Ewa Mazierska The Politics of Space in Polish Communist Cinema

It is a commonplace that the communist cen- so important to Polish post-war cinema and cul- sors, especially during the Stalinist period, were ture at large, but also because his work perfectly preoccupied with the spoken word rather than lends itself to comparison with films from other images (see, for example, Zwierzchowski 2005: ex-socialist countries. In particular, the prob- 15–43). This meant that certain ideas unwel- lems and pathologies which he satirised in his come by the authorities were easier to transmit films concerned people in the whole ex-Soviet through visual means, including the represen- bloc and, to varying degrees, were present in the tation of space, than through dialogue or the cinemas of countries such as Czechoslovakia, construction of the narrative. This essay intends Hungary and the Soviet Union. to discuss this subversive ‘politics of space’, re- In contrast to Bareja, Krzysztof lated to different periods of Polish cinema. More Kieślowski’s ‘politics of space’ is relatively well precisely, I will refer to the politics of space in known and I have devoted part of my earlier three different senses: firstly, the official politics essays to the politics of space exemplified by of space in socialist Poland; secondly, the actual Marek Koterski (see Mazierska 2004). I will uses of space by Polish citizens; and thirdly, its refer to their work largely to illuminate the spe- cinematic representation. cificity of Bareja’s approach to ‘socialist space’ It would be impossible to analyse in one and his influence on younger film-makers. article the representation of space in all Polish post-war films, even if we focused only on fea- SOCIALIST POLAND ACCORDING ture films. This essay is therefore a product of TO STANISŁAW BAREJA selection. I chose the films of three directors who created the most distinctive and persuasive Stanisław Bareja (1929–1987) was not the portrayals of urban Poland: Stanisław Bareja, only Polish post-war director to use discourses Krzysztof Kieślowski and Marek Koterski. The on space to convey criticism of communism. bulk of my discussion will be devoted to Bareja. Others include, to name just a few, Aleksander The first reason for this choice is that his films Ford, who directed The Eighth Day of the covered a substantial proportion of Polish post- Week (Ósmy dzieД tygodnia, 1958), Jerzy war history: from the early 1960s to the late Ziarnik, the director of The New One (Nowy, 1980s, paying particular attention to the uses 1969) and The Troublesome Guest (Kffopotliwy of space in official and unofficial discourses. In goЗŚ, 1971) and Leon Jeannot, who directed post-communist Poland, he is regarded as the The Man from M-3 (Czffowiek z M-3, 1968). director who most accurately captured life in the However, Bareja devoted more films to this is- Polish People’s Republic (Polska Rzeczpospo- sue than any other film-maker and mastered lita Ludowa, PRL), the ultimate director of this this kind of criticism in his numerous comedies. phenomenon (see Łuczak 2007). The second He was also very consistent in his choice of set- reason is the lack of familiarity of both Western ting. Practically all his films were set and shot in and Eastern film scholars with his films or even Warsaw, where the problems affecting the whole his name, which is a consequence of such fac- country were most visible and the means to tors as his consistent use of the comedy genre, mask them most developed. Bareja’s principal the alleged bad taste in which he indulged in methods were exaggeration, intensification and his films, his lack of allegiance to any distinctive incongruous juxtaposition. He captured a com- school of Polish cinema (although retrospective- mon social phenomenon and replicated it in his ly he was linked to the Cinema of Moral Con- films, expanding it to huge proportions; he also cern) and, perhaps most importantly, his blatant brought together many small annoying negative criticism of the politics of Polish state social- phenomena and juxtaposed ordinary elements ism. Bareja’s cinema is not lost but is certainly or features in an unexpected way. Together, undiscovered.1 This essay is meant to rectify these techniques underscored the ‘absurd’ this situation, if only in small measure. Bareja’s work deserves to be brought to the attention of 1 In recent years the literature on Bareja has grown, but international audiences, not only because he is the bulk of publications are below academic standard.

231 permeating life in the PRL and, indeed, in the hospitals, all for the benefit of ‘ordinary people’, whole Soviet bloc. It is worth mentioning here the Kowalskis and the Kwiatkowskis. On the that ‘absurd’ (Latin absurdus), which in com- other hand, it can be read as ironic, as it makes mon usage equals ‘ridiculous’, literally means the point that only in ‘statistical terms’ is life in ‘out of harmony’ (see Esslin 1968: 23). My Poland good; for individuals life is less rosy. argument is that this lack of harmony, especially The narrative of Marriage of Convenience the dissonance between socialist ideology and revolves around the relationship of Joanna, the practice, was at the centre of Bareja’s cinematic pretty daughter of semi-legal rich traders from discourse. the Różycki bazaar (ciuchy), and her two suit- For the purpose of chronology, it is worth ors: the slacker aristocrat Edzio and the poor dividing Bareja’s films into two groups. In the artist Andrzej, who together rent a loft in the first, made in the 1960s, when Władysław Old City. Edzio, who makes Joanna’s acquain- Gomułka was Party leader, Bareja countered tance first, asks Joanna’s parents for her hand in the official social and cultural map of Poland marriage, but they reject him, claiming that the by focusing on places and people whose exis- union would be disastrous for all concerned. In tence was suppressed or marginalised in of- order to survive in the environment of state so- ficial discourses.2 In Marriage of Convenience cialism, they should look for partners favoured by (MaffŠeДstwo z rozsffldku, 1966), which was the new ideology, such as artists who hardly earn made following narrative patterns of Polish anything but are allowed to possess anything, pre-war comedy (see Wiśniewski 1973: 15), he unlike Joanna’s parents who earn a lot but can- showed, on the one hand, the Poland of small not reveal their income, because they would risk but very prosperous traders dealing in West- losing it. Thanks to Joanna’s marrying Andrzej, ern and Western-looking clothes at semi-legal her parents can launder their illegally earned markets and, on the other, the Poland of the money while assuring prosperity for their daugh- remnants of the Polish aristocracy, living in ter and themselves. Luckily Joanna and Andrzej large, although neglected villas, full of antique really do fall in love, and therefore their eventual furniture. These two Polands were reluctantly marriage is not a marriage of convenience. tolerated by the authorities because they harked Because Marriage of Convenience casts back to pre-war Poland and underscored what as main characters artists, aristocrats and trad- the Poland of ‘small stabilisation’3 was lacking: ers, it focuses on the spaces they appropriate. style, elegance, fun and a healthy economy. At The aristocratic house where Edzio’s aunt lives the same time, Bareja was reasonably posi- is almost a ruin; whatever one touches there tive in his depiction of the new socialist Poland crumbles to dust. The paintings decorating its (perhaps to avoid annoying the censors). This is walls, representing the grandiose past of Edzio’s conveyed in the very first scene of the film, when ancestors, underscore the absence of the aris- the camera pans over the roofs of the Old City of tocracy in contemporary Poland. Such a mate- Warsaw (which, despite looking so different in rial decline also represents the metaphorical its style from typical socialist architecture, was decline of this stratum of Polish society, which an achievement of post-war communist govern- appears to be deserved, as Edzio and his aunt ments), accompanied by Agnieszka Osiecka’s are snobbish, selfish and ultimately useless. The song, Mr. Kwiatkowski, Mr. Ko walski (Panie flat of Joanna’s parents strikes one as provincial, Kwiatkowski, Panie Kowalski). The viewpoint with old-fashioned furniture, ornaments and in this scene can be described as ‘tourist’, as it a large photograph of the couple’s wedding. does not belong to an inhabitant of the town but Again, it appears to have little relevance to the to the film’s author, who directs us, the audience Poland of the 1960s. Only the loft inhabited by (his ‘tourists’), towards the most attractive parts Andrzej and Edzio looks stylish, largely because of the town. Osiecka’s song evades unequivocal its lodgers have little furniture and Andrzej’s interpretation. On the one hand, it celebrates paintings show what he sees from his window. the huge building programme that is taking Although Bareja’s choice of characters place in post-war Poland of houses, schools and leaves him little scope to explore the lifestyles

232 and zones of the socialist mainstream, on sev- relation to Czechoslovakia, but in a way that is eral occasions they appear in the background. also valid in Poland, the boundary between the For example, at a certain stage Joanna and public and private permeated many more as- Andrzej visit the furniture shop Emilia, the best pects of life than production and consumption: known furniture shop in socialist Warsaw and it affected morality, the value of time and prop- famous for long queues (immortalised in later erty, modes of conduct, patterns of hospitality films by Bareja), to choose furnishings for their and socialising etc., and it was maintained and new house. Although they should be living in made manifest by its own appropriate symbolic an aristocratic mansion, they find themselves devices (see Holý 1996: 19). Contrary to of- among the functional items designed for a mini- ficial ideology, which proclaimed the primacy ature, one-bedroom or studio flat. Everything of society over individuals and, consequently, here is designed to fold and unfold, depending the greater significance of public zones (for ex- on the function it is meant to fulfil; for example, ample, of factories, cooperative farms, offices or a desk can act as a bed. In his subsequent films, schools) over private ones, in reality the private Bareja would mock this socialist functionality by zone proved more important to the citizens of showing that it does not function. Yet, in Mar- Eastern Europe. Public property and public riage of Convenience, the socialist furniture space were regarded as nobody’s. People who still exudes some charm. In another, humor- worked there did not identify with it and, conse- ous scene, a dodgy businessman, nicknamed quently, did not try to make it look or function Engineer Kwilecki (played by Bogumił Kobiela, better. It was neglected and impoverished, or an actor who in the 1960s specialised in the used for private purposes. An extreme exam- roles of socialist ‘survivors’), who operates to- ple of this attitude was stealing or exchanging tally in the private sector, steals some thread public property for something which could be from a state factory to use in the production of used for private purposes. Widespread pilfering textiles to be sold at ciuchy. In order to cover of socialist property was greatly encouraged by his illegal activities, he makes his flat look like the prevailing economic situation. Given the a skansen of folk art, complete with a wooden chronic shortage of building materials, tools and cradle, in which he sits as if it were an armchair. other goods, pilfering them from building sites This scene can be read as an introduction to the and other places of work or buying them from motifs of the appropriation of public property for those who had stolen them was the only solu- private purposes and of covering illegal activi- tion for many people (Holý 1996: 24–25). The ties in the disguise of folk art. It is worth adding Czech proverb of the time: ‘Anyone who does that, in his later film Teddy Bear (MiЗ, 1980), not steal is robbing his family’ clearly endorsed a pseudo-folk straw sculpture of a bear is used this moral principle of unofficial privatisation. as a container for alcohol to be smuggled to On the other hand, such practices slowed down London. economic development and negatively affected In the 1970s and 1980s, Bareja moved the quality of public enterprises, including the away from the ‘remnants of pre-war Poland’, building of blocks of flats for the burgeoning to concentrate on people who constituted the population. stock of socialist society: the new intelligent- The accommodation crisis provides the sia, the working classes, and socialist manag- main theme for two of Bareja’s productions from ers. He focused on two interconnected issues: the unresolved accommodation crisis and the degradation of public space. It should be kept 2 There are other reasons for dividing Bareja’s work into two periods, such as the change of his scriptwriters, which in mind here that the reduction of the level of account for the fact that his later films offer a more uncom- private ownership of the means of production, promisingly critical vision of Poland. brought about by socialism in virtually all coun- 3 The term was taken from the play by Tadeusz Różewicz, tries of the Soviet bloc, led to the sharpening of Witnesses or Our Small Stabilisation (Żwiadkowie albo nasza maffa stabilizacja, 1962), but in due course was used the division between the public and the private to describe the whole decade of the 1960s when Władysław domains of life. As Ladislav Holý observes in Gomułka was Party leader.

233 the ‘decade of the propaganda of success’, when organisation where ordinary members can say Edward Gierek was Party leader: Every Rose nothing and the bosses have great power, be- Has Its Fire (Nie ma róŠy bez ognia, 1974) and having as owners. 4 Alternatywy Street (Alternatywy 4, 1981). The second, and ultimately more seri- In Every Rose Has Its Fire, a not so young ous, problem that Janek and Wanda encounter professional couple, Janek and Wanda, live in on their road to their dream flat is their forced cramped accommodation in one of the rooms in co-habitation with Wanda’s ex-husband Jerzy a large villa where most of the rooms are taken and all the people whom he brings to their new by state offices, where there is continuous noise. home, as well as those whom they bring upon There is so little space in their room that they themselves in their amateurish attempt to get cannot even share a bed. Janek and Wanda are rid of Jerzy and his entourage. Jerzy uses the waiting for a cooperative flat, but are well aware socialist policies on space as a way to earn his that the queue is very long; it might take them living. His trick consists of arranging for people ten years or more to reach this elusive goal. from the provinces to be registered in War- However, one day a miracle happens. A man saw—for a fee, of course. It must be mentioned who claims that he lived in the villa as a child, that, for most of the communist period, without offers to trade them his newly acquired coop- such registration it was impossible to find any erative flat for their miniature room. Of course, official employment in Warsaw, buy property or they happily agree but their joy is short lived, even rent a flat. The policy of registration was as soon numerous problems arise and they find a way to control internal migration of Poles, themselves in a worse situation than before. The especially to limit the influx of provincials to flat that should be ready to move into proves places where there was already a shortage of uninhabitable. The doors have no handles and accommodation, such as Warsaw. One could eventually fall off their hinges; the lock on their not simply register in Warsaw as one wished, front door can be opened by a key that fits the but had to find somebody already registered front door of all other apartments; the bell does there to register the new person as staying with not work; the walls dividing rooms are so thin him. Finding such a person was not easy, as that they collapse; the sink is broken so that wa- registering somebody, particularly on a perma- ter once turned on cannot be stopped and floods nent basis, granted him or her the right to stay the flat; the windows do not open and so on. practically till the end of their lives, or at least As a Polish viewer might guess, and as is con- till the registered person ceased to be in regular firmed by an employee of the cooperative’s ad- contact. Jerzy exploits this rule to his maximum ministration, the vast majority of defects are due advantage by remaining registered with Wanda to the builders’ conscious strategy. They create despite having divorced her many years before. flaws so that they can be paid twice: first by the This means that wherever Wanda moves, Jerzy cooperative hiring them to build the block, and has the right to move in with her. Being himself then by the private inhabitants for correcting permanently registered in Warsaw, he can regis- the defects which they purposefully created. The ter in Janek and Wanda’s flat his new wife whom cooperative, whose prescribed role is to ensure he married fictitiously, the child he adopted, that their members receive their flats in good also fictitiously, the child’s mother and, in due shape, in reality facilitates the builders’ second, course, the child’s other relatives. All these peo- private income (and most likely their own extra ple gradually invade Janek and Wanda’s space, income) by putting them in contact with the making their life even more miserable than it inhabitants. We witness this in a scene where was previously. the administrator tells Janek when various The policy of registration, of which Jerzy workmen will come to fix the defects. The coop- takes advantage, can be regarded as a typi- erative itself, as with so many institutions in the cal way of dealing with a social problem by the socialist world which nominally were common socialist authorities. Instead of tackling its property, does not live up to its name. It is not root cause, which in this case is a shortage of really a cooperative, but a strictly hierarchical accommodation, by building more houses, it

234 defuses it by creating a bureaucratic obstacle pressure on him. For Winnicki, this is a signal that prevents a large number of citizens from to outdo his competitor by offering the chair- even mentioning this problem. In this way, the man two coupons towards a Fiat, one for the propaganda of success can be perpetuated, chairman and one for his son. This exchange is despite the lack of real success. As the case of an example of extreme, albeit informal and il- Wanda, Janek and Jerzy demonstrates, such a legal, privatisation of public property, including bureaucracy disadvantages honest citizens and public space: the cooperative chairman gives benefits those who are dishonest and sly. something to the Party official which is not real- The situation of Janek and Wanda, as Rafał ly his but which he only administers, in order Marszałek observes, brings back memories of to receive something from his customer which the time after the war, when Warsaw had been does not belong to the customer. As we can destroyed and people were crammed into the see, only people occupying positions of power few remaining houses. At the time, as Treasure could engage in this kind of non-monetary ex- (Skarb, 1948) by Leonard Buczkowski shows, change. Ordinary people had to wait for their such overcrowding was met with patience, un- flats in endless queues, bringing useless docu- derstanding, and even acceptance. However, the ments such as references from their places of almost thirty years which had passed since the work or from social services, confirming their war, eroded this patience and made people feel difficult situation4 and only being able to afford desperate (Marszałek 2006: 53–55). The ulti- such small gifts as bottles of foreign alcohol. mate sign of the end of their patience is Janek’s The chairman has a large cupboard full of these final act of rage, in which he destroys everything gifts; they meaningfully occupy the space where in ‘his’ flat and ends up in a psychiatric ward. the files of the cooperative members should Similarly, Jerzy recalls the memory of a ‘Warsaw be kept. fixer’, able to find solutions even in the most Because of the multitude of factors affect- difficult circumstances, a type familiar from pre- ing the waiting time for a flat and the confusion war cinema, where the type was immortalised about the significance of the factors, being al- by Adolf Dymsza. However, Jerzy, as played located a flat is like winning the lottery. This deadpan by Jerzy Dobrowolski, comes across feature is excellently conveyed in an early scene, as a more sinister type than the characters per- when a crowd of cooperative members are wait- sonified by Adolf Dymsza, because he has no ing for a secretary to post a list of the people scruples and acts only for his own advantage. awarded flats. Indeed, those who get flats on Basically, he is a crook who thrives on socialist this particular day are picked randomly by a absurdities and human misery. television journalist who is visiting the coopera- The issues of acquiring a cooperative flat tive to make a programme about the excellent and living in a newly built housing estate are progress of the Polish building industry, which also the subject of 4 Alternatywy Street, which is a typical example of the Gierek ‘propaganda is set in the district of Natolin. As in Every Rose of success’. As in Every Rose Has Its Fire, the Has Its Fire, the cooperative employees do not flats ‘given’ to the cooperative members are in serve the inhabitants but, rather, treat them dreadful condition. It takes the inhabitants a lot as unpleasant intruders. Moreover, its chair- of money, time and effort to transform them into man uses his power to ‘give’ the flats away as habitable places. a means of amassing consumer goods, as we Another typical socialist figure who treats see in an episode when the high ranking Party public space as his private kingdom is the jani- official, Comrade Winnicki, tells the chairman tor of the block at 4 Alternatywy Street, where that he needs a three-or-four-bedroom flat to solve a family problem resulting from his wife 4 The phenomenon of attempting to ‘jump the queue’ acquiring a lover. The chairman explains that he by bribery was shown in some earlier Polish films, such as is sympathetic to Winnicki’s plight, but it is not The Eighth Day of the Week by Ford and The Troublesome Guest by Jerzy Ziarnik. However, before Bareja no director easy to solve, as there is another prominent per- had the courage to reveal the blatant corruption of the social- son ‘from television circles’ who is also exerting ist cooperatives.

235 the main action of the series takes place. This in the sense that it is highly bureaucratised. man, meaningfully called Anioł (‘Angel’),5 who Ordinary members of the cooperative or even was previously employed as a cultural officer in the actual flats for which they wait for many the provincial town of Pułtusk, acts like a cross years, if not decades, come across as merely between a landlord and the overseer of a youth shadows of their existence in a file. The motif of camp. He forces the inhabitants to clean the this ‘shadow existence’ is excellently rendered staircases, decorate the block and spy on each in an episode in which the people waiting for other, and he passes the ‘intelligence’ he col- the completion of a block at 4 Alternatywy are lects to the local police. It must be added that informed that it will never be finished because Anioł himself aspires to be the chief spy in his it figured in the previous year’s building plan block. We can guess that his ideal would be and was ticked off as completed. Consequently, Bentham’s Panopticon, which Michel Foucault the current schedule is no longer of any impor- used as a metaphor for modern ‘disciplinary’ tance. However, later we learn that the builders societies with their inclination to observe and finished it promptly (by socialist standards), normalise (see Foucault 1991), of which the because of the intervention of a Party official. society of state socialism was a perfect example. Another Kafkaesque moment concerns two However, as the designers of the socialist blocks families who move to the same flat because they were unfamiliar with this concept or hadn’t the share similar surnames (Kotek and Kołek) and courage to implement it, he has to make up for the same initial, which makes their names look this ‘defect’ by using his wit and determina- identical on official documents announcing that tion. He goes to great lengths to gain access to they were allocated the apartment. Although the lives of other inhabitants, leaning out of the Mr. Kotek and Mr. Kołek both resolutely pro- window of his basement flat to see what is hap- test at being cramped in one apartment, their pening on the street or on the balconies above protests are in vain. What really matters for the him, walking outside the block and gazing into cooperative hierarchy is the content of the docu- other people’s windows, or walking the stairs, ment, not the actual situation of the desperate trying to eavesdrop through the doors. Conse- people. Eventually, the Koteks and the Kołeks quently, the block at 4 Alternatywy becomes a become resigned to their fate and put up with metaphorical Panopticon. In line with his ‘sa- their enforced cohabitation. cred’ name, Anioł also seeks to be worshipped 4 Alternatywy Street not only laments the and tries to accustom his neighbours to certain absurdities of the pseudo-cooperative system, quasi-religious rituals, in which he functions as but also celebrates the resilience with which a semi-god, such as staging performances or ordinary people endure and subvert it. For ex- singing songs in his honour. Needless to say, ample, in the depth of winter the inhabitants, this enforced ‘cult of Anioł’ brings to mind the deprived of central heating, organise their own cults of various communist leaders, principally heating by acquiring a railway engine. In another Stalin. The cult of Anioł is more visible, as the scene, when deprived of electricity, they gather places of ordinary religious cults are excluded in the apartment of Comrade Winnicki, who from Bareja’s work. Socialist authorities were has a television which runs on batteries. Such hostile to building churches, especially in new scenes bring back memories of earlier Polish urban areas, where it was easier, at least in the- television serials, in which people living in one ory, to create the new socialist men and women. house worked together to ensure a minimum liv- As a Panopticon with a semi-religious centre, ing standard and shared their limited resources the block at 4 Alternatywy thus becomes the (see Talarczyk-Gubała 2007: 256–257). The totalitarian system in miniature. spontaneous cooperation of the people living at The whole system of flat cooperatives 4 Alternatywy also subverts the enforced cooper- comes across as, on the one hand, utterly ation imposed on them by Anioł (see Miodusze- personalised, because personal connections, wska 2006). Finally, 4 Alternatywy Street bribes and gifts matter a lot. On the other proclaims the end of the pseudo-cooperative era. hand, it is rendered as Kafkaesque or Haškian,6 Thanks to the joint efforts of the inhabitants of

236 the block, Anioł is overthrown and the coopera- for some extra months of service and providing tive block receives a new, humble janitor. It is not him with expensive cameras. A more extreme difficult to see the demise of Anioł as a metaphor example of using public space to private ad- for the victory of Solidarity in 1981. vantage consists of arranging an exhibition In What Will You Do When You Catch at a railway station, which makes the station Me? (Co mi zrobisz jak mnie zffapiesz, 1978) unusable by passengers for days if not weeks, and Teddy Bear, probably the most appreci- simply to allow the originator of the exhibition, ated film Bareja ever made (see Janicka 1997: Krzakoski’s wife, to be interviewed for a televi- 18), the director moves away from satirising sion programme. Krzakoski needs his wife to be the challenges of living in a cooperative block, on television because he wants to show her to a taking issue with the use of public space, prin- man who is meant to spy on her. cipally the space of work, for private activities. Unlike managers who can manipulate In What Will You Do When You Catch Me?, the public space in a number of ways, ordinary pretext for such an exploration is the attempt of employees must content themselves with mere the director of a large state company, named Ta- neglect or humble theft. To demonstrate this, deusz Krzakoski, to prove that his wife has been on several occasions the camera in What Will unfaithful to him, so that he can conveniently You Do When You Catch Me? focuses on the divorce her and marry a new woman whom he building site of a new Warsaw estate, where the met on a short business trip to Paris. Teddy workers spend a large proportion of their time Bear focuses on the problems of a certain Mr. in idleness, because they are waiting for cer- Ochódzki, the chairman of a sports club who tain documents, or simply because they prefer was recently divorced by his wife, who tries to not to do anything. On another occasion, the deprive him of everything they have collected in lorry drivers employed on the site cannot leave their marriage, including their flat and the con- it until the inspection which is meant to estab- tents of a foreign bank account. The narratives lish whether the workers are stealing bricks is of these films are looser than those of the two completed. The inspection consists of putting films previously discussed; the camera often ap- a skewer into the piles of rubble carried by the pears to leave the main actors of the drama, in lorry. When the skewer does not detect any order to follow other citizens of Warsaw navigat- bricks, another, thinner one is used. This whole ing their way through the multiple absurdities exercise is futile because everything of value of modern living. In this way, Bareja can show has already been taken from the site. Yet, when how public space and property is impoverished a single brick is eventually found on a lorry, and degraded by three types of people using it: the whole cavalcade of vehicles has to return managers and overseers, ordinary employees to the building site and the drivers are labelled and customers. ‘thieves’. The low ethics of work, as revealed in The people at the top unofficially privatise these episodes, is closely related to the fact that public space by running their private or semi- in socialist Poland productivity was never an private businesses there. In What Will You Do objective of the economy. Full employment and When You Catch Me?, the manager of a garage fulfilling some abstract plans were always more prioritises repairing the cars of people who repay important, and companies were often rewarded his services beyond what is required by the of- for the size of their projects and the number of ficial tariff, usually by gifts in kind. It is not dif- resources they used, which in practice equalled ficult to see a parallel between his behaviour and rewarding waste. In this and other episodes of that of the chairman of the housing cooperative What Will You Do When You Catch Me?, such in 4 Alternatywy Street—both take advantage of their positions as custodians of queues by 5 ‘Angel Guardian’ is in Polish Anioff StróŠ and stróŠ re-prioritising places in them. In addition, Krza- means both ‘guardian’ and ‘janitor’. koski pays for the repair of his private car out of 6 I am evoking Kafka and Hašek in one sentence because company funds. He also employs in ‘his’ firm a the universes they created in their work have much in com- man whose job is to spy on his wife, paying him mon (see Steiner 2000: 34–36).

237 as when a man says that he cannot send a crane who, after complaining that he has been given somewhere because that day he is expecting an a dirty chicken, is photographed and the pho- ‘unexpected inspection’, Bareja also satirises tograph is displayed in the shop as one of the socialist ‘inspections’ which were ineffective customers whom the shop will not serve. as they came too late, were easily predicted Bareja also shows customers who steal and focused on the misdemeanours of ordinary from public places, most often from shops and workers, rather than the crimes of those at the restaurants. In due course, such ‘privatisation’ top who were responsible for losses of gigantic of public resources affects the way the custom- proportions. Inspections of this kind also under- ers are treated, namely with distrust. We find an scored the absurdity of the socialist economy, as extreme version of this attitude in the milk bar the principle, in this case punishing a worker for featured in Teddy Bear, where all the cutlery stealing a single brick, proved more important and crockery is chained to the table. As a result than the negative result of following this prin- of this arrangement, the aluminium bowls from ciple, in this case producing total chaos at the which the guests eat are never washed; the food building site. scraps are merely wiped out with a dirty cloth by Among the people who work in state en- a person serving food from a gigantic bowl full terprises, as portrayed by Bareja, we can identify of potatoes or buckwheat. The chain to which two contradictory or perhaps complementary spoons used by two customers are attached is approaches to the space of their work: appropri- so short that when one person lifts a spoon to ation and alienation. The first attitude is, under- his mouth, the person sitting opposite him can- standably, more common among managers and not eat. This arrangement, while satirising the directors, who furnish and decorate their offices excessive reaction to a common problem (after as if they were their private homes and use them all, stealing from restaurants also happens in for private pursuits, such as sex. The people the West) is also symbolic of the enforced col- on the lower rungs of the social ladder tend to lective use of public space in Poland, which use their work places as little as possible, and thwarts any pleasure or even the fulfilment of disappear from them as early as they can, either the most basic human needs. physically, for example to the nearby shop to buy Zones that should be shared by everybody alcohol, or mentally, by switching themselves in a specific way in Bareja’s films are also ap- off from work by phoning relatives, manicuring propriated for private uses. A street is not only nails or eating. Of course, both attitudes have used for driving vehicles, but also for selling a detrimental effect on customers. Consider, petrol by lorry drivers to the owners of private for example, the situation in What Will You Do cars or for leaving unwanted goods. Of course, When You Catch Me?, where a postal clerk eats such a use of a street makes it inconvenient or strawberries and cream while serving custom- even dangerous for their proper users, but their ers standing in a long queue. When one of them interests are not protected. The policemen who reproaches her by saying ‘Either eat or work’, should forbid such practices are more concerned she closes her till, clearly demonstrating that with arresting pedestrians who use vulgar words private pleasure is more important for her than or drivers who go over the speed limit in areas public service. In Teddy Bear, a man who visits where special dummy houses are erected to a shop is simply informed by the shop assistant: catch drivers not expecting to see them there. ‘Don’t you see that I am eating.’ The power of The more lamentable the state of public employees to refuse to serve customers breeds space, the more effort is put into covering it, lit- a special kind of customer who is very patient, erally and metaphorically. Huge slogans, posters humble and grateful for any service, as if it were and billboards are erected to hide ugly building a personal favour. Not surprisingly, custom- sites, decrepit walls and factory buildings. This ers who expect a high standard of service are dominance of, as Jean Baudrillard would put refused any service, and are even stigmatised, it, the kingdom of signs over the kingdom of such as the hapless visitor to the grocery shop material things, is excellently portrayed in the in What Will You Do When You Catch Me?, previously mentioned scene from What Will You

238 Do When You Catch Me?, where the railway ‘We were sent to a desert.’ What Will You Do station is unusable by passengers, as it has been When You Catch Me? begins with the image of changed into a space for an exhibition called a man on horseback riding through Warsaw. In ‘Travelling by train saves you time’. Teddy Bear Teddy Bear, a horse cart loaded with coal moves begins with a scene of constructing the large through central Warsaw, in close proximity to façade of an estate, complete with dummies pre- the Palace of Culture, Warsaw’s most prominent tending to be real people. This scene can be re- building. The film begins and ends with a view garded as a metaphor for the whole building in- of a large straw bear, attached to a helicopter, dustry in Poland—what mattered was its façade floating over Warsaw. Likewise, many of Bareja’s or representation in official reports, not qualities films include people from the country coming to which could be appreciated by the inhabitants. Warsaw in search of a better life. This mixture of A façade can also act as a trap, as shown in the rural and urban can be interpreted as Bareja’s scene of catching the speeding drivers: those critique of an artificial, rushed and incompetent who do not grant the dummy houses the status Polish urbanisation and industrialisation (on of reality are punished by fines. the critique of Polish urbanisation see Wallis Dobrochna Dabert observes that the space 1971). It can also be regarded as a satire on the of offices is represented in Bareja’s films, as in alliance of workers and peasants, and the post- other films of the Cinema of Moral Concern (to war promotion of folk culture in the form of folk which she links Bareja’s films), from an external festivals, galleries and shops selling kitschy sou- perspective, suggesting the author’s emotional venirs. This last policy again worked as a façade: distance from it (see Dabert 2003: 136). Indeed, the shallow support of folk culture obscured the we typically see offices from the viewpoint of the real neglect and hostility of the communist au- hapless customer, rather than from that of the thorities to the countryside. powerful chairman or director. Typically a large The final opposition which Bareja tack- desk and chairs divide them. These pieces of fur- les in his films is that between Poland and the niture point to the impossibility of any solidarity rest of the world. As one might expect from the between the authorities and citizens of Poland director’s critical attitude to socialism, he rep- under state socialism and, in a wider sense, are resents the West positively, the East negatively. a potent symbol of the neglected opportunity to The West is full of goods which are lacking in create an egalitarian society. Poland, and therefore the constant motif of his Another dialectic to which Bareja draws films is smuggling Western goods to Poland in attention is that between urban and rural space. order to consume them or sell them at a profit, Natolin in 4 Alternatywy Street has the worst and selling Polish goods, principally alcohol, features of both the country and city. As in the in the West to obtain hard currency or scarce country, it has an undeveloped transport system Western goods. Moreover, the West is a zone of which makes any journey to the centre of War- freedom, including political and sexual freedom, saw long and cumbersome. There are few shops, as signified by the bank which is not serving and no cinemas, restaurants or cafés (therefore customers due to industrial action in Teddy workers often drink alcohol on the pavement), Bear, and numerous sex shops in What Will not to mention any buildings that might attract You Do When You Catch Me?. In Bareja’s West, tourist gaze or symbolise the glorious social- one can even find some Polish products which ist future. On the other hand, the multitude of are lacking in Poland, such as Polish ham in high blocks of flats creates a sense of anonymity, the Polish Delicatessen in London, as shown in of being among large numbers of people but Teddy Bear. By contrast, in socialist Hungary, without any contact with them (see Mazierska, as depicted in What Will You Do When You Rascaroli 2003: 98; Talarczyk-Gubała 2007). Catch Me?, the work ethic is lacking: clerks are One gets the impression that nature has been immersed in their own affairs and rudeness and devastated but nothing of value has replaced it. drunkenness is common. Not surprisingly, one of the new inhabitants, Just as Polish goods can be found in the upon receiving the keys to a new flat laments: West, so Western goods permeate Polish offices

239 and private houses. However, Western goods Chaos and disorder ruled Poland in the in Poland are clandestine, hidden from public mid-1980s—everywhere, everything, view, such as Western comic books and alcohol practically everybody’s life. Tension, a locked in the drawers and cupboards of various feeling of hopelessness, and a fear of yet clerks and officials. This has to do with their worse to come were obvious. I’d already preciousness and their status as forbidden fruit, started to travel abroad a bit and observed dangerous for a healthy socialist body and mind. a general uncertainty in the world at large. The idea that the West is attractive but, from I’m not even thinking about politics here the official perspective, corrupt and dangerous, but of ordinary, everyday life. I sensed mu- is excellently conveyed by Ochódzki, who in tual indifference behind polite smiles and Teddy Bear tells a group of sportswomen about had the overwhelming impression that, to cross the border to travel to London that this more and more frequently, I was watching city may have some charms but they should people who didn’t really know why they make sure that these charms do not obscure were living. (Kieślowski, quoted in Stok its shortcomings. From the current perspec- 1993: 143.) tive, Bareja’s idealistic representation of the West might appear slightly naïve, but even in The Decalogue was, thus, meant to repre- its naivety it excellently transmits the socialist sent both Polish and global situations or, more mindset. precisely, the Polish situation as an extreme The criticism of public space in Bareja’s version of the global condition. Accordingly, films goes hand in hand with an emphasis on the what torments Kieślowski’s characters in this importance of the private sphere. Although the series are not only the circumstances pertaining socialist tenement blocks are ugly and function to late socialism, but modern times in general. poorly, people strive to acquire them and value The most important feature of the Polish con- them, because there are not enough of them. text is the martial law of 1981 and its aftermath, This idea is most clearly conveyed in Every Rose which led to an atmosphere of stagnation for Has Its Fire, in which a couple who have just most of the 1980s (on society under martial law got the keys to their flat are so happy that they see Lewenstein, Melchior 1992). Kieślowski fo- dance on the roof of their block of flats. Such an cuses on people living in one housing estate— image belongs to the Poland of Gomułka and Ursynów in Warsaw. He presents it as drab Gierek; after 1980, we find practically no cine- and unpleasant, although in reality Ursynów matic characters who are happy simply because was, and still is, regarded as a success story in they have a roof over their heads. the Polish version of Le Corbusier’s approach to urban living—an estate which is large, but KIEŚLOWSKI AND KOTERSKI— inhabitant-friendly, full of greenery and with a LATE COMMUNISM reasonably good public transport system and AND BEYOND infrastructure. On the other hand, the choice of Ursynów allowed Kieślowski to cast with Unlike Bareja who focuses on public space plausibility some quite affluent, educated and and on the public-private dialectic, Krzysztof cultured people as his protagonists. Had he Kieślowski, in his The Decalogue (Dekalog, chosen, for example, Bródno as the setting for 1988), and Marek Koterski, in virtually all his The Decalogue, it would be unrealistic to tell films, focus on the private zone, typically the the stories of a surgeon with an international space of a private flat in a large block. reputation, a well-known advocate and an The Decalogue is regarded as one of the acting student. most important, if not the most notable, prod- Unlike in Bareja’s films, the inhabitants ucts of the Polish film industry in the 1980s. of the housing complex in Kieślowski’s series Kieślowski himself described the origin of this do not interact with each other. As Mirosław series of films in this way: Przylipiak observes:

240 The impression of imprisonment is over- internalised the external enemy—the state; whelming. Trapped in the small cubicles of they do to each other and to themselves what their apartments, in the boxes of their tow- previously the authorities have done to them. er blocks, in elevators and mazes of cor- The state, their institutions and functionar- ridors, the protagonists additionally lock ies are almost invisible. Consequently, what I themselves in, cut themselves off from the described previously as the official politics of outside world with bars (episode X) and space, is rendered either unimportant or invis- bolts (episode I). In the staircases, on the ible. The second reading is suggested by Paul paths winding among tower blocks, they Coates, who claims that the state might be occasionally meet characters known from represented metaphorically by the tower blocks other episodes, as if the whole universe of the series’ housing complex; ‘its authority a consisted of a limited number of elements. vague, louring presence limned with continual This claustrophobic mood is enhanced absence’ (Coates 1999: 94). If this is the case, by framing and lighting, which privileges then it should be added that, unlike in Bareja’s close-ups and darkness, tightly envelop- films, the state authority has as its adversary a ing the silhouettes of the protagonists. different kind of authority: that of the Catholic (Przylipiak 2004: 226–227.) Church. However, the Church, understood both as a religious institution and physical In such an environment, human bonds dis- space where believers meet, as depicted by integrate and an atmosphere of distrust and Kieślowski, fails to counter the melancholy and suspicion grows. Locking themselves in private indifference his characters suffer. spaces leads to a proliferation of social pathol- While Bareja tended to idealise the West, ogy, and is a way to contain it and hide it from either as a real space, or as a material or imma- public scrutiny. In The Decalogue, we witness terial sign, frozen in a souvenir, a photograph promiscuity and betrayal, incestuous tenden- or a foreign book, a real or invented story or cies and even the stealing of children, as well even a hard currency, Kieślowski—perhaps as many other transgressions of the Ten Com- drawing on his experiences as a disillusioned mandments. On the whole, the director demon- traveller—resisted such a temptation. Many of strates that in Catholic Poland in the 1980s, the his characters, as Przylipiak observes, belong reality and even the concept of family deviated to the exclusive group of those who possess a significantly from the ideas conveyed in the Cat- scarce commodity—a passport and resulting echism. However, Kieślowski’s characters lead opportunity to travel to the West (see Przylipiak very private lives and, because they do, they try 2004: 227). However, these trips hardly excite to gain access to the existence of other people. them and do not change anything in their lives. Many of them spy on others, read their letters It is in their private space that they have to sort and eavesdrop on them, often using expensive out their problems or remain unhappy forever. and sophisticated equipment. Such practices His lukewarm attitude to the West foreshad- are also depicted in Bareja’s films, most impor- owed Polish post-communist reality and post- tantly in 4 Alternatywy Street, but their nature communist cinema. in Kieślowski’s film is different. In Bareja’s In Kieślowski’s The Decalogue, the ordi- films, spying was typically politically motivated nary block of flats is endowed with metaphorical (by the authorities’ desire to know what people meaning, but is still realistic. In Marek Koter- know and say) or pragmatic—one did it to find ski’s cinema, especially his second film, Inner out, for example, where the neighbour bought Life (Ēycie wewnőtrzne, 1986), it verges on the a scarce good, such as a fur coat or toilet paper. surreal. Similarly, while Kieślowski’s characters In The Decalogue, by contrast, it becomes a are suspicious and extra-sensitive, in Koterski’s way of life, marking a breakdown of communi- films they tend to be paranoid. The protago- cation, distrust and aggression between people nist of all Koterski’s films, Adam Miauczyński, who should be close to each other. Distrust whom we can at times regard as the director’s and aggression suggest that the people have alter ego, depending on the movie, works as a

241 film director, teacher or literary critic (which are of the moral decline of late socialism, which the occupations Koterski himself engaged in), or new regime was unable to reverse. In Nothing the precise occupation is not disclosed. Central Funny (Nic Зmiesznego, 1995), the wife of the is the fact that he is a frustrated member of the protagonist considers divorcing him and mar- intelligentsia and his housing situation is the rying a wealthy foreigner met through a dating main cause of his unhappiness. agency, and his teenage children ignore him. Miauczyński’s block is situated among At this stage, however, the protagonist not only many similar buildings, in a grim housing estate blames his relatives and neighbours for his dis- in Łódź, which, despite being the second largest appointing situation, but also the political sys- city in Poland, is, or at least was, regarded as tem. He says at one point: ‘Communism spoilt very provincial, working class and generally un- forty years of my life and democracy completed attractive: an epitome of communist drabness. my destruction.’ In Day of the Wacko (DzieД Although the block is huge, it comes across as Зwira, 2002), made seven years later (by which claustrophobic. Few outsiders venture there time Poland had enjoyed over a decade of de- and everybody seems to spend all their time mocracy), when the protagonist collects the behind the locked doors of their flats, in lifts modest monthly salary of a secondary school or standing idly in long, dark corridors, remi- teacher, he complains: ‘Governments change, niscent of the characters in Roman Polański’s but my life does not change, because every new The Tenant (Le Locataire, 1976). All Michał’s authority treats me like a dog, like an arsehole, neighbours reveal some eccentricity, such as paying me next to nothing.’ At the same time, drilling holes in walls purely for the pleasure of he continues to blame his family, his neigh- it. Michał himself is not lacking in peculiarities; bours, the housing estate and his unappealing he secretly collects whisky bottles from the rub- city for his wasted life. By this time in the nar- bish chute and spies on his neighbours. Unlike rative, his separation from his previous family in Bareja’s films, spying is not political and, is almost complete: he lives in a different flat, as in Kieślowski’s films, it does not have any although in the same block as his ex-wife and real purpose, such as finding out about one’s his son, whom he visits occasionally. It should wife’s extramarital affairs. It only testifies to the also be added that the flat is rather spacious characters’ boredom and paranoia. While in and tasteful, with the walls painted in clean, Kieślowski’s film, people are distrustful or indif- distinctive colours, as opposed to the dark-grey ferent to each other, in Koterski’s film they are of his previous flats, and the flat is often bathed openly hostile, rude and malicious. They derive in sunlight.7 The surroundings are also more true pleasure from getting on the nerves of fel- appealing, with a multitude of shops, better low inhabitants. roads and parks. Thus, although objectively Koterski’s films, beginning with Inner Miauczyński’s housing situation has improved, Life, can be perceived as the chronicles of a man in comparison with the situation in the earlier imprisoned in an apartment block. Hence, in films by Koterski and those of the characters Inner Life, Michał is married to an attractive depicted by Bareja, Koterski’s protagonist is woman who works as a teacher and they have far from happy. His continuing critical attitude a son, who causes his parents no trouble at all. to the space of his life points less to his objec- However, Michał and his wife hardly speak to tive standard of living, than to the gap between each other and it is clear that, from his point of the reality and expectations of a member of the view, the relationship is a failure. Miauczyński Polish intelligentsia. Koterski attributes to his hates his flat, his block, his housing estate and protagonist the view that, as an educated and his town; each of them constitutes one circle of cultured man, he should be granted a special his oppression. By extension, he is a prisoner position in society, not having to mix with ordi- of communism, which has created all these nary people and having enough personal space circles of oppression. In Koterski’s later films, to develop his creativity.8 However, this view is the protagonist’s personal life disintegrates as rejected by the new authorities as it was by even further, which can be read as a metaphor the old. After 1989, a new class usurped the

242 position of the nation’s elite: businessmen and or in the lift does not work or that the housing managers; and the intelligentsia felt more un- estate is placed in the middle of nowhere, hav- dermined and powerless than ever. ing the worst features of two worlds: the city and Whenever Koterski’s protagonist attempts the country. It is isolated from cultural life and to break with his life, whether before or after lacking in the pleasures of nature. There are few 1989, his escape is limited to a mental retreat: trams reaching the estate and it is very windy. dreaming or daydreaming. If he actually leaves Furthermore, summer and winter rarely feature his block of flats, the escape is short-lived and in Koterski’s films. The most common season is disappointing. For example, Miauczyński’s late autumn or early spring, periods which ex- night walk in Inner Life is cut short by a group pose all the inadequacies of the estate. Interiors, of policemen, who find it suspicious that a citi- in common with exteriors, lack any individual zen is walking at night just for recreation. An- features. In Day of the Wacko, as was previous- other example is a brief holiday at the seaside by ly mentioned, the flats and the whole estate look Miauczyński in Day of the Wacko. He intends better, but the inhabitants are still not able to to rest and enjoy himself, but his negative at- enjoy the improvements. For example, the mod- titude to people on the train prevents him from est area of parks and lawns are not used for hu- participating in their conversations and makes man pleasure, but as toilets for dogs, and noisy him unable to concentrate on the book that he road work disturbs the sleep of the people living is reading. Later, he almost returns home im- in the estate. The view in Koterski’s films is any- mediately when he discovers that his neighbour thing but that of a tourist. The director himself is on a holiday to the same resort. Moreover, his claims that he shot his films from the ‘pave- everyday fears and obsessions, resulting from ment’s level’, rather than from any high point a being convinced that he has failed as a lover, tourist might occupy (see Lenarciński 1996). husband, father and professional man, and that The same rule as that governing construc- he is surrounded by enemies, never relinquish tion of the mise-en-scène applies to the use of their grip on his mind and they prevent him sound. Blocks of flats in Eastern Europe are from enjoying the sea and the sun. His ‘siege notorious for their acoustics: people who live mentality’ can partly be regarded as a legacy of there hear what their neighbours are doing, communism, when citizens were discouraged whether they want to hear it or not. Similarly, from cooperating with each other outside any Miauczyński has complete aural access to the structures approved by the state and were ex- lives of his neighbours. He hears their con- pected to ‘be vigilant’. Such an attitude, leading versations, the music that they listen to, the to social fragmentation, helped the communist authorities to govern and control the disgruntled 7 This change might be linked to Koterski’s relocation citizens, as shown in Bareja’s 4 Alternatywy from Łódź to Warsaw. Day of the Wacko is set in a nameless Street. Yet, Mauczyński remains homo real so- town, but we can guess it is Warsaw. cialism even in democracy: politically passive, 8 This class was endowed with a special mission and sta- negatively disposed to all types of politicians, tus during the period Poland did not exist as a separate state neurotic, even mad. as the creators of culture and models to be imitated by the rest of the nation. After World War II the importance of the The mise-en-scène conveys the idea that intelligentsia in the official political and cultural discourse the madness of Koterski’s protagonist is caused was undermined by their generally poor pay and the leader- ship role of the working class. The communist housing policy both by his private idiosyncrasies and the fail- led to a much greater mix of people belonging to different ures of the public sphere. In his films prior to social groups than in the West: engineers, teachers, even actors and factory directors tended to live in the same block Day of the Wacko, the flats and housing estates of flats as factory workers, builders and cleaners, often to the bear a resemblance to the places depicted by significant discomfort of the higher classes. However, in the Kieślowski, but they are typically darker and minds of the majority of Polish members of the intelligentsia, contrary to the official slogans, they remained the jewel in grimmer, as if they are made bleaker by the the national crown—its most precious asset. As a result of perception of somebody who utterly despises these factors in post-war years the intelligentsia experienced the greatest gap between, on the one hand, its perceived his environment. The director never misses the social status, dreams and aspirations, and on the other, its opportunity to show that the light in the corridor achievements and rewards which led to deep frustration.

243 noise produced by showers, children’s toys and conversations with the natives and instead household tools. What differentiates his block spends his time watching television and phon- or his perception of it from the average is the ing his Polish lover. It appears that, wherever fact that in his place noises are amplified and he goes, Miauczyński carries his ‘block’ with echoed. Moreover, Adam’s conviction that his him; it blocks him from any positive contacts neighbours or people working near his block are with people, sentencing him to be a perpetual noisy in order to get on his nerves encourages stranger. Koterski thus suggests, and I agree him to take revenge and be even louder. Some- with his diagnosis, that space is a human con- times a peculiar competition takes place to see struct, not only in the sense of being physically who can produce the most noise, which makes created by people but also, and perhaps more the lives of everybody involved in the contest so, mentally constructed. The assessments of utterly miserable. various elements or aspects of space, the mean- Camera-work is another means which ings of spatial divisions, are all culturally con- suggests that madness is all around Adam, but structed. he magnifies it through his paranoid attitude Koterski’s diagnosis explains the paradox to everything and everybody. It can usually be that, although the living conditions of Poles regarded as objective, but from time to time improved significantly over the period the films we also get slightly distorted compositions and discussed here were made, the well-being of his angled shots, which, since the times of The characters did not improve or even deteriorated. Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (Das Kabinett des Dr. It should be mentioned here that in post-com- Caligari, 1919), directed by Robert Wiene, munist cinema and other cultural discourses of have been regarded as signs that the images do this period, high-rise housing complexes have not represent the real world, but the mind of a much worse connotations than they ever had madman. Moreover, in House of Nutters (Dom before, being represented as hotbeds of all pos- wariatów, 1985) and Inner Life (two films sible misfortunes and social pathologies (see which most strongly emphasise the character’s Kalinowska 2005; Mazierska 2004). It feels madness), the protagonist is often lit in a way like the old negative spatial evaluations are not that distinguishes him from other people: he only still projected on the new times, but ‘en- cuts a darker, more shadowy figure. riched’ by new layers of criticism. One wonders In addition, realistic narratives are occa- whether the tower block will ever be redeemed sionally disrupted by scenes clearly belonging to in post-communist cinema and other discourses a different ontological order: dream, daydream on space. Perhaps, but to do so we need new or imagination. For example, in a scene in Day generations of film-makers and cultural histori- of the Wacko, Adam travels through his hous- ans, able to look at the urban space afresh, tak- ing estate without touching the ground, as if the ing into account such factors as, for example, law of gravity does not apply to him. There are the ecological dimension of living and the long numerous scenes in which people change into commuting time from the suburbs to the cen- animals or in which harmless animals are trans- tres of towns. formed into dangerous beasts. Such scenes suggest that Miauczyński leads his life largely in his head. It is worth adding that, unlike Bareja, Ko- terski does not idealise the West. In common with Kieślowski, the West is for him like the East or, perhaps, even worse. We see this in Ajlawju (1999), where Miauczyński receives a fellowship to study in the United States. There, however, he ends up in a housing complex similar to the one he left behind in Poland and becomes even more detached from his surroundings. He avoids

244 FILMS wybranych problemów poetyki i Hames. London, New York: Wallflower etyki. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Press, pp. 225–234 4 Alternatywy Street (Alternatywy 4), Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza dir. Stanisław Bareja. Poland, 1981 S t e i n e r, Peter 2000. The Deserts of E s s l i n, Martin 1968. The Theatre of Bohemia: Czech Fiction and Its Social Ajlawju, dir. Marek Koterski. Poland, the Absurd. Harmondsworth: Penguin Context. Ithaca, London: Cornell 1999 University Press Fo u c a u l t, Michel 1991. Discipline The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (Das and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. S t o k, Danusia (Ed.) 1993. KieЗlowski Kabinett des Dr. Caligari), dir. Robert Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Penguin on KieЗlowski. London: Faber & Faber Wiene. Germany, 1919 Books Talarczyk-Gubała, Monika 2007. Day of the Wacko (DzieД Зwira), Holý, Ladislav 1996. The Little Czech dir. Marek Koterski. Poland, 2002 PRL siő Зmieje! Polska komedia and the Great Czech Nation: National filmowa lat 1945–1989. Warszawa: The Decalogue (Dekalog), dir. Identity and the Post-Communist Trio Krzysztof Kieślowski. Poland, 1988 Transformation of Society. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge Wa l l i s, Aleksander 1971. Socjologia The Eighth Day of the Week (Ósmy University Press i ksztafftowanie przestrzeni. dzieД tygodnia), dir. Aleksander Ford. Warszawa: PIW Poland, West Germany, 1958 J a n i c k a, Bożena 1997. Moje kino. Misior.—Kino, no. 3, pp. 18–19 Wiśn i e w s k i, Cezary 1973. Komedia Every Rose Has Its Fire (Nie ma róŠy grozy obyczajowej.—Kino, no. 7, bez ognia), dir. Stanisław Bareja. K a l i n o w s k a, Izabela 2005. pp. 12–16 Poland, 1974 Generation 2000 and the transformating landscape of new Polish Z w i e r z c h o w s k i, Piotr 2005. House of Nutters (Dom wariatów), cinema.—KinoKultura, Special Issue Pőkniőty monolit. Konteksty dir. Marek Koterski. Poland, 1985 2: Polish Cinema, November (http:// polskiego kina socrealistycznego. www.kinokultura.com/specials/2/ Inner Life (Ēycie wewnőtrzne), Bydgoszcz: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu kalinowska.shtml) dir. Marek Koterski. Poland, 1986 Kazimierza Wielkiego Lenarcińs k i, Michał 1996. Życie The Man from M-3 (Czffowiek z M-3), z poziomu chodnika.—WiadomoЗci dir. Leon Jeannot. Poland, 1968 dnia, January 31 Marriage of Convenience L e w e n s t e i n, Barbara; M e l c h i o r, (MaffŠeДstwo z rozsffldku), dir. Małgorzata 1992. Escape to the Stanisław Bareja. Poland, 1966 community.—The Unplanned The New One (Nowy), dir. Jerzy Society: Poland During and After Ziarnik. Poland, 1969 Communism. Ed. Janine R. Wedel. New York, Oxford: Columbia University Nothing Funny (Nic Зmiesznego), Press, pp. 173–180 dir. Marek Koterski. Poland, 1995 Łu c z a k, Maciej 2007. MiЗ. Czyli Teddy Bear (MiЗ), dir. Stanisław Зwiat wedffug Barei. Warszawa: Bareja. Poland, 1980 Prószyński i S-ka The Tenant (Le Locataire), dir. Roman Marszałe k, Rafał 2006. Kino rzeczy Polański. France, 1976 znalezionych. Gdańsk: Słowo/Obraz Treasure (Skarb), dir. Leonard Terytoria Buczkowski. Poland, 1948 M a z i e r s k a, Ewa; R a s c a r o l i, The Troublesome Guest (Kffopotliwy Laura 2003. From Moscow to Madrid: goЗŚ), dir. Jerzy Ziarnik. Poland, 1971 Postmodern Cities, European Cinema. London, New York: I.B. Tauris What Will You Do When You Catch Me? (Co mi zrobisz jak mnie M a z i e r s k a, Ewa 2004. zffapiesz), dir. Stanisław Bareja. Domesticating madness, revisiting Poland, 1978 Polishness: The cinema of Marek Koterski.—Journal of Film and Video, Vol. 56 (3), pp. 20–34 REFERENCES M i o d u s z e w s k a, Zofia 2006. C o a t e s, Paul 1999. The curse of the Społeczna architektura blokowisk. law: The Decalogue.—Lucid Dreams: 40-latek Jerzego Gruzy i Alternatywy The Films of Krzysztof KieЗlowski. Ed. 4 Stanisława Barei.—Kwartalnik Paul Coates. Trowbridge: Flicks Books, Filmowy, no. 56, pp. 154–168 pp. 94–115 P r z y l i p i a k, Mirosław 2004. D a b e r t, Dobrochna 2003. Kino Dekalog/The Decalogue.—The moralnego niepokoju. Wokóff Cinema of Central Europe. Ed. Peter

245