When I first watched Vito Acconci's 'Undertone,' I had the impression that he was addressing the audience through the camera – what William Kaizen described as a "one-to-one connection established between the viewer and what is on view." (Kaizen, 265) It was almost as if he was letting the audience peer into what could be interpreted as the turmoil of thought and desire. If it wasn't for him talking about how his hands were on his thighs, one could only imagine about what could be going on under that table. I found it interesting that he would use the words "I want to believe," when describing both himself and a woman under the table – as if his hands were really switching back and forth from his own and a woman's. David Antin equated the visual style of addressing the audience in the piece to that of a "presidential address." (Antin, 44) That is definitely noticeable when he raises his hands up from under the table and addresses the camera/audience directly, talking about how he 'relies on you.' to be there for him. However, after reading Kaizen talk about Acconci's 'Centers,' I began to realize that he was not only addressing the audience but himself, as well. With 'Centers,' Acconci addressed the camera in a similar way to 'Undertone' – all the while looking at his immediate self reflected back to him on a video monitor. Realizing this, I began to think that he was likely utilizing a similar method for 'Undertone.' With that in mind, his reliance on 'you' seemed to be more about relying on himself than on the audience – although both seem to be true. What at first seemed like him (or some persona of his) opening up to the audience became him looking into himself to release his demons, or something of the like. This is what can be fascinating about video – the ability to be live in the past and the present simultaneously.
Vito Acconci is known for his provocative and confrontational performance works, and, after watching 'Undertone,' I would safely aver that the piece fits within that context. While I find this work and some of his other performance pieces aggressive displays of masculinity, this video speaks to a few different elements that were presented in the readings. In the text, ‘Live On Tape: Video, Liveness and the Immediate,’ William Kaizen describes the immediacy or “liveness” of video that was so provocative for viewers when it first started to permeate our culture. Compared to television or film, this immediacy of video offered a sense of authenticity of what is taking place onscreen. Kaizen references Roland Barthes by stating that film and photography have “that-has-been” effect, and that the two mediums, “generate their affect by returning the dead to life” (Kaizen, 262). He goes on to state that, “television, on the other hand, operates in the present tense. It says about what it shows: ‘this is going on.’ Compared to film, it seems even more alive” (Kaizen, 262). An authenticity was accepted and embraced because of the “present tense” affect of video, while film was considered past tense; it was something that was fabricated and constructed for our viewing pleasure.
‘Undertone’ raises a few different issues in relation to “liveness.” Acconci shifts between quietly mumbling to himself about how he wants to believe there is a girl under the table to directly addressing the camera (audience), stating that he needs us to be sitting across from him at the head of the table. The script itself wavers between this idea of past tense, a fabrication of sorts, and present tense, an authentic immediacy. While Acconci is nervously mumbling to himself with his hands hidden under the table his performance is dramatic: his hands are out of view, he is rocking back and forth, and he seems like a completely different person compared to the man who directly addresses the camera. In this way, his presence seems more scripted or fabricated. When he brings his hands up from under the table and addresses the camera, the liveness and immediacy of his presence is felt by his directness.
In David Antin’s essay, ‘Television: Video’s Frightful Parent,’ he describes video art as a way for artists to critique our media culture. “…the significance of all types of video art derives from its stance with respect to some aspect of television which is itself profoundly related to the present state of our culture. In this way video art embarks on a curiously mediated but serious critique of the culture.” (Antin, 43). Acconci is, indeed, using different styles of media within this one artwork. His mumblings reflect that of a dramatic, filmic character, while his direct address to the camera references what Antin coins as a presidential address. By oscillating between these two styles of media, Acconci emphasizes and affirms these prescribed genres, which consequentially critiques them as well.
Acconci’s “Undertone” went between two phases. In one, Acconi addressed the audience directly with his hands folded on the table. In the other, the audience watched as he went between telling us about a woman under the table massaging his legs which switched off with him telling the audience he was messaging his legs. The camera is placed on the opposite edge of the table. The audience cannot be certain whether or not there really is a woman under the table.
What is important with these two transitions is the manner to which he addresses the audience. When his hands are above the table, Acconci looks straight at the camera and speaks to audience directly. He repeatedly asks the audience to remain at the end of the table and watch him because he needs the audience to listen. When Acconci’s hands are below the table, he is either describing the woman massaging his legs or himself doing the same action. Each description starts out with “I believe” and Acconci does not address the camera in any way. This recalls Kaizen’s article where he discusses the immediacy of live TV and the pre-recorded feel of film. When Acconci places his hands on the table, it has a live feeling as he looks and addresses the audience specifically; sort of a news anchor feel. When the audience watches Acconci describe his actions, is it as if each “step has been predetermined,” as Kaizen describes with film. (Kaizen, 262)
Each phase in the video follow a time pattern as well. The direct audience addressing phases last roughly 30 seconds each, while the descriptive, film-like sections last almost two minutes each. This is much like the commercial time and program time that Antin describes. The two minute phases are like watching a pre-recorded show while the 30 second phases resemble commercial blocks. It is as Antin describes, “It is very easy to exaggerate the apparent differences between commercial time and program time by concentrating on the dramatic program. Television has many programs that share a mechanically segmented structure with the packet of commercials.” (Antin, 41)
At first, I did not understand Antin’s connection between Undertone and a presidential address. (Antin, 44? page 83 in course reader) However, after a second look at the work and hearing the artist’s earnest tone of voice I can better understand this connection and how this artwork can be interpreted as a parody of the public figure. Antin compares Acconci’s address to that of Richard Nixon. (Antin, 44) I think that a reasonable comparison for a younger audience would be Bill Clinton’s response to his relationship with Monica Lewinsky in 1998. In all three of these videos the men direct their gaze to the camera, toward an assumed viewer. Acconci looks directly at the camera, directly at the viewer, and attempts to forge a connection with viewers by stating, “I need to know that I can count on you.”
In Undertone Acconci states, “I need you to keep your place there, at the head of the table.” He often speaks directly to an assumed viewer through the camera. This illustrates a point made by Kaizen, “This is a position uncommon for film, but quite common in live television, especially in the news and on talk shows, where talking heads speak to an observer who is absent or anonymous for them.” (Kaizen, 270) When Acconci states that he needs the viewer I think that he is speaking to a need for this specific medium to have an audience and the way in which viewership defines the artwork.
Both Acconci directly addressing an assumed viewer and the position of the camera to mimic a viewer’s position as sitting across from the artist function to highlight “...the illusion of immediacy,... ‘the feeling that what one sees on the TV screen is living and actual reality, at that very moment taking place’”. (Antin, 39) The camera’s position across the table from Acconci implicates the viewer as being present in the same space as the artist. I suggest that this method may be carried over from paintings in which an empty seat at a table or an open space around a table would extend a welcome to viewers to join. (For examples, see Leo von König’s At the Breakfast Table, 1907, or José Gutiérrez Solana’s The Circle of the Café Pombo, 1920.)
The video posted shows us a transition in relationship between subject and viewer and how the use of videotape recording was used in the early stages of video and performance art. Due to the relative new nature of film, artists experimented and presented video in a way that was thought provoking where the viewer has to deal with if the video being shown is really going on right at that specific time. What I find interesting most about all of this is this notion of the illusion of immediacy. William Kaizen writes in his article Live on Tape: Video, Liveness, and the Immediate, quoting David Antin, "The live production on videotape, though delayed in reaching the home by a few hours or days, was generally accepted as actual live television by the average viewer. Defined by the feeling that what one sees on the TV screen is living and actual reality, at that very moment taking place." What is interesting about this is the fact that we still to this day believe that, even though our world is offset by time zones. Video plays with us brining up different illusions of space and time.
This video, titled Undertone by Vito Acconi, brings up thoughts about how this relationship exists between the viwer and the subject. In the video Vito switches in and out of his performance first he is in the performance describing what he wants to believe and then he switches out, directly addressing the viewer as though we were there in the room with him and that we are needed to be there. His movements and gestures also show distinctly the change between the relationship with the viewer. Antin writes in his article that "the most basic of these [communication characteristics] is the social relation between "sending" and "recieving," which is profoundly unequal and asymmetrical." This video by Vito attempts to break that asymmetrical relationship.
Kaizen’s article presented and discussed the idea that video was based on immediacy, influenced by television and its basis on the ‘live.’ Being conditioned as I am by a culture created by media, I realized that the desire for immediacy is so prominent within my life that I take it for granted and don’t consider it to be novel. If I were to watch Vito Acconci’s Undertone without having read Kaizen I would be inclined to watch for a few minutes maybe before I wandered in thought or sight. In comparison with the media I view daily it is not nearly as “real” feeling and in some ways therefore not very immediate for me. I don’t feel as if I’m actually sitting at the other end of the table or that Acconci is speaking to me when he addresses the camera.
So, I attempted to view the video piece as if I were watching it within the context of 1972, when television and video were newer and less explored. (Kind of like trying to see how an audience would be terrified by the image of a train rushing at them, though I’m not saying my present experience with video is how all people view it, its simply a product of what I have seen the most.) Kaizen discusses Douglas Davis’ ideas that “…immediacy in video is based on live television’s ‘sense of authentic presence’ (262). Acconci recognizes this immediacy and uses it while also calling attention to it in Undertone. The placement of the table forces the viewer to recognize themselves as a viewer who is being directly addressed by Acconci, thus pulling them into a more ‘authentic’ experience. In terms of playback and re-presentation of this video, there is no difference in immediacy or authenticity than there would be with film, but it feels like it is more present than it would be on film, or that the time between its occurrence and being viewed is very short. Kaizen also notes, “In live television, no matter how carefully scripted or composed the presentation, the threat of disaster lurks, waiting in the wings” (262). Acconci plays with this aspect of television by creating a space that is unseen by the viewer and placing the possibility of another human presence within it. It works to cause anxiety because it is unknown as to whether or not he is describing an actual woman, but there is no end to the sense of excitement created. The video’s end isn’t over in the sense that a television program is and the ‘threat of disaster’ is no longer. The viewer’s desire for this conclusion is never fulfilled and they are left uneasy because there is no answer as to whether or not a girl was under the table. Antin writes, “The social uses of television continually force the issue of ‘truth’ to the center of attention” (38). The television audience is predisposed to assume that what they are seeing or hearing is truth. Acconci plays with this by directly addressing the camera, calling forth the association with honesty that has been instilled in viewers via newscasters or presidential addresses. By stating one thing over and over, speaking to the camera directly, and then stating the opposite repeatedly, the viewer is left uncertain as to what to deduce from the information given. It seems as if he is essentially flipping the habits and subconscious aspects of viewing television on their head and attempting to distance video and establish it as its own force.
Vito Acconci’s video “Undertone” is as much about Acconci connecting with the audience as his connection with himself. “I can sit in front of the monitor, stay concentrated on myself, dwell on myself, see myself in the round” (Kaizen 269). Acconci records himself in order to investigate himself thoroughly and plays then plays it for the viewer so the viewer can learn from the artists’ own experience. The position of the table directly in front of the viewer allows the viewer to come into the scene and gives viewer the sense of playing an active roll in this discussion between Acconci and the magical women under the table and between Acconci and the viewer. “Video became an improved mirror-a hyper-mirror- that allowed self to be examined from all angles and from every side”(Kaizen 269).
“The feeling that what one sees on the TV screen is living and actual reality, at that very moment taking place”(Antin, 39). Without this kind of audience participation and their inability to distinguish between present reality and recorded events from the past, Acconci would not have been able achieve the level of audience interaction and in turn the video would have had trouble convincing the audience that he was actually speaking directly to them. Acconci realized early on, the power that television had over the population and used this power to capture their attention and in turn he got the help he needed. “I need you, I need you to be here”.
When viewing Vito Acconci's Undertone I thought about the fact that the whole time it seems that Acconci interacts with himself as "someone" and himself and then also the audience. When reading William Kaizen's Live on Tape: Video, Liveness and the Immediate I found a part of the reading that states "Video has given her the ability to interact with herself in a way that was overwhelming at first" (Kaizen 267). Kaizen is discussing how Edie Sedgewick was able to interact with herself from another reel where she was sneezing, and almost mirror that image on the new reel. Now Acconci wasn't working with two reels but he was working with the table as a somewhat barrier to the audience. Saying I need you here to believe me that there is a girl under the table, which he created by interacting with himself, very similar to how Sedgewick interacted with herself.
When reading David Antin's "Television: Video's Frightful Parent" I tried finding relations to Vito Acconci's Undertone. Antin states "The most important thing was the notion of information presentation, and the notion of the intergration of the audience into the information" (Antin 38). I feel that this relates to Undertone because the way that Acconci almost orders the audience to stay because he is situated you as the other 'person' on the other end of the table. He states that he needs you to be there, which in a sense draws you in as the viewer and you stay. That is the way that he integrates the audience into the information that he is trying to present. Which Kaizen would say that he was interacting with himself as a way to get the information presented and integrating the audience.
A notorious masturbator it comes as no surprise to see Acconci once again touching himself. What is surprising is the odd style and hypnotic rhythm of this performance. Acconci’s performance Undertone seems to mimic the rhythm of commercial television. Switching, as commercial television does, between a performances that makes us feel invisible (most sitcoms and dramas) to a performance that makes us feel present, seen and spoken to directly (advertisements). In this way Acconci draws attention to the influence of commercial television on our experience of performance and time. Video art has a unique capacity for social commentary as Antin points out on page 43 “To a great extent the significance of all types of video art derives from its stance with respect to some aspect of television, which is itself profoundly related to the present state of our culture. In this way video art embarks on a curiously mediated by serious critique of the culture.”
Another interesting aspect of this performance is its complete reliance on the video camera for its effectiveness. This performance could not be staged for a live audience. Performing for a video camera is unique because the audience is imaginary. The performer must imagine a potential audience. It is interesting how the imaginary women in this piece is just as real as the imaginary audiences on the other side of the video camera. We (the video viewing audience) can no more touch Acconci’s legs then the imaginary women can stop him from rolling off the edge of the table, as he requests us to do. In a sense, both the imaginary woman and we, the video audience, only exist in Acconci’s mind.
Part of the appeal of Undertones is what Kaizen refers to as the “liveness” factor in video. As Kaizen points out “…the threat of disaster lurks waiting in the wings. Part of what captivates the audience is the possibility of failure…”(p. 262) This possibility of failure presents itself in Undertones by the uncertain way Acconci speaks when his head is down, the audience is in constant tension wondering if he will mis-speak, break character or become embarrassed. We are also kept captivated by the possibility of masturbation; will we be accidental pornographic voyeurs?
As I watched the video “undertone” by Vito Acconci the only thing that brought me into the video and really made me feel like I was sitting there and he truly needed me there was when he began speaking of if he were to roll over the take and I would stop him from falling. Granted it was a number of things that pulled me in to the event that was one that really took me. Another thing after reading Kaisen’s “Live on Tape”, it make me realize the hand motions he was using also pulled the viewer in. In the reading it reads, “Pointing is the most interpellative of gesticulations…Pointing says:’You! Pay Attention to this thing! Here! Now!’” I do wonder if he were to use different hand motions would it pull the viewer in that much more? What really interests me about “Television” by Antin was the thought that Patrick had a few post back. How Acconci would have had a hard to convincing or more so pulling the readers in if there wasn’t the mentality, “The feeling that what one sees on the TV screen is living and actual reality, at that very moment taking place”. What I would argue is since we had seen it through a Computer screen, would that hinder the effect it has on us? Would it had a different or heavier pull on us if it was on a TV screen? Another thing that came up in the reading was color. Another question I pose is, if the video were to be in color would it have a deferent effect on the viewers? Corbin manning
While I was watching “Undertone” by Vito Acconci I noticed right away that the perspective was really interesting, it made me feel like I was sitting across the table from him. Although, it is just Vito Acconci in the video, but he communicates to himself almost as another personality and then also us, the audience. In the reading William Kaizen’s Live on Tape: Video, Liveness and the Immediate; he refers to video as giving a person the ability to interact with themselves, in a way that was overwhelming at first. This could maybe explain why Acconci finds it so easy to interact with himself in the video. Also the hand motions that Acconci uses really sort of pulls the viewer in, to become more interested in what Acconci has to say.
While reading “Television: Video’s Frightful Parent” by Antil be describes video art as a way for artists to critique today’s video culture. I feel like Acconci is using many different styles of media within this one artwork. The way he speaks (mumbles) it parody’s that of a presidential speech. It’s definitely visibly noticeable when he raises his hands from beneath the table and address the audience with the phrase “relies on you to be there for him.” I find it interesting that he would choose do infuse more than one style of media into one, it’s an interesting concept.
Watching Vito Acconci's 'Undertone,' I had the notion that he was addressing the audience with the use of the camera. It was as if he was allowing the audience to watch the commotion of deliberation and aspiration. William Kaizen stated it nicely as "one-to-one connection established between the viewer and what is on view." (Kaizen, 265) Acconci is really opening this up to allow the viewer to listen to what he is saying and to think of what he is doing. I found it fascinating that he would use the words "I want to believe" when describing both himself and a woman under the table.
In David Antin’s essay, Television: Video’s Frightful Parent,’ he describes video art as a way for artists to evaluate our media traditions. “The significance of all types of video art derives from its stance with respect to some aspect of television which is itself profoundly related to the present state of our culture. In this way video art embarks on a curiously mediated but serious critique of the culture.” (Antin, 43). Acconci is using different styles and methods of media in this work. When he is talking, it imitates that of a dramatic character, when his direct address to the camera suggests that of what Antin said was a “presidential address.” When Acconci uses these two styles of media he is showing diversity of how the audience watches, thinks about and finally critiques his work.
Acconci’s Undertone is set up in a room where the camera is placed at the end of a table, a place you might physically sit if you were there in person. This calculated set up only adds to the sense of “immediacy” the film takes on. I think Kaizen best describes this feeling with the statement, “It is as if it were a window that tunneled through to another place, opening directly onto the event shown. In this it is closer, both rhetorically and technically, to the present tense of theatre than to film.” (263-4) It is true that video creates this presence that no other medium can. The sense of ‘live-ness’ in Acconci’s video is created by his brief moments of directly addressing the audience; when he does this he pulls the audience into the scene and makes them feel as if they were present in real-life. In Acconci’s Undertone he plays with the line between video art and television in somewhat of a parody. I don’t know that I would have been able to catch on to this and the many ways he does this if I hadn’t read the article by David Antin. Being that we are all so use to television addressing us “the viewer” in specific styles, it is easily overlooked. David Antin talks about television “which the transmitter must assume two apparently different roles in transmission. In one he must appear to address the viewer on the stations behalf as the entertainer; in the other on the sponsor’s behalf as the salesman” (39-40). He also discusses how there is a line drawn in communication between the roles of transmitter and receiver. In Undertone Acconci make several shifts in his roles. He sits down and starts a performance making no indication of his awareness of the viewer’s presence. He verbalizes his thoughts leading the audience to follow his thoughts on a woman beneath the table. He then repositions himself to face the camera and draws his arm up to direct himself at you even more; he talks directly at the viewer. As Antin references on pg. 44 this is similar to the style a president may use when addressing the people. Acconci is clever in the way he positions and interacts with the viewer. As David Antin points out there are many roles that we see in television and video. So as a viewer it is always your job to question what is being sold to you.
When I first watched Vito Acconci's 'Undertone,' I had the impression that he was addressing the audience through the camera – what William Kaizen described as a "one-to-one connection established between the viewer and what is on view." (Kaizen, 265) It was almost as if he was letting the audience peer into what could be interpreted as the turmoil of thought and desire. If it wasn't for him talking about how his hands were on his thighs, one could only imagine about what could be going on under that table. I found it interesting that he would use the words "I want to believe," when describing both himself and a woman under the table – as if his hands were really switching back and forth from his own and a woman's.
ReplyDeleteDavid Antin equated the visual style of addressing the audience in the piece to that of a "presidential address." (Antin, 44) That is definitely noticeable when he raises his hands up from under the table and addresses the camera/audience directly, talking about how he 'relies on you.' to be there for him.
However, after reading Kaizen talk about Acconci's 'Centers,' I began to realize that he was not only addressing the audience but himself, as well. With 'Centers,' Acconci addressed the camera in a similar way to 'Undertone' – all the while looking at his immediate self reflected back to him on a video monitor. Realizing this, I began to think that he was likely utilizing a similar method for 'Undertone.' With that in mind, his reliance on 'you' seemed to be more about relying on himself than on the audience – although both seem to be true. What at first seemed like him (or some persona of his) opening up to the audience became him looking into himself to release his demons, or something of the like. This is what can be fascinating about video – the ability to be live in the past and the present simultaneously.
J. Michals
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteVito Acconci is known for his provocative and confrontational performance works, and, after watching 'Undertone,' I would safely aver that the piece fits within that context. While I find this work and some of his other performance pieces aggressive displays of masculinity, this video speaks to a few different elements that were presented in the readings. In the text, ‘Live On Tape: Video, Liveness and the Immediate,’ William Kaizen describes the immediacy or “liveness” of video that was so provocative for viewers when it first started to permeate our culture. Compared to television or film, this immediacy of video offered a sense of authenticity of what is taking place onscreen. Kaizen references Roland Barthes by stating that film and photography have “that-has-been” effect, and that the two mediums, “generate their affect by returning the dead to life” (Kaizen, 262). He goes on to state that, “television, on the other hand, operates in the present tense. It says about what it shows: ‘this is going on.’ Compared to film, it seems even more alive” (Kaizen, 262). An authenticity was accepted and embraced because of the “present tense” affect of video, while film was considered past tense; it was something that was fabricated and constructed for our viewing pleasure.
ReplyDelete‘Undertone’ raises a few different issues in relation to “liveness.” Acconci shifts between quietly mumbling to himself about how he wants to believe there is a girl under the table to directly addressing the camera (audience), stating that he needs us to be sitting across from him at the head of the table. The script itself wavers between this idea of past tense, a fabrication of sorts, and present tense, an authentic immediacy. While Acconci is nervously mumbling to himself with his hands hidden under the table his performance is dramatic: his hands are out of view, he is rocking back and forth, and he seems like a completely different person compared to the man who directly addresses the camera. In this way, his presence seems more scripted or fabricated. When he brings his hands up from under the table and addresses the camera, the liveness and immediacy of his presence is felt by his directness.
In David Antin’s essay, ‘Television: Video’s Frightful Parent,’ he describes video art as a way for artists to critique our media culture. “…the significance of all types of video art derives from its stance with respect to some aspect of television which is itself profoundly related to the present state of our culture. In this way video art embarks on a curiously mediated but serious critique of the culture.” (Antin, 43). Acconci is, indeed, using different styles of media within this one artwork. His mumblings reflect that of a dramatic, filmic character, while his direct address to the camera references what Antin coins as a presidential address. By oscillating between these two styles of media, Acconci emphasizes and affirms these prescribed genres, which consequentially critiques them as well.
-Kate Brandt
Acconci’s “Undertone” went between two phases. In one, Acconi addressed the audience directly with his hands folded on the table. In the other, the audience watched as he went between telling us about a woman under the table massaging his legs which switched off with him telling the audience he was messaging his legs. The camera is placed on the opposite edge of the table. The audience cannot be certain whether or not there really is a woman under the table.
ReplyDeleteWhat is important with these two transitions is the manner to which he addresses the audience. When his hands are above the table, Acconci looks straight at the camera and speaks to audience directly. He repeatedly asks the audience to remain at the end of the table and watch him because he needs the audience to listen. When Acconci’s hands are below the table, he is either describing the woman massaging his legs or himself doing the same action. Each description starts out with “I believe” and Acconci does not address the camera in any way. This recalls Kaizen’s article where he discusses the immediacy of live TV and the pre-recorded feel of film. When Acconci places his hands on the table, it has a live feeling as he looks and addresses the audience specifically; sort of a news anchor feel. When the audience watches Acconci describe his actions, is it as if each “step has been predetermined,” as Kaizen describes with film. (Kaizen, 262)
Each phase in the video follow a time pattern as well. The direct audience addressing phases last roughly 30 seconds each, while the descriptive, film-like sections last almost two minutes each. This is much like the commercial time and program time that Antin describes. The two minute phases are like watching a pre-recorded show while the 30 second phases resemble commercial blocks. It is as Antin describes, “It is very easy to exaggerate the apparent differences between commercial time and program time by concentrating on the dramatic program. Television has many programs that share a mechanically segmented structure with the packet of commercials.” (Antin, 41)
-Rebecca Margis
At first, I did not understand Antin’s connection between Undertone and a presidential address. (Antin, 44? page 83 in course reader) However, after a second look at the work and hearing the artist’s earnest tone of voice I can better understand this connection and how this artwork can be interpreted as a parody of the public figure. Antin compares Acconci’s address to that of Richard Nixon. (Antin, 44) I think that a reasonable comparison for a younger audience would be Bill Clinton’s response to his relationship with Monica Lewinsky in 1998. In all three of these videos the men direct their gaze to the camera, toward an assumed viewer. Acconci looks directly at the camera, directly at the viewer, and attempts to forge a connection with viewers by stating, “I need to know that I can count on you.”
ReplyDeleteIn Undertone Acconci states, “I need you to keep your place there, at the head of the table.” He often speaks directly to an assumed viewer through the camera. This illustrates a point made by Kaizen, “This is a position uncommon for film, but quite common in live television, especially in the news and on talk shows, where talking heads speak to an observer who is absent or anonymous for them.” (Kaizen, 270) When Acconci states that he needs the viewer I think that he is speaking to a need for this specific medium to have an audience and the way in which viewership defines the artwork.
Both Acconci directly addressing an assumed viewer and the position of the camera to mimic a viewer’s position as sitting across from the artist function to highlight “...the illusion of immediacy,... ‘the feeling that what one sees on the TV screen is living and actual reality, at that very moment taking place’”. (Antin, 39) The camera’s position across the table from Acconci implicates the viewer as being present in the same space as the artist. I suggest that this method may be carried over from paintings in which an empty seat at a table or an open space around a table would extend a welcome to viewers to join. (For examples, see Leo von König’s At the Breakfast Table, 1907, or José Gutiérrez Solana’s The Circle of the Café Pombo, 1920.)
The video posted shows us a transition in relationship between subject and viewer and how the use of videotape recording was used in the early stages of video and performance art. Due to the relative new nature of film, artists experimented and presented video in a way that was thought provoking where the viewer has to deal with if the video being shown is really going on right at that specific time. What I find interesting most about all of this is this notion of the illusion of immediacy. William Kaizen writes in his article Live on Tape: Video, Liveness, and the Immediate, quoting David Antin, "The live production on videotape, though delayed in reaching the home by a few hours or days, was generally accepted as actual live television by the average viewer. Defined by the feeling that what one sees on the TV screen is living and actual reality, at that very moment taking place." What is interesting about this is the fact that we still to this day believe that, even though our world is offset by time zones. Video plays with us brining up different illusions of space and time.
ReplyDeleteThis video, titled Undertone by Vito Acconi, brings up thoughts about how this relationship exists between the viwer and the subject. In the video Vito switches in and out of his performance first he is in the performance describing what he wants to believe and then he switches out, directly addressing the viewer as though we were there in the room with him and that we are needed to be there. His movements and gestures also show distinctly the change between the relationship with the viewer. Antin writes in his article that "the most basic of these [communication characteristics] is the social relation between "sending" and "recieving," which is profoundly unequal and asymmetrical." This video by Vito attempts to break that asymmetrical relationship.
Alex Ninneman
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKaizen’s article presented and discussed the idea that video was based on immediacy, influenced by television and its basis on the ‘live.’ Being conditioned as I am by a culture created by media, I realized that the desire for immediacy is so prominent within my life that I take it for granted and don’t consider it to be novel. If I were to watch Vito Acconci’s Undertone without having read Kaizen I would be inclined to watch for a few minutes maybe before I wandered in thought or sight. In comparison with the media I view daily it is not nearly as “real” feeling and in some ways therefore not very immediate for me. I don’t feel as if I’m actually sitting at the other end of the table or that Acconci is speaking to me when he addresses the camera.
ReplyDeleteSo, I attempted to view the video piece as if I were watching it within the context of 1972, when television and video were newer and less explored. (Kind of like trying to see how an audience would be terrified by the image of a train rushing at them, though I’m not saying my present experience with video is how all people view it, its simply a product of what I have seen the most.) Kaizen discusses Douglas Davis’ ideas that “…immediacy in video is based on live television’s ‘sense of authentic presence’ (262). Acconci recognizes this immediacy and uses it while also calling attention to it in Undertone. The placement of the table forces the viewer to recognize themselves as a viewer who is being directly addressed by Acconci, thus pulling them into a more ‘authentic’ experience. In terms of playback and re-presentation of this video, there is no difference in immediacy or authenticity than there would be with film, but it feels like it is more present than it would be on film, or that the time between its occurrence and being viewed is very short. Kaizen also notes, “In live television, no matter how carefully scripted or composed the presentation, the threat of disaster lurks, waiting in the wings” (262). Acconci plays with this aspect of television by creating a space that is unseen by the viewer and placing the possibility of another human presence within it. It works to cause anxiety because it is unknown as to whether or not he is describing an actual woman, but there is no end to the sense of excitement created. The video’s end isn’t over in the sense that a television program is and the ‘threat of disaster’ is no longer. The viewer’s desire for this conclusion is never fulfilled and they are left uneasy because there is no answer as to whether or not a girl was under the table. Antin writes, “The social uses of television continually force the issue of ‘truth’ to the center of attention” (38). The television audience is predisposed to assume that what they are seeing or hearing is truth. Acconci plays with this by directly addressing the camera, calling forth the association with honesty that has been instilled in viewers via newscasters or presidential addresses. By stating one thing over and over, speaking to the camera directly, and then stating the opposite repeatedly, the viewer is left uncertain as to what to deduce from the information given. It seems as if he is essentially flipping the habits and subconscious aspects of viewing television on their head and attempting to distance video and establish it as its own force.
Vito Acconci’s video “Undertone” is as much about Acconci connecting with the audience as his connection with himself. “I can sit in front of the monitor, stay concentrated on myself, dwell on myself, see myself in the round” (Kaizen 269). Acconci records himself in order to investigate himself thoroughly and plays then plays it for the viewer so the viewer can learn from the artists’ own experience. The position of the table directly in front of the viewer allows the viewer to come into the scene and gives viewer the sense of playing an active roll in this discussion between Acconci and the magical women under the table and between Acconci and the viewer. “Video became an improved mirror-a hyper-mirror- that allowed self to be examined from all angles and from every side”(Kaizen 269).
ReplyDelete“The feeling that what one sees on the TV screen is living and actual reality, at that very moment taking place”(Antin, 39). Without this kind of audience participation and their inability to distinguish between present reality and recorded events from the past, Acconci would not have been able achieve the level of audience interaction and in turn the video would have had trouble convincing the audience that he was actually speaking directly to them. Acconci realized early on, the power that television had over the population and used this power to capture their attention and in turn he got the help he needed. “I need you, I need you to be here”.
Patrick Walter
When viewing Vito Acconci's Undertone I thought about the fact that the whole time it seems that Acconci interacts with himself as "someone" and himself and then also the audience. When reading William Kaizen's Live on Tape: Video, Liveness and the Immediate I found a part of the reading that states "Video has given her the ability to interact with herself in a way that was overwhelming at first" (Kaizen 267). Kaizen is discussing how Edie Sedgewick was able to interact with herself from another reel where she was sneezing, and almost mirror that image on the new reel. Now Acconci wasn't working with two reels but he was working with the table as a somewhat barrier to the audience. Saying I need you here to believe me that there is a girl under the table, which he created by interacting with himself, very similar to how Sedgewick interacted with herself.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading David Antin's "Television: Video's Frightful Parent" I tried finding relations to Vito Acconci's Undertone. Antin states "The most important thing was the notion of information presentation, and the notion of the intergration of the audience into the information" (Antin 38). I feel that this relates to Undertone because the way that Acconci almost orders the audience to stay because he is situated you as the other 'person' on the other end of the table. He states that he needs you to be there, which in a sense draws you in as the viewer and you stay. That is the way that he integrates the audience into the information that he is trying to present. Which Kaizen would say that he was interacting with himself as a way to get the information presented and integrating the audience.
Amber Blanchard
A notorious masturbator it comes as no surprise to see Acconci once again touching himself. What is surprising is the odd style and hypnotic rhythm of this performance. Acconci’s performance Undertone seems to mimic the rhythm of commercial television. Switching, as commercial television does, between a performances that makes us feel invisible (most sitcoms and dramas) to a performance that makes us feel present, seen and spoken to directly (advertisements). In this way Acconci draws attention to the influence of commercial television on our experience of performance and time. Video art has a unique capacity for social commentary as Antin points out on page 43 “To a great extent the significance of all types of video art derives from its stance with respect to some aspect of television, which is itself profoundly related to the present state of our culture. In this way video art embarks on a curiously mediated by serious critique of the culture.”
ReplyDeleteAnother interesting aspect of this performance is its complete reliance on the video camera for its effectiveness. This performance could not be staged for a live audience. Performing for a video camera is unique because the audience is imaginary. The performer must imagine a potential audience. It is interesting how the imaginary women in this piece is just as real as the imaginary audiences on the other side of the video camera. We (the video viewing audience) can no more touch Acconci’s legs then the imaginary women can stop him from rolling off the edge of the table, as he requests us to do. In a sense, both the imaginary woman and we, the video audience, only exist in Acconci’s mind.
Part of the appeal of Undertones is what Kaizen refers to as the “liveness” factor in video. As Kaizen points out “…the threat of disaster lurks waiting in the wings. Part of what captivates the audience is the possibility of failure…”(p. 262) This possibility of failure presents itself in Undertones by the uncertain way Acconci speaks when his head is down, the audience is in constant tension wondering if he will mis-speak, break character or become embarrassed. We are also kept captivated by the possibility of masturbation; will we be accidental pornographic voyeurs?
Anna Helgeson
As I watched the video “undertone” by Vito Acconci the only thing that brought me into the video and really made me feel like I was sitting there and he truly needed me there was when he began speaking of if he were to roll over the take and I would stop him from falling. Granted it was a number of things that pulled me in to the event that was one that really took me. Another thing after reading Kaisen’s “Live on Tape”, it make me realize the hand motions he was using also pulled the viewer in. In the reading it reads, “Pointing is the most interpellative of gesticulations…Pointing says:’You! Pay Attention to this thing! Here! Now!’” I do wonder if he were to use different hand motions would it pull the viewer in that much more?
ReplyDeleteWhat really interests me about “Television” by Antin was the thought that Patrick had a few post back. How Acconci would have had a hard to convincing or more so pulling the readers in if there wasn’t the mentality, “The feeling that what one sees on the TV screen is living and actual reality, at that very moment taking place”. What I would argue is since we had seen it through a Computer screen, would that hinder the effect it has on us? Would it had a different or heavier pull on us if it was on a TV screen? Another thing that came up in the reading was color. Another question I pose is, if the video were to be in color would it have a deferent effect on the viewers?
Corbin manning
While I was watching “Undertone” by Vito Acconci I noticed right away that the perspective was really interesting, it made me feel like I was sitting across the table from him. Although, it is just Vito Acconci in the video, but he communicates to himself almost as another personality and then also us, the audience.
ReplyDeleteIn the reading William Kaizen’s Live on Tape: Video, Liveness and the Immediate; he refers to video as giving a person the ability to interact with themselves, in a way that was overwhelming at first. This could maybe explain why Acconci finds it so easy to interact with himself in the video. Also the hand motions that Acconci uses really sort of pulls the viewer in, to become more interested in what Acconci has to say.
While reading “Television: Video’s Frightful Parent” by Antil be describes video art as a way for artists to critique today’s video culture. I feel like Acconci is using many different styles of media within this one artwork. The way he speaks (mumbles) it parody’s that of a presidential speech. It’s definitely visibly noticeable when he raises his hands from beneath the table and address the audience with the phrase “relies on you to be there for him.” I find it interesting that he would choose do infuse more than one style of media into one, it’s an interesting concept.
Kelsey Gunnlaugsson
Watching Vito Acconci's 'Undertone,' I had the notion that he was addressing the audience with the use of the camera. It was as if he was allowing the audience to watch the commotion of deliberation and aspiration. William Kaizen stated it nicely as "one-to-one connection established between the viewer and what is on view." (Kaizen, 265) Acconci is really opening this up to allow the viewer to listen to what he is saying and to think of what he is doing. I found it fascinating that he would use the words "I want to believe" when describing both himself and a woman under the table.
ReplyDeleteIn David Antin’s essay, Television: Video’s Frightful Parent,’ he describes video art as a way for artists to evaluate our media traditions. “The significance of all types of video art derives from its stance with respect to some aspect of television which is itself profoundly related to the present state of our culture. In this way video art embarks on a curiously mediated but serious critique of the culture.” (Antin, 43). Acconci is using different styles and methods of media in this work. When he is talking, it imitates that of a dramatic character, when his direct address to the camera suggests that of what Antin said was a “presidential address.” When Acconci uses these two styles of media he is showing diversity of how the audience watches, thinks about and finally critiques his work.
Acconci’s Undertone is set up in a room where the camera is placed at the end of a table, a place you might physically sit if you were there in person. This calculated set up only adds to the sense of “immediacy” the film takes on. I think Kaizen best describes this feeling with the statement, “It is as if it were a window that tunneled through to another place, opening directly onto the event shown. In this it is closer, both rhetorically and technically, to the present tense of theatre than to film.” (263-4) It is true that video creates this presence that no other medium can. The sense of ‘live-ness’ in Acconci’s video is created by his brief moments of directly addressing the audience; when he does this he pulls the audience into the scene and makes them feel as if they were present in real-life.
ReplyDeleteIn Acconci’s Undertone he plays with the line between video art and television in somewhat of a parody. I don’t know that I would have been able to catch on to this and the many ways he does this if I hadn’t read the article by David Antin. Being that we are all so use to television addressing us “the viewer” in specific styles, it is easily overlooked. David Antin talks about television “which the transmitter must assume two apparently different roles in transmission. In one he must appear to address the viewer on the stations behalf as the entertainer; in the other on the sponsor’s behalf as the salesman” (39-40). He also discusses how there is a line drawn in communication between the roles of transmitter and receiver.
In Undertone Acconci make several shifts in his roles. He sits down and starts a performance making no indication of his awareness of the viewer’s presence. He verbalizes his thoughts leading the audience to follow his thoughts on a woman beneath the table. He then repositions himself to face the camera and draws his arm up to direct himself at you even more; he talks directly at the viewer. As Antin references on pg. 44 this is similar to the style a president may use when addressing the people. Acconci is clever in the way he positions and interacts with the viewer. As David Antin points out there are many roles that we see in television and video. So as a viewer it is always your job to question what is being sold to you.