Magazine article Artforum International

A Thousand Words

Magazine article Artforum International

A Thousand Words

Article excerpt


What I'm after is the liquidity of things, how one thing leads you on to the next. These films take place in very ordinary urban settings. I'm not concerned with spectacular events or frantic rhythms. The works are about concentration, intention, and paths of thought: the flow of totality in our perception, the fragmentation of the "river of phenomena," which takes place all the time. I avoid all postproduction because I want to keep the clumsiness, insecurity, and ambiguity of the actual shooting. It's really the awareness involved in the shooting itself that is important to me, not what one can do with images afterward. The tension between my intentions and reality itself is what drives the films. I devote a day to creating a kind of "story." Walking down, say, Sixth Avenue, I'll suddenly see something that intrigues me - a plastic bag, a green umbrella, an airplane tracing a line in the sky. That's how I get started.

One can't really see the films as entries in a diary, because they're not at all private. I'm very conscious of the fact that they'll be viewed by somebody else. I think about the viewer all along. The presence of the viewer makes me want to be more precise. But more important, the fact that the thoughts of the spectator are with me as I shoot the film short-circuits all ideas of privacy. There's nothing private about the process of creation.

The metaphoric links between things are not something I plan but something that just happens. The kind of connection that intrigues me is contiguity. I move from one thing to another, and in the film they'll be situated next to each other or happen right after one another, although there may be ten or twenty minutes between them in reality. The connections themselves are real, not metaphoric. Borges wrote somewhere that all these things that are next to each other, we call the universe. It's this "being next to each other" that appeals to me. In the films things are related, but through proximity rather than narrative. Therefore you can begin in one place and wind up in another that doesn't seem related to the starting point. For example, the tape I like the most, From Dog Shit to Irma Vep, traces a series of connections between two things: a piece of dog shit I saw in the street at 10:45 A.M. and this beautiful Chinese actress whose face I found on a poster at 4:45 P.M. Between these two events there's an entire day of walking, now condensed into forty minutes of recording on a tape.

There could be some kind of resemblance between what I'm doing and John Cage's recordings, but Cage's work has so much to do with chance, whereas I'm really focusing on concentration and intention. The same goes for the automatic writing of Surrealism. That's all about losing control, whereas the flow of images in my work is extremely controlled. I trace certain intentions with the camera, and then suddenly the tension between my intentions and reality becomes too great and the whole thing breaks down.

I wake up in the morning. The light has to be okay. I have breakfast and then start walking down some street until something catches my attention. That's when the movie starts. When I begin recording something, I don't know how long it's going to last, maybe thirty seconds, maybe five minutes, so I improvise, watching and walking at the same time. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.