Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I think Daniel’s presentation was great. Some of photos that were shown were nice, particularly the one’s that were somewhat painting with streaks of light. I agree that it’s hard to classify Daniel’s musical work as being within a specific genre because of the uniqueness of the music due to the scope of the voices he aims to include. As a music maker myself I was intrigued at how Daniel was able to weave stories into his songs with words and art, not just through the music alone. This is reminiscent of plays, or even movies, where the spoken word is combined with visual art and music to tell a story. So Daniel after all is not doing something entirely new, it’s just that he’s making the art about topics and people not usually focused on: in this case, those who suffer from vision loss or blindness.
I like that you highlighted the point about making art for one’s self rather to please others, Cory. I found this to be very important advice from Ursula’s presentation, since art should be made to express one’s self. Conforming to societal norms or expectations can prevent artistic growth and progress. Many of Ursula’s works were not particularly appealing to me, however I respect the dedicated efforts of Ursula and her team as well as her unique artistic vision. I think her ideas about art are good, and they apply to many artistic forms outside of just sculpture. It is also clear that Ursula has spent many hours practicing her craft, and this is evident in her well finished, if not always clear in meaning or form, cedar sculptures. Of course, this is seen in any practice, but Ursula’s pieces are a testament to the saying “practice makes, if not perfect, very good”.
I agree with everyone that Christy’s narration is key to the success of the movie’s story telling. It’s interesting that Christy is using a camcorder to record events, as if looking at the events separate from the time and place, yet all while remaining present. This could be seen as somewhat of a parallel to the many sorts of looming shadows over the characters in the movie. Such shadows include the recent death of Frankie but also the pressing need at the beginning of the movie for the Sullivan family to find a means to successfully survive. Similarly, Christy’s perception of the events taken place are viewed through the camcorder, and we the audience are looking at what Christy sees. Thus the audience is much more engaged in the story.
I’ve observed one common idea in this thread that the New York City of today is very different than the city of the 1970s. In fact, the city as a whole is a world on its own, and has constantly changed over time. The unique characteristics of each of these “worlds” are specific to time and place. Such characteristics include the drug problems and economic crisis of the 1970s. However, with these problems come the quests to deal with these problems. This is how we get the Sullivan family’s story at scrounging around to survive as well as people like Matteo. In other words, NYC in the 1970s provides the necessary obstacles for the perseverance of immigrants and those of NYC to shine through.
Both of the above responses make about the opening scene with relation to the themes of the movie, that of the lasting effects of a terrible loss and the struggle to continue in the face of the resulting sadness, as well as dealing with a loss of hope. One important theme is the continuing impacts of Frankie’s death on the family. Johnny, for example, instinctively answers “three” to the border patrol officer’s question about how many children he has. It is obvious that Frankie’s death was relatively recent, and the family has still not been able to fully recover from the effects of their son’s absence. As the family initially enters the city, they pass under the river through a tunnel to Manhattan – the city is this glowing beacon of hope that is physically and figuratively separated from the rest of the world. Even the daughters consider their move to Manhattan a sort of vacation at first. Quickly though, the entire family’s optimism is tested. Their apartment building is run down, and their apartment bare bones; this forces them to work hard, work together, and also scrounge for every penny. We see numerous examples of the Sullivan family supporting each other as much as they can in the times following their challenging arrival. Firstly, Sarah settles for a job at an ice cream parlor, giving up her wish to be a teacher for a time so that Johnny can audition. At the same time, Johnny spends a great deal of effort finding an air conditioner, lugging it across the street and up into their apartment, in addition to buy a plug adapter just to get a few moments of cool air. And indeed only a few moments of respite are gained, since the air conditioner quickly fizzles out. This scene in particular stood out to me. It might at first seem futile, the family’s whole effort to save bottles, lift such a heavy unit up so many stairs, just to have the dream end abruptly. However, I would argue that this perseverance is a central theme to the movie, and of the American Dream overall. The quest towards a better life is rife with struggles, and it is only through unified efforts, well exhibited by the Sullivan family that there is a chance at achieving ones lofty aspirations.
I like how you described Corrigan as almost like one person against everyone else in the city. It’s almost a direct contrast to the tightrope walker, who brings all the people of the city together in a way. I agree that the need to feel people’s pain is part of his unique and somewhat strange approach towards helping people. It’s interesting that you described Corrigan’s story as Christlike. I didn’t look at it that way before, but now that you’ve mentioned it, it does seem to make sense.
I think you did a great job of analyzing Corrigan’s character. I like how you described how his religion is something that adds to his conflict. Usually religion is something that brings someone peace, and I think in a way it does so for Corrigan, but not without a struggle. I’m not sure if I would say that his purity and innocence was completely corrupted — we don’t see him breaking his celibacy, and his religiously-infused caring for the prostitutes lasts all the way up to the end, his car crash death. Corrigan always has a part of him that wants to help and care for others, even though it might be concealed.
Hi Adam,
Your points about the experience of movement of the city are really interesting and well stated! I think another example of movement in the movie could be the stolen $5000. It keeps getting exchanged among the characters, and for each person who has access to the money, it represents hope and a better future. These reasons are also some main reasons people immigrated to New York City, so I think it’s interesting how this $5000 might even be considered a metaphor for New York and its opportunity.Hi Chaz,
I like your observations about the prevalence of lying in the world of the characters in “Smoke”. It does seem like many characters lie with non malicious intent, and maybe even good intentions. I’m not sure that Cyrus’ attack on Thomas was out of a resurfacing of a previous unhealthy mindset, though. In fact, Cyrus seems to consider his past mistakes grave errors. Perhaps Cyrus’ attack is just a result of Thomas’ “lies” being revealed, and not through a flaw of Cyrus’ character. I think an important aspect of the lies in the film is that they are often hard to distinguish from reality. The reality and characters of smoke are intertwined with lies, and you put it well saying that these lies “can be tied to the core of oneself”.
