For your new blog post, please write on the following:
1) Define McCloud's concept of "closure" in your own words. Watch a short clip of any film (about 10 minutes). Note any examples of closure you see. Comment on how these instances function in the film. How do they add to the impact of the movie? [1 paragraph]
2) Read the Berger article. Then come up with one question you have in response to the article and one interesting point that it makes. [1 paragraph]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1) If I understand McCloud correctly, closure is the concept of you seeing something in a film or a ply, or even when you are reading and you read about something that may happen to one of the characters(an example would be an evil plot against another character or any negative experience that my happen). My defintion is the instance where the observer(the reader) is able to know more than a character at a given point in time and also be able to see something that another character may not be able to. I just watched Quantum of Solace and there was a lot of examples of closure in that film. For example, while Daniel Craig(James Bond) was fighting a bad guy, the viewer was able to see his partner engaged in another fight and in danger for that matter, and James Bond didn't know this, but the viewer did.
ReplyDelete2) Professor Liu, I have to go to another class right now but I will continue my blog later=).
McCloud's concept of closure is basically being able to know exactly what the puzzle is without having all the pieces. You can see a before and after clip, picture, or comic and know what went on in between without having the middle piece. Our mind can assume what is going on based on our past experiences and learnings. The unique thing about it is that our imagination lets us fill in the missing piece in our own way but at the same time we all get the main point. With closure we do not have to actually see what is occurring but can perceive it in our own way based on what we know. In The Dark Knight the joker puts a knife in a man's mouth and the man is killed. We do not see the blade actually cutting open his mouth but we know this because our minds can figure it out. In a romantic scene if a man and woman are kissing and then they go into the bedroom and the scene finishes we understand what happens then without having to actually see it.
ReplyDelete2) One question I have is, Did painters use a lot of hidden messages in their artwork so that we as viewers would see the paintings and uncover them?...or did they think we would never figure them out?
An interesting point that the article makes is that we only see what we look at and that to look is an act of choice. This is interesting because one would think that seeing and looking are the same thing but this article states that seeing has a much deeper meaning. We have to look at things to see them and understand them.
1)Going off of what McCloud was saying about closure, to me it means that given a situation we already know what the outcome is based on previous experiences. Or when we are watching a movie, a show or a play and we observe all the parts or scenes we can predict what is going to happen next just by assuming and putting all the pieces together. I just watched an ABC Family series “Make it or Break it” and one of the gymnasts hurt herself and will never be able to do gymnastics again. She was also the best of the best. I knew she would eventually get hurt because her back was hurting and she had to take drugs to get rid of the pain.
ReplyDelete2)My question is tied with the interesting point that I think he makes. I just don’t know why he says on page 5 that the invention of the camera changed the views of how man saw painting. The interesting point I think he brings up is when a painting is replicated that it loses its uniqueness. I agree with this, but than I don’t. Agree because if there is only one than, that’s the classic, the original, no one else has it. But the facts of there being more than one means that a lot of people like it and want it hanging on their wall at home because it’s so unique.
Q1: Closure is an assumption made about what we see and don't see which is based on previous experiences. In White Mane, in the first 10 min, this kid is getting out of his boat one scene and the next he's standing at the edge of a corral. So, i assume he has been to the corral before - this assumption which is made "between" the scenes is closure. Coming up with my own conclusions can add a lot to the movie. Either bad or good assumptions will have a big impact on what I percieve.
ReplyDeleteQ2: One question I have in response to Berger's article is, how many artists, ones whose art sits in museums, create pieces of work with just a feeling, without thinking about context and composition. On the other hand, I found the relationship Berger creates between past and present interesting. I don't think I completely understand what he's talking about, but it seems to make sense as I went on. For instance, the idea that the past is a set of conclusions that we draw from to act, makes things a lot more vulnerable to unjust conduct. And I believe Berger makes a perfect example of such a situation, with the two volume study on Frans Hal and the perspective the author had on the two paintings contained in the article.
1. McCloud takes a great deal of time to discuss the idea/definition of ‘closure.’ I took from McCloud that closure is the gap between two panels of comics, and we as readers, are supposed to infer what has happened from picture to picture. McCloud mentions the word faith, and I believe it is true that you must have faith when regarding closure; faith in yourself that you are intelligent enough to imagine what has happened in between the pictures, but also to have enough faith in yourself to believe that what you have imagined is the same idea that the author has inferred. Therefore we must do a lot of guess work, and assuming when coming to closure. An example of closure would be in Friends when Chandler and Monica go to the bedroom and the door shuts, we can all assume what has, or is going to happen. By using closure the author is able to captivate the audience, and their interaction.
ReplyDelete2. Because of Berger’s observation that Hal’s paintings were biased, and did not represent the images properly, it makes me wonder if that happens today; If we see a picture in our history book of King Henry V, how do we know that’s really what he looked like? Like Hal, the artist could have disliked the King, and portrayed him with un-natural features giving the readers a false image. We have no actual representation to prove that the painting is true, or false. I suppose we just have to go with that all artists are good people, and would not portray people unfairly..but I highly doubt that’s true.
1. Closure is the mind viewing something as a whole when only given fragments. In the movie Fried Green Tomatoes a young boy is killed by a train. One scene you see him with his foot stuck in the tracks and the next all the people from the small town are rushing to the train tracks. You never see him killed but your mind understand that he is. Closure adds interest to a movie becuase it makes the viewer an active part of the plot.
ReplyDelete2. Why is does the dance around the idea of mystification? Can't he just come out and say that art back then had a element of the unknown and thus engages the viewer as they put in the missing pieces. I really like the idea he states about information having no authority within itself; that information is either used or ignored. I find this true. Information has no value but it tends to have value when we react to it.
1) From what i'm understanding of McCloud's concept of "closure" is a lot like that of my fellow classmates. Basically, McCloud's concept of "closure" allows the viewer a more heightened experience, by giving us pieces of situations that show us just enough to set-up and conclude a scene, leaving each viewer to their own imagination/experiences to fill in the blanks. Thus allowing ea viewer a heightened sense of "closure"/assisted-conclusion too the scene. An example: Jurassic Park I: Scene where we watch the Park Ranger lower a harnessed cow down into a dense greenhouse filled cage, down we see only cable now being lowered...cable stops...brief silent pause...then, all of a sudden, massive violent screeching, tugging screaming/growling.. .now, silence, cable rising all the way back up ...seriously damaged/ruined, what's left of the harness is torn to shreds. Now, even though we could not actually see what was going on in the cage, we were able to conclude/have "closure" that this was obviously "Feeding Time". For me, these types of scenes always heighten my experience allowing my mind to fill in blanks and imagine what's actually happened during the abyss of unseen clips, then drawn to closure.
ReplyDelete2) My question from Berger article: Are we to trust that these drawings/paintings were of factual events/happenings-or-are we allowed to realize that each painter shows their own interpretation of the events in which they wanted the viewer to see when it is viewed? The painters storytelling masterpiece. With this personal viewpoint of my own, I believe that regardless of actual facts depicted in any works that we view, we also get the personal view points of the painter through their life's experiences. This is why i agree with the points made about reproduction of any art form. Basically, Yes, obviously things are lost/destroyed in any reproduction: Given the angle;lighting;texture;material;format;etc. Ea reproduction takes on/off its own reproducers view of what they want us to see. Thus, losing its original meaning in the process. Allowing the meaning/"Beauty" in the eye of the beholder.
Q#1))McCloud's definition of closure to me, meant the space from comic to comic that gives your imagination the quick film it is supposed to produce.
ReplyDeleteI watched Pan's Labryinth for ten minutes. The examples of closure I saw was in the beginning of the movie. There was a blank screen and I heard someone panting loudly. This added to the suspense because i did not know what was going on until i saw the little girl lying on the floor with a bloody nose. The heavy breathing gives our imagination an idea of what was going on. Then the actual scene is the closure, showing us what it actually is. Another example of closure is the movie changing from scene to scene. It takes you to another part in the movie, while still keepiing what you've already seen in the back of your head. This allows us to start putting the pieces together, trying to figure out whats gonna happen next.
1) Closure is a way of completing a picture or an event out of fragment. Rambo, though almost comically bloody, has a lot of closure. Several times during the battle scene, soldiers are shooting, but the camera doesn't show who it was aimed at. The next scene someone yells and falls over. Closure allows the viewer to decide that the gun was aimed at that person. This adds to the action feeling of the scene. Even though they could have shown more details of each event, the severe cutting of scenes adds to the energy a movie of this sort requires.
ReplyDelete2) Do art history classes take Berger's point into consideration? If they do, how do they try to remove previous associations with an artwork to see it a different way? Wouldn't some previous assumptions about art remain? In other words, is it possible to observe art in such a vacuum?
One interesting point that the article makes is the effect of reproduction. It makes sense when one thinks about a macaroni picture. It has a significant meaning when hung up on the fridge, but if one sees it as an image representing a fast food restaurant, would one see it as "oh, my son made that for me for mother's day". The love and caring that was associated with that macaroni picture no longer exists when it is reproduced, at least not in such a deep and personal way.
1) Closure is the space in between panels in which we use our own thoughts and ideas from past experiences to fill in the blank spot. If we were unable to mentally form these thoughts, comics would only be drawings that may not make very much sense, which is why closure in very important in the comic world.
ReplyDeleteWhile watching a Star Wars movie, there was a scene where someone was about to be shot, however right before the killing the camera turned away and looked off into the distance while gunshots were heard. I didn't see how the person was killed but I was able to use my own closure to picture it in my head.
2) What can be done to preserve the value of art images? Or is it too late to save their value at all? I feel it was a very interesting point when it was said that the meaning of an image can be changed when someone sees something beside it or immediately after it. After looking at the pictures on page 9, I realized that this was true. Seeing the Greek sculpture with the Levi's on instilled that image in my brain as an advertisement, not a work of art, therefore the meaning was changed.
1. Closure is a basically the gap in between two comic boxes and used in movies for dramatic effects. Closure gaps force the readers to "fill in the blank" with their imaginations based on the previous and future slides. There is closure in The Matrix when Agent Smith is shown ready to leap then landing safely across a dangerously long gap between two buildings. This type of closure in the movie added to the excitement by foreshadowing what daring stunts the characters are possible of doing in the later stages of the movie.
ReplyDelete2. Berger’s comment on how cameras destroy the uniqueness of artworks is a very interesting topic. I tend to believe it is the viewer of the artwork that makes that individual piece special or not. An individual could even believe that the replica could look better in another environment like their home wall instead of some museum wall. The meaning of different art works could have multiple meanings based on the person that judges the art, because everyone comes from a different background so everyone has different opinions.
McCloud's concept of closure is to be able to see between the lines. Closure is the imagination we use to fill in the missing blanks in a comic's pictures. We do not necessarily have to see the whole seen to understand the greater picture. In a show called Dark Blue, two of the characters start to kiss. Then the scene turns away to another story line. Without having to actually see what the two characters are doing, the viewer knows. It kind of adds a dramatic effect when television and movies use closure. It invloves the audience.
ReplyDeleteWas Hals painting of the Regents and the Regentesses taken well at the time? Did viewers understand the message that Hals was trying to send with his painting? An interesting point that I think the article makes is how reproductions have ruined the meaning of the original artwork. Using the artwork to sell a product takes away what the artist was trying to show the world.
1. Closure to me seems to be the self-satisfaction one receives after using their imagination or prior knowledge to grasp the world as a whole. Like there is more than what one can see.You can see closure at the end of almost every horror movie. For instance when the villain is finally "killed" the camera zooms into him and out of nowhere he twitches. We have to use our imagination in order to gain closure. Has he come back to life or is he long gone?
ReplyDelete2. I think Berger makes a very interesting point when he claims that history is controlled by a small minority of people who are trying to justify what happened in the time period. Why does Berger think that because now art can be seen by everyone at all times, it has lost the true meaning intended by the artist?
1. Closure is basically the subtle way different mediums of entertainment use to create a more suspenseful way of narrating that create a stronger bond with the audience rather than the in-your-face action that usually leave a bland aftertaste. When used in film, closure enables the viewer to picture in their own minds what would have happened next--using their imagination for the details--yet still understanding the basic premise where the cause and effect are clearly known.
ReplyDelete2. To me, Berger's opinion that just because art is now more widely availible to [common] people and not just people of wealth takes away "mystique" or value of the artwork struck me as an arrogant old man stuck with bygone ideas. It wasn't any question or interesting point that came to my mind but just shock. It would seem logically possible that the more people that can view art, the more chance of it to be analyzed deeper--or is that such a far-fetched idea to Berger? In any case, the world of art is immense and changes all too frequently, rendering Bergers points bordering on the senile side.
1) Closure is the act of observing a part or parts with our five senses and believing the whole exists through the use of our experiences. In comics, closure is what leads you to assume that a character with sunglasses on has eyes, even though you can't see them. But closure doesn't solely relate to tangible objects such as eyes. It also supplies a flow of change, time, and motion in comics, thereby animating them through the use of your imagination. In the Lion King, the first scene consists of varying shots of different animals. At one point elephants are the center of attention, and at another the focus is on a flock of birds. This instance of aspect-aspect closure shows no real progression of time, but it does present images to promote the setting of the story. Next, the movie makes a scene-scene transition that introduces Scar and his plot to overthrow Mufasa, thereby progressing the story line.
ReplyDelete2) Why does Berger view the demystification of art as a bad thing? Art is meant to be enjoyed, not hidden away, seen only by a select few. He argues that photographs of art have made the art itself valueless and powerless, and he has good some good examples of ways that this is true, but he completely disregards how photographs have helped art and its appreciation. Photography has made art accessible to those who would otherwise never have been able to see and enjoy it.
I found it interesting how the words around a painting can change its meaning so drastically, as in the case of Van Goh's Wheatfield with Crows.
....Continued
ReplyDeleteQ#2)How do you think we can restore the way we view a portrait or painting? Will there ever be artist like the ones we had back then? and if we do, will we be able to interpret them the same?
When Berger mentions that,"the invention of the camera changed the way in which men saw paintings painted long before the camera was invented" i kind of disagree. Yes the invention of the camera lessened the importance of artist. But it also opened the door to a new art form, photography. This invention allowed for people other than the wealthy to view the art and express their feelings towards it. It is now accessible to anyone, rich or poor.
1.)I would define McClouds concept of closure as the ability to imagine a scene between the scenes. Or the ability to make up for time, distance and events that you cannot see by making it up in your mind or predicting what will happen in the future or what has happened in the past based on previous knowledge. For example in the beginning of the movie disturbia, a boy and his dad are in the car and then i hear a loud "bang", and the next thing they show is the car totalled and the boy screaming. i did not see actually see the car crash in the movie but i can use the concept of closure to know that they did crash, it created excitement and shock to me as the viewer.
ReplyDelete2.) i think bergers idea of decreasing the uniqueness through distribution/reproductions is very true and interesting. Looking at a photograph and painting are different to me. there is a different sense about a painting, it seems more like a work of art. and when i see a photograph of a painting, the painting does not have the same uniqueness anymore. i wanted to know more about bergers meaning of mystification, i didnt really get that
Q1
ReplyDelete“This phenomenon of observing the parts but perceiving the whole has a name. It’s called closure” (pg63)
To my understanding, McCloud describes closure as being able to see merely part of something, yet understanding its full meaning and/or concept. For instance, many different films or television shows show a man, woman, and doctor in a hospital room, with the woman’s legs spread open, the man holding her hand, and the doctor between the woman’s legs. We see the struggle, pushing, and sweat pouring down the woman’s face as she pushes. The next scene shown is the woman holding her child. Clearly, the infant came out of the woman’s vagina, however, it is far too graphic to show via media. Another example would be the television show “Two and a Half Men,” where Charlie enters a bedroom with what is always extremely attractive woman. Next, Charlie’s arm is around the attractive woman as both seem to be relieved in bed. Gee, I wonder what happened…. These closures impact the show by allowing the viewer to make up their own story, even though I SHOULD be obvious in regards to what truly happened.
Q2
Berger says that when one sees their beloved, the only way that they can truly accommodate their completeness is by making love. That made me think…what the hell kind of man is this? I am not saying this to sound like a gentleman or anything, but had it ever occurred to him that woman have emotions, not just bodies? Or is it just me…? An interesting point Burger makes is his view on reproduction on artwork, and how nothing like the original is worth much, or shouldn’t be at least. This ultimately ruins the originality of the actual hard work initially put forth.
1.) In terms of what McCloud had said, closure is the readers way of using his or her imagination to fill in the gaps with what we can not fully see. We take a part and imagine a whole, and comics often challenge the reader to do this. McCloud uses the example of the reader not seeing his whole body, but we imagine that the body is there. In he movie Oceans 11, the very beginning starts off with the main character Danny Ocean in front of a parole board. Within the span of 2 minutes he goes from a prison to a casino in New Jersey, leading us to fill in the gap of what he did. We can only imagine what happened in between that time period.
ReplyDelete2.) One question i have from Berger's article is: why judge the art that an artist makes so critically? cant we just sit and appreciate the fruits of the artists labor? i feel like trying to put so much thought into the art appreciation process takes away from the beauty and natural feeling that comes with art. We should just always accept the fact that whether an artist is painting a historical figure or any other model for that matter, the personality and emotions of the artist will always be put on display within the work.
Q1: Closure is mentally conditioning one's self to accept certain phenomenon and ideas based on their own knowledge and experience of it in order to have a fuller and richer understanding of the vast world around them. In film or in comics, closure is the process of allowing our imagination to work in order to "fill in the blanks" on what has happened or is happening from one particular event or scene to the next (film) or from one picture to the next (comics). An example of closure in a film is seeing a boy and a girl going out on a date for first time; the next scene is the boy brings the girl home, both are ecstatic about their time together, and both ponder if they should kiss. We assume that both enjoyed each other's company, and we relate to the movie based on our past experiences on first dates. This makes the viewers remember their own experiences and/or emotions and allows them to relate to the ideas presented in the film more.
ReplyDeleteQ2: One interesting point that Mr. Berger makes is that when a camera reproduces a painting, it destroys the uniqueness of its image. As a result its meaning changes. I don't quite agree. Yes, a camera may destroy the uniqueness of an image by having another copy, but it does not necessarily alter the meaning of the image. It even gives the other people the opportunity to appreciate the beauty of the painting because they were able to see it by other means.
One question that I have for Mr. Berger is: Why do you say that paintings are often reproduced with words around them? How have the "words changed" between the two paintings of Van Gogh in the article?
Side question: Mr. Berger says that the sight of the beloved has a completeness which only the act of making love can accommodate. Is this not lust?
2) The main question that I came up with in response to reading the John Berger article concerns when he described the idea of mystification and when he brought up the idea of a minority group. The question I have is what does he mean when he says that a privileged minority group is striving to invent a history which can retrospectively justify the role of the ruling classes. I simply did not know what he meant by this, if it was actually a group of people he was talking about or if it was some kind of metaphor. The one interesting point that it made that I found appealing above others is when he said that when a piece of artwork is projected through a television, its original meaning and the setting that it was supposed to be seen im is completely lost and misinterpretated for what it is supposed to be. I agree with him when he says that when a piece of artwork is seen in many homes, the setting of each individual home takes over and the painting does not mean and convey the message that it was designed to.
ReplyDelete1) McCloud defines closure as the act of a reader filling in the details when an incomplete picture is presented. McCloud thinks it is an important aspect in comics, in which the reader's perception of the flow of events in comics depends on how he or she interprets what happens between frames. However, he also notes that closure occurs in more than just comics; the reader provides closure when visualizing words from a book.
ReplyDeleteIn the movie "Along Came Polly," the viewer instigates closure in two notable instances. When Reuben and his new wife Lisa are at the beach for their honeymoon, they see a hotshot scuba instructor approach them - naked, or at least implied to be naked. The audience is only shown the top portion of this man's body, but in the next scene (with a subject-to-subject transition in between), Lisa covers her eyes in shock. Though nothing explicit is shown, the viewer for a split-second might picture phallic imagery, adding to the comical effect of the scene.
The second instance occurs a few minutes later, when Reuben returns to the boat of the scuba instructor to meet his wife, who supposedly was with the man for scuba lessons. Instead, he and the audience hear ecstatic groans and see flippers clashing against a pole, implying that the instructor and Lisa were having sex. The viewer is not shown the fact as it occurs, keeping in touch with its lighthearted, comical, almost ridiculous atmosphere, yet providing enough evidence to allow the viewer to understand what is happening.
2) An interesting point that Berger makes is how differently art was perceived hundreds of years ago as compared to now. He posits that art in the present is more free and universal, as well as more open to interpretation. He supports his argument by showing the reader how interpretation of meaning in art relies on context, as with the Van Gogh and Hals paintings. I found it interesting how due to the camera, art can be reproduced in multiple settings and not be restricted to palaces and churches, giving rise to varying, non-proprietary interpretations.
My question is "what is this 'mystification' and why is it important?" I have my guesses, but I don't think I truly understood what he meant by mystification and why it is important.
Q1: According to Mccloud’s definition of closure, it is smoothly filling in the gaps between scene to scene in motion pictures, page to page, or between comic boxes with your imagination. In your mind you tend to predict or guess, what you think is going to happen next. The short clip I watched was from the Soloist. Since the beginning, I predicted that when the journalist befriended the homeless musician Julliard, he would help him find medical attention, and possibly cure Julliard. To my dismay, this was not the case, the ending was not anything I expected. Julliard was in the same condition as when the journalist found him, but he is now offering his friendship and accepts him for who he is and is no longer pushing him to improve his condition.
ReplyDeleteQ2: Why is Berger view of (demystifying) explaining of the art, and making it available to everyone a bad thing? I feel that in some way because images are replicated and copied around the world, the original piece is no longer special. It is great to preserve the original artwork, but with duplicates people of every class can enjoy the art. I don’t know if I agree or disagree with Berger, because I feel that it should be preserved, but on the other hand common people should be able to enjoy the art work too, and with pieces ranging tens of millions of dollars, common people wouldn’t ever be able to afford that.