Week 6 Response

So out of the two I chose to read Amnesia... because it started off interesting or eye catching as you can say. ...he was going to be married... but that was an hour ago... new life that a corpse draws from the air, I mean it's the kind of thing where your curiousity thinks for you, intending to seek out answers as to why or what happen, how it all began, who's this dead man, etc. knowing that you are going to regret it later on as you continue to finish the reading (well, atleast I sort of did) but the thought doesn't pop up instantly due to an overlap by curiousity.
If you were the man who encountered a boy bleeding, you are entitled to two options minimum:
1. Walk away and pretend you didn't see a thing
2. Ask to see if he needs help
The protagonoist chose option 2 yet was interupted by the boy telling a story as he strools along in the rain which presented option 3. Walk along and see what's up.
The rest is basically a comparisons of option where one would choose to react to the situation and the protagonist amazes us with option "out of the ordinary".
And here's my final question, are we to focus on the story told by the bleeding boy in the rain or the fact that this man who followed the boy and entered the library as he was ordered to, or is the story and situation related..?

MOCCA exhibition: if you've hit Queen Street West & Spadina... you've gone too far... (learned it the hard way...)

The exhibition involves the usage of dark space/vision, mirrors, glass, TV, what I believe to be horrify/mysterious background music, and replica of a forest or village, etc. to recreate what is known as Scenes from the House Dream, yet due to a fact that I have no idea what else to mention, I’ll go with each work that I understand. The first one involves the moving of a blimp up and down accompanied by a television playing selective scenes of fireworks explosions reflected upon the glass that stood between the television and the blimp, as a result one would assume that the blimp is flying through the fireworks which I may interpret as a prototype for his other works came to my understanding much earlier. Then it was the second piece that lead to my understanding (sort of) of his work. It consists of a living room replica lit by the fireplace where a man interacts with the objects that exist within the room as projected through the television that lies behind and into the glass as if as if an actual man in motion existed within the replica through reflection under darkness. Now skipping over many works that holds a similar principle to the first and second piece, you would encounter what to believe a female figure sitting at a coffee table accompanied by books or coffee (which actually lead my first thought to an actually person in watch). Apparently it was a projection of an image or video (I can’t recall whether it was moving or not) or a piece of black cardboard divided into dimensions providing the illusion of 3D-ness.

I wonder whether the experience would be somewhat different when accompanied by a crowd, cause during my visit I entered alone and personally find the exhibition sort of creepy in a way due to its pitch black and music played in the background which also made it inconvenience to travel within (at first… then you eyes sort of adjust to the darkness).

Hollis Frampton: Nostalgia

Ummm.... First off it is just me or the video itself, or the video intended to where the vocalist's description on the photograph not match the photograph presented? Anyhow...am I to focus on the fact that he is burning every photograph that does not satisfy him or the life experiences he gained during the process of making these photographs. Burning a negative = over exposed photograph (or was it the other way around...).

Photography: Untitled

I personally have no idea of what to say or response to but here it is for Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography by Roland Barthes. Reading this leaves me confuse yet lights a bulb or shatters the glass (whichever one you call it I forgot, anyways...) since I've never gave such a deep thought towards photography before, it use to begin with the word or action "look" then leads off to "This, that, and that..." as to identifying what's on it and going along with what's provided without questioning or judging (Okay, maybe juding occures the split second whether the first to first three "that" draws your attention or not before sticking to the photograph or moving on to the next one). Okay, back to the reading. The authour gave me the feeling (maybe just him or possibly everyone else) that people prefer looking at photos, etc. never-encountered before, anything (including ones that outstands what's encountered before) fresh in thought. Another thing is that I sort of agree yet disagree with the author, how photogarphs transform the occurence of once to infinity yet limited due to its main focus on the subject, yes. However it is such limitation that generates a topic of pure imagination and logic in relation to the occured event. Another way I'll put this is "A picture is worth a thousand words, yet because of it we are able to build on those thousand words..." (I guess...)...