HaFI Presents #01: NIEMANNS ZEIT – EIN DEUTSCHER HEIMATFILM, dir. Marion Schmid/Horst Kurnitzky, (FRG 1985), September 11, 2019, Arsenal Cinema
September 2nd, 2019 — Projects / Event
The Public Screening, which we have organized for over two years in the Arsenal Cinema, is now being continued with a curated program. This time the Harun Farocki Institut has given “carte blanche” to the film maker and former colleague of Farocki, Stefan Pethke.
NIEMANNS ZEIT – EIN DEUTSCHER HEIMATFILM (Marion Schmid, Horst Kurnitzky) an essay film made in West Berlin screened out of competition at the Berlinale of 1985. A lonely academic played by Gerd Wameling, who was part of Peter Stein’s Schaubühne ensemble at the time, carries out research into the images and texts of National Socialism. A sparse mise-en-scène. Documentary sequences. And right in the middle, a formal island of black-and-white in which three men – a biologist, the philosopher of religion Klaus Heinrich and the most famous mountaineer in the world – are confronted with their very different respective notions of nature.
Marion Schmid, a co-publisher of Carl Einstein’s writings, and Horst Kuznitsky, the author of Triebstruktur des Geldes knew Farocki from Heinrich’s lectures at the FU, which were open to all and attracted a wide spectrum of curious attendees.
In the presence of Marion Schmid and Horst Kurnitzky
Moderation: Stefan Pethke
Niemanns Zeit – Ein deutscher Heimatfilm
Marion Schmid and Horst Kurnitzky FRG 1985
With Gerd Wameling, Reinhold Messner, Klaus Heinrich
35 mm OV/EnS 113 min
The Harun Farocki Institut Presents
Wed, 11.09.2019, 7.00pm, Cinema 1
Location: Arsenal – Institut für Film und Videokunst e.V.
Potsdamer Strasse 2, 10785 Berlin
Tickets: 8 Euros / 5 Euros (Members) / 3 Euros (Children/Berlin-Pass)
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
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?”
September 7th, 2020
T.J. Demos on why cultural practitioners should never surrender, via tranzit.sk: “For artists, writers, and curators, as art historians and teachers, the meaning-production of an artwork is never finished, never fully appropriated and coopted, in my view, and we should never surrender it; the battle over significance is ongoing. We see that battle rise up in relation to racist and colonial monuments these days in the US, the UK, and South Africa. While the destruction of such monuments results from and is enabling of radical politics, it’s still not enough until the larger institutions that support and maintain their existence as well as the continuation of the politics they represent are also torn down. This is urgent as well in the cultural sphere, including the arts institutions, universities, art markets, discursive sphere of magazines and journals, all in thrall to neoliberalism, where we must recognize that it’s ultimately inadequate to simply inject critical or radical content into these frameworks, which we know excel at incorporating those anti-extractivist expressions into further forms of cultural capital and wealth accumulation. What’s required is more of the building of nonprofit and community-based institutions, organizing radical political horizons and solidarity between social formations.”
August 21st, 2020