― Eazy (Eazy), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 21:56 (seventeen years ago) link
It's like picture-within-a-picture.
― JordanC (JordanC), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 21:56 (seventeen years ago) link
― Laurel (Laurel), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 21:56 (seventeen years ago) link
― Eazy (Eazy), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 21:58 (seventeen years ago) link
― n/a (n/a), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:00 (seventeen years ago) link
― horseshoe (horseshoe), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:01 (seventeen years ago) link
i am also a former filmmaker!
― giboyojimbo (gbx), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:01 (seventeen years ago) link
xpost - I can get you into office buildings.
― Handgun O. Mendocino (pullapartgirl), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:01 (seventeen years ago) link
― n/a (n/a), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:03 (seventeen years ago) link
― crunkleJ (crunkleJ), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:03 (seventeen years ago) link
― n/a (n/a), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:04 (seventeen years ago) link
I used to write playlets like this all the time.
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:06 (seventeen years ago) link
― giboyojimbo (gbx), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:06 (seventeen years ago) link
― giboyojimbo (gbx), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:07 (seventeen years ago) link
― crunkleJ (crunkleJ), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:07 (seventeen years ago) link
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:09 (seventeen years ago) link
― Laurel (Laurel), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:09 (seventeen years ago) link
― Handgun O. Mendocino (pullapartgirl), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:11 (seventeen years ago) link
― danno martinez (danno martinez), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:11 (seventeen years ago) link
― crunkleJ (crunkleJ), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:11 (seventeen years ago) link
― Eazy (Eazy), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:11 (seventeen years ago) link
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:12 (seventeen years ago) link
― crunkleJ (crunkleJ), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:13 (seventeen years ago) link
bland != banal
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:13 (seventeen years ago) link
― Handgun O. Mendocino (pullapartgirl), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:13 (seventeen years ago) link
But why does dialogue have to be banal to be real?
― Handgun O. Mendocino (pullapartgirl), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:15 (seventeen years ago) link
― danno martinez (danno martinez), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:17 (seventeen years ago) link
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:18 (seventeen years ago) link
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:19 (seventeen years ago) link
― Eazy (Eazy), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:20 (seventeen years ago) link
― danno martinez (danno martinez), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:21 (seventeen years ago) link
I dunno, are most people not as interested in the aggressively ho-hum as I am? Am I the only one who asks new romantic partners to "tell me a boring story"?-- Chris Piuma (chri...), February 25th, 2003.
-- Chris Piuma (chri...), February 25th, 2003.
― Handgun O. Mendocino (pullapartgirl), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:21 (seventeen years ago) link
But when real-life banality is applied to art, it automatically becomes more interesting because a) we're not used to seeing banality in art: it becomes the exception rather than the rule, and b) art has the power to make the banal transcendent.
ideally has the same what's-going-on-here? pleasure of eavesdropping.
Bingo. There's an intimate, voyeuristic thrill to it. It feels visceral, somehow.
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:21 (seventeen years ago) link
This thread would be great to have read to you as a bedtime story -- oops (buttch9...), February 26th, 2003.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oops is OTM. -- Chris Piuma (chri...), February 27th, 2003.
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:23 (seventeen years ago) link
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:24 (seventeen years ago) link
― Handgun O. Mendocino (pullapartgirl), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:24 (seventeen years ago) link
― JordanC (JordanC), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:25 (seventeen years ago) link
Me: Yes, thanks. You?
My boss: Not bad.
Me: Do anything exciting?
My boss: No.
Me: Oh.
― Eazy (Eazy), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:25 (seventeen years ago) link
Writing about something banal in a non-banal way would be interesting I guess. But I don't hold out much hope for the outcome.
― crunkleJ (crunkleJ), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:25 (seventeen years ago) link
― Handgun O. Mendocino (pullapartgirl), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:26 (seventeen years ago) link
― JordanC (JordanC), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:27 (seventeen years ago) link
Using that poetry analogy, I think what we're talking about is more of finding the profound in daily life than in being deliberately boring - it's more like Vermeer and Rembrandt painting daily life in Holland (ho hum) instead of the great moments in religious history.
― Eazy (Eazy), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:28 (seventeen years ago) link
This is a very good question, and the best answer that I can give is that I experience both at the same time, or go back and forth: the pleasure is both in the visceral voyeuristic thrill and the rational appreciation for the uncanniness of the vérité style. (I'm serious, I have like a whole chapter in my senior project about this where I talk about Raymond Carver and Mike Leigh.)
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:30 (seventeen years ago) link
― Handgun O. Mendocino (pullapartgirl), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:31 (seventeen years ago) link
xpost--this is a corollary to what Jenny just said.
― crunkleJ (crunkleJ), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:32 (seventeen years ago) link
― Laurel (Laurel), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:32 (seventeen years ago) link
― jaymc (jaymc), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:32 (seventeen years ago) link
― Handgun O. Mendocino (pullapartgirl), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:33 (seventeen years ago) link
― crunkleJ (crunkleJ), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 22:34 (seventeen years ago) link