Change Your Image
aburk903
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Konec stalinismu v Cechách (1991)
Agitprop Indeed
More human than historical or political- this addresses us as so many Svankmajer pieces do. The human (sculptor) is God (the divine is human to clay as we are human to a certain historic animalism). The God (a prosthetic god- appendage of the machine) sculpts all from clay in the same image. It is an industrial creationism. Rapid consumption follows- sculpting, hanging, recycling...(might this massive rolling pin not call to mind Eisenstein's Odessa Steps?). But the cycle ends- the graven image is now painted, becomes neutralized as a work of art rather than an honorific bust, and God washes the guilt from hands that now begin again the meandering creation.
Historia Naturae, Suita (1967)
A Tragedy of Consumptive Domination
Here is a story of domination and consumption. We begin seeing the shellfish, ultimately consumed as food. As the vignettes progress, we see aesthetic consumptive domination, voyeuristic consumptive domination, the consumptive domination of scientific examination, the consumptive domination of pet ownership, the consumptive domination of manipulated breeding, the consumptive domination of generating a historical narrative of the other species, and finally the human itself objectified (made object of scientific scrutiny, medicalized). We see in this final image that humanity has- after its domination of 'nature'- consumed itself. Consumerism ends as the consumer devours itself. There is a ninth vignette- we consume this image. It continues with us-
Et Cetera (1966)
What Has Svankmajer Done?
To the tune of Carnival of Venice, we see the cyclic behavior of humanity- always repetition, always more rapid; an increase of efficiency without progress. One undergoes a process of four steps, flying greater distances with each- only to ultimately return to the point of origin and abandon one's wings. One whips the animal and masters it, forces it to contort into one's own image and thus becomes the animal who is now controlled by that which was formerly mastered. This is the dialectic of humanity and nature (or, perhaps better, Self and Other). Finally, the building of one's home- this does not entirely cycle as the other two, for the individual first inverts the starting place by drawing a line between self and the text which is the foundation (the grounds) for construction. The house is drawn frantically- indifferent exteriority and claustrophobic interiority cannot be overcome.
I would suggest that, although the hat would not be mine if it did not have three corners, Svankmajer and the viewer also enter into a fourth cyclic process of stagnation here. Why else am I writing?