…cry to this.

My Mother, My Son by Mary Frey

And another one, less obvious, but no less gorgeous – Bathroom Landscape:

Every once in a while the question comes back lurking: are there things that are not to be shown? Or rather: not to be worked at? Do you imagine this – a woman standing in the room with a camera, waiting for the right moment so she can take a picture of her son carrying her mother? Hold her up just a bit honey… Just a little more…
And yet, this is one of the most touching pictures I have seen in quite a while.

(via)

Audience by Chris O’Shea. A very interesting technical description can be found here.

It’s my birthday, so today I’m leaving you with some new art that was not meant to be art, made by a scientist in collaboration with ants… (Don’t mind the off-screen commentary and enjoy the visual ride).

(If you’re interested in the ant-not-art part of it, you can see the 6-minute documentary episode here)
(Thanks Pusty!)

Apparently the manager of FC Barelona, the young Josep Guardiola, prepared this film for his players before the finale against Manchester United. And before the game, instead of making the classic motivational speech, he showed them the film. And said nothing afterwards.
If I’m posting this on the New Art blog, it’s because this shows a very powerful turn in the way we see film/media. Although the advent of the “TV era” has been prophetized for a long time, and many declared its beginning many decades ago. However, this event, for me, is a very important sign of a shift of paradigms. And it is not as simple as moving from a deep human experience to a superficial “screen” experience. The presence of the manager, of the person, is still crucial (it would be difficult to imagine – for the moment – that he weren’t there), but his action is not. Hence, translating it into performative terms, we can say it is not about the actor-audience connection, as some sort of a mystic communion. And a possible reason so many thinkers complain is because they thought the aesthetic experience of a live event had some “added value” because of it being inter-subjective. Suddenly, it appears the inter-subjectivity is just one possible aspect. One that can be done away with – while maintaining, and that is my argument, the value of the experience. Yes, now it seems more about the show-spectacle, but this is not to say the “spectacle” is, as such, of lesser value (based on what?). For one, it appears as a surprizingly intimate event. And if the film will presumably seem kitsch to most of us, that is clearly because it was tailored for a specific audience, with specific references, under very special circumstances. Could it be that this type of intimate media spectacle is what’s in the air?