Sleep
(1963, Andy Warhol)
'Sleep' is essentially one continuous, unbroken six hour-long filmed study of John Giorno (a poet, and supposed lover of Warhol's)... sleeping. The concept is identical to that of Sam Taylor-Wood's "video portrait" of David Beckham sleeping that we discussed in Week V's seminar. There's no doubt that Wood's piece (despite being a commission by the National Portrait Gallery) was directly inspired by Warhol's, especially given 'Sleep''s broad recognition on the video art scene.
Andy Warhol is famous (and notorious) for his lengthy, low-concept film works. You may be familiar with 'Eat' (45 minutes in length) and 'Empire,' (upwards of eight hours in length) both filmed in 1964; both similar in style to 'Sleep,' in the sense that the focus is centralised and unchanging throughout.
In order to contextualise my choice of artist and piece, I shall study sleep in line with the "video art" criteria established in the seminar:
'Sleep' is...
- Time-based (durational, non-narrative) - six, uninterrupted hours of continuous footage.
- Confessional - Whilst John Giornio is not necessarily "confessing" anything, the act of sleeping is itself considered private. The spectator is invited to witness something that the performer would normally keep to himself, and in that sense the piece could be considered a confession of sorts.
- Interactive - In regard to the above, the private nature of the act (sleeping) depicted on screen implies that the spectator is intruding on the privacy of the filmed individual. By focusing on the image, the spectator becomes something of a voyeur (a notion addressed in Rush's chapter). Voyeurism is essentially based on the connection between the spectator, and the object of the spectator's interest. The spectator naturally empathises with what they see and mentally translates it into a form that they can utilise (in this context, utilising said product in order to develop an opinion of what they are witnessing). Whilst the viewer does not physically interact with Giorno, they unwillingly interact with him on the emotional level through natural empathy.
- Physical - This is fairly straightforward. The film depends entirely upon the physical presence of Giorno. After all, it is study of a man in a state of sleep. Without the man (or the "star"), there is no piece; in the same sense that the characters in a film, or the narrator in a novel is required to convey the story to the consumer.
- Conceptual - 'Sleep' is considered to be Warhol's "anti-film." (another idea that Rush raises in his book) The ideas conveyed through the piece are inherently rebellious as Warhol defies the conventional norms of early to mid twentieth-century cinema, and its focus on narrative expression.
- Deconstructive (Objective/ documentary Vs Subjective/ personal expression) - Whilst we view Giorno from an objective position, 'Sleep' cannot be considered a documentary as it expresses nothing about the subject; its purpose is not to inform. However, as I mentioned before, the spectator, as a voyeur, naturally relates to the subject's position and thus experiences his slumber from within through their empathy. Added to this, Giorno is not consciously expressing, but at the same time he shares his experience with the spectator, and that in itself can be considered a form of expression. As I'm sure you can gather, the line is blurred.
Andy Warhol's films are considered by many to be pretentious, hollow, and devoid of any artistic merit. Personally I wouldn't pay to watch any of his work, but I still admire its spontaneous nature. I like 'Sleep' for the same reason that I liked the video for Bob Dylan's 'Subterranean Homesick Blues' that Dean posted a few weeks back. It seems completely unplanned (or in the context of the discussion, "non-matrixed"): I can picture Warhol suddenly being hit with a flash of inspiration, popping up his camera, and just letting it roll. As a result it feels raw and immediate, and despite the fact that I view it through the restricted frame of a viewing window, it creates the illusion that it is entirely non-mediated.
3 comments:
I agree with the idea that this piece can be seen as voyeursitic, in the sence that the spectator is essentially watching someone in their most vulnerable state.
Personally, i enjoyed the David Beckham version slightly more. This is not only because i find him nice to look at, but also because i felt as though i was being let into a secret by watching such an iconic figure so intimately and close up. Taylor-Wood's creation could be interpreted as playing upon many womens fantasies of waking up with David Beckham, whereas i dont think that Warhol's example has the same intent!!
This piece is incredibly engaging due to its simplicity, which is also its overall concept. There is a definite interest in watching something so natural and raw, reinforced as the format was later mimicked. That the piece is durational is apt; it allows the viewer the opportunity to become absorbed by the situation, in the same way that sleep is a body numbing activity. That sleep is numbing though does not take away the physical element, (the presence of the sleeper is key), or the interactive element of watching someone in this vulnerable state.
Personally, I enjoy this version better than Taylor-Wood's film of david Beckham, simply because David Beckham is such an iconic figure and I kept expecting the film to turn out to be a perfume ad. The Giorno version invokes the same sense of expectancy, but this time it's much vaguer, simply a desire to see if anything will happen. This, for me, is the more voyeuristic, confessional experience because there's no reason for us to want to watch Giorno, no reason for us to think he is important, and yet the film remains compelling.
Post a Comment