Thursday, August 16, 2007

Notes on Blogging Aesthetics VI


Is this a lasting treasure/Or just a moment's pleasure?
--The Shirelles, "Will You Love Me Tomorrow"

4 comments:

dave said...

What would it mean if this image were actually in motion--i.e. how does blogging operate in terms of stillness and motion within the image?

Cinephile said...

Man, it's too late in the night to answer that! (:

I chose the image because, one, I lovelovelove The Band Wagon, probably (no, no-- let's commit-- it really is)the greatest musical in Hollywood history. And "The GIrl Hunt," from which this image comes, is the most sublime moment in the film. But how do we read it? Is it "campy" (and what does that mean?)? Or is there something funkier, deeper, more elusive/allusive going on there (hence, a nice image for the shirelles quote, which raises the same question in the lyrics--about a love affair, but also about the larger empherality/permanence of pop genius-- the song is, in effect, asking that question about itself). And is there a way we can be as smooth and complex-- both heavy and lighter-than-air-- as Fred Astaire in our writing?

Which is a long, wordy way of saying-- I think there's a kind of "choreography" going on between image and text-- or at least, at its best, I hope that's what goes on with the blog/word/space (one post fitting/juxtaposing with earlier and future ones) relationship. And is a blog post a lasting text, or just a response to a moment? And what do we mean by "just"? (What Jeff at Yellow Dog might call "here and now", or what a student of mine more perjoratively said is the "do much", as in, "this writing is pretty, but it doesn't do much"-- a real quote, by the way, and one I've been thinking about for three months-- I'm not sure if it's the "do" or the "much" that fascinates me about that implied demand).

I'm not sure that makes as much sense as I'd hope (hey, it's 1:30am! (:), but I really appreciate the interesting question.

dave said...

That's an interesting response--thanks! And would you then say that the "movement" here, while perhaps frozen in the image, is in the connection between image and caption--as well as the "movement" of the writing itself that such juxtapositions generate (if not in the evocation of the way that Astaire and Charisse move in our memory of this moment)?

Cinephile said...

As Bill Murray says the to the preist in Ed Wood: Why not? (: