Aneka and Junming had a conversation on experimental film this morning. I felt some of the questions raised in their conversation worth further contemplation. For instance, how to seriously define experimental film, is there a clear boundary between experimental film and commercial production, or, between film and video? The second consideration of me is whether the experimental film has enough ability to communicate with normal audience, on what extent can they really be understood? Obviously avant-garde film - or other forms of avant-garde art - seems more like“artists’ community only for artists”, in this teny tiny circle, artists are the ones who produce the works as well as audiences who consume them. Art for art’s sake is pale, ironic and narcissistic, if film lacks the ability of communication, how can it be democratic? The third question I am keeping in mind is why do people make experimental art, where does the motivation locate? Do they use experimental art as a means of reaching the untellable perception world of their own, or an irreplaceable way of expression in order to transfer the “personal perceive” to a commonly shared experience? And finally, what do experimental film offer? A belonging to subculture, an quasi-vanguard status, a challenging viewing angle toward the mundane world, an inspired reflection for one’s own, or just a label of belonging to certain kind of socio-cultural class?
没有评论:
发表评论