Videoblogging theoretics, being the media, and the completely improvised future of a world currently without rhyme, reason or good beetroot fertiliser.
I can’t be entirely sure, as it was a while ago that I made this, and a lot of my work just “becomes” as part of the process, and the interpretation is usually up to the audience.
The work itself could perhaps be interpreted as an attempt to show that the U.S. Constitution is more often literally interpreted by “the people”, especially amendments I (consistently breached by the government of G.W Bush), II (used as rhetoric to justify the invasion of other nations), and IV (again, consistently breached by U.S. governments over the last 30 years), when these amendments are way past their use by date, and in many cases their language and scope are completely out of context with the 21st century.
So why amendment XI? The practical reason is likely because ten seemed a round number, the footage I had was an off cut of only a certain length, and any more amendents would have slowed the pace of the piece, and probably made Simple Simon more prominent than I would have liked.
The artistic reason is probably because amendment XI, while being both outdated and vague, in a way protects the U.S. from being sued by foreign governments, which effectively protects the U.S. from being sued by countries the U.S. has invaded. You can find an analysis here: http://www.answers.com/topic/amendment-xi-to-the-u-s-constitution
Why Simple Simon? We’ll, isn’t this the epitome of sit down, shut up and literally do what you’re told?
RSS feed
Interesting choice of music Richard. Well done.
Any specific reason Simple Simon replaces the 11th Amendment? I’ve got some theories but I was wondering what yours was.
I can’t be entirely sure, as it was a while ago that I made this, and a lot of my work just “becomes” as part of the process, and the interpretation is usually up to the audience.
The work itself could perhaps be interpreted as an attempt to show that the U.S. Constitution is more often literally interpreted by “the people”, especially amendments I (consistently breached by the government of G.W Bush), II (used as rhetoric to justify the invasion of other nations), and IV (again, consistently breached by U.S. governments over the last 30 years), when these amendments are way past their use by date, and in many cases their language and scope are completely out of context with the 21st century.
So why amendment XI? The practical reason is likely because ten seemed a round number, the footage I had was an off cut of only a certain length, and any more amendents would have slowed the pace of the piece, and probably made Simple Simon more prominent than I would have liked.
The artistic reason is probably because amendment XI, while being both outdated and vague, in a way protects the U.S. from being sued by foreign governments, which effectively protects the U.S. from being sued by countries the U.S. has invaded. You can find an analysis here: http://www.answers.com/topic/amendment-xi-to-the-u-s-constitution
Why Simple Simon? We’ll, isn’t this the epitome of sit down, shut up and literally do what you’re told?