vidding, POV, why naming things is a tricky business (and Picasso)

[compelled by discussions stemming from previous vid thoughts post]

From discussions it has increasingly become clear that the issue of Point of View in vids has been mixed up into various things:
1) the Point of View of the characters in the vids
2) the Point of View of the audience (ie. 50% of a vid*)
3) the Point of View of the creator (ie. the other 50% of a vid. ie. artistic intent)

*_{What I mean by 50% of a vid is that a piece of art is both the created product and the viewer's response to the product, one cannot exist without the other. A vid, as a artistic product, exists in that space between the artist and the audience. (or as my roommate quotes: "God exists not in one man, but in the process of connection from one person to another")}

And dude, all these three things are NOT equal. The 'Point of View of the audience' cannot and should not be absolutely controlled by the creator (which could also be called "literalism", the *bad* kind). The 'Point of View of the characters' is an artistic construct, it's a narrative device, it's arbitrary; there exists forms of art that do not demand Point of View in it's construction, such as certain music and some genres of the painting and poetry and the like. A 'Point of View of the characters' is part of a narrative style and is internal to the story-world (the diegesis) of the artistic product.

What I am, in the end, tripping over and flailing myself into icky inksplats in vidding discussions is the bit regarding the 'Point of View of the creator', that other 50%, and the exact naming of it. It's, of all three, the most necessary (I think) and inherent in art itself; there would be no art if no artist felt that they did not have a worthy thing to convey. (Which is probably why most successful artists are somewhat arrogant assholes and aren't delicate flowers, but that's a discussion for another time.) But thus the 'Point of View of the creator' is so inherent to art itself that I think it's taken mostly for granted in discussions of artwork, so when Point of View is usually spoken of (in most discussions of art that I participate in) it's in regards to the characters within that artwork and *not* to an external awareness or outlook such as either an omniscient or an artistic Point of View.

Usually in general fandoms, when there's discussion of the 'Point of View' of the creator, it's usually labeled something like author or artist 'intent'.

And it's the naming of the vidder's intent as 'POV' that tripped me up in the end in vidding discussions.

The problem with calling it 'Point of View' instead of vidder 'intent' is that not only that at least lierdumoa and I got massively confused during discussions of vidding Point of View, but that Point of View practically implies narrative and a narrative logic to the vid. This is crippling when you're attempting to make a vid non-narrative; it's crippling when you don't naturally work in strict narrative format. It's the round peg into a square hole syndrome; it just won't work unless you're willing to let it hurt.

(luckily I'm a vidding masochist, as lierdumoa can attest)

The specific labeling of vidder's authorial intent as "Point of View" was actually detrimental to me for certain stages of a couple vids; in fact some of the most fun vidding I've had is probably from my first vids where I didn't worry about vidding rules and in Hero vid which I'd conceived as a visual kata and not really as especially narrative. (The narrative I've pieced together only after I had a chance to sit back and take a look at it.)

Incidentally, this is why I'm almost afraid to give newbies advice sometimes, because for every new vidder who has an element to their style on which I can give decent advice there's about 2 or 3 vidders for whom I *know* that any advice I might give them will steer them towards choices that might make *me* happier, but might not be the best for them or their vid or their vidding style.

'Cause, really, I would rather see a kick-ass unique vid that makes me like the vid despite myself rather than seeing a mediocre vid that's panderingly similar to what I usually like. And the kick-ass vid would be kick-ass *because* it would be in that vidder's own style, *because* that's where their artistic soul/inclination/intent resides, *because* creating things in one's own style brings out the absolute best in one's creativity and talent.

Just look at Picasso.


Meanwhile, I'm off to rail at vid some more. (t-minus 2 days. _{and counting})

[edit] Note, just because the vidder didn't give the vid a narrative and didn't give the vid a character POV doesn't mean that they don't exist. It just means that narrative or the character POV might be in that 50% contributed by the audience.