![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The last Vividcon post, I swear
Aug. 22nd, 2004 03:00 pmThis is the info about the Literalism vs. Metaphor panel and vidshow that I moderated and VJed. Because, d00d, clearly I don't understand the concept since I have a vid that has all these lines about water and no clips of actual water.
( The Literal vs. Metaphor vid show play list )
And here is the handout I made for the panel part. While I'm being facetious about the Bridge part for the extreme literalist's take, the point of it is that with a lot of vidders who don't really understand metaphor and always choose the heavily literal route, their vids can be perceived as boring or uninteresting or worse because the clips aren't often there in service to a greater story. In this you'll see that all of the clips are random and don't do anything except illustrate that exact lyric; in the metaphorical possibilities part, I've chosen a story about Giles and his job with Buffy, so all of the possibilities are open to keeping the story about them. If you have to illustrate a lyric about brushing tears away with a literal action, you won't be able to find that with Giles, really, but you could shove a clip with Angel in there -- only then, you have violated the focus of your story if Giles and Buffy were your subject.
The big thing I talked about was communication -- what are we trying to communicate in our vid? Does the clip we choose communicate the story? or does it just help illustrate the lyric, or move us on to something else more important? I think it's nearly impossible to teach someone to be artistic or aesthetic, though we can teach timing and mechanics; this is something that we are either born with, or we learn through time and experience and understanding. Seeing and thinking in metaphor is something that an artistic person takes for granted. Some people, though, may never be able to move past literalism, and they will always choose the obvious clip-for-lyric path; this may be okay for other metaphor-impaired folks, but you have to be prepared for mockage from people who do have that more metaphoric mindset.
( The Literal vs. Metaphor handout )
( The Literal vs. Metaphor vid show play list )
And here is the handout I made for the panel part. While I'm being facetious about the Bridge part for the extreme literalist's take, the point of it is that with a lot of vidders who don't really understand metaphor and always choose the heavily literal route, their vids can be perceived as boring or uninteresting or worse because the clips aren't often there in service to a greater story. In this you'll see that all of the clips are random and don't do anything except illustrate that exact lyric; in the metaphorical possibilities part, I've chosen a story about Giles and his job with Buffy, so all of the possibilities are open to keeping the story about them. If you have to illustrate a lyric about brushing tears away with a literal action, you won't be able to find that with Giles, really, but you could shove a clip with Angel in there -- only then, you have violated the focus of your story if Giles and Buffy were your subject.
The big thing I talked about was communication -- what are we trying to communicate in our vid? Does the clip we choose communicate the story? or does it just help illustrate the lyric, or move us on to something else more important? I think it's nearly impossible to teach someone to be artistic or aesthetic, though we can teach timing and mechanics; this is something that we are either born with, or we learn through time and experience and understanding. Seeing and thinking in metaphor is something that an artistic person takes for granted. Some people, though, may never be able to move past literalism, and they will always choose the obvious clip-for-lyric path; this may be okay for other metaphor-impaired folks, but you have to be prepared for mockage from people who do have that more metaphoric mindset.
( The Literal vs. Metaphor handout )
