Wow interesting film, and indefinitely confusing, the composition book and the categories and relationship between the objects was hard to connect. I think I would have to watch it multiple times to exactly understand what was going on. Emotionally, i feel that this movie invokes a very eerie feeling in me, more like a horror movie. The movie feels like the viewer is getting drawn into the shadows of the city, becoming one with it. Instead of being a bystander looking at things it makes the viewer seem like he suppose to understand this word association throughout the entire film. Like I stated before I difficulty understanding some of the word association like the narrator, and was trying to draw a conclusion if there was one on the point of it.

Visually I must say the film was well made, the perspectives he used were interesting and captivating and I must say the images were scenes that were from the city and are common to see but people never take the time to notice. I think if I went out into the city my mind would consciously and unconsciously notice the little things such as signs and people more so then before the actual film. The Cohen seems to focus on common objects, in my opinion because we seem them everyday and we don’t really second guess them, never really think about there use or practical application, or even the why and how behind them. Our minds just brush them off as nothing since they have no significance to our daily lives. But it is those small things that make this city what it is today. Not the monuments and memorials, but the broken down signs and neighbors, the decrepit streets and looming shadows in the dark alleys and corners.

One thing that came to mind the entire time I was watching the film was how it almost seemed like American Beauty, the plastic bag especially, how it was floating in the wind so carelessly. Overall, the movie gave me one of the most uneasy feelings. The mixture of disturbing music and the dark images as well as the strange man voice naming off random areas, objects and time periods all created this vibe of there was a deeper part of this city, New York City, that people don’t know about or don’t care to know about.

I am not too familiar and don’t really remember too many films before 93′ that would really inspire this film but horror movies, and suspense movies come to mind when thinking of influential pieces for this film. Clockwork Orange for some reason rings a bell, but not really sure of the relevance, even the plots are different, but I was thinking this more because of the fact that there were disturbing images that were influential within the film making it incredibly symbolic.

1. How did Benjamin view the importance and role of ‘the collector’? How do objects and the spaces they inhabit help us to see more closely and anew?

Ben views objects as a way to tell a story, to construct a part of time from his past that he couldn’t live but was surrounded by. Almost like pieces in a puzzle, he puts together an assortment of statements along with each piece. I apologize the article was written in a complex manner so it was a little difficult to read. What i pulled away from it was that Ben, uses his collection to explain things from a child’s point of view because children are able to deconstruct and construct what they see to simple forms, more for their understanding. Not only that but also Ben uses the surrounding environments, meaning the objects, places, etc etc, to live a past that shows a strong statement of the reflecting time period. “The collector,” is: infantile, irresponsible, immune to the world of calculations and appliance, exists outside an economy of use, in a realm of desire.”A collector is someone who looks at an object for  its significance more so than the traditional use of the item. By viewing these items in this new light we are able to “release ourselves from a dull utilitarianism, emancipation, and homogenising factuality of objects.” Objects are seen as worlds of knowledge to each their own. Kind of like the concept of a picture that can be described with a thousand words, object can be the same. Basically a true collector is someone that can take an object with their hands and feel a past streaming from it memories, feelings, dreams, times, experiences, of not only his own but of others and what the object can represent. That is a true collector.

2. In what ways did Benjamin identify with the Surrealists and their anti-commodity, poetical strategy of data collection from everyday life, dreams, street life, and from the banalest environments?

It seems that the way Ben identifies with the Surrealists is through focusing on the the concept of a “Kitsch” or according to him it is a compilation of objects and mass culture from the 19th century. It is interesting to read this article and the language used in it to explain these concepts. Benjamin uses symbolism to define humans in a certain era, about people who have died out over time and how the surroundings have changed and phased certain cultural traditions and concepts out. Benjamin focuses on the time period itself it seems and deconstructs it from the environment, people, the culture, even the traditions. Also a quick note he seems to focus on objects and concepts that were obsolete.

3. When photography and film were emerging visual technologies, Benjamin introduced the term ‘optical unconscious.’ What did he mean by this? How does photography and film both reflect and construct the world around us?

Optical unconscious is has to deal with the idea of tangibility. From what I could gather from the reading is opitcal unconsciousness is the ability to take an object without touch or feel but to image it is ours with the same sensation as if we were touching it. This is different and adverse from looking at the object versus touching it, but Benjamin believes that we can have the object if we look at it, and visualize it to be ours. Film and photography construct the world around us by showing people that they don’t necessarily need to go places or buy objects to feel like they own or been to the place on the film or photos. Film and photography have the amazing ability to show and tell people a story and make the person feel like they were actually there or were performing an action even without being in the same area. But is only if the photo and film was made right.

-Disclaimer-: these are the ideas that i formulated from the reading, they are possibly right but most likely wrong because I am terrible at interpreting and reading slightly “outside the box” concepts.” So if anyone reads this blog just know that thank you.