This is one of my favorite internet videos, probably because of the way it affected me the first time I saw it. So I’m going to try to apply Collingwood’s disentanglement of “art proper” and “craft” to this video.

1. Means and end

Maybe I don’t understand this separation as much as I should, because I would say that the means and end are distinct for this video. The actual tools / actions employed by the video creator are not a part of this video. But I think that superficial application of this distinction could be applied to almost anything, which is why I say I probably don’t understand this distinction that much.

2. Planning and executing

The result, from what I can tell, was obviously preconceived. The video creator set out to make a video that would represent the self-destructive struggles endured by those attempting to attain the beauty represented in the media.

3. The end is prior to the means in planning and the means is prior to the end in execution.

This seems pretty obvious to me. This overlaps a lot with point number 2; the planning happened by deconstructing the end goal to figure out the means (e.g. deciding to use certain visual elements to portray the struggle), and the execution happened by working through the means to the end.

4. Raw material and finished product

In this case the raw material might be all of the models used to create the animations, and the video footage of the woman’s face. They are combined in the finished product.

5. Form and matter

The form of the video is separate from the matter used to create the video.

6. Hierarchical relation

a) raw material of one craft is the finished product of another

The raw materials of this video (the models created and the video footage of the woman’s face) are the finished products of other crafts: creating models and shooting videos (?)

b) one craft supplies another with tools

Not really sure how this point applies

c) complex operation is parceled out among a number of trades

All of the “trades” were done by the same person (except for the acting done by the woman), but it was still parceled out. Video editing, model creation, animation, etc.

 

So, according to my understanding of Collingwood, he would call this “craft.” What is expressed in this video might come across as too obvious for Collingwood. The video creator clearly knew what he was trying to express before making this video, so there was no emotional oppression stage (but maybe that’s just me speculating).

What do you think?

Advertisements