Anaylse the drawing system of Paul Noble in his series Nobson Newtown

Analyse the drawing system Paul Noble uses in his series Nobson Newtown in relation to the content of his work and the positioning of the viewer. Support your argument with reference to a drawing which makes use of a different system

Paul Noble is defined by his knack to appropriate the stylisation of architectural and technical design to manifest the sublime Nobson Newtown – a dystopian Metropolis which festers within the growing corruptions of the Western and Eastern politics and religious societies. Amongst the rugged detail of the 4H pencil; he installs this Eden like paradise, surrounding morbidly structured monuments, within enthusiastically crafted walls and scripted symbolisms – there lay darker characterisations of sex, paraphilia and idol worship – standing out indirectly from those who had preceded him. His style emulates the erotic crudeness of H.R Giger, instilling engraves and textures that inflict a certain mood upon the panoramic scenery; reflecting the altering times of day, to the mannerisms of the Nobson inhabitants.

The biblical references found within his on-going saga of Newtown, are exceedingly adopted word for word from the Ten Commandments; the visually grotesque caricatures of faeces amplifying the betrayal of true spiritual faith within humanity of God, Allah or Jehovah of Abrahamic belief systems whilst ironically stating the excessive commercialisation of not only religion but the connotation of art and the industry within itself.

Further study shows, that he manufactured the essence of his world upon the interpretations of good and evil, inflicting his thoughts on the mythology of Heaven and Hell upon the composition of the buildings and atmosphere’s expression. His approach to this condones the philosophies of nihilism, the struggle of secularism, and the advancement of antitheist movements’ – atheism and secular humanism.

Nihilism philosophy is commonly associated and popularised by German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche whom of which was involved within its counterpart movement existentialism. Its school of thought concentrates upon the misinterpretation of reality, and loss of significance within society; it’s strongest feature the artificial attachment towards organized religion and its manifestoes (i.e. idols). Catholicism is Nietzsche’s “muse” in this deduction, for Catholicism was the first and most significant organisation of Christianity in the Western world, additionally the most influential.

“I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him? All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment .” (Nietzsche, 1883/1885)

Nobston Newtown withholds this quote subconsciously as a visual metaphor for the primitive aspects of the inhabitants, inclusively the mock hieroglyphics taken from pre-Abrahamic cultures, moreover upon Paul’s Palace, where the paraphilia of faeces and eroticism is adopted in placement of dieties. Consequently, it may refer to Noble’s deliberate manifestation of stereotyping male mind-sets – offsetting the limited aspects of some men, thus himself as an individual – upon the association with the popularization of pornography within the commercial industry.

In addition to this, Nietzsche’s description of humanity against the theoretical over-man refers to humanity’s lack of confidence to repel against the instinctive repression to ridding itself from superstition, thus the signifying of faeces representing our desperate belief in a deity. Noble ventured into the Ten Commandments to demonstrate that perhaps the corruption of today’s world is so reliant upon a being of higher power, that we are attempting to take God’s place with a human being in a high status – politicians, musicians, royalty and scientists are examples of people with such a status. All these aspects of human society have influences upon the industry, and inflection upon us as people – like a deity.

“Behold, I teach you the overman. The overman is the meaning of the earth. Let your will say: the overman shall be the meaning of the earth! I beseech you, my brothers, remain faithful to the earth, and do not believe those who speak to you of otherworldly hopes! Poison-mixers are they, whether they know it or not. Despisers of life are they, decaying and poisoned themselves, of whom the earth is weary: so let them go. Once the sin against God was the greatest sin; but God died, and these sinners died with him, to sin against the earth .” (Nietzsche, 1883/1885)

Referencing the previous nihilist work ‘The Gay Science ’, Nietzsche is inflicting a premonition of the future exploited corruption of organized religion, initiating the theory of the growing loss of faith in any belief system. Referring back to the philosophy of nihilists, it validates that the physical representations of dogmatic religion has no influence; describing the deliberate misuse and misinterpretations of many religious symbolisms; i.e. Nazism, Satanism – and incredibly, the prompting of iconoclasm – the destruction of religious icons, socially formed within a religious group.

The association with Noble’s interpretation of Heaven and Hell exhibits characteristics of such structures, the slow destruction of a dystopia through the plagiarisms of people – reflecting the warnings stated by Allah, Jehovah or God within the Old Testament; the biblical tale of Sodomy and the fall of Eden.

——–

“I use very hard pencils, very rarely softer than 4H. Sometimes the pencils are so hard it seems they would rather scratch a hole in the paper than give up their pale graphite .” (Noble, 2009)

Hardened lines within the commencement of this practise were once established in accordance to necessity rather than to uphold a denotation, in subliminal or mindful state.

Etchings of Germanic medieval artists Master E. S and Konrad Witz; pre-1350, right through to the late-15h century were dealing exceptional exhibitions articulating with a pioneering technique, ‘bracelet shading’ . It was later industrialised by draughtsman Durer of the sixteenth century, becoming standard equipment for draughtsmen throughout Europe. Bracelet shading was achieved by the broadened depth, and curve of the line, through the usage and definition of pen.

To delineate plasticity, as his contemporary Mathias Neithardt-Gothardt – affectionately named Grunewald – they adapted the linear concoction of their illustrations with the infusing tone definition of the pen to establish revolutionary lifelike shape upon a flat layout

Practiced in collecting visual and physical data, Noble succeeded to expand past the limits of two-dimensional imagery, capably expressing the ability to construct the illusion of the three-dimensional; defined by the tactical exaggeration of the hand gesture, and pressure placed upon the medium of his choice. His technique therefore duplicates the stigma of the medieval etchings of the 14th and 15th century, prior works of similar design being accumulated from Greek vase painting
Said vase paintings are noted to configure a reality of subconscious motion because of the thickness and penetration of the chisel – comparable to that of an etching; where the function of shadow; illustrates an unconscious depth to the theme – holding a similar foundation, only that the “pectoral” muscle goal is to represent the early instruction of animation and movement.

The visual phantasm to demonstrate an effect by the mere stroke of a pencil, no matter how thick the lead is relied upon his talent with perceiving kinaesthetic or tactile learning – the illusionary aspect of the mind that can intimidate the memory of touch. It is a memorising ideal demonstrated in detail within industrial and commercial design – guerrilla marketing and film making; notably the dynamic build of motion and computer graphics, usually instructed to blend by controlling established pixel imagery.

“I arrange the objects of my drawings on a spatial plane using cavalier protection. The origins of this projection lay in military cartography – fore, mid and background are got rid of and everything depicted is equally close and far. The viewer becomes the architect and the drawing, an architectural plan. He or she is no longer earthbound but hovers like an angel over the described scene, taking in the entire design ” (Noble, 2009)

There may be a possibility that the introduction of tactile or kinaesthetic learning was adopted by post-polytheist and early 20th century art movements, inclusively illusionism and surrealism.

Illusionism, the term founded by 5th century artists and painters, Zeuxis and Parrhasius, was a movement of which not only stepped into both an influentially high-tech aspiration of art, inspiring modern day magicians but a philosophical doctrine. The facility was to infuse illusion with atmosphere to present the misconception of the scenery, permitting the viewer to experience a believable landscape – in means of them taking immediate notice upon the art, and the hallucinations.

The concept of Surrealism implements the status quo of the primary foundations of Illusionism, in the process illuminating the art culture with many founding fathers; of whom which inputted their own twists and eccentricities upon paintings and letter-forms; inclusive of French writer and poet Andre Betron (1896-1966), Spanish painter Salvador Dali (1904-1989), and contemporary Swiss artist H.R Giger as previously familiarised within the introduction.

Surrealism broadened the depths and curiosities of humanity, by not just luring society to step into a three-dimensional world; but to allow them to inquire into their own thoughts, psychologically revealing their own inner insecurities. How such undeniable efforts were achieved were through the exaggerated figurines, and everyday objects; enforcing the terminology of “hallucination” to a whole new reality

The mentioning of Giger, and the potential comparison stems from the inventive approach to sexualise a dystopian Metropolis, through the outrageous stimuli of cyborg women and creatures; comprehending the futuristic concoction for the alienoid Xenamorphs of Ridley Scott’s Alien film franchise. The conceptual art of H.G Giger’s “alien” was revolutionary, for the creatures alone ventured his vision of transhumant theories of the Metropolis myth into a broader scale, entwining his art into film genres of psychological thriller and horror – reminiscent of the original 1927 Germanic feature film of the same name.

Subtle mentions of religion hide within the industrial “biochemical landscape”; notably considered in “The Spell VI” (2011) enhancing the strength, and intellectual beauty of the chimera Baphomet (Fig.1), sometimes known as the Goat of Mendez. It is a figure prominent of early Christian scriptures – such as Gnosticism, The Knights Templar and Ophites – Paganism, and co-ordinated with the Satanist belief system. Its position, because of its inbred history differs according to that belief. Though the creature’s significance is not disputed for example – balance of the Left and Right path, good and evil (i.e. light and darkness), man and woman (i.e. Yin-Yang); the origins of said being. It is reported to either be a Christian deity, of which the Pagans adopted into their belief system, and vice versa. The legend of Abrahamic cultures see it as the lovechild of fallen Arch-angel Lucifer and demon Lilith , or the symbolic manifestation of angel Samael; a spiritual being of Judaism of whom could pass between all three dimensions – Heaven, Earth and Hell, thus transcend to cherish all three attributes. It holds common ancestry with other formations of deity that characterise harmony, or bonded to Earth; Pan of Greek mythology is a notorious example.

(Fig.1. “The Spell VI” transpersonalspirit , 2011)

(Fig.2 “Satan I” selfdestructv2.deviantart.com , 1976)

With further study, evidence of biblical influences can be seen within an earlier piece, “Satan I” (Fig.2). A reviewer of NarrativeinArt.com established a connection within the current corruption and manipulation of Western world religions; the symbolic metaphorical structure attacking the genuine nature of Christianity. Such manifestoes are found inside the basis of many conspiracy theories surrounding the New World Order and the misconceptions of the Illuminati.

According to contemporary spiritual superstitions, the purpose of these two infamous societies are meant to oppress human civilization; suppressing human rights through the façade of dictatorship; its institution influenced by Luciferian and Satanic belief systems.

Alternatively, there is an theological assumption basing the review upon the creation of Lucifer, the fallen angel of Enlightenment, that “he” was the first and only angel to be on an equal status with his creator; God, Allah or Jehovah. Because of this careful conception, the arch-angel was deemed the threshold to adorn those who seek the deity with knowledge; enlightening the onlooker with the power to beseech his creator. Thus additional assumptions that the Bringer of Light’s influence amongst humanity was the fundamental creation of three important aspects of religion; aspects that are themselves condemned by many; reformed religion, atheism – in connections with agnosticism – and Satanism – the counterpart of Luciferianism.

Reformed religions are in themselves theological, and spiritually open-minded to embrace things that fundamentalist religions do not; atheism, through agnostics is the refusal to belief in deities, replacing their faith in a God into science, whether it to prove or disprove that a deity or deities existence.

Through Luciferianism and Satanism, the darkened counterparts of Christianity, these belief systems instead swap the power from God to his offspring Lucifer; as both an individual guide and God in his own right.

His own approach towards his morbid surrealism was, and is achieved by the use of a stencil procreated with scrap piece of metal with controlled metallic equipment puncturing into the material; a practise resembling that of an etching, only upon a rawer magnitude. The artist’s skill was documented by American psychologist and writer, Timothy Leary (1920-1996). He revealed for the release of Griger’s “H R GRIGER/N.Y CITY” (1982)’ a biographical concept art book of H.R’s work, and later concieved in 1997, originally conceived in 1981; the inspiration for the metallic stencil was given to him by colleague Cornelius de Fries – of whom had been working for the electronic industry at the time of the stencil’s discovery.

Therefore it expanded upon Paul Noble’s designation to imply those who view Nobston Newtown to become a part of the town themselves. Those who observe, the onlookers of his master-piece, reveal a holographic, psychosomatic scheme. He is defying the audience with the concept of enchantment, through a dystopian outlook.

“Are you a viral visitor staring with your petalled-poppy eyes into our reproductive organs? ” (Leary, 1982)

(Fig.3, “Erotomechanical VIII” Museum Syndicate.com , 1979)

“Nobson Newton arose from Noble’s invention of a cityscape whose buildings double as an orthogonally projected typeface. The result is a semi-legible architect. The rows of structures spell out the name of the town, which is the title of the work. The overall result is like Swiftian parodies of municipal planning done by a sadistic autocracy. “Town planning as self-portraiture” is how the artist explains the total lack of inhabitants; he being the only citizen”.

Noble as an artist is a skilled magician of illusion, the architect of fantasy and dreams (Fig 3), and the draughtsman to stimulate his creation to life. Through the delusion of mundane imagery, he has cleverly plagiarised tactics only found in politics; to dismiss and distinguish reality from fiction – a stepping stone away from H.R. Giger (Fig.4); Paul deliberately masked his distorted mind, making his panoramic works savoury from a distance. His touch is of subtly, consequently allowing unknowing victims to walk into an exhibition without a clue of what to expect.

A wolf in sheep’s clothing.

__________________________________

December 12th 2012

Essay: Visual Communication and Cultural Meaning Research

Visual Communication and Cultural Meaning: Research Project

Very early on in my development as an artist, as a creative person in general, I was always interested in the complex and the dark nature of art. The horrific and queer. My ideas on their own accord are just as strange and detailed, some have remained with me years and they keep on reappearing into my head so I can reconstruct them, enunciate them with further development.

Over the years, I find more than one art movement influences me, in reference to the current direction of which I’m taking with my art, and within those movements a number of artists. The Arts and Crafts movement, founded by William Morris, Art Nouveau, with the artist Aubrey Beardsley, the Aesthetics movement, or specifically the Aesthetic literature; a formation where author and playwright Oscar Wilde and Beardsley were collaborating members and of course; the Gothic – notably its architecture and literature alone. These four movements of art and design were interlinked, because of their usage of design itself. They were purposely decorative, and complicated; the artists themselves were intricate. That within itself is something I feel connected to. It asks the question as to why these movements in comparison to me wanted to take this route as an art form – was it to escape reality? Am I trying to escape reality like Aubrey Beardsley?

For example, if you look into the art works found in the Art Nouveau sub-movement; Rococo, every piece of the detail are based upon the painter’s imagination. The only perhaps realistic features are the people, the remarkability of the compositions. The surrounding central figures are mythical or supernatural humanoids. Aubrey Beardsley emulated this. His work strongly held a form of sexuality, exposing the sexual nature of the human body similar to how the Ancient Greek and Roman sculptures did from earlier centuries. Based upon the fantasy that sex could be permanently open and not hidden away, to look upon the human body as an art form, to expose intimate areas for the eyes to see – which in this day and age, is happening, has happened. In my early adolescence years I also was fascinated by both areas of the spectrum – I would draw mythical creatures and explore sexual scenarios (which my peers considered “porn”), as it was, as I saw it then to be inquisitive, considered it normal to venture into the anatomy of the human body.

An artist of the late stages of Art Nouveau, which I took immediate attention to was Leonetto Cappiello and his piece Maurin Quina, 1906. An advertisement for a brand of absinthe named Maurin, which upon its release – in response to the depicted imagery, was banned. The moment I set my eyes upon this poster, I was intrigued by the formation of the research of portrayal that was placed into this particular masterpiece. It spewed with history, mythology with a mysticism of possible demon/Satan worship; a reflection upon modern-day gothicism.

                           

                      “Maurin Quina”, 1906            “Sanguis Daemn (Blood Demon)” – my art, 2010.

In comparison to my personal style, if you exclude the lack of colour, Cappiello’s artwork is considerably simplistic, minimalist; which of course, contrasts with the original nature of Art Nouveau. However, it has kept a reoccurring figure of ancient history. Outside of my love for art, I am drawn to demonology which studies demons within many cultures outside religious context. Demons, are as supernatural beings possibly the most rehashed elements of mythology today, far more so compared to other mythological creatures. Used frequently in gothic literature, the inspirations of the undead (zombies, vampires) – all of which are witnessed with the productions of early 20th century – 21st century horror films, and psychological thrillers. For instance, in Islamic folklore there is a demon of which kills human beings for their blood and flesh, using their body as a host.

Reason of course demons are so frequently used in the likes of religious text, folklore, modern fiction and art, leading to Leonetto’s work are because of their nature. They are commonly known as tricksters, jesters of the court. They are also seen as guardians of treasures, even messengers of Gods. A demon or devil challenges people, makes them question themselves. Their sanity perhaps, if you go back to “demonic possessions” which were and still are being blamed for simple diagnosis to various mental illness; Schizophrenia being one. Maurin Quina mingles into an altered metamorphosis, as mentioned, taking an infamous figure in human history – the Devil and combined it with the temptations of “la fée verte” – the Green Fairy, the logo of absinthe. A fairy, being a manifestation of a demon, only in a smaller form.

In a similar context to Maurin, where the demon has been taken into account as a swindler, when I approach aspects of various demon mythologies and bring in what some people would call, the “monstrous” side of the supernatural creature in question – similar to the horror film genre, there is no sophistication to the thing itself. This a theory played within Christianity, the fear of a temperous, powerful and sometimes physically grotesque spirit. The narrative, is therefore complex; whether it is in a decorative form or how a mind interprets it at first hand.

Another characteristic of Cappiello’s Maurin, is of how he illustrated the demon for the painting. It holds a coyness – a vulnerability to the pose, carefully constructed to imply an impish miscontrudeness to it – concluding that its body-language is a lie, toying with the viewer, effeminate in its stance. Unknowingly, had I replicated this imagery – despite being naive to the artist at hand.

“The Others” (my art), 2010

Never had I found a reference to replicate the posture of the creatures implied, it was simply through imagination and memory. Could this be a suggested distant “psychic” link between artists? Similar to twins theorised to possess strange telepathic links; knowing what they are each thinking? Could it be the same for completely unrelated artists? Was I somehow replicating Cappiello’s ideas onto paper, regarding my altered approach, and differed influences?

The creature in my art, was a “monster” from Others by British author, James Herbert – released in 1999; a novel about a man named Nicolas who is investigating into the allegations of mistreatment towards residents within a nursing home -only to find that the nursing home is in fact containing experiments, and those who suffered from untreatable congenital illnesses. All the while, with Nicolas finding out secrets about his own past.

What interested me about the novel’s narrative;  was the great homage to classical horror –  where such things as malformation were a reoccurring distinguishing feature. Beasts that due to their outwardly appearance creates a somewhat irrational fear for us humans. Frankenstein, by Mary Shelly is an outstanding story about such a phenomenon, where the physique of the creature is so primitive in the eyes of sophistication, no one is able to look past what it is. The experiments, of such similarity in Herbert’s novel are what people could call “demonic” in essence, due to their flexing personalities – the creations of the physician, like the monster of Frankenstein having to deal with what they are, trying to defend themselves from the scrutiny of the outsiders.

How does this psychological debate of the miscontrudeness of demonology and appearance of artwork relate to the complicated visual aspects of Art Nouveau, Gothism, or Art and Crafts? Because, with a visual construction of these movements, there has to be a mean of escape, like with my first question – are artists trying to escape reality because it’s so dull? Artists of such movements come across as solitary people, keeping their private lives in the shadows (whether it is out of choice, or the fear of scrutiny) and with doing so replacing the world and society around them with their masterpieces. Art, doesn’t matter what form, whether it is to write, to draw, paint, or to act out a scene in theatre; artists have this need to not conform to real time. I feel that the thoughtful, if not useless decorations that are squiggled into negative space, the Arabesque, are a means of the creator avoiding leaving the room of which they created their piece. Trying to perfect something they cannot perfect in their own lives; so they create a story with the lines; with mythology and monsters because it’s far more interesting than sitting in a room full of people and talking about nonsense.

This brings me back to the subject of Oscar Wilde and Aubrey Beardsley; two artists in their own right in the Aesthetics movement, and both skeptics of the world during their time. Wilde was a critic of Victorian era England, very blunt in his views and in a sense was incredibly truthful in what was occurring around him. He took to the philosophical view of “Hedonism” – a controversial view or was considered controversial.

It spoke that people could be allowed to express themselves, express pleasure and comparing it to today’s society, Hedonism evidentially exists. People have been granted to live their lives openly; for example, two consenting adults allowed to love, regardless of sex. However, at the time it was a questionable way to live, people who acted this way or allied themselves with Hedonists were of course casted out.

It was because of this, that the Aesthetic movement materialized in the first place; it was a means of the “queer” artists of the crusade (writers, painters, actors etc.) to co-exist in this little world that was hidden away from reality, the scorn. The movement within itself was the equivalent to a singular portrait of the Art Nouveau, a tapestry of Arts and Crafts and the architecture of the Gothic.

These Aesthetic artists had their fantasy built around them, and that one fantasy drew outsiders in because it was a different way of living. Work of the association was of course exposed to the public; getting somewhat mixed to negative reviews at the time; because it was showing the honest authenticity of the world of which people lived.  Wilde was an illuminating figure when it came to such; as he was the man that would force into people’s faces with the artists’ opinions and lives, with the subliminal message “We do exist, and we’re going to make sure you know we exist, we’ll even force our opinions down your throats if we must”.  A complete contrast to the reasons behind the Aesthetics movement, however, it seemed to work in his favor for a time.

Today he has a great fan community, including myself.

Looking towards Aubrey Beardsley as a very large dissimilarity of Wilde; impersonating the pacifist; a person who questioned the world, but decided to change it through art instead of speaking his mind verbally. Their collaborations with one another identical to the close relationships in history; real life or fictional; the closest comparison can interestingly be found in Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson. In truth, they’re chalk and cheese, but amazingly, they were their own bread and butter.

“Lysistrata Defending the Acropolis” by Aubrey Beardsley, Illustrations to Lysistrata

The crudity of the visual can hopefully speak for itself, it shows immediate mockery, for this illustration through the eyes of a masked man, the mockery materializing from three women. However, expand outside the box, metaphorically speaking; and this one person is embodying the society around of which Beardsley had to endure every day. When he was well enough to explore the world around that is, for because of Teburcilousis, he was normally trapped within the walls of the house or his bedroom, hearing stories. Stories of which were interpreted into these designs, making imaginably humorous takes of what he heard, and in doing so exaggerated the scenario, because it gratified relief from his illness.

There is again the subject of nudity used in all of his work, which is a rematerializing theme within genres of Art Nouveau, a reminiscence of Rococo, [xix]Ukiyo-e (“Ukiyo” Japanese for “Floating world” in English”), two art movements that occurred before Art Nouveau’s popularity in Europe. Sex, whether it is found in sculpture, painting, prints, and literature, must be a gauge for a means of escape if you look into modern-day and ancient pornography, whether it is to see sexual intercourse, kinky foreplay, or a seductive pose (erotica).

When all of this boils down to how this affects me as person and my own artwork – I can base this all to one thing. I’ve experienced things in my life that has resorted to me evading the sourness of my relationships in regards to family and friends. The expenditure of time I place into the notions behind my drawings, and the continuous refurbishing of the ideas, the construction of the colour, the figures; it’s me enjoying time away from the problems which persist in everyday life. It doesn’t even stop at visual drawing, it includes my writings. Sometimes I’ll sit at computer, whether it is to role-play (I use this figure of speech outside the world of RPG, I take it into a form of a story, I put my heart into the characters). Or to finish a chapter of my fan fiction or original fiction; and simply type away until it’s complete. Hours go by, and by the time I’m finished, the day has gone and its night time. It just concludes that possibly, even for a realist like me; if I am to be influenced for such complexities, I may be attempting to escape something I am trying to understand. Reality itself.

—-

September – October 2011

Essay: Dream Metaphors in Mainstream and Experimental Film

Combination of Question 2 (Compare and contrast early cinema (1835 – 1910) and mainstream narrative cinema) and question 7; (Explore the power of the dream metaphor in experimental film and video).

 In this dissertation, I want to explore dream sequences; their technique, design and how each genre of film and the directors themselves wanted them to be approached. To do so, I needed to associate with the narrative of experimental and mainstream cinematography – as the process itself is more incestuous than originally believed. I’m going to feature the works of Hitchcock (Spellbound), David Lynch (Eraserhead, Blue Velvet), Tim Burton (Edward Scissorhands), and Winsor McCay (Dreams of a Rarebit Fiend), instigate the future discussions of the unique tactic of each film maker. To assist explanation for the classification of the act, I will be looking to Sigmund Freud’s Interpretation of Dreams; which I feel was a large sector of how the hallucinations stemmed.

As it may be clear, the usage of the dreams all depends on the inspirational impact of the director; their vision for the film. With the conventional narrative, a dream must have a meaning. A subject of which the dreamer, and in this case, the actor within the character as well as the viewing audience themselves must be able to relate. While, the opposite side of the coin is the untried film narrative; the experimenting director ventures into the visual aspect. It all revolves around the artistic structure, how the spectators respond to the image.

Despite that contradictory value involving the imagination of the mind as one’s sleeps; as I specified earlier, there is an incestuous connection. Many of the arrangements of extravagant Hollywood movies, the scenes involving daydreams, lucid dreaming, nightmares and subtly flashbacks and flash-forwards are designed by an experimental director. For example, Hitchcock’s Spellbound’s dream structure was constructed by Salvador Darli; an extravagant surrealist painter best known for his melting objects.

Hitchcock was interviewed the same year, after the film Spellbound was released; this footage seen for the very first time in 2010, when the BBC broadcasted a documentary on the said director. He explains that the media at this time, thought that he only chose Dali’s collaborative insights for publicity value; but he ventures on to dismiss this theory:

“What I wanted and again what we were talking about earlier; was the vividness of dreams. As you know, Dali’s work is very solid, very sharp. Very long perspectives and black shadows. Actually, I wanted the dream sequences to be shot in the back yard, not in the studio at all. I wanted them shot in the bright sunshine, so the cameraman would be forced to, what we call “stop damp” and get a very hard image. This was again, the avoidance of the cliché. All dreams in movies are blurred, which isn’t true! Dali was the best man for me to do the dreams, because that’s what dreams should be! So that’s the reason I had Dali”

The atmosphere of  the first dream act of the film was overwhelmed with still human and painted eyes created into the architecture of the set, with a man randomly cutting through the paper drapes whilst a crowd were sitting at tables playing poker.

The initial meaning behind eyes, in the study of dreams is interpreted to represent the dreamers inner subconscious experiencing a sudden revelation upon a subject, or oppositely struggling to accept the comprehension depending upon the condition of the eye; for instance if an eye out of the pair were injured, missing, or had something within it – it symbolises the dreamers’ inability to reach a certain goal with an internal truth about themselves or something that will come to matter one day.  To see a singular eye (commonly referred to as the third eye) imbedded in the dreamer’s forehead; foreshadows a spiritual veracity that will be upon the person in waking hours; moreover, seeing a pair of eyes, receding back into the head signifies that the visionary should attempt soul searching for an occurring truth if in doubt.

To bring this interpretation into the imaginary world of Spellbound, and Dali’s hallucinations for the protagonist to experience; it appears that the use the singular eye; excluding the physical setbacks and the third eye to conjure the image of the eyes watching. This appears to represent the character’s struggle to acknowledge a reality, that he is unconsciously suppressing an issue related to him.

In deep contrast however, to the narrative of commercialised filmography hunting for an individual in particular to use experimentation in their films, as Hitchcock strived for; two contemporary film makers replicated the achievements of Windsor McCay.

Winsor McCay was perhaps the first film maker in the experimental film era to co-ordinate dream sequence visuals as an official dream would conjure; using his own effects, by duplicating the ever moving cinematography that was acknowledged in his comics. He was a skilled film and art director; he pioneered most of the special effects that would be taken advantage of today because they are so well adapted by modern contemporaries. Stop motion, floating objects, animation; all essentials that are later seen being obtained by the two directors of interest. Coincidentally they are also inspired by the surrealism and expressionism artistic movement, like Hitchcock. However, they instead of finding a particular meaning for the dream-like-states, both categorically aimed to make each film throughout every scene somewhat out of focus. Regarding the works of Tim; there are two elements of his visionary with film that separates him from his contemporary, Lynch; particularly in Edward Scissorhands – this was a motion picture that used flashbacks, one of the director in question’s first films using this technique.

Flashbacks are a psychosomatic state where a person recalls past memories; sometimes falling into a trance, sometimes going as far as to re-enact that memory. The recollection within itself is the equviliant to a daydream, where the person unconsciously switches off to reality.

How he approached the performance was using what Hitchcock called ‘the blur’, a cliché in mainstream narrative. This was to dissociate himself from other directors who wanted to co-exist between the two spectrums of cinema; to be appreciated by both parties.

Flashbacks, in the replacement of dreams however, in the terms to sampling Burton’s work, is how each figure in the remembrance represents a certain significance to the character’s memory; similar to dreams in their ability to deploy people. Most commonly, the films involve an elderly patriarch, the father of the protagonist and according to the study of dream interpretations; there is a shared established connection with an elderly male character conjuring up in dreams of ordinary subjects. It’s one of the most common archetypes stated to present an embodiment of a dad, and this can relate to a spiritual guide such as God(s), or a more harmful appearance; such as a tyrant, a giant, Devil etc.

Specimens, like Wilbur Wonka, Willy Wonka’s father in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) portrayed by Christopher Lee and the Inventor, played by Vincent Price in Edward Scissorhands (1990) separately decipher their stories into distinctive references to the individual characters, using their view upon not only parenting, but the world in which they co-exist. Edward’s creative parental substitute is reflecting the untimely death of someone important to the dreamer. The language of dreams, see this as a sign of a future enlightenment or rebirth, something has ended purposely so a door can open to a new aspect of someone’s life.

Furthermore, if we go by how Scissorhands was dressed, if this was seen in the context of the reverie; it would be a philosophical suppression of the dreamer – the clothing that Depp’s character wore was a physical restraint; a theoretical obstacle that he was trapped in and for the purpose of the flashback was based on the fact that Scissorhands was left incomplete, out of touch with a future he would never be able to experience – not being able to be fully human, without the sense of touch; his hands. Burton has there for combined two denominators into the flashback scenario; Edward’s hands are not only artistic transition of the injury of the hands, but the disembodied hands of which his “father” was giving to him as a gift before he died. He accidentally destroyed his new hands, which is observed to characterise the attack upon one’s ego, and the notion that they were incorporeal was a metaphor that Edward Scissorhands was destined to be a misunderstood character; he would never be able to express himself like an ordinary human would.

Dr. Wonka is the opposite; his presence demonstrates a typical tyrant; and in young Willy Wonka’s eyes the man who won’t let him be who he wants; the hindrance of his dream career. Conversely in the psychology of dreams – the orthodontist isn’t to be taken as a factual physical person, genuinely; the equviliant to the confectioner’s subconscious displaying self-doubt. In any scenario where the dreamer has someone standing beside or in front of them, either verbally or physically disrupting their course; most frequently a person that the dreamer knows – it’s the unconscious state of the mind preventing the conscious from pursuing its goal.

Frued spoke about the three elements of the mind- the Id (an area of the conscious that concentrates upon the primal instincts; including the impulsive desires and pleasures of the individual – whether based on sexuality or another form stimuli); the Ego (the rationalisation of the impulses, controlling the nature of our waking state of mind) and the Superego. The superego is the automatic function of the Id; it censors what it feels to be a destructive need when we are awake, but while we are asleep, the roles switch place. It is one of the many reasons for when a dreamer suddenly starts to move in their sleep, as if they are running like in the vision they are experiencing at the time.

The flashback in this case, to take it to dream context may be showing an example of the Superego and Ego combined; in the formation of Dr. Wonka prohibiting Willy Wonka’s Id; the strong urge to become something wholly extravagant, and in the process rationalising them. However, the future confectioner eventually surpasses those two elements of his subconscious and continues on his path regardless, demonstrating the strength of the Id.

Now turning my attention to David Lynch, who as I mentioned earlier approached Winsor McCay’s experimentation of dream visuals differently to Burton; there is the familiarity with the usage of the blur but unlike his peer; the purpose of his films work around the traditional experimentation – every single frame of the scene is figuratively out of focus, yet vivid, and the storyline itself questionable; an component that is shared with the escapade of dreams.  Eraserhead (1977) shows these characteristics quite strongly; but one, Eraserhead validating true inspiration from the surrealist movement; and pictorially a film noir; what is also observed by some, especially his fans – the use of the animatronics in this film are still to this considered a pioneering test; because what he was using as a puppet was a deceased lump of flesh. Unlike the future of animatronics, such as Jim Henson’s Dark Crystal, Labyrinth and The Thing coming up six or so years after.

The process of this particular motion picture regulated from a grant given to him in 1968 by The American Film Institute; which is one of the largest experimental film production companies in America alone. The Independent Film Maker’s grant, as it was known back then was a newly procreated programme; and Lynch was one of the very first few to become a part of the programme in its early stages.

Attempting to translate the narrative of Eraserhead has become quite difficult by many mediums, because Lynch has left most to the viewer’s imagination into how the film should be interpreted. He was interviewed for a behind the scenes feature on the official DVD release of the feature film, to explain the origins of Eraserhead, and it was clear that even he, the creator of this project no longer remembered the significance behind it; saying  “It’s strange how Eraserhead is, it isn’t a personal film. It’s my first feature, and it took the longest of any film; and I lived and loved that world. I can’t remember when I got the idea, when the word “Eraserhead” or any part of the idea came to me first.  I can’t remember if it was in Philadelphia, or when I first came to California. Completely don’t remember; don’t remember writing the script and I don’t remember the ideas coming in; especially the initial idea.  A lot of times I remember when the first thing kind of came, maybe I don’t. But, for sure I don’t remember this. ”. From this quote alone, this may be a consequence of writing the narrative on a whim, possibly on the influence of recreational drugs or alcohol.

Despite of the lack of knowledge concerning the influences; there are noteworthy meanings to each valuable character; however which can only be estimated. Many of Lynch’s fans have speculated for example that the purpose of the entire film is about the fear of conceiving, becoming a parent. There are sections of the film which do confirm this notion; for example the scene with the main character, Henry Spencer spending time with his estranged girlfriend’s family for dinner; the tiny chicken which was put upon his plate began to convulse as if in agony until from the opening that was used to place stuffing; spurted out dark thick liquid, the reminiscence of blood; replicating what appears to be a woman experiencing a miscarriage or abortion. The pregnancy of the girlfriend, Mary and her mother define a connection to this incident by informing the protagonist of his child’s condition; it’s premature with small disfigurements. Its mother identifies herself as not being maternally bonded when she classifies the new-born as being other than a human.

The revelation of how strained the relationship between parent and child is then demonstrated in the following scene; the child’s deformities are strikingly revealed for public scrutiny; it is how the young woman, Mary stated – it couldn’t be compared to any normal human child; it was deformed to the point where it had no limbs, a face similar to a burn victim, it’s organs were exposed if not for the bandage, keeping the undeveloped skeletal structure together and it was intensely ill – to the point where it couldn’t eat.

The philosophies of dream significances conclude that all these sequences are related to the disruption of the pregnancy alone; it’s communally stated by many women that experience dreams where they are either losing the foetus, having bodily malfunctions while pregnant or the child is born malformed. The meaning behind most is from the mother-to- be experiencing fear of not being able to handle raising a child; not having confidence.

With this in mind, the incentive of Hitchcock, McCay, Burton and Lynch was to take dreams and explore them with a distinctive point of view and regards them into the technology that was at hand; and by doing so, managed to validate films that are considered ahead of their time. Hitchcock was the first mainstream director to ask the hand of an artist, Salvador Darli; the most influential surrealist painter of his time to question the structure of dreams in films; to step outside the border of how dreams should be perceived. McCay, a multitalented artist in film, animation, stop motion and comics designed the word cinematography and used that remarkable talent to emphasis the hallucinations onto paper with only ink at hand. Burton took the wisdom of McCay, the surrealism of Darli, and tasteless clichés of dreams in narrative cinema and warped them into a gothic adventure; and productively kept an amateur film maker’s attitude in distributing his filmography. Then there’s Lynch, the sore thumb of mainstream cinema in the sense that he walks amongst those of Hollywood but keeps the mentality of experimentation, namely with the usage of his “living” animatronic puppet; popularising the technique before the years of animatronics came into popularity outside the avant-garde.

It brings me to question what the future is going to hold with mainstream narrative and experimental cinema as they are today. They are always finding new technology to experiment with, and if you take into account the current sensation of three dimensional technologies; it makes you wonder how dreams will be one day constructed; if the likes of dreams as visions and the metaphors behind them are so extraordinary. How is a new and forthcoming director going to transform Freud and psychoanalysis?

---

—-From 24th April 2012

Essay: Maya Deren – Meshes of the Afternoon

Adapted from the Question:
Choose a film from the course to explore in detail and discuss its meaning in regards to its formal techniques, and its historical/social context. Consider the aims of the film maker and refer to any contemporary theoretical and subsequent critical analysis.

Meshes of the Afternoon, is a story that follows a woman within a dream; who experiences a repetitive pattern on what was occurring only moments before she fell asleep. Only to realize that was occurring around her was in fact reality, and it led to her demise at the climax of the film. The core factor was inspired by the heavy emotions of paranoia, inquisitiveness and confusion; turning a murder mystery into a psychotic nightmare.

The purpose of me writing this dissertation is to search into the depths of what further inspired Deren’s decision to create such a psychological storyline, and what methods she used to make the finished product.

Few contemporary experimental film directors, markedly female directors hold Maya, appropriately Jo Ann Kaplan and Sarah Pucill, as a large guidance, ensued by the success of Meshes. It was one of the many films associated with her first husband, Alexandr Hammid (nee Hackenschmied). Together they produced techniques that were highly exceptional for the time.  Coincidentally, this film has grown a large fan base in the modern century of the experimental and underground film genres; furthermore as a result, is the most accessible.

In a clip of a ten minute interview with British Film Institute, Kaplan emphasized her adoration for the director in question, mentioning in further detail of the relationship of Deren and Hammid; “I’m certain that a lot of the method, which she used over and over again, comes directly from him” The so referred method that Jo-Anne speaks of is the component of the 1930s Surrealism, since the trickery of the imagery for Meshes of the Afternoon and the later works replicates some of these measures. This era of Surrealism is a direct reference to the avant-garde crusade; where the brush strokes, and nature of the paint itself had questionable effects on the viewers.

Maya Deren has openly spoken about the initiative within the Afternoon’s instinctive development, stating “This film is concerned with the interior experiences of an individual. It does not record an event which could be witnessed by other persons. Rather, it reproduces the way in which an individual will develop, interpret and elaborate an apparently simple and casual incident into a critical emotional experience”.

There are many elements of the film which give not only the genre an intriguing view point, nonetheless even the smallest of details which might go unnoticed until the ending is revealed.

Alike the visual thesis she presented was the usage of questioning her own sanity; not the self-resulting death, however, the practice of the props. There was the flower at the beginning of the film, following by the opening of the door with the key, the phone, the knife and loaf of bread upon the kitchen table, and then the revelation of the hooded figure; possessing a mirrored face. What made Maya adopt the reflecting face? Was this supposed to represent the character’s self-questioning? For its time, this special effect was considerably advanced, and the technique itself fascinates me, because I have come to see up to date variations in other mainstream media.

A direct connection of a modern day perception of the mirrored face was used in the television series Stargate; with the character of Anubis. Anubis, a Goa’ld system lord named after the Egyptian God of Mummification was given the ability to ascend; which was a consequence of tricking a character called Oma Desala, a member of a fictional humanoid race called the Ancients, later to be known as the Lateans of the sunken city of Atlantis.  He wanted the knowledge, power and the technology of the Ancients to surpass his former system lords of the Goal’d and control of the human population. However, when his ruse was found out, the rest of the Ancient society agreed to cast him out, and as punishment for his crimes of manipulating them; they transported his mind into a state of flux; as a result he was no human, nor was he an Ancient. Anubis was instead left standing as a hybrid; the body of a man, the mind of a Goa’ld, but with the face of transparent goo; which did not reflect any face upon its surface because it was so dense.

Could this be a play upon the idea that the characterisation of Anubis is so self-absorbed within his own power and knowledge, that he has become blind to his own corrupted state? The density of the goo a physical representation of his short-sightedness, thus ‘reflecting’ upon other’s inability to cast their own reflection? They unable to change his ways?

What differs between Deren’s and the works of Stargate’s attainments is the use of technology; when the character of Anubis came into the picture, there was a 63 year old gap; and by the late 1990s, the dependence of the computer animated sequences were in demand.

Furthermore the pattern is correspondingly subtly experienced within Stephen King’s novella story ‘Secret Window, Secret Garden (from Four Past Midnight); by which is then replicated into the 2004 film ‘Secret Window’ starring Johnny Depp. The character, Morton Rainey, a once influential mystery writer in a case of writer’s block begins to experience the visits of a man named John Shooter. Shooter is threatening him with plagiarism, stating that Rainey had stolen his story that was issued in a magazine nine years before the events. Later down into the plot, the character of Shooter is revealed to be an element of Morton’s mind, a duel personality because of the stress of Morton’s wife cheating on him six months prior. Shooter’s purpose is to manifest the distress, anger and jealousy of the writer; turning those heated emotions into murder. What King continues to write, which isn’t followed on in the film, however, leaves the characterization of the man more open-ended; through the eyes of Amy Rainey, the estranged wife; she implies that Shooter could’ve been a ghost of a man that Morton had in fact plagiarized from, that had materialized to haunt him into insanity, and death.

How the storylines of Dern’s and King’s conjoin is the aspect of the ghost-like figure, which is a representation of the protagonist. Despite the key influence not being immediately in film form; it was the novella that inspired the 2004 film; which took the visual adaption of the events to a new level. In addition to the spiritual essence, there was a distorted mirror sequence as Secret Window loomed towards its climax; echoing the end of Dern’s Meshes of the Afternoon – where Rainey had a revelation of the honest reasons behind the turn of events.

This demonstration of captivating narrative was instigated by the introduction of Sigmund Freud’s thought process Psychoanalysis, which was then stimulated into his hypothesis; Interpretation of Dreams – the assembly of psychoanalysis and dreams didn’t derive into film making until during the Second World War. Prior to the philosopher’s adaptions of dreams study, there is of course oneirology  and dream interpretation (sometimes known as dream analysis); the official learning of unconscious brain activity as we sleep and connotations behind it. These idiosyncratic elements of brain study were themselves Freud’s main stimulus. However, without Frued, dreams would not have become so popular.

Practice of the mirror, in the case of Deren, was manifested from the analysis of dreams that have been subjected into two areas; the emotional and mystical. One of the three clarifications of the mirror for the inner state of the sleeper speaks of a fear of seeing someone’s else’s face – this is a reflection of the dreamers true nature of themselves, or what they wish to be seen as. In regards to the superstitions of mirrors; there is an element of joined symbolism of the soul; the phobia of not liking the real essence of yourself. In the context of Meshes of the Afternoon, Deren’s character was in a mental, emotive and physical dilemma with her inner persona and was passing this dread onto the character’s lover in the state of lucid slumber. She did this, so that the ambiguous figure had a tangible form to relate to.

Another aspect involves the telephone, the phone is always out of place from the receiver; as if it’s been used, or perhaps going to be used but was instead forgotten about and left to lay about the stairs. In this instance, it maybe reflecting the woman in the narrative to be trying to get a grip on herself; the phone displaying her sub-consciousness, forewarning her of her path to insanity, but she doesn’t wish to listen?  Phones have been acknowledged in the study of dreams, to demonstrate a hypothetical lack of communication between the dreamer, and whomever the dreamer has drawn to mind in attempting communication with; i.e. boyfriend, girlfriend, family member. The lack of care for the phone, in this case may be due to the character giving up in trying to get through to herself; a disconnected line.

When Deren’s lover walks into the home, within her lucid secondary dream, he’s putting the phone back onto the receiver; this could be a depiction of her subconscious finally getting through to her, appearing to her in person she no longer needs try and connect – the events that are about to unfold have been figured out.  The rational elements of her mind is then finding a path out of the inner confusion; giving the lover a double metaphor, an implication of two aspects of herself.

Similarities are perceived in The Secret Window narrative of the film, especially drawing on the same exact signifiers of the mirror and the telephone; only, because it was made for mainstream audiences though ironically not well received by critics – the symbolism of the objects were taken a step further. Mort Rainey was allowed to see himself in the mirror, more than once and it was always with his back turned. He was also interacting with the character of John Shooter over the phone; whilst Deren’s character had no obvious interaction with either, she was always viewing this from a distance. The preliminary idea behind the dreamer’s reflection in a mirror having their back facing them, is a strong essence of hatred or self-inflicted stress  placed upon themselves; they are not able to face something they are feeling, or have physically done when awake, and it’s a sense of the subconscious being in denial – precisely like Mort Rainey’s denial of his personality’s actions whilst in a unconscious state (sleep).

With the two separate scenarios where Mort was being faced with his reflection, the first time was in reconsideration to him believing that this man – John Shooter, the man who is accusing him of plagiarism was in his living space, invading his privacy all because of a misunderstanding with a story; the echo he envisioned within the glass belonged to Shooter, or so he thought until he attacked it to realize it was himself – that he had imagined the stranger being in there. The second time around, was when the reality of what was unfolding before him; he was being faced with a truth he wasn’t yet ready to betroth.

The telephone on the other hand, was the somatic joining between himself and his split personality; a contrasting facility in regards to Deren’s work, which was speaking about lack of communication. The phone is the character of the schizophrenia, the two being able to establish communication yet with one of the conscious bodies straining to accept the dual nature. Along the same lines was the contact with his ex-wife Amy Rainey; the woman who caused the beginnings of his schizophrenia or made the symptoms worse. How he verified his association with her was with aggression – she was a nuisance, and she may have been, from her behavior a physical indicator of his inner guilt that he wasn’t ready to accept. The nagging questions about if the loss of their unborn child didn’t happen, if she didn’t cheat? These were obviously enquiries that he was asking himself but the plot wouldn’t let on right away.

Deren’s story of Meshes of the Afternoon continues in its inspiration to the deduction of psychoanalysis when the imagery refers to the butcher knife which is at first within the loaf of bread and then retrieved to lie upon the kitchen table; when Deren’s character removes it within the looping sequence. When the knife is shot again, this is where the usage of stop-action is taking hold; with the demonstration of disappearing and reappearing props. The purpose of the knife at this point is to interrogate the many versions of the sleeping woman into admitting who the culprit is that will become the future murderer. Rationalizing this arrangement by the study of dream interpretation; speaks of the butcher knife, like the mirror, and the telephone is a psychological misinterpretation of the dreamer’s real emotions; they are either unconsciously or consciously trying to overpower a hidden truth, not wishing to listen.

Maya instigates further depth into the dream’s association with the butcher knife, by implementing further awareness into the character; the inclinations of the building climax are implying into the woman’s conscious sanity. It is clear by this point that the woman, though not yet completely aware is beginning to associate the inevitable events as they are going to occur. It is here that the wandering impression of her lover comes into the room, this then leading to the conclusion that the subconscious is beginning to take control and rationalize the events to her.

In the same sequence, Maya Deren’s third and last persona manifests a pure black palm when she retrieves the butcher knife in the formation of the house key; playing the game of short straw with the secondary and first versions of herself.  This is the focusing section of her mind that is showing signs of restraint.

The uses of the black palmed hand is retrieved from  the legendary “black spot” of Robert Lewis Stevenson’s tale Treasure Island; the inference of the black spot is supposedly given to a person, for the novel’s purposes a pirate that has been cursed with death, as a form of punishment from a previous crime unto another pirate. Meshes’ alteration gives the implication that the woman is bound for death also. The effect of painting the entire hand black is an undermining implication of blood being on her hands; originating from the common “blood on your hands”, which is symbolic towards a person who allows death upon an unexpected person, but without being the actual interceptor of the killing.

Last, but not least, the key; throughout the narrative, the key is repetitively being used as a means of getting into the household, and in the woman’s looping structure in the short film is always dropping it outside, it is later used in the variation of short straws.  There are multiple meanings when it comes to the formats within and outside the dream world; frequently the phrase “the key to your heart”; draws upon the statement of a soul mate, while the other person represents the lock. However, within the framework of dreams – the key, depending on its condition and the environment foreshadows the dreamers’ status in society, locking away unwanted emotional turmoils, unlocking unfound answers, and for the purpose of Maya’s film; the lack of control of one’s self.

A reviewer upon the film mentioned there being an underlining message of feminism, under the title “A woman fighting with identity”; upon reading this review, I realized that throughout the film’s silent dynamics; with the woman fighting against herself, that there is considerations of feminism.

There for, I wish to conclude this essay with the key alone because I feel out of all the connotations; the key was the strongest element towards the film’s climax. Because of this, the key signifies the struggle for status; which leads to the knife being construed into her fighting against her restrictions related to her current position; the mirror being the window to what she could potentially become, and the phone being the receptor of what she is currently, and the uprising of her true self. Her lover then is the signifier of the male role, and her wanting to murder him was the woman attempting to break free of her inner restraints. When the culmination of the film came; the man walked into the home to find his lover dead. This gives the impression that the woman’s dream was a reality, but the ending of the film was itself a symbol. It was to represent the death of what she was, but who she had become was left a mystery.

---

—-From 25th April 2012

David Lean

David Lean has been noted by Steven Spielberg to be one of his greatest influences in filmmaking, and David Lean is classed as the 9th greatest director in the British film industry. One of the founding members of the BAFTAs (then known as the British Film Academy), and was made chairman in 1947.  With films as Great Expectations, Oliver Twist, Lawrence of Arabia, Doctor Zhivago under his belt, Lean is indeed a marveled Modernist director, and editor.

Lawrence of Arabia, was and still is today considered his masterpiece, with a greatly chosen cast (Peter O’Toole, Alec Guinness, Anthony Quinn, Jack Hawkins and Omar Sharif) and carefully structured story, it told the biography of T. E Lawrence and his struggle to cease the civil war between the two Arabic countries. There is a scene in Lawrence of Arabia that is noted to being one of the best delivered scenes in cinema, with a slow 10 minute build up of the character, played by Sharif approaching. The scene deliberately concentrates upon the desert landscape.

The scene has been shortened to the converse of Peter O’Toole and Omar Sharif, whom of which were nominated Most Promising Newcomer – Male at 20th Golden Globe Awards in 1962. For this film, David Lean had received five awards alone, (Best Director at the 35th Academy Awards; Best Film for Source and Best British Film at the 16th British Academy of Film and Television Arts, shared with his producer Sam Spiegel; Best Motion Picture – Drama, at the 20th Golden Globe Awards, shared with Spiegel again, then a singular award Best Director of a Motion Picture).

What astounds me from Lean’s work is his love for scenery, he would openly go on location to places such as India and Russia, and his introductory credits, the lengthy scenes were deliberately capturing the movement of the characters’ environment. The countries’ landscape, most notably within battle scenes. Doctor Zhivago shows a great deal of this.

From 3:33 -3:38, there is a slow downed, panoramic shot of Russia’s snowy landscape, the figures in a silhouette like distance, like a painted Christmas card. From 4:15 – 4:20, Zhivago is left to stare upon a snowed horizon, which distinguished sleigh tracks to be a tormented reminder of his love’s departure.

However, to me, out of all of David Lean’s films, my favourite will just have to be Brief Encounter. I know, it’s extraordinary of someone my age to consider this old fashioned, black and white film something to be admired; but to be truthful it is. Not because of the lightning affects, and the photographic shots being ahead of their time, but because of the raw emotion between the two characters, played be Celia Johnson and Trevor Howard. Despite the fact it is set in post-World War II, everything needed to be prim and proper; women were considered a certain way, men were considered a certain way, it still relates to this day; how adultery is treated, how two people committing an affair do react.

The scene that works wonders on my emotions is, not, well it is the ending as well. The ending does frustrate me, because after everything the couple went through, they still had to depart, never to see each other again, and the woman had to return to her husband. But the scene that I admire the most is the scene at the bridge, where the two share a kiss. The scenery around the pair is subtle, quaint which contrasts with the likes of Lawrence of Arabia. Plus, how Lean managed to capture the vulnerability of the pair, the protectiveness and the possessive of Alec’s character.

Dave McKean

Dave McKean

I personally like to call Dave McKean the “British Tim Burton”, because in all sense and purposes he is, in every way. He’s our gothic, grungy film maker, illustrator, comic book artist, and graphic designer of the late 20th and 21st century.  A repetitive collaborator with one of my favourite intriguing authors; Neil Gaiman. Looking at his work for Graphic Design project last year, I fell in love with the disturbed imagery. It holds that avant-garde, horror film sensation. The moment your eyes fix upon a piece of his artwork – such as this…

…You can’t keep your eyes off it, your thoughts, emotions, they’re drawn into this creation, like stepping into a Tim Burton film. A fantastic blend of horror, suspension, danger, wistfulness, it all comes together; because you don’t know what Mckean was thinking when he conjured any of his pieces up – well when I look at it anyway. That’s the marvelous thing about artists, you know? You have no idea what is going through one’s head as they draw out a painting, when a writer types up a story. Even when an outsider asks, and an artist explains, they still won’t understand, not completely, because that outsider is not tuned to that artist’s state of mind.

With his illustrative works for Coraline, it brought to life the written words to Gaiman’s book completely, a twisted, corrupted version of Alice in Wonderland had finally came to motion just by looking at the beautiful, cracked drawings. Which in turn were made spectacularly in the 2009 adaption of the film, McKean’s illustrations were animated. It served both the book and the drawings justice.

Tim Burton

“One of the greatest directors of our age” – Christopher Lee, BAFTA awards, 2011

I couldn’t possibly agree more.

Tim Burton is more than just a director;  he is an artist, poet, producer, script writer, occasional actor and animator. He is the king of Gothic cinema of the late 20th and early 21st century. He doesn’t just appeal to “Emo goths”, he appeals to everybody. He is a master of expanding the dark elements of his films to suit even to children. Within his films, there is a unique combination of black, dark and slap-stick humour. His work is also not a film, it’s an expansion of himself – and in doing so, the viewers of his films can relate to everybody. As once in everyone’s life, they have been an outcast, whether it is because of their eccentric personality, how they dress, how they talk.

1989’s Batman Returns was the last of the 1980s-1990s Batman installments that Tim Burton directed, due to Warner Brother’s considering this film too dark, and too violent for children, being replaced by Joel Schumacher to continue the franchise for a mainstream audience.

His usage of pastel and watercolour in his paintings, and drawings is clever, cartoonist but at the same time distinct. Sure, amateur artists can emulate his style, but nothing can completely be compared. The closest comparison to Tim Burton’s work is the character designers of Henry Selick’s “Coraline” (Shane Prigmore and Shannon Tindle) . Burton’s robotic dolls are slender, large eyed and eerily beautiful in design, rarely painted in bright colours. His most brightest work to date would be Big Fish, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Alice in Wonderland. Yet, there is still that…misty mystique, a creepiness about that colour. It makes the viewer uneasy, yet drawn to it.

Personally, I would consider his masterpieces in film Gothic-avant garde, the genres continuously showing the lives of troubled protagonists, Ed Wood being an biography of the real Ed Wood, considered the worst director in cinema history. Surrounding the scripts that have an inkling essence of Burton behind the character’s facade, the atmosphere of the scenery changes, whether it is the personality of the character that emphasises this, or the actual scenery itself. A blend of modern day and Victorian era. A chameleon.

You have no idea how badly I want to go on about this artist, and he is an artist of film, art, story, poetry. He is my inspiration, not in style perhaps, but what I draw. I base my Illustration projects on how he thinks. This is why I love Tim Burton, he is open minded to things that no other director would consider.

Yinka Shonibare

Yinka Shonibare

Inspired by colonisation, post-colonisation, and globalisation. A member of “The Most Excellent Order of the British Empire”, and nominee to the Turner prize of 2004.

Yinka Shonibare’s fashion designs are fascinating, in all honestly. How he combines two contrasting cultures to create an original art piece. Being able to comprehend and acknowledging that what this man has designed is in fact, white western world clothing with the branded, cultural, colourful African materials is quite easy for me to grasp, whilst I wonder how other viewers will take it. Having grown up in Nigeria for most of his life, he had obviously took time to observe the people around him, got inspired. He’s looked at the history of Africa, the colonization of South Africa, how his ancestors had to cope.

Looking more closely into his works, his drawings, paintings, and films; his pieces, which includes the fabulous clothing, it’s a self-expression. Shonibare is speaking about on who he is as a person, telling his viewers that he is proud to be a black Nigerian man with an English upbringing. He was born in England, went to live in Nigeria and came back to be educated here. It’s a contrast to other black artists, who contemplate upon who they are, and what they are, using their experienced talent to explore what makes them different.

I see influence from the Dada movement, Pop Art, collages of his family culture and using Western art movements to emphasise it.

Artwork from Yinka Shonibare’s site: (http://www.yinkashonibarembe.com/drawing.html)

Coco Fusco

Coco Fusco; a photograph from her recent works “War of Terror”

Coco Fusco, an established “interdisciplinary” artist and writer, has expanded her career by continuous experimentation, becoming a chairwoman, performer, lecturer, and exhibitionist of art, but also a producer and editor of her own films. She was born and raised in New York, and is of Cuban descendant. Looking at her works, I can happily consider her of the avant-garde and feminism movement of art. Fusco is a woman who makes a loud statement of what she believes in. Her experimentations branch out into electronic media, multi-media productions, and live performances.

“The Couple in the Cage”, is one of the performance stunts that stands out to me, there is a staggering amount of meaning in this piece of art. It represents so many factors of how we view each other as a race. She explores racism, sexism, human rights, freedom of speech, and stereotypes. Her work is a state of identity, and can be, not compared to, but be placed along side the work of Renee Fox, and the author Malorie Blackman (known for “Noughts and Crosses” and “Pig Heart Boy”); who openly explore what makes them different but the same. Fusco breaks the barriers of her colour, her origin to speak out to people of all skin tones, of all genders.

The Couple in the Cage, starring Coco Fusco and Paula Heredia.

When I look at this piece of visual work by Fusco, which uses still life, body paint art, history, I see it not just looking back at the African natives being treated as slaves, exploited for their bodies, but also a tribute to the past natives of other countries, like indigenous people of the Americas, the people of Mesopotamia, the exploitation of their culture, which was incredibly different to our own. It led to disastrous things, whether it was the extermination to their race, culture, or the white people forcing them to live like white people. This woman is openly standing up for them, making the viewer enjoy the work, but reminding some of the majority of what their ancestors had done, letting the viewer marvel upon an odd experience and explore a guilt trip at the same time.

Symbolism; the Semiotics

I wanted to resume from where I left off from my “Semiotics” post on this blog, as you can see I was getting incredibly detailed on the Symbolic side of semiotics. I sort of showed a bias view on what symbolism is, what people automatically think when one speaks of symbolism – religion. Because, to be frank, that is what is emphasised as symbolic. The crucifix, the well-known image of Christ, Christianity. However, I want to broaden the reader’s horizons a bit, especially mine, as I fully well know that symbolism spreads further, branches off from religion.

Symbolism is used, possibly unnoticeably so in everything…manmade, as yes, religion is man-made, religion was a constructed group, to concentrate on the belief of a superior being. We gave God, Jesus Christ a symbol to worship, to respect….Sorry, getting a bit nihilistic…EVERYTHING MANMADE MEANS NOTHING…I’m joking.

What I’m trying to say is, symbols are used everywhere we go – that is what Semiotics is based on, symbols. Something people can relate to, whether there is a true meaning behind the concept. Pictogram images on signs, it’s all symbolic. I’m going to be silly now and, instead of using a religious symbol to shove in your face, I’m going to use Harry Potter as a visual example.

Deathly Hallows SYMBOL – (Don’t tell me the ending, still haven’t finished the book!)

What do people think when they see this? Do they see something negative, like Lord Voldemort? Or positive, like the Order of Phoenix? Or is there any meaning to it at all, is it just merely an image that is used to frighten the characters of the book as well as the readers? – (of course it’s not the latter, but I’m asking anyway)

In reality, and I’m sadly spoiling myself, this is the symbol of the Peverell Brothers, three deceased men from inside the seventh book, who have been with us the entire time. They held three objects, that was said to have been created by Death, and one of these objects was the Invisible Cloak. Which was coincidentally owned by James Potter, and now Harry Potter, given to him as a Christmas present in the first book. (Do not read this if anyone hasn’t read the book fully, or seen the second part of the film yet!) However, explaining this, does it justify the implications of the symbol? Was it founded to potentially be have an influential effect, positive or negative?

Now to compare it to something more…controversial.

The all-seeing eye/The eye of Providence

We all know what this is meant to represent, don’t we? The Illuminati. (Latin for “Illuminatus” – Enlightenment). Hold your horses, I’m not personally saying I am in on the so-called “Illuminati” that is planning on doing this “New World Order”. This is just a mere example, I am using because this symbol has so many implications behind it, so many origins of history. Let me give you a brief background first;

The (Order of) Illuminati were a 18th century society split from the Enlightenment movement, founded by the German Adam Weishaupt, a philosopher and first professor of canon Law of the University of Ingolstadt. The “secret society” was made on the basis of freethinkers (the philosophical believers of Freethought, a view that life should be seen through logic, science and reason and without authority, tradition and dogma) – many of these freethinkers being well-known intellectuals of the time; Ferdinand du Brunswick, a Prussian field marshal known for his participation on the Seven Years’ War of 1756 -1763; Franz Xaver von Zwack, the first president of the Speyer government, and governor of Munich; Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, a German philosopher, writer and pictorial artist; Johann Gottfried (von) Herder, a German philosopher, literature critic and poet, as well as other ruling Dukes of Gotha and Weimar.

The ideals of the Illuminati were that of the Freemasons – a secret society, which is said to have originated as early as the 16th century in Scotland, and separated into individual lodges, which have been found throughout the United Kingdom, and the society having spread across the countries. The participants of each lodge had different views, depending on the individuals state of thought, however, they were to follow a few simple rules; being a man, freeborn of good repute and well recommended; to believe in the supreme being (God), to support one’s self and family, to come to Masonry by their own free will. (http://www.exsequi.org.za/join-masons.asp)

The reign of the “Bavarian Illuminati”/”Perfectbilists” ended as the new governmental law of Enlightenment Despotism was instigated by Karl Theodore, the new ruler of Bavaria, coming into ruling in 1777. The Illuminati and other “secret societies” like it were slated as illegal in 1784, this led to the permanent downfall in 1785, when the struggle to find a new “leader” had failed.

Despite the loss of Illuminati, it had spread outside the Eastern European countries; the original documents made of the society, and of Adam Weishaupt having been released in 1787 by the ruling government. The authors, Augustin Barruel’s Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobism, and John Robinson’s Proof of Conspiracy had both expressed the theory that the secret society survived, and that crazily enough, the Illuminati had some involvement in the French Revolution. But let’s stop it right there. Didn’t the French Revolution have a positive effect on France? Wasn’t the aftermath of it all a success?

So, this lead’s me to the question – What is it about the Illuminati symbol, the use of the All-seeing eye that frightens people? Why has it had such a negative reaction when looking into the brief history of the Illuminati, the foundation of the society says otherwise? The all-seeing eye, has been a symbol for many ancient cultures; Ancient Egyptians, Christianity. It’s the eye of God/a God. Why should that frighten people? I’ll tell you why, because in the bible, in the Revelations it speaks of the rise of the Anti-christ, and modern conspiracy theorists believe the Illuminati, or whoever is claiming to be the Illuminati is one of a few secret societies that are manipulating popular culture; films, and music, and governmental control. The religious people (Christians) believe the Illuminati are planning to wipe them out, that the Jews are somehow involved. Explaining the large war predicted from Heaven and Hell.

But why use the all-seeing eye, why use a God’s eye to represent such a malicious society? If the Illuminati, and the Freemasons were against God completely, wanting to throw him off his mantle, why use something that is borderline religious? If the Illuminati, are planning to create a New World Order, that is based on logic, and reasoning, and science – isn’t that what our world is trying to accomplish in the first place? I wouldn’t see much difference, other than there will be no “God” mentioned.

Benjamin Franklin was a Freemason, and just happened to be the founding father of the United States of America. To me, that is a positive influence. The Freemasonry used the symbol of God, which implies they founded a country on religious or spiritual bounds. There was nothing malicious about the act. Which leads to my conclusion that the symbol, that paranoia and fear of this symbol is misconstrued. The legends of the Illuminati and the Freemasons were taken out of hand, like any legend, because of the lack of information.