Private Lives, Public Spaces

In the exhibition Private Lives, Public Spaces, the viewer is invited into the personal lives of dozens of families, whether through specific events or in everyday life. These videos provide a glimpse into the identities of the subjects, but not necessarily in the way it may have originally been intended. As the viewer changes, so does the perceived identity of those filming and being filmed, especially as the videos become further removed from their more familiar, intended audiences. In her article Social Psychology of Identity, Judith Howard discusses the different ways that identity is formed, but explains that a significant part of one's identity is decided on by the individual. When looking at the home movies in this exhibition, the identities of the subjects are decided on by strangers, and are altered not only by what is seen but also by what is omitted.

In her article, Judith Howard discusses how identity is shaped socially, through communication and meaningful interaction. Though this may be true for the individual, this changes drastically depending on who is involved in this interaction. As I watched the "Ardizzone Family" home movies I could tell that my response was much different than that of someone closer to the family. In the video, a young woman is getting ready for her wedding, and is shown talking to and posing with her mother, father, and other close family members. The video is taken before the ceremony, adding to its intimacy. As a stranger watching it, I could not relate fully to the feelings that the intended audience of close family and friends would have. As an outsider I was not particularly attached to any of the subjects, and felt almost guilty for looking into a moment that I was not supposed to be a part of. In this way, I was not able to see how this woman’s identity was shaped as I did not feel part of the subject’s social interactions.

According to Howard, another way that identity is formed is through "interactionism". She defines "interactionism" as the attachment of "symbolic meaning to objects, behaviors, themselves, and other people" (371) through personal interaction. She mentions that language is especially important in forming identities, as certain groups of people, such as those belonging to a certain ethnic group, or even in a social group like a sorority, create bonds and develop interests through how they talk, who they talk to, and what they talk about. In Private Lives, Public Spaces though, the audience can only watch the videos silently and must piece together what is being said. In this way the viewer misses out on certain aspects of the subjects' identities as they cannot hear what is being communicated.

The interaction between the subjects and the objects in the video also changes depending on who is viewing it and how familiar they are with the people being filmed. In the "Swinnerton Family" home movies, there is a clip of a shed being burned in the woods. The structure is fully engulfed in flames and is filmed from a short distance for a few minutes. The scene seemed violent and eerie to me, and gave the impression that the filmmaker was the one who lit the fire. I came back to the video a few minutes later and was surprised to see that the next clip was of a group of friends playing pool in a basement. The scene was playful and lighthearted, and seemed in stark contrast to the clip of the burning shed. The scenes afterwards were also fairly light and relaxed, and made me think that the feelings I had gotten from the first clip were extremely different from those of the people who had filmed it. Because I did not know the subjects personally and could not fully see how they interacted with their surroundings, I was unable to see the complete context of the scenes or how casual the subjects were about them. 

Another way that Howard says identity is formed is through ethnicity and cultural background. I found this particularly interesting in relation to the Private Lives, Public Spaces exhibit because there seemed to be a lack of ethnic diversity in the home videos. The majority of the movies showed white subjects, most often nuclear families and heterosexual relationships. In one video, "Cruise/Chicago Trip, 1935" a family is filmed on vacation and appear to be on a tropical island. In one scene they pose for the camera with coconuts in their hands, and the video shows footage of the native islanders and the scenery. In the next scene the family is back on a boat laughing with one another. It was interesting to watch this family move so quickly to one culture and back, as the viewer is watching from the vacationer's point of view. In this way the ethnic identities of the native peoples were not able to be formed by them, but rather by the filmmaker and then by the viewer. Howard writes that "at earlier historical moments...identity was to a great extent assigned, rather than selected or adopted" (367). This video was a good example of this, as the native islanders were secondary in the home movie and were distinctly "other" from the family, preventing them from being able to adopt their own identities. 

In almost all of these home movies, there is a gap between what is seen and what is not seen. As the viewer, who cannot hear the videos’ sound and is not familiar with the subjects, it is difficult to understand the lives of the families being filmed, as we only get a small glimpse into their private spaces. That being said, this small glimpse can often be a very honest one, based on the videos’ intended audiences.

My Response to Private Lives, Public Spaces exhibit at MoMA

Trip to MoMA: Private Lives, Public Spaces Response

Last Friday, my Arts, Imagery, and Culture class took a trip to the Museum of Modern Arts. There we saw an art show called Private Lives, Public Spaces. The exhibit showed old home movies that people made from the last century using only film cameras. The presentation was interesting to see because it was nice to see old films that people made back then before the age of social media became mainstream, which impacts our daily lives. Back then, there was no such thing as Social media nor the internet – it was just people making home movies with film cameras that used film only. The overall purpose of the show was to watch these home movies to get a sense of these people's private lives back and determine who they were and what they were doing to construct their identities. What it means to "construct an identity" is by comparing yourself to others and figure out what makes you different than this person or this specific group of individuals.  

The first home movie I came across was a film called Wise Family. While watching the film, I saw six men hanging out while looking at the camera, smiling. I don't know what these men were doing, but from looking at how they dressed, they looked like farmworkers. I saw the information label that the film filmed in 1927, so around that time, two years before the stock market crash in 1929 that sent America into a prolonged recession in the thirties, also known as the great depression, men mostly worked in factories and farms. The subjects in the film appeared to be happy while laughing and smoking cigarettes. How does Wise Family have to do with identity? According to Judith Howard’s article on the Social Psychology of Identities, she talks about Class Identities – identities referring to what class you’re in America: Upper, Middle, and Lower. So, for the home film Wise Family, we can identify that the men in the film are low class (poor). I think why the film is titled Wise Family is because these men are poor but their wise with each other given the set of circumstances they're in back then. They're not happy about being poor, so the best they can do is always look at the bright side of things in life. With their act of "wiseness” towards each other in the film, we can get a sense that these men will be fine, despite them being poor. 

The second film I observed in the art show was called Jarret family. In this home film, I saw what it appears to be the family of Jarret's, although I never found out who Jarret was in the movie or is Jarret used as the last name of someone. The film showed what appeared to be a family get together inside Jarret's house. From Howard's article, we can quickly identify Jarret’s family as either middle or upper-class African American families. The African American part is coming from Ethnic Identities – identifying people that are in the minority. As for the middle- or upper-class part, in the film, African American women were wearing necklaces and dresses that middle class or upper-class women would wear. So that made me think that this family might be wealthy or in between, but I couldn't tell. The film showed clips of activities from the Jarret family between 1958-1967, and around that time, Segregation and the Civil Rights Movement were going on in America. The primary purpose of the Jarret family was to show that African Americans are equally the same as white people in the sense they're capable of having families and doing the same fun activities that white families were doing back then.

The last film I wanted to discuss in the art show is the Martin family. The same as Jarret's family, this film shows the Martin family's only difference is that the family is white. There's a scene in the movie where the mother undresses her infant child, leaving the baby naked. Then the father picks up the baby and plays with him by throwing him up and down while holding the baby's legs. At first, I felt uncomfortable watching this film because I wouldn't say I like to watch babies when they're naked – I don't find that adorable. For identity wise, the Martin family is white, and they're either middle-or upper class judging from the way the parents dressed in the film. The year of the film was 1927, and this family back then had nothing to worry about because we can identify this family is wealthy. 

In conclusion, these movies do help us identify people in a way; by comparing your characteristics that make up your identity to the other personal features that make up their identity as well. These films listed do, in a way, foreshadow social media imagery because, for example, Facebook and Instagram, users like to post pictures and videos of themselves doing fun activities. These old home movies showed case the same thing with people doing activities, whether it's hanging out with friends, being at parties, or playing with your infant child – the movies do foreshadow the world of social media. The only difference is that these films were mostly family-related, and social media users today don't use social media platforms to confide their private lives. The majority use social media for marketing, networking, and, unfortunately, cyberbullying. Nowadays, younger people are always thinking about what's going on in their lives on social media. In contrast, back in the old days, that level of pressure and stress didn't exist, which I can identify us millennials as "hungry social media junkies." It's an addiction that's hard to stop.       

Museum Of Modern Arts Response

On Friday, we went to the Museum Of Modern Arts and viewed films that spanned from the early 20th century. Many films on the floor have spanned from simple home videos of a couple and their kid to unused footage. In addition, we were introduced with an article written by Judith A. Howard called “Social Psychology of Identities”. Within this article, we read about different identities and cognitive concepts that can be classified as social, ethnical, gender, sexual, class, and Age identities. I can interpret that the goal of this article and the purpose for it was that it is meant to demonstrate different constructs of identity that we as human beings have to take time to self reflect and ask ourselves who we are. After self reflecting, we would then understand who we are and can adapt to our environment and recognize other identities as well. In short, the article attempts to make us understand the culture around us and then understanding and adapting to other cultures. From the home videos that were presented during the trip, there were three videos that struck out to me more than the rest of the videos.

Firstly, the first video I saw was the one in the back to the left corner. The video was titled, “Miscellaneous reels” and it was shot in 1977-1978 by Joseph Szkodzinski. At first glance, the video itself is conveniently told  by the title. Because of how the shots were filmed, one can make the assumption that the footage is useless and there is no context to the clips. However, while looking through other films and coming back to this one, the film made me look at it differently. At first, when I saw the film for the first time, I noticed there were shots of the city life with cars going down the street and people walking in the streets as well. When I came back to it later on, I noticed there were more shots of the countryside with trees, mountains, and wildlife. Shortly after looking at it the third time, I noticed that the film had a flow to it that made sense. While looking at it as it shot from countryside to city, I made an assumption that this took place in upstate New York because of how Szkodzinski managed to get shots of the city and the countryside. In addition, I believe that he wanted to show us the two different types of cultures that are very close to each other. 

Another video I found interesting was a film titled, “Christian Boys/Clergy” The film doesn’t have a identified filmmaker, but it is classified under the Commanda Collection and it was filmed in 1948. When I saw the film, there was a family that was celebrating in a parade and then the family celebrated near a lake. One thing that struck me about this film like the majority of certain films is the consistency of showing community and the culture that surrounds the community. Despite it being a home video and it not having any intention of showing meaning, it is up to one’s interpretation of the film to see what it means to them. Another film that goes hand in hand with, “Christian Boys/Clergy” is another film that is set on an island in the south seas. The film is titled, “Best South Seas” and like the other film, it has no identified filmmaker, but this film is now under the Charles L. Turner Collection and it was filmed in 1937. During this film, it shows the natives to the island taking their stock of pigs somewhere and one pig simply refuses to go along. Eventually, we see a group of guys with one girl in the middle make a formation and start dancing. They have floral necklaces on and hay skirts and everyone seems to be enjoying themselves and having a good time. Like the last film, This film gives off a similar vibe of community and how the power of cinema can be so powerful that it can make this harmless home video and somehow get put in the museum of modern arts.

Assignment 1 -MOMA

Jeffrey Figlar

ACM

02/19/20

MOMA Assignment

In Judith A. Howard’s ‘Social Psychology of Identities’ we learn that “identity is a concept that neither imprisons nor detaches persons from their social and symbolic universes” (Davis 1991:105). In earlier times identity was not chosen by the individual but was assigned by other factors. Today, a person’s identity means much more than it used it and is something that people pride themselves on even more. A person’s identity is what makes them unique and is what people revert back to at the end of the day. 

Social cognition says that people categorize information first and foremost. By categorizing what we see or hear we are making it more familiar and easier to relate to. The first movie I watched was Miscellaneous Reels by Joseph Szkodzinski, who used clips from 1977-1978 to form this film. In this film you see a man in various areas taking photos while he is being filmed. This film has many different cl2ips throughout, but I believe all take place in NY. From various mountainside shots to the everyday life in New York City, they were not specific in what they captured. Sharing clips of taxis driving, people walking the streets, to the mountains and fields of upstate New York, they gave us a glimpse of what life physically looked like during a whole different time period. The man in the clip identifies as a photographer and seems to be dedicated to his craft. Through watching him do his work it is obvious that he is passionate about photography and could be grouped in with others who love art or do this type of craft for a living. His passion for photography says a lot about him but does not sum him up entirely. He may be into art, but he may also be extremely different from another photographer based on other factors such as where they grew up, who their parents are, and etc.  

The second movie I watched was Best South Seas by an Unidentified Filmmaker in 1937, which seemed to take place in Hawaii. This filmed was of a woman and some men who danced for a crowd in what seemed to be a festival. It seemed the women who was scene in various different shots identified as a performer but also her culture played a huge part in her. Throughout the whole film you see the wonderful lifestyle of Hawaii, and how the people of the island have such strong Hawaiian roots. From beautiful volcanos, to islanders cannoning, and many culture dances, I believed this film was meant to be seen by an audience. The audience would be anyone interested in cultural dances or anyone who identifies strongly with their own culture. The woman in the film is dancing for an audience and seems to identify as a performer. From the footage alone it is clear that her ability to dance is an important part of who she is because of the way it is captured. It showcases the culture of those from Hawaii and also her intense passion for dance. Howard describes Interactionism by saying that “people attach symbolic meaning to objects, behaviors, themselves, and other people, and they develop and transmit these meanings through interaction” (Howard). The woman dancing in this film is meaningful because the dance is intertwined with their culture and their identity. To anyone raised in Hawaii this is a symbol of their heritage and although they might not be the ones dancing, they are being represented in a way. When people see hula dancing, they may connect it to Hawaii or something general, but to a Hawaiian and/or someone who grew up on the island it has significant and deep meaning. 

The third movie I watched was Wise Family, S.D.W & Friends Roughing It in Canada. When I started to watch this film I quickly was intrigued because I enjoy watching people camp. From various scenes of them cannoning, fishing, and or making a campfire to eat, they all seemed happy and genuinely having a great time. This family in the film were all comfortable with being in the nature, which indicated to me that they identify with nature and have a passion for the wilderness. Howard goes into detail about identities across time. She writes “theories of social cognition have underemphasized how identities shift over time” (Howard). In this film the people are seen camping which is not for survival but for fun. In primitive times camping could not be seen as someone’s hobby or something fun to do because our idea of camping is what they did to survive. In modern times people go out into the wilderness and live without basic necessities for fun. For the people in the film it is obvious that camping is fun for them. They identify as campers but only in first world countries would camping be considered a hobby. If we consider how some people even today have to scavenge and hunt strictly for survival this identity shifts to something else entirely. 

            Identities come from a collection of our surroundings, our family, our trauma and our passions as well as so many other factors. Each person may find importance in one thing more than the other and creates the sense of self. Siblings may come from the same two people and live in the same area but end up being completely different people. Identities are extremely specific and are not entirely created by the individual but rather accepted by the individual. What we allow shapes us into who we are but also what we reject shapes us as well. Every choice a person makes results in their sense of self. 

Moma Response

Based on Judith Howard’s article titled “Social Psychology of Identities”, constructing an identity means approaching and adapting social positions to your own life. Which basically states that when it comes to building your own identity one must take a look at their character, social positions, and roles. Within the exhibition I believe some of the people in the home movies where expected to be seen by others as many showed characteristics of organized calligraphy when recording. Many of the videos were made for some sort of entertainment or documentary to an audience. The question is, who is the audience for these films? I believe the audience for majority of these films would be family relatives, as they would understand the context behind the videos more clearly compared to outside people would question the film and heavily criticize it. For example, on the right wall on screen 28 it showed a home video of parents doing various things to their naked baby daughter whose name was Susan L. Palamara. Within the video the parents were holding their baby up from her legs, holding her in midair position from her legs. And the father rubbing his face towards his daughter’s vagina as a way to make her laugh. In the context of a family member watching this video, they would had viewed it as a comedy. However, from being viewed by strangers (which included myself) the video can be seen as disturbing due to the undressing of the baby girl all the way to what the parents did towards her which can be seen as extremely problematic. Another problematic part about this exhibition as a whole was the structuring of the left back side of the wall which had videos show casing African Americans, Indians, and some Chinese. Within this portion when some of the clips showed an African American on screen the video right next to it showed case a group of monkeys. This was problematic due to the racist phrases often told to African American people being called monkeys based on their skin tones and facial features which shows some racial discrimination. Alongside majority of the people being present are white and no Spanish demographics being shown. There was also a short instance of a man shown sexually harassing a distressed woman at a social gathering or party in which the woman made it obvious that she was uncomfortable but the man kept bothering her.  

Some of these family home videos compare to artistic/commercial cinema in a few ways by first being unscripted works due to them being expected to stay in a private setting as well as be randomly recorded scenes that don’t easily transition from one video to another. However, because of that nature it heavily foreshadowed the social media imagery that many people hold today when it comes to presenting themselves towards a camera, based on the people trying to present a good side of them, a childhood event, or accomplishments in society or in your social circles. Which is something extremely common within our society in the present generation not only within American but around the world. Only major difference would be that in the modern time people have become more critical on what to post and how to make a post the best it can be through photo editing and right set ups. 

What these images say about America in my opinion was that white people had more time and money to make these home videos compare to people of color as majority of the home videos presented white people than anything else. (which isn’t a bad thing but it was one of the most obvious observations.) As a graphic designer I didn’t learn much about these videos that I have learned in my film prior or by watching them, however I believe the museum chose these films for us to see in order to start a conversation about what we are seeing and comparing it to our own cultures and generation as a whole. With that in mind I also have a general idea on why the Museum also decided to call this exhibition “Private Lives, Public Spaces” which is that of us presenting our lives and the activities we do within our families or social circles to the general public and conversing on the differences/issues/similarities between them to ourselves. With that in itself starts building another form of identity due to the people observing and grouping together these films with each other’s experiences.  

Introduction

Who am I? My name is Angelica Dematas. I am a 24-year-old junior double majoring in music and biology. I would describe myself as an outgoing positive person and if I am having a bad day, I try my best to never let my energy negatively affect anyone else. I am bold, extraverted, but timid when it comes to expressing my crafts. Singing is a passion I discovered about 4 years ago and I still have not found the ability to believe in myself as far as performing, but I am working on it.

One of my goals in life is to be a doctor of adolescent medicine and work in a low income neighborhood like Newark. I would like to get involved with philanthropic ventures of bring more sexual health awareness to high school and college students. I grew up thousands of miles away with my mother away from our large family in Trinidad. Another goal of mine is to make my mother proud and become closer to my family in Trinidad.

Some words I would use to describe my identity on microlevel are daughter, sister, student, black, and Trinidadian. These smaller details about my identity are extremely important to the way I think
and view life. As a daughter of a black Trinidadian immigrant, I am dedicated to making my mother proud. As a first-generation college student my identity as a student holds a significant amount of importance. On a macro level I identify as a female. The most important aspects of my identify are attached to my culture and family background.

Introduction

Hi, everyone, Nice to meet you all. What's up? Everyone is use to introductions or probably not that much interested so I'll make this sweet, short and simple. My name is Britley Blessitt and I am 20 years old. Ya girl will officially be legal in Summer 2020.  Do I hear a HGS part 2? Jk. Anyways, the best way to describe me is I am funny, caring, sweet, as you can see goofy because I know you guys might read this like who's daughter is this? lol I love my family unconditionally. I believe in positivity and self love.  I am a junior and my major is Journalism and my minor is legal studies. I am more than interested in pursuing law school. My mom always tells me that I can argue like there's no tomorrow.  So anyone ever needs a lawyer one day, call me, beep me.

My family inspires me each day to do amazing things. Because of my hard working family, I have learned that not only every day is a new day but every new day comes with a new grind. My favorite color is green. I love to write poetry and listen to music. I love surprising my friends and family with sweet surprises whenever I can. To me, the people close to me are like the greatest superheroes without capes.

My dream, no change that, my goal and career is to be a great News anchor. I am VERY energetic so if there times when we're in class and I just so full of energy blame it on the genetics idk lol. Anyways, and that's a wrap.