{"id":125,"date":"2014-09-10T14:21:32","date_gmt":"2014-09-10T14:21:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/?page_id=125"},"modified":"2014-09-15T08:25:45","modified_gmt":"2014-09-15T08:25:45","slug":"thomas-van-den-berg","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/reflections\/intransition-1-3\/thomas-van-den-berg\/","title":{"rendered":"THOMAS VAN DEN BERG"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2><strong>On (UN)RELIABLE (UN)RELIABLITY<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p><strong>By Thomas van den Berg<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Curated at <a href=\"http:\/\/mediacommons.futureofthebook.org\/intransition\/2014\/09\/14\/audiovisual-research-essay-alternative-text-based-scholarship\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>[in]Transition<\/strong>, 1.3, 2014<\/a> by <a href=\"http:\/\/www.rug.nl\/staff\/m.kiss\/\" target=\"_blank\">Mikl\u00f3s Kiss<\/a> (<span class=\"st\">Rijksuniversiteit Groningen<\/span>\/University of Groningen)<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" src=\"\/\/player.vimeo.com\/video\/73310641?title=0&amp;byline=0&amp;portrait=0&amp;color=6b1307\" width=\"640\" height=\"352\" frameborder=\"0\" allowfullscreen=\"allowfullscreen\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>This text is not necessary in order to understand the video<a href=\"http:\/\/vimeo.com\/73310641\" target=\"_blank\"> <em>(un)reliable (un)reliability \u2013 or, Perceptual Subversions of the Continuity Editing System<\/em><\/a>, nor is it necessary as a companion piece. However, this text does explain exactly why my video should need\u00a0no\u00a0written supplement. The sentences you are reading right now are an afterthought, to distance myself from the shortcomings of the audiovisual work presented. Nevertheless, I feel the video\u00a0should remain in the\u00a0form in which I originally made it, as it illustrates one of the first attempts at a theoretically laden, <em>standalone<\/em> piece of audiovisual\u00a0film studies\u00a0work, made precisely\u00a0with the ambition of attaining academic standards normally understood in relation\u00a0to written scholarship. When one works with technologically more expansive media than a word-processor, however, specific technical\u00a0constraints and\u00a0practical pitfalls also\u00a0arise. These imposed both positive and negative limits on the kind of work that could be carried out\u00a0from a theoretical point of view, sometimes stalling progress, sometimes opening up possibilities for exploration and presentation.<\/p>\n<p>The video was not made with publication in mind. It was an experiment for one of my Masters courses\u00a0taught by Dr. Mikl\u00f3s Kiss, at the University of Groningen. I had carried out\u00a0up to about three quarters\u00a0of the work I would normally have done had I been aiming to write the research up solely as a paper, and then I started shaping\u00a0it into video. My\u00a0production circumstances were spartan: I had limited time, worked on a six year-old MacBook that could barely manage iMovie \u201809, and recorded all audio and music in <a href=\"http:\/\/audacity.sourceforge.net\/\" target=\"_blank\">Audacity freeware<\/a> with a simple dynamic microphone and a borrowed Focusrite interface. Some voice-over segments are audibly worse than others, due to an unreliably improvised pop-filter. My computer proved time and time again that when things were finally in place in the iMovie project, they were not to be meddled with afterwards (this is why the mispronunciation of \u201cdisparate, spatiotemporal shots\u201d remains while the correction \u201cspatiotemporally disparate shots\u201d shows up on screen).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, my aim was clear. I wanted to (attempt to) produce a video that would suffice as an audiovisual container for\u00a0a research paper. With this goal in mind I sought ways of\u00a0ensuring the same qualities of lucidity and traceability of information as one would aim for, ideally,\u00a0in a written\u00a0text. In my video these efforts\u00a0can be seen\u00a0in the references presented at the bottom of the screen (similar to footnotes) as well as in the rhetorical set-up of the video. Like a written paper (although possibly a little more loosely), the\u00a0video presents\u00a0a thesis, a contextualized and reasoned case study, a theoretical framework, and an analysis and conclusion.\u00a0In between the\u00a0thesis and case-study\u00a0sections in the video, though,\u00a0I strategically\u00a0placed a self-reflexive passage in which I considered\u00a0the possibilities of videographic essay\u00a0forms, in the context of film studies, in order to establish a useful\u00a0frame of reference for the audience.<\/p>\n<p>At the time (late 2012 to early 2013), my knowledge of the audiovisual essay was still nascent, yet sufficent\u00a0for me to build on. Now I feel that several theoretical notions presented (mostly in the self-reflective part of my video) would\u00a0benefit from some nuancing or rephrasing, but I no longer have any way of achieving this with this\u00a0video. So the referencing\u00a0early on of what I considered a fruitful format (audiovisual formalism) is arguably underdeveloped, yet I think it holds up. In my written thesis work I have gone on to dig more deeply\u00a0into various modes of audiovisual film studies. I can hopefully share the results of that research\u00a0with anyone interested in the near future.<\/p>\n<p>With all of this said, please consider my video for what it is: an <em>essai<\/em>, an attempt.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: right;\"><em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: right;\"><em>Edited by Catherine Grant<\/em><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h2><strong>Biographical note<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p><strong>Thomas van den Berg<\/strong>\u00a0(b. 1987) recently graduated from the University of Groningen (NL), Department of Arts, Culture and Media Studies, specializing in film studies. His masters\u00a0thesis explored the evolution of and future possibilities for videographic film studies. Together with his supervisor, dr. Mikl\u00f3s Kiss, the results of this thesis will be reworked into a pedagogical booklet. Prior to his specialization Van den Berg studied English Language &amp; Culture, and obtained his Bachelor\u2019s degree in Communication Studies. He is currently working as a freelance writer, videographer, and composer\/musician. With his band Kinetophone he has written and performed experimental soundtracks to several films from the silent era, and is now working on soundtracks for contemporary Dutch filmmakers.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><strong>Further video credits and information<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Essay Video for the master&#8217;s course Arts &amp; Cultural Change \/<br \/>\nDr. M. Kiss \/ University of Groningen \/ 2013 \/<br \/>\nby Thomas van den Berg \/ s1645269 \/<\/p>\n<p>This video is an attempt to work an academic case study with solid theoretical footing into a container where audiovisual rhetoric is employed. Therefore, implications entail both furthering the essay video-format, as well as reflections on artifice in the technique surrounding conventional(ized) narrative film. By means of a case study on Michael Walker&#8217;s\u00a0<em>Chasing Sleep<\/em> (2000) I propose to reconsider the definition of &#8216;unreliable narrative&#8217;, and additionally seek to problematize our reliance on an artificial system of storytelling which is wrongly considered analogous to our ecological perceptual system.<br \/>\n\u2013 Introduction [00&#8217;00&#8221;]<br \/>\n\u2013 Reflection on &#8216;essay&#8217; and audiovisualcy, differentiating the forms and prospects [01&#8217;10&#8221;]<br \/>\n\u2013 Demarcation of case study: Michael Walker&#8217;s <em>Chasing Sleep<\/em> (2000) [03&#8217;54&#8221;]<br \/>\n\u2013 Theoretical framework concerning ecological perception vs continuity editing, and ecological perception of continuity editing [06&#8217;40&#8221;]<br \/>\n\u2013 Analysis of salient phenomena found in\u00a0<em>Chasing Sleep<\/em> [17&#8217;20&#8221;]<br \/>\n\u2013 Discussion and conclusion [31&#8217;11&#8221;]<br \/>\n\u2013 References &amp; <em>post scripta<\/em> [35&#8217;55&#8221;]<br \/>\n(total runtime: 36&#8217;49&#8221;)<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><strong>NB:<\/strong> this video contains copyrighted material which Thomas van den Berg does\u00a0not own. All rights reserved.<\/p>\n<p>* rectification: the mention of &#8216;dusk&#8217; should be &#8216;dawn&#8217;<br \/>\n*** CONTAINS SPOILERS for Michael Walker&#8217;s &#8216;Chasing Sleep&#8217; (2000) ***<\/p>\n<p>Fair use is codified at Section 107 of the Copyright Act<br \/>\nUnder the fair use doctrine, it is not an infringement to use the copyrighted works of another in some circumstances, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, or educational use.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>On (UN)RELIABLE (UN)RELIABLITY By Thomas van den Berg Curated at [in]Transition, 1.3, 2014 by Mikl\u00f3s Kiss (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen\/University of Groningen) <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/reflections\/intransition-1-3\/thomas-van-den-berg\/\">Continue Reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\">THOMAS VAN DEN BERG<\/span><span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":120,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"page-fullwidth.php","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-125","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/P4VcpT-21","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/125","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=125"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/125\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":746,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/125\/revisions\/746"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/120"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/audiovisualessay\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}