Our life is driven by the impulse of desire. We follow our dreams to achieve our goals through life. However, where is the object of desire coming from? Is something that we decide or is a social construction we learn through education and culture?
Personally, I have been always obsessed with these questions. As a male person born in the mid 80´s, I was taught to desire women and money. Success is a synonym of “having” these two “things”. We are constantly struggling to get them and finally achieving happiness. So, for our society, the way to satisfaction is through the accumulation of possessions. In consequence, we give our time in exchanged for money to achieve this unreachable joy. Desire is something that cannot be never fulfilled. If we are willing to give our lives for reaching our desires, and desire is something that we are taught, then, is truly possible the existence of freedom? Or slavery has been hiding behind the shifting of language?
In the Art field, the logic is the same: we constantly are in the search of success. It seems that this enjoyment is reachable when we finally understand the meaning of Art and we produce a “good work of art”. Nevertheless, nobody knows what is the meaning of it. We give for granted the existence of a consensus about the meaning of the word. And, if you ask as an artist the reaction of Academy is to leave the concern. We are afraid of ontological questions because the nature of them will lead as to a non-logical answer. Art is now part of the social sciences, thus, there is no place for such venture. The Scientific method is distorting the way we approach it.
Loop is a short film which works as an allegory of these concerns. In it, a painter reaches a point of frustration in his work, decides to take a break and falls sleep. While he sleeping, there is a phantasmagoric presence standing in front of him. She whispers something in his ear and leaves the studio. The artist wakes up with the door noise and starts following her. Time and space become distorted in his chase. The closer he gets, the further she is. When he finally reaches her in a dead end, she evaporates and he falls from the building. Once on the ground, he wakes up, finds her and keeps following her. His chase is a metaphor of our chase for desire. I decided to use this cliché of the artist following her muse because the whole thing about desire is a cliché that should be already overcome. But she also is an allegory of art itself as a phantasmagoric thing that we try to reach but, the closer we get, the more confusing becomes. Art itself is a cliché.
Formally, the film uses the language of early silent cinema: establishing shot, master shot, close-up, intra-frame shots and the monochromatic aspect are elements of the style. Also, there is a separation of the sound and the image: the sound in the movie does not match the actions that are happening to explore the psychological reality of the character. Another element is the surrealistic aspect of the film and its connection with painting which was inspired but the German expressionism. Finally, there is an absence of death similar to the silent cinema comedy element but, used in a psychological and dreamlike way. The death of the character is a metaphor for the relations between desire and slavery present in our society. We give our time, and by extension, our lives in exchanged for the object of desire we were taught to chase. If we finally want to end slavery, we must begin by breaking the loop in which we are trapped.