Saturday, 26 September 2009

#VHSMovieClub: The Vmhs Code

Perhaps with the formation of this fledgling media history organization it is time to reveal a dangerous theory that was passed to me by a contact before he was 'retired' by the agency he espionaged against.

A hardly documented power struggle between the ratios 4:3 and 16:9 has existed since the invention of the first canvases and the demands of their purchasing artists, who for reasons unknown requested a certain length of canvas. The width was almost always the same, being constrained by the limit of the press that formed it (although there were variations between the maximum width of any particular press which led to certain canvas makers growing popular and in later years actually dictating the content and composition of the art - but more on this later).

It was in this period that two greatly opposed art fractions were formed; the 4:3ers and the 16:9ers - their names of course representing their canvas proportions (and because of the finite amount of width variations their size as well).

Throughout the ages the battle has raged; unseen yet experienced, irrelevant yet integral, furious and most certainly spurious. Nevertheless like the romanticized power struggles of New York mafia families there have been a few occurrences when it's boiled over into public awareness. Early Summer 1973 was one such time, when with the period later known as the 'Movie Formation Control Years' (or MFCY*) began.

The 'Movie Format Control' department was at the centre of a globo-political power struggle since the first VHS cassette was released in 1973. The movie was 'Soylent Green' starring Charlton Heston, so it was a huge coup for the Russians that their format (16:9) was used for the case that held the VHS cassette.

At the time Heston was an American icon in the making and so it was all the more impressive that the Soviet had turned him. For the US, Heston's face on a Soviet format was a huge insult. Revenge was sought and achieved with the release of CD-ROM cases in 4:3 and continues with the casing for blank DVD's today.

In contrast VHS packing had been consigned to the back shelves in charity shops, where it appears it is only regarded by top men. Top men. It maybe a sign of the rivalry subsiding with DVD movie packaging being an approximation of the two size formats.

As for the relationship of canvas makers to their clients (artists to the rest of us), it was a perverted period in art history when its very presence was realized through its function rather than its form. [Assuming you accept that in other all circumstances, 'Art can have no function other than as a conduit for the artist's thoughts'. This is not to be mistaken with the assertion that 'art can have no function other than as a conduit for the Artists thoughts].

4:3vhs16:9
This is the 'sign' that has alerted most of those I have talked to about this topic to the hidden messages left behind by representatives of 'the formats'. In this example you pronounce vhs as a word rather than an acronym so it sounds like versus. 4:3 being the US and 16:9 obviously translatable as the Soviets. Creepy right..?

4:316:9
With no other documentation on the actual beliefs of the 4:3ers or 19:9ers this link is the only documented reference: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=kEgnLpm06zQC&pg=PA193&lpg=PA193&dq=4:316:9&source=bl&ots=Re1ifXKLRC&sig=AZGCjqCIJBeKQ47iOEjqUZE_tCM&hl=en&ei=UeO9Sr6YI5rLjAfN8YhA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#v=onepage&q=4%3A316%3A9&f=false

*The MFCY were formally called CMYK but K was ejected after a failed attempt for complete control of the acronym and was replaced by F in a realignment which inevitably led to their intended meaning being lost. (CMYK has since been replaced by C,M,Y and K)