Interdependent Time

 My final for the class is a short film I made titled Interdependent Time. The idea of liquid antiquity was something that stuck around with me since our very first class, so I thought it would be appropriate for me to respond to that. The film, very simply put, is about someone trying to get somewhere. That’s the largest narrative (maybe only? Idk you tell me. Maybe intrinsic narration) thing I attached to it. I wanted to work with finding different ways to bind and liquify. I couldn’t tackle the whole book at once, so I thought if I worked with two lexemes, as well as the essay and whatever else interested me, I would be able to tackle it all. I largely wanted to work with ‘mētis’ and ‘revolution’ as those struck a particular chord with me. I also drew from ‘transmission’ and ‘film’, although the latter less so. The way that ‘mētis’ and ‘revolution’ inform each other represented liquidity to me and that is what I wanted to get here. The contradictory and reinforcing nature of revolution pushes it into an either 4-d or 0-d space that constantly breaks and begins. This idea about the anxiety of beginnings yet having a sort of constant action almost reworks your understanding of time as whole, as it should with classics. At what point do these boundaries liquify? Why would they bind again? Mētis is always able to find a passage. Ever wise, the mimicry works to find yourself a new space I think. There is no sort of limbo in the slightest in mētis yet there are moments of mimicry or of apparatus, but not at all an apparatus of limbo. Both working with time allowed for certain helpful direction. There was also a bit of inspiration from the movie Stalker. Overall, moments of binding are obviously present, but not in any way of relatability, which would result in idolization and solidity.

P.s. the sound is loud sometimes I think