Januar 2020: Digitalisierungen des Harun Farocki Instituts

In den Jahren 2016 bis 2019 wurden die folgenden Film- und Videomaterialien aus dem Bestand des Harun Farocki Instituts digitalisiert:

 

RONNY UND HARUN SPIELEN THEATER (1982)
6 min
16mm Umkehr, Magnetton
Farbe
2K Digitalisierung, Oktober 2016

Aufnahme einer Performance des Trailers zu ETWAS WIRD SICHTBAR im Foyer des Delphi-Theater anlässlich der Aufführung des Films beim „Forum“ der Berlinale. Darsteller: Ronny Tanner und Harun Farocki.

***

ZUR ANSICHT: PETER WEISS (1979)
62 min 16mm, s/w, Magnetton
2K Digitalisierung, Oktober 2016

Dreharbeiten in Stockholm. Nicht verwendetes Gesprächs-Material aus ZUR ANSICHT: PETER WEISS. Im Gespräch: Peter Weiss und Harun Farocki.

***

HARD SELLING (1991)
21/22 min (zwei leicht unterschiedliche Fassungen)
S-VHS, Farbe, Ton
Digitalisierung, September 2017

Ein nicht fertiggestellter Film Farockis aus dem Jahr 1991. Farocki fährt mit dem Adidas-Vertreter Klaus Glahn durch Brandenburg und Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Autofahrten durch die „neuen Länder“, Gespräche zwischen Farocki und Glahn im Auto, Filialbesuche des Außendienst-Repräsentanten, der das Händlernetz nach dem Fall der Mauer aufbauen soll.

***

GESPRÄCH MIT GISELA TROWE (ca. 1983)
14 min
16mm Umkehr, Magnetton, Farbe
2K Digitalisierung, April 2018

Gisela Trowe spielte eine kleine Rolle in Peter Lorres Film DER VERLORENE. Farocki und Felix Hofmann filmten ein Gespräch mit ihr für die WDR-Produktion PETER LORRE – DAS DOPPELTE GESICHT (1984). Das Material fand in der fertigen Sendung keine Verwendung.

***

ETWAS WIRD SICHTBAR: PROBEAUFNAHMEN (ca. 1980)
16 min
16mm, s/w, Magnetton
2K Digitalisierung, Juni 2019

Darstellerinnen und ein Darsteller bei Proben zum Film ETWAS WIRD SICHTBAR (1982).

***

BILDER/GESCHICHTE (ca. 1987)
Dreharbeiten zu „Bilder der Welt und Inschrift des Krieges
20 min
16mm Umkehr, Magnetton, Farbe
2K Digitalisierung, Oktober 2019

Eine Gruppe von Schulkindern besucht die Antikensammlung. Ein blindes Mädchen beschreibt unter Anleitung einer Museumspädagogin zwei Statuen – eine aus Bronze, eine aus Marmor. Das Material wurde vermutlich für BILDERKRIEG (1987) bzw. BILDER DER WELT UND INSCHRIFT DES KRIEGES (1988) gedreht, aber im fertigen Film nicht verwendet.

***

Die Digitalisierung zwischen 2017 und 2019 entstand im Rahmen von Archive außer sich, ein Projekt des Arsenal – Institut für Film und Videokunst e.V. in Kooperation mit dem Haus der Kulturen der Welt. Gefördert im Rahmen von Das Neue Alphabet durch die BKM auf Grundlage eines Beschlusses des Deutschen Bundestages.

31.01.2020 — Archiv / Schaufenster
Schnittstelle

Lauren Berlant, the brilliant theorist of „cruel optimism“ and related issues, died of a rare form of cancer on June 28. The following, devastatingly optimistic quote is from a 2016 essay on the commons as „infrastructures for troubling times,“ part of a book that they worked on with the typically double-edged title On the Inconvenience of Other People: „What remains for our pedagogy of unlearning is to build affective infrastructures that admit the work of desire as the work of an aspirational ambivalence. What remains is the potential we have to common infrastructures that absorb the blows of our aggressive need for the world to accommodate us and our resistance to adaptation and that, at the same time, hold out the prospect of a world worth attaching to that’s something other than an old hope’s bitter echo. A failed episode is not evidence that the project was in error. By definition, the common forms of life are always going through a phase, as infrastructures will.“

 

Some basics from the Strike MoMA site: „Campaigns, actions, and letters chip away at the regime’s facade from the outside. Inside, every time workers organize, defy the boss, care for a coworker, disrespect secrecy, or enact other forms of subversion, cracks are created in the core. Cracking and chipping, chipping and cracking. As the walls that artificially separate the museum from the world collapse, we reorient away from the institution and come together to make plans. Let us strike in all the ways possible to exit from the terms of the museum so we can set our own.“

 

via Hyperallergic on the environmental impact of blockchain referring to recent NFT (non-fungible token) art sales: „This is not the first time the art world has come under scrutiny for being on the wrong side of the climate conversation. Artists and activists have protested everything from the carbon footprint of physical art fairs to the fossil fuel money funding major museums. But some say the energy consumption of cryptocurrencies is particularly egregious, and research shows it’s relatively easily quantifiable. A study by Cambridge University, for instance, estimates that bitcoin uses more electricity per year than the entire nation of Argentina. (Ethereum mining consumes a quarter to half of what Bitcoin mining does, but one transaction uses more power than an average US household in a day, according to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.)“

 

Nicholas Mirzoeff on “Artificial vision, white space and racial surveillance capitalism”: “Based as it is on ‘epidermalization’ (the assertion of absolute difference based on relative differences in skin color), AI’s racial surveillance deploys an all-too-familiar racialized way of seeing operating at plan-etary scale. It is the plantation future we are now living in. All such operations take place in and via the new imagined white space of technology known as the cloud. In reality, a very material arrangement of servers and cables, the cloud is both an engine of high-return low-employment capitalism and one of the prime drivers of carbon emissions.”

 

Sara Ahmed on the performativity of disgust (from The Cultural Politics of Emotion, 2004): “To name something as disgusting is to transfer the stickiness of the word ‘disgust’ to an object, which henceforth becomes generated as the very thing that is spoken. The relationship between the stickiness of the sign and the stickiness of the object is crucial to the performativity of disgust as well as the apparent resistance of disgust reactions to ‘newness’ in terms of the generation of different kinds of objects. The object that is generated as a disgusting (bad) object through the speech act comes to stick. It becomes sticky and acquires a fetish quality, which then engenders its own effects.”

15.06.2021

auf Hyperallergic über die Umweltbelastung durch Kryptowährungen aus Anlass jüngster Auktionen von NFT (non-fungible token)-Kunst: „This is not the first time the art world has come under scrutiny for being on the wrong side of the climate conversation. Artists and activists have protested everything from the carbon footprint of physical art fairs to the fossil fuel money funding major museums. But some say the energy consumption of cryptocurrencies is particularly egregious, and research shows it’s relatively easily quantifiable. A study by Cambridge University, for instance, estimates that bitcoin uses more electricity per year than the entire nation of Argentina. (Ethereum mining consumes a quarter to half of what Bitcoin mining does, but one transaction uses more power than an average US household in a day, according to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.)“

 

Nicholas Mirzoeff on “Artificial vision, white space and racial surveillance capitalism”: “Based as it is on ‘epidermalization’ (the assertion of absolute difference based on relative differences in skin color), AI’s racial surveillance deploys an all-too-familiar racialized way of seeing operating at plan-etary scale. It is the plantation future we are now living in. All such operations take place in and via the new imagined white space of technology known as the cloud. In reality, a very material arrangement of servers and cables, the cloud is both an engine of high-return low-employment capitalism and one of the prime drivers of carbon emissions.”

 

Sara Ahmed on the performativity of disgust (from The Cultural Politics of Emotion, 2004): “To name something as disgusting is to transfer the stickiness of the word ‘disgust’ to an object, which henceforth becomes generated as the very thing that is spoken. The relationship between the stickiness of the sign and the stickiness of the object is crucial to the performativity of disgust as well as the apparent resistance of disgust reactions to ‘newness’ in terms of the generation of different kinds of objects. The object that is generated as a disgusting (bad) object through the speech act comes to stick. It becomes sticky and acquires a fetish quality, which then engenders its own effects.”

07.11.2020

David Graeber (1961-2020) on What Would It Take (from his The Democracy Project. A History, a Crisis, a Movement, 2013, p. 193): „We have little idea what sort of organizations, or for that matter, technologies, would emerge if free people were unfettered to use their imagination to actually solve collective problems rather than to make them worse. But the primary question is: how do we even get there? What would it take to allow our political and economic systems to become a mode of collective problem solving rather than, as they are now, a mode of collective war?“

07.09.2020
mehrweniger Kurznews