WEEK 1: HOSTED BY JAMIE CREWE

An online conversation between students of the BA Fine Art and MArt courses at Sheffield Hallam University.

Begun at 9.00PM on Monday October 13th.

Hosted by Jamie Crewe, on the subject of the stranger and falling in love, with reference to Richard Linklater's film Before Sunrise.

In attendance: Luke Chapman, Jamie Crewe, Luke Dilnot, Daniel Sean Fogarty, Jonny Fox, Natalie Mortimer, Sarah Smizz

TRANSCRIPT:
http://www.box.net/shared/jqq3ndgkhr

POSTSCRIPTS:

Madeleine Walton

I enjoyed reading the transcript though I was somewhat frustrated as technology had excluded me from the conversation. However, this what I would have liked to say had I managed to get on line.
You talk about the stranger, however what you really mean is the stranger you are sexually attracted to just as the Jesse and Celine are attracted to each other from the start. No-one has addressed the issue of the stranger who you don't fancy, the fat woman on the train. (Luke said so much when he talked about her!) It seems that that stranger is of little interest to you and if that is the case then it isn't ever really about the stranger but really about fancying someone and gratifying your own desires.
This morning I listened to a news item on the news about a survivor in Eastern Congo, Zawadi and her daughter Reponse. The item won the 2008 Bayeux Calvados Award for War Correspondents, in the radio category.Zawadi told her horrific experiences which can be heard if you are interested at http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7657000/7657461.stm . Anyway the people who heard this original item, strangers sent money, presents etc and now Zawadi has secured her home, her daughter is in school and she has been able to set up a shop to create an income, Zawadi said "I thank you for everything you have done for me and for helping me have a future. In the past I would often think about killing myself but now that I know you are there I don't feel that urge anymore.".

Madeleine

Sharon Kivland

Do you know, that was my immediate reaction. I was most interested in the fat woman on the train, the alcoholic; these are those we consider to be other to ourselves, absolute others, outside the sphere of our desire and thus abject, with whom we fail to identify (our narcissism will not allow this). If I welcome, embrace, that other, then am I excluded from the exchange of desire; do I become abject? However, a note of caution: there is self-gratification in encompassing the other – one finds this in Hegel – the ‘belle ame’ (lovely soul), an idea of ‘wild’ moral conscience, casting goodness all about her, following the impulse of the heart against the order of the world (Freud and Lacan comment on this, too, in different ways, but in relation to hysteria).

Bests,

Sharon

Joanne Storey

Hey everyone,
My apologies again for my absence at e-crit and for this late reply to the transcript, me and technology do not get along.

I found this subject (that of the stranger and love) very interesting. I probably fall in love with a stranger at least twice a week without engaging in any conversation with them. I think this is because without speaking to them, you can remain in control. There are no faults, boredom, or uncomftable situations. For a moment, you can almost imagine what your life would be like with that person.
I usually find that to know someone ISN'T to love them. They only seem to disapoint, become human and predictable, and who wants that?
In a way, I feel the same about myself. I like to remain a stranger. Read into this what you will.

I really enjoyed the film. Even though I felt quite sad at the end of it. I'm looking forward to watching Before Sunset.

Just another quick point,
I noticed how the two bonded over the other strangers in the film -
The fighting German couple
The men talking about the play
The palm reader
etc...

As soon as you find one thing in common with someone you have bonded to some extent, so I see it as everyone is a stranger, it just comes down to who's stranger.

Jo
x

Martyn Cashmore

Before Sunset Commentary on the Strangers, Progression

The woman tells her husband to put the paper away and then he says that there's something about her in it: 70.000 women are alcoholics.She replies that he's the real alcoholic and he answers that it's only because of him being married to her.Then they start telling each other that they should move back in with their mothers and keep going on about that and storm out.
The couple storming out is the first barrier that is broken between the main characters, a small giggle insues where eye contact is made (another barrier) and a series of small talk questions are asked (more barriers). Notice at this point there is no mention of names. When they move to the lounge car they sit at a table she takes the dominant roll by placing herself over the table whereas he takes a more reserved, defensive position i.e. making his appearance as big and flat as possible against the chair. This maybe anxiety because of her dominance. This is not where her dominance ends, she maintains eye contact (also moving back behind the table barrier folding her arms) whilst he shakes his head from side to side avoiding contact, but laughing (not baring teeth) to keep her amused. He then makes a stand to strive for dominance by becoming kinetic with his arms explaining that he is not ignorant of other languages, he fails.
After he asks about her family and her intentions for the journey she withdraws allowing him to be dominant for a while, he folds his arms (Huzzah!). Rolls change and he maintains eye contact from his new defensive position, knowing that he has found a topic that she is uneasy talking about with a stranger, in order to maintain dominance he must reciprocate and not show the same anxiety.
She mentions the taboo topic of sex, cunningly disguised during his explaination of his mundain show, just to spruce up his droll monologue. Maybe a balance of rolls occurs where he shifts the subject of the conversation to her, whilst she is attentively listening...
The conversation about death is her trying to hell him that she is vulnerable where as he has this profound understanding of it using the imagary of the spirit of his Grandmother in the spray/mist of the hose (very phalic, oedipian).
They arrive at the station and they depart, but something brings him back. Satisfaction of the ideal fantacy, maybe. He offers her the chance of adventure and excitement. They are no longer two strangers/ voyeurs, this is the second encounter of the lover. It’s 15 minutes into the film and the second encounter before they are actually introduced, Jesse & Celine.
How can love be unselfish? It is a gift that has to be recieved and given in response for it’s own gratification. It’s a shame that there arn’t three of them for one to get jealous.
From the point on the bridge where they meet the two actors and she introduces him to them as her husband on their honeymoon all that was going through my head was; Get On With It, just fuck him and leave. They share the moment , the fantacy is fulfilled (without them finding too much out about each other i.e. their faults), how he manages to get her to believe that there will be no strings attatched is beyond me, must be in his trustworthy, blue eyes. Although, before the moment she changes her mind and denys him (poor boy), a sudden strroke of reality in the fantacy, a spanner in the works, it begins to collapse.

Tim Thorpe

Critically, the film is harmless enough; a pleasant ingulgence that threatens to become self indulgent and as such I found it a little tedious. That said, it's perhaps more a comment on me than the film; perhaps the "romance" has finally left my soul.

I felt somewhat uncomfortable at times in recognising the posturing and mutual preening in this courtship dance. Perhaps also a hint of regret. I am a spectator and therefore excluded from the game. As the story of a transitory relationship based on a mutual sense of attraction, each character is role playing in a comfortable fantasy. The realities of the world surround them, but don't intrude to spoil the reverie. I am left with the feeling that they have learned little or nothing about themselves or each other.

Regards
Tim

Luiza Holub

The film is a celebration of youth, time and moments of connection. It's about living in that moment that you will remember for the rest of your life. It is a midsummer enchantment where only each others company is of importance. The relationship between the two characters is something we all want, but too often see slip away.

'Think of it like this: jump ahead, ten, twenty years, okay, and you're married. Only your marriage doesn't have that same energy that it used to have, y'know. You start to blame your husband. You start to think about all those guys you've met in your life and what might have happened if you'd picked up with one of them, right? Well, I'm one of those guys. That's me y'know, so think of this as time travel, from then, to now, to find out what you're missing out on. See, what this really could be is a gigantic favor to both you and your future husband to find out that you're not missing out on anything. I'm just as big a loser as he is, totally unmotivated, totally boring, and, uh, you made the right choice, and you're really happy. '



The strangers we pass on the street but never speak to or only make eye contact with, or even the strangers that we have the smallest conversation with, is what I think Jesse is in a way describing, just before they get off the train together. During their 12 hours in Vienna, Jesse and Celine become soul mates. I would like to think that we meet soul mates all the time, at different times, in different places and for different reasons.