Pitts Grad Research Assignment: Discussion Questions on Article or Essay

In the conversation between Doug Aitken and Robert Altman they discuss the concept of collaberation or at least what goes into making one of his films since he is a larger budget film maker. I am interested in at what point a project becomes a point of us/our and mine. It seems like there are a lot of people who get lots of credit for movies, films and art in general where they may not be the "creative force behind" the bang or the zing of the final project. But at the same time they may have been the one who thought of the idea with out which the house falls apart. Is it simply a parlayance of the word "collaboration" when two artist mutually agree to try out a partnership? I think that perhapse a simple acknolwledgement is enough. Or perhapse a creation of a collaborative name or collective so that the individual names become secondary to the work created or the aims of the project.

Later in that same conversation Robert Altman talks about the concept of improvasation in perticular dialog. He says he is not overly concerned with what the characters are saying with specific words rather what they are saying more interms of conveying atmosphere. Do you think a geneal audience of art seekes are more inclined to think along these lines with mediums such as painting and sculpture than with say film, video or sound? I feel like with sound art that often times confronts language or subverts language it is very hard for many listeners to fully invest in projects that deviate from the standard listening practice. Video and film, especially in the exerimental realm is very hard to grasp. But when either separately or together attempt to define or shape an emotion, or emotional space, the spectators have the same sort of hurdle to hop as there are two elements that they aren't used to justifying. The run of the mill western art lover has a hard time justifying anything frivolous. Frivolity seems to be attached to art except when an established authority has spoken for it. So that your Michelangelo's and Cezanne's are perfectly legitament for people to justify a little time, but to sit in a dark space and watch projections of the sunlight reflected off of glass structures whith a soundtrack meant for calm and meditation is harder to sit through. Robert altman points out that being able to experince a thing first hand is the most visceral of experinces so it makes it doubly hard when the aim is to take a primary experience, say of light reflecting, and then bring it inside where it can be then expereinces for the first time with the inclusion of sound and have people sit with it. What is it about the inabilty to concentrate and therefore contemplate the here and now that people get frustrated by having to sit through something new? Looking for something new is all I ever want to find.

Aitken, Doug. Broken screen expanding the image, breaking the narrative 26 conversations with doug aitkin. New York, NY: D.A.P/ Distributed Art, Inc., 2006. 26-37.