Comments on: OK GO AGAIN

By: Kennedy

Kennedy — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:54:45 +0000

Ok Go was named mtvUs house band. They have videos, live performances, and interviews at this link:
http://www.mtvu.com/music/house_band/

By: Grant

Grant — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 19:04:33 +0000

Burt, brilliant, thanks, Grant

By: burt

burt — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:15:51 +0000

The bodies move when the feet don’t, and don’t move when the bodies do. This causes a perceptual dislocation, a visual play on words, that opens up our awareness to the feelings and rhytms of walking, and so on.

It’s an art thing, really. As for why they did it in such a structured way, maybe that was the choreographer’s syntax limitation? If one were paid to spin these things, rather one would link this insistance of multiplicity of views with Muybridge photos, as it is a looking anew at human movement.

By: Discourse.net

Discourse.net — Sat, 02 Sep 2006 22:19:37 +0000

OK Go a Go-Go

There may be more to this OK Go phenom than I grasped (see Notes from the Cultural Treadmill). The video has spawned a bunch of spin-offs. In addition to the Lego version noted by Ann Bartow in the comments, there’s a pretty funny chipmunk style versio…

By: Tom Asacker

Tom Asacker — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 07:45:53 +0000

Hey Jens,

Long time. And great analysis. But I contend that it’s even simpler (you artists can make big meaning out of white paint on a white canvas).

Treadmills are well-known to us, and our experience with them visceral: if we close our eyes for a moment, get distracted, etc. we fall off! So we are intrigued both by the mastery and creativity, but, like watching a car race, we’re secretly waiting for someone to crash. :-0

Grant, you certainly make us think. Thanks.

By: LK

LK — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:39:36 +0000

“For instance, the Beatles were the last band to wear a uniform, and no band in recent times has worn anything coordinated except as a rather good joke.”

are you calling devo, the hives, (arguably the white stripes) and other bands in uni’s (calling steve portigal, help me out with other names here) a joke?

; *

(i think this marks the first time a silly emoticon face has appeared on this blog)

By: jens

jens — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:53:35 +0000

oh grant …
you never where one for simple explanations. where you?
it also reminds me of something. but more of a chaplinesque or keatonish scene.
well, maybe these are our “modern times” and the in/out rythmn of our mailbox is the 21st century equivalent of the steam-machine or the assembly line…

to me the key to the sensation lies somewhere slightly different.

we watch the video AND we immediately ask ourselves: “what is wrong? – why can’t i trust my senses?” The question stimulates us – and hooks the intellectuals (as we can clearly see). – the irritation attracts us (as always).

where does the irritation – in this case come from?
a combination of three factors
A) we know how treadmills work
B) we know how the mechanical functions (legs and arms) of the human body work
c) we know what level of animation we can expect from a trashy home video – …not much

what we realize: here are three quite simple elements combined – but the outcome is not simple at all…

personally i also had a closer look at the mechanics of this video. – i assumed that they changed the running direction of the treadmills during the performance.
with quite some amazement i found out that the trick was even more simple.

great choreography.
absolute masterpiece.

quite similar to what we in german call “Konkrete Kunst”.

we seem to know what we see. – every detail is familiar.
yet the result not.
how does that get together? – we do not know (HERE LIES THE TENSION – HERE LIES WHAT DRAGS US IN)
and we want to find out.