Lecture 1: L. Nakadate

It was very insightful to see her talk, mostly the way she talks rather than what she said. It is fascinating to me how she succeeded in a very conservative institution as Yale (maybe she didn't but that did not destroy her confidence), the unusual approach to her work at this time, her eventual recognition and the current exhibit in PS1. Laurel does what she wants and she believes in it to such an extent that she does not question its value or meaning. This became obvious to me from the way she answered a question from the audience whether she regrets exploiting the lonely men.

I did not like her early work. The moment when she entered the strangers homes is when she exposed herself to risk. As soon as she figured out these are wretched and miserable people, she did whatever she wanted. It is clear that the 3 men on her early videos are indeed lonely, don't know how to react to her dancing, don't know what is happening. I cannot imagine them harming her. Instead of being compassionate with their lack of social skills, she ridicules them. This recalled Amelie (2001) by Jean-Pierre Jeunet, where the very lonely main character interfered with the destinies of other lonely people in order to make them feel better. What Amelie was doing is totally opposed to Laurel in its intent. Nakadate is very nihilistic and reminds of celebrating over the weakness or misery of others.

Feeling lonely herself, she acts like children usually do: distancing themselves from the different or weak in the group. Laurel desperately wants to be different from the lonely middle aged men in order to reject the idea of her ownloneliness. This is done by ridiculing them and emphasizing her own youth, able body and daring character.

I can see a feminist discourse in her work, very distantly. Her early videos are about identifying weaker people and celebrating their weakness.
Is there any socio-economical consideration in her works? I did not ask her this question because I don't expect a honest answer anyway. Her victims are obviously of low income and this is something that sets her apart from them. How did she pay her studies in Yale, her trip in Japan, her 30 day train ride?

Instead of challenging gender power relationships her work seems to be exploiting power generated by her subjects economic hardship or emotional trauma due to different unknow reasons. What is lacking in her work is investigation of the reasons for her subjects current state. Instead she exhibits their way of being as a trophy.

Aki Kaurismaki has many powerful movies about loneliness. This is the main topic in his very unsettling Proletarian Trilogy including The Match Factory Girl (1990) about a female factory worker and Shadows in Paradise (1988) about a garbage man. Kaurismaki's painful focus is not just loneliness but most of all the reasons for it.

What can be seen in Nakadate's work is vast impermeable surface. Her crying face is a facade, a confrontational image rather than a personal experience. Given the fact how much recognition and shows she has made, it seems that the demand of the art market is towards more and sturdier facades.