Peter Lorre Retrospective: Screening and discussion with Felix Hofmann, July 19, 2018, Zeughaus Kino, Berlin
Felix Hofmann Filmkritik author, and together with Harun Farocki, director of the TV feature PETER LORRE – DAS DOPPELTE GESICHT (The Double Face of Peter Lorre) (1984), will talk about the film on July 19 at 8:00 pm within the framework of the Peter Lorre Retrospective at the Zeughauskino in Berlin. A discovery from Farocki’s estate will also be shown.
During the inventorying of the archive at the Harun Farocki Institut we found a 16 mm working copy which features an interview with the actress Gisela Trowe conducted by Felix Hofmann. Trowe played the role of a prostitute in the film DER VERLORENE (The Lost One) (1951) (D: Peter Lorre). The interview was conducted in 1984 in her apartment in Hamburg. It was filmed by Farocki and Hofmann for the WDR feature PETER LORRE – DAS DOPPELTE GESICHT (The Double Face of Peter Lorre) (1984), however it is not contained in the final version of the feature. The working copy, which we have digitized*, will be screened for the first time publically within the framework of the film series “Das Gesicht hinter der Maske. Hommage an den Schauspieler Peter Lorre” (The Face Behind the Mask. Homage to the Actor Peter Lorre) at the German Historical Museum’s Zeughauskino in Berlin, together with the film PETER LORRE – DAS DOPPELTE GESICHT.
Guests: Felix Hofmann and Volker Pantenburg
Thursday July 19, 2018, 8:00 pm
Unter den Linden 2
* The digitization of the material was completed 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.
July 2nd, 2018 — Projects / Event
On Friday, April 6, 2021, at 8 p.m., Akademie Schloss Solitude will host a Zoom event with former HaFI Residency fellowship holder Shirin Barghnavard about her film “Invisible” (2017). Moderated by Doreen Mende. To register, click here.
April 14th, 2021
The magazine MONOPOL currently features an interview (in German) with Shirin Barghnavard about her film “Invisible,” which she conceived and shot during her HaFI residency in 2017.
April 14th, 2021
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.”
November 7th, 2020