lunes, 30 de noviembre de 2009

Keith Moon Is Not Alright

Moon Portrait.JPG (18163 bytes)

Keith and his Swedish girlfriend Annette Walter-Lax were living in Harry Nilsson's flat in Curzon Place, Mayfair, London. The building address isnumber 9. Previously, Moons friend "Mama" Cass Elliot had lived and died in the flat. Yes, the same top floor flat, #12.

On the morning of September 7th, 1978, Keith woke up at 7:30 am, and watched "The Abominable Dr. Phibes." Annette cooked him a steak, and he went back to sleep. Annette crashed on the couch, as Keith snored a lot. At 3:40pm, she woke up, and got spooked. It was too quiet. She tried waking Keith, but guess what? She phoned the doctor, who then phoned an ambulance. She tried giving him mouth to mouth, with no response. The ambulance came and tried jolting his heart, but that didn't work either. Keith was dead at 32.

Keith was born in 1946. The death certificate is wrong. Turns out that Keith was taking Heminevrin, a prescription drug used to combat alcoholism. He was given 100 tablets to be administered as he pleased. He must have felt a hell of a binge coming up, coz he downed 32 of the things.

Keith's body was taken to Middlesex Hospital, where he was pronounced dead on arrival. His death was ruled accidental.

The funeral took place on Wednesday, Sept 13, at Golders Green Crematorium, which has snazzy new ovens.  Eric Clapton, Charlie Watts and Bill Wyman were among the 120 mourners that crammed the West ChapelFlowers were sent by various Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin, Fleetwood Mac, Bowie, The Moody Blues and Liz Taylor (kidding).

Roger Daltrey cried all through the service in the chapel. He sent the coolest arrangement, a champagne bottle embedded in a television set. Annette had a heartshaped bouquet of red roses placed on the coffin. A wake was held at Hendon Hall.

Keith was cremated at Golders Green, and his ashes scattered in section 3P.

Tarnation (Jonathan Caouette)

With all that powerful brainstorming Hollywood screenwriters undergo and that these last couple of years it's been squeezed into conjugating overcooked sequels and low-fat remakes ad infinitum, it isn't surprising that attention has slowly but surely shifted from feature films to documentaries. After Michael Moore redefined documentary films as weapons of social deconstruction (Bowling for ColumbineRoger & Me and nowFarenheit 9/11) and Nanette Burstein & Brett Morgen reinvented the autobiographical exercise as a visual feast (The Kid Stays in the Picture), audience and filmmakers alike suddenly discovered that documentaries could compete—if not surpass—pictures, when approached with a bright and innovative angle.

Jonathan Caouette's Tarnation marks another bold step, pushing the limits of the documentary to create an emotionally rough piece bathed in raw visuals. Assembling footage he has shot since the age of 11, Caouette, now in his early 30's, has created a vibrant and often painful cinematographic diary of his life, growing up as a gay boy in a tough family environment. Since he was able to hold a camera, the young filmmaker started shooting his everyday life with its high and—mostly—lows, without knowing that this would feature enough drama to become the center of a film. Even though he is always on screen, from his teenage years as a new wave boy to his current life as a caring and responsible adult, the real center of Tarnation is his mother, Renee.

A former beauty, Renee saw her life turn upside down the day when, as a child, she fell from the roof of her house. Fearing that she was mentally suffering from the accident, her parents put her on electroshock treatment, which would ultimately create a real disorder that would partly be transferred to Jonathan. For a brief moment, she had a happy life as a wife and mother until her husband left them. From there her life went downhill, until Jonathan took her in to live with him and his boyfriend.

With its use of home footage, Tarnation can be compared to Capturing the Friedmans. But where the latter held a certain self-restrain, never clearly establishing the guiltiness or innocence of the protagonists, Caouette's approach is uncompromising and full-frontal, pointing the finger at his grand-parents, but most of all showing his mother's slow degeneracy, from a beauty to a crazy woman, which you know must have been a very painful process for him. Particularly there is one sequence where Renee is dancing and singing, holding a pumpkin. This is one of the most difficult moments of the film, simply because as Jonathan keeps following her relentlessly with his camera, you realize how disturbed she is. He could certainly have cut the scene shorter, but by keeping it rolling for us, he shows us how deep the damage is, even if for him—and for us—this is something we don't really want to see.

Even if he is omnipresent here, which without a doubt makes Tarnation a highly narcissist piece, and despite the fact that he is gay, which you know must have been an issue growing up in a state such as Texas, he becomes secondary to the story, taking a role as narrator. Renee is the heart of Tarnation, which might have happened unconsciously during the editing process, and even when she is not onscreen, her presence is felt, like a ghost; her life and Jonathan's are clearly bound.

At a more technical level, Tarnation is a great editing piece, blending together various formats such as Super-8, Betamax, VHS, Hi-8 and Mini-DV. The fact that Caouette didn't try to soften and standardize the various formats contributes to the creation of a harsh onscreen reflection of their painful life. But rather than showingTarnation as a home video—what Capturing the Friedmans essentially was—, he incorporated his own artistic influences in the process, giving it an abstract and avant-garde look, in the vein of David Lynch's Eraserhead and Darren Aronofsky'sPi.

A great deal has been made of the fact that Tarnation was conceived for only a couple hundred bucks using Mac's bare bone iMovie software, which isn't really relevant as you can make a bad film for $200 and iMovie or with $80 million and Avid. What really matters here is that despite its low budget and amateurish technology, Tarnation is a fully professional piece, both artistic and powerful, and the involvement of Gus Van Sant (Elephant) and John Cameron Mitchell (Hedwig & the Angry Inch) as executive producers certainly attests to his talent as a filmmaker.

Joy Division (Grant Gee)


It's been one of the more pleasant coincidences of the Toronto International Film Festival this year that there's not one, but two separate films focusing on the times and musical legacy of Manchester's Joy Division. Anton Corbijn's Control is a bio-pic about the band's late singer, Ian Curtis; I had the chance to see it in May at Cannes. The other film -- simply titled Joy Division -- is a documentary take on the band's genesis and influence, their victories and struggles. Directed by Grant Gee (Radiohead: Meeting People is Easy,) Joy Division may not be as immediately striking as Corbjin's film -- with its stark-yet-warm black-and-white photography and Sam Riley's performance as Curtis -- but it's just as compelling. 

Formed in the industrial city of Manchester, Joy Division marked a unique turning point in popular music: Where punk turned to post-punk, where anger was replaced by angst. Formed by Bernard Sumner, Peter Hook, Stephen Morris and Ian Curtis, Joy Division released only two full-length albums before Curtis's suicide; at the same time, tragedy isn't the only thing that made Joy Division's short discography a legend. 

Indeed, Gee's demonstration of that legend is a great demonstration of his technique here -- forming a collage of ephemera and seemingly-random information that forms an easy-to-read big picture. To illustrate just how many bands have covered Joy Division's seminal single 'Love Will Tear Us Apart," we're shown ... an iTunes search screen. And while you'd think that simple blunt instrument of a visual may seem inelegant or crude, it instead works perfectly -- not only proving Joy Division's place in the hearts of their admirers but also in an instant reminding us how completely the music business has changed since the days of hand-crafted 7-inch single sleeves and cut-and-paste artwork -- which, thanks to Gee's fractured-yet-focused technique, we also see.
Gee not only gets important interview moments out of Sumner, Hook and Morris, but he gets smaller, human moments, too -- which are, of course, just as important. There are other contributors - the late Tony Wilson (perhaps best known from his fictionalized exploits in Michael Winterbottom's 24 Hour Party People), dazed and glazed minor rock personality Genesis P. Orridge, Curtis's friend and lover Annik Honoré -- but we return again and again to Sumner, Hook and Morris. And we should, as they were there. The movie leaps between topics -- the work of William S. Burroughs, the industrial landscape of post-war Manchester (Sumner: "I don't think I saw a tree until I was about 9. ..."), the origins of the infamous waveform album cover for Unknown Pleasures, the forceful power and fleeting poses of punk rock. And it should, because Joy Division did the same. 

Gee manages a brute-force balancing act here -- layering information on top of more information, cutting between interviewees, skipping between old TV footage and new photos of what once were the locations of important Manchester clubs -- each numbered in sequence, labeled "Things That are Not There." And we do get a sense of Manchester then and now, and even as it was before then -- newsreels depicting World War II flowing into old home movie footage and then stately shots of the city Manchester's become. The past and present seem more fluid than they normally are in Gee's film, like they are in memories and dreams and good pop songs. We see New Order, the band Sumner Hook and Morris carried on as, performing a Joy Division song (something which, to their credit, they did not do for 18 years after Curtis passed) with the original four-person line-up of band as they were then, performing the same song, layered over it. It should not work. It does, perfectly, bravura confidence leaping off the screen. Joy Division is less a requiem than a celebration; Gee's film is a dense, rich and exciting look at a band who helped make modern pop music become truly modern

Sherman's March (Ross McElwee)

Ross McElwee is a modern master of cinema vérité -- rough, real-life documentary filmmaking that seeks to expose a subject's soul through its very lack of polish. In McElwee's case, that subject is almost always himself. Insistently personal, always autobiographical, occasionally exploitative, watching McElwee is like watching someone's (well-financed) home videos. That may sound like faint praise, but McElwee elevates the form. While his films can be maddeningly ordinary, at times they're almost genius. They are both insufferably egocentric and incredibly compelling; while they walk a fine line, they fall more often to art than to narcissism. Take, for example, Sherman's March, widely considered Ross McElwee's masterpiece. He had planned to examine the lingering effects of Sherman's march on the Southern psyche; instead, he ends up examining his own psyche, using a recent break-up to reflect upon the dilapidated state of his romantic life and begin a tongue-in-cheek search for the perfect mate. I'll say this: Ross McElwee knows who to follow when he's got that camera on. Sherman's March is a parade of fascinatin' Southern women,
including Pat, a self-described female prophet and wannabe starlet who dreams of falling in love with Burt Reynolds; Winnie, a cow-milking hippie linguist of discerning intelligence; Joyce, a big-haired soul-singer on the Carolina lounge circuit; and so on and so on seemingly ad infinitum (it's a long film). Then there's McElwee himself, as the wry, vulnerable, and sometimes pathetic narrator with a fear of Armageddon and a passing interest in the life of William Tecumseh Sherman. Among the romantic parries and thrusts there are several priceless scenes, including a particularly painful honkytonk, the meeting of the Antichrist and the Easter bunny, and a discussion of Southern slavery so vapid that it boggles the mind. Sherman's March is undoubtedly a good film, amusing enough that its nearly three-hour length fairly slides by, but sometimes you have to wonder why McElwee keeps that damn camera running all the time. At times he comes dangerously close to exploiting his subjects' trust -- when an ex-girlfriend says "you're gonna make me cry" is when he zooms close to her face (the better to see the tears). He makes many of his subjects look like the sort of patent fools that documentarians delight in exposing, and more than one such fool doesn't like it. Perhaps the most telling line is offered as an aggravated aside by a burly man whose girlfriend McElwee is trying to steal: "You sure you never had anybody hit you?" I wondered the same thing, but at the same time I had trouble resenting poor Ross, with his heart so palpably on his sleeve. In the end, it is McElwee's genuine affection for the people he films that redeem the bald intrusions of Sherman's March.
--Jay Hardwig

A Day With The Boys (Clu Gulager


image

What if Kenneth Anger took a crack at William Golding’s Lord Of The Flies?  It might look something like Clu Gulager‘s chilling meditation on boyhood—and manhood—A Day With The Boys.  As Vice’s Ryan McGinley says of the short:

There’s no dialogue, just marching music, which makes it seem kind of like a Vietnam allegory.  Legendary cinematographer László Kovácsreally makes this film what it is.  It’s so psychedelic—saturated with slow-motion sequences, solarization, and freeze-frames.  Images dissolve and bleed into one another and turn into paintings.  It’s a great example of super-creative late-60s avant-garde filmmaking.

Later that year, Kovács would achieve wider countercultural street cred with the release of Dennis Hopper’s Easy Rider.  But much like Charles Laughton after The Night Of The Hunter, Clu Gulager would never direct again.  He did, though, continue on as an actor in both film and television.  Random footnote: Clu’s son, John, was theSeason 3 winner of Project Greenlight.

Sadie Benning began making videos at age sixteen when her father, experimental filmmaker James Benning, gave her a pixelvision camcorder for Christmas. The Pixelvision is a small, hand-held, black and white video-camera marketed for children by Fisher-Price in the late 1980s. The Pixelvision failed on the general market for the same reason it has been a hit with experimental filmmakers: grainy images, tinny sound, and a box frame. Benning's videos can be described in a variety of ways, including autobiography, ethnography, personal films, diary-films, and stories of coming-out. Thematically, her films consistently condemn homophobia, racism, and sexism while concerning themselves with the perspective of young people and women.

Benning demonstrated an early ability to manipulate images and create sustained narratives. She culls from a wide variety of sources including television, magazines, newspapers and popular culture. Her recent work reflects many of the same themes she explored early on, yet also displays an increased ability and maturity as a filmmaker. Recent films include The Judy Spots (1995), which aired on MTV, and Flat is Beautiful (1998). Her work continues to attract attention and is regularly screened at film festivals worldwide.

Her intensely personal and autobiographical videos document the dreams, desires, fears, and fantasies of a teenage lesbian in the process of defining self, sexuality, and identity. They delineate the social and sexual straitjacket that girls are expected to conform to, while working out strategies of transgression and rebellion in an effort to create an identity space beyond the boundaries of heterosexuality and gender conformity.

 The Judy Spots
 
The Judy Spots
Combining defiance with a childlike innocence and vulnerability, Benning responds to a world that simultaneously ridicules and frightens her by retreating into the relative, but ultimately temporary, safety of her bedroom and a form of self-imposed exile. Ultimately, the reality of violence cannot be escaped or ignored and Benning is forced to confront her own vulnerability in a world that is often openly hostile and threatening to women and lesbians. The ridicule and alienation she encounters at school derive from her androgynous gender expression and her lesbian sexuality. However, she is quick to note that conformity to the rules of heterosexuality and the gender system, which are expressed most visibly for her by the image of the “good white girl”, is a representation that does little to provide any measure of protection for women in society. 

A devastating film about lost innocence, random violence, and child abuse, A Place Called Lovely (1991) begins with an intensely personal account of her own victimization at the hands of Ricky, a neighborhood bully. Confronted daily with her own experiences of violence, and with sensationalized headlines in the newspapers that detail child abuse, molestation, mass murder and random accidents she quickly recognizes that no one is immune to violence and tragedy: “I was in my Dad's Chevy truck when I watched a station wagon full of people flip over and blow up. Tragedy, that can happen to anyone.” Fighting back against the neighbourhood bully does little to calm her fears or her overwhelming sense of powerlessness because, as she ultimately recognises, Ricky is just one small part of a larger social problem that has no cure. The opening scenes document the ways in which violence touches Benning's own life directly, from the police car drawing up to her neighbour's house and the sounds of police sirens wailing in the background while she stands in her backyard, to the narrated details of her own victimization: “We got off the school bus and his hands were tangled in my hair, it hurt, and I watched clumps of my hair fall to the ground and blow away.” Although she is helpless to defend herself from her tormentor she refrains from directly blaming Ricky for his actions, realizing that the bully is also a victim at the hands of his parents who are “older and meaner.” 

At the core of A Place Called Lovely is the depiction of childhood as a battleground and a fight to stay safe. The school bus, the playground and the neighborhood become the setting for childhood violence, played against a background of adult violence, police sirens wailing and the cries of children. Children's voices and laughter are inextricably mixed with the wailing sirens. Ricky, as an abused child, takes out his fears, frustrations, and emotions on smaller and weaker children, just as his parents take out their anger and frustration upon him. Expressions of love are confused with abuse and violence. In a child's voice, but with adult words, Ricky screams “I love you. I love you. I wanna kiss you. Goddamn it you fucker I wanna be alone”, mimicking a confusing and violent adult world.

Ricky's abuse has turned him into an abuser. Benning's response, when she is older and stronger, is to beat Ricky until he cries. Who is the victim and who is the abuser? The cycles of violence ultimately implicates everyone, until innocence is just a word with no meaning and no reality, allowing Benning to dismiss her grandmother's ineffectual advice that “only bad things happen to bad people, so don't hang around them.” This version of America, Benning suggests, is both a myth and a dream. The reality of growing up in America is marked by the knowledge that “evil is common,” tragedy can happen to anyone, and victims turn into abusers. She rejects the image of the good white girl not only because it is an American myth, but also because trying to emulate this myth contributes to the continued disempowerment of young girls and women. Recognizing that empowerment is found in self-definition rather than in strict conformity to social standards and prevailing definitions of womanhood, Benning, rather than merely reversing the binary of good/bad, subverts it by demonstrating that conventional definitions of womanhood are designed to prevent women from exploring the possibilities of their own identity and self-empowerment. More importantly, the “bad girl” plunders masculine icons of power and rebellion for her own use, thus allowing her to assume a freedom that crosses boundaries of gender and sexuality

Girlpower (1992) opens with a restatement of the themes of violence and disempowerment found in A Place Called Lovely. The only hope of escape from a world both “brutal and needy” is found in the realm of the imagination where teenage girls can, at last, make their own rules: “I built my own world inside my head. I had imaginary friends, make believe love. I travelled to far away places and did as I pleased. I fought the law and, of course, made my own rules.” 

Growing up, Benning's early childhood play and fantasy involve imitation of teenage male heroes she saw in magazines and on television: “When I was a kid I took my shirt off imagining I was just as sexy and powerful as when Matt Dillon did it for the centerfold of Teenbeat magazine.” These early fantasies involve the direct imitation of male coded behaviour, placing Benning in the role of the active rescuer rather than the passively rescued: “I rode my big wheel down the street pretending I was Erik Estrada riding on my motorcycle to save the life of some girl who desperately needed to be rescued.” 

Benning's childhood fantasies reverse the conventional images and play of young girls who are encouraged to dream of rescue by the handsome prince. These fantasies extend beyond role reversal and appropriation when she also includes her emulation of female rock stars including Joan Jett, Debbie Harry of Blondie, and the Go-Go's, early media icons of powerful, independent women. The images of women in popular culture began to change in the 1980s, providing teenage girls with figures of their own, rather than those independently appropriated from male images of power and autonomy. 

After exploring her response to both male and female images of power, Benning turns the camera on herself in order to answer the question “what's inside of me?” What she finds is an intense anger directed at a world that renders her isolated, alienated, and invisible. Her initial reaction is to withdraw into herself and into a world that is of her own making, free from the loneliness that she is confronted with at home, at school, and within her own family. She establishes her own space of belonging, rejecting the world that is offered to her and that insists on her invisibility and, more frighteningly, her eventual eradication. Using appropriated footage of an interview with a leader of the American Nazi Party who prefers to “gas queers” more than anyone else, Benning vividly expresses the source of her alienation from American society, a source that goes far deeper than mere teenage anxiety and rebellion. She attempts to resolve her frustration with the sense of powerlessness she feels in the face of the overwhelming attempt by Western culture to obliterate and deny her identity as a woman and as a lesbian through a defiance that she renders in a series of inter-titles: “Fuck you man” and “Hear me or Die” and through the active creation of her own heroes rather than those culled from television or magazines glorifying male power and privilege. Benning depends upon her own imagination and a belief in self: “I wondered how I would survive, how I would escape, and where I would go? In my imagination I travelled the world. I was as powerful as a bullet. I survived because I created my own heroes. Nobody needed to know I was somebody because it was my secret.” Girl power has its source from within and must be sustained by the imagination. It is Benning's secret weapon in a cultural war that seeks to destroy young women by rendering them hapless and helpless in a world bent on random violence and terror.         

 Jollies
 
Jollies
While A Place Called Lovely and Girlpower concentrate primarily upon Benning's developing sense of self in the world, her isolation, and the growth of individual sources of power and resistance in a culture hostile to women and children, JolliesIf Every Girl Had a Diary, and Me and Rubyfruit (all 1990) focus on Benning's sexuality. If Every Girl Had a Diary is a meditative video diary. Stripped of music and intertitles, and with very little movement, Benning chooses to directly address the camera with a sustained narrative and close confidential style rendering her video into diary form. Employing stark close-up images of her face with a tone of voice that is both confrontational yet contemplative, she announces wryly “last week I almost laughed.” 

With the laying claim to her lesbian identity and sexuality comes the concomitant need to have that identity made visible and validated by society in general. Benning not only needs to make her identity as a lesbian visible to the world in general, in order to provide validation of that identity, but wants this visibility to produce respect rather than the attendant punishment that her sexuality often entails: “It's only been a year ago that I crawled the walls. You know, I've been waiting for that day to come when I could walk the streets and people would look at me and say that's a DYKE. And if they didn't like it they'd fall into the center of the earth and deal with themselves. Maybe they'd return but they'd respect me.” Her video diary records her fears, loneliness, and frustration and the sense that her individuality is lost and rendered invisible amongst the din and the crowd of “800 million faces” each absorbed with their own affairs and worries: “All of us concerned about what concerns us, and we're talking and listening, exchanging glances. And me, I'm numb, I've got a headache. I can imagine a million places I'd rather be.” Yet, ultimately, this sense of disconnection and loneliness that she feels in the middle of a crowd gives her room to explore her identity on her own terms and the opportunity to know herself for who she is and not who she is with: “I guess to be alone is to know yourself for you and not who you are with, and I like that.” 

The theme of lesbian identity is further explored in Me and Rubyfruit with an examination of how heterosexual norms and laws impact her romantic relationships with other girls. Edited in camera with hastily scrawled intertitles, Me and Rubyfruit begins with a question the narrator poses to her friend Leota: “Leota, you thought about getting married?” This question turns into a marriage proposal but Leota is quick to answer that “girls can't get married.” The narrator challenges this “rule” by telling Leota that “if we wanna get married we can; it doesn't matter what anyone says.” She goes on to link “breaking rules” with the power that money and fame can confer: “Nobody dares tell someone famous what to do. Now ain't that better than sitting around with an apron on?” Life, art, and celebrity converge when Benning says “we'll kiss like they do in the movies and then we'll be engaged.” Although she is quick to declare the unspoken rule that girls can't marry girls as “dumb”, she also realizes that kissing Leota must be kept a secret: “Leota and I went off by ourselves each day after school. Somehow we knew enough not to go kissing in front of everyone, so we went into the woods and kissed until it was time to go home.” The messages they pick up from society tell them, at an early age, that what they feel must be hidden, that it is somehow wrong and against a set of “rules” that make no sense to their individual lives, but which they are powerless to defy, especially in public. In a 1993 interview Benning discusses the influence of mass media upon her sexuality and her self-image: “I don't see my images on TV (and) that means I'm not valuable. That means my sexuality doesn't sell beer. Even if you're straight, the representation of women and minorities is just completely warped and constructed to entertain and oppress you” (1). In a brief sequence of shots the camera lingers on mainstream images of women and heterosexual sex found in magazines and on television. There are no images that depict her feelings for Leota, and the knowledge that they are somehow 'different' sends the girls into the woods, maintaining the silence and invisibility that surrounds their emerging sexuality. 

Expanding many of the themes found in Me and RubyfruitJollies is a history of Benning's childhood and teenage sexual experiences. Intensely personal and revealing, Jollies details Benning's early sexual experiences and experimentation with both boys and girls until, eventually losing her virginity to a girl, she embraces her coming-out and her queer identity. Benning takes us through typical pre-teen and adolescent experiences as she attempts to sort through and understand both her feelings and her sexuality. She is quick to note that although her feelings are perfectly normal for any adolescent, it is the object of her affections that makes her not only different but, as she will soon come to realize, invisible in the larger culture that expends its time, energy, and advertising on heterosexual love. 

Jollies opens with a tale of first love: “Like most people I had a crush. It started in 1978 when I was in Kindergarten. They were twins and I was a tomboy.” This tale of first love begins ordinarily enough but concludes, not only with her confession of a crush on twin girls, but also with the identification of herself as a tomboy. She goes on to narrate her experimentation with boys, but the language she uses and the scenes she depicts have a sense of the grotesque and the unnatural, as in her description of an experience she had with a boy when she was just twelve: “So I got naked with this guy. He was my boyfriend. We were in a room full of birds. I was twelve and he was sixteen. So he got up, I got dressed, and he jacked off in the bathroom.” It is after this experience, Benning notes, that she starts kissing girls. In this somewhat roundabout way she demonstrates the naturalness of her feelings for girls, defending against charges that what she feels for girls is somehow unnatural or abnormal, and a charge many lesbians face when they first come out. Narrating her experiences to a background of asynchronous sounds and information including the local weather report and daytime soap operas, the mundane conditions further highlight her own sense of difference from social norms, yet also provides contextualisation for her emerging queer identity. That while she may feel different, strange, and out of touch, the world responds by continuing to turn on its own oblivious and self-absorbed axis. 

 It Wasn't Love
 
It Wasn't Love
It Wasn't Love (1992) expresses a playfulness and composure that is not found in other videos dealing with similar issues, including Jollies and Girlpower. This video appears to offer the promise of a freedom and rebellion that embraces both love and romance without the fear of being labelled different and the alienation and isolation that often accompany this labelling. Love is associated with danger and rebellion, opening up possibilities of adventure and self-discovery while reversing the ending of the traditional heterosexual romance that concludes with the submersion of the heroine's identity beneath the all-encompassing categories of wife and mother.        

It Wasn't Love centers on the narrator's construction of a series of imaginative roles and scenarios that enable her to act out her rebellion and defiance while reflecting her desire for autonomy, respect, and power. The opening shots of Benning and friend combine some of the major themes of this piece. The relationship between the two girls, their direct and defiant stares at the camera, coupled with the enclosed sense of space create an image of female autonomy and power. There is an imaginative envisioning of what it is like to have individual power and autonomy, a power that commands respect and awe in the onlooker. The narration and intertitles describe the ultimate teenage fantasy road-trip: a female version of Bonnie and Clyde in love, in trouble, and unstoppable. With dreams of freedom, a life of crime, and the glamour of Hollywood, the film depicts the ultimate wish list of the lesbian bad girl whose life is not only constrained by school and parents, but also by the fear of a world that cannot tolerate her difference. In recreating media images of what it means to be both powerful and “cool”, Benning also reveals the frustration of her position as a teenage lesbian growing up in Middle America. Yet it is her imagination that ultimately frees her, allowing her to act out various roles including a tattooed biker; a heavily made-up femme fatale; a pool-playing, cigar smoking, male hood; and the androgynous lesbian bad girl with a crush. 

This work ends on a far more positive note than many of her other films especially in terms of gaining access to an inner sense of power and autonomy rather than continuing to rely on media images and her imagination. According to Benning, “the most revolutionary thing is to just love yourself and love what you do. You can't do anything more than that” (2)

Collectively, these videos highlight the lack of positive and empowering images available in the wider culture for both women and lesbians to identify with. Her work seeks to subvert the dominant image in society of the passive white girl who waits to be rescued in favour of the outlaw bad girl who lives by her own rules. The bad girl, however, is often only an imaginative figure, someone Benning can escape into when the pressures of the world push down too hard. She develops her tough girl image primarily through the colonization of male iconography. Rendering herself butch, femme, androgynous, but always lesbian, Benning as bad girl is on a mission to command respect and make her presence known. Her videos, which privilege the visibility of female power and lesbian sexuality, create a visual diary of a girl who dreams of breaking all the rules. 
Melissa Rigney, June 2003

Capturing The Friedmans (Andrew Jarecki)

Andrew Jarecki at event of Capturing the Friedmans
T
his new film by the brother of Andrew Jarecki, who made the controversial "Capturing the Friedmans," has been blasted as an inferior version of the "collage" or "montage" form of documentary, which is to say a documentary that mixes footage from a wide variety of sources (as if "montage" were not the basic element of film). In full grumpy mode, New Yorker film critic David Denby even says it's time to put an end to this kind of documentary altogether:
Isn’t it time to retire the collage method of making documentaries? A phrase or two clipped out of some policy expert’s discourse, followed by a bit of stock footage of jet fighters lined up in rows, followed by some candy-sucking kids hauled by their parents to a convention-hall weapons show, and, wham!, you’ve got an indictment of American militarism and imperialism. Except you don’t; you don’t have much of anything but tawdry film-editing technique.
That's more an example of tawdry film-criticism technique than of anything in this film. The "collage method" doesn't really denote a distinct category of documentary, and the method isn't objectionable. Even if all the footage of a doc is by the same director/photographer, it's quite likely to include interviews and shots of a lot of different people and places. A historical doc is going to have to use old footage. And how varied the elements in a film are depends on the subject and outlook. Jarecki's subject in "Why We Fight" is a very broad, but also very important one.

What Denby's possibly really annoyed by is Jarecki's blanket opposition to American militarism, which leads Jarecki to come at his topic from a variety of angles and rely on many and varied voices. He uses not only solid authorities like retired Lt.Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, who observed the cooking of intelligence data in the lead-up to the Iraq invasion ("We elected a defense contractor as vice-president," she adds); super-patriot and moral stalwart Senator John McCain, who has serious reservations about a lot of what the Bush administration does, but jumps when Cheney calls; anti-imperialist polemicist and data-gatherer Chalmers Johnson, who served in the CIA and has a devastatingly comprehensive sense of the US's pursuit of global dominance; a slightly wacky but often truth-telling ranter, the venerable Gore Vidal; a simple ex-cop who feels stung for getting his WTC-victim son's name on a big bomb dropped in Iraq and then immediately afterwards seeing Bush on TV claim he'd never said Saddam had WMD's; Bush making that claim; Rumsfeld and Cheney and Richard Perle cynically fudging; a Kellogg, Brown, and Root huckster at a military trade fair cynically hawking his services; a 23-year-old who's joining the army for the perennial reason that he's got nothing better to do; a variety of Iraqis who've seen the "collateral damage" first-hand, like by having their wives and children killed and maimed. This is not a smart president, a rustic in a kufiyya says, and this bomb that hit my house was not a 'smart missile.' If this mélange of voices is the "collage method," it's a damned effective and relevant one.

The fact is that Jarecki isn't a stunning, in-your-face polemicist like Michael Moore, who can carry off even wilder and more provocative "collages," though Denby didn't like "Fahrenheit 9/11" one bit either, even while acknowledging its effectiveness. Films like these are too political for the politics of critics reviewing them to be anything but highly relevant.

If you're strongly opposed both to US aims at global domination and to the current administration's uniquely blatant and illegal ways of pursuing them, like myself, you're likely to feel, as I do, that Jarecki's film can only shed light on a subject that is often clouded.

How that clouding goes on is one of Jarecki's many relevant topics: he chronicles the way the media and Congress were deceived--and deceiving--in the run-up to the Iraq invasion. "How We Fight"'s "collage" gives ample evidence of lying, prevarication, and cynicism on the parts of Messrs. Bush, Rumsfeld, Perle, et al. Is cutting in their blatant lies another example of "tawdry film-editing technique," like the pictures of delighted parents and children at outdoor displays of new bombers?

For those of us who are concerned about what's going on with US policy, there's undeniably a sense of déjâ vu at times in "Why We Fight"; but that's because what Jarecki presents is historically correct. He starts out notably, and bookends his film, with Dwight D. Eisenhower's speech when he retired from office in 1961, warning about the "military-industrial complex." Originally the speechwriters included Congress in the nexus, and the film corrects that omission by dwelling on the essential role of Congress, and points out that there is a new element, the think tanks, which formulate policy more than the executive branch now--and that policy promotes war, because its aim is, on the right, global dominance. If a bomb has parts from every single state, as Chalmers Johnson says, then representatives of every state will have a stake in its continued manufacture. "When war becomes this profitable," he says, "reasons are always going to be found to start a new one."

Much has been made of Wilton Sekzer, the retired NYC cop, who wanted revenge after 9/11 and got a 20,000-pound bomb inscribed "in loving memory" of his son who died in the WTC. Sekzer is an average Joe, and a profoundly sympathetic man. There's no questioning his patriotism and faith in his leaders--till he got burned. Some have said Sekzer is out of place in this film, that he grabs too much attention. Others say he is the heart and soul of it. In fact he, like the young recruit whose mom has died and who doesn't have the motivation or maybe the funds to continue school and therefore joins the army, is just another of the human pieces in a vast inhuman puzzle for which Chalmers Johnson has the documentation in 2006, and to which Ike had the key in 1961.

Nobody's Business (Alan Berliner)

As film critics compile their year-end lists, they might include a new category: least likely movie star. One candidate is Oscar Berliner, a cranky, reclusive, and ostensibly unremarkable man who received an impassioned standing ovation at the 1996 New York Film Festival. As the central character of the experimental documentary Nobody's Business, the 79-year-old retired sportswear manufacturer has become a symbol of sorts -- an ordinary man whose life is proven to be worthy of celebration. Berliner also has become a proud father. Nobody's Business was created by his son Alan, who is developing a reputation as one of America's most innovative, exciting filmmakers. WhileNobody's Business represented a breakthrough for Oscar Berliner, who, after years of solitude, has become a minor celebrity in the building where he lives, it also has been important to Alan. Nobody's Business is Alan's most widely seen film to date, having toured the world (it has won nine international festival awards) and been broadcast as the 1997 season opener of PBS's prestigious P.O.V. television series.

Alan Berliner, who has created a compelling body of work revolving around issues of family identity, will bring the funny, touching, and inventive Nobody's Business to Austin as part of the Texas Documentary Tour. The film will be screened at the Alamo Drafthouse, 6:30pm, on Wednesday, January 14. In a way, Nobody's Business represents the culmination of more than 12 years of work for Berliner. His last three films have explored the American family. Each has been more personal than the last. For his 1986 work, The Family Album, Berliner spliced together vintage, anonymous home movies and bits of audio gathered from more than 150 families to create a birth-to-death narrative collage.The Family Album, in its non-specificity, examined the essence of American familial life. The film was included in the 1987 Whitney Biennale.

Intimate Portrait (1991) sifts through a different kind of archival material: the unfinished autobiography of Joseph Cassuto, Berliner's grandfather. Cassuto was, to most who knew him, a relatively unremarkable businessman. But Berliner, using home movies, interviews with his uncles (Cassuto's sons), and his grandfather's writings, constructs a portrait of a memorable, cryptic individual. Critic Desson Howe, writing for The Washington Post, called Intimate Portrait "an archetypal musing on the enigma of personality." With Nobody's Business, Berliner for the first time takes on a living, breathing (and very contrarian) relative. From the opening scenes, Oscar Berliner is completely resistant to his son's attempts to question him -- he's the most reluctant subject since General Motors chairman Roger Smith, who gave Michael Moore the runaround in Roger & Me.

"You're wasting your time!" Oscar shouts (he's hard of hearing) at his son. "My life is nothing. I was in the army, I got married, I raised a family. I worked hard, had my own business, that's all. That's nothing to make a picture about! Who the hell am I?"

That question -- who is Oscar Berliner? -- is central to Nobody's Business. Alan is determined to prove that his father's life, given a passionate investigation, contains a mythic dimension. The details of Oscar's life -- which include an immigrant childhood, a stint as a naval officer in World War II, a marriage to a bombshell of a woman, a successful career in the textile industry, and two kids and a grandchild -- are of great interest to Alan. To Oscar, these memories are only nominally significant. He refuses to talk with his son about the past, except in dismissive tones. Even after Alan travels to Eastern Europe in search of traces of his family (Oscar's parents were Polish immigrants), Oscar remains steadfastly unimpressed.

"There was one tombstone standing all alone," Alan tells his father upon returning from the Berliners' ancestral home, "and that one I chose to see as your grandfather."

"Hooray for you," Oscar says, disinterested. Berliner said he was a bit surprised at the totality of his father's resistance. Making Nobody's Business turned out to be a risky venture -- at stake was the relationship with his father. "He's a cantankerous, stubborn man, and he didn't think much of the undertaking," Berliner said during a phone interview from his Manhattan apartment. "I'm this earnest, genealogist wannabe with a romantic edge, interested in pretty much everything to do with our family history.... He's the most compelling character in my life, and he leads this reclusive, sad existence, not talking to others for days at a time, spending his day alone in this emotional poverty. It's been the source of exasperation for me, and for a long time I've tried to change him. The time came to have a heart-to-heart, and I thought that making this film would be a good chance to try and understand him and make a healing."

Nobody's Business has been called a "personal documentary" and a "film diary" -- terms that have come to have negative connotations. While those who point cameras at their own lives often produce angst-ridden, self-indulgent work, Berliner's movies have raised the level of family documentation to an innovative new level.

Berliner was trained as an artist and experimental filmmaker at SUNY-Binghamton and the University of Oklahoma, and his fine-arts background is evident in Nobody's Business. He wrote, directed, produced, shot, and edited the film, which has a handmade, labor-of-love quality. Nobody's Business also builds on themes visible in Berliner's early works -- video installations, large photographic scrolls, and collages that explore issues of space and time.

Berliner continues to tinker with notions of time and space, as a filmmaker, an editor-for-hire (he has won two Emmys and been nominated for three others), and a film professor (he teaches a course at the New School for Social Research entitled "Experiments in Time, Light and Motion"). Nobody's Business, for example, travels smoothly from the intense, face-to-face father/son interviews to more playful encounters with members of Berliner's extended family; and from the family history vaults run by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Utah into the world of mathematical genealogy (any two humans, Berliner learns, are at least 50th cousins). Berliner's quirky, epic journey eventually leads to Poland, where the filmmaker finds that the Holocaust erased all but trace material about his family.

Nobody's Business wastes no energy adhering to conventional definitions of documentary -- this is a genre-bender, filled with thoughtful, idiosyncratic touches. The film, for example, is punctuated with recurring footage of a boxing match, a clever, resonant reminder of Berliner's combative relationship with his father. New York Film Festival director Richard Pena, asked to locate a cinematic reference point for Nobody's Business, suggested Citizen Kane, another innovative film that explored the conflicts and struggles that come with belonging to a family. "Alan Berliner represents to me the most exciting breakthrough out of the impasse of the family film," Pena told Phillip Lopate, writing for The New York Times. "Most documentaries end up planting the camera and waiting for something to happen. With Berliner, one sees a much more playful, essayistic thought process at work."

Even with their experimental trappings, Berliner's works remain accessible. The filmmaker spent much of 1997 traveling to festivals throughout North American and Europe with Nobody's Business, and at every stop, he said, the audiences demonstrated their appreciation. "I don't know how the high priests of the avant-garde have responded to the film, but the people in the pews in the Church of Everyday seem to relate to it," Berliner said. "It seems to transcend gender and religion, and cultural, social, and national demographics.

"I guess, if you peel away the layers, you take it down to the very fact that everyone has a father, so everyone has a frame of reference for the film. I also think the emotional territory is honest enough that people can find their way in, and use the film as a measure of their own situation, their own history."

Without the reminiscences of his father, Alan had a difficult time answering basic questions about his ancestry. Where did the Berliners come from? What did it mean to be a Berliner? To help address those issues, Alan began scouring phonebooks from around the country and invited dozens of people named Berliner to New York. Interviews with these random Berliners broaden the film's context. From a story of a father and son, Nobody's Business expands into an exploration of cousins, commonalities, and what it means to be related.

"Yes, we are related, but we are still strangers," one cousin tells Berliner. Another unknowingly sums up the entire film: "We are all strange relatives." Nobody's Business, like The Family Album and Intimate Stranger before it, will also be screened at the Museum of Modern Art, a notable honor for contemporary filmmakers. The Family Album and Intimate Stranger also preceded Nobody's Business as selections ofP.O.V., PBS's famed television venue for documentary film.

The response to the 1997 PBS broadcast of Nobody's Business is now the stuff of legend. After the film aired in June, viewers overwhelmed the call-in line, blowing out the PBS phone system. Nobody's Business elicited three times the response as any previous P.O.V. broadcast. Berliner said he fielded calls and letters from, among others, Inuit women in Alaska and Korean families in California, all of whom felt a connection with Alan and his father. This despite the fact that Oscar at times seems almost a caricature -- the crotchety New York City Jew.

"People are finding a piece of themselves in my father, or in me," Berliner said. "I think it serves, in a vicarious, or voyeuristic way, as a substitute for people who haven't had these conversations with their parents. I think my father as a character, however stereotypical he may be, is authentic enough to relate to, and the integrity of his stance, of his existential plight, also is authentic."

Cranky and cantankerous, Oscar Berliner is a great film character, funnier, suggested one British reviewer, than any of Woody Allen'sinventions. But Nobody's Business inhabits much broader territory than any of Allen's films -- this is an immigrant film, the story of American assimilation told in first person.

Oscar's story is a familiar one. His parents arrived in America and, struggling for acceptance, neglected to document their origins. For Oscar and his parents, ethnicity was a handicap. For Alan, having grown up in a relatively flavorless mainstream, it is a nagging necessity. "Everyone who came over felt a need to start fresh, to start anew," Alan said. "My father's generation tried really hard to not have the Yiddish accent. He tried to be good at baseball, not remember the older stories. He wanted to be American.

"But I'm freed from having to blend in -- I'm blended. So rather than sink into a soup that has less and less flavor, we are each trying to find our colors, our pedigree, our stories, lest the American tapestry begins to fade." 

--Jason Silverman

JOHAN VAN DER KEUKEN

The Way South, 1980-81

verslesud.gifThe coronation of Queen Beatrix on the eve of May Day in 1980 provides a salient point of departure for Johan van der Keuken's The Way South, a cultural interrogation into the intertwined sociopolitical landscape of immigration, dislocation, underprivilege, and class division. Continuing on the prevailing theme of economic disparity between the continental north and south (in such essay films as DiaryThe White Castle, and the The New Ice Age), van der Keuken encounters his first destination within a short distance from his home in Amsterdam, where a unused office building on Kinker Street has been converted to a communal squat by activists (who see their action as a pragmatic solution to the affordable housing shortage by making use of existing real estate that would otherwise remain unoccupied). Facing an imminent siege by riot police to force their eviction, the squatters discuss the logistics of their staged resistance, from rounding up volunteers for round the clock sentry duty to guard the main entrance, to installing reinforcing screens in order to thwart a surprise intrusion from unsecured windows. Intercutting a shot of the activists protesting in the street with footage of a public rally celebrating the country's liberation in 1945, van der Keuken presents the activists' defiant expression of freedom within the irony of self-imprisonment that reveals their idealistic act of resistance.

Van der Keuken captures a similar image of imposed occupation at a nearby church, where a group of Moroccan migrant workers have assembled to seek refuge while awaiting their deportation, having lost their jobs as a result of stricter guidelines governing immigrant labor (one that also levies the restrictive requirement of having continuous employment under a single employer as a means of providing a loophole to deny access to social services). Spending a final night at the church before their expulsion, the immigrants sleep in communal beds under panels depicting the Stations of the Cross, implicitly linking the sorrow, isolation, and sacrifice that also mark their uncertain plight.

The problem of assimilation is also implied in the profile of Goutte d'or in Paris, the oldest immigrant community in Europe, where the idea of impermanence and transition embodied in the names of boarding houses such as Hotel du Progrés collides with the reality of a fourth and fifth generation ethnic African population continuing to reside within the same community (a social immobility that is also reinforced in the portrait of a construction worker and his wife who, despite having lived in France for over 45 years, are still considered immigrants). Focusing on the everyday routine of Ali, a disabled former car factory worker who has been taking clerical correspondence courses in order to find a new way to make a living after his accident, van der Keuken reveals the intrinsic racism that continues to exist behind the ideal of social inclusion, where a constant police presence can be seen from his apartment window, and he is compelled to carry his disability and residency papers at all times in case of "random" identity checks.

The myth of post-colonial integration revealed by the experiences of Goutte d'or's residents also resurfaces in Rome, where an octogenarian widow, Nonna Rosa - the daughter of an Italian father and Eritrean mother - talks about her transient life between Eritrea, her homeland, and Italy, her country of citizenship. Displaced by fascism, racism, British territorial expulsion, apartheid, decolonization, and finally, Ethiopia's annexation of Eritrea in 1962, Nonna Rosa's life has been marked by perpetual exile, struggling to bridge the two cultures of her identity only to belong to neither.

In the village of Calabria in Locri, a Catholic priest, Father Natale, exposes a different kind of institutionalized oppression, defying the thinly veiled threats of a mafia don who lords over the small town with the silent complicity of the local church. Establishing a clothing factory cooperative to provide jobs for the poor (and stave off the lure of organized crime), Father Natale sees a correlation between the church's increasing inability to attract young men into the priesthood and its perceived culture of corruption. Concluding the chapter with a montage of gravestones from villagers who were killed by the mafia, van der Keuken wryly reinforces the macabre connection between the church and organized crime through the mutual commerce of death, and the tragic dignity of ennobled resistance.

The moral cost of the illusive pursuit of wealth is similarly reflected during the observance of the Feast of Sacrifice in Cairo, where a family's financial ability to provide sacrificial food itself becomes a status symbol. Offering alms to the poor - who are often found living inside family vaults (connected the parallel image of the Kinker Street squatters) - in exchange for prayers for the souls of lost loved ones, van der Keuken illustrates the conflation of economy and spirituality in the meaning of sacrifice. Framed against the television broadcast of an imam preaching against the perils of following "desires" that is ironically being shown simultaneously over multiple televisions at a shop window display, the imam's call for solidarity paradoxically reflects the self-inflicted fragmentation of society as well (a man-made division that is also symbolized by a prefiguring shot of pedestrians cutting through un-reinforced sidewalk barricades in lieu of crossing at street corners). Concluding with an incisive, tongue-in-cheek montage of a manually operated waterwheel (that evokes a recurring image of Sisyphean ritual), peanut farmers (harvesting to the radio broadcast news of the U.S. presidential race between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan), brick loaders (a metaphor for Cairo's economic transformation literally being carried on the backs of workers), and repeated shots of graffiti that alternately read "No Future" and "Carry On", van der Keuken's expressed desire to touch reality also suggests a quixotic quest to transcend the bounds between the figurative north and south, to dismantle the artificial notions of privilege and exclusion, and consequently, find the root of our common humanity.

Springtime: Three Portraits, 1976

springtime.gifA muted, yet provocative composition on the changing face of the labor movement - or more appropriately, its immobility - in Western Europe in the 1970s, Johan van der Keuken's Springtime: Three Portraits articulates the struggle of the working class under the protracted climate of an austere, stagnant global economy (stemming in part from the OPEC oil crisis) and industrial recession through first person testimonies and quotidian observations of society's increasingly fragile and economically vulnerable middle class. This sense of work time as stasis is prefigured in the opening shot of an impressive wall clock in the suburban home of unemployed garment factory foreman, Joop Uchtman in Den Helder who, despite his productive working relationship with the factory seamstresses under his supervision, was laid off during company downsizing, as local industries sought to shrink their higher waged domestic workforce in favor of overseas outsourcing as a means of reducing operational costs and retaining global competitiveness. Threading through Uchtman's alternately expressed pride at his work (and implied humiliation at having to become dependent on the state and his wife) and anxiety over the repercussions of his inability to find a new job on his young family, with his all too familiar daily routine of reporting to the labor office in person to confirm that he has not secured a job and is eligible to receive unemployment benefits, and seeking advice from a friend on the merits - and illusion - of enrolling in state-sponsored vocational retraining, the recurring image of the clock becomes, not only a metaphor for the bureaucratic rituals of his vain search to find a job, but also reminder of his expiring state-assisted benefits, the dream of a comfortable middle class life being slowly swept away with the swinging of the pendulum.

In Frankfurt, the intersection between past and present, history and memory is embodied in the establishing shot of social activist and former teacher, Doris Schwert listening to a reel tape recording of her father's wartime testimony as a partisan rebel and political prisoner who fought against the Fascists in Germany and Spain in the 1930s and 40s. Instilled with her father's socialist ideals of solidarity and worker empowerment, Schwert's student radicalism and subsequent political engagement as a young teacher had drawn increasing concern from school administrators and West German officials who saw her ties to the communist party as tantamount to an act of ideological sabotage in the waging of the Cold War. Contrasting the images of protest graffiti demanding the reinstatement of the blacklisted, left-leaning teachers at her former school with recruitment posters tacked near empty classrooms that paradoxically tout equal opportunity to job seekers even with such insidious former affiliations as the Nazi party and wartime service in the SS, van der Keuken presents the idea of work time as historical recursion, where lessons from the past are whitewashed and reinvented to conform to the sociopolitical and economic expediencies of an amnesic present, a sobering reality that is punctuated by the chapter's concluding, intercutting shot of a confectionery store window display that is lined with premium chocolate Easter baskets and archival footage of a postwar Frankfurt street in ruins, the metaphoric resurrection of a national soul, fueled not by moral enlightenment, but exploitation and consumerism.

The near wordless Amsterdam closing chapter chronicles a day in the work life of metal worker, Jan Van Haagen, from his early morning suburban commute on his bicycle, to the bellowing of a factory horn that signals the official start of the work day (a sound akin to an air raid signal that also recalls the image of wartime Europe introduced in the Frankfurt chapter), to the union-synchronized meal break, to a passing anecdote of a senior co-worker's health problems that led to an early death after refusing to use an exhaust hood during welding operations (in favor of the company's earlier policy of instituting milk breaks as a means of bolstering employee health after working with hazardous materials), to the closing of the workshop in the afternoon. As in the Den Helder chapter, the clock becomes a recurring motif, marking through the workers' prescribed labor and break schedule with the monotonous ritual of fabrication and assembly. Framed against the image of a constantly turning exhaust vent on the facing wall of the building, the juxtaposition between the factory clock and the exhaust fan illustrates the idea of work time as a cultivated environment for social as well as technological progress, a humanization of industrial production.

I ♥ $ / I Love Dollar, 1986

ilovedollar.gifFilmed in 1984-85 in an era of Reaganomics, a spiraling U.S. national debt, an unresolved energy crisis, a politically stabilizing Brazilian recession, and an unprecedented Asian high tech economic boom led by Hong Kong, Johan van der Keuken's I Love Dollar is an ingeniously conceived, cohesively organic, and provocative exposition into the circulation and financial mechanisms of money in modern civilization and its wide ranging social and geopolitical repercussions. Incisively opening to the sound of a jaunty, Tin Pan Alley-styled, synthesized piano melody (that recalls a more somber version of Abba's Money, Money, Money) juxtaposed against the curiously distorted image of a funhouse mirror-like reflection from the entrance of a commercial building, this introductory image of highly polished and transfixing, but visually deceptive urban financial institutions is immediately upended by the incongruous - and seemingly unrelated - shot of a bustling park (perhaps somewhere in South America) as a group of bystanders congregate around a dice-rolling betting table. A subsequent shot of a stock exchange trading room in Amsterdam provides the intrinsic correlation between the disparate images of recreation and work, poverty and privilege, as a commodities broker attempts to explain to a client on the telephone the increased risk and relative volatility of speculative investment associated with the commodities trading of precious metals.

Inasmuch as van der Keuken seeks to collapse the implicit class-based connotative shell game by redefining the underlying idea of stock investment as an act of gambling (a democratization that is subsequently represented by the high society sport of derby horse racing in then-British colony Hong Kong in which both thoroughbred owners and off-track betting agents represent the same potential for financial gain based on a calculated, yet essentially chance-based system), so too is the concept of investment recontextualized, not solely in terms of financial seeding and funneling of capital, but also in terms of personal commitment and dedication to communal projects. Switching locations to the (then) slums of Alphabet City on the Lower East Side of Manhattan (in a jarring contrast in economic conditions that is punctuated by a playfully sinister, otherworldly music that accompanies the shot of a pair of working class young men - the film's interview subjects and first hand witnesses to the urban blight - as they drive past the desolation and ruins of a seemingly alien urban landscape): first, a first-generation Puerto Rican immigrant and business student speaking from the kitchen of his hard-working mother's quaint neighborhood cafeteria as he explains his entrepreneurial goal to expand the reach of his mother's ethnic cooking into the more affluent clientele of Fifth Avenue by studying the mechanism of high finance while continuing to support the community by maintaining their original store as a reminder of their economic and social roots; then subsequently, a pair of working class homesteaders renovating a derelict, burned down building on Avenue C who express their frustrated attempts to petition City Hall to be issued a title grant to their homesteaded property and the constant fear of dispossession that inevitably accompanies the process of gentrification. Culminating with a radio-prompted, impromptu fundraising gathering in front of the cafeteria to raise money for paralyzed children in Puerto Rico, these marginalized communities subvert the notion of abstract consequences created by the short term goals of a manipulated, virtual money flow - a sentiment articulated by a Dutch commodities broker who acknowledges the international repercussions of the industry, but nevertheless, feels disconnected from its collateral effects (a figurative turning of a blind eye that is subsequently reinforced in the interstitial shot of a blind street vendor hawking pencils in the street) - by humanizing the face of personal investment and stakeholder in the building and nurturing of communities.

A subsequent pillow shot of the now iconic image of the World Trade Center (that punctuates a personable and motivated young woman's rendition ofI'm Always Chasing Rainbows as a sardonic commentary on her demoralizing, catch-22 limbo to better herself: unable to get a job to further her education without work experience, and unable to get work experience without a job) also serves as an incisive symbol for the correlation between artificially created perturbations within the international stock markets of industrialized countries as a means of manipulating domestic growth and the imbalanced economies of developing nations. At the core of the hypothesis is an American analyst's examination of the concept of supply side economics that has become the framework for fiscally conservative governments - and in particular, Ronald Reagan's administration - that favors a less intrusive government in the stimulation of the economy, even as it seeks to implement tax cuts for businesses as a means of generating an eventual "trickle down" benefit to the local economy. Contrasted against the modern-day reality of a mammoth and unprecedented national debt caused by systematic deficit spending (that reached the trillion dollar milestone for the first time during the Reagan administration), the concept not only underlies the common practice of buying stocks on margin, but also encapsulates the inextricable disparity of underdeveloped countries in the arena of world trade (a miasmic, figurative deal with the devil that van der Keuken wryly alludes through the repeating images of revolving glass doors bearing the inopportune address of '666'), as export revenues are diverted towards interest payments to international debt holders and not re-invested into the national economy to foster sustained growth. Moreover, the idea of debt as a socially accepted, virtual generator of money is also presented as an ingrained aspect of American culture, enabled by a massive credit industry that generates income from the interminable payment of interest (while the amount of debt remains unchanged), and behaviorally reinforced by a dysfunctional government seeking to evade the responsibility for - and the catastrophic repercussions of - an inevitable national economic reckoning.

After establishing the interrelation between industrialized economies - and in particular, Western economies - and the stagnation of third world countries, van der Keuken then sets his sights towards Switzerland in order to examine the traditional (and at times, reprehensible) centrality of Swiss financial institutions in the conduct of international economic affairs. Correlating the Protestant Reformation (by way of John Calvin's theological work in Geneva) and the origins of capitalism through the converging ideal of a Puritan work ethic, the country's iconic reputation as the epicenter of international finance provides an archetypal framework for the very concept of virtually created wealth, illustrating the country's economic role as an archaic, but ingrained middleman gateway - in a complex financial network that resembles what van der Keuken describes as a "spider web" - for channeling (or perhaps, laundering) money to be reinvested into other parts of the world. It is interesting note that by invoking Calvin, van der Keuken also opens the door to the specter of colonialism though the settlement of Calvinist Boers in South Africa and, in the process, indirectly evokes its legacy of systematic exploitation of natural and human resources that has also contributed to the continued economic disparity of post-colonial, emerging nations in the world market. Concluding with a shot of a desolate outdoor farmer's market at sunset juxtaposed against the sound of an audio broadcast news of the European currency markets' collective decision to actively adjust the inflated value of the U.S. dollar against their respective currencies, with inaudible - and appropriately indeterminate - consequences for third world nations, the quotidian image of empty vendor stands in the process of disassembly serves as a metaphoric call to arms to dismantle the intrusive, artificially imposed financial structures created under the archaic illusion of a standardized, world trade free market economy that continues to foster a system of inequitable and disproportionate economic barriers, perpetuate marginalization, and engender inhumanity.

Brass Unbound, 1993

brass.gifJohan van der Keuken's sublime and exhilarating riff on the city symphony and musical documentary, Brass Unbound is a thoughtful, infectiously engaging, and complexly resonant exposition on the transformative evolution of the ceremonial brass band throughout post-colonial societies from tools of enslavement and imperialism, to instruments of cultural celebration and personal expression. The film ingeniously opens to a long shot of a Nepalese man briskly traversing the hills of a rural village with a sewing machine curiously slung across his back on his way to a cottage factory where a handful of other tailors have already taken their respective corners on the dirt floor and are busily toiling at their monotonous craft, the monotonic cadence of the rattle and hum of sewing machines increasingly masked by the rhythmic sound of a tinny folk music emanating overhead. A seamless vertical tracking shot places the camera in seeming levitation towards the second floor where an ensemble of brass and woodwind musicians rehearses. A second cutaway to the city visually connects the second floor folk musicians with a second brass band as a musician practices in a cramped, underlit room above an opened family home, where an overhanging billboard advertises the services of the Hansilo modern light music brass band. This metaphoric, introductory image of ascension - if not transcendence - through music would subsequently be articulated by an unnamed Nepalese musician (and unofficial band manager) as he traces the evolutionary history of the ceremonial brass band in his native country, where the first Rana, Jung Bahadur, having journeyed to Europe to forge an alliance with the British Empire in order to secure his family's dynastic, regional autonomy after the conquest of India during the nineteenth century, sought to elevate his national stature by returning home in 1850 with several modern brass and woodwind instruments in order to integrate the sound of their impressive, bright harmonies into the pomp and circumstance of his official ceremonies. Born to a lower caste often relegated to an ancestral vocation as tailors, the musician perceives the Rana's introduction of the novel instruments to Nepal, not as a means of currying favor from neighboring foreign colonists, but rather, as a transformative blessing that indirectly elevated the very social position of his entire caste, as the responsibility for musicianship of the new, western instruments - and therefore, the entrance and visibility into the Rana's court and privileged society - fell within the scope of traditionally accepted professions associated with his caste.

The notion of the brass band as accompanists through all the existential and spiritual ceremonies - providing the musical refrain to the familiar rites of passage of an eternal natural cycle - carries through to the interconnected image of social rituals, as a brass band hired to provide entertainment for a wedding ceremony and subsequently, devotional accompaniment for a Hindu pilgrimage in Nepal is paralleled to the sound of an elegiac prelude to a chorus during a Surinamese funeral service, a retired musician recalling the unfamiliar customs of the Dutch-introduced formal soirées of his youth in Minahassa, Indonesia, and in Ghana, to a ceremonial seafaring initiation at a coastal village. At each juncture, the idea of a metaphoric, transcendental journey is traced back to the historical context of the physical voyage rooted in colonialism, a theme that is reinforced in the narrator's statement as the camera surveys the landscape of post-colonial Suriname: "In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, ten million people were carried over the ocean in wooden ships. They were taken as slaves from the west coast of Africa to work in the plantations of colonies in the New World. The churches brought them God's Word, and, somewhat later, God's instruments."

A more explicit manifestation of the European wind instruments as a means of colonialist subjugation is directly correlated to the continued popularity of the "spirits" musicians in modern-day Suriname, even as roughly half of the indigenous population have converted to Christianity. Originating from the performance of the Winti ceremony in order to drive away the evil spirits from possessed bodies, the ritual became a common practice on colonial plantations as a means of exerting control over the hearts and minds (and souls) of rebellious, willful, troublesome slaves. It is through this recurring theme of brass band music as an integrated living soundtrack for the human condition that the idiosyncratic image of a bobbing, bellowing tuba drifting sinuously through the diverse architecture that line the city streets of Suriname - in all the splendor of colonial privilege and dilapidation of exploited, abject poverty - can be seen as a metaphor for the wind instruments' integration (and finally, assimilation) into the native traditions of colonized peoples, transformed from insidious artifacts of cultural imperialism to integral - and empowering - instruments of a cross-pollinated, yet distinctly indigenous living culture.

The Mask, 1989

mask.gifSet against the bicentennial commemoration of the French Revolution and the drafting of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, Johan van der Keuken's The Mask is a relevant, provocative, and bracing exposition on the contemporary social representation of the ideals of the 1789 revolution - liberty, equality, and fraternity - at a particularly transformative time in globalism and international politics when Eastern Europe was gradually emerging from the crumbling economy of a disintegrating Soviet bloc, and thus liberating itself from a state of "equality without freedom", and the nascent steps towards the formation of a European economic union were being vigorously debated through the media by political leaders (most notably, right-wing ultranationalist Jean-Marie Le Pen's racially inflammatory comments) seeking to sway public sentiment towards their cause on such confrontational issues as immigration and national identity, financial independence and common market leverage. The film opens to an image of understated, but trenchant irony as a pair of street musicians from Madagascar attempts to engage the captive (and largely disinterested) commuters into their guitar and saxophone performance by equating the sentiment expressed in their native folk song with the hopeful ideals of the revolution. The estranged image of these marginalized, panhandling immigrants searching for a receptive audience as they vainly chase their illusory dreams of a better life in the transitory platforms of an adoptive promised land is brought closer to the consciousness of the common man - in this case, the native Frenchman - through an equally incisive isolated shot of van der Keuken's seemingly atypical subject, a genial and unassuming 23 year old part-time waiter named Philippe, traveling in the opposite direction of a crowd on a set of escalators at a train station.

Comely, free from substance abuse, articulate, and presentably dressed in a dark, neutral colored suit, Philippe defies the stereotype of a vagrant. Uprooted from a fairly stable home life by the untimely death of his long ailing mother, as well as an unfortunate series of self-admitted youthful indiscretions (which included such rash, but seemingly innocuous decisions as resigning from a job without immediate prospects for a new one on hand), Philippe now walks aimlessly throughout the city to pass the long, empty hours on an all-too familiar routine (an evicted immigrant couple at a social services office similarly articulate this round the clock ambulatory ritual as a means of passing time) that includes stowing away in the waiting areas of train stations while dodging patrol officers making their rounds on the nights when he is unable to secure a bed space at the overfilled Salvation Army. His ambition, he muses, is to have a wardrobe of finely tailored suits with which he could present himself during job interviews and professional meetings that would serve as a mask of trustworthiness and dependability and conceal his instability.

As celebrations for the bicentennial reach a crescendo, Philippe, too, gets caught up in the politics of the moment, spending time with a pair of homeless, alcoholic military veterans who bristle at François Mitterand's public gesture of extolling the virtues of a national open immigration policy (arguing instead that such liberal immigration embraced by Mitterand robs the native French citizens from opportunities and social services), even as they equate Le Pen's heavy-handedness with the brutality of World War II death squads. However, van der Keuken preempts their alcohol-fueled specious argument (a generalization subsequently echoed by Philippe) with earlier scenes of struggling musicians and evicted immigrant families to create a pervasive atmosphere, not of the insidious nature of racism, but of the intrinsic psychology of disenfranchisement and marginalization, where fears of personal failure and human frailty are perverted into scapegoat absolutions of xenophobia and sense of unmerited, entitled privilege that inevitably lead to inertia and complacency. It is within these underlying paradoxes of homelessness and freedom, social status and equality, racism and fraternity that van der Keuken presents, not only an incisive portrait of the untenability of revolutionary ideals, but also a pensive, everyman cautionary tale on the alienating, self-defeating cycle of poverty, dependence, and social entrapment.

The Eye Above the Well, 1988

eye_well.gifOn the surface, photographer turned filmmaker Johan van der Keuken's selection of an ancient Indian folktale narration that opens and concludes The Eye Above the Well is a curious one. Recounting the tale of a man suspended precariously from a tree branch above a snake-infested dried-up well who, in moments before an inescapable, horrific death, nevertheless reaches to taste a drop of honey on the tip of a blade of grass near the well, the tale seems ideally suited to a facile interpretation of third world allegory for capturing moments of grace and humble beauty in the face of poverty, hardship, and inevitable death. However, perhaps what is intrinsically significant about the inclusion of the folktale is not found in the content of the parable, but rather, in its context - in the seeming incongruity of its existential orality within a visual and representational ethnographic cultural survey. Indeed, inasmuch as van der Keuken captures the travails and quotidian rituals of life within the rural and urban communities of Kerala near the end of the twentieth century without the overt intrusion of narrated (first world) perspective, he also chronicles the process of passage, continuity, commutation, and transference - creating a snapshot, not only of a captured moment, but also the reinforcing fragments of a future memory in an interrelated stream of collective consciousness.

Acutely aware that each superseding film frame is a figurative erasure of the previous one, van der Keuken's gaze transcends that of passive observation or ubiquitous surveillance and instead, becomes a chronicle of the ephemeral - a theme that is reinforced in the establishing shots of the village through the veil of diaphanous smoke that suffuses the landscape. It is, therefore, perhaps not surprising that van der Keuken's sublime, extended traveling shot through the rural village as a moneylender embarks on his daily collection route visually prefigures the pervasive sense of displacement and migration of Chantal Akerman's D'Est and rootlessness of Peter Mettler's Gambling, Gods and LSD, where the organic happenstance nature of the passing images serve as a metaphor for existential transience. In contrast to fluidity of camera movement implemented in the rural sequences, the city is depicted through a quick cut montage that reflects the chaos of urban life (in a sequence that also prefigures the baroque visual strategy of Mark Lapore's collage film, Kolkata). In his photography of the disparate landscapes, van der Keuken's gaze lies, not in the details of the captured image, but in the intrinsic, subconscious destruction of that image within the sequentiality (and manipulation) of the film itself - the transformation from the physical (object) to the cognitive (memory).

In an early sequence, the image of a martial arts instructor overseeing his students' flexibility exercises and kata-like drills illustrates the social process of imparting knowledge between elder and protégé, a passing of legacy that is reinforced in a subsequent shot of the middle-aged instructor and his student formally posed in the foreground of a wall bearing the portrait of the instructor as a young man and his own teacher. A series of subsequent encounters - a village schoolteacher, a spiritual cantor, and a Kathakali instructor - evoke the presaging image of the complex choreography of martial arts exercises to illustrate the repetition innate in the process of enlightened ritual. In another sequence, a moneylender traveling from village to village to collect weekly installment payments on outstanding loans represents the most immediately identifiable form of transference - financial transaction - as money changes hands through a succession of craftsmen, teachers, and shop owners, and is used to finance a loan for another local merchant. It is interesting to note that this commodification of social interaction is subsequently connected to the shot of a bicycle messenger transporting film cans to the local movie house when the moneylender visits the projectionist to collect payment on his debt. It is through this seeming chance encounter that van der Keuken illustrates the sublimative process of enlightenment and transference - the intersection between the physical (ritual) and the ephemeral (idea) through the intrinsic duality of film as both a material object and fictional, intangible, projected image.