Pictures from our next session will be posted Tuesday night, enjoy =D.
-Alex
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Preliminary Live Design meeting
That went well. :) Basic sequence of events planned out, acted out. Pictures to follow as soon as Alex gets home and uploads them.
New meeting time - TUESDAY 2PM AT JOE'S, AND FROM THERE TO THE QUARRY WHERE WE WILL FURTHER REFINE OUR SEQUENCE OF ACTIONS
(If you follow the path past Joe's and past the stairs that lead to the Merrill bus stop, you'll see signs for the Quarry up and to the left. If not, people around you should be able to give you directions, or just call Boyd.)
WE ARE STILL MEETING ON WEDNESDAY.
We may or may not recruit Mark's girlfriend to help us with lighting (since we're at a disadvantage, being half the size of other groups, and my suggestion of hiring workers from outside the hardware store to help us was summarily vetoed). Her name is Holly, she's nice.
New meeting time - TUESDAY 2PM AT JOE'S, AND FROM THERE TO THE QUARRY WHERE WE WILL FURTHER REFINE OUR SEQUENCE OF ACTIONS
(If you follow the path past Joe's and past the stairs that lead to the Merrill bus stop, you'll see signs for the Quarry up and to the left. If not, people around you should be able to give you directions, or just call Boyd.)
WE ARE STILL MEETING ON WEDNESDAY.
We may or may not recruit Mark's girlfriend to help us with lighting (since we're at a disadvantage, being half the size of other groups, and my suggestion of hiring workers from outside the hardware store to help us was summarily vetoed). Her name is Holly, she's nice.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Can Theater and Media Speak the Same Language: Reading Notes
- Since its beginnings, theater has always used technology to dazzle and mystify the audience.
- Since the early-mid twentieth century, video and projections have been used; sometimes as a gimmick, sometimes as a replacement for a backdrop.
- Projections and moving images do not work on stage, they distract the audience, they don’t have the same scenographic vocabulary.
- Theater “tricks” the audience by making the signified the signifier; a human represents another human, a chair represents a chair.
- When an audience sits in a theater, they realize that they are supposed to perceive the stage as what it represents, not what it really is.
- When something like a video is projected on stage, it disrupts the audience’s perception of the stage.
- Another issue is that the audience perceives the stage and actors as part of “here and now.” It’s being performed live, the sets are moving and changing, etc. But when an image is projected, while it still exists in the “here and now” it still also exists in the past. It’s been pre-made, pre-recorded.
To comment on the reading:
I saw a production of Hamlet where the ghost of Hamlet's father was used as a projection of some sort of otherworldly mist, and I thought it worked surprisingly well. The again, the author did say there were exceptions.
-Mark Escobedo
- Since the early-mid twentieth century, video and projections have been used; sometimes as a gimmick, sometimes as a replacement for a backdrop.
- Projections and moving images do not work on stage, they distract the audience, they don’t have the same scenographic vocabulary.
- Theater “tricks” the audience by making the signified the signifier; a human represents another human, a chair represents a chair.
- When an audience sits in a theater, they realize that they are supposed to perceive the stage as what it represents, not what it really is.
- When something like a video is projected on stage, it disrupts the audience’s perception of the stage.
- Another issue is that the audience perceives the stage and actors as part of “here and now.” It’s being performed live, the sets are moving and changing, etc. But when an image is projected, while it still exists in the “here and now” it still also exists in the past. It’s been pre-made, pre-recorded.
To comment on the reading:
I saw a production of Hamlet where the ghost of Hamlet's father was used as a projection of some sort of otherworldly mist, and I thought it worked surprisingly well. The again, the author did say there were exceptions.
-Mark Escobedo
Aronson's Can Theater and Media Speak the Same Language? Notes
- projected scenery, especially film/video, do not work onstage
- projections and images are innately different from the stage, so employing both is simply overwhelming and confusing
- this clash between theater and media involve physiological, psychological, and philosophical reasons
- theater is the only art form to use objects to signify the same object (human = another human, chair = chair, etc)
- we have an intrinsic understanding that we reside in time and space
- this understanding carries over to what is perceived onstage
- projected images derail this sense of time & space producing a separate world on stage
- images, being static, are subject to the angle at which they are viewed (so no single person in the audience sees the same thing)
- photographs while in the present represent something historical, whereas the stage is wholly present and something we can touch
- there is also a spatial dislocation between stage and projected images
- the stage frames each scene much like a painting does
- when a player leaves the stage, our imagination fills in what happened to them
- cinema and projections conflict with the frame onstage and puts into question figure and ground
- images (especially moving ones) cause confusion and dislocation: the projection is seen as the figure and the stage as the ground
- since projections are framed, we perceive them as boundless; the stage, on the other hand, is apparently confined and finite
- moving images also force a competition of focus between it and the actors
- projections have no permanence since it is only light and shadow
- there are cases of contemporary media and theater working together such as the Wooster Group's productions
- as Aristotle warned, spectacle is "the least artistic" aspect of theater
- projections and images are innately different from the stage, so employing both is simply overwhelming and confusing
- this clash between theater and media involve physiological, psychological, and philosophical reasons
- theater is the only art form to use objects to signify the same object (human = another human, chair = chair, etc)
- we have an intrinsic understanding that we reside in time and space
- this understanding carries over to what is perceived onstage
- projected images derail this sense of time & space producing a separate world on stage
- images, being static, are subject to the angle at which they are viewed (so no single person in the audience sees the same thing)
- photographs while in the present represent something historical, whereas the stage is wholly present and something we can touch
- there is also a spatial dislocation between stage and projected images
- the stage frames each scene much like a painting does
- when a player leaves the stage, our imagination fills in what happened to them
- cinema and projections conflict with the frame onstage and puts into question figure and ground
- images (especially moving ones) cause confusion and dislocation: the projection is seen as the figure and the stage as the ground
- since projections are framed, we perceive them as boundless; the stage, on the other hand, is apparently confined and finite
- moving images also force a competition of focus between it and the actors
- projections have no permanence since it is only light and shadow
- there are cases of contemporary media and theater working together such as the Wooster Group's productions
- as Aristotle warned, spectacle is "the least artistic" aspect of theater
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Stevenson runs 7 minutes ahead of the rest of the world
I'm getting sick of College Eight dining hall food. So tonight, my roommate and I went to Stevenson to eat because their dining hall recently opened up after renovations. We got there at 6:58 PM, not knowing that they close at 7 PM (how many people normally eats before 7?). At the door, the workers that swipe the cards say that they are closed. This random guy ahead of us asks the workers what time it was. They say 7:05. The guy looks at his phone and says it’s 6:58. The workers say that his phone clock must be slow. Then, my roommate and I pull out our phones and say that it’s only 6:58. Still, they say that they can’t let us in…
This wouldn’t have been as bad had my roommate and I not gone to Stevenson yesterday night as well only to find out that it was Cowell/Stevenson college night.
Kevin
This wouldn’t have been as bad had my roommate and I not gone to Stevenson yesterday night as well only to find out that it was Cowell/Stevenson college night.
Kevin
live design idea
the instructions:
live design: with simple props and simple costumes, the entire group enacts a design that shows visually a transition between two states. total time including setup performance and break down= 15min.
my idea:
we have someone dress up as a bull & its master or owner (whatev) and have the owner lead the bull onto stage. someone comes and feeds the bull and it proceeds to defecate. we then have some other people come and mother fucking devour the fecal matter (nom nom nom).
now, i do not know if that will take up 15m, the idea is open to mother fucking criticism mother fuckers.
ALSO: MEETING TO DISCUSS LIVE DESIGN ON SUNDAY 5/31 (THAT'S THE DAY AFTER SATURDAY AND BEFORE MONDAY) @ THE FIRESIDE LOUNGE WHICH IS SOMEWHERE.
live design: with simple props and simple costumes, the entire group enacts a design that shows visually a transition between two states. total time including setup performance and break down= 15min.
my idea:
we have someone dress up as a bull & its master or owner (whatev) and have the owner lead the bull onto stage. someone comes and feeds the bull and it proceeds to defecate. we then have some other people come and mother fucking devour the fecal matter (nom nom nom).
now, i do not know if that will take up 15m, the idea is open to mother fucking criticism mother fuckers.
ALSO: MEETING TO DISCUSS LIVE DESIGN ON SUNDAY 5/31 (THAT'S THE DAY AFTER SATURDAY AND BEFORE MONDAY) @ THE FIRESIDE LOUNGE WHICH IS SOMEWHERE.
Environmental Design Criticism
I'm pretty confused with the criticism our group received on our environmental design project. We were told that our decorations covered up and took away from the meaning of our structure.
A lot of other groups' designs were mainly supposed to be decorative and making an environmental space different. Groups that made the Spiderweb, the chalk drawings, the birthday bus stop, and others were I think mainly based on making a space look different and getting spectators to feel good, yet not having other meaning behind that. Don't get me wrong, I liked all those designs and thought they were cool. But they were still mainly based on looking cool and decorating a spot.
For our design, we decorated a bridge with natural elements, like the sticks, the rocks, and the ferns. We also had an additional meaning behind it like making the unnatural natural yet unnatural (or whatever it was). And attempting to bring life to our bridge (the ferns), yet ironically killing life (the ferns). And our bridge being there and allowing others to make their own interpretations.
So since other designs were made to basically decorate a spot, we too decorated a spot, and get hammered by criticism. Huh? We not only decorated the spot, but had meaning behind it has well. We had both decorations and meaning, so wouldn't that be better? Had we not had meaning at all so that our decorations had nothing to cover up, would that have been better?
On our stage design, we were told that our first design was the bare minimum, before we changed it and made it better. So basically, we wanted to make sure that we didn't do the minimum, by adding lively decorations like the ferns and the sign and the stick man. And now, we're told we did too much, and the decorations were unnecessary.
A lot of other groups' designs were mainly supposed to be decorative and making an environmental space different. Groups that made the Spiderweb, the chalk drawings, the birthday bus stop, and others were I think mainly based on making a space look different and getting spectators to feel good, yet not having other meaning behind that. Don't get me wrong, I liked all those designs and thought they were cool. But they were still mainly based on looking cool and decorating a spot.
For our design, we decorated a bridge with natural elements, like the sticks, the rocks, and the ferns. We also had an additional meaning behind it like making the unnatural natural yet unnatural (or whatever it was). And attempting to bring life to our bridge (the ferns), yet ironically killing life (the ferns). And our bridge being there and allowing others to make their own interpretations.
So since other designs were made to basically decorate a spot, we too decorated a spot, and get hammered by criticism. Huh? We not only decorated the spot, but had meaning behind it has well. We had both decorations and meaning, so wouldn't that be better? Had we not had meaning at all so that our decorations had nothing to cover up, would that have been better?
On our stage design, we were told that our first design was the bare minimum, before we changed it and made it better. So basically, we wanted to make sure that we didn't do the minimum, by adding lively decorations like the ferns and the sign and the stick man. And now, we're told we did too much, and the decorations were unnecessary.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Presentation Discussion Order
1. Thought Process
-Location
-Design
2. Sketch and Inspiration
3. Supplies
4. Construction/creation
5. Improvisation
6. Meaning/interpretation
7. Passerby reactions
I tested the powerpoint on a housemate's Mac and it worked so we are good to go for tomorrow.
-Alex
-Location
-Design
2. Sketch and Inspiration
3. Supplies
4. Construction/creation
5. Improvisation
6. Meaning/interpretation
7. Passerby reactions
I tested the powerpoint on a housemate's Mac and it worked so we are good to go for tomorrow.
-Alex
Compare and Contrast
Compare and contrast the two different styles in the video clip. (You'll probably be doing more of one than the other.)
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
I LIKE TO CONNECT AND BE MEANINGFUL WITH MY BLOG EVERY NIGHT, DO YOU?
I PERSONALLY ENJOY THE POINT THAT FORMS AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE FROM THE TWO LINES THAT ALMOST JOIN, FORMING THE ROAD; AND I ALSO TAKE JOY FROM THE UNREALISTIC TREE BRANCHES THAT JUT FROM THE LARGE TREE TRUNKS, ALMOST AS IF THEY'RE TRYING TO DANCE.in other goddamn news, we are meeting tomorrow (that's WEDNESDAY WEDNESDAY WEDNESDAY) at 7pm @ Joe's, as per usual.
PC or Mac
Last week, my Gateway laptop died. When I tried to turn it on, it either gave me error messages, sat at the opening "Gateway" screen, or have a blank black screen and did nothing. Since then, I've gotten my computer to start working again. But it was extremely irritating.
I'm a huge supporter of Mac, though I own a PC. I do have an iMac at home though.
Because I am so angry at PCs or at least my crappy Gateway laptop, I took this quiz on Facebook called "Are you a Mac or are you a PC?", just to see what I’d get. And…
You are a Mac person. You like instant functionality and beauty combined. You love the smoothness in a Mac. You would rather pay a little more now than run to the store every month. It means you think for the longterm! So take a bite at the nearest apple!
Yes! I swear, I was gonna go on this HUGE rant if I had gotten PC. Man, I really hate PCs now. Maybe it’s just my crappy Gateway. Actually, no. It’s just PCs in general, but my Gateway is just the lowest of the low.
If I would have gotten PC, here’s what it would have said…
You are a PC person. You want functionality over smooth looks. You love customizations and you would stay away from Macs because they take so many decisions for you! You like to have things your own way even if it may mean putting in a little extra effort. Make your choices at the nearest geek hub!.
Functionality?! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! That is HILLARIOUS!!!! WOW! Functionality… HAHA!!!
Most people who love PCs hate Macs and most people who love Macs hate PCs. So in the spirit of randomness on our blog, what do you like better: Macs or PCs? Comment or post something.
Kevin
If The Other Party Wins
Kinda old because the election is long over, but still funny.
One thing's for sure: the person you disagree with is going to ruin the country.
One thing's for sure: the person you disagree with is going to ruin the country.
Meeting Today
Hey, just letting you all know that our environmental design is no longer there and was taken done by someone. (Maybe it was a safety hazard to those bikers.) Whoever took it down, I hope that when they were taking it down, that rock hit him in the head ;). So our meeting today might be shorter than expected, or maybe we should just talk about how we are going to present on Thursday.
Meeting today at Joe's at 2 PM.
Kevin
Meeting today at Joe's at 2 PM.
Kevin
Random Group Pictures.
There were a lot of random photos taken that I wanted to post just because.
-Alex
-Alex
Monday, May 25, 2009
Environmental Design: The unnatural naturally altered in an unnatural, but natural way.
Anyone feel free to comment =D
-Alex
As always, more pictures are here:
http://s616.photobucket.com/albums/tt248/ultima377/?start=all
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
