Tangled thoughts on the visceral vs the think-y in vids
I started writing this post last night at 3am, so it’s really not the most coherent thing ever, but I thought I’d finish it today and post it anyway.
Having just got back into the whole LJ thing, I’ve been catching up on posts that other people have made recently about vidding. And I have also been getting back into actually making vids (or, a vid) myself for the first time in many years. And it’s all got me thinking: a lot of what I’ve been reading seems to look at vidding primarily as a way to make an argument, or present a viewpoint or tell a story. Often these arguments/viewpoints/stories are ones that were not made explicitly in the original source, and that vidders feel compelled to make themselves by taking that source and arranging it in such a way as to make a case for a different interpretation of it.
But more and more, I don’t think that that is really the reason I vid, and it’s not the reason I watch vids either. “Making a point” about the source is very much secondary to me: I vid because I want to play with the relationship between music and visuals. For a while I thought that what I was trying to do was to sort of use TV/film source to “translate a piece of music or a song into a visual experience”. Now my viewpoint is slightly different: I’ve been thinking that rather than just having the visuals “obey” the music, there are times when there has to be to some extent more of a two-way interplay. But for me the music must still, always, be the boss. The music - not the lyrics - for me, have to dictate the kind of visuals being presented. In terms of mood, pace, motion, rhythm… if those elements of the music are not in consistently, in some way or another, being translated in the visuals I’m seeing, I just can’t get on board with a vid even if its making a great point or presenting an interesting argument.
I think really what I’m saying is that when I watch a vid I want to be swept along on an aesthetic, visceral ride where what I’m hearing with my ears and seeing with my eyes is this great, meld-y synthesis-y type thing that coheres throughout into this visceral/emotional experience . I don’t want to be trying to piece together an argument. I…don’t want to be *thinking*, just experiencing.
The logical conclusion of that is that I’d rather watch a vid that was very pretty (and by pretty I mean audio-visually pretty in terms of the nice-ness of the overall synthesis between the two) than one that was very clever (and by clever I mean in terms of the use of lyrics/clip choice/editing to make an argument in so far as that is largely separate from the finer details of the music). In brief: if there’s a song with, say a huge drumroll in it, and the pretty vid translates that into the visuals (by, say, a series of quick cuts or a clip with a stuttering sort of motion in it, or a clip that is tangibly emotionally dramatic in a drum-roll type way), but the clever vid doesn’t do any of these things, that would put me off the clever vid to such an extent that I would probably turn it off.
Now. Wanting to make an argument or present a certain viewpoint, of course doesn’t preclude doing that in a musical, visually interesting way. As a vidder, I certainly make arguments in vids, and having classified myself as someone more interested in musical/visual synthesis than in the narrative of a vid itself, I was initially confused as to why I therefore did this. I think that maybe the reason is that “arguments” in vids can actually add a whole other layer to that musical/audio interplay. I don’t know how to explain this exactly. I think part of it is that I basically want to be whacked over the head with arguments in vids. Whacked over the head *musically*, like the emotion of a certain chord or musical phrase translates into the visuals I’m seeing, in a way that provokes a different sort (or intensity) of emotional reaction than I might otherwise have had to that clip or sequence if the music wasn’t making me experience it in that specific way. That’s looking at it moment by moment, but of course there’s then the issue of building up that sort of emotional interplay over a whole vid, bearing in mind the overall structure of the thing, which I’m not going to think about too much now in case my brain explodes. Essentially though, the argument has to be *part* of that visceral experience. It has to be, I guess, in some way an emotional and aesthetic rather than *just* intellectual. If I’m honest, from my point of view, it has to be a *lot* emotional and musical and aesthetic, and not really too much intellectual. Maybe this is because I personally am just not as good at understanding the sorts of arguments that people make in vids, without a lot of help from the music…
There are a million other issues that this whole thing raises, like what about the viewer familiarity/unfamiliarity with source issue, and how this relates to a vid as a visceral/emotional experience. Coming back to that massive drumroll I used as an example earlier, lets say that this is present in the music used for a Buffy vid. Now if a vidder used a clip of Buffy looking pensive at the end of “Becoming Part 2” on that drumroll, that might make emotional/musical sense to me as a Buffy fan, because I know that’s a pivotal, drum-roll type moment in Buffy’s life. I have my previous emotional experience from watching Buffy to bring to bear on that audio/visual moment. I might even *possibly* have a spine-tingling type, visceral moment of “ooh” because the drama of the drumroll was matched in the drama of the source. But I think it’s unlikely, for reasons I will come to in a second. If I was watching that vid as someone who had never seen Buffy before I definitely don’t think I’d have an understanding of why that clip was used on such a musically dramatic moment because all I’m seeing is a clip of a girl looking a bit sad - it doesn’t seem very drum roll-y. I *certainly* wouldn’t have a musical/visual/emotional synthesis “ooh” moment. What would work best for me as a viewer unfamiliar with the source would be something that in terms of the motion/cutting of the clip OR the tangible, easily-discernable emotion of the clip, was drum-rolly. And coming back to me as a Buffy-knowing viewer, I’d be way more likely to have a visceral reaction to that drumroll if the clip (or sequence) used there was both emotionally drum-rolly, AND drum-rolly in terms of motion too. Is that too much to ask? ;-)
Reading this all back, I’m not entirely sure I’m making my point very clearly, even to myself. I expect this is stuff that more actively communicative vidders/vid watchers, and/or regular vivid-con goers a have already talked about a lot. But I think going over it all for my own benefit has actually helped me, to some extent, reconcile the narrative/intellectual and musical/visceral elements of vidding in my own head, which is something I’ve always struggled with.
If anyone who might read this has any suggestions for further reading on this topic, that’d be great.
Having just got back into the whole LJ thing, I’ve been catching up on posts that other people have made recently about vidding. And I have also been getting back into actually making vids (or, a vid) myself for the first time in many years. And it’s all got me thinking: a lot of what I’ve been reading seems to look at vidding primarily as a way to make an argument, or present a viewpoint or tell a story. Often these arguments/viewpoints/stories are ones that were not made explicitly in the original source, and that vidders feel compelled to make themselves by taking that source and arranging it in such a way as to make a case for a different interpretation of it.
But more and more, I don’t think that that is really the reason I vid, and it’s not the reason I watch vids either. “Making a point” about the source is very much secondary to me: I vid because I want to play with the relationship between music and visuals. For a while I thought that what I was trying to do was to sort of use TV/film source to “translate a piece of music or a song into a visual experience”. Now my viewpoint is slightly different: I’ve been thinking that rather than just having the visuals “obey” the music, there are times when there has to be to some extent more of a two-way interplay. But for me the music must still, always, be the boss. The music - not the lyrics - for me, have to dictate the kind of visuals being presented. In terms of mood, pace, motion, rhythm… if those elements of the music are not in consistently, in some way or another, being translated in the visuals I’m seeing, I just can’t get on board with a vid even if its making a great point or presenting an interesting argument.
I think really what I’m saying is that when I watch a vid I want to be swept along on an aesthetic, visceral ride where what I’m hearing with my ears and seeing with my eyes is this great, meld-y synthesis-y type thing that coheres throughout into this visceral/emotional experience . I don’t want to be trying to piece together an argument. I…don’t want to be *thinking*, just experiencing.
The logical conclusion of that is that I’d rather watch a vid that was very pretty (and by pretty I mean audio-visually pretty in terms of the nice-ness of the overall synthesis between the two) than one that was very clever (and by clever I mean in terms of the use of lyrics/clip choice/editing to make an argument in so far as that is largely separate from the finer details of the music). In brief: if there’s a song with, say a huge drumroll in it, and the pretty vid translates that into the visuals (by, say, a series of quick cuts or a clip with a stuttering sort of motion in it, or a clip that is tangibly emotionally dramatic in a drum-roll type way), but the clever vid doesn’t do any of these things, that would put me off the clever vid to such an extent that I would probably turn it off.
Now. Wanting to make an argument or present a certain viewpoint, of course doesn’t preclude doing that in a musical, visually interesting way. As a vidder, I certainly make arguments in vids, and having classified myself as someone more interested in musical/visual synthesis than in the narrative of a vid itself, I was initially confused as to why I therefore did this. I think that maybe the reason is that “arguments” in vids can actually add a whole other layer to that musical/audio interplay. I don’t know how to explain this exactly. I think part of it is that I basically want to be whacked over the head with arguments in vids. Whacked over the head *musically*, like the emotion of a certain chord or musical phrase translates into the visuals I’m seeing, in a way that provokes a different sort (or intensity) of emotional reaction than I might otherwise have had to that clip or sequence if the music wasn’t making me experience it in that specific way. That’s looking at it moment by moment, but of course there’s then the issue of building up that sort of emotional interplay over a whole vid, bearing in mind the overall structure of the thing, which I’m not going to think about too much now in case my brain explodes. Essentially though, the argument has to be *part* of that visceral experience. It has to be, I guess, in some way an emotional and aesthetic rather than *just* intellectual. If I’m honest, from my point of view, it has to be a *lot* emotional and musical and aesthetic, and not really too much intellectual. Maybe this is because I personally am just not as good at understanding the sorts of arguments that people make in vids, without a lot of help from the music…
There are a million other issues that this whole thing raises, like what about the viewer familiarity/unfamiliarity with source issue, and how this relates to a vid as a visceral/emotional experience. Coming back to that massive drumroll I used as an example earlier, lets say that this is present in the music used for a Buffy vid. Now if a vidder used a clip of Buffy looking pensive at the end of “Becoming Part 2” on that drumroll, that might make emotional/musical sense to me as a Buffy fan, because I know that’s a pivotal, drum-roll type moment in Buffy’s life. I have my previous emotional experience from watching Buffy to bring to bear on that audio/visual moment. I might even *possibly* have a spine-tingling type, visceral moment of “ooh” because the drama of the drumroll was matched in the drama of the source. But I think it’s unlikely, for reasons I will come to in a second. If I was watching that vid as someone who had never seen Buffy before I definitely don’t think I’d have an understanding of why that clip was used on such a musically dramatic moment because all I’m seeing is a clip of a girl looking a bit sad - it doesn’t seem very drum roll-y. I *certainly* wouldn’t have a musical/visual/emotional synthesis “ooh” moment. What would work best for me as a viewer unfamiliar with the source would be something that in terms of the motion/cutting of the clip OR the tangible, easily-discernable emotion of the clip, was drum-rolly. And coming back to me as a Buffy-knowing viewer, I’d be way more likely to have a visceral reaction to that drumroll if the clip (or sequence) used there was both emotionally drum-rolly, AND drum-rolly in terms of motion too. Is that too much to ask? ;-)
Reading this all back, I’m not entirely sure I’m making my point very clearly, even to myself. I expect this is stuff that more actively communicative vidders/vid watchers, and/or regular vivid-con goers a have already talked about a lot. But I think going over it all for my own benefit has actually helped me, to some extent, reconcile the narrative/intellectual and musical/visceral elements of vidding in my own head, which is something I’ve always struggled with.
If anyone who might read this has any suggestions for further reading on this topic, that’d be great.