes a strong chapter to the longstanding debate on spectatorship. She describes various theories of spectatorship, investigates the central gallery/cinema argument about whether the ambulant or sitting spectator has more power, and briefly suggests that cognitive theory may provide new answers to these ongoing questions.As mentioned, a large majority of the book does not describe much in the way of blue chip installation art (although Bill Viola and Douglas Gordon do get some play), instead focusing on an array of film and video sub-disciplines that exists outside the gallery context. Even contemporary gallery transplants like Anthony McCall are linked to the role his early work had to the cinematic context. …","PeriodicalId":44193,"journal":{"name":"MILLENNIUM FILM JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Installation and the Moving Image\",\"authors\":\"C. Kennedy\",\"doi\":\"10.5860/choice.192998\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Installation and the Moving Image Catherine Elwes, Wallflower Press, 2015Since at least the Sixties, there has been a large divide between artists who made film and video for the gallery and those who made it for the cinema. This divide could be broadly characterised as indifference/ ignorance of the gallery artists towards the cinema artists and suspicion/jealousy flowing the opposite way, with side skirmishes between the materialists of film and the pluralists of video. A large frustration on the cinema side has been a sense of the ignorance or even duplication of history and a disregard for the dialogue that has developed over the course of that history on the part of the art market.Catherine Elwes' new book is a helpful corrective for some of these divisions. As a survey of the artist moving image, the most remarkable thing is that she writes a wide path into the history of the installation. Early on in the book, she claims that she is not describing a trajectory that brings everything together, \\\"arriving triumphant at the high renaissance of today's digital gallery installations\\\". Rather, anyone approaching this book as a primer on installation art will instead receive a high degree of insight beyond the gallery canon. Elwes first discusses the impact of architecture, painting, sculpture and performance on how artists deal with space, object and time-, which are logical but often underplayed antecedents to installation. This sets the stage for a remarkably extended tour of film history, complete with a thorough discussion of structural film and its connection with expanded cinema-both of which, through their polemics or ephemerality, were originally positioned quite opposite to the gallery project (ironically, expanded cinema- like performance-is often the history that the current art market seems most interested in reclaiming). Most of Elwes' focus is on disciplinary practices, but she devotes a strong chapter to the longstanding debate on spectatorship. She describes various theories of spectatorship, investigates the central gallery/cinema argument about whether the ambulant or sitting spectator has more power, and briefly suggests that cognitive theory may provide new answers to these ongoing questions.As mentioned, a large majority of the book does not describe much in the way of blue chip installation art (although Bill Viola and Douglas Gordon do get some play), instead focusing on an array of film and video sub-disciplines that exists outside the gallery context. Even contemporary gallery transplants like Anthony McCall are linked to the role his early work had to the cinematic context. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":44193,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MILLENNIUM FILM JOURNAL\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MILLENNIUM FILM JOURNAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.192998\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MILLENNIUM FILM JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.192998","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

Catherine Elwes,墙花出版社,2015至少从60年代开始,为画廊制作电影和视频的艺术家和为电影院制作电影和视频的艺术家之间就存在着很大的分歧。这种分歧可以大致地描述为画廊艺术家对电影艺术家的冷漠/无知,以及相反的怀疑/嫉妒,以及电影唯物主义者和录像多元主义者之间的小冲突。在电影方面,一个很大的挫折是对历史的无知,甚至是对历史的复制,以及对艺术市场在历史进程中发展起来的对话的漠视。凯瑟琳•埃尔维斯的新书对其中一些分歧进行了有益的纠正。作为对艺术家运动影像的考察,最值得注意的是她在装置的历史中写下了一条宽阔的路径。在书的开头,她声称,她并不是在描述一条将一切融合在一起的轨迹,“胜利地到达当今数字画廊装置的高度复兴”。相反,任何将本书视为装置艺术入门读物的人都会获得超越画廊经典的高度洞察力。Elwes首先讨论了建筑、绘画、雕塑和表演对艺术家如何处理空间、物体和时间的影响,这些都是合乎逻辑的,但在装置艺术之前往往被低估了。这为电影历史的延伸之旅奠定了基础,完成了对结构电影及其与扩展电影的联系的彻底讨论——这两者,通过它们的论战或短暂性,最初被定位为与画廊项目完全相反(具有讽刺意味的是,扩展电影-就像表演一样-通常是当前艺术市场似乎最感兴趣的历史)。埃尔维斯的大部分注意力都集中在纪律实践上,但她用了一个强有力的章节来讨论长期以来关于旁观的争论。她描述了各种各样的观众观影理论,调查了画廊/电影院关于走动的观众和坐着的观众谁更有力量的争论,并简要地提出认知理论可能为这些正在进行的问题提供新的答案。如前所述,这本书的大部分内容并没有以蓝筹装置艺术的方式描述太多(尽管比尔·维奥拉(Bill Viola)和道格拉斯·戈登(Douglas Gordon)确实得到了一些展示),而是专注于一系列存在于画廊环境之外的电影和视频子学科。即使像安东尼·麦考尔(Anthony McCall)这样的当代画廊移植者,也与他的早期作品对电影背景的影响有关。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Installation and the Moving Image
Installation and the Moving Image Catherine Elwes, Wallflower Press, 2015Since at least the Sixties, there has been a large divide between artists who made film and video for the gallery and those who made it for the cinema. This divide could be broadly characterised as indifference/ ignorance of the gallery artists towards the cinema artists and suspicion/jealousy flowing the opposite way, with side skirmishes between the materialists of film and the pluralists of video. A large frustration on the cinema side has been a sense of the ignorance or even duplication of history and a disregard for the dialogue that has developed over the course of that history on the part of the art market.Catherine Elwes' new book is a helpful corrective for some of these divisions. As a survey of the artist moving image, the most remarkable thing is that she writes a wide path into the history of the installation. Early on in the book, she claims that she is not describing a trajectory that brings everything together, "arriving triumphant at the high renaissance of today's digital gallery installations". Rather, anyone approaching this book as a primer on installation art will instead receive a high degree of insight beyond the gallery canon. Elwes first discusses the impact of architecture, painting, sculpture and performance on how artists deal with space, object and time-, which are logical but often underplayed antecedents to installation. This sets the stage for a remarkably extended tour of film history, complete with a thorough discussion of structural film and its connection with expanded cinema-both of which, through their polemics or ephemerality, were originally positioned quite opposite to the gallery project (ironically, expanded cinema- like performance-is often the history that the current art market seems most interested in reclaiming). Most of Elwes' focus is on disciplinary practices, but she devotes a strong chapter to the longstanding debate on spectatorship. She describes various theories of spectatorship, investigates the central gallery/cinema argument about whether the ambulant or sitting spectator has more power, and briefly suggests that cognitive theory may provide new answers to these ongoing questions.As mentioned, a large majority of the book does not describe much in the way of blue chip installation art (although Bill Viola and Douglas Gordon do get some play), instead focusing on an array of film and video sub-disciplines that exists outside the gallery context. Even contemporary gallery transplants like Anthony McCall are linked to the role his early work had to the cinematic context. …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
MILLENNIUM FILM JOURNAL
MILLENNIUM FILM JOURNAL FILM, RADIO, TELEVISION-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
Illusions in Motion: Media Archaeology of the Moving Panorama and Related Spectacles MOTION(LESS) PICTURES: The Cinema of Stasis Installation and the Moving Image The Territory of Images Optic Antics: The Cinema of Ken Jacobs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1