THE ARTS IN NEW YORK CITY Fall 2017 | Baruch College | Macaulay Honors

In my lifetime, I probably visited Grand Central Station a few times, but I never stopped to embrace what’s around me like other fellow New Yorkers. This trip allowed me to stop and analyze what’s around me. A special place I thought was notable was the ‘whispering walls.’ My friends and I had a conversation from opposite sides of the corners. According to the audio tour, the acoustics travel through the ceilings to the other side. Apparently, it’s  a known secret to New Yorkers, but I discovered it that day. Also if you keep a close eye, you realize the amount of details of acorns in the architecture of the terminal, which was a symbol of the Vanderbilt’s family.

Most love scenes shown in cinematography are often located in train stations and airports. Usually the character is running away from a scenario involved with their lover, on a next train or flight. In movies, the clock in the center of the train station on top of the information desk is a prominent symbol of the location. A scene that I recall that was taken in that very station is Men in Black between Will Smith and Tommy Jones. I think adding another layer of information onto this station adds to experience because as my friends and I were strolling the station we were pointing out parts of the stations that we recalled from popular shows or movies we have watched.

-STORY-

Nothing was going right for Elizabeth. She was stressed about everything in her life. The rapid morning traffic and influx of people only overwhelmed her even more. She halted, dropped all her stuff, and cornered herself in the whispering gallery to start crying. She didn’t know where she was heading out in life and felt alone. She just lost her job at her bank, she was a single mother of two infants, piling up on student debt, nothing was going right for her. Little did she know there was someone who was willing to listen on the opposite side of the whispering gallery, who could hear and sympathize with her. He asked her what’s wrong and why she was crying into a wall. She was so confused on who she was speaking to, all she heard was a comforting male voice. She was so upset that she gave in and mentioned that nothing in her life was going right, and that everything was falling apart. They ended up having an hour conversation through the wall without ever turning around to see each other. They talked about their beautiful children and their mutual love for Grand Central Station. It was both of their favorite spot in all of New York. Elizabeth’s daughter, Amy was going to start the first grade just like John’s son, Marty. Both of them mentioned that they come to this part of the station to think and clear their heads. Ironically, the most fast-paced spot in New York helped them rewind and think. She finally stopped crying, and they faced each other for the first time. They were complete strangers, but they ended up understanding each other so much better because of the walls. Something sparked for them, they walked towards the kissing room, and he leaned in to kiss Elizabeth. Ever since then they would try to visit the whispering gallery and kissing room to recall on the first time they met.

THE END.

After watching The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, one of the first things I noticed was the music set to the film. The soundtrack itself was spooky and reminded me of the stereotypical horror movie that I figure that this film probably set a precedent for. While it seems stereotypical, when this film came out it was likely one of the first of it’s kind, which makes me appreciate it even more.

I began to see the fault in reality almost immediately, when a ghost appears in the film and they set off to tell the story of how she became a ghost. I liked that much of the film was almost like a spiral, where they were telling a story that began to tell a story that would then have a flashback and so on until it was over. At the end when Francis is in the insane asylum, it made me question whether we was ever sane to begin with or if perhaps it was all a figment of his imagination.

The scenes itself I felt like were very simplistic, however when I consider what film was like in this time period I know that this was something revolutionary for the film industry. The scenery and acting were very simple and actors were often stationary. They did not have to do much, except stand there, and the intertitles were able to describe what they could or could not convey through actions. However, lighting did play a big part in the film especially because instead of murdering someone on camera due to lack of special effects, they were able to pretend to murder someone through showing the shadows instead. Not much of the film seemed particularly fascinating to me honestly, but I could see a lot of good efforts and advancements that directors have likely studied and replicated  over the years.

If I were to create a murder mystery in New York City, I would definitely use my history of SVU to aid me in that. What I learned in SVU was that the murderer is either the most obvious person, or the least obvious person. Personally, I enjoy when the least obvious person ends up being the killer, and so that’s what my murder mystery will end with, however it will have several twists and turns. I like the idea of telling a story through multiple people, and I would use several people across the five boroughs to tell the story leading up to the murder, the murder itself, and afterwards. I would make sure to use interesting angles, such as from across a train platform, or from the window of a skyscraper looking out, to show the events unfolding without putting them up close and personal. I would have a character that exists as a narrator that interacts with all of the characters, and after picturing him as the good guy, reveal to the audience through backstory that he was the killer after all.

I noticed that The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari uses framing to alter reality a lot through the film. Because the framing is so small and the cameras aren’t able to follow the characters through the setting, the background is often smushed or twisted. When they wanted to put the attention on a specific person, they would frame their face with blackness because they couldn’t zoom in. Perspective also played a huge role in this film. The point of view changes depending on what the film wants to show. The most memorable example of this was when Alan was killed. The perspective was changed several within a few seconds to show all of the angles of the moment. My other favorite example how the produced played with reality is the road up the town. It looked like stairs, but the way they were painted and the way the background was created, it looked like the people were moving farther away on a far road.

Reality is also altered because in a lot of parts you could se the backdrop was painted on. An example of that is in the scenes after the funeral. All of the plants are clearly made out of cardboard and the walls are simply white sheets painted over.A lot of the objects that were painted seemed unnatural and couldn’t have been the real thing. Although a lot of the scenery was fake, the film was decently produced and the plot was interesting enough that it wasn’t noticeable throughout the film. I noticed that the physical reactions and emotions were very much exaggerated at all times. It looked extremely unnatural and sometimes a little silly, but without the exaggeration, it would be extremely hard to understand how the characters are feeling, even with the help of the music. The music set an overall tone to the film, but for individual emotions, you have to pay attention to the facial and physical movements.

In the end, the film did a great job of twisting reality one last time. Throughout the whole film, we were made to believe a certain truth; that the director was the Caligari that killed people through a hypnotized (or a sleepwalking) man. But in the end there was a plot twist in which the whole film was fake and just a made up story by a man in an asylum. Everything that we though to be true was once again altered and made fake.

If I were to create a murder mystery silent film in NYC, I would definitely take advantage of all of the rooftops and sky scrapers. With certain visual affects I think you could make it seem like the rooftops are way higher than they actually are. Being so high up, with fog would create a creepy illusion. This feature would make my film relatable but unique at the same time. I think it would create an interesting perspective. Also, the subway would also be a unique NYC feature to use in my film. In contrast of being really high up in the sky scraper, I would also film under ground. Both are extremes and I want to highlight that in my film.

In “Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography,” Roland Barthes discussed about two concepts of photography, studium and punctum. Studium is when a photograph catches one’s eye, but there’s no deeper connection. The picture could have a colorful background or could be of someone doing a distinctive pose. Barthes state that studium is matter of liking or not liking, ‘not loving.’ Punctum has more substance compared to studium. In the text, it mentions punctum ‘bruises’ you, so it leaves a lasting impression on you. When you see the photograph, you’re taking something away from it when you leave; leaving a mark on you.

When I visited the Photographs of Marcel Sternberger: Portraits of the 20^th Century exhibit at the Miskin Gallery, I found most of the photographs at the exhibit to be studium. For example, when I saw these pictures of the infamous scientist, Albert Einstein, it caught my eye since I recognized him from my science textbooks. Although these photographs got my attention, it didn’t leave a lasting impression on me. I didn’t take anything away from it other than Albert Einstein played a crucial role in the development of the early 1900s. 

This photograph of the ‘Old Man,’ in my opinion was an example of punctum because not only did it capture my eye, but it led me to have an emotional reaction. At first, when I saw this picture I noticed the details of the man. The way he is looking down, instead of looking into the camera. He also has this solemn look on his face as well. I interpreted it as him reflecting on the adversities that people were dealing with during the 20th century such as the World War. The photograph also had a very simplistic and straight-forward title, “Old Man,” which leads spectators to focus solely on the subject of the photograph, the old man. The details of the old man such as his beard and eyes reminded me of my own grandfather. He looks very similar to this man in the photograph. Since I was able to relate this picture back to my own life, it ended up ‘bruising me’ like Barthes stated. It got an emotional reaction out of me, which is what punctum does to viewers. 

You can see studium in this picture because it can catch someone’s eye at first such as the black and white filter on the photograph or the scenery of New York. There is also a presence of punctum because it leaves a lasting impression on me personally. It’s a picture of me looking at the city I grew up in, and wanting to do big things in it as well. It stirs emotion when I see this photograph, which is what punctum is intended to do. No matter if a photograph has punctum or studium, photographs serve some purpose or message to the world or even a single person.

Ariel Margolin

Blog #5

The photograph that single-handedly stood out to me among the rest in terms of encapsulating Barthes concepts’ of “studium and punctum” was of celebrated opera singer Lawrence Winters. The gallery in whole was a wonderful collection of taking figures we know as greater-than-life, melting their figural wings and bringing them to a very mortal state. Although all the photographs show many sides of human existence and perhaps include historical figures more recognizable than the one by which I was stricken; the photograph of Winters’ to me signified something greater than all else: hope.

“Studium” or study, should bring the historical element of a photograph. The historical relevance of the photograph cannot be overstated as by breaking the color barrier, we open up the respective group to be fully charged in its potential. By limiting the arts, we limit the depth of which we creatively can reach, as an entire productive portion of the population is barred from engaging based on a non-artistic reason (in this case race.) The photograph shows a historical marking point, and for this I can comfortably sit here and say it captures the essence of studium.

The true attraction point of the photograph, lies in the smile and hopeful glee of the photographed. Within, Winters’ lightly curled smile and twinkling eyes reveal all; the “punctum” element Barthes describes, what “pricks” or “penetrates” the viewers conscience. In the age of the internet, we are subject to thousands of images a day, yet some of them stick to us like snow to a tree. This photograph is not some dry, recollection taken for the textbooks to commemorate, it shows true change, true progress. From his expression, we see that this change is real, and better days with brighter horizons are upon us. Most photographs have some form of studium, but the greats have the punctum which keeps them dog-eared in the folds of history.

Upon my treks through the city and around my neighborhood, I truly was unable to find something which too had studium and punctum. Something which contains both studium and punctum is amongst the rarest of photographs; only the truly significant things can have both. Only if I were to photograph the constitution in Washington or the MLK ground-zero, would I be able to have them. The truly hard-to-find element is punctum, for it is what is able to pique our human imagination. It like a falling flower petal can fill our hearts with emotion and our minds with thought.

I think a photograph is different from a drawing because its more real and relatable. When I look at a photograph, I try to place myself in that time and place more than I would with a drawing. Whenever I see a picture of a person, I can give this person an alternative life because the photograph doesn’t give any background or descriptive info, its up to the observer to decide how to feel about the object.

I found it interesting when Barthes talks about a a picture being reproduced an infinite amount of times even though the moment it was taken was an instant. When people attempt to take a good picture, they will snap several photographs that all look very similar, but there will always be one that stands out and for some reason is most pleasing. Its interesting to think about that the smallest of details make insane differences when it comes to photography, which makes me wonder what kinds of techniques can be taught about photography if the details aren’t up to us.  That” how I defined punctum. That one little detail that makes a difference. It stands out and it makes you feel something that you wouldn’t otherwise feel. It evokes emotion and helps the viewer relate to the image.

On page 14, Barthes talks about the photographer manipulating the background in order to make the photograph look pretty. I think manipulating the background and giving the viewer a lot to look at is studium. I think studium involves the background and all the details of a photograph. It allows the viewer to have a general feeling about the picture rather than taking them in with a detail. After reading that it was cool to see the exhibit where there was no background and simply the people that were being photographed. It was easy to focus on the subject and influenced my thought process. I was no longer looking at where the subject was sitting or what they were doing, I was only looking at their face and expression. I especially liked the photograph of Albert Einstein and Ilse Sternberger. I think the studium part of this photograph makes you feel overall relaxed. Its clear that the people in the photograph aren’t totally comfortable with each other and they are both posing for the picture. The interesting part about the photograph, is that when I went to find a more clear example online, I came across what I thought to be the exact same picture, until I realized its not.  The two people in the second photograph are clearly happy and are having a good time. Using punctum, I noticed that Einstein is a little reserved and seems shy. His body language shows that he is not completely comfortable even through he is having a pleasant time. Ilse has a genuine smile on her face and it doesn’t seem like she’s faking a smile for the sake of the photograph. She is genuinely happy. Einstein on the other hand seems a little embarrassed. These genuine details emphasize that pictures are a product of a specific moment. Both photographs are very similar and were taken within moments of each other, but I found the second one to be more pleasant and genuine. 

Upon further investigation, I discovered that one of the pictures that I photographed was in fact the smiling picture except… it was cropped

I think the fact that this picture was framed differently is another example of studium. The emotion that the photograph evokes varies depending on the framing.

The photograph I chose was of my hiking trip. At first, all you see is greenery and nothing special. But when I look at this photograph I feel at peace. Climbing the mountain was an accomplishment and seeing the view at the top was worth all of the work. My favorite part is the contrast due to the sundown. We were in the shadows but as we looked out. It was sunny and bright. If you look really close you can see boats zooming by in the water and leaving trails behind.