Reading Response 7

4. The trickiest part of Sitney’s chapter is to understand the similarities and differences between Warhol and the structural filmmakers. He argues that Warhol in a sense is anti-Romantic and stands in opposition to the visionary tradition represented by psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. But for Sitney’s central argument to make sense, he needs to place structural film within the tradition of psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical films. Trace the steps in this argument by following the following questions:

a. Why does Sitney call Warhol anti-Romantic?

Warhol created films (and other works of art) which Warhol (and by proxy Sitney) calls "anti-Romantic" because his films ignore the both the techniques and the underlying meaning utilised by the lyrical/Expressionistic filmmakers (like Brakhage). Instead of being the driving force behind the camera and the films' meaning, Warhol simply turned the camera on and let things occur, something unthinkable to the likes of Brakhage, who placed himself in his art as much as possible. Warhol let the films take shape without him, leaving in mistakes (out of focus bits, etc.) and his films hold no meaning beyond what he creates: mundane activities rendered as art, because anything can be art to Andy.

b. Why does Sitney argue that spiritually the distance between Warhol and structural filmmakers such as Michael Snow or Ernie Gehr cannot be reconciled?

Warhol utilised the techniques found in later structural films (particularly the fixed camera) for their own ends: because it was unheard of in the film circles he wasn't really a part of (the Brakhage school, basically) and eventually he left this technique behind after perfecting it in Empire. The structural filmmakers utilise these same techniques for a deeper meaning, to focus on a portion of space, usually seen in a mystical or spiritual light.

c. What is meant by the phrase “conscious ontology of the viewing experience”? How does this relate to Warhol’s films? How does this relate to structural films?

“Conscious ontology of the viewing experience” means becoming aware of the act or experience of viewing, in this case usually because of duration. Warhol used this awareness in his films due to their sheer length [well over the usual viewing time, up to eight hours] and the mundaneness of the nature of what is being filmed. The structural films also use this in their length, but generally many of these filmmakers insert markers of duration, so the audience also knows what point the films are at (though they may not know exactly when it will end, it gives an idea.)

d. Why does Sitney argue that structural film is related to the psychodrama/mythopoeic/lyrical tradition, and in fact responds to Warhol’s attack on that tradition by using Warhol’s own tactics?

Structural film has a meaning behind its patterns, which is asserted by the filmmaker, linking this movement to the previously discussed ones. Though it has a different agenda and form, these films also show the filmmakers' personal vision (Sitney's point of departure for his book) and as Warhol was responding/reacting to this filmmaking tradition, the very act of doing so inserts him into this tradition of avant-garde filmmaking.

Note to self: get around to doing the rest to study over spring break!