AMV Editing: A Postmodernist art movement?

General discussion of Anime Music Videos
Locked
User avatar
iamfanboy
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:26 am
Location: your pocketses *gollum*
Contact:
Org Profile

AMV Editing: A Postmodernist art movement?

Post by iamfanboy » Sat Oct 21, 2006 4:19 pm

So, there I was in my art class, when my teacher brings out a painting from the early '80's. Feminist artist describing how woman no longer needs man, etcetera, etcetera; very postmodern because the artist used two images juxtaposed from of all things, '50's B-movies: a woman writing a letter and a human male skull she was looking at to describe a narrative.

That's when it hit me: anime music video editing is a postmodern art movement.

It'll take me a bit to lead up to WHY I came to this conclusion, so bear with me. ^_^

There are, of course, dozens of different definitions available for what postmodern art is, and all of them read like they were written just to scare off the casual person. Take this example from Wikipedia:
In a nutshell, the pro-postmodernism argument runs that economic and technological conditions of our age have given rise to a decentralized, media-dominated society in which ideas are simulacra and only inter-referential representations and copies of each other, with no real original, stable or objective source for communication and meaning.
Yuck. Why couldn't they have just said, "Postmodernism argues that art and ideas have no value in and of themselves; the only value they have is that which WE assign to them?"

One significant movement in postmodernism is the use of images from media and popular sources to make a new art piece - to tell a story that was NOT in the original source. Take this iconic painting by Warhol:

Image

What's the first thing you think when you see this? "Wow... she looks... creepy. That's not natural." And yet, Marilyn Manroe was generally regarded as one of the most beautiful women who ever lived - what story was Warhol trying to tell by doing this, by taking her image and painting it over... and over... and over... and over... in different, frightening ways, so that you can't even SEE the one image that is painted just as she appeared in life?

I don't like Warhol, he's too obvious. <_< But it's a good example to describe what I'm talking about.

And you know what? WE do it.

We take other people's work (animation and music) and combine them to tell narratives that the original creators never would have concieved of. Oh, there are some videos which are so obvious that the original creator would have done it, if they'd've had the time; and there are some artists who make their own animation and either combine it with existing animation or simply go off on their own; but both are variations in the postmodernistic movement.

Even ancillary things about postmodernism apply to us. They often run on the other side of copyright laws by using other people's works in their own, they aren't often regarded as 'real' artists by critics but the people like them, etcetera...

We are a step ahead of the mainstream postmodern artists, because we're creating art for the sake of the art. We've avoided the masturbatory tendancies of postmodernism because we ARE creating for an audience, while avoiding the pitfalls of art-whoredom because there is no profit involved; we can walk the fine line between self-love and other-love that true art requires.

We're avant-garde, folks. Ain't it creepy?


...Has this been talked about before on the forum? I couldn't find a searchy function, so I wasn't sure....
Official Fanboy Disclaimer: The above post is not meant to be taken internally. If you do so, consult a doctor immediately. Examine the post carefully, because it may have been meant as tongue-in-cheek. If you take the post too seriously, be warned that the poster may be laughing at you very loudly. Do not taunt Happy Fun Post.

User avatar
Otohiko
Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 8:32 pm
Org Profile

Post by Otohiko » Sat Oct 21, 2006 5:09 pm

The Birds are using humanity in order to throw something terrifying at this green pig. And then what happens to us all later, that’s simply not important to them…

User avatar
Beowulf
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 9:41 pm
Location: in the art house
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by Beowulf » Sat Oct 21, 2006 5:46 pm

I haven't read one word of thise thread but Andy Warhol is a fucking no talent hack and represents pretty much ALL THINGS WRONG with art and artists.

User avatar
Otohiko
Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 8:32 pm
Org Profile

Post by Otohiko » Sat Oct 21, 2006 5:53 pm

Beowulf wrote:I haven't read one word of thise thread but Andy Warhol is a fucking no talent hack and represents pretty much ALL THINGS WRONG with art and artists.
Adrian Belew (of King Crimson) wrote: And if Warhol's a genius,
What am I?
A speck of lint
On the penis of an alien
:roll:
The Birds are using humanity in order to throw something terrifying at this green pig. And then what happens to us all later, that’s simply not important to them…

User avatar
Beowulf
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 9:41 pm
Location: in the art house
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by Beowulf » Sat Oct 21, 2006 5:55 pm

Adrian Belew is a genius and one of the finest and most creative guitar players alive. To have his name in the same page as ______ is both equal boths insult and tragedy.

User avatar
Otohiko
Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 8:32 pm
Org Profile

Post by Otohiko » Sat Oct 21, 2006 6:00 pm

Beowulf wrote:Adrian Belew is a genius and one of the finest and most creative guitar players alive. To have his name in the same page as ______ is both equal boths insult and tragedy.
Warhol and penis, on the other hand... :P
The Birds are using humanity in order to throw something terrifying at this green pig. And then what happens to us all later, that’s simply not important to them…

User avatar
iamfanboy
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:26 am
Location: your pocketses *gollum*
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by iamfanboy » Sat Oct 21, 2006 6:36 pm

? Wow, this thread went into a tangent fast...

Andy Warhol was just an example; his work is so obvious and supertexted and, well, well-known that it's easiest to point to him and say, "This is an example of post-modernism." I could have picked Félix González-Torres or Sol LeWitt, but have any of you heard of them? Not counting a Google search, of course. :lol:

And, whether you like him or not (I personally don't, I think he contributed significantly to the downslide of art began by Picasso in the early 19th century), he WAS successful. If he would have painted landscapes or portraits, would we be talking about a Warhol nowadays?


However, back on subject, we ARE in the same category as him: as postmodern artists. Is that a bad thing? Well, not really, as long as we don't take ourselves too seriously. Warhol's paintings DO have a certain value, in context; it's just that he made it TOO big and TOO obvious and TOO, well, whorish.

I firmly believe that there are three kinds of art:

1) Masturbatory art, created solely for the sake of the artist and anyone else's opinion of it be damned. Who cares what you think? It's what I thought when I made it, and what I think when I look at it, that matters. Pollack fell into this category. It's not necessarily BAD, it's just that he created it just for himself.

2) Prostituary art, where the artist whores himself and his talent for the highest bidder by creating whatever is most popular at the moment. Who cares what I think? It's what sells that matters. Warhol was squarely in this camp. We don't see what he thinks in any of his pieces at all. He has no connection to them. He made each piece solely to fund his avant-garde artisteee lifestyle, and never had a second thought about selling any of them.

3) Good art, that walks the fine line between both of the above categories. It has enough of the artist's thoughts in it that you feel her in it, but enough of you in it to draw you in and make you feel connected. Georgia O'Keefe did this particularly well, I think: she made art solely for herself and her husband, but it had a certain something, a je ne se quois charm, that made you want to reach out and touch them.


How does that relate to AMVs? Well, "Scene set randomly to music" AMV is self-involved; YOU see how it's great, why shouldn't everyone else? A lot of artists start here.

Good art is relatively common on this website; obviously you make it for yourself but also for other people.

And I haven't been here long enough to identify the protituary art, but you know it when you see it. It's obvious. It lacks the spirit, the connection, that you NEED from an artist - like Metallica for the last 15 years. I got my art teacher mad when I called an artist that had a showing at my college a "whore" in a report; she failed me - but how was I supposed to see him any other way? He had nothing of himself in his paintings. Not a damned thing.

But that's not really the point. We ARE artists, you guys; maybe not well-paid or respected, but still we belong in a specific category of art and are a movement all our own: the Anime Music Video movement.



Wouldn't it be funny if in 40 years they were teaching OUR stuff as the beginning of a new postmodern era? :P
Official Fanboy Disclaimer: The above post is not meant to be taken internally. If you do so, consult a doctor immediately. Examine the post carefully, because it may have been meant as tongue-in-cheek. If you take the post too seriously, be warned that the poster may be laughing at you very loudly. Do not taunt Happy Fun Post.

User avatar
godix
a disturbed member
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2002 12:13 am
Org Profile

Post by godix » Sat Oct 21, 2006 8:31 pm

You know one of the things I always liked about the AMV community is that, for the most part, it isn't full of self absorbed twits who will analyze a video to fucking death. This site is by and large full of people who's sole comment on Odorikuruu would be 'It has a good beat and you can dance to it. I give it a 10, Dick!' I mean come on, it doesn't take a fucking art degree to go 'The AMV Hell type videos are getting kinda old'. We don't need a psychological profile of the creator's history and motives to say 'BTB was made by an effects whore'. An in depth 20 page analysis of the theme and meaning behind Phenomenon or Worlds Unbroken isn't required to realize the creators have just been recycling the exact same ideas and editing for their last 20 or more videos. It is entirely possible to say what you do and don't like about AMVs without once considering how IWIWAL compares to Salvador Dali. Just tell us if you liked a video and why, preferably without using huge words and bullshit to make your simple ass thought sound impressive and groundbreaking. AMVs are fair new. Many AMVs are experimental and the 'art form' is still changing. There, that wasn't so damned hard was it?

In the interest of those staring at the original post with a deer in the headlights type glaze, allow me to translate the post into common english:
So, there I was in my art class, when my teacher brings out a painting from the early '80's. Feminist artist describing how woman no longer needs man, etcetera, etcetera; very postmodern because the artist used two images juxtaposed from of all things, '50's B-movies: a woman writing a letter and a human male skull she was looking at to describe a narrative.
Translation: God my teacher is full of crap.
That's when it hit me: anime music video editing is a postmodern art movement.
Translation: Hey, did ya ever realize AMVs are pretty new?
It'll take me a bit to lead up to WHY I came to this conclusion, so bear with me. ^_^
Translation: Excuse me why I write a fucking thesis on the topic of AMVs not being around years ago.
There are, of course, dozens of different definitions available for what postmodern art is, and all of them read like they were written just to scare off the casual person. Take this example from Wikipedia:
Translation: I like big words but they can be kinda confusing
Quote:
In a nutshell, the pro-postmodernism argument runs that economic and technological conditions of our age have given rise to a decentralized, media-dominated society in which ideas are simulacra and only inter-referential representations and copies of each other, with no real original, stable or objective source for communication and meaning.


Yuck. Why couldn't they have just said, "Postmodernism argues that art and ideas have no value in and of themselves; the only value they have is that which WE assign to them?"
Translation: Some art is different than what came before. It isn't better than old art though, unless you think it is. Let me rephrase those big words used to say this a little without actually making clear what they actually mean.
One significant movement in postmodernism is the use of images from media and popular sources to make a new art piece - to tell a story that was NOT in the original source.
Translation: You can rip someone off and still make something different than what you ripped off.
Take this iconic painting by Warhol: <b>(picture of painting removed because it sucks)</b>
What's the first thing you think when you see this? "Wow... she looks... creepy. That's not natural." And yet, Marilyn Manroe was generally regarded as one of the most beautiful women who ever lived - what story was Warhol trying to tell by doing this, by taking her image and painting it over... and over... and over... and over... in different, frightening ways, so that you can't even SEE the one image that is painted just as she appeared in life?
Translation: You can rip someone off and still make something different than what you ripped off.
I don't like Warhol, he's too obvious. <_< But it's a good example to describe what I'm talking about.
Translation: In case you missed it earlier, you can rip someone off and still make something different than what you ripped off.
And you know what? WE do it.
Wow, a sentance that doesn't need translation. You need to work on this, you'll never be a true artist if you can't make every single sentance an obscure pretentious mess.
We take other people's work (animation and music) and combine them to tell narratives that the original creators never would have concieved of. Oh, there are some videos which are so obvious that the original creator would have done it, if they'd've had the time; and there are some artists who make their own animation and either combine it with existing animation or simply go off on their own; but both are variations in the postmodernistic movement.
Translation: We rip anime off and still make something different than the source.
Even ancillary things about postmodernism apply to us. They often run on the other side of copyright laws by using other people's works in their own, they aren't often regarded as 'real' artists by critics but the people like them, etcetera...
Translation: Ripping people off usually isn't legal and some people don't like people who rip off shit.
We are a step ahead of the mainstream postmodern artists, because we're creating art for the sake of the art. We've avoided the masturbatory tendancies of postmodernism because we ARE creating for an audience, while avoiding the pitfalls of art-whoredom because there is no profit involved; we can walk the fine line between self-love and other-love that true art requires.
Translation: We make AMVs because we want to. None of us is getting rich off this.
We're avant-garde, folks. Ain't it creepy?
Translation: AMVs are fair new and experimental.
...Has this been talked about before on the forum? I couldn't find a searchy function, so I wasn't sure....
Translation: I was too busy looking up big words to use to notice there's a link labeled 'search' at the top of every page.
Image

User avatar
Orwell
godx, Son of godix
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:14 am
Location: Frying Pan. Destination: Fire.
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by Orwell » Sat Oct 21, 2006 8:49 pm

... ---

And try fixing your sig following the forum rules this time. Penis does not go in eye.

What this community needs, is a really spicy chicken sandwich.

Image

What's the difference between prostitution and masturbation, if the end result is money spent on yourself? Wouldn't that be a delayed masturbation? Good art is subjective. I don't care if half the people in the world praise it, if I think it sucks, then by golly, it sucks. End of story.

(I do like the fact that a new member is willing to discuss stuff, just wish it was more relevant to amvs than defining them as a prententious art movement to console those who realize all their really doing is flaunting copyright laws across the globe. Pretty much what godix said.)
Latest
[Kristyrat]: Vote for Orwell
[Kristyrat]: because train conducters are dicks.
Otohiko: whereas Germans are like "god we are all so horrible, we're going to die a pointless death now."

User avatar
iamfanboy
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:26 am
Location: your pocketses *gollum*
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by iamfanboy » Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:19 pm

*blink*

*adds disclaimer to his posts as new signature*


Theeeeeeeerrrreeee we go. That's more like it.

I haven't joined a new forum in a long time, so I've forgotten that when people take me too seriously, it's bad for the digestion. ^_^


Mmm, mostly I was trying to say is that AMVs are most definitely art by the strictest of definitions, and they could even be part of a specific art era, which makes AMV editors artists.

Dunno why that made people... well, angry. Is it just so obvious that it shouldn't be mentioned? Or should this post have been in a different category?


And yes, I do love the English language. It really is quite fun. If I come off as over-educated, well, it's because I am. I'll try to adulterate it some. And thanks for the advertisement in your sig Godix, with a much-improved version of my video out there I need more exposure.

User avatar
SSJVegita0609
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2002 10:52 pm
Location: Around...
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by SSJVegita0609 » Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:59 pm

fanboy,

Don't worry about people giving you crap. It's inevitable on an internet forum. :wink:

That said, as an art student myself, I have to say that I hate the word postmodern. It's incredibly prententious (who the fuck is so modern they're BEYOND modern, anyways?). AMVs are a fun, arguably artistic hobby. My advice is to take them for exactly that, and not lose yourself in unnecessary analysis. Leave that to the Art History dept.
The best effects are the ones you don't notice.

User avatar
Kalium
Sir Bugsalot
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 11:17 pm
Location: Plymouth, Michigan
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by Kalium » Sat Oct 21, 2006 10:54 pm

SSJVegita0609 wrote:(who the fuck is so modern they're BEYOND modern, anyways?)
Considering that they took the ideas of the "modernist" movement and worked beyond them, the name "postmodernist" makes perfect sense. You have to consider context.

Anyway, as the local guy who likes to discuss AMVs as art and attendant theory, I will note that this is sensible as far as it goes.

However, you're missing that a lot of AMVs are essentially masturbatory. A great number of videos are made simple because the editor wanted to express something, and chose this particular form. A number of editors could care less what others think.

Are we avant-garde, per se? I haven't a clue. I do know that we are unique. We have a unique aesthetic, a unique community, and an increasingly common form. That's what matters.

User avatar
godix
a disturbed member
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2002 12:13 am
Org Profile

Post by godix » Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:18 pm

iamfanboy wrote:Mmm, mostly I was trying to say is that AMVs are most definitely art by the strictest of definitions, and they could even be part of a specific art era, which makes AMV editors artists.
Ya think? Anything people do mainly because the results look/sounds good to someone (even if it's just themselves) is art. Picasso, AMVs, movies, TV, architecture beyond 'it's a large concrete box with a door', Kalium drawing on the wall with his own shit when he was 5 years old, whatever. It's all art. You can get a lot more pretentious than this definition, and many do, but I've never heard anything get more accurate. NOTE: I didn't say all this was GOOD art. That's an entirely different topic.
Is it just so obvious that it shouldn't be mentioned?
AMVs are a form of art? Who wouldn't that be obvious too? Other than overeducated art major twits who argue on if Picasso's blue period was an expression of his mood, an exploration in the depth and meaning of colors, or just that the local supply shop had a special on blue paint.
And yes, I do love the English language. It really is quite fun. If I come off as over-educated, well, it's because I am.
And if I come off as someone who finds your comments to be the drivel of someone who'd be so busy classifying a painting of a rainbow as modern realist art that they don't realize it looks pretty, well, it's because I am.
And thanks for the advertisement in your sig Godix, with a much-improved version of my video out there I need more exposure.
I gotta thank Pyle for my sig idea again. It consistantly provides me amusement.
Image

User avatar
SSJVegita0609
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2002 10:52 pm
Location: Around...
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by SSJVegita0609 » Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:32 pm

Kalium wrote:
SSJVegita0609 wrote:(who the fuck is so modern they're BEYOND modern, anyways?)
Considering that they took the ideas of the "modernist" movement and worked beyond them, the name "postmodernist" makes perfect sense. You have to consider context.
Meh, I call that innovation. Postmodern as its used today implies a sense of ego, a proclaimation that one is an embodiment of the future. Even art critics and enthusiasts use it to describe works that they personally find important, and therefore wish to inflate and impose upon others.

Though I don't get offended by the concept, I'm just tired of hearing it used in unappealing context (I deal with too many elitists, you might say).
The best effects are the ones you don't notice.

User avatar
downwithpants
BIG PICTURE person
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2002 1:28 am
Status: out of service
Location: storrs, ct
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: AMV Editing: A Postmodernist art movement?

Post by downwithpants » Sun Oct 22, 2006 12:05 am

iamfanboy wrote:We are a step ahead of the mainstream postmodern artists, because we're creating art for the sake of the art. We've avoided the masturbatory tendancies of postmodernism because we ARE creating for an audience, while avoiding the pitfalls of art-whoredom because there is no profit involved; we can walk the fine line between self-love and other-love that true art requires.
welcome to the org.
you couldn't be farther from the truth.
when vcas come, you will see why.
maskandlayer()|My Guide to WMM 2.x
a-m-v.org Last.fm|<a href="http://www.frappr.com/animemusicvideosdotorg">Animemusicvideos.org Frappr</a>|<a href="http://tinyurl.com/2lryta"> Editors and fans against the misattribution of AMVs</a>

Locked

Return to “General AMV”