Richard Porton, “Notes from the Palestinian Diaspora”
1. Based upon the interview as a whole, summarize Suleiman’s perspective on nationalism, both in terms of Palestinian identity and the concept of Zionism.
He says he’s Palestinian. Now if Israel accepts Palestinians in government positions and the state is called Israel, he says he would be Israeli. It doesn’t matter to him whether he’s Palestinian or Israeli, but as long as religion and radicalism is a norm in Israel, he’ll stay a Palestinian because they are who he identifies with most.
2. Also summarize Suleiman’s perspective on storytelling and film style. Which filmmakers does he tend to identify with, and why? Which filmmakers does he not identify with (including other Palestinian filmmakers) and why?
He likes Bressen, Ozu and Hou because of their self-reflexive manner of filmmaking. But he’s “indifferent” to Khleifi or Chahine because their films are just not as interesting to him.
Gertz and Khleifi, “Between Exile and Homeland”
3. What are some of the essential differences between Sulieman’s two feature films, Chronicle of a Disappearance and Divine Intervention, and what had changed in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict between the release of the two films?
The first film has implicit violence/passivism and the second has explicit violence. Chronicles of a Disappearance uses more indoor spaces of homes; while in Divine Intervention, the home is mostly removed from the film. Divine Intervention also uses more Palestinian symbols. In between the release of the two films little has changed for the Palestinian people as promised by the Oslo Accords, in fact things have become worse for the Palestinians.
4. What is Suleiman’s position on showing violence (or the aftermath of violence) in the cinema? How does his position relate to our discussion of the end of Waltz with Bashir?
He no problem with violence in the cinema, but doesn’t like real violence. There’s violence all around in Israel/Palestine, so it’s something everyone is used to and deals with daily.
5. How does Suleiman use images and symbols common to Palestinian culture and Palestinian cinema in unique ways in Divine Intervention?
He uses them in ways to envelope pride and patriotism for the Palestinian people. One example is the “Ninja” scene where symbols like the kaffryah, a gun, hand grenades, a map of Palestine, and a Crescent Moon and Star are all used to show Palestine’s struggle and to induce thoughts of pride in one’s people.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Response for 11-16
1. State the Haaretz argument against the politics of the film in your own words. How does Gideon Levy support his argument with details from the film? What else does he use to support his argument, outside of the film?
Levy argues what is portrayed in Bashir is all false and made up propaganda. He talks of the soldiers singing in the film about how Lebanon is beautiful and then they destroy the country, killing men, women, and children. The protagonist filmmaker visits a psychologist and they relate his interest in the Palestinian camps to the concentration camps his parents were in during WWII, forcing him to realize he acted like the Nazis.
2. State the Commentary argument against the politics of the film in your own words. How does Hillel Halkin support his argument with details from the film? What else does he use to support his argument, outside of the film?
Hillel argues the background story, or context, of Bashir is not properly explained. The other battles and massacres before the events in Bashir are not even mentioned. Also nothing is said of Bashir’s assassination or of the PLO.
3. Respond to Levy's or Hillel's critique of the politics of the film. Support your argument with details from the film, as well as with details as you understand them about the conflict and the region.
In my opinion, any film with a political message is propaganda. In response to Levy’s argument, I do feel using art, especially comic-like drawing and violence, is a strong form of propaganda. It can be used to relate a subject to an audience and it’s easier for the audience to accept than the harsh reality of documentary footage or journalistic photos alone. It gives a buffer to get the message across without being too aggressive. Most of Bashir looks as though it came from a comic book, which detaches us from the reality of the situation; however at the end we are brought into the harsh reality of the event with the images of documentary footage of the aftermath. This punch line at the conclusion of the film strikes the message home that this really happened, these horrible things actually happened and Israel let it take place.
Levy argues what is portrayed in Bashir is all false and made up propaganda. He talks of the soldiers singing in the film about how Lebanon is beautiful and then they destroy the country, killing men, women, and children. The protagonist filmmaker visits a psychologist and they relate his interest in the Palestinian camps to the concentration camps his parents were in during WWII, forcing him to realize he acted like the Nazis.
2. State the Commentary argument against the politics of the film in your own words. How does Hillel Halkin support his argument with details from the film? What else does he use to support his argument, outside of the film?
Hillel argues the background story, or context, of Bashir is not properly explained. The other battles and massacres before the events in Bashir are not even mentioned. Also nothing is said of Bashir’s assassination or of the PLO.
3. Respond to Levy's or Hillel's critique of the politics of the film. Support your argument with details from the film, as well as with details as you understand them about the conflict and the region.
In my opinion, any film with a political message is propaganda. In response to Levy’s argument, I do feel using art, especially comic-like drawing and violence, is a strong form of propaganda. It can be used to relate a subject to an audience and it’s easier for the audience to accept than the harsh reality of documentary footage or journalistic photos alone. It gives a buffer to get the message across without being too aggressive. Most of Bashir looks as though it came from a comic book, which detaches us from the reality of the situation; however at the end we are brought into the harsh reality of the event with the images of documentary footage of the aftermath. This punch line at the conclusion of the film strikes the message home that this really happened, these horrible things actually happened and Israel let it take place.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Response 11-9
Ilan Avisar, "The National and the Popular in Israeli Cinema"
1. How and why has the concept of nationalism changed since the end of the Cold War? Why does Avisar emphasize the notion of an “imagined community” when discussing nationalism? What are the negative and positive connotations of nationalism?
It is believed nationalism lead to the first and second World Wars. Since the Cold War it has caused problems in Eastern Europe, Africa, and the Middle East with developing countries of former colonial rule. Avisar feels nations and a sense of nationalism are not real things, they are just made up to give people false senses of control and freedom. Nationalism can unite people of a country who only have the nation as a common bridge, but it can also build up the wall between the “us” and the “them” separating people from one another.
2. What are the three principal historical forces guiding the movement of Zionism as it emerged in the 19th century? How do these three forces correspond to Benedict Anderson’s definition of the nation?
First, the Jewish people were tired of living in exile and wished to return to Zion, the homeland. Second, they wanted to escape anti-Semitism. Third, they had a sense of nationalism, with values of self-determination, preservation of national heritage and to build a cultural identity.
3. If there was no “indigenous Jewish national culture” because there was no Jewish state, how was Jewish identity and culture defined and expressed before the establishment of Israel?
Jewish culture was based on the religious practices. The “men of letters” expressed the Jewish national identity of wanting a homeland, the use of Hebrew as a common language, and recalling common texts of myths and folklore.
4. What other ideologies of Jewish existence competed with Zionism in the 19th and 20th centuries? What characterized Zionism in contrast to these competing ideologies (what ideals were the “backbone” of Zionism)?
One ideology was to assimilate with Europeans; another was a Marxist revolution; and the third held America as the promise land. Zionism, in contrast, wanted Jews to unite and work together for their common good. It encouraged hard agricultural labor, collectivism, and the combat of hardships and threats in the homeland.
5. What irony does Avisar observe about the rise of overtly critical political films in the 1980s? How have these critical political films affected the relationship between the Israeli cinema and its own local audience? What replaced this cycle of critical political films in the 1990s and 2000s?
He observes the films were having a redundant effect because politicians and news organizations were also discussing the same political issues. Film as a medium for political and social protest was unneeded. The local audience turned away from these films creating a gap between the Israeli cinema and the audience. What filled in the vacuum of political films was a series of liter films which used humor to discuss the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians. These films are more compassionate toward the characters and the settings. They helped build a constructive dialogue between the Israeli filmmakers and their local audiences.
1. How and why has the concept of nationalism changed since the end of the Cold War? Why does Avisar emphasize the notion of an “imagined community” when discussing nationalism? What are the negative and positive connotations of nationalism?
It is believed nationalism lead to the first and second World Wars. Since the Cold War it has caused problems in Eastern Europe, Africa, and the Middle East with developing countries of former colonial rule. Avisar feels nations and a sense of nationalism are not real things, they are just made up to give people false senses of control and freedom. Nationalism can unite people of a country who only have the nation as a common bridge, but it can also build up the wall between the “us” and the “them” separating people from one another.
2. What are the three principal historical forces guiding the movement of Zionism as it emerged in the 19th century? How do these three forces correspond to Benedict Anderson’s definition of the nation?
First, the Jewish people were tired of living in exile and wished to return to Zion, the homeland. Second, they wanted to escape anti-Semitism. Third, they had a sense of nationalism, with values of self-determination, preservation of national heritage and to build a cultural identity.
3. If there was no “indigenous Jewish national culture” because there was no Jewish state, how was Jewish identity and culture defined and expressed before the establishment of Israel?
Jewish culture was based on the religious practices. The “men of letters” expressed the Jewish national identity of wanting a homeland, the use of Hebrew as a common language, and recalling common texts of myths and folklore.
4. What other ideologies of Jewish existence competed with Zionism in the 19th and 20th centuries? What characterized Zionism in contrast to these competing ideologies (what ideals were the “backbone” of Zionism)?
One ideology was to assimilate with Europeans; another was a Marxist revolution; and the third held America as the promise land. Zionism, in contrast, wanted Jews to unite and work together for their common good. It encouraged hard agricultural labor, collectivism, and the combat of hardships and threats in the homeland.
5. What irony does Avisar observe about the rise of overtly critical political films in the 1980s? How have these critical political films affected the relationship between the Israeli cinema and its own local audience? What replaced this cycle of critical political films in the 1990s and 2000s?
He observes the films were having a redundant effect because politicians and news organizations were also discussing the same political issues. Film as a medium for political and social protest was unneeded. The local audience turned away from these films creating a gap between the Israeli cinema and the audience. What filled in the vacuum of political films was a series of liter films which used humor to discuss the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians. These films are more compassionate toward the characters and the settings. They helped build a constructive dialogue between the Israeli filmmakers and their local audiences.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Response for 11-2
Fred Camper, “In Chaos, Truth: Kippur”
1. What is Gitai’s position on objectivity, and what does Camper find interesting in how Gitai transitions from an “objective” to “subjective” viewpoint in Kippur?
Gitai says there isn’t an objective view; only subjective views exist from many perspectives. Gitai uses long takes and moves for long shots in to close ups.
Nitzan Ben-Shaul, “Israeli Persecution Films”
5. Define the terms “Zionism” and “Sabra.” In what ways does the Sabra woman in Hill 24 Doesn’t Answer “metonymically represent the future of the state”?
“Zionism” is the establishment and development of a Jewish state. A “Sabra” is a native-born Jewish revolutionary agent of Zionism, who works/fights to gain land and participates in the socialist collective. The Sabra woman in Hill 24 Doesn’t Answer represents the future of the state by surviving the war to live in Israel as it moves to a better future. She also has a non-Jewish foreign lover, which shows the peace between East and West.
6. What is the significance of having both nativist (Sabra) and diasporic (non-native born) characters in the group defending Hill 24?
They are all Israelis, no matter where they come from, fighting against the Arabs who wish to destroy them and remove their presence from the region.
7. Why was the period following the Six-Day War (1967) significantly different than the period following the War of Independence?
The cinematic focus shifted from patriotism to the persecution of the Israeli people by their Arab neighbors and the world in general. There was a sense the world disliked the Jewish people and wanted to bring down the Jewish state.
8. Ben-Shaul suggests that Israeli ideology shifted “to an individualistic social paradigm as a better social coping mechanism than the collectivist one.” How did this shift manifest itself in films of the period (1967-1977) and particularly in the film Siege?
They felt an individual can influence his society and would be better able to lead the society than the collective thought of society. To illustrate this, the woman, in Siege, is being influenced by her husband’s friends and neighbors (society). As a whole, society shows attitudes of mourning, loneliness and claustrophobia; while the woman’s attitudes change to that of boredom, defiance and disrespect. These conflicting attitudes go against what social pressures are asserting on her.
9. Ben-Shaul suggests that in the 1980s, “persecution thematically dominates Israeli war films as never before, along with the often vague suggestion that Israel is somehow responsible for the persecution it suffers.” Why is this particularly true for films dealing with the Yom Kippur War (1973)?
The director’s of these films have a lot of anxiety because of the switch in power from a left leaning government (one they support) to a right leaning one (one they are unsure of). These films also portray war as gruesome, and that everyone is a victim of an interconnected cycle of war.
1. What is Gitai’s position on objectivity, and what does Camper find interesting in how Gitai transitions from an “objective” to “subjective” viewpoint in Kippur?
Gitai says there isn’t an objective view; only subjective views exist from many perspectives. Gitai uses long takes and moves for long shots in to close ups.
Nitzan Ben-Shaul, “Israeli Persecution Films”
5. Define the terms “Zionism” and “Sabra.” In what ways does the Sabra woman in Hill 24 Doesn’t Answer “metonymically represent the future of the state”?
“Zionism” is the establishment and development of a Jewish state. A “Sabra” is a native-born Jewish revolutionary agent of Zionism, who works/fights to gain land and participates in the socialist collective. The Sabra woman in Hill 24 Doesn’t Answer represents the future of the state by surviving the war to live in Israel as it moves to a better future. She also has a non-Jewish foreign lover, which shows the peace between East and West.
6. What is the significance of having both nativist (Sabra) and diasporic (non-native born) characters in the group defending Hill 24?
They are all Israelis, no matter where they come from, fighting against the Arabs who wish to destroy them and remove their presence from the region.
7. Why was the period following the Six-Day War (1967) significantly different than the period following the War of Independence?
The cinematic focus shifted from patriotism to the persecution of the Israeli people by their Arab neighbors and the world in general. There was a sense the world disliked the Jewish people and wanted to bring down the Jewish state.
8. Ben-Shaul suggests that Israeli ideology shifted “to an individualistic social paradigm as a better social coping mechanism than the collectivist one.” How did this shift manifest itself in films of the period (1967-1977) and particularly in the film Siege?
They felt an individual can influence his society and would be better able to lead the society than the collective thought of society. To illustrate this, the woman, in Siege, is being influenced by her husband’s friends and neighbors (society). As a whole, society shows attitudes of mourning, loneliness and claustrophobia; while the woman’s attitudes change to that of boredom, defiance and disrespect. These conflicting attitudes go against what social pressures are asserting on her.
9. Ben-Shaul suggests that in the 1980s, “persecution thematically dominates Israeli war films as never before, along with the often vague suggestion that Israel is somehow responsible for the persecution it suffers.” Why is this particularly true for films dealing with the Yom Kippur War (1973)?
The director’s of these films have a lot of anxiety because of the switch in power from a left leaning government (one they support) to a right leaning one (one they are unsure of). These films also portray war as gruesome, and that everyone is a victim of an interconnected cycle of war.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Response for 10-26
Bordwell, “Hou, or Constraints.”
1. What are the basic parallels and contrasts between the City of Sadness scene described on p. 186-187 and the scene described on p. 229?
They both take place around a table. Horizontal planes are used to conceal and reveal characters at particular instances. The first scene uses windows, while the second is more tight and close.
2. In what ways does Hou take the idea of deliberate constraints even further in his subsequent films, especially Flowers of Shanghai?
I don’t know.
Valentina Vitali, “Hou Hsiao-Hsien reviewed”
2. What are the three broad trends identified by Vitali in how Hou’s films were discussed in reviews and articles?
Characters, political allegories for the present and future, and thematic and stylistic continuity across all Hou films are mainly discussed in reviews.
3. What point does Vitali make using the extended example from an article by French critic/filmmaker Oliver Assayas?
He speaks of the nostalgia of a past French/European cinema based on French nationalism and anti-Americanism parallel to that found in Taiwan and discussed through New Taiwanese Cinema.
4. What conclusions does Vitali make about critics who suggest looking at Hou’s films as “universal” or critics who “propose injunctions not to take into account historical references?”
The films are Taiwanese and historical references help shape Hou’s films to being distinctly Taiwanese, and the historical references should not be ignored.
5. Ultimately, why is the “instruction manual” inferred by Vitali in her reading of these reviews similar to the instruction manual for approaching mainstream Hollywood films?
The “instruction manual” for approaching Hou’s films view accepts the narrative devices as part of a universal film language, similar to that of Hollywood film making. The directors Hou and Lynch are compared with the film technique of the play-back, utilized by each.
Paul WILLEMEN, “The times of subjectivity and social reproduction”
1. Why does Willemen not love the films of Hou Hsiao-hsien because of their complexity?
He says bad films can be complex as well.
2. Why does Willemen not love the films of Hou Hsiao-hsien because of their “Tawianness”?
He says he can learn more about Taiwan from a book or article than watching a Hou film.
1. What are the basic parallels and contrasts between the City of Sadness scene described on p. 186-187 and the scene described on p. 229?
They both take place around a table. Horizontal planes are used to conceal and reveal characters at particular instances. The first scene uses windows, while the second is more tight and close.
2. In what ways does Hou take the idea of deliberate constraints even further in his subsequent films, especially Flowers of Shanghai?
I don’t know.
Valentina Vitali, “Hou Hsiao-Hsien reviewed”
2. What are the three broad trends identified by Vitali in how Hou’s films were discussed in reviews and articles?
Characters, political allegories for the present and future, and thematic and stylistic continuity across all Hou films are mainly discussed in reviews.
3. What point does Vitali make using the extended example from an article by French critic/filmmaker Oliver Assayas?
He speaks of the nostalgia of a past French/European cinema based on French nationalism and anti-Americanism parallel to that found in Taiwan and discussed through New Taiwanese Cinema.
4. What conclusions does Vitali make about critics who suggest looking at Hou’s films as “universal” or critics who “propose injunctions not to take into account historical references?”
The films are Taiwanese and historical references help shape Hou’s films to being distinctly Taiwanese, and the historical references should not be ignored.
5. Ultimately, why is the “instruction manual” inferred by Vitali in her reading of these reviews similar to the instruction manual for approaching mainstream Hollywood films?
The “instruction manual” for approaching Hou’s films view accepts the narrative devices as part of a universal film language, similar to that of Hollywood film making. The directors Hou and Lynch are compared with the film technique of the play-back, utilized by each.
Paul WILLEMEN, “The times of subjectivity and social reproduction”
1. Why does Willemen not love the films of Hou Hsiao-hsien because of their complexity?
He says bad films can be complex as well.
2. Why does Willemen not love the films of Hou Hsiao-hsien because of their “Tawianness”?
He says he can learn more about Taiwan from a book or article than watching a Hou film.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Response for 10-19
1. The February 28 incident took place in Taiwan. It was sparked by police beating a woman. Regular people became angry and erupted into riots. The government cracked down on rioters and people that could lead riots, which lead to thousands of people being killed and arrested. Martial Law was instituted for over four decades as a result.
2. City of Sadness does not directly confront what the Nationalist government did in the February 28 incident.
3. The film was somewhat confusing watching it the first time because time would jump considerably sometimes. I would have to reassess what the space and time were to understand the plot. The spaces were mostly the same throughout the film, like the home and the streets, but the actors would change as the boys became older. I would have to put a new face with a name in order to follow the plot. Also, when Hou cut from scene to scene, he would often establish the scene with a space, and I wouldn’t know when the story was taking place.
2. City of Sadness does not directly confront what the Nationalist government did in the February 28 incident.
3. The film was somewhat confusing watching it the first time because time would jump considerably sometimes. I would have to reassess what the space and time were to understand the plot. The spaces were mostly the same throughout the film, like the home and the streets, but the actors would change as the boys became older. I would have to put a new face with a name in order to follow the plot. Also, when Hou cut from scene to scene, he would often establish the scene with a space, and I wouldn’t know when the story was taking place.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Response for 9-28
1.What are the two dimensions of symbolic violence discussed by Teo in relation to the Election films?
Symbolic violence referring to violence containing symbols, according to law and ritual, and symbolic violence referring to violence of male domination are the two dimensions of symbolic violence discussed by Teo. The first refers to, for instance, the triads fighting over a baton, a phallic symbol, or another physical object with a symbolic meaning. The second refers to the triads as a patriarchal power which subjugates its members, men are ruled and controlled by other men in accordance to the laws of the gang.
2. While gangster/triad films are an internationally comprehended genre, why does Teo argue that the Election films present a distinct localized version of the genre? What are some of the parallels and contrasts between the fictional world of the Wo Sing Society and the politics and history of Hong Kong as a whole? Specifically, how have general elections worked in Hong Kong since the 1997 transition?
To’s films portray the triads in confrontation with each other and the police. In Election, the triads elect a new leader and violence erupts once more. In the 1997 transfer of power, many triads were uncertain of their future in a new unified Hong Kong – China. China doesn’t want democracy in Hong Kong, and the democracy inside the Wo Sing Society is a false one.
3. Why does Teo argue that Election 2 is the more political of the two films? In what way does it comment on socio-economic changes since the 1997 transition to Chinese rule? In what ways does Election 2 draw parallels and contrasts between the mainland Chinese government and the Wo Sing Society?
It directly shows the conflict between the Chinese government and the Hong Kong triads. It shows a democracy, of sorts, in a Communist leaning society. In addition the struggle of triad interests versus Chinese interests. A parallel, however, can be drawn between the triad elections and Hong Kong elections in that the triad leader is chosen by a closed cabal of high ranking individuals similar to how Hong Kong’s chief executive is chosen.
4. Here’s another attempt to tackle Walter Benjamin’s concept of mythical violence. Earlier in the book, Teo describes mythical violence as “a meta-critique—a form of violence that critiques the violence in our midst.” (p. 8). If this is the case, then what is the commentary in the Election films on the violence of the triads and modern urban environments?
It critiques the struggle of power and desire for stability with an unknown future.
5. What is the distinction between “yin” violence and “yang” violence, and how does Teo use this distinction to suggest why the Election films stray from genre conventions? How does this distinction help convey the political message of the film?
Yin violence is a “feminine” violence that is devious, clumsy, and confused. Yang violence is a “masculine” violence that is sober and clean. Election uses yin violence, men using a feminine approach to violent acts. The violence is messy. Swords are used as opposed to the traditional gun in action genre films.
Symbolic violence referring to violence containing symbols, according to law and ritual, and symbolic violence referring to violence of male domination are the two dimensions of symbolic violence discussed by Teo. The first refers to, for instance, the triads fighting over a baton, a phallic symbol, or another physical object with a symbolic meaning. The second refers to the triads as a patriarchal power which subjugates its members, men are ruled and controlled by other men in accordance to the laws of the gang.
2. While gangster/triad films are an internationally comprehended genre, why does Teo argue that the Election films present a distinct localized version of the genre? What are some of the parallels and contrasts between the fictional world of the Wo Sing Society and the politics and history of Hong Kong as a whole? Specifically, how have general elections worked in Hong Kong since the 1997 transition?
To’s films portray the triads in confrontation with each other and the police. In Election, the triads elect a new leader and violence erupts once more. In the 1997 transfer of power, many triads were uncertain of their future in a new unified Hong Kong – China. China doesn’t want democracy in Hong Kong, and the democracy inside the Wo Sing Society is a false one.
3. Why does Teo argue that Election 2 is the more political of the two films? In what way does it comment on socio-economic changes since the 1997 transition to Chinese rule? In what ways does Election 2 draw parallels and contrasts between the mainland Chinese government and the Wo Sing Society?
It directly shows the conflict between the Chinese government and the Hong Kong triads. It shows a democracy, of sorts, in a Communist leaning society. In addition the struggle of triad interests versus Chinese interests. A parallel, however, can be drawn between the triad elections and Hong Kong elections in that the triad leader is chosen by a closed cabal of high ranking individuals similar to how Hong Kong’s chief executive is chosen.
4. Here’s another attempt to tackle Walter Benjamin’s concept of mythical violence. Earlier in the book, Teo describes mythical violence as “a meta-critique—a form of violence that critiques the violence in our midst.” (p. 8). If this is the case, then what is the commentary in the Election films on the violence of the triads and modern urban environments?
It critiques the struggle of power and desire for stability with an unknown future.
5. What is the distinction between “yin” violence and “yang” violence, and how does Teo use this distinction to suggest why the Election films stray from genre conventions? How does this distinction help convey the political message of the film?
Yin violence is a “feminine” violence that is devious, clumsy, and confused. Yang violence is a “masculine” violence that is sober and clean. Election uses yin violence, men using a feminine approach to violent acts. The violence is messy. Swords are used as opposed to the traditional gun in action genre films.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
