09.21.2006 18:02 Pia Lindman FASCIA
Comments
SteveL - 09/21/2006 18:37:54
I guess it was over my head.
I know it’s very hard to get good camera position in a crowd, but I felt like I spent too much time in Pia’s armpit.
Rob - 09/21/2006 19:05:02
Good stuff. She’s doing daily performances for over a month? (Probably why I’d never make it into MIT.)
By the way, it’s spelled “Aggression”. 
Terrence Walker - 09/21/2006 19:08:33
Robots? That’s my kinda thing. I see there will be considerable variety in this video blog. It will be cool to see what happens next.
Reporter. - 09/21/2006 19:47:21
Hmmmmm…
You spelled aggression wrong.
And that lady’s a wacko. Plenty more interesting things in the world.
I miss Amanda. I want to see more of her. There must come a point here somewhere wherein you disprove Andrew’s “I created Amanda” line.
Declan Dempsey - 09/21/2006 20:03:09
I love how different each day has been so far. It’s a great testament to how many interesting things are happening from coast to coast. Just hoping that these hard-hitting pieces don’t vanish when you’re off home turf.
Chris Murphy - 09/21/2006 20:40:15
Strange…
I enjoy art, but this was not really my cup of tea.
However, I still enjoy being exposed to it.
I think it would be nice if you end the podcast with an teaser for the next podcast.
Maybe not necessarily the subject, but where you are headed. (Example: Next stop – Buffalo!)
Have fun!
jm - 09/21/2006 21:12:37
Yeah, so interesting. Agree with above, do like the “every day’s different” feature. Sort of happening as you go along.
Reporter: Just look at the Josh Wolf interview and the piece that was produced by Current TV this week…no Andrew in sight and great work.
Case Closed. I wish Andrew would give it up.
W.O> - 09/21/2006 21:53:49
I thought it was great. Although, I didn’t know what she was talking about. It didn’t matter because I like to look at tall girls. Especially artsy ones with thin shiny clothes. Please don’t think of me as shallow.
ironic1 - 09/21/2006 22:09:20
I think the anthropology of gesture would be fertile territory for thought. I’m not sure I got the connectionb between that and the architecture though. I guess I need the dots connected a little more for me.
Was the sound garbled in parts for anyone else or was it just me? It was hard to hear in some parts because, I’m guessing, of the party noise.
Danny - 09/21/2006 22:56:18
Heh, I drive pass that corner almost every week and had not idea it was used for a art exhibits. Looks like I learn something new today.
Christiaan Huygens - 09/22/2006 01:04:31
I didn’t get it.
I am sorry, I really tried to get it, but I just couldn’t get it.
I do not think this makes me a bad person.
jriz - 09/22/2006 03:01:15
i suspect it might take some time before we notice the distinct differences in amanda’s solo style and techniques vs. the former rocketboom duo of amanda and drew. i believe expecting to feel the full disproving of drew’s “i created amanda” line (i didn’t know he claimed that quote but i’ll take it on faith the reporter has done his/her research) will take at least a few weeks if not longer. and to assert “case closed”, while positive in thought and seemingly supportive, in my opinion is premature since looking at amanda’s existing body of solo work compared to the body of work she did while at rb is not exactly comparing apples to apples. obviously this solo work thus far is interesting, but the rb stuff she did was WAY more enjoyable, prolific, structured in its randomness, sustaining, and entertaining. but there was so much more content, that again, it’s just not comparable, yet.
i say this in the spirit of my personal belief that the reason why amanda’s work was so great at rb was that she was so tuned into us, the viewers, and was able to attentively take feedback and incorporate it for the good of the show. now, i tend to be rather idealistic and like to see everyone win — i wish both amanda and drew would both succeed in their own individual ways. but my honest and uncensored opinion thus far is that while saying “case closed” would be nice, that is actually setting amanda up for possible failure because honestly, the case is FAR from closed to some influential parties, as the reporter’s comment clearly illustrates — this despite that we may want it to be closed.
the content is interesting in its own way. it’s also uniquely amanda and fresh and fun to watch. but in my single opinion, there is a sense of “trying too hard” that i feel is going on (natural when getting back into the swing, of course) and also an awkwardness in amanda’s interviewing style that wasn’t there before, as if she’s not willing to stick her neck out as far for viewers like in the past (also understandable in the beginning).
one thing that really bothered me was that it seemed as if there were no preconceived notions of what to talk about with the interviewer, and so i felt like i didn’t really get an overall sense for what the artist is really about. just one very particular aspect (in addition to her armpit, to rib the camera person a bit and also agree with SteveL), and so i didn’t feel as inclined to look up her art or even remember who she is. for the first time, i felt like amanda was struggling to come up with remotely meaningful questions (this also even with wolf yesterday, which surprised me). with pia, i felt as if she might actually be annoyed by amanda’s presence, which felt a little awkward and uncomfortable.
i don’t mean this to be negative, just trying to give my assessment as i see it so you can use the feedback. maybe one thing that was missing was that amanda didn’t do her usual up-front “captivate and motivate” this woman to be interesting for the camera. i suspect you don’t want to “rest on your laurels” and i felt this strongly and admire it, but i don’t see what’s wrong with getting in the person’s face, asserting that you are “amanda congdon, former anchor at rocketboom, and i want to capture some interesting points from you about your art for an independently produced video blog project…the episode featuring what you say will air online for a viewer base of potentially thousands” and then let her sweat it out a little trying to be entertaining and interesting. of course, we didn’t see all the cut footage so maybe you did say all that, but from what we did see and hear, it sounded like you were so intent on appearing anonymous (“i’m a video blogger…’a what?’…”) that it backfired and this woman didn’t give her all, thinking it was just some home video clip you were gonna post to show just your family and friends.
regardless, i’m glad to have a daily dose of amanda again in video form and i’m pulling for the success of the show, thanks for all the work you and your team are putting in to get back in the swing and entertain annoyingly picky viewers like me.
Bob - 09/22/2006 04:27:38
You totally need to get the production values under control. The sound and image quality (in regards to the compression, not the actually shooting, which is a whole other story) is terrible. As a fan of yours, not Rocketboom, I know you’re capable of so much more.
DrIck - 09/22/2006 10:52:07
Bob, you totally need to get over the details and take in what is being said in the content. One gets the feeling that you try to be critical of “production values” only to show how fabulous and knowledgable you are. Who even cares what “compression” is? Let it be. In contrast, jriz’s comments are a whole lot more relevant and helpful. Those directly lead to thoughts about how to make tomorrow and the next days’ shows better. Sorry to pontificate about the pontificators, but spontaneous exibitions of exotic plumage with no purpose other than self-display sometimes get my goat.
jm - 09/22/2006 11:07:50
Ya know, one thing I really like about this medium is the way viewers can “inform” the producers in real time. Of course everyone will not agree, but we shouldn’t try and shut each other up either. I know very little about “production quality”, but I do know I like to be able to hear what is being said, especially if it’s the delicious Amanda, and I’d prefer not to be looking at someone’s neck/torso during an interview.
Nothing in the comments above was mean-spirited, and in fact I thought it was intellegent and well considered. If we cannot offer constructive criticism from our own experiences of the piece, much of the unique magic of this medium is gone.
We don’t do AAA any favors by being mindless cheerleaders.
chu - 09/22/2006 13:46:07
i’ll chime in here… i think Amanda & Mario went to this cool art opening, had their camera, and just decided to talk to her. that’s spontaneous vlogging at it’s best! with all the flaws you’ve pointed out too, but that just goes with the territory. i actually think it’s a little overproduced for an off-the-cuff video, though i do like it (and am also confused somewhat by the artist).
comparing this project to rocketboom is indeed apples and oranges. some good suggestions though, keep the ideas flowing.
ps – the sound in this one was unavoidably bad, being in a loud crowd. it sounds a little strange because I used SoundTrack pro to cut out some of the background noise, which made Amanda and the artist easier to hear at the expense of making it sound oddly compressed.
SteveL - 09/22/2006 14:39:46
It’s great to see everyone being so constructive. I think it’s clear that everyone who has commented want’s to see AAA do well.
I love the premise of the show, having been a huge fan of Kuralt (another UNC guy).
My only two suggesions are:
1) Don’t ever be afraid to stop and film somethig you think might be cool, no matter how remote or unplanned. I trust your instincts (most of the time).
2) Have FUN. If you ask any of your following what their favorite RB episodes were, they will mention episodes that you remember as having the most fun doing, no matter how silly or irrelevant
they seemed to be at the time.
If you have fun, we’ll have fun. I promise!
Walter Crespo - 09/22/2006 14:40:26
Very interesting Amanda, I can’t believe she didn’t know who you were, sure was a lively crowed.
Big John - 09/22/2006 14:53:14
Amanda appeared to be totally unprepared. Pia Lindman’s treatment of Amanda left Amanda looking small and amateurish. Her subject was totally unconcerned about Amanda and “videoblogging” and at the end even disregards her last question leaving Amanda to plead “Hello?”. I think Amanda sees herself and videoblogging as some sort of “art nouveau” and was seeking recognition as such from this “out there artist”. What surprised me was that they even posted it after they saw how it turned out.
ctgirl81 - 09/22/2006 15:10:30
Hi everyone! Thanks for chiming in. As the trip progresses I think everyone will have a better understanding of the style of the show… we are reporting from the road what we see and hear… sometimes we know in advance what that will be, sometimes we don’t. That’s part of what makes this journey so fun for us. In the case of Pia, the lovely and gracious artist depicted in this video, we just walked into an art gallery, were interested in what we saw, and turned on the camera. I think videoblogging is the perfect medium for this kind of on the fly, spur of the moment “reporting”.
Max - 09/22/2006 15:25:00
Really good!
Hmm, a unidirectional microphone would be nice for social events though… 
Shel - 09/22/2006 23:47:32
Is this what all comment sections are like?
What a bunch of nitpickers. It takes allot of hard work to pull this video blog off. I for one think you are doing a excellent job Amanda!
I look forward to your next broadcast.
Shel. Canada.
mariolibrandi - 09/23/2006 02:22:57
Thanks for ALL the feedback everyone
Speaking of unidirectional mics, does anyone know of a good electronics, B&H style spot, in Philly?
panikeeer - 11/24/2006 11:45:49
I didnt find thing that i need… 
yahoo