The discussion will continue through September 19. Join us!
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
krismcd59 |
Our First Interstitial Salon! |
Lead | |
|
Here's our first IAF Salon, a moderated discussion of thought-provoking writing about interstitiality. We're discussing Greg Frost's "Coloring Between the Lines" www.interstitialarts.org/why/coloringBetweenTheLines
The discussion will continue through September 19. Join us! |
|||
krismcd59 |
Let the Conversation Begin... | ||
|
For our first foray, I'm acting as conversation maven more than moderator -- your comments are welcome at any time and I won't be collecting or editing them beforehand. When I asked Greg for permission to use the article, he commented "I hope it stirs the pot." I'm wondering -- as is the IAF in general -- whether our friends out there think there's a pot to stir in the first place? Is art that crosses genres finding more -- and faster -- acceptance from audiences and publishers now than it did even two years ago? We've heard from a few artists on this very EZBoard that they're still meeting resistance when they try to market their work. What do y'all think?
|
|||
sirrywhite |
Re: Let the Conversation Begin... | ||
|
Yes! There is still a pot to stir. Although the art world is (and sort of has been for a while) pretty open to and encouraging of work that defies genres, the film world, for example, seems to be getting more closed off. Hollywood (even "indie" Hollywood) is more formulaic than ever. Festivals require you to fit into their categorical and time limitations. These limitations are totally archaic, but they are still programming the old fashioned way - 90 minute features, 10 minute shorts. If the length isn't right, it won't get shown, if the category isn't fitting, it gets lumped into "experimental" - which is fine, but my point is that the borders are there! Digital work is still thought of as a separate, lower art form. Thankfully, the internet (YouTube especially) is making it possible for anything audio-visual to reach an audience. What do you guys think about YouTube and it's role in fostering interstitial art? I find it to be astounding.
|
|||
revolotus |
stir, stir... | ||
|
Sarah,
I agree with what you have to say, but I think it goes even deeper than the examples you gave. This post-modern anything- goes concept we have of the world we live in fools us into thinking that we have come to inhabit interstitiality, when maybe we have just given up on it, or started to question whether it exists at all. I think the borders are most dangerous when we dont see them. These overall experimental and indie categories just lump everything into other which is not the same as between. Isnt the contour of the between space essential to the works that inhabit it? Dont other categories actually rob us of access to interstitial spaces and deny us the chosen context for our pieces? I think it raises the bar for anyone who feels that these spaces are essential to the nature of their work. I think it begs the question of why one would want to create art that defines itself explicitly as interstitial. Is it that this is my art, and there is not a place for it, so I will carve out spaces to share with other outsiders so we can raise our collective voices to say that our art is art, too? Or is access to the interstitial in art essential to its nature and function? Maybe fitting interstitial work into a common market model is what robs it of its pot-stirring potential, allows it to be lumped into other categories, hung on gallery walls, displayed as installations, and removed from the place wherein it can stand (or float, or explode, or heal, or whatever else it might do) in its original context. Is finding audiences and publishers really the task at hand? That seems to be a marketing issue (which is another art entirely, with its own challenges and potential shifts arising from in-betweens defined by the things they are between). I think there might be several pots to be stirred here. |
|||
janeyolen |
Re: stir, stir... | ||
|
Coming from the world of children's books, I would suggest that picture books have, for years, stirred the pot. In the late sixties Maurice Sendak's WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE brought a child across borders of reality and irritated (and frightened)a lot of those who felt we need to color within the lines.
These days there are a number of picture books that are calculatedly metafictional in both their words and art: David Wiesner's Three Little pigs book, Robert Sabuda's pop up books (notably THE WIZARD OF OZ) and John Muth's ZEN SHORTS to name three. And graphic novels are stirring the pot with such abandon, we are all getting dizzy. (I'd like to also point the finger at my own SISTER LIGHT/SISTER DARK which combines song, balladry, poetry, narrative, mock journaling, invented folklore etc.) Does Greg's house metaphor work? As long as we realize that writers and artists were taking things out of the rooms and mixing them in the hallway long before there was an Interstitial Movement to tell us that's what'[s been happening. ALICE IN WONDERLAND is iconic. And with Alice, we all fell down a rabbit hole into a constantly changing world of literature and art. Jane |
|||
krismcd59 |
Re: stir, stir... | ||
|
This is wonderful stuff, and Jane, thanks for joining the discussion! I'm very interested in the ways in which Children's Literature seems to anticipate so many of the iconoclastic and interdisciplinary movements in literary art. In my English Department, we happen to have a number of specialists in children's lit (we're actually developing a Ph.D. in the topic), and, even with their sterling credentials, they still frequently struggle for respect in the academic world. Things are getting better -- one of my colleagues was interviewed by NPR when the last Harry Potter book came out -- but I wonder if the tendency of children's lit to play with genre isn't part of that academic bias against taking children' lit seriously. There's also the difficulty of how to -- and who should -- teach picture books -- a lit prof or an art history prof? Ideally it should be both in a team, but budgets being what they are... Jane, I'd love to hear your experiences on the academic side of things.
|
|||
krismcd59 |
Re: stir, stir... | ||
|
revolotus and sirrywhite, welcome also to both of you and thanks for your part in the discussion. I'm fascinated by YouTube as well, and the way it has allowed so many people think of themselves as digital artists. I wonder whether the relative ease of "publishing" on YouTube (vs., say, the effort a painter has to go to to find a gallery or an actor to find a stage) is also part of the blurring of the boundaries between artist, art form, and viewer. I'm thinking of that now-classic digital piece, "Six Years," in which you watch a young man's face morph, one daily snapshot at a time -- in a way, you can't get more intimate or intrinsic than that. Not being a graphic artist, I'm struggling for a way to articulate how a piece like that is different from traditional self-portraits like Rembrandt's or Van Gogh's, or even that piece Norman Rockwell did of himself painting his own self-portrait. Any thoughts?
And revolotus, I agree that the marketplace can't be separated from questions about artistic production, genre, intention, etc. How ironic, as you say, that declaring oneself to be interstitial automatically creates a new box! Also ironic that the cover of the Interfictions anthology features a sculpture that takes the form of little boxes...(This was deliberate, of course, but, as you point out, there's more than one way to think about a box!) |
|||
janeyolen |
Re: stir, stir... | ||
|
About teaching the Picture Book, I believe one need not be a Professor of Art to have the ability to "read" and teach the art of the picture book. However, a background in looking at both art and the long history of picture books is necessary.
Too many reviews of picture books say, essentially, "the artwork complements (or "compliments") the text. As if that is the role of the art. But the artwork in the best picture books also extends, decorates, enhances, deepens, opens up, comments upon, and sometimes even destroys or breaks down the text. Another thing to think about when teaching the Picture Book is that if the author and illustrator are not one and the same, the author of the book rarely gets to meet or speak to the illustrator, kept apart by a strange and long-standing assertion that the two should NOT confer; that it is the editorial perogative to midwife the book. The author is simply the purveyor of text. In the making of graphic novels, however, the author is not only encouraged to instruct the illustrator, but it is part of the presentation of the mss. that there are full notes on how the illustrator is to proceed. Author as art director and visualizer. Even if the author has NO art background. An interesting difference, I think. Though what this has to do with interstitiality or Greg's boxes I have yet to work out. Jane |
|||
Gregor9 |
Re: Stir Stir | ||
|
Jane,
I agree completely that the borrowing was going on long before someone said "Look, there's stuff being moved around in here." I think it's the same with any attempt to define a moment or a movement. As soon as you say "metafiction began with (I'll randomly make one up) John Barth's Sotweed Factor," and you identify what constitutes metafiction, then immediately you have Tristram Shandy and John Dos Passos throwing very big monkey wrenches into your clever analysis. So with all of this. The most I could do was say that this was going on and there seemed to be a lot of it about, that the movement Sterling identified as slipstream now flows comfortably in both directions. GF |
|||
janeyolen |
Re: Stir Stir | ||
|
I was pretty sure you felt that way, Greg, but we were simply using your words on the page as a starting point.
And if we go way back to--say--Homer where travelogue and myth and song and political diatribes all work together. Or, of course, ANY theater crosses borders constantly. I went to a Peking opera in Edinburgh a couple of years ago, speaking of border crossings! But of course then things get too diffuse and too unwieldy to be of any use if we go that way. Jane |
|||
Gregor9 |
Re: Stir Stir | ||
|
A few years back in Philadelphia, Michael Swanwick and I watched a kabuki theater performance of The Iliad. The theater company is American. Music was Japanese (or at least real imitation Japanese) but dialogue was in English, and the ending of the play was, um, antithetical to Homer, with the shades of the warriors recognizing that they were the same underneath, and should not be enemies. Not quite how that story normally goes. It defied categorization on so many levels, but experientially it was a delight.
-gf |
|||
janeyolen |
Re: Stir Stir | ||
|
You want theatrical interstitiality, come to the Edinburgh Fringe Festival!
Jane |
|||
krismcd59 |
Re: Stir Stir | ||
|
This past Sunday's NPR Weekend Edition featured an interview with Camille DeAngelis, the author of a new novel, Mary Modern, about a scientist who clones her grandmother and discovers that the new clone retains her grandmother's memories. The author, who sounds very young, seems bemused that the interviewer would even focus on the genre-mixing in which she's engaged ("it's got suspense and some romance..., and it's super-gothic"), insisting there was never any attempt by her publisher to categorize her novel as one thing or another. She comments matter-of-factly, "People want to exit ordinary life... and sometimes you get tired of reading about ... cheating spouses," channeling Greg's observations exactly. But I'm not sure that this is interstitiality at work. I want to return to Greg's assertion that interstitial art "is not a category so much as it is a modality" -- and he also suggests that its best examples avoid the self-consciousness of metafiction that can make such novels so wearying to read (I couldn't finish Dave Egger's A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, for example, admirable as I found bits of it). What do you all think? Is it possible to be interstitial without calling undue attention to the artist's cleverness in playing around with genre?
|
|||
janeyolen |
Re: Stir Stir | ||
|
Ah--but this brings me to my big question. Is interstitiality simply mixing genres? (Remember, genres are rather new in publishing rather than centuries old in story.)
Or is it mixing the arts. The song and dance Buffy. Maus. Gaiman's Mr. Punch. My Sister Light/Sister Dark. Opera in general. Narrating storybook ballets. Kushner's Sound and Spirit broadcasts. June Tabor reading my poem "Beauty and the Beast: An Anniversary with music especially made for it. Beat Poets reciting to jazz. Cirque de Soleil. I'm asking. I don't have answers. Jane |
|||
Patrick OConnor |
Re: Stir Stir | ||
|
I've been slow to join the conversation, since it coincided with the beginning of the semester. Kudos to all of you who are teachers and students yet still found time to join in the fray.
I was supposed to be finding articles about film theory for my course on Mexican directors in Hollywood so that we could talk about "Y Tu Mam Tambin" and "Great Expectations," both directed by Alfonso Cuarn. But I'm trained in lit, so I thought of both films as Bildungsroman, the novel of formation or socialization, where the Mexican movie is a failed Bildungsroman, in which the two Mexican teenagers are unable to grow up, or they grow up wrong. It bothered me that I kept telling the students, like those jokes about Hollywood movie pitches ("It's Sideways meets Gone With the Wind!"), that the movie was a sex comedy and a Bildungsroman and a road movie. But it is. Some lit theory finds this to be completely unsurprising, indeed almost the definition of the novel. The strain of thinking in that direction is started really by Mikhail Bakhtin: he didn't like the Hegelian argument that the novel is an epic for the modern world, an (inevitably failed) attempt to totalize what had been naturally total and unified in a classical or mythical world. Rubbish, said Bakhtin, novels are supposed to criticize totalities, make fun of Don Quixotes who are out of touch with reality; especially they are supposed to bring in all kinds of language of the everyday and juggle them, making fun of Dickensian lawyers who treat their wives like juries or schoolteachers who treat their boyfriends like pupils. The problem for me with Bakhtin has always been that he didn't seem to like story --that was one of my favorite parts of Greg's argument. I was reminded of E.M.Forster's friendly, wistful definition of the novel in 1927: "The novel, oh dear me yes, tells a story." He contrasts it with the blustery businessman, interrupted no doubt on the golf links, who says, "A novel tells a story, and I can't be bothered with the kind of people who say it doesn't. And my wife thinks the same way." (The book I recommended to my students was a very smart and well-written sociological approach to the Bildungsroman by Franco Moretti at Stanford called The Way of the World, which certainly finds a way to talk about the story aspect of Goethe, Austen, Stendhal, Dickens, and others without trying to turn Bildungsroman into attempts to be epics.) But Bakhtin can still be the patron saint of interstitial fiction, especially for the people who try to tell a story knowing that sometimes they want to sound like a fantasist, sometimes like a Western writer, sometimes like a philosophical fabulist, whatever. Some storytellers want to tell a story that's kind of a sex comedy, kind of a Bildungsroman, kind of a road movie; they want to invoke those generic traditions, often simultaneously, and critique some (Y Tu Mama is a critique of sex comedies), suggest that others are almost impossible (how can you grow up in Mexico in 1999 when Mexican masculinity and Mexican politics are so screwed up?), and are pure examples of others (it delivers what a road movie is supposed to deliver). Viva la intersticialidad... |
|||
krismcd59 |
Re: Closure of sorts for this Salon | ||
|
As Board readers will note, this Salon discussion raised some terrific questions that deserved deeper attention, but family issues intervened and your Humble Moderator let things slide a bit. Now that we've broken the ice, though, watch this space for a new article and conversation-starter very soon (by Halloween, anyway). I'm on the hunt for piece that treats of appropriately seasonal topics -- the uncanny, the weird, the freakish, perhaps -- in an interstitial way. I have a few candidates, but suggestions will be welcome.
Thanks again to sirrywhite, revolotus, janeyolen, Patrick OConnor, and of course, our author, Gregor9 for participating, and we hope to see you again. We'll be back in your conversational space soon! |
|||