HAFI 007: Filmkritik: Index: 1975–1984
Between January 1957 and autumn 1984, 334 issues of the monthly journal Filmkritik were published. In its final decade (1974-1984) Filmkritik no longer accompanied current cinema releases; many issues were monographic studies of neglected or forgotten filmmakers, idiosyncratic forays into the history and present of cinema and television.
In this period, Harun Farocki – along with Hartmut Bitomsky, Peter Nau, Gerhard Theuring, Wolf Eckart Bühler and others – was a driving force of the journal, both as editor and author.
From a statement made in 1982: “Then there is the fact that many of the authors/editors make films themselves. Just like one is a communist only during one’s university years, it applies that one only writes about film as long as one is not yet able to make films. (How can one not realize that someone only writes because he is unable to do something else.) This is a premise we try to contradict.”
HaFI 007 reprints the yearly indexes from 1975 to 1983, supplemented by the the index for 1984 which was still missing. It was compiled by Franz Josef Knape. It also includes the program “42 films, selected and presented by Filmkritik,” screened at Kino Arsenal (West-Berlin) in October 1982. The indexes are in German, the other texts in German and English.
Available for 8 Euro here at Motto Books.
The PDF is available here.
* HaFI 007 is published within the framework of “Archive außer sich,” a project of Arsenal – Institute for Film and Video Art in cooperation with Haus der Kulturen der Welt as part of “The New Alphabet,” a HKW project supported by the Federal Government Commissioner for Culture and the Media due to a ruling of the German Bundestag.
April 24th, 2018, Projects / Publication
On the occasion of the film festival “Reconstructing Realities,” the Broadway Cinematheque in Hong Kong will show the film “How to live in FRG” (1990) from Harun Farocki.
The screening will take place on Saturday, July 11, 2:30 pm (local time) at the Goethe Institut Hong Kong.
Reconstructing Realities – A Film Programme to Celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the Berlinale Forum
The screening will be followed with a talk with Doreen Mende from the Harun Farocki Institut.
The talk will be public via Zoom. A link will follow shortly.
July 8th, 2020, HaFI
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.”
July 7th, 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.”
June 28th, 2020, Tom