I spent the weekend thinking on Laurel Nakadate and her works. Originally it started from an interview my friend sent me through an email. This interview was dazzling, struck me so close to home and then, made me question strongly about several different things such as my work ethics. Nobody told me to work--as a hooker-- but I have worked, and nobody told me not to write, but I would often stopped writing as if there was any reason to stop it. As if that was the only way to think. Or it may really be is the only way to think; write and stop. And think with a long interval.
I would discuss more on the artist Nakadate later but one thing in brief for now; she is talking about how to look in the interview and she sees bravery in the act. I never thought of 'seeing' that way. To think about how people look is ultimately meaningful especially in the current context--post literary world where people communicate more in images than in languages--but I more attached some other meanings to the act. To me, seeing is an alternative to taking action. But reading her ideas about the act of seeing indeed makes me rethink the same old definition of 'what it means to see' to me.
I believe her ultimate tool of art making is her camera to establish point of her view as well as her boundary, her own identity and subjectivity. In another words, camera is her alibi that provides all of those that I raised that essentially establishes one's identity. I have been wondering about the same thing regarding my case. To me, writing is the tool of establishing my point of view in the world and how to set the boundary. In other words, how to restore myself from the ultimately extreme situation of danger, which is out there once you go work every night. And ultimately I have been pushing the limit and the goal of my project has shifted, or been blurred and now become something else. Or something I can't really place now. I have been trying to figure out disoriented.
0 comments:
Post a Comment