Just like some of you, I found the Rosler reading to be pretty bizarre and dense. Those 20-odd pages were like navigating the Congo; it was slow, foreign, and ultimately aggressive with its ideals. What I've come to understand is that she has at least some passion for the potential of video art, and I've come to agree with the need of an easily accessible medium since everyone has the potential to make art --- to make a social comment.
Like Obi, I felt that Rosler unnecessarily made the reading complex by adding her critiques in a forced, aggressive manner. This in turn made the reading awkward and dense, like a hedge maze created by someone having a stroke. I felt that if Rosler had made her comments and criticism more of a poetic metaphor or parallel, the reading would've been lighter and I wouldn't feel as if I'm having her perspective and principles shoved down my throat.
The only possible redeeming factor of the reading was the facts --- the concrete content elaborating more on the history of video art, and the art world throughout the period. Still, Rosler's commentary was like having a radical feminist group gain control of Reading Rainbow to attack viewers with their own beliefs.
Reading Raaaainnnboooow...
ReplyDeleteOk I totally agree that if Rosler had written with eloquence it would be much easier to seriously consider her ideas.