¡Colores!; 1902; Godfrey Reggio with VB Price, VB Stand Up, Line Cut, Audio

Well, I'll just let you know we're ready and you can tell me when we're rolling and I'll just... Okay. You're rolling? Okay. Okay, Eddie. Pull it up the street. Okay. And then take a time to be a kid. Hmm? It's good. Okay. The first time I saw New Mexico filmmaker, Godprey Regios, a claimed film, Coyone Scotsie in 1983, I thought to myself that I'd finally seen a work of art arising from my own era and my own world that matched the sense of dire reality that I shared unspoken with many others. The film itself is wordless. It doesn't tell you anything, but rather gifts you with experience. Coyone Scotsie is a Hopi Pueblo word. Scotsie means life, and Coyones means crazy, out of balance, a crazy life, teetering for a fall.

Godprey Regios created a different kind of film. He manipulates time to submerge the audience in a cinematic experience, changing the way we see the world. Coyone Scotsie contains a profound prophetic message about how we live on Earth. It's as relevant today as when the first film came out 33 years ago. Watch the entire film, Coyone Scotsie, following this coloris. We need to do it again. The last one you said when the first film came out, I think we should say when the film first came out. I mean, it means the same thing. No, no, no, you're right. So that's why we're doing it one more time. You're already sitting there. Oh yeah. Am I ready?

Stand by. Okay, we're rolling. The first time my... The first time I saw a New Mexico filmmaker, Godprey Regios, acclaimed film Coyones Scotsie in 1983. I thought to myself that I'd finally seen a work of art arising from my own era and my own world that matched the sense of dire reality that I shared unspoken with many others. The film itself is wordless. It doesn't tell you anything, but rather gifts you with experience. Coyones Scotsie is a hopey Pueblo word. Scotsie means life, and Coyones means crazy. Out of balance. A life teetering for a fall. Just start at Coyones if you want to. Okay. We got that first one. Okay, so I'll go down where?

That kind of Scotsie is a hopey Pueblo word. Okay, you want to go up a little bit with the... Yeah, okay. I'm sorry, yeah, okay. Coyones Scotsie is a hopey Pueblo word. Scotsie means life, and Coyones means crazy. Out of balance. A crazy life teetering for a fall. Godprey Regios created a different kind of film. He manipulates time to submerge the audience in a cinematic experience, changing the way we see the world. Coyones Scotsie contains a profound prophetic message about how we live on Earth, as relevant the day as when the film first came out 33 years ago. Watch the entire film. Coyones Scotsie following this color. Okay, let's roll one more time. Okay, we're rolling ready when you are.

The first time I saw a New Mexico filmmaker, Godprey Regios, a claimed film Coyones Scotsie in 1983. I thought to myself that I'd finally seen a work of art arising from my own era in my own world that matched the sense of dire reality that I shared unspoken with many others. The film itself is worthless. It doesn't tell you anything, but rather gifts you with experience. Coyones Scotsie is a hopey Pueblo word. Scotsie means life, and Coyones means crazy. Out of balance. A crazy life, teetering for a fall. Godprey Regios created a different kind of film. He manipulates time to submerge the audience in a cinematic experience. We have to do another take. Okay, so the one thing I'm so sorry

because it's in the middle of your wonderful, the dramatic voice, but you're saying Scotsie means life. It's just Coyones. That's right. It's only little things like that. That's good. Coyote, Coyote, Coyote. Okay. Can you want me to do the whole thing or just do it? Yeah, I'll have to start using it. Taking me bread. Coyote. Coyote. Coyote. Okay. There you go. I need the words. Yeah, from the top. Sorry. Okay. Ready? Ready. Okay. Okay. Ready? Ready. Okay. That's all you have. The first time I saw in New Mexico Filmmaker, Godprey Radio. It's okay. The first time I saw in New Mexico Filmmaker, Godprey Radio, it's okay. The first time I saw in New Mexico Filmmaker,

Godprey Regios, a claimed film, Coyones Scotsie, in 1983. I thought to myself that I had finally seen a work of art, arising from my own era in my own world, that matched the sense of dire reality that I shared unspoken with many others. The film itself is wordless, doesn't tell you anything, but rather gifts you with experience. Coyones Scotsie is a hopey-publow word. Cotsie means life, and Coyones means crazy, out of balance, a crazy life, teetering for a fall. Godprey Regios created a different kind of film. He manipulates time to submerge the audience in a cinematic experience, changing the way we see the world. Coyones Scotsie contains a profound prophetic message about how we live on earth, as relevant today as when the film first appeared 33 years ago.

What's the entire film? Coyones Scotsie following this Cholores. I'm going to stick with the beard, you know what I'm doing? There was just that little thing at the beginning. Okay, well, that's good. So this is that close-up, so we're looking at, you know, you have those great expressions here. Let's try to do it in one. Let's do it in one if we possibly can. Stand by just a second. We need to get your shot. It's a good... Ready? The first time I saw in a Mexico filmmaker, Godprey Regios, a claimed film, Coyones Scotsie in 1983, I thought to myself that I'd finally seen a work of art arising from my own era in my own world that matched the sense of dire reality

that I shared unspoken with many others. The film itself is wordless. It doesn't tell you anything, but rather gift you with experience. Coyones Scotsie is a Hopi Pueblo word. Cotsie means life, and Coyones means crazy, out of balance, a life teetering for a fall. Screw it. A crazy life teetering for a fall. Do I have to do the whole thing again? Yeah, that would be fine. I want to start at Coyones Scotsie. Can we stop at Coyones Scotsie? I hope we have a word? Yeah, that would be great. Cotsie, Cotsie, Cotsie, Cotsie, Cotsie. Okay, are you ready? We're in your order. Okay, Coyones Scotsie is a Hopi Pueblo word. Cotsie means life, and Coyones means crazy, out of balance,

a crazy life teetering for a fall. Godfrey Reggio has created a different kind of film. He manipulates time to submerge the audience in a cinematic experience, changing the way we see the world. Coyones Scotsie contains a profound prophetic message about how we live on Earth. As relevant today as it was when the film first came out 33 years ago, watch the entire film, Coyones Scotsie, following this Chloris. I had always heard that it heard a different translation of that about the tools that had been well used and more long periods of time and had broccoli in it. Okay. Okay, here we go.

Okay. It's really wonderful to have you here with us tonight, Coyones. Thank you. Thank you. You know, I've been watching Coyones Scotsie now, I think probably eight times, and I just saw it again in my kitchen last night. And I got to wondering about how this whole thing has changed for you over all these years, because I realized that I had a very different view of it, too. But the thing that I really was really interested in as a cultural anthropologist is how you fixed on that word, Coyones Scotsie, and those three words in the Cassie Trilogy. How did you come in? Well, the actual situation is I didn't want a word for the name of the film. I wanted to have an image because we're dealing with not a written script. We're not dealing with text. We're dealing with texture. We're not coming from literature. We're coming from visualization.

So it's a visual composition. It's a visual form. Now, that's different than what you would find in traditional cinema, which tells you a story. However, this is not a story to be told, a story to behold. So in that sense, I wanted to have a visual as the title for the film. And I had such a visual. But at the end of the day, I was persuaded that that would kill the film. Nobody would know what to say. And so I said, okay, we'll let that go. Having said that, I wanted to find a word that had no cultural baggage. So what I did was, you mentioned anthropology. I'm not an intellectual or meaning have big degrees or anything, but I did go to a funky, beautiful, small college. And I learned that if you're studying, say, ethnology, the department uses the professor and the book's

own subjective categories to analyze indigenous peoples. So that, you know, I can't blame them. I mean, that's the limit of what they can do. So I said, how interesting it would be to take the subjective category of indigenous peoples and have them analyze Bahana, or white people, or the bigger culture. And so, I was very moved by the Hopiites. I'm not a Hopiite. I tried not to drive them crazy. And also with a professor at the University of Arizona and Flagstaff, Atka Hart-Malatke, I said, I'm looking for a word, and then I describe what I'm looking for, a world that's completely upside down, where the moment of the truth is the moment of the false, where everything that seems normal is, at least from the point of view of this film itself, abnormal.

Anyway, I found this word, koyanas katsi. It's an ancient word. It's a compound word. Katsi means life. Koyanas means crazy, turmoil, in conflict, fundamentally what that word means is a way of life that calls for another way of living. And that to me is profound. The perspacacity, the clarity, the insight of these people watching us for centuries, literally, is worth us taking a look at. Now, this film is not about Hopiites. It's about using their term, which no one knew, including many of the Hopis. Okay? That's not to say some Hopis didn't know it. I had to get permission. I went through the equivalent of a theological examination. My mentors were David Menongue

and Minalansa. Minalansa was a very important clan leader in Oloraya B and David was a healer and a clan leader and a possessor of the prophecies of the Hopis to the outside world. And they backed me and brought me to another village where their Kikmungue or their elders wanted to examine where did I get this word? What do you think it means? I felt like I was at university trying to get a dissertation. So that Minalansa stood up for me. She was a very important woman at that moment, and David, who was controversial, but important, and they gave me permission to use the word. So that word, because it has no cultural baggage, for example, many people thought that the word came from Japan. In Italy,

if I can be so bold, Koyanas and Katzi have two different completely names, different names, having to do with the sex organs of men. So while the film was very successful there, that might have had something to do with it. But I was very pleased in choosing that word, and then when a trilogy came up, I wanted two other words that in compound with Katzi could describe or given offering a point of view to the film. So Poakatsi is a black magician that consumes the life of another person in order to support her own or his own life. So it operates through allurement and seduction, and I said, what a better metaphor or point of view or even parable for the relationship

between northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere countries in the film Poakatsi. So first film, northern hemisphere, hyperindustrial grid, societies, technology, Koyanas Katzi, second film Poakatsi, cultures of orality, cultures of tradition, of simplicity, handmade life, and then Nakoi Katzi, all together all at once, the global world in which we live, the world where the image is more real than reality. So that usually when I make a film, the locations are everything because the locations are like characters in the film that I try and the films that I make. And in the case of Nakoi Katzi, we relocated not, the location itself was an image. So we relocated on to images that were iconic, that everyone had seen in some way,

tortured those images, repossessed them and put them back out in a reanimated form. The word Nakoi means war, but not war of the battlefield, war as ordinary daily living. The actual etymology, if I can use that word, is each other kill many life. So I felt that would be an appropriate term, to describe the Simeis twins of Nakoi Katzi of war and religion. Isn't that wonderful? I'm sorry, I just thought it was beautiful. So after 33 years, I know when I go back and look at things that I've done and I'm often, I think I'm not unhappy with them, but I certainly come to them in a different way. And I'm wondering how you now come to, particularly to Koyana Scott,

but to the ultra-logy, now that it's had this much time to soak into you, as someone who's not only made it, but watched it in experience that yourself. Well, you know, I virtually don't live in the past much. I'm still active attempting to make another movie, with Philip and my colleagues. We've done six movies together. I look at these films like Children. And fortunately, at my age, I don't have to be concerned about whether my child gets fed or whether, you know, they get show up at night. I mean, they're taking their adults, they take care of themselves. And Koyana Scott has achieved a life of its own. It has a life that will certainly outlive mine. And so I can only feel happy for it. So Koyana Scott is out in the world,

certainly doing its own thing. It doesn't need me to say a word about it. It has a voice of its own. Do you think that, just I guess, I don't know, we all look at our work in different ways, but does the film mean the same thing to you as it do? She was. Let me make a distinction between meaning and meaning full. The films that I do are not aimed at the head. They're aimed at the solar plexus. They're aimed at the aesthetic triplets that reside within each and every one of us. In many of us, they're dormant, but they're there. And they can be brought to life. And they are the triplets of sensation, emotion, and perception. Now, when I think of Koyana Scott,

which I don't often think of, I'm not thinking of a meaning. I'm thinking of the meaningful experience, the opportunity that I had to be involved in that project. Let me say this by way of putting that into a context. When I say I, I really mean we. These films are way beyond my personal capacity. I always make every effort to work with people more talented artistically than I am. And so, to be able to work with Philip Glass, to be able to work with Ron Fricky, to be able to work with John Cain, Ray Jim Menace, Larry Top, all these people. This is an opportunity for me because my job is more like a midwife to help the process give birth to itself. And there's an old adage that I've been with for a long time.

Begin and the work will show you how. It's an old Polish proverb. Another one, Zen, leap, and the net will appear. Those are the means that I use to make the film as ridiculous as that sound. So, to go back to your question, what does this film mean for me? What does this film mean for me? It means, and when I think of it, I think of it in terms of the relationships that I've had and the opportunity to create something that none of us involved with it had ever done before. Wonderful. At some point you said that our language, Western European languages, can no longer describe the world that we live in.

I thought that was a powerful observation. And that indeed your films, I can't say they're a replacement for language, but it's kind of like a river moving around a dam that won't hold the water back. You move around the language in a way and around the traditional senses of meaning so that the image that the viewer gets is so forceful and so powerful that it stays with them. It certainly stayed with me for years and I've thought about it and worked with it. I really don't know how much of it's even appearing in my own work. But so what is the replacement of a failed language? Let me give a background to that comment. The comment was that our language no longer describes the world we live in. Now of course, let's be clear. This is only a point of view.

I'm not here to speak the truth. I'm here to only tell you what my shadow tells me. And having said that the reason that's important is that I feel we see the world through language more than through our eyes. It is our language that makes us different from makes us so human and animal as it were. Different from our other cousins in the form of the language that we have. If our language no longer describes the world in which we live, then we're not seeing the world that's there. If I may be biblical, if I may be biblical, we live in a world more real than true. So I wanted to make an effort to make a film more true than real. Now because the films that I'm involved with are about the twilight of the real,

how the real is disappearing in the presence of us as we sit here. So not being able to see, not having our language describe a world that's no longer here, our language has in that sense become antique. We're describing a world that's not here. Let's look at the U.S. Congress. What world are they living in? Where are they coming from? Are they in the Mexico state legislature who can hardly pass two or three laws in a whole session because of this ideological point of view, which is a language that has nothing to do with the truth of the world in which we live. So having said that, let me offer to those that are listening tonight, something you've already heard. Napoleon has this great dictum of pictures worth a thousand words. So I tried to take a thousand pictures metaphorically as it were,

turn that statement on its head, and offer you a thousand pictures that can give you the power of one word, Coyanus Cotsie. Since we see the world through language, maybe we can adopt another way of looking at it through languages that do see the world in which we live in. And I would go at the risk of being provocative. I would go to those that are more oppressed in our society who see more the reality of day-to-day living and have them help us see the world in which we live. Beautiful. So for someone who doesn't know how movies are made, I'm very interested in the techniques that were used, the cinematic language, if you will, the time-lapsing and the speeding up. I was watching, again, those cars, you know, boom, boom, boom.

I was thinking that in each one of those blurs were human beings who were also blurred, just like this world is blurry all of it. How did you come up with the arsenal of technique? To put that into a context, in a theatrical film, the films that all of us see on TV are in the theater about stories to be told. There's a foreground and a background. The foreground is the characterization, the plot, the story. So you can follow it so that it's meaningful to you. The background is maybe what you see as the car is driving from one place to the next, or the house in which the event takes place, or the field in which the event took place. What I wanted to do was switch those relationships. I wanted to take the foreground of conventional cinema, eradicate it, and take the background, second-unit production, and make that as if we're shooting Greta Garbo.

God, I got it. Because we, you know, I'm sure the audience knows this term, genius loci. All locations possess a voice. They can speak if you can listen. And so nature has a very high voice, as does the new nature that we've created, the technological universe that we live in, which is from my point of view, off planet. So if the foreground is eliminated, the background, which is usually just to, you know, you don't even notice it, it's just part of the event, becomes the foreground, then the question becomes, how do you treat it? These films, as I said earlier, are an attempt to elicit the aesthetic triplets of sensation, emotion, and perception. So you have to do it through the form.

In art, only form has meaning. In cinema, if you get rid of the convention of a story to be told, in other words, take it out of literature, of screenplay, and put it into a visual medium, then what are you dealing with? Motor speeds, lenses, where the camera is mounted, whether it's still or moving, at what all of those give you tremendous reach for the vocabulary of the visualization of the film. And so, in the case of Kojana Skatsi, the point of view of the film is that, which is most present, is that, which is least seen. It's the forest for the tree. We live in a world that we're surrounded by, so it becomes ordinary. It is taken for granted. It's the assumption we make for the sake of our behavior.

So, if you, in other words, not only the blind, cannot see, all of us are blind to the world by virtue of its presence, not by virtue of some secretive thing that's going on or some cabal or some conspiracy of old men and blackouts that are controlling the world, it's all visibly present here. How to see that? We've all seen traffic. But if you see traffic in a way that gives you another perspective on it, this is what art can help you do, change your perspective. I hate the word art because it's been hijacked by the market. But art is an attempt to touch people in a way that, let's say, something more practical can't do. And it's different for each person.

So, in the case of the films using either slowed up footage, or if you want to, when you slow the footage down, there's an inverse relationship. So, you shoot it very slow. When you project it, it's very fast on the screen. If you want to shoot it very fast, you shoot it extremely slow. And it's an inverse relationship. And then it comes back to you in slow motion. So, you shoot it very fast to make it very slow. You shoot it very slow to make it very fast. And then it gives you a way of receding something that you see every day, but you might see it then in a different way. So, for example, in Poakatsi, the norm for cinema is 24 frames a second. Our norm was anywhere from 48 to 160 frames a second, because it allowed you to feel things from other people that in a moment you couldn't catch at 24 frames a second.

Also, long lens is used, which compresses. So, there's an arsenal of form-related technique that allows you, as it were, to sculpt in time something that is called cinema. Wonderful answer. Oh, this is great. You got a coffee, excuse me. So, while Kojoneskatsi particularly, what may I all do? But it has this extraordinary organic feel. It's like these images were shot exactly in the way that they themselves have wanted to be seen shot. They're so beautiful. And yet, we know, rationally, that there was somebody there, you presumably, Andrew collaborators, who were making choices.

How did you make those choices? Well, let me be clear. The cinematographer for 83% of Kojoneskatsi is Ron Fricky. I consider him an artistic genius. He knows about framing, composition. He's an engineer. He can create motors. He can create cameras, design them. He's on steroids. So, that's what I meant about working with people more talented than I. I choose the location. I drive him crazy, telling him all the things. I think I want to see. But at the end of the day, it's a collaborative form. It's something where I'm not going to try to tell Ron Fricky how to best shoot this completely. I'm going to tell him what I want, how I feel. He's going to have to do it. Same thing with Philip Glass.

He's going to have to write the music. I might, again, speak to him, write, drive him crazy with all kinds of comments. But at the end of the day, he has to remember to forget everything I've told him in order that he can have an original response to this material. So, still the image in my mind is you and Mr. Fricky and his staff and everybody else. Shlumping around the world with all this material, all these cameras, all this stuff, things happening. How do you know when they're going to happen? How do you know how to be there at the right time? How do I know all that work? It seems like there was a tremendous amount of magic involved, too. I mean, I have a lot of luck. Well, a lot of luck. And in my case, naivete, being willing to make mistakes, sometimes not even knowing it. But then having at least the courage at times to know that the mistake is the biggest teacher that you can have. Now, let's talk about getting around for Koyana Scotsi, a Polakotsi, which was in 13 countries.

None of that could have been done without Alton Warpole. Now, for those of you that don't know him, he's for me, Mr. New Mexico cinema. There's not an aspect of cinema in New Mexico that he doesn't have his very ample contribution to make on. He was the guy that helped organize the whole production of Polakotsi with two crews, with two and a half tons of equipment going around the world for a little over six months. Without a person like that, you're shooting blanks. So I was more than fortunate to be able to work with Alton. I must also tell you a story about Alton. You're doing the intensity of making Koyana Scotsi in Venice, California. The film was edited twice. It was remixed twice.

A lot of mistakes were made, and I must say that I have one person to thank. I don't know if he wants this thank, but one night over many drinks. Dear Alton was counseling me to believe that you are a filmmaker. So he gave me the courage at a moment of great darkness in my own. When things were falling apart, I had just fired an editor. You don't need to hear all the story. It's unimportant. But that's the value of collaboration as well. People who can help you see something in yourself that maybe you're afraid or incapable of seeing. So I have to thank Alton for putting me on that road big time. As you're talking about collaboration and creative people helping one another. It seems in a certain sense, as I was watching this last time last night,

that the world that we have evolved is a world that doesn't help itself. We don't help each other anymore. There's no sense of collaboration in how we build a world. You and Tuit that there's a lot of talk going on between the makers of this. The viewer can almost tell that. In a certain sense, the product itself, the process of the film itself is about a world that I would love to see once again. Well, everything that goes into the film, if you know how to read it, is up on the screen. The conflicts, the this, it's all there. I asked my crew when they come into the film to, as it were, get ready to take a trip to Anna Perna, say bye-bye. And we're going to take this long, long journey. We're going to meet every morning at 10.30.

We're going to work until the evening where it's going to be a very tough and arduous event. But that's to get us all into the same heartbeat, into the same breath, into the same motion about it. Now, that's not to say that everyone, that's to get everyone to follow my heartbeat or my breath. It's that we can create together a commonality of a collaboration that allows that to happen. When someone is treated as a person that has nothing to do but a job that they're paid to do, that's it, then creativity goes out the window. They have a task. Everyone that works on these films, from the person that works in the kitchen to the person that sweeps the floor frequently myself, has access to the main frame. At the end of the day, how do I say this?

My role is to be everything from a mother to an assassin, because we don't do this by committee on the other hand. We're not taking votes. We have to satisfy, it's not even me, it's whatever is in me is represented through me. And I try to be as open as I possibly can to all the great thoughts of other people, many of them way beyond thoughts that I could have that get incorporated into the process. But at the end of the day, I have to feel that this is what I want to do. Yeah. So it's not a committee process is what I'm trying to say. Could you talk to me some more, I'm sorry, it's just time. Yeah. All right, I'll try that.

I'll give that a go. Okay, let me just try a shot here. I'm wondering if the making of Cleona Scotsie, as well as the actual film, the making of it is a model for a new kind of living together, a new kind of world. As I'm watching these films I'm thinking about the future, I'm thinking about my grandchildren, I'm not quite at the back door, but I'm getting there. What are we looking forward to? Is there a way that we can talk to one another again, work with one another again, create with one another again? So if one believes that your world is your range of relationships, then yes. But if one buys into the fallacy of the globalized moment, here we are all together,

one people, one way, one path, the blue planet, then we go through representative democracy, and we don't trust any politicians because they're interested in themselves, they're very few courageous souls anymore, then what do you do? So I could in no way recommend that what I participated in in making Cleona Scotsie be a model for others. There's a law of degrees, we all have to find, we all cast our own shadow and therefore have to find our own dynamic. But what I can say as an abstraction, the dynamic that drove those films was the deliberate attempt not to live in a rooted future. In cinema, if we live in a rooted future, then we repeat no matter how brilliant what has been done in the past. Now, being audacious, I wanted to have an uncreated future that we were going to work on.

In other words, if you live in the rooted future, you know what the outcome is going to be in terms of the film. I wanted an uncreated future which would allow us the freedom to create something, in my case, to shield ourselves from the blinding light of technology so that in the darkness through creativity, through form, we can create life and light. Now, that leads into something obviously contradictory because, well, the films that I've been involved in, or you can look at them as a point of view about technology, some say a critical point of view. Whatever everyone sees a different picture, so however you want to make it. But these films do use the highest form of technology in the moment that they're made.

This Poakatsi in terms of the actual budgeting of the shooting of the film costs more than out of Africa. Where most of the money went into the crew and the stars and the writers and all the producers, where 90% of our money goes into the making of the film. It's just another approach to how to deal with this. Okay, we're going to try and wrap it up a little bit now. So let me think about it. Let's just both think together. If you want to talk about the motivation for Poakatsi, I can do that, or not, or we can, however, whatever you want to do. Oh, yeah. No, I think we did. But let me think about the motivation. Okay. So in the, I guess it was in the 70s, you made a powerful movie about privacy and propaganda.

And the way the world is manipulated and the way we are manipulated by it. I know that there's, that the, that the great excitement about Poakatsi is that it is so unpredictable with the manipulation of time. And the, and the incredible expansion and contraction of time is so startling to the eyeball that, that the notion of propaganda is simply dissolves before you. But what is, is any of that in the motivation behind making that movie? What you're referring to is what's called the New Mexico media privacy campaign done for the ACLU. It was done in, the campaign was in March of 1974. So that was 34 years ago. Everything that Snowden is revealing now was already in beyond naison form in full bloom, but in an analog configuration only starting to be going digital.

So that record keeping in 1974 was well on its way and very healthy, if I may say, without any of us knowing anything about it. So the Watergate trials had just gone through the Congress and that was just the tip of the iceberg. Some of us felt that, that the use of technology to control behavior, the use of drugs to control kids like Ritalin in schools, cycle surgery and federal institutions, that most of our decision making on a government level was now through computer, all the rhythms. All of that seemed like a very, very important issue at the time. So we did a, a full service public interest advertising campaign did billboards at high traffic density areas all over Albuquerque in the state in the Mexico.

We did television in prime time spots. We did radio and drive time. We wrote a book and put it out in the Albuquerque journal midway through as an insert on a Sunday. We had all kinds of talk, talking heads, hot air balloons with eyes floating around. And that was really in form a precursor for me of the form used in the films because it was all nonverbal. And it was done in a way that was inescapable. People are addicted to the medium. So if you have something on billboards, you can't not look at a billboard. You might not give it recognition, but it's looking at you as you go by. So it's like the wallpaper, again, that's hidden in plain sight that none of us see. So in Albuquerque, we tried to put the billboard where there were clusters of billboards because we designed a form that was in diametric opposition to the nature of commodity advertising. So that our billboard was given presence by virtue of the similarity of all the rest. Even though they were different, they had this commercial similarity.

I always had a big eye or a child with like a mug number which was our Social Security number. All of those things were done in a manner that people could not escape it because it was on TV. But the first time, I can't remember, I think it was KOB said they were having people call up, calling up to find out when the next advert would be on the two. So this went on for a month knowing that politicians do the right thing for the wrong reason. We scheduled it at the time right before the state's democratic and Republican conventions. Sure enough, they adopted all of the issues from the campaign because public opinion went from 14% to 63% in three weeks. So for example, Manuel Lohan Sr., who was the Secretary of Interior, he's deceased now, knew him well, and he was, I think, a representative.

He sponsored with some other people in the U.S. Congress, the elimination of psychosogery and all federal institutions. School boards got rid of some school boards, got rid of Ritalin as a way to treat hyperactive kids and making them by the way drug addicted. So it did have a very small effect, but it, for me personally, indicated a nonverbal form that could be extremely articulated. Okay, I'd like to ask you a little bit about the future. So as I was watching Koyana Scotty again last night, I felt that I was watching a film that wasn't about the future, that wasn't in the future, that was in a kind of a timeless state, particularly in an ironic way because time is used and speeded up and slowed down so wonderfully in the film itself.

But then I got to thinking about this is going somewhere, this world of ours, this incredibly crazy world of ours, it is going somewhere. I'm wondering when you talk to young people, how do you deal with their worry and their fear about the future? That's a very difficult question. Of course, I just have a little point of view on it and the truth is there is no one point of view about it. I often tell young people that whatever you're interested in, I don't care what it is, commit yourself to that, commit yourself to it not with grace and gratuity, but like to an insane asylum. Because otherwise you're going to end up just making a living, you're going to end up spending all that time going to university or community college or training school in order to end up to make money.

And that's not going to be a very fulfilling life. So whatever you can do or believe you can do it, boldness has genius, magic and power in it. Gerta said that in the 18th century. And that's what I try to tell people. I was a teacher at St. Mike's High School in Santa Fe for years and I learned early on by mistake that the student is the efficient cause of education, not yours truly, the teacher. All I could do was facilitate and most of the time get in their way. And I believe that's the case today. So my advice to young people is to, you know, if they could create, if they could live in an uncreated future, rather than in the rooted future, then they would have an opportunity to offer something. Now, they might have to go through the right of a useful unemployment for a long time. They might have to live many lives and die many deaths.

What I'm saying is that those people willing to say no to necessity can be free to pursue that which is within them. All of us have a voice within ourselves. We just have to believe it and we can hear it and it can lead us. That's so good. So are we wrapped up, do you think? It's up to you. Okay, so do we, are we, are we, we're done. Okay. Okay. Okay. Great.