Monday, February 6, 2012
Visual Art How to Fake It: Amelia Winger-Bearskin on Video Art
Posted by Laura Hutson on Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:00 AM
Amelia Winger-Bearskin is a performance artist and a professor of video and performance art at Vanderbilt. She's our expert. I called her up and asked her to share some of her video art wisdom, and some examples of video art that are good starting points for understanding the medium. Here's what she had to say.
Amelia Winger-Bearskin: With video art, the first question is how to recognize it. Because you could have a video of The Terminator playing in a gallery, and it's part of an installation and somehow supports the work in the exhibit, but isn't video art per se. So I think the first thing to look for is just knowing what it is. Ask yourself, “How do I know this is video art and not a broken TV?” That could be the biggest faux pas of all, if you start by saying, “It's so interesting that this TV is off!” And the gallerist says, “No, that's just broken.”
More from Amelia, and more examples of video art, after the jump.
In my experience with trying to communicate with mathematicians or physicists or bioengineers or industrial designers — I don't go in assuming that I'm going to drop a couple names in their direction and they're gonna think I know what I'm talking about. So the way that I try to approach it is to learn how to ask the right questions. Frequently I have to go to someone who is in-the-know and say, “You know what, I know you and I know you're a physicist. If I want to talk to another physicist, what's the right question to ask?” And so I think that's always the best way to approach video artists, if he or she is on site — to go up to them directly and know how to ask the right questions.
But sometimes you can answer your own questions by looking at the wall tags next to the work. Like, if it says something like, “Documentation of the project,” then I know that this is maybe a site-specific work, and I'm just looking at the video to show me what it looked like when it was happening. Or sometimes the video might say something like, “Documentation of a performance piece,” in which case I know the actual work happened live somewhere else, and now I'm watching the video of it. And sometimes it might say, “Video appropriated image on a loop,” and so I know the reason why The Terminator is on is actually because the artist repurposed it — maybe reedited it — and is now putting it in the context of art.
You could say something like, “Have you seen work by this artist before?” And they might start telling me, “OK, this is Nam June Paik's work,” or, “This is Yoko Ono's work, and you should know that.” And then you can say, “OK, well why is this person important?” Asking the right questions can actually make you sound like you know more than you do because suddenly you're going to learn more from that person and what their context is — and by asking the right questions, next time you're not gonna have to fake it.
If you're going into a space and looking at the wall tag, try to see what its context is. If it's something that says, “Documentation of performance,” you can say, “Was this piece meant to be viewed in person? Did I miss something by not seeing an actual performance, or was it a performance just for the video?” And then see what that person says.
If someone asks, “What did you think about that video?” and you know from the wall tag that it's a performance documentation, you could say, “Well, I really wish I would have been there live, and I could have gotten that kind of context.”
If it's a piece that is actually video art and maybe it's something that's been generated by that artist, you can ask the person, "Have you seen their work before?" and if they say, "No, this person's work is pretty new," then I think the best way of entering the conversation is by saying, "What other art would I need to know in order to understand this? Can you give me a way in?"
And sometimes they'll say, "Well look, this person is talking about portraiture. They're talking about photographic portraiture." Or maybe they're talking about painting in general, and you can say, "OK, so if I need to understand painting to understand this video, then what is this video saying about painting?" And you can start a conversation about that.
And if you're talking to another person who doesn't know anything about video art either, then you're in luck! You can both ask each other these questions based on your reactions.
Comments (7)
Showing 1-7 of 7
My first few questions would be: Is video art part of film? Or its own thing? If it is seperate, how are they different? How do you draw the line between the two?
like
dislike
I do not believe that any lines drawn or otherwise are helpful in talking about film or video....however Video Art is a medium with which artists make art. Does that connect with film? Video and Film are mediums like printmaking and painting are, they are mediums no more no less. Do you mean Film as in hollywood or in the 'film' community? I think there is a great book by Michael Rush (who is someone who started out in live video performance working with Pink Floyd) called Video Art. That is a good start -Amelia
Film: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film
By using your "Video Art is a medium with which artists make art" definition, all filmmakers are also video artists.
Film is bigger/more inclusive than just Hollywood and is much more than just a medium. Its also an industry and an art form. Does that comprise a community? I'd say yes. But I'm not certain if that fits your definition of the "'film' community."
So I'm still not certain what differentiates one from the other.
Also, sorry for misspelling separate.
I always understood the difference between film and video art to be the artist's intention. Also the venue it's being presented in. It's sort of like differentiating between Norman Rockwell and Picasso. Both use the same instruments, but one is called "illustration" while the other is "art." The Rockwell is on the cover of Saturday Evening Post, and the Picasso is at the MoMA. It's total gray area.
The argument for distinguishing between film and video art kind of reminds me of trying to put labels on musical genres. You spend a lot of mental energy deciding whether something is witch house or dark wave, and it's only sort of useful, at best.
Did you watch the Robert Wilson videos? His subjects are Johnny Depp, Brad Pitt, etc., but it's pretty clear that they're video art and not cinema. Maybe it's like the definition of child pornography? You know it when you see it?
I'm not sure where this falls along the film/video art spectrum, but I'd love to see a program around here by the experimental filmmaker Phil Solomon, especially his machinima pieces of recent years. My friend Chris Stults at the Wexner Center in Columbus tells me I have to see Solomon's 2007 film "Rehearsals for Retirement," which reworks the interstitials and digital graphics from GRAND THEFT AUTO into a meditation on mortality.
if video art was a fountain, it would not be the fountain of youth. why? because--unlike hollywood--it does not portray what people want to see. but what they actually see in their f***d up minds. and if you connect, alright. and if you dont, also alright
