Private Lives, Public Places

Hilijos Exume

Imagery, Identity and Culture: Private Lives, Public Spaces

Constructing an identity can be done intentionally and unintentionally. Some identities are ascribed, given to us at birth. Such as being a certain race, gender, nationality or age. These characteristics are part of who we are. And some identities we create for ourselves. Such as our occupations, clothing style and musical taste. Together these characteristics form our personality and overall identity.

Home videos are one of the most private pieces of media and are perfect sources of viewing the identity of a family or a group of friends. Home videos usually depict days in the life or people enjoying the company of their loved ones. They are meant to be viewed by a select group of individuals, usually those involved in the video. That is why MOMA's exhibit Private Lives, Public Spaces is named as so. It features videos captured in people's private cameras and yet they are showcased in an open museum space. As the public, we get an inside look at some private footage of people truly being themselves.

In today's social landscape, people often reveal themselves in social media outlets like Instagram, snapchat etc. However we cannot always trust the credibility of the content posted there. Technology has gotten to a point where imagery can be easily altered, disintegrating the authenticity of what we see. An intagrammer can use multiple methods to show him/herself in an appealing way for the sake of pleasing the followers. This doesn't show who the instagrammers really is, but rather who they want people to view them. This sort of imagery isn't as skin deep as a home video.

The videos in the exhibit, Private Places Public Spaces are authentic. They depict the activities of people engaging as they normally would without any worry of an outside gaze. This is definitely a difference compared to social media imagery. Some people act differently when they know they're being seen versus when they are in their private lives. By catching a glimpse of people in their private lives, we are seeing their true identity.

Fictional movies are another type of video media where the imagery isn't an authentic representation of the people. Actors and actresses pretend to be someone they are not. Movies, however are a more dramatic comparison. Despite the differences between social media, movies and home videos, there is still a connection. They are all trying to capture moments. Usually good/entertaining moments. Like selfies today, home movies sought to capture and document an event, or a feeling, or any happening worth remembering. Home videos foreshadowed the need to keep and share memories/events.

One video captured identity perfectly. It was a home video of the Martin Family. Lon Martin, the father. Mary Steichen Martin, the mother. And their baby Nell. Much of the video shows the parents playing with the baby, especially the father. He plays a sort of peekaboo among other games that are quite questionable and too playful. Nonetheless, the moments seem to be a loving bond between parents and child. In today's age, parents would have used Instagram or a youtube vlog to display that same amount of affection.

As a graphic designer, it is important for me to be able to read imagery. Therefore, with the absence of sound and text, I have to be able to put together clues and elements and form an interpretation of what I see. With that in mind, the Martin home video shows the conventional depiction of a family household. We see a mother being motherly, as she's the one usually seen holding the baby. We see the father in a dressing shirt and tie. This tells the viewer that he is a working man. It is also worth mentioning that this family is white and considering that the video is from 1927, this furthers depicts the imagery of America at this time period.

Another video untitled "Cruise" by an unidentified filmmaker also relays typical 1920 imagery. It showed a group of well to do white people dancing. I can tell that they were upper class because of the way they were dressed and based on the title. Again similar to the Martin video, this video shows a snapshot of America during the roaring twenties. An exuberant time period where people danced and dressed differently. But the country still had racial issues so it is no surprise that only white people are featured. But we also see the power of the home video. The people are really letting themselves go as they dance.

A third video filmed in New York by Victor Ginsburg also featured scenes of dance. Though the imagery is different than that on "Cruise". The overall video is more patriotic. There are multiple scenes and wide shots that feature the American flag. As the flags are being shown, we also see people walking, cycling and going about their business. America is portrayed as one of productivity and peace. Sometimes the Statue of Liberty is seen in the background. There was also a firework scene. Piecing these images together leads me to believe that the video was shot on Independence Day. We are seeing the identity of America as a nation. It is a feeling of pride and celebration. A young woman was seen doing a salute towards the flags and also impersonating a soldiers march. It is safe to say that that woman identified herself as a proud American. She is joined with other kids and they dance together. This group was more racially diverse. The video was filmed in 1981. This shows the progression of America.

These three videos had a common thread. They all reflected America during a particular time frame. The Martin Family showed the conventional American family of the 20s, “Cruise” reflected the feeling and the type of people we'd see in that same time period and Victor Ginsburg's video showed a more progressive, inclusive and patriotic America. Nonetheless, a large majority of the videos in the entire exhibition didn't feature that many minority races. The wall text at the entrance of the exhibition mentioned that portable cameras were introduced in the 20s. It's possible that people in high socioeconomic classes had access to this new technology. Wealthier people had more chances to preserve and capture their stories.

Private lives, Public spaces

Identity is a big construct of what makes a person who they are, in Judith Howard ‘Social Psychology of Identities’ she discusses all different types of identities and how they’re constructed. Howard states that, “Identity talk is organized around two sets of norms, one concerning respect for situated identities and a commitment to basic moral precepts, and the second concerning ways in which people deal with failure to endorse these basic moral precepts, through denials of responsibility and other attributional tactics.” There is always a talk on identity and how to deal with or how its constructed. People tend to group and associate themself with others who share similar identities to them or identities that share some form of commonality. A person as usual can cross over into multiple identities and in that sense cross into different types of relationships and connections between others and groups they associate with.

The home videos foreshadow the social media imagery of today because it shows the interest of recording almost everything that happens in everyday life and events. The need to show what happens or to share something that happens, it all started with these home videos and slowly involved into something that is shared not only for the person but to others as viewers. 

The home movies we saw at the MOMA in comparison to artistic and commercial cinema is that a lot of them are edited to shots that the person recording was mainly interested in or scenes that they liked from what they recorded and switching between close up and far away shots and exploring angles. In contrast to them there not acting in most cases but doing things they would do in their everyday life like go to church, have a wedding and more.

On the issues of race and gender in the movies I noticed that there was more focus on white families having activities such as the family having a wedding, or the one with their babies while the films with people of color focused on them at work or at school. There was one video in particular that showed some children of color at school being taught by a wgite woman and another video with some other men of color where they were mainly doing work. There was one video in the front that showed young children at a home setting and one with some boys dancing with a girl but those were some of the select few that focused on people of color. When it comes to gender on the other hand a lot of the videos didn’t have much of a focus on women during the recording they were mainly on the sideline with a few that had a focus on them. It connects with Aidiche’s book where she talks on how to treat women and how to give them the same equality as men and not teach them to live up to the standards placed on women from society similar to the women showed on the videos where they were displayed as caretakers for their children and their homes. Videos where women were put in some focus of the video they were either with children or by their husband’s side but there was very few to little videos displaying a focus on women and showing off their individuality innstead there was a focus on their roles in society and put in the background or a motherly position. 

Some things that I noticed about the films is that some are a bit questionable such as the one where this couple is with their child and the father starts lifting up his daughter while she is nakes and moving her around all over around him and flipping her it was just odd to see that done on a young naked child and very questionable with how bleak the setting where it was done at. It’s just a very questionable thing to record especially when put into the aspect that it was a home video. Usually people with children don’t usually do tricks on video with their child naked. 

As a graphic artist these videos make me learn that there are all types of people in their own different types of spaces and things that they do that mamy pbe personal or preferential to them. It makes me aware that everyone has their own type of preference to what they like to see or do and that affects their interests. In my field I will have to work with all types or peoples that share all types of interests and preferences. 

Private Lives Public Spaces

Emily Quast
February 21, 2020

Private Lives Public Spaces

In Judith A. Howards Social Psychology of Identities she writes, “Self-schemas include organized knowledge about one’s self, the cognitive response to the question of identity: Who am I? These include the characteristics, preferences, goals, and behavior patterns we associate with ourselves” (138). She poses the question of identity and breaks down what makes an individual an individual. This questioning of “Who am I?” arose a few times whilst watching the myriad of videos compiled together in the MoMAs exhibition Private Lives Public Spaces as one is transported into the private lives of these home videos which, originally, were meant for the eyes of a select few now posed in public spaces for all to contemplate and view.

Howards describes different types of identities, sexual, gender, ethnicity, class and more that combine to make up an individual's identity. Yet, the individual's identity is comprised of two parts, “social, defined by membership in various social groups; and personal the idiosyncratic attributes that distinguish an individual from others” (Howard 139). While the individual attributes play a factor in how an individual creates their own personal identity another leading factor are those interactions formed through various social groups and interactions of those around them albeit close relations or those in passing. It is this moment where we ask ourselves “Who am I?” and as mentioned in Howards writings, we can shape and mold ourselves for specific situations and frame our identities for whom we are interacting with at any given point. So, we delve into the films and take a look at the private lives put on public display, questioning our role and our identity whilst at the same time, understanding and placing that of those involved.

One of the first few videos which I spent a decent amount of time watching was that of the cluster of dancing, what looks like wedding or a party in each. This cluster of home videos transported us back in time and place, to a carefree atmosphere of libations and fun. Seen are how the individuals put their all into looking their best, conforming to societal norms to fit the identity of the masses of the time whilst grouped together at their function yet, the same question that began this paper nagged at me whilst watching all of them dance merrily, “Who am I?” Each person has their own identity of which we do not fully get to grasp or obtain through the video, we can guess, what looks to be middle to upper class, ethnically white, males and females together. Yet, even for the time period, the criteria for identity is different and has changed dramatically since the filming of this video. So I wondered who these individuals grew to be, changed to be, did their identities remain or like the fluidity of time, morph.

Another film I spent some time with was New York c. 1981 by Victor Ginsburg. I was attracted to this film due to the fact it was a location of which I, myself, can identify with, and can place myself within yet, just filmed within a different time period. Unlike most of the other films which were hard to place myself within, this one was rather easy due to the fact, I had seen the same sights, visited the same locations and knew of the same streets. The film felt as though it could have been a memory of my own. Through Howards writings this is described as Interactionism, Howard stating, “People behave toward objects on the basis not of their concrete properties, but of the meanings these objects have for them. Because meanings develop through interaction, language plays a central part”(171). Part of identity is finding familiarity and comfort in what you seek out around you, so, this is a facet of this exhibition, to make connections of seemingly mundane private life put on public display for others to find meaning with, to realize that identity runs deep and across many generations even though it may evolve and change, at the core are the same principals which have been leading it all along.

The last film which I had spent the remainder of my time watching was Tompkins Square Park c. 1966-67 by Howard Guttenplan. I was drawn to this film due to the social movements and intermingling of different people which drove the video. People gathered together for causes the believe in, with one another, putting aside their differences to just be and work towards a better means of life. It reminds me of so many movements and marches today that unify and unite, to bring about justice and rectify inequality. This is also one of the first films where I had seen this happening, all the other films were more so about leisure, happy moments, very private matters yet, with this film, the essence itself is very public in nature, as if meant to reach a broader audience then whom it was just filmed for in the first place. This was the first film while watching that I did not feel all intrusive on and the question of “Who Am I?” seemed rather clear.

Various factors play in the make up of identity of an individual that the exhibition Private Lives Public Spaces and Howards writings paired together. They made one question the very essence of what it means to be you, where one draws inspiration, who they change for, how the times change and more. Identity is such a complex and ever evolving idea that it is nearly impossible to put a label on or categorize any one individual just because they, in themselves, intersect with so many different variables. So always question “Who am I?” and find those elements that make you an individual and connects you to the billions of others out there, past, present and future.

Private Lives, Public Spaces

Angel Juarez

Colloquium in Arts, Culture, and Media

Profs. Cherow-O’Leary and Caçoilo

Writing Assignment

Private Lives, Public Spaces

Identity is a strange notion, a way humans describe themselves by seemingly arbitrary elements put on by themselves and the outside world. Judith Howard takes a look at the different ways of how identities are created and how they relate to people in her journal, “Social Psychology of Identities”. This introspection of identities, how they are created, and how they affect those they are applied to can be used as a lens to look at an exhibition currently on display at the Museum of Modern Art. This exhibit, called “Private Lives, Public Spaces”, puts on display many home videos, never originally meant for any kind of public viewing.

Many of these videos can be looked at through these lenses that Howard introduces to look at these videos in terms of identity. Home videos, in general, are usually something just meant to be watched by the person taking the video or their family and friends. This isn’t to say home movies usually contain any particularly sensitive information that would make them “private”, it’s just the fact that they are usually made for more personal and sometimes documentation purposes. These home movies usually have no or a tiny audience and are never mass produced or published. So what happens when these kinds of videos are put in a new environment? In this exhibition, these videos now have a new and larger audience, if they ever even had any at all. This can open up discussion and interpretation of these videos and what they may mean in terms of the identity of these people. When filmed under the assumption that no one else would ever watch these videos, people would act normally, just as they are, their true selves. However, unfortunate as it may be, everyone can now be a spectator in these peoples’ lives, whether they knew about it or not.

One film I watched was called “Holland” and was taken by the Wise family in 1926. It seemed to be recorded scenes of the different places and vistas the family saw and visited while on a vacation to the country of Holland almost one hundred years ago now. One thing that struck me as interesting was the title used within the film itself. The title read “Scenes From the Land of Wooden Shoes and Windmills”, which was immediately putting an identity of sorts on the entire country of Holland. After this title followed a series of scenes of coastal towns, bridges, marinas and harbors, and other beautiful scenery shots native to the country. I did not see, however, any wooden shoes. There was one windmill I saw, but it was on screen for a few seconds only. For a country seemingly renowned by this filmmaker for its wooden shoes and windmills, they were surprisingly scarce. Was it perhaps because they felt the country was already well known for these products and they wanted to feature other highlights on their trips? Or perhaps they were just using this preconceived notion of the country to give the viewer context of what they will soon be saying. This seems to be a version of Judith Howard’s notion of interactionism. Howard writes, “The basic premise of symbolic interaction is that people attach symbolic meaning to objects, behaviors, themselves, and other people, and they develop and transmit these meanings through interaction” (Howard 371). This seems to be a prefect example of how this home movie has been affected by the national identity of the country of Holland. Perhaps this was the family’s  first trip to Holland and they only dubbed it the Land of Wooden Shoes and Windmills because of the reputation they received through interactions with other people. Maybe this family already had an established rapport of sorts with the country, and this title they gave the country was from their own experience. Either way, this notion of interactionism seems to be a very popular way of  assigning an identity to a country. This is something very common to see, like attributing sushi to Japan or vodka and mountains with Russia. There had to have been once time where these connections were made and, through interacting with others, these identities spread and cemented themselves though the collective subconscious.

Another interesting notion brought up by Howard is gender identity, which could be used to investigate two other films through this lens. These two films, “Mary Steichen Martin, W. Lon Martin, and Nell” filmed in 1927 by the Martin Family and “A Personal production” filmed in 1940 by Douglass Fairbanks, Jr. and Mary Lee Epling Fairbanks both seem to be about similar subjects; A very young girl. In the first of these two films, it showcases the family’s relationship with each other. The parents seemed very loving and they all looked happy as they played with their young daughter, flipping her through the air and helping her do handstands. In the second of these two films, however, the even younger child seems to be by herself for most of the film. What really caught my attention was a title card in the video that read: “Mummy says I must always act like a lady”. While Howard doesn’t go into the topic much in her journal since she acknowledges others’ discussions on this topic, but it is an interesting and important topic to talk about. In our society, gender is a social construct, as Howard says, that seems to be completely concrete and enforced at very young ages. From the color of young children’s clothes to the toys made for them, there’s a clear division between what boys should be like and what girls should be like. In the Fairbanks’ film, they show their daughter partaking in very feminine scenes, like wearing frilly dresses and having tea parties with her stuffed animals. However, in the Martin family’s film, it had a much different depiction of how they treated their daughter. For one, she was completely naked for a large portion of the film, she was only in a dress in the very. beginning. Furthermore, the way they were playing with her was more like playing with their child, not specifically their daughter or a girl. Flipping her through the air and helping her do handstands aren’t as explicitly feminine activities as much as tea parties are. This kind of treatment is interesting to see, as it seems to be more common for parents, even before the baby is born, to completely fixated their child’s identity on their gender, no matter how or who their child will grow up to be.

Identity is such an interesting and intimate facet in our everyday lives. Everything, from people to objects to whole countries, can have their own identity, whether made up by themselves or appointed one from the outside world. However, people usually don’t act like their true selves when they know people are watching or when they’re being recorded for something they know will have an audience. This is why home movies, usually intended to have a small audience, if any at all, is a good way to show peoples’ true nature. This, combined with Judith Howard’s journal, “Social Psychology of Identities”, can be a rather interesting and eye-opening way at seeing how we assign identities, how these identities can affect us, and how some identities can simply be engrained through society.

MoMa Response Assignment

Eric Morales

CLQM Art, Culture and Media

Professor Cacoilo

21 February 2020

Private Lives, Public Spaces Exhibit in MoMA Response

As a class, we went to the Museum of Modern Arts to observe different varieties of identity from many films. In Judith Howard’s “Social Psychology of Identities” she defines identity as “a concept that imprisons nor detaches persons from their social and symbolic universes.” which means adapting and improving social positions on who you are as a person (Davis 1991:105). Today’s perspective on identity is much different than it was back in its historic times. In present day, the concept of identity is viewed as what makes up every person individually and their social structures; however, in historic times there weren't many problems with identity because societies were more stable than how it is now.  

The first film that I chose that explores Judith Howard’s essay is called “Martina’s Playhouse” by Peggy Ahwesh which was filmed in 1927 and is about our sexual construction and complexities. In the early 1900’s, women’s identity was not as known as men were and When I first viewed this film, it was honestly weird how the parents were recording their daughter and playing with her naked. It just felt awkward and uncomfortable to see the film but aside from my opinion, it displays identity such as the family being white and being an middle to upper class family due to what clothes they were wearing in the film. Also in her essay she stated that “openness about one’s sexuality has come in both professional literatures and subcultural communities to be seen as evidence of a healthy gay identity, and thus passing can be seen as problematic.” With this film, they attempt to break the barrier of women's sexuality by showing their daughter naked; however, they did not execute in an effective way in my opinion. 

The second film that I chose that explores Judith Howard’s essay is called “Wise Family”. From what I saw, the men in the film looked like they worked on a farm and it was during 1927. Judith’s point of view of identity can connect to this film because in her essay, she talks about Class Identities in which explains Upper, Middle, and Lower classes. In this film, the men are the lower class which is identified as being poor. Despite being a lower class, the men were happy and enjoying each other’s company while smoking cigarettes. In America, we view the upper class as the “best” class and having the ideal life of being perfect in which that’s not true because most people are actually grateful for what they have and enjoy the people around them. Money and popularity don’t bring happiness, it’s the people you surround yourself with that brings you joy.

The third film that I chose that explores Judith Howard’s essay is called “Jarret’s Family”. This film had caught my attention because it was based off of ethnic identities in which display how African Americans are equal in class as white people. During that time, The Civil Rights Movement and Segregation were still occuring in America so it was rare to find a family of African Americans like the Jarrets. They were having a get together at the Jarrets home. In Judith Howad’s essay, she illustrates to readers about “Ethnic Identity” which tells us how people are identified as the lower class or in the minority. The film showed African American women in the early to mid 1900’s dressed up and wearing fancy jewelry. This film demonstrated to the audience that African Americans are equal in power and class especially during a horrific time in history. These people still enjoyed one another and never lost hope.  

In conclusion, all of these films have made connections to Judith Howard’s essay “Social Psychology of Identities” and demonstrated to readers and viewers how identity can affect everyone individually. It was a great experience and a privilege going to the Museum of Modern Art for the first time. All of the history and information that I retained there was knowledgeable and just helps explore the past in many different ways. I think it’s important for all of us to know our identity and where we come from; however, we all need to realize that we are human beings and should be treated equally upon each other.

Museum of Modern Arts (Private Lives, Public Spaces)

Last Friday in class we took a trip to the Museum of Modern Arts (MOMA). 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.  Watching these home movies, I see people in the past capture moments and events in a person’s life is incredible. It’s like archival footage of the family history. Home movies are basically cinema to a family so that they can come together to watch and enjoy their movies.  Home movies back in the day is like social media.  Back in the day the home movies showed everything about a person when they grew up and the moments in their life. Just Like Facebook live, Snapchat and Instagram stories we see everything about person’s life and what they’re doing. But what is the meaning to “Construct an identity”, the shaping of a person’s values, beliefs, practices, discourses, and knowledge; influenced both by cultural systems and by individual actions.

 The first home movie I came across was a film called Manhattan Moods by Charles L. Turner American 1915-2005. The filmmaker showed in the film is moods in Manhattan in 1942 America. It’s like archival footage for a time long past. Seeing Manhattan in the past and looking at it now is breathtaking, also seeing some things change, but some can stand the test of time. As a photographer/videographer, I see the shots and feel like I’m transported to 1942. Seeing the buildings that wasn’t built back then but are here now is amazing.

The second movie was Wise Family also by Charles L. Turner. 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 was filmed in 1926. The subjects in the film appeared to be happy while laughing and smoking cigarettes. How does the Wise Family deal 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 that is why the film is titled Wise Family because these men are poor and wise with each other given the set of circumstances they're in. They're not happy about being poor, so the best they can do is to always look at the bright side of things in life. We can get a sense that these men will be fine, despite them being poor. 

The third movie is Snow, made in 1973 by Fred Hatt American, born in 1958.  The movie is about kids having fun playing in the snow. In more detail, the film has two friends having a snowball war with one kid while hitting the other kid with a snowball.  He fell on the snow and ran over the kid over with his sled.  So, do I think that people in the home movies expected to be seen in a certain way by others? For me No, the people from the home movies wasn’t expected to be seen by others in a certain way because everyone has home movies, that’s their life. Why would a person see anything different? Who is the audience for these films? For people who love home movies, like filmmakers, videographers or maybe just the general public. The exhibit showed old home movies that people made from the last century using only film cameras.  Watching these home movies see people in the past capture moments and events in a person life is incredible. It’s like archival footage for the family history. Home movies are basically cinema because to a family they can come together to watch the home movies like a cinema to enjoy. Why do you think the Museum calls this exhibit” Private Lives, Public Spaces?” Because these are home movies that are private in a public space, which is a Museum.

Private Lives, Public Spaces Response

Private Lives, Public Spaces Response

by Bruno Xavier

              Last Friday, after the hell me and my classmate went through to come to the Moma Museum. Our class had to go to the exhibit called Private Lives, Public Spaces. There they had a lot of home movies with different things being showed. After viewing the home movies from the exhibitions, I was first confused about what was going on at first because most of the videos had unusual things happening within them. After reading Judith Howard’s article “Social Psychology of Identities”, I learned can connect the home movies to this article simply because the movies wanted its audience to see these people true character and see if they could relate in any possible way. So in other words the definition constructing an identity means to find out how you are as a person and reflect on everything and then give you a better understanding of yourself. This will also help you better understand other people as well as their cultures. 
             The first movie I remember watching was the home video the Martin family. This film shows the Martin family's shows the life of a white family and its mainly focused on the baby. There was one disturbing 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 her by throwing her up and down while holding the baby's legs. At first, I felt weird when I watched it because in today's society you don't see this being filmed. However maybe back then it could have been a common thing that parents used to do. The purpose was quite pleasing though because its always nice to see a baby smiling and enjoying life. If this film had been published in today's society then all social media platforms would slaughter the film with negative comments. Also the Martin family looks like they have money and are quite wealthy judging from the way the parent's cloths. The year of the film was 1927, so this family back then had nothing to worry about because we can identify this family is wealthy of some sort.
             The next movie I watched was the Wise Family, S.D.W & Friends Roughing It in Canada. When I started to watch this film I was interested because I enjoy camping and have been a few times with my family. I always have wanted to see how other family's enjoy camping and if i can relate to some of there traditions in anyway. From the scenes shown I saw they were cannoning, fishing, and or making a campfire to eat, they all seemed happy and were enjoy themselves. This family in the film were all happy to be away from there homes and  being one with nature, which indicated to me that they identify with nature and like to spend some quality time with family. I am the same way with my family because you laugh and have real conversations and just relax from reality for a while. Howard goes into detail about identities across time. In the film the people are seen camping, not the classic naked and afraid type of camping but the one were you just have fun. Camping for a lot of people is considered boring and with today's technology they would rather stay home and use that. For the people in the film it is obvious that camping is fun for them. They identify as campers but only a select group of people consider camping to be entertaining. Whereas some people use it for surviving in the wild.
           The final movie I saw was Best South Seas. There wasn't a named filmmaker by it looked to be on a island with a resort of some kind. I remember seeing a man and a women who dance for a lot of other people. It looked like the women who was seen throughout the film looked like performer and her culture really helped her. Throughout the whole film you see the wonderful lifestyle of the island, and how the people of the island have such really represent their culture. The cultural influenced dances really showed me and made me feel how strong their connection to their identity was. 
           To summarize this experience, I believe the exhibition was called "Private Lives, Public Spaces" was to help people become more educated and help gain a better understanding about identity. I really enjoyed watching these home films because it gave me insight on how life was back then. Also it was nice to experience how other people's cultures were and how they were just comfortable with themselves which helps me try to figure out how I will construct my identity.