Laida Lertxundi: Films & Influences

laida-lertxundi-cry-when-it-happens.png


OFFoff Cinema, Gent, 13 February 2012

Courtisane is proud to present for the first time in Belgium a survey of the work of Laida Lertxundi (ES, 1981), one of the most talented young filmmakers working in the tradition of the avant-garde today. Lertxundi makes 16mm films with non-actors often shot within and around Los Angeles, where she’s been living for a number of years. Her films evoke external and internal spaces of intimacy, questioning how viewers’ desires and expectations are shaped by cinematic forms of storytelling, and searching for alternative ways of linking sound and music with found parameters, constructed situations and everyday environments. In recent years her work has been widely shown at festivals and venues such as MoMa, LACMA, the Viennale, the Rotterdam International Film Festival or the BFI London Film Festival. After having screened Cry When It Happens last year in the competition programme, Courtisane will once again showcase Lertxundi’s work during the coming Courtisane festival (21-25 March 2012), with the screening of her latest short film, A Lax Riddle Unit, which premiered last October at Views of the Avant-Garde during the New York Film Festival. As a prologue to this year’s festival, Courtisane will present at OFFoff four films by Lertxundi together with a selection of works by other filmmakers that have inspired her practice.

Hollis Frampton
Lemon

US, 1969, 16mm, 7′

frampton_lemon.jpg
“As a voluptuous lemon is devoured by the same light that reveals it, its image passes from the spatial rhetoric of illusion into the spatial grammar of the graphic arts.” (HF)

Laida Lertxundi
Footnotes to a House of Love

US, 2007, 16mm, 13′

laida_footnotes.jpg
Footnotes is most centrally about the presence of place, the house and the desert beyond, and the possibilities they seem to invite. narra- tives and relationships are only just hinted at and seemingly swallowed up by the surroundings. There is a subtle mysteriousness to the place that could easily have made it a site for terror, or at least danger, but this is constantly leavened by a gentle, disarming playfulness and teasing.” (Patrick Friel)

Laida Lertxundi
My Tears are Dry

US, 2009, 16mm, 4′

laida_tears.jpg
“As with her earlier film, Lertxundi is concerned with the feeling of a location. She creates an off-hand, casual tone that is both comfortable and slightly on edge. The effect is gentler here, but the cross-cutting at the beginning between a woman sprawled on a bed playing snippets of the 1961 Hoagy Landis song “My Tears Are Dry” on a portable cassette deck and a woman plucking discordantly on a guitar sets up an uneasy tension (a slight nod to the “Dueling Banjos” in Deliverance?). It’s the experimental film equivalent of lo-fi pop.” (Patrick Friel)

Bruce Baillie
All My Life

US, 1966, 16mm, 3′

baillie_life.jpg
“Caspar, California, old fence with red roses.” (BB)

Laida Lertxundi
Llora Cuando Te Pase/ Cry When it Happens

US, 2010, 16mm, 14′

laida_cry_4.jpg
“Los Angeles City Hall is reflected onto the window of the Paradise Motel. It serves as an anchor for this traversal through the natural expanse of California. Here, we discover a restrained psychodrama of play, loss, and the transformation of everyday habitats. Music appears across the interiors and exteriors and speaks of limitlessness and longing.” (LL)

Laida Lertxundi
A Lax Riddle Unit

US, 2011, 16mm, 5′

laida-lax.jpg
“In a Los Angeles interior, moving walls for loss. Practicing a song to a loved one. A film of the feminine structuring body.” (LL)

Morgan Fisher
Picture and Sound Rushes

US, 1973, 16mm, 11′

fisher_picture.jpg
Picture and Sound Rushes takes the form of a lecture in which his deadpan discourse describes the various permutations of sound/silence and picture/no picture. These states are demonstrated in the editing, which cuts between them at regular intervals (determined by dividing a roll of film equally by the total number of combinations), with no regard for the audience struggling to follow the dialogue”. (Mark Webber)

Goodbye Cinema, Hello Cinephilia videos

cine.png

How to write about cinema today? “For whom? Against whom?” wondered French critic Serge Daney in a fervent 1974 plea for the rethinking of the critical function of Cahiers du Cinéma at the time. For the late Daney, beyond all possible aesthetic criteria and related ways of assessment, film criticism always implied an intervention in the political or ideological arena. From this point of view, it is not enough to simply explain what is being told in a film – a tendency in most contemporary film criticism – it is at least as important to lay bare where, how and by whom it is told. With his emphasis on the ethical dimension of cinema, Daney was explicitly following the footprints of the cinephilic tradition, based on the idea that each cinematographic work represents a voice and a standpoint, a vision of the world that at the same time legitimises and organises the work. This is the critical guideline that Daney, self-proclaimed “ciné-fils”, would follow his whole life, from the glorious days of the “Cahiers Jaunes” in the 1960’s, through the political and social deadlocks of the 1970’s, to the confrontation with the expansion of television and information in the 1980-90’s. Today, almost two decades after his death, a question resonates unrelentingly: where to find the “critical function” Serge Daney devoted his life and work to ? What is left of the cinephilic thought, now that the way we understand and experience cinema has undergone such fundamental transformations? In other words, what does the contemporary cinephile stand and fight for in the post-cinematographic era?

Following the publication of the first Dutch translation of the writings of Serge Daney (published by Octavo), we organised a series of events on the state of cinephilia and film critical thinking today. Here are the video’s of the talks and discussions:

Adrian Martin, Sint Lukas Brussels, 20th October 2011

Jonathan Rosenbaum, Cinema RITS Brussels, 27th October 2011

Jonathan Rosenbaum, KASK cinema Gent, 28th October 2011

Jacques Rancière (followed by a conversation with TJ Demos), Bozar studio Brussels, 18th November 2011

Jacques Rancière in conversation with Corinne Diserens on the work of Béla Tarr, Bozar studio Brussels, 18th November 2011

Drawn from Life

aida_3_war.jpg

Palestine: cartography, memory, imagery. Some notes.

(this text accompanies the exhibition ‘Drawn from Life’, hosted online by Animate Projects. The exhibition contains works by Till Roekens, Sarah Wood and Dominique Dubosc )

Cartography

Maps are all but common in Palestine. On those that are available, hastily distributed by the Israeli PR services, there is a never a reference to the West Bank, but to Samaria and Judea, the old biblical names of the province, as if it was nothing there other than the Israeli settlements which continue to multiply like mushrooms. There is no sign either of the ‘Green Line’, the internationally recognised demarcation line between Israeli and Palestinian settlements: in these maps, the Holy Land appears as one continuous territory from the Mediterranean Sea to the River Jordan. Only those who read the small letters will notice the designations ‘Area A’ and ‘Area B’, the territories on the West Bank of the Jordan under Palestinian or shared Israel-Palestinian rule. ‘Area C’, however, which stands for the settlements under Israeli rule, the security buffer zones, the strategic areas, the settler roads and military bases, as defined during the Oslo agreements in 1993, does not appear in these maps; Israeli rule appears as self-evident. There is absolutely no indication of the countless borders, walls, fences and checkpoints that traverse the territory: those are only for the Palestinians[1].

In Oslo, Arafat suffered from this lack of reliable, well documented maps of the Palestinian Territories. The Palestinian negotiators found themselves powerless against the fruits of the systematic mapping put in place by Israel in the 1970s as a sign of their neocolonialist policy[2]. Since then, it has become evident that the agreement that should have accelerated the resolution of the conflict, played in favour of the occupier, who delayed and undermined the arrangements that were made. The ensuing ghettoisation of Palestine is the result not only of the aggressive use by Israel of its power apparatus, but also of what architect Eyal Weizman refers to as an ’architecture of occupation’: the geo-spatial and logistic mechanisms of control and division that keeps on fragmentising and isolating the Palestinian territory. Everyday needs and utilities such as housing, paving, public lightning, water supply and electricity are used as tactical tools in a long-running process during which the living environment is continuously and abruptly reconfigured, suffocating its inhabitants slowly but surely.

The doomed ‘road map’ proposed by George W Bush and his administration in 2002 as a possible solution to the conflict is nothing more than a smoke screen hiding the reality on the ground[3]. Annexation, destruction, reorganisation and subversion of space are still the order of the day in Palestine. The urban and rural environment cannot be considered simply as the backdrop of the conflict, but as an instrument of divergent political, economical and social powers. What unfolds horizontally as an arrangement of powerful manoeuvres and gradual counter movements, increasingly reveals itself on a vertical axis. The more reckless are the actions of the Israeli air force, the more underground becomes the resistance. The response to the absolute oppression of the Palestinian air space is a creative form of subterranean opposition: a rare symmetry in an predominantly asymmetrical conflict. Ultimate visibility (mapping and surveillance) versus relative invisibility (tunnels and bunkers); high-tech (satellite and GPS) versus ingeniousness (compass and drawings). Or how, for each form of cartography – traditionally associated with mechanisms of the exercise of colonial power – there exists a possibility of counter-cartography.

Memory

What memory? Whose memory? Who can still remember the tragic events of 1948? What history makes mention of the humiliation, banishment and annihilation of thousands of Palestinians during the Al-Nakba (‘the Catastrophe’)? An unspeakable trauma for some; an ugly stain for others. For some, a gruesome manifestation of a colonial ideology that still today continues to spread insidiously; for the others, an unfortunate collateral damage of an independence war between two military forces. For everyone, willingly or not, an indication of the fact that ‘Palestine’ today represents only a fifth of its original territory and a third of the Palestinian population. It’s a painful recollection that the political arena and the mainstream media tend to avoid or simply ignore for it throws a divergent light on the status and the perspectives of the Palestinians in refugee camps, on the West Bank, on the Gaza strip. Italian journalist Paolo Barnard speaks in this context of a ‘missing narrative’: just as if the French Revolution were to be described in history books as a violent outburst without historical roots or background.

‘Nations are narrations’, according to Edward Said. Imperialism is not only about the appropriation of land, but also about the making – and the control – of the stories about whom the land belongs to, and who can cultivate it. There is no room for alternative versions. In Israel, the dominate narrative is not only inscribed in the official discourse and curriculum[4], but also in the landscape: in national parks, Palestinian olive, almond and fig trees have given way to imported conifers, erasing all evidence of Palestinian life prior to 1948. Where Palestinian villages used to be, one now finds settlements surrounded by ecologically correct spaces for leisure and entertainment[5] . How can Palestinians reclaim their memories, knowing that the common experience of the pre-Nakba period has been fragmentised? Knowing that the Palestinian geography – with the help of archaeologists and biblical experts – has been increasingly Hebraicized and that a number of archives (including the Palestinian Film Archive[6]) have disappeared or been devastated? How does a memory that chiefly consists of gaps and silences disclose itself?

‘The point, then, isn’t to preserve memory, but to create it.’ French philosopher Jacques Rancière refers in this sentence to The Last Bolshevik[7], Chris Marker’s tribute to Soviet filmmaker Alexander Medvekin, but it can also be applied to the Palestinian situation. ‘Memory must be created against the overabundance of information as well as against its absence. It has to be constructed as the liaison between the account of the events and traces of actions, much like that ‘arrangement of incidents’, that Aristotle talks about in the Poetics and that he calls muthos: not, as it were, a ‘myth’ that points us back to some sort of collective unconscious, but a fable or fiction. Memory is the work [oeuvre] of fiction’. It is the ‘fiction’ – originally ‘fingere’ doesn’t mean ‘to feign’ but ‘to forge’ – of the ‘village memorial books’, in which are collected cartographic maps, lists, poems and drawings by Palestinian refugees. It is the ‘fiction’ of the poetry and graffiti that since the first Intifada has tinged the Palestinian side of the West Bank. It is the ‘fiction’ in the work of countless poets, filmmakers and theater writers exploring and inventing new relations between past and present, bearing witness to what is forgotten, denied, ignored. For every dominant narrative, fetishised and instrumentalised in the name of History, there are possible fictions of memory.

Imagery

What are the images of Palestine that we believe to know? A huge concrete wall, separating the weak from the mighty, the dispossessed from the prosperous. An extensive matrix of checkpoints, earth mounds, trenches, gates and roadblocks, restricting the movements of almost four million people. A country cut of its environment, its ecosystem and its chances of survival. Refugees who have been living in ‘provisional’ camps for over half a century. Families who are unable to leave their homes, while armed forces are stationed on their roof. Dried up lands that are no more viable today than the South African Bantustans were yesterday. Bulldozers demolishing homes, uprooting orchards and destroying crops. Kids throwing rubber bullets back at the same Israeli soldiers that previously fired them. 1.4 million people, mostly children, piled up in Gaza, one of the most densely populated regions of the world, with no place to run and no space to hide. ‘The world’s largest prison’, cut off from all essential supplies, bombarded by a barrage of lethal missiles for the sake of ‘war against terror’. Sabra and Chatilla. Muhammad and Jahal al-Durrah. Death and suffering.

What image is missing? ‘There is no complex image of Palestinian Reality’, wrote Serge Daney, ‘and that, I’m afraid, plays into everyone’s hands… Between the word and the thing, the word – the word ‘Palestinians’ – has won out. It’s a word with success, it’s a pure signifier, at once umbrella and alibi for everybody. And we know how much easier is to die for a word than to work for the image of a thing.’ Just as the homeland has become a slogan, so have the images we believe to know become cliché, in the sense that a cliché is an image that can no longer evolve. ‘No doubt this cliché is useful for the survival of the word ‘cause’’, wrote Daney, but it doesn’t function as much more than an advertising label. [8]‘ This is what Jean-Luc Godard also struggled with while making Jusqu’a la victoire, a documentary about the Palestinian refugee camps, which would eventually become Ici et Ailleurs: how to make an image that has not been overwhelmed by rhetorical framing[9]? In the context of one of his more recent works, Notre Musique[10], Godard points out that the Palestinians’ image is that of the ‘others’ of the Israelis: on the one hand, the intractable, anti-Semitic terrorist refugee, and on the other, the figures of helplessness and victimhood. ‘Do you know why Palestinians are famous?’, asks Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish in the film. ‘Because Israel is our enemy’.

Under every image, there is another image. Just as under Jewish settlements, Palestinian villages are buried. Just as behind the pastoral, displaced landscape paintings on the Israeli side of the wall, there is an ‘other’. It is a matter of not only seeing what there is (‘just an image’, as Godard said) but also of imagining what is missing, what has been removed from sight. ‘Absence was in their hands just as it was under their feet’, wrote Jean Genet recounting the time he spent among Feyadeen[11]. Absence is still at the heart of the Palestinians: absent from their own country[12], absent from their own image. ‘Out of place, out of time’[13]. Mahmoud Darwish once described the image that Palestinians have created for themselves as a foothold for vision: ‘When we see our faces and our blood on the screen, we applaud the image, forgetting it’s of our own making. And by the time production goes into postproduction, we are only too ready to believe it is the Other who is pointing at us. [14]‘How to visualise an absent image which is not predicated upon the insistent presence of absence? How to set up ways of seeing which are not predicated upon the predominant idea of the abstract Other? In the absence of an image, we are left to rely on its frail ghost: imagination.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

[1]Pieter van Bogaert, ‘Reality Check’. In: Pieter van Bogaert, Els Opsomer & Herman Asselberghs, Time Suspended, Square, 2004.

[2]One of Ariel Sharon’s obvious talents is the use of maps and cartography.

[3]While Israel formally accepted the Road Map, it attached fourteen reservations that completely eviscerate it.

[4]See Eyal Sivan’s Izkor: Slaves of Memory, 1991.

[5]See Illan Pappe’s The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, Oneworld, 2006.

[6]‘Established in 1976, this was an archive of political cinema, documenting the Palestinian people’s struggle and resistance movements, as well as images of their everyday lives – homegrown film of a country and people more usually represented by western news footage. The aim of the film-makers who had established it – and in the 1970s, film-makers really did work collectively – was to make ‘a people’s cinema’. For a nation unused to film, with no infrastructure to show it, and where everyday survival seemed more vital than watching images of that survival, it was an ambitious project. But after six years, the archive was lost in the 1982 siege of Beirut’ (Sarah Wood).

[7]Chris Marker, Le Tombeau d’Alexandre, 1993.

[8]Serge Daney, ‘Before and After the Image’. Originally published in French in Revue des Etudes Palestiniennes 70, 40, Paris, Summer 1991 and in English in Documenta X.

[9]Jean-Luc Godard & Anne-Marie Mieville, Ici et Ailleurs, 1976.

[10]Jean-Luc Godard,Notre Musique, 2004.

[11]Jean Genet, Prisoner of Love, Wesleyan, 1992.

[12]Remember the early mobilising phrase of Zionism: ‘We are a people without a land, going to a land without a people.’

[13]‘Hors du Lieu, hors du temps’ (Elias Sanbar).

[14]Mahmoud Darwish, Memory for Forgetfulness: August, Beirut, 1982, University of California Press, 1995.

Figures of Dissent : Jean Genet

gent-chatila1.jpg

Figures of Dissent : Jean Genet
24 November 2011 20:30, KASKcinema, Gent. A Courtisane programme.

“Power may be at the end of a gun, but sometimes it’s also at the end of the shadow or the image of a gun.”
— Jean Genet

Orphan, prisoner, deserter, vagabond, writer, dramaturge, one-time filmmaker and overall poet : the life and work of Jean Genet (1910-1986) resists easy classifications. But if there is a constant characteristic in his unorthodox trajectory, it is an ever-moving feeling of resistance and rebellion. “Obviously I am drawn to peoples in revolt”, he says in an interview in the early 1980’s, “because I myself have the need to call the whole of society into question.” From his first novel, that would earn him the respect and recognition of the likes of Cocteau, Sartre, de Beauvoir and Breton, he manifests a profound aversion towards all forms of social consensus, as well as a deeply felt affection for those who do not “belong”. And yet, it wasn’t until Les Paravents, the closing chapter of a series of theatre plays that he wrote between 1950 and 1960, that Genet would – be it implicitly – take sides with a political resistance movement: the Algerian independence fighters. A few years later he would write a tribute to Daniel Cohn-Bendit, one of the protagonists of May 1968, and protest against the inhumane living conditions of immigrants in France. In 1970 he travelled clandestinely to the United States where he supported the cause of the Black Panther Party. That same year he visited for the first time Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan, where he would remain intermittently until 1972. When he returned ten years later, he was confronted with the terrible consequences of Israel’s invasion of Lebanon. Genet would be one of first Westerners to witness the aftermath of the blood bath perpetrated at the Shatila camp by the Lebanese Phalangist Militia, with the tacit approval of the Israeli government. His Palestinian experiences are recounted in the essay Quatre heures à Chatila (“Four Hours in Shatila”) and in his posthumous novel Un Captif Amoureux (“Prisoner of Love”). He writes: “All these words to say, this is my Palestinian revolution, told in my chosen order. As well as mine, there is the other, probably many others. Trying to think the revolution is like waking up and trying to see the logic in a dream.” During the past two decades since he passed away, his writings have only gained more force. Two documentaries gauge the resonance of his work in the light of the continuous ghettoisation of Palestine.

Richard Dindo
Genet à Chatila (Genet in Chatila)

CH/Palestine, 1999, 16mm on video, colour, stereo, English spoken version, 99’

genet-chatila.jpg
“Le titre du film de Richard Dindo est trompeur. Optant pour un intitulé de documentaire, Dindo, qui n’a fait que paraphraser l’un des titres de Genet, Quatre heures à Chatila, ferre en quelque sorte son spectateur avant de l’emporter dans un long poème sur le temps, de lui faire découvrir en companie du personnage attachant d’une jeune journaliste algérienne, jeune Arabe parlant difficilement l’arabe et comme habitée d’une peine infinie, que la meilleur façon d’aller dans la durée consiste à avancer dans les lieux. (…) (…) Armé d’une langue magnifique, Genet joue fondamentalement, tout comme il aurait misé au jeu, la fusion des strates temporelles. “Le présent est toujours dur, l’avenir est supposé l’être davantage. Le passé, ou plutôt l’absent, sont adorables et nous vivons au présent.” Pour se dégager de l’emprise de ces durées, plantées en chacun et apparamment inextricables, Genet va donc faire fusionner les strates du temps, ses strates du temps: son récit sera tout à la fois celui d’un premier séjour en 1970, d’un second en 1982, d’un troisième en 1983-84, et celui d’aucun d’entre eux. Et Richard dindo, qui a pour bonne habitude de coller littéralement aux textes de ses auteurs, vient à son tour mêler – et dissoudre – sa strate, celle du temps cinématographique, à celles de Genet. Il demeure ainsi dans l’oeuvre et effectue, en sa compagnie, sa propre sortie de la durée. Là où résidait la grande prouesse de Genet dans son Captif Amoureux, se retrouve le pari, réussi, de Dindo.” (Elias Sanbar)

The Otolith Group
Nervus Rerum


GB/Palestine, 2008, video, colour, stereo, English spoken, 32’

nervus.jpg
“It is perhaps with Nervus Rerum (the title is taken from Cicero and translates as ‘the nerve of things’), the 2008 film shot in the Palestinian Jenin refugee camp on the West Bank, that The Otolith Group’s (Kodwo Eshun & Anjalika Sagar) vision achieves its greatest success. The film begins with the camera moving slowly up a backstreet in Gaza. Children look on silently as an eerie soundtrack deepens their gaze. Abandoned cookers line the sides of the road; graffiti is everywhere, a palimpsest of politics. Two men stand talking next to a pick-up truck filled with empty plastic bottles. ‘We are death,’ declares Sagar. ‘We are dead when we think we are living.’ The words are taken from Fernando Pessoa’s ‘The Book of Disquiet’ and Jean Genet’s book about Palestine, ‘Prisoner of Love’; they both distance us and draw us closer to the slow, quiet images of the settlement. (…) This is the success of Nervus Rerum and The Otolith Group as a whole: when image and voice fail to coincide; when the ‘big story’ of Palestine becomes a whole series of smaller tales; when representation fails because it has to.” (Nina Power)

In the context of the research project “Figures of Dissent (Cinema of Politics, Politics of Cinema)”
KASK / School of Arts

Figures of Dissent : Masao Adachi

adachi-portrait.png

Figures of Dissent : Masao Adachi
23 November 2011 20:30, KASKcinema, Gent. A Courtisane programme.

“Shooting a gun or shooting with a camera, it doesn’t make a difference to me”
— Masao Adachi

“The revolution has been continuously my theme. Main subject” says Masao Adachi (born 1939). “People Said: Revolutionary Cinema. I said: No. It’s Cinema for Revolution.” Of all the filmmakers that would be inspired by the spirit of resistance and utopia of the 1960’s and 1970’s, Adachi is without a doubt the most radically and perseveringly militant. Armed with a camera or with a gun: it made no difference to him. To him, both weapons served as possible intervention tools in the fight against political and social oppression. It is not accidental that his first films were made under the auspices of the Japanese student movements that were born after WWII against what were regarded as antidemocratic and neo-colonial policies (particularly in relation to the USA). With his surrealistically tinted and politically provoking experiments he inscribed himself rapidly as part of the so called “new wave” currents that shook Japanese culture of the time. In that context he collaborated with the likes of Nagisa Oshima and especially Kôji Wakamatsu, with whom he would inject the erotically charged “pink cinema” genre with a lively dose of anarchism. Resulting in controversial works such as Seiyûgi (Sex Game, 1968) and Jogakusei gerira (Female Student Guerillas, 1969), these experiences taught Adachi the basic rules of guerrilla-style filmmaking: fast and cheap. In 1971, after visiting the Cannes Film Festival, Wakamatsu and Adachi travelled to Lebanon, where they would film Sekigun-PFLP: Sekai Senso Sengen (The Red Army / PFLP: Declaration of World War), a propaganda film in support of the Arab fight against Israeli occupation. In 1974 Adachi returned to Pastine, with the idea of making a second film. He would end up staying 26 years, at the service of the Palestinian cause. In 1997, under the pressure of the Japanese authorities, he was incarcerated in Beirut. He was extradited to his country three years later, where he remained in prison for two more years. Once free, Adachi gave the account of his experiences in a series of autobiographical publications as well as a new film – his first in more than thirty years : Yûheisha – Terorisuto (Prisoner/Terrorist, 2006). Today Adachi’s activist thought resonates with more force than ever, as show the number of screenings and retrospectives that have been organised around the world in recent years. Perhaps the most beautiful homage is the one that French filmmaker Philippe Grandrieux pays to his work in a recent cinematographic portrait.

Philippe Grandrieux
Il se peut que la beauté ait renforcé notre résolution – Masao Adachi
(It May be that Beauty has Strengthened our Resolve)

FR, 2011, video, color, stereo, Japanese and French spoken with English subtitles, 75′

grandrieux_small.jpg
“A to and fro between politics and cinema, between Trotskym and Surrealism, between armed struggle and screenplays, between Palestine, Lebanon and Japan, between the day-before-yesterday and today, between beauty and resolve, between the art of eating and that of being a father, such is the risky and precise life of Masao Adachi, the monsieur with the white hair glimpsed in his delusions. And this is just how Philippe Grandrieux, faithful to his way of doing things, decided to suggest his portrait, with no a priori, without interrupting speech, filming him and listening to his words without at first understanding them, framing him in a tight close-up that is sometimes underexposed, other times overexposed, to better abandon him later for: cherry trees in blossom, the streets of Tokyo swarming with cars and passersby, familiar objects and lactescent celling light. And from time to time, Grandrieux lets speak a few shots from his earlier films, from where suddenly crops up the phrase, Genet-like, given in the title: a paradoxical program that hesitates to connect one shore to the other”. (Jean-Pierre Rehm) This is the first part of the film series “Il se peut que la beauté ait renforcé notre résolution”, dedicated to filmmakers who in the course of the 20th century devoted their lives and work to resistance and emancipation.

Masao Adachi & Koji Wakamatsu
Sekigun-PFLP: Sekai Senso Sengen (The Red Army / PFLP: Declaration of World War)

JP/ Palestine, 1971, 16mm, color, stereo, Japanese and Arabic spoken with English subtitles, 69’

adachi2.jpg
“In 1971, Adachi and Wakamatsu were invited to Cannes Film Festival. On the way back they went to Beirut, and while they were there shot Sekigun PFLP – Sekai Senso Sengen (The Red Army/PFLP: Declaration of World War) a film that showed the ‘everyday life’ of Arab guerillas, and transformed a ‘news documentary’ into a radical text for a world revolution. Rejecting the existing system of film exhibition and declaring the screening itself as a political act, the ‘Red Bus’ mobile projection unit was formed and they hit the road, showing the film in Palestine and Europe. This film can be seen as the key Japanese film of that era, as it completely epitomised the spirit of the radical filmmaking movement. It was also a personal turning point for one of its makers: Adachi left Japan in 1974, in order to join the Palestinian revolution as a Japanese Red Army soldier. “ (Go Hirasawa)

Texts concerning Masao Adachi and PFLP

In the context of the research project “Figures of Dissent (Cinema of Politics, Politics of Cinema)”
KASK / School of Arts