Filmkritik Nr. 335–336, Nov.-Dez. 1984

Im Oktober 1984 führte Arno Luik ein mehrtägiges Gespräch mit dem amerikanischen Dokumentarfilmer Emile de Antonio. Es geht um die Anfänge des New American Cinema und Jonas Mekas, um die New Yorker Kunstszene mit John Cage, Robert Rauschenberg und anderen, um de Antonios Filme wie IN THE YEAR OF THE PIG, PAINTERS PAINTING und UNDERGROUND, um abenteuerliche Geschäfte mit Nylonseilen und Gesichtsmasken der US Army.

Das Gespräch wäre zentraler Bestandteil der Filmkritik-Ausgabe 335/336 gewesen, die von Jürgen Ebert konzipiert worden war. Die Texte waren bereits im Satz, dann fehlte das Geld für den Druck. Die Filmkritik stellte ihr Erscheinen ein.

Jetzt wird die damals nicht veröffentlichte Ausgabe während des Festivals „Edit Film Culture!“ veröffentlicht und darüber hinaus im Buchhandel und beim Verlag Brinkmann & Bose erhältlich.

Mehr Informationen über unseren Beitrag im Rahmen von Edit Film Culture! hier.


* Die Publikation Filmkritik Nr. 335–336, Nov.-Dez. 1984 ist im Rahmen von Edit Film Culture! entstanden, einem Projekt der silent green Film Feld Forschung gGmbH in Zusammenarbeit mit Jonas Mekas/Anthology Film Archives, Arsenal – Institut für Film und Videokunst e. V., SAVVY Contemporary e.V., Harun Farocki Institut, Spector Books und Lithuanian Culture Institute. Gefördert durch den Hauptstadtkulturfonds.

30.06.2018, Projekte / Publikation

Avery F. Gordon, in an interview conducted by Katherine Hite and Daniela Jara in Memory Studies:  „Non-participation is one modality of what I call being in-difference. Being in-difference is a political consciousness and a sensuous knowledge, a standpoint and a mindset for living on better terms than we’re offered, for living as if you had the necessity and the freedom to do so, for living in the acknowledgement that, despite the overwhelming power of all the systems of domination which are trying to kill us, they never quite become us. They are, as Cedric J Robinson used to say, only one condition of our existence or being. Running away, living apart, squatting, communing, feral trading, bartering, self-managed currencies, human, debt, labour, knowledge strikes, boycott, divestment, non-policing, throwing your shoe at an occupying president: the ways of non-participation in the given order of things are many, varied and hard to summarize. And they are taken up for a variety of reasons, including the failure or irrelevance of states and the US–European post–World War II social movement model.“

07.07.2020, Tom

Denise Ferreira da Silva via Canadian Art: „Visuality or rather visualizability—being available via social media and accessible through electronic gadgets—seems to have become the main (if not the sole) criterion for reality, which becomes crucial for the ethical-political demands for the protection of black lives, for state accountability and for justice. If that is so, the only way is through these conditions of representation. I mean, the creative move first takes the visualizable as it is, that is, as a twice removed re/composition (at the same time a live streaming, news reporting and documenting) of the scene of violence which only tells us that it happens. It exposes the excess that is the state’s use of total violence, of law enforcement as technique of racial subjugation, while simultaneously removing the black person (the father, the sister, the friend) out of the scene of violence and its visualization. It does so by restoring the dimensions of their existence that the camera cannot capture. That is, the creative move must protect (as an ethical gesture) the black person (keeping her obscurity) in the excess that is the very visualization of the scene of total violence.“

28.06.2020, Tom

Ajay Singh Chaudhary on the politics of climate change, via The Baffler: „One of the most common misconceptions concerning climate change is that it produces, or even requires, a united humanity. In that tale, the crisis in the abstract is a ‚common enemy,‘ and a perfectly universal subject is finally possible in coming to ‚experience‘ ourselves ‚as a geological agent,‘ through which a universal ‚we‘ is constituted in a ’shared sense of catastrophe.‘ The story I am telling you is different. In this story, there is no universal ‚we.‘ Climate change is not the apocalypse, and it does not fall on all equally, or even, in at least a few senses, on everyone at all.“

23.06.2020, Tom
mehrweniger Kurznews