Remote-Controlled Phoenix by Minches
March 30th, 2008 9:54 AMIn my down time at work I drew up some quick plans...
Asked a friend to be my accomplice and photographer...
Did some research on the possible dangers of smashing my TV screen in with a hammer. Apparenlty the CRT can hold a charge long after it's been unplugged, as can various other components. Awesomeness.
After a great deal of planning and scheduling, the day was upon us...
Big thanks to Patches for his assistance.
You can see the full set of Patches photos from the smashing here.
From Death to Rebirth
Currently, my favorite thing to do with the TV shell, is to frame things and then take pictures like they're in the TV. It is highly entertaining to me. Obviously...
I keep thinking of doing something permanent with the TV shell, but the more I play with it, the more I really like the transitory nature of a roaming shell, interacting with whatever is currently on display in my home.
The Current Resurrection: Fire Place Mantle Art
34 vote(s)
- C.M. Gonzalez
- Someone
- GeneShark Tom
- Edifice Complex
- Haberley Mead
- Adam
- Ink Tea
- GYØ Daryl
- Flea + SINGING?
- Kyle Westwood
- Darkaardvark
- Loki
- Flash Harry
- inquisitive dragonfly
- auntie matter
- Lank
- Bex.
- Lincøln
- Magpie is back to task
- Myrna the Minx
- Flitworth
- Julian Muffinbot
- Dela Dejavoo
- JTony Loves Brains
- JJason Was Not Really Mothra:
- GYØ Ben
- Kyle Hamilton
- teh Lolbrarian
- ♫ babe
- Blue
- Praxis
- Ben يامين
- Rachel's Reflection
- Jefftown™
Favorite of:
Terms
(none yet)31 comment(s)
This is awesome. I think it is much more interesting actually. I think your'e wrong.
But chyeah. I love the photo with the flowers.
I like it.
I'm sorry that scienceguru can't see the art behind what you've done here. Books and books have been written on "the frame", and you're creating a really interesting frame and questioning it in the same moment-
Is what is "on tv" reality? Does framing non-televised reality in a television frame change its significance, or its perceived significance?
Every time you take a photograph, you are framing reality. That's what a photograph is: the lens is your frame. Sticking another frame in there is just framing your frame.
It's a lot of frames, but the same point. And it's already made by the act of taking a picture.
Another form for a television is to use it as something other than a frame for images.
Thank you for the lesson on photography.
Truly insightful. Really you should change your name to ArtGuru.
Thank you so much for gracing us with your teachings.
Is there no subject that you are not a conduit for wisdom and guidance?
Can't help you much with Swahili :>
Don't know a word of it.
Um, I wasn't really talking about photography. I was talking about sociology, and I'm going to be pretty ineloquent when I try to be more specific- as I'm not a sociologist, but I'll give it a go.
"The frame" describes the way we describe, define, speak about, or think of anything, and how we differentiate what belongs in that medium or in the definition of that word, and what does not. So, what belongs in the frame "television"? What actually gets there, and what doesn't? I'm submitting that in Minch Niddle's completion, she has changed not only what gets into the frame of "television" but who gets to make the decision of what gets in there. Again, I'm not a sociologist- I've read enough to get myself in trouble, probably.
Also, thanks for the sarcasm. Charming, truly.
Or maybe you were just making fun of me? But I think the television changes the frame, and her use changes television's frame.
sigh.
Add sarcasm to that list… seems you are naive to that as well.
I don't think you know all that much about science or art either though.
Definitely not enough to be a Guru, teachers tend to lean towards being constructive with their comments. You seem to have fallen to the awful fate of many ignorant Americans. Believing you already know everything and as a result not being able to learn anything.
Perhaps you should consider changing your name to bored girl obsessed over Loki.
hrm... Thanks for all the insightful theories behind my praxis... glad my television is at least inspiring thought, which is more than it ever did for me in its previous form :)
Ha, I think that I now have an SF0 crush on you after seeing you wield a hammer to crush your boob-tube.
I love this task completion if I had a television I would use it to frame the amazing view from my house.
"With all this smashing of electronics, SF0 is gonna need its own private landfill soon :>"
True enough. The same thought has been troubling me with some of the praxes generated in this otherwise exciting and creative "collaborative production" game.
But this criticism doesn't apply to you, Minch. I rather like your resurrection.
Cheers.
Thanks I.K. Benzot... I keep meaning to tell you, one of my friends lives in St Louis... I have sent him links to La Moustache Fausse and Trespassing because they are so amazing.
Was your TV in working order before you smashed it?
Sorry, but leaving aside all the destruction as of late, I don't see where another form has happened here. A television is (or was) two things: a piece of furniture and a frame for transmitted images.
Now:
Its a smaller piece of furniture and a frame for images that aren't being transmitted.
To make a sociological point about who decides what's on television, you'd have to send different images via a receiver. Your images aren't on television.
BTW, if you actually wanted to do that, anybody can go make a television show at AccessSF. www.accesssf.org.
The sarcasm was for praxis BTW :>
And yeah, this has been a boring day. Sick and exhausted from flying and a conference yesterday so not much good for anything but typing ....
It's metaphor. Instead of framing electronically broadcast images, her "TV" is now framing live images. It has become a tiny theater, in a way. A tiny theater masquerading as a television.
That is, to me, a more interesting form.
A very, very tiny theater that already exists via the gadget called the camera. I guess you could smash a camera and make a movie of yourself holding up the parts and broadcast it on public access TV as well. Then the camera would be the subject of a TV documentary.
What kind of camera do you have that resembles a proscenium arch? :>
The camera is simply a way for her to document the new frame and transmit it to us. The point of the praxis is not photography, and when the camera is set down, what's left of the television continues to frame things in real life. We just can't all be invited over to Minch's house to see the lovely flowers, now brought to us on TV.
I love the Sutro tower through the shell picture.
"Was your TV in working order before you smashed it?"
Yes. In fact, my TV was in perfect working order. There was no reason to smash it other than this task, and I wanted to.
JTony is right. At this moment my camera is sleeping in her cozy little bed (much like I am about to) and the TV shell is still framing flowers.
Lank, I like the analogy to theater. It sort of feels like my own portable theater now. I like that.
I don't get it either. still looks like a TV to me.
public access tv rocks!
i like yor drawing of the green glowing tv tho!
well, it IS still a TV. More interesting form doesn't have to mean completely different form than before, it just means more interesting.... and interesting is one of those things that is in the eye of the beholder - like beauty, or art.
I am looking forward to seeing other praxis of this to see what different interesting forms people come up with.
"posted by I. K. Benzot on March 30th, 2008 5:28 PM
With all this smashing of electronics, SF0 is gonna need its own private landfill soon :>
True enough. The same thought has been troubling me with some of the praxes generated in this otherwise exciting and creative "collaborative production" game."
Hmm... this sounds like an excellent basis for This!
I want to smash things with you. Let's go back to the Davies symphony hall and drop calculators from the balcony.
Good God, that'll cost you a fair chunk - by my reckoning, $4000 at the minimum... (and that's a fairly cheap camera, if my maths is correct)
I love the recontextualization that this t.v. frame engenders.
It creates questions like "Who has the power to decide what images are shown to us on television?
How does television inform our viewing of the 'real' world?
How 'real' is what we see on t.v.?
How do performativity and the gaze transform the power and meaning of a subject/object?"
and on and on...
To all critics, I have this to say:
If you must be uselessly negative, at least don't be sophomoric, inane, and boring as well.
Thanks.
You have duly smashed a television, but there is no resurrection in a more interesting form - you're just taking pictures with one of the parts.
With all this smashing of electronics, SF0 is gonna need its own private landfill soon :>