Public Screening #08: Emile de Antonio: In the King of Prussia, July 11, 2018, Arsenal

Issue 335/336 of Filmkritik in 1984 was supposed to be dedicated to Emile de Antonio. The layout for the texts, including a 40-page conversation between Antonio and Arno Luik, had already been completed, but there was no money left for printing; the magazine ceases to be published. As the HaFI’s contribution to the “Edit Film Culture!” project, the issue is now finally to appear 400 months late via Brinkmann & Bose, conceived by Jürgen Ebert. To accompany the publication, we are showing de Antonio’s IN THE KING OF PRUSSIA (1983) – “a film about the legal process against the “Plowshares Eight‘, eight members of the Christian peace movement in US, who hammered a nuclear warhead to pieces at a weapon’s factory.” (Ebert) The accused play themselves, while the police, jury, and court staff are played by actors, with Martin Sheen as judge Samuel Saulus II.

In the King of Prussia
Emile de Antonio, USA, 1983
35mm, OV/GeS, 92 min

Wednesday July 11, 2018, 6:00 pm
Arsenal Cinema 2
Arsenal – Institut für Film und Videokunst e.V.
Potsdamer Strasse 2
10785 Berlin

July 2nd, 2018, Event / Projects
Interface

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

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.”

June 23rd, 2020, Tom
moreless news