|
Free Radicals: A History of Experimental Film (2012)
These were our home movies.
Until one day, my dog peed on them. I thought it looked cool! It was the 60s: peace, love, rock 'n' roll, hippies, and experimental home movies. I grew up watching films, showing films, making films! My dad worked for television, his dad worked for Hollywood, my mom painted every day... My parents screened films at home for their friends. I saw all sorts of films. My dad invited experimental filmmakers onto his television show, and he invited them and their films into our home. These days, most of my friends and colleagues are filmmakers. I wanted to shoot in the streets, and I wanted a camera that could take a knock. You can do all kinds of things with the Bolex, but the Bell & Howell, let's just push film through it. Art has only one function as far as the artist himself is concerned: that is to follow his visions. I'm trying to paint the images that flash through my mind, that spark in my hypnogogic vision... Art can be anything, and that's what produced the "avant-garde". I never made compromises and really already a long time ago, I didn't care anymore if anyone likes it or not. We did not think about history, we were in the present, and we were doing what we wanted to do. We were friends, and we were all crazy about cinema. I filmed every day. I filmed with friends, in school. There were no rules. We were totally free. Images were everywhere. Images were my life. Images are still my life. And my life is images, images... Nobody's going to close us, because we're crazy! Arguably the greatest city in the world... Whether it's the greatest city for experimental filmmakers remains to be seen. There were much better experiments being done in Prague, in Paris, in Berlin, long before there were great filmmakers here. But a half century ago, just about a half century ago, I started working in New York for an arts series where we did everything we wanted to, every week. We were in pre-production, production and post-production every day. It was difficult to put experimental artists on television, because television doesn't like experimental film. It's unpredictable; sometimes it's a little edgy; sometimes the filmmaker obviously has something in mind that the studio executives would rather not be shown to an all-family public. We were always told: children are watching! Be careful of what you do! Children are watching! He was right, I was watching! This one fascinated me. The screen was no longer a window into a world but a flat surface, and yet the squares seemed to recede into a third dimension. This is one of the first abstract films ever made by Hans Richter in 1921. I used to have pieces of film of different formats, just as a kind of a souvenir from different film shoots that we did, and I would bring them home and you saw what film was all about. It was like pieces of paper. You had to work on it. I remember you used to draw on film leader, and scratch on film, and paint on film. A lot of other filmmakers have done this, but you didn't know that at the time. I was eight years old when I met Hans Richter. He lived not far from our house. He was a painter but he also played with film. He was 85 when we filmed him in 1973, and I had the distinct feeling that he was preparing himself for a summing up. I just improvised, as I do in... I give chance a chance, as I do in painting, as I do in film. That was the main credo of Dada: the discovery of chance as a possibility of expression. I didn't know anything about filmmaking, I had just a table, on both sides light, on top the camera which couldn't move up and down, so I cut cardboard, small very thin cardboard, squares and rectangles, I think 40 or 50, from very small to big, and white, light grey and dark grey. And later on when I needed black I just used the negative. Richter wanted to go beyond the frame, so he started painting variations of forms on scrolls. The filmstrip was also a scroll, and allowed him to paint in time. Time was becoming a new dimension for the artist. Rhythm in my opinion is the essence of filmmaking, because it's the conscious articulation of time. And if anything is at the bottom of filmmaking it is the articulation of time, of movement. You had never seen an abstract film before making Rhythmus 21. There wasn't any. So there was no example I could relate to. This was so as if you stepped into an empty room where there is no space. It was really an eerie experience which I loved. I must have been influenced by Richter, because years later I also made a film with receding rectangles. And this film got me into a filmmakers' cooperative and there I met many more filmmakers, some of whom also became friends. Then I realized I had become an experimental filmmaker. I didn't even know what that meant! But there I found myself on the wrong side of the tracks with dozens of other poet filmmakers, free radicals. They were totally free, and they pushed film into radical new directions. I grew up making films and I'm still making films. In this film I'd like you to meet my friends and see their films. Let's watch one, a four-minute film from 1958 made without a camera, what we call "direct animation" just by scratching with a needle onto black film stock. It's not as easy as it looks. Len Lye scratched for weeks, an hour of film stock, just to get four good minutes. You know that film, Free Radicals, well it was made 15 years ago. And when I see it now, I think it still holds up. But I'm into a different type of kinetic art. I'm composing figures of motion. This I'm showing to represent a person, that's the scale. He is six foot high, and they go through this arrangement here which I call the Universe. And sixty foot above them then is the Universe, and in they go to see a most amazing kind of grouping, a grouping which symbolizes nature, energy... Lye experimented in sculpture too. Now you wouldn't call a painter or a sculptor experimental, but that's the word that stuck for film artists. I understood the promise and I got fascinated by film itself, and I made quite a number of experimental films, but only experimental films in the proper sense of the word. I got into making abstract films from Hans Richter and seeing his things, Leger for instance, you know, where he plays... but none of them did this kind of thing. But the idea of experimental film turned me on certainly. I suddenly found that everything was permitted. You could go anywhere with any material. You should not hold back. Your whole unconscious, your whole belief should sputter out, should come out. It was really trying to find a new form of expression. Experimental film has been around as long as film has been around. But all the early works are now lost. The earliest experimental films that still exist were all made at the close of World War I in 1919 and the early 20s. Those artists, frustrated by the war, wanted the post-war world to be radically different from the world before the war. So they experimented in all forms: cubism, Dadaism, surrealism. This film was made by Viking Eggeling, also a Dadaist and close colleague of Hans Richter. He died one year after this film was released. The whole tradition of avant-gardism of course came out of rebellion against the society, completely. In 1914 the World War I was such a drastic disaster compared to previous wars, which were jockeying of potentates, but World War I was so destructive. The little society of artists were disgusted to such an extent that they threw out art also. Although the filmmakers were expressing complete freedom and playfulness, this was sometimes misinterpreted as rebelliousness. Between the two wars, some German filmmakers got into trouble. The Nazis banned this film made by Hans Richter in 1927, Ghosts Before Breakfast. A friend of mine had suggested to make a film about rebellion of revolvers. Now you can't make a film about rebellion of revolvers because a revolver that rebels doesn't shoot, so not shooting is not an action, you know, it's just a piece of iron. So I discarded this. But I said all right we make a rebellion of objects. We all wore bowler hats. At the time we didn't want to be recognized as artists so we all had bourgeois bowler hats like the businessmen in Wall Street or in London. So we put black strings through the bowler hats, a piece of cardboard inside, a long stick and swung these bowler hats in front of the camera. And it looked awfully nice. It looked like a swarm of pigeons! Suddenly a kind of rhythm developed which became a kind of political satire. I thought I could see in his face when he told us about his early days that he was reliving the period before the collapse of Germany with the third Reich. He had told us for example that the Nazis saw right away that surrealism and experimental films had to be banned because if objects could get out of control, human beings could get out of control. And he lost a lot of films because he got beaten up the Nazis, the SS. If you look at the film Ghosts Before Breakfast you'll see scenes of thugs punching into the camera. That's actually an experience he had and he carried on his person, when he escaped, films that he thought were of value. Richter was political, he was a writer, he was a filmmaker, and we have here in the coop collection Ghosts Before Breakfast with the reel that has the swastika on it. So this is actually the reel, you can see the iron cross. Hans Richter was not alone. During the 1930s and 40s, many European artists and filmmakers came to America where they met American artists and filmmakers. For example, Maya Deren met Alexander Hammid, an accomplished Czech filmmaker forced to leave Prague. The two married, and he taught her filmmaking. Together, the young newlyweds made Meshes of the Afternoon in 1943, now considered one of the most important films of the early American avant-garde. I'm interested in the fact that the war engendered the radical art. Yeah, the American art wasn't taken seriously by anyone until then. And it's those Europeans who came over, who taught 'em a few kinks, they all tried to measure up to the exciting European art that they'd become acquainted with, and kind of overdid it. And their overdoing it made it more attention grabbing than the European art who were getting complacent in accepting their importance, you know. Tell where you have been, tell what you have seen. The Mekas brothers, Jonas and Adolfas, also emigrated to America from Lithuania because of the war. They dreamt of making films, and as soon as they landed in New York they got hold of a 16mm camera, and they did make films! They documented daily life in the immigrant communities of Brooklyn. From this would evolve the diary style of filmmaking. Jonas also started writing for a small neighborhood paper called The Village Voice, promoting experimental films. Suddenly the Voice multiplied its readership, and Jonas became an influential film critic. We wanted to share our films with... among ourselves and all others interested in them, and so we rented spaces to show them and etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. You know the Village Voice as a newspaper took off during newspaper strike. It was the only paper in New York for however long that strike lasted. And it went from a circulation of 200 people to 200.000 people or whatever. And I guess it stayed up there ever since, I don't know, but that's when it became a big newspaper. At that point or at that time, Jonas was writing his little column which then became widespread. And Jonas included me very generously as one of the important avant-garde filmmakers. It was a very specific scene and it was surprisingly separate from the art world. There was the experimental film world, which was more or less downtown, and uptown was more or less at that time the art world. Not that the Museum of Modern Art didn't show experimental films, they did. But it seemed as if people from the art world didn't come downtown, except for when Warhol would show at these theaters that Jonas used to use. There was the Charles Theater in the Lower East Side. You could show up with a roll of film or a film, and they would show it, and let you in free. I said I have a short film, and it was all originals, you know, and I could play it with 78rpm phonograph records. And it happened that Jonas was in the audience on this amateur night. He found out where I lived, and I had no telephone - poor - and his card said to call him. And I phoned him on a public telephone. He said he wanted to show the film. I said well, it's not really a film, it's just rolls, and I can't afford to make a print of it. He gave me the name of a lab and said "charge it to me." And so I said, "I have a second film. Can I bring it in also?" I mean, this was an angel, right? Jonas started organizing screenings and helping filmmakers, even though he had no finances of his own. Twenty years ago when I applied for the visa, my first visa to America, Jonas Mekas was my financial sponsor although he didn't have a penny in the bank. Luckily the American consulate in Tokyo didn't check his bank, so I could sneak in. Now twenty years later, today Jonas is as bad financially as at that time but as good at that time editorially, if I may say. There was an audience at the beginning? There was an audience at the beginning? Yes, yes there was always an audience! That's very optimistic. A very optimistic statement... you assume there was an audience, yes, hmm... I thought the audience was mostly other filmmakers that would, you know, go to the Charles, and I don't really think until Jonas had the Voice to get at the news that there were people making films, people making film art, that an audience began to come around. Then it was really a good audience, mostly artists, and very serious. Well, pretty serious. I showed New York Eye and Ear Control in 1964 or 65 at one of these theaters of Jonas'. It was shown with a film of Warhol's, and he always had a huge entourage so that normal audiences were maybe ten people, that would be about it - the same people too - but whenever he was there, there was a huge crowd. And New York Eye and Ear Control was shown first, and his group hated it, they threw things at the screen and stomped and whistled and all that kind of shit, which was really rather annoying. But when it was over, Andy and I think it was Gerard Malanga ran back to the projection booth where I was standing, and they were very excited! They said, what is this? This is fantastic! Who made this? Who are you? And all this kind of stuff. Where most artists and filmmakers were leaving Europe for America, Robert Breer did the opposite. He left America for France in 1949. Robert Breer experimented in animation, making every frame different from every other frame. I can remember one of the first times publicly was in Paris, and Agnes Varda was invited and I... the two of us were invited to show our avant-garde films. Agnes Varda, and then myself, got up on the stage and stood around there and talked a little bit shyly, at least I did, and then showed our films. And my films I remember being a very mixed reaction with the audience, and somebody coming up to me angry because I was destroying their vision with my film. And it was an explosion of hostility afterwards. Instead of any supportive applause there was this long silence and then hostile questions, one being a man standing up and saying, "Mr. Breer, I see you don't respect Napoleon." I'd made fun of Napoleon in one of my other films I guess. Anyhow in general they were offended by how disorganized my films looked. When I made this big step for me and small step for mankind, when I went to changing radically not just the shape of frames but doing it, changing the shape, 24 times a second, I just put whatever came to my mind on the table under the camera. So at some point it includes the head and face of my cat whom I grabbed and stuck under the lens for one shot, for one or two frames. So that's how I made the film. That was completely nonsensical or radical, depending on how you look at it. Nonsensical for most people, because the film had been... the big achievement of film was to record movement smoothly as though in reality and of course it made film the most wonderful medium in the world, and what I was doing was trashing it, in a way. But I was trashing it in the name of something new and different, you know, "avant-garde" which in the painting world was important. Do it here. When Courbet painted his L'Apres-dinee a Ornans, which showed normal common people, and he painted it in a big format, it caused a scandal which almost ruined him, because the big format had been reserved for big themes, religious themes, etcetera. So the only thing is, when you smoke your first cigar, maybe you vomit because your body receives something he is not sure he will survive, so that's the shock, from any kind that is new. So, the fact that you don't have success does not come from cinema, it comes from doing something which brings people into another realm where they have not been before and they get scared, that's it. Isidore Isou actively pushed film into this new scary realm. He too had emigrated in 1945 from Romania to Paris, and there he created the Letterist movement, making poems, paintings, films, and writing political theory. Letterism was an attempt to break art forms down into their constituent parts or letters, building new languages out of the rubble. Maurice Lemaitre joined his movement and he too started creating Letterist films, aggressively pushing the art of film into uncharted territory. The Letterists made films from scraps of found footage, scrounging used strips of film from garbage bins behind film labs. People tell me filmmaking is expensive, but all you need is a dark room with running water, some chemicals and some free time. Do-it-yourself is the credo of the independent filmmaker. The ideas come from your tools and materials. Many of these experimental film artists didn't start in film, even though there was film. They started in graphics of some kind. That was certainly the case with Richter, who was always a draughtsman and a painter, and it was the case with Vanderbeek too, who was making collages, and then he filmed these collages and then he filmed these collages in a way which enabled him to move them around so that on screen you had what amounted to animation. Years later, Terry Gilliam took some of those same ideas for those montage sequences you saw in Monty Python. Those come right out of Vanderbeek. Stan was living with a group of other people in a kind of communal situation about two hours from New York, north of New York. As I remember it, the Moviedrome was literally built in the woods, and became like an adjunct to his house. Stan's idea was that all over the world there should be places where people could go and see movies. They should see movies the way you would see the heavens, you'd lie on your back and look up. To me this was a homemade planetarium. How many films were actually shown there I don't know. But he was always experimenting with different kinds of projectors and different ways of introducing an audience to a film. We sat in the Moviedrome, leaned back against the wall... It was never completely finished! There was always, "watch out there's a gangplank there... don't trip over that wire..." He, after all, was the man who filmed on naked dancers; he filmed on steam... I once went to a theater where people danced in steam and Vanderbeek projected his films against them. So that was one side of Vanderbeek. On the other side, he was able to go into Bell Labs and talk his way into them giving him money and studio space out in New Jersey, so he may have been slightly mad, but he wasn't a madman. Vanderbeek was always a wonderful contradiction to me. On the one hand he was outrageously experimental. You could never imagine Stan saying "nah that'll never work." If you suggested something he'd say, "well let's try it!" He was a Dadaist, an American Dadaist, and he worked in many media. On the other hand, he was very self-disciplined. I think this served him very well. He was a decent businessman on top of everything else. Later I did another documentary with Stan. And he invited us up to MI to film him in a space that he called the Architecture Room. It was the size of a big living room, floor to ceiling, all four walls, banks of electric equipment, all in service to a little monitor on a table with a keyboard. Suppose we consider the computer a tool, very much like the hammer, although we don't know what to make with it or what to do with it. So for the last two years I've been here at MI as an artist fellow at the Center for Advanced Visual Studies, and the attitude I've had is to explore what these new technologies mean to us. I believe that there's an enormously important future in the development of new communications systems that artists, literally all around the world will try to deal with. You could draw a picture of a house, the way a child would draw a picture of a house, and then you could enter a command which would rotate that 360 degrees. Jesus was Stan excited! This was a big deal in those days. I remember at one point in the filming a dog walked through the architecture room. Nobody paid the slightest attention. Everyone was glued to that monitor. I'd like to show you now a small film that I actually jokingly call computer fingerpainting, which uses a system very similar to this one that we just are working with now. It's called Symmetricks. Your children, 14-15 years old will be able to work with this in probably 3-4 years. Art schools of the future will teach programming as much as they teach life drawing. There's a whole new definition of communications which are now in our hands potentially, if we can get our hands on them. I wonder what Vanderbeek would think now, where the average iPhone has more computing power in it than a million architecture rooms at MIT. It was Vanderbeek who coined the term 'underground cinema' in 1963. He was a founding member of the filmmaker's cooperative and even drew the logo. And like the other filmmakers, he seeked out ways to finance his prolific filmmaking hobby. I wondered about this and I asked Jonas Mekas. I asked him, how a poor immigrant, working in factories, could afford to shoot so much film? During that period I made Lost Lost Lost and Walden. I always managed to buy a roll of film. I mean, you do all kinds of jobs, factories, all kinds of places... You can always afford one roll of film per month or per week. On 8th avenue and 50th street there was a place that was selling black and white film for like one dollar. Everybody said, ah look at the quality, this black and white, like washed out, that interesting quality- no that's because the film was outdated! And you could buy it cheap. So it was not... it was cheaper than video today. Because okay, you do video, but then you have to edit it, you need other technologies, and it's becoming more expensive than film. Film was cheap. Hunger, you know. Just hunger, man. Walking one night, walking home through Chinatown, man there was a bag of garbage food in front of one of the restaurants and spilling out of it were greasy - this is going to disgust you, folks! greasy spare ribs, cold greasy spare ribs thrown out in the garbage. I looked at it, picked up a couple and began to eat them. Yeah. That was the worst. Even though filmmaking was exciting, especially so-called experimental filmmaking was an exciting way to go, but I could never sell them to large numbers of people, and that came as a shock and a disappointment to me, I didn't know what the hell to do. Didn't Len Lye go on strike as a filmmaker? Oh he quit making films and he was very disappointed because he was given a Brussels or some prestigious award which had a little bit of money with it, as the most, the best, avant-garde filmmaker, but because there was no follow-up and no real money from that, he was disgusted that he got that much attention. Before his strike, Len Lye had been working as a filmmaker for hire, for the British post office. This was one way experimental filmmakers could make a living. He was allowed to experiment at the post office, where he pioneered and innovated in almost every film technique. This film, Rainbow Dance, using one of the first color processes, involved very complex printing tricks. This was 1935. While most films were in black and white, Lye's film stood out like fireworks from the features it often preceded. Audiences loved it. The Post Office Savings Bank puts a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for you. No deposit too small, the Post Office Savings Bank. OK, well we'll loosen it all and get in what we can. Lye segued into the art world through his sculptures, but his films were never part of the art world. Galleries couldn't sell films. The filmmakers found themselves in a no-mans-land, between the commercial film industry and the art world. The galleries are hostile. Its place is artificial. I mean, people doing this thing like making limited numbers of prints. For what reason? Only to make something artificially rare. It's horrible. It's a lie. The modern art museums always had the filmmaker part of the museum - it's probably still true - are the poorest part of the museum. I don't know how long that will last but I'm sure it's still true. They don't, they aren't given nearly as much money as the main part of the art museum, because the art museum can still sell these unique pieces to people because art collecting is anal, you know? I thought these films were great art. I wanted galleries and museums to recognize that. So in 2005 I started a gallery to try and show experimental films in the art world. Here is the FIAC art fair in Paris, in which I invited Jonas, Peter and others to show their work. Peter Kubelka started making films in Vienna in the 50s. He invented a new approach to filmmaking called metric montage, based not on the content of the shots but on their length. He made ADEBAR in 1957, showing it both as a film and as a sculpture. The work was 50 years old when I suggested we try selling it. In fact, when I showed the film in Alpbach, the print broke. And this film cannot miss a frame. If you miss a frame or two, the rhythm will be gone. So I said, no more and the print will only live further like this. Then I put it on these wooden things, and it would move in the wind, and then during the night it got wet and then the wind would tear it apart, then the people came and started to snip off pieces... This is for example, this is the most sentimental shot. It starts as the movement. It starts with a man and a woman and then the woman dances out and the man remains alone. See, this is the Hollywood departure, but Hollywood takes 90 minutes for that and I take exactly 52 frames. A little more than two seconds. -Yeah, a little more than two seconds. My films are made like sculptures, they are not made on an editing table or with the help of the projector because at that time - it's not even my merit - because I was too poor to have a projector, and too poor to have an editing table. I had just enough money to film that minute. In fact I had two minutes of material, one Arriflex reel of 60 meters which is two minutes, that was all. And I had one light which I put on the wall so I couldn't have even filmed the faces, because there was not enough light. It was only enough to get silhouettes. So an important factor in the making of my films were my life circumstances. So these are as much sculptures as they are film, but in addition, they are their own score. When you read the film like this, and you know how fast you read, and you can learn this much faster than learning to read a musical score. If you work on it for two weeks you can do it. Memorizing, you can memorize it. And for example you can measure the speed. The way artworks are handled now is very strange, namely as a commodity of business, you see? It will change again, it will get over, but today now this is horrible. And it creates a completely new genre of people who do something which they call art but it isn't, it's commodities, decoration, and so on. So I wanted to ask you, how did you guys meet? It was December, end of '63, December, maybe it was the last day of the year, in Knokke-le-Zoute Belgium, in the experimental film festival which was run by the great friend, great guy, Jacques Ledoux. -Yes, it was this guy. So the screening of miscellaneous, some so-so, mostly pretty bad movies that many people liked and applauded and had great time. And then this film comes up and it says Arnulf Rainer, and the audience is silent. Everybody's silent. Then some people begin to make some noises. Then I think maybe there were even some boos. And then some left. Reaction was to me so disgusting that I left immediately, did not want to see anything else, and leave the theatre, and I see this guy standing there, sort of like he had been beaten on the head with a board, sort of, you know pretty quiet. I said, that must be Peter Kubelka! So I came and I said, boy that was great! That was a masterpiece! We stayed friends all our lives since then. We never had a falling out and we always are friends. And we do different things and we are still friends, we are friends despite everything. There is a question of solidarity and recognition, that somebody else is doing that is not commercial, not, though it's something very, very, very different, but like somebody who is doing... you feel solidarity with somebody, that, yeah we are in the same area, you see. And influence is something else. So there is like friendship, more than influencing, you see, which gives you, helps you to do the way you want to do, because somebody else is doing the way he or she is doing with no compromise. "No compromise" is how Stan Brakhage made his life work. Over five decades he filmed or painted close to 400 films. He too struggled to make a living even though he is considered one of the most important figures in 20th century art. He lived in Colorado. Here we see him filmed by Jonas Mekas in 1967, and here we see him in New York with Jonas, filmed by me in 2000. Three years later I was invited by French television to interview Brakhage, sick with cancer, at his new home in Canada. It happened to be his last interview. He told me his films were like poems, and should be understood and felt as poems, an adventure in perception. At least what my integrity was that I did not fake being a poet and for that reason I believe that the muse who permits - who is that part of human consciousness that permits the creation of an art or not - allowed me to do something with film. Huh! And you can say, what! For me? Film for me? Thanks a lot! Every time you turn around it costs you a fortune, it'll destroy your whole life, you know, you can't... Press the button but once and you've spent fifty dollars, you know. But anyway, that was the gift that was given to me, and so long as I remain true to that and the other arts (and I've always been very careful therefore to do so, to be so), I could be a filmmaker. It is made with my fingernails, with my spit. "This is the spit of the poet!", you know. The spit of the filmmaker, as I won't fancy myself as a poet, nope. The spit of the filmmaker! And it's made from the nails themselves, feeling, pressing, making an impress of whatever feelings there are to them in space and shape and so. So thus maybe a little film is being born, maybe not, who knows. But I'm trying, I'm trying. I'm trying from this sickbed to sing a song. I miss Stan. We had real serious shadow hunger, and we were looking for a movie to grab onto. One time we walked into this theater that was showing Green Mansions, 'cause maybe something might be happening with that movie. And it ended up with us trying to find just something to have an experience. Like looking at the film - it was a color film, a big color film - so if somebody was sitting and had some gap between their arm and their body, you might want to look at the film through the gap, so it would have this shape, or upside-down. And we ended up with our heads against the screen looking up at it like this, and an usher came and very politely told us that we would have to leave. But it was out of desperation. The film industry was even less receptive than the galleries. Finally the filmmakers got together and took matters into their own hands. Led by the Mekas brothers, they set up their own distribution cooperatives and networks and cinematheques, and these are still active today. Nobody wanted to distribute our films. So we had to create our own distribution center. Possible, not possible, there was nobody who wanted to distribute them to begin with. How did everyone know everybody else to get together at first? I called them, my brother, myself, we called them in January '62, said it's time that we create our own film cooperative distribution center. And about 25 filmmakers, or about 20 or so, came and we all said yes let's do it, and we created our own distribution center. OK, you're visiting the New American Cinema Group, the filmmakers' coop, founded in 1961 by a group of 22 New York artists. The coop was founded as part of the counterculture. It wasn't just isolated New York Film Coop. It was part of a movement, like Free Cinema in England, or the French New Wave. And the manifesto is that it's a personal vision. It's: anyone can make a movie; you can make a movie for fifty dollars. So what they did is formed a network of distribution, exhibition, publication. With money generated from distribution, the coop even helped sponsor some filmmakers. Jack Smith, when the cooperative advanced monies for Normal Love, he pulled out, he refused to pay, so that the filmmakers suffered. In 1970, Jonas and friends founded a museum for film called Anthology Film Archives. The idea behind its founding was to create a museum for the art of film, that was solely focused on film as an art form, and it came out of the screenings that were happening at a place called the Filmmakers' Cinematheque in New York City in the mid-1960s. And Jonas Mekas, Jerome Hill, Peter Kubelka and P. Adams Sitney were the four people who are responsible for founding Anthology and for realizing this idea to create a museum that would be a permanent home for the kinds of avant-garde and experimental and personal films that they were screening at the filmmakers' cinematheque. The idea was that we'll establish a collection which will slowly grow as time goes, always every year adding new titles of the most representative, the best of what is being done in cinema as we move ahead. What you see on the first floor here where the prison cells used to be, that is the first floor film preservation area, or vault. It took nine years, from the time Jonas acquired this building for Anthology to raise the funds and do the work to renovate this building. During the last 20-30 years, cinema has branched out into numerous directions and branches, very personal documentary films, diary films, very personal, small, poem, little poems maybe one minute long, maybe ten minutes long, maybe six-seven hours long. There's a variety of different approaches to cinema that has developed during the last 2 or 3 decades. And Anthology Film Archives is dedicated to the screening, preservation and study of all these directions. I remember going to - what was it called, the invisible cinema? - that was built by Peter Kubelka, where you sat encased in a black box, with only one opening namely forward where you could see the screen, isolated from everyone else in the theater. It was only the screen and you, only you and the screen. It was a very specially designed theater that was Kubelka's... dream. -Did you like it? Yes, that was a dream theater. Jonas Mekas was in charge, and he was the most exciting person, I mean he just got excited about anything, and he got excited about just leader. And so I decided well if he can get excited about leader I'd just do leader. And so I just did a lot of leader, and it was exciting. Since 1970 when we opened, what happened? The native American Indian cinema happened, the black cinema, the Asian-American cinema, the gay-lesbian cinema, so many varieties of other cinemas came in and they all need homes because commercial movie theaters are not going to show them, so Anthology became home to all the alternative forms of cinema. Even with no funding, no audience, no way to make a living, no means to finance their art, the poets of cinema, the experimental filmmakers, go on. New young filmmakers appear on the scene, children replace their parents, the coops continue. Life goes on, cinema goes on. One of the things that's happening now on the scene is fear. You know, evictions, the economy's bad... When I went to Hannover, I went to... the Hannover museum had a recreation of Kurt Schwitter's studio that was bombed by of course the US forces while he was in the studio creating his art. It was like, all right, if you're an artist you create, no matter what the political climate, it's part of your... it's part of being political, is to create, to express your personal vision. My ambition was to capsize the United States of America. Did it work? Art is something really necessary for the survival of mankind. That's the challenge as I see it, for the artist and as well for the fabric of our whole society. We must reach out, somehow, communicate, balance our senses, and live a good life. I don't know what it means, but art means nothing in this sense. It means only what it is. Art means being. It's a new form of being. The artist is not a holy man, but he is on the way to be a holy man, and when he creates, he is holy. That is the duty of the artist. That does not mean that he has no social duty, of course, but he is a part of the time, he is a product of the time. What he expresses is only what the ordinary people do not hear, do not hear, feel or sense as clearly as he does. My dear friends, we've only seen a handful of filmmakers. This is only a very small part of the story. We've only scratched the surface. From generation to generation, cinema is evolving. Today, dozens of filmmaking communities everywhere are inventing new techniques and bringing us new images. Some use new technologies, but the old ones are still surprising us. Artist-run film labs, coops, festivals and microcinemas are multiplying all over the world. Today, making a film is easier than ever before. There are so many, hundreds of films to see, and to make. But today I only have one for you. This one. Free Radicals. karagarga.net |
|