 | ||
| Finding Balance! http://uvac.uvic.ca/gallery/cornett/files/2012/08/U011.3.1.jpg |
As far as our proposal is concerned, we stuck to it almost to a tee, except for a few smaller details which I will explore.
Our proposal detailed working with Chris to create a film around 10 minutes in length, filmed in his studio, that would be accessible to both students and the public. We also stated that it would be made with the intention of being a useful resource for Chris to be able to share on his website, or however he so chose. We wanted to introduce Chris Paul as a Coast Salish artist and highlight the piece "Finding Balance" in the Cornett Building. While focusing on this particular piece, we also wanted to provide the viewers with a broader view of Chris' style and artworks, while displaying part of the process (although there are many) that he uses to create art. We wanted to avoid creating a film that was predominantly straight on interview footage by effectively using B-roll such as shots of his hands while he worked, Chris entering his studio, and footage of his various pieces of art. We also intended for this film to be a useful educational feature for future classes and the community as a whole.
In our proposal we stated that "the film will focus on Chris Paul's innovative, boundary-pushing style". I think that as the film progressed this 'focus' changed. I think that we including interview clips where he discussed his innovation and style, and this innovation is evident in the artwork that we showed, but in the end, I do not think that this was our primary focus for the film. I think that if we had strictly stuck with this theme it would have been limiting for what we wanted to achieve when talking about how Chris' evolving art style and the piece in Cornett which was the focus of the class project.
We also discussed using images throughout the film in both in our proposal and treatment, but in the end we chose not to go down this avenue. It ended up being slightly difficult to coordinate with Chris during the project and we did not want to create more work for him when we were unsure what kind of photos would have been necessary. Looking back, I feel like it may have been nice to have photos of Chris' earlier artworks when he was a youth, or Chris with his mentors or family members as these people were discussed at length in our film, but I think that although these may have been nice in the film, they may not have necessarily been exactly what we wanted in the end either.
We did not end up using Indigenous music. Although this seemed like a good idea at the onset, I think we came to the conclusion that it may have been redundant or unnecessary to try and use Indigenous music in the film. Much of what we focused on in the film was innovation and uniqueness, and by simply putting in Indigenous sounds as background music solely because we were working with an Indigenous artist seems slightly Eurocentric -- Chris may listen to this style of music on occasion, but it is not the sole soundtrack to his life.
In our proposal we talked about the importance of this film as an educational tool for a variety of reasons. One of our goals for this project was to highlight the connections between the Indigenous territory that UVic is built on, and the Indigenous artists and their works from the Artist in Residence program, with education for Indigenous communities, UVic students, and the general public on these artists and their art as part of an ongoing project for the future. In a way, this project reflects aspects of ethnographic film making that we explored in Anthropology 309 last semester. The films we produced in this class bear resemblance to Tim Asch's work. Tim Asch created films for the purpose of education of cultural anthropology in a classroom setting. He was very blatant about the methods he used and he tried to show how film making can alter or benefit the study of culture. This is similar in some aspects to what we have done with these films in order to add dimension to the Artist in Residence program.
In addition to this, we created a fairly collaborative film with our artist. We worked with Chris in a way that ensured that the intentions of our program and project and the entire process were clear to him, instead of treating our artist as a subject to be observed from a distance and learn from through the anthropologists' interpretations. This collaborative and reflexive way of film making seems to mimic aspects of John Rouch's and the Macdougalls' work. We collaborated and shared our ideas with Chris and encouraged him to input or discuss anything he wanted, and to refrain from doing anything he was not comfortable with. Chris will receive a copy of the film so that if he is unhappy with, or disagrees with the way that we have portrayed him or his works in this film, we can rework it to his liking, or scrap it entirely. At all points during the process Chris had the option to back out if he no longer desired to be part of the project. I think this point is important to note because without this key detail, it does not seem like the project could be truly collaborative. As stated above, one of the main goals of this classes projects were to create accessible and shared knowledge. These movies will be available online, at the university and through QR codes at the specific art pieces. Hopefully these films will prove to be beneficial to our collaborative artists!
As far as our treatment goes, I think we ended up changing quite a bit, and I think I learned several valuable things as a result of the alterations.
I think the biggest thing with our treatment is that we did not hand in a set of interview questions when we handed in our treatment. We did this because we had attempted to, but had not been able to get a hold of Chris before our treatment was originally due, so we wrote our treatment based on the research we had done on him, but without having a feel for what Chris was like, or how he conducts himself, etc. Our intention was to create a film that would be useful for Chris as a resource, so we were apprehensive to create a bunch of questions that Chris did not find relevant or useful for him or his art world. In the end, when we attempted to share our interview questions with Chris before the interview he replied saying that he did not want to see them beforehand, so perhaps we were too lenient or concerned about being inclusive rather than taking charge from the get-go.
After we met with him the first time we began to get a feel for what we were in for and were able to return again to get some B-roll and double check to see if there was anything essential that he wanted in the film. Once we heard from him we were able to put together interview questions promptly, but we waited longer than we would have if we had just not worried about the collaborative aspect until after we created the first draft.
Based on Chris' responses to our interview questions -- interview questions are posted below--, we changed the order of our interview clips in our film from our original treatment order. After the interview was recorded it became evident that this order would not create a fluid film, so we rearranged and added to the original documents ideas. Looking at the original treatment and the information laid out by Chris, it is clear that this order would not have worked.
In regards to the setting for the interview itself and how it was to look, we ended up with something quite different from what we had originally envisioned. We had not seen Chris' studio before we wrote the treatment and had not figured out yet what work he does in the studio and what he does elsewhere. Chris is currently in the process or renovating his studio space and therefore we had several space and lighting limitations that caused difficulty for the film angle, such as the glare from the setting sun through the glass doors causing problems for the camera angle, and the interview space background because of the limited space we were in and the restraints of what could be moved around, etc. In the future, I feel we could benefit from trying to set up the camera studio space before the interview is supposed to commence. We got quite stressed out trying to do everything within the time limit the class was given for the interview and we ended up having a less than perfect camera angle as a result.
In the end I think we followed the same general theme of our film treatment, but our final product looked fairly different than the initial idea. I think this was for the best, as we reevaluated after we started to work with Chris and figured out what would work for the project and what needed to be changed or added in. Our final film covered a few more questions that those that were posed in the treatment. I think our film turned out to be more creative and unique than it would have been if we stuck to our treatment. After rereading the treatment, it seems fairly stale and insincere, but our film seems genuine and special in a way.
Interview Questions:
- Introduction of himself
- What inspired you to do a piece in the Cornett building/how did you become associated with UVic?
- What do these pieces featured at UVic mean to you?
- Where do you get your inspiration?
- What types of materials do you work with?
- Is there anyone in your life who has inspired you?
- Can you discuss any challenges that you may have experienced over the years through your art? (ie. cedar allergies, not knowing how much people will pay, etc)
- You’ve often been considered an ‘innovative’ artist. What are some of the reasons you think this might be? Do you consider this innovative nature to be reflected in your Cornett pieces?
- You were a part of the Artist in Residency project. Can you explain that collaborative project to us? Do you often work collaboratively with others?
- How has your art evolved over time, from abstract and watercolour to your more current projects?
