Dieser Artikel wurde für das Programmheft des VIVA 8 Festivals, London Film Makers Co-op (GB) geschrieben. Es ist nur auf Englisch erschienen.
Tanya Ury’s Video Hotel Chelsea – Köln wurde auf dem Viva 8 Festival aufgeführt und ausgezeichnet als:
best confrontational video.
„Vor einigen Jahren habe ich eine Super-8-Kamera gekauft, danach eine Hi‑8. Ich liebe sie – sie sind so unauffällig, man kann sie fast in der Hosentasche verstecken. Aber ich nehme sie nicht überall mit. Ich bin übervorsichtig, dass Kunst nicht eine Vorrangstellung in meinem Leben einnimmt. Also sammele ich Geschichten und Situationen, und später filme ich etwas geplantes aber anders, und stelle Ideen neben einander. 8mm ist so harmlos – Du kannst es überall hinstellen und keiner merkt was Du da tust. Es ist unaufdringlich – Du kannst Dein Leben einfach weiterführen, während Du filmst. Das professionelle Kamera-Team kündigt sich mit seiner überwältigenden Präsenz an. Eine Crew die arbeitet, ist in sich eine Performance.“
Now everyone’s got a Hi8 and it has become a cliché. The mystique of filmmaking should finally have evaporated. Holidays and growing children are filmed by individuals en masse; previously only an élite documented with Super 8. But I imagine that every Hi8 owner also takes the camera into the bedroom. Home movies will have taken on new vistas. Surely everybody makes their own home pornos? So this has to have become a banal act in private, even if in public the subject of sex and its image making still excites the need to create taboos. The theoretical millions worldwide using Hi8 for such a function legitimises my own engagement (in art) with the subject matter in question. A tripod and mains supply also allows for the privacy of working without an extra cameraperson.
Of course I have used other types of cameras: U‑matic and VHS. The advantage of Hi8 is not only its size but the picture is also strong enough to pass for broadcast quality. I can live with the fact that, especially when projected, video images break up; it is the aesthetic of the un-aesthetic. When I want the clearer image of Super 8, I still transfer to video for the edit, because the idea rather than the materiality of film is paramount to me.
As a rule the disadvantage of using 8mm as a medium is that it is not taken seriously and so sponsorship and recognition are hard to come by. The myth of film may have been exploded by a Hi8 consumer public, but in fine art, film and TV circles, the hierarchy is clearly defined: Hi8 is not high art. Whilst galleries perceive the work as too closely identified with film, film distributors and curators consider video to be the poor relation. However, in spite of and in the face of all this discrimination, I have repeatedly come down in favour of 8mm. A raw image does not disallow for the pushing of an idea until it expands beyond the medium’s limitations; in fact the video look, lacking its visual depth, demands to be backed by philosophical insight that penetrates the surface of the image.
I have sometimes been described as a performance artist and I have made live art, but the act was mediated by Hi8 cameras to monitors, which were concurrently viewed by the spectators. I could not conceive of presenting performance in any other way. Whether something filmed really happened or not is a fact which television and film have confronted us with daily: an incident, captured on security camera, a child’s evidence in court, the tourist’s Hi8 coup at the scene of the crime, the denial of holocaust film footage. These sorts of instances have dictated my use of Hi8 within performance. For this type of live action Hi8 is practical; one can manœuvre easily.
Before I was an artist I documented the construction of the house I built with my ex, on Super 8. Years later I was able to use the material effectively as home movie found footage with added spoken texts that contrasted with the visuals. That was the first footage I ever shot and it connected me to childhood memories of the Super 8 films my father had taken, while also looking forward to married life. The act of editing and making an art video ten years later with the material precipitated a deconstruction of that childhood, the marriage, and the house itself.
It has been my experience that in some experimental circles these 8mm works have been well received, but there has also been much criticism of the lack of professional finesse: too much camera handshake etc. It is a question of value systems and in which camp one wishes to reside. 8mm is not mainstream and is also old fashioned; it’s like preferring to use a typewriter or even writing by hand, instead of using a computer. As far as I’m concerned, a handwritten letter is stripped of pretensions; the 8mm medium also reveals flaws but tells you more about the true intentions of the author.
1996 Publiziert im Programmheft für das VIVA 8 Festival, London Film Makers Co-op (GB)