Filmkritik, Issue 335/336, Nov/Dec 1984
In October 1984, Arno Luik conducted an extensive interview with the American documentary filmmaker Emile de Antonio. “Dee” revisits the beginnings of the New American Cinema and Jonas Mekas, the New York art scene around John Cage, Robert Rauschenberg and others, his own films like IN THE YEAR OF THE PIG, PAINTERS PAINTING, and UNDERGROUND. He also remembers dubious business deals involving nylon ropes and face masks of the US Army.
The resulting 40-page monologue was meant to be an integral part of the issue 335/336 of the German film journal Filmkritik, conceived by Jürgen Ebert. The galley proofs were already finished, but the money to pay the printer was lacking. Filmkritik ceased existing.
The previously unpublished issue will be released during the “Edit Film Culture!” festival. It will also be available in book stores and directly via Brinkmann & Bose.
More information on our contribution with Edit Film Culture! here.
* The publication Filmkritik Nr. 335–336, Nov.-Dez. 1984 is realised within the framework of Edit Film Culture!, a project by silent green Film Feld Forschung gGmbH in cooperation with Jonas Mekas/Anthology Film Archives, Arsenal – Institut für Film und Videokunst e. V., SAVVY Contemporary e.V., Harun Farocki Institut, Spector Books and Lithuanian Culture Institute. Funded by Hauptstadtkulturfonds.
June 30th, 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