Present (11): ADa, CG, JG, BH, NH, SJN, TK, MOC, FS, JW + 1 visitor (Kiera?)
Apologies (8): CC, EF, DH, EH, PMc, BN, TR
Catherine Grant ( http://www.sussex.ac.uk/profiles/183852 ) spoke initially about how the new(ish) media alternatives (video, experimental or informative fim etc.) to traditional written output by academics can function: the different formats present themselves before, instead of or in addition to more typical scholarly work. A series of Catherine’s moving image pieces, not intended particularly for projection but to be accessed on YouTube and via other channels, were screened to illustrate these points.
Moments of a similar type, instances of ‘direct address’ for example, can be cut from classic films and re-presented in a sequence. Apart from providing something new or poetic, the material is educational and she does use the results with film students. Catherine referred to Heidegger’s ideas on ‘materiality’ as well as more contemporary thinkers and to the meaning, now, of being able to edit easily, pause, rewind and so experience film in a very different way. The point was made that quick and dirty approaches to montage and the lower-end video editing tools are just as suitable, if not more apt for this kind of work.
The discussion partly revolved around the nature of this media, the differences with other approaches to communication, and the qualities of Catherine’s particular creations. What is the significance of using certain typography alongside moving image, the impact of different square-ish aspect ratios, of projecting on a large-scale and the effect of the presumably deliberate intensity and rate of delivery for participants/audience? These and other questions arose. The films are intended for a particular following and unashamedly expect a level of experience and knowledge from spectators.