Bruno Dumont and Hadewijch

I have yet to write my blurbs about Hadewijch. I found the film quite interesting, and a noteworthy turning point in Dumont’s career. It delves into lots of contemporary ramification about religious extremism (clash/friction of religions) departing from a historical/fictional account on a fairly unknown Christian mystic Hadewijch and her writings. I saw the film at its premiere in Toronto this year. I took some photos of Dumont after the screening while discussing with Piers Handling of TIFF. This photo stands out as a bit obligue and abstract, but has a mysterious tag as well hence paralleling the film in a way.

I’ve cross-posted this with my other blog Filmarylin.

Shirin

Shirin has been an absolute flat-out discovery for me among 2009’s titles. Quotations come from Kiarostami’s own description of the movie. I had waited such long time to catch up with this on big screen, alas, for the reasons unknown, it never made it to North American distribution if I am not mistaken. Kudos go to the BFI for plunging to release this gem on DVD. The disc contains an amazing extra feature as complementary to the film that is called ‘Taste of Shirin’, that could pass easily a sort of ‘making of’. This would be a great new year investment for those interested in seeing this.

Offscreen. How did it occur to you to make such a movie?

Abbas Kiarostami. It was a response to an old temptation, a very old one dating back to the days when I had become a director. It was all about watching the audiences. I believe it has its root in the fact that, in the absence of an audience, no production could be dubbed a production on its own. It is not that I want to grease the palms of audiences. I don’t seek to lift the stature of the audience at the expense of the production. What I am saying is that the moment an audience is affected by a movie, the creation is that special moment, not the film itself. There is no such thing as a movie before the projector is switched on and after the theatre’s lights are turned off. A film which consists of many frames that is placed in a box, or works by a digital system, etc., is nothing like a painting or statue to prompt us to think of it as a mass or an identity. I believe the identity of the silver screen hinges on audiences, in such a moment that it sees its audience. So a production takes shape in the moment we see the audience. In other words, at a certain juncture audiences and the movie become one.

I believe this work features two movies. I mean, we don’t look at the production in the abstract; rather, we look at its impact on audiences. This is a very old phenomenon evident in some other films I have directed. For instance, in Under the Olive Trees the moment there is an argument between Ms. Shiva and Hussein with the construction worker who has dropped the bricks, we see the traffic jam without actually seeing it. I mean on their faces we see the whole atmosphere without seeing the actual congestion. It is the case in several recent productions of mine. We see the film through the impact it has on people who are watching a movie.

I had a very radical feeling and wanted to watch the audience in private. To me watching people is more interesting than anything else. This is a very old feeling. It has nothing to do with directing. It is a deep and bold gaze; similar to that of children in the cradle, quite straightforward. There are moments in this film which are just like a gift to me. It is a blessing to be able to look at someone so closely to detect feelings on their faces.

Offscreen: What reaction do you think your movie will draw?

AK: I cannot guess. “I don’t care at all” is quite a cliché these days because many directors begin to use that expression after a very brief experience in filmmaking. The fact that I have never uttered that sentence over the years makes me feel comfortable saying it right now. I am not saying I don’t care whether they like the film or not. What I am saying is that their not liking the movie won’t affect my feelings about it. I believe I have already answered this question without answering it, by watching the film several times; whenever someone has watched the film, I have watched it too. It comes despite the fact that I have never watched my own movies, even once. Actually, Close-up is an exception. I have watched it three or four times.

This film has a lot to explore. That is why when I watch it again I find something new which invites me to watch it again.

More of it can be found on wonderful Canadian film journal Offscreen.

http://www.offscreen.com/biblio/pages/essays/shirin_kiarostami/

Art of Junk Food

Allan S Weiss’ has strived to publish a culinary/gastronomic alphabet at Cabinet a few years back. I was just having a read through their sold out issues and upon stumbling the piece I was quite intrigued by the Junk Food section. It’s very well worth pondering more on the point he is making whether junk food could ever inspire the so-called haute cuisine. Although, it’s not quite clear why we should thrive for this kind of anticipation, it’s made me wonder why the phenomena of junk food has found more space in art (Warhol, pop-art, Oldenburg, etc..) or cinema or literature than the ‘art of making food’ itself.

J

Junk food. Cultural studies has motivatedvast amounts of writing on fast food andjunk food conceived as a major sociologicalphenomenon; they are occasionallyalso considered in culinary terms, either asa counter-ideal opposed to the heightsof “transcendental” cuisine, or as a meansto argue for the total subjectivization ornonhierarchization of culinary values. However—while usually avoiding arguments onthese matters, since they originate in a verydifferent, indeed antithetical universe ofvalues from my own—I still await the wordof a great chef who claims any inspirationwhatsoever from such food. Furthermore,in response to criticisms of hierarchicalæsthetic judgments, quite frankly, I havenever yet heard anybody say, “Hey, let’sgo out for an awful meal.” The notion of“taste,” when practically utilized in regardto food, almost always implies good taste.I wish to insist that this position is not at alla manifestation of culinary snobbism, sincethe very poorest of peasant foods—in factmuch less expensive, more nourishing, andsimpler than fast food, and still just as ubiquitousand widely appreciated—have inspiredhaute cuisine from its inception. Consider onion soup, cabbage soup, and that provençalgarlic soup whose name so poeticallyindicates a zero-degree of the culinary arts,aïgo bouïllido, “boiled water.”

From “Ingestion: A personal gastronomic alphabet, part II”, Cabinet, Issue 2

nudities

Can’t wait to read Agamben’s new book. This excerpt is taken from the translator’s own blog.

“The nudity of the human body is its image; that is, the trembling that makes this body knowable, though it remains, in itself, ungraspable. Hence the unique fascination that images exercise over the human mind. Precisely because the image is not the thing, but the thing’s knowability (its nudity), it neither expresses nor signifies the thing. Nevertheless, inasmuch as it is nothing other than the giving of the thing over to knowledge, nothing other than the stripping off of the clothes that cover it, nudity is not separate from the thing: it is the thing itself.”

[An excerpt from Giorgio Agamben’s Nudities, forthcoming in Stanford University Press.]