Demo, input very much welcome!

this may take me a while, just to let you know, but i will listen abd comment. and i can't download just the text because i don't have MS Word.

Pearl,
You're on a Mac, right?
You can open Word docs in TextEdit. Drag the word file onto the TextEdit application icon. Just tried it and the text came through fine.
:)

hmmm. i don't see how i can drag a word file anywhere. i can't open it to begin with. I get a pop-up that says "the microsoft office 2004 test drive has expired." it wants me to buy the application which i'm not about to do.

I mean literally drag the file. :)
TextEdit is in your applications folder. Find Arjen's word doc and drag it onto the TextEdit icon and the file will open.
Or drop me a PM with your e-mail and I'll send it to you in rtf format.
:)

i got it!! i can't believe it. thank you so much!

For those who aren't as computer-savy as Pearl, I'm trying to get the text under the video.

this was quite the trip!
the beginning was intruiging and mysterious. i especially liked the "byebye" at around 3:25 and how it kept up. then i liked the mood change with the acoustic guitar. i liked all the different images and the general color of the entire video. i don't know where some of those images came from so it kept me watching. none of this piece is the "expected" thing--no cliches, etc. the only thing is i don't know if i quite "got" the idea that it's supposed to be from different perspectives, which i think is an important part of it. and then, i can't decide about something and it may be that you've already said that this is an idea for a piece. because now that i know that i see it as an idea and not as a thing onto itself, if you know what i mean. i see it as a sketch for something else more than as a finished piece. if you hadn't already said that i might have seen it as something finished.

The perspective bit is probably already harder to get if you don't speak Dutch, pretty hard for me to guess how this comes over to non-Duchies. In any case, for those who care, here's some random thoughts about this. There are a number of main characters, and each show a different aspect of the story, and each character represents a certain aspect of such tragic events.

1) The Dutch, nameless, neighbour. In his part of the text there is no pity, grief or compassion, just arrogant sarcasm. He doesn't know the names of the other people even though they live right next door. But while he doesn't care about other people's name the story doesn't care about his: he's the only main character of whose name nor picture is given. He represents the cold and numb, those who point fingers instead of reaching out with their full hand.

2) Phil, the main character and neighbour of the above character is 'the criminal/murderer' here. He's introduces all the names and is ultimately the only one who cares about the victim. But as sorrowfull and regretfull he might be his main emotion is self-pity.

3) Suzanne. In a way she is the most important character as the symbolic victim. Nothing however is said as it's not about her but about the situation around her. No pictures are shown of her, all we read is her name and all we hear is her crying.

4) Lucille, the sister of Suzanne, she represents the open and honest sadness. During the crying photo's of her response are shown. Meanwhile the lyrics are sung by the sarcastic and cold nameless main-character while the text shows the thoughts of Phil.

5) Amanda, the mother/husband of above three. Goes from being the mother of a four-part family to being a single mother with one daughter. She's always in the background. Her name is mentioned but once and the only picture of her after her marriage is vague and blurry. She represents the silent and unseen sorrow.

However, in the end all characters are unhappy and sad people, and while the ending is open there's little hope of a great future for any of them. While the text in the clip (updated the link, for those who were too soon. ;)) is taken directly from the textfile it shows much less character then the full writing. They are more cold statements, newsflashes from a mind or such, then anything else.

now i see the text. visually i like the way it runs across the screen but it comes across like it's a subtitle. i tend to think that artwork shouldn't need text. i'm old fashioned like that! there is, however, a lot of precedent for that sort of thing in comtemporary art.

Man, thats really deep:!: Probably some of the best stuff you have done to date!

i tend to think that artwork shouldn't need text.

I don't really know, I guess it depends on what kind of artwork you consider this to be. Obviously literature has always has a fondness for text, but text is also pretty important in music. In visual arts words were less important in, say, the middleages but that's because they could fall back on very rigid and sharply definined rules of symbolism. Before that paintings and sculptures served more as an alternative to language: most large nations had many, many different languages in the old days and literature wouldn't work in such an environment.

Now what I really want is do a project with one set of music but two sets of video and text. In one room two opposite walls would both show one of these clips with people sitting in the middle of the room watching either one of them. They would all hear the same music and story but will see radically different sides of the main characters. In that sense the text would be the opposite of texts in catalogues: it strengthens ambiguity and makes it less easy if not impossible to 'get it'. Ah well, we'll see. I'm still trying to cristallize the idea a bit, it's all very rough in my head still.

Ken: thanks. :)

seeif there's a gallery where you live that will let you do that. it's an interesting project. you'll find someplace.

I need to weigh in here. for the most part I like the piece. the idea is evolving and could be very successful as an installation.
right now it is in between. and that is fine, because the piece is growing and probably will become more clear to you just what it's essence is.
as a piece of music without the supporting visuals or installation it is a success. it captures a somber tone and allows for the listener to create the visuals. you have many universals that tap into our collective psyche.
as a full blown installation the piece can become a visceral experience.

I think you are capable of taking this bit of music and turning it into something physical. video, film, theatre, dance.
it is possible. there is a very rich history. in modern art you could begin with silent films and the Dada movement and move to Merce Cunningham, Robert Wilson, and the current batch of video performance artists (too numerous to name off hand).

Pearl: Will definitely try that later, but it's certainly not easy and I'll need to come up with something seriously impressive before I'll try that. Would be wicked though to be part of a gallery! :twisted:

Dogbite: I'm not sure what I want to do now. The big thing is that when an idea isn't fully planned-out things sneak in that are hard to sneak out. Ideally I'd start a new project from scratch and work on everything at the same time, that should keep the balance, consistency and impact at a much better level. The whole installation scene is looking more and more interesting to me every day btw, which is strange because I couldn't give a hoot about it a year ago. Anyway, thanks for thinking along, much appreciated. 8)