Film After Authority: the Transition to Democracy and the End of Politics Kalling Heck University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Wisconsin Milwaukee UWM Digital Commons Theses and Dissertations May 2017 Film After Authority: the Transition to Democracy and the End of Politics Kalling Heck University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.uwm.edu/etd Part of the Film and Media Studies Commons Recommended Citation Heck, Kalling, "Film After Authority: the Transition to Democracy and the End of Politics" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 1484. https://dc.uwm.edu/etd/1484 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by UWM Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UWM Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FILM AFTER AUTHORITY THE TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY AND THE END OF POLITICS by Kalling Heck A Dissertation SubmitteD in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English at The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee May 2017 ABSTRACT FILM AFTER AUTHORITY THE TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY AND THE END OF POLITICS by Kalling Heck The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2017 Under the Supervision of Professor Patrice Petro A comparison of films maDe after the transition from authoritarianism or totalitarianism to Democracy, this Dissertation aDDresses the ways that cinema can Digest anD extenD moments of political transition. By comparing films from four Different nations—the Italian Germany Year Zero, Hungarian Sátántangó, South Korean Woman on the Beach, anD American Medium Cool—in relation to iDeas Drawn from critical anD political theory, this project examines how anD why these wilDly Diverse films turn to ambiguity as their primary means to Disrupt the ravages of unchecked authority. By intervening in discussions of aesthetics and politics, this dissertation contends that ambiguous aesthetics has the capacity to help us see the worlD Differently, anD is therefore productive for any revolutionary undertaking. Accounting for questions of art anD authority more broaDly, this project examines the perhaps impossible task of creating a work of art that can at once create meaning anD reject its own authority. The significant conclusion of my project, then, is that ambiguity is a coherent response to the enD of authoritarian politics, but that its total rejection of authority always reDiscovers the Difficulties of inaction anD ineffectiveness that arise from the assumption that extension and waiting are the only solutions that can yield radical change. ii © Copyright by Kalling Heck, 2017 All Rights ReserveD iii For Mary iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………….1 I. AUTHORITY YEAR ZERO…………………………………………………………………...28 II. THE IMAGE THAT WAITS…………………………………………………………………68 III. THE END OF AUTHORITY, THE END OF DEMOCRACY…………………….109 IIII. FORCE, HOPE, AND DEATH…………………………………………………………..158 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………………...201 v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I’D like to first of all thank my aDvisor, Patrice Petro, for her support all throughout the process of writing this Dissertation. Her thoughtful notes always pusheD me in fruitful directions, and she is surely responsible for the success of this project, in so far as it is a success. I thank Elena Gorfinkel, whose aDvice anD encouragement propelleD this project at every stage, anD whose work continues to inspire my own. This project was initially inspired by discussions with Peter Paik, anD his aDvice anD provocations proviDeD many of the more interesting wrinkles to be founD here. Kennan Ferguson likewise was instrumental at this processes inception, in particular by virtue of his Political Theory seminar on the topic of Nature, anD he has continued to provide great insights along the way. Ivan Ascher, another political scientist who tacitly legitimizes my claims to political theory, also proviDeD great support, particularly via his seminar on Marx. Brian Price, whose presence and work has haunteD me longest of the figures here, was a major source of inspiration, as was the WorlD Picture community in general. At UWM anD elsewhere I have haD the opportunity to call a number of profounDly inspiring thinkers frienDs. These incluDe Adam Cottrel, Eric Herhuth, Mark Heimermann, Adam Ochonicky, Ali Sperling, anD GorDon Sullivan, all of whom greatly impacteD this work. This dissertation is DeDicateD to the memory of William Heck. vi INTRODUCTION Four Angels There are at least two versions of Jean-Luc Godard and Jean-Pierre Gorin’s Vladimir et Rosa (1971, creDiteD to the filmmaking collective The Dziga Vertov Group). The major version to have been distributed tells the story of the group of eight political activists chargeD for inciting to riot at the Democratic National Convention in 1968. Shot in the aggressive anD abstract style that the pair was known for at the time, the film explores the court case but refuses to report on either the case’s context or its outcome. It is insteaD content to vaguely allegorize the trial and to satirize the authority figures for their perpetration of what was surely a farce. Through bold colors, direct adDress, smash cuts, anD general DiscorD, the film, rather than Directly rebuking the case, renDers the trial totally incoherent, an abstract collage of competing images anD Dialogue that mirrors the nonsensical charges brought against the defendants. The seconD version is remarkably Different. The film’s chief financier Barney Rosset organizeD anD recorDeD a screening for two of the DefenDants from the actual case, the irreverent anD sarDonic Abbie Hoffman anD Jeffrey Rubin, anD recorDeD the results.1 DispleaseD with the film, the pair laugh anD yell at the screen, mocking its ambiguity anD its unwillingness to accurately represent the specifics of the trial. “It’s not keeping my interests” Rubin, towarDs the beginning of the film, posits, his heaD resteD in his hand. “It’s riDiculous,” he continues, as Hoffman laughs. This version of the film continues by cutting between GoDarD anD Gorin’s footage anD this new auDience of Hoffman anD Rubin, the auDio of the film hearD alouD in the theater linking the two spaces. The longer the film 1 Douglas Martin, “Barney Rosset Dies at 89; DefieD Censors, Making Racy a Literary Staple,” The New York Times (New York, NY), Feb. 22, 2012. 1 continues, the more frustrateD Rubin anD Hoffman become. The primary concern of these viewers moves at some point from speculation as to which characters in the film represent them anD their fellow DefenDants—an investigation that quickly leads nowhere—to a Discussion of the broaDer goals of the film. Hoffman at one point proposes, once familiar with the film’s style, that the major function of this film is to proviDe coDeD messages to The Weather Underground—a radical leftist group—laughing, but refusing details. While Hoffman continues to attempt to DecoDe the film’s hiDDen meanings, Rubin grows increasingly irritateD: “The trial was more exciting than this movie” he contenDs summarily halfway into the film. The major critique, however, comes via Hoffman, when responDing to an unhearD question: “Say we haD this film maDe in the miDDle of the trial, right?” he begins, We take it arounD say we organize Demonstrations at the enD of the trial. We take this film, we show it to a large group of young kids, you know, I don't get the feeling that they woulD want to like get involveD in like a TBA. Or if we showed it at a fund raising party I don’t think people would want to give us any money. I mean what coulD we Do with the film? Say if we haD it in the miDDle of… He is interrupted by the figure who asked the question, escalating the conversation by referring to what was, presumably, an unhearD accusation from Hoffman: “That Doesn’t make him a C.I.A. agent just because his films Don’t move anyboDy to do anything. You gotta have a little better connection than that even for my paranoia.” After a bit more Discussion, the topic is again broacheD when Hoffman continues, “He serves the interest of the C.I.A. with this move Definitely.” He is interrupted again, “So is he paid or unpaid?” the figure asks. “Yea, I woulD say paiD” Hoffman responDs. “PaiD?” “Yea, I mean there’s rumors of that.” 2 That Abbie Hoffman accuses Jean-Luc GoDarD of being paiD by the C.I.A. to proDuce a film so ambiguous that it unDermines the political potentials of this trial is striking, but helpful too in establishing the political Dynamics of ambiguity. That is, this accusation from Hoffman reveals (with some stress) the Distrust that so often meets ambiguity, a Distrust arising from the possibility for an ambiguous object to carry messages anD meanings that are Difficult to gather anD even more Difficult to control. This problem takes on particular immeDiacy in moments where political expeDiency is thought to be necessary. InDeed what Hoffman anD Rubin’s responses present are exactly the tensions that ambiguous cinema proDuces in moments that seem to call for a more “engageD” moDe of politics, which is the major theme of this Dissertation. For these reasons, I will address here the political potentials of ambiguity, its aDvantages as well as its Drawbacks, by examining the history anD trajectory of the cinematic moDe that has taken the title of art cinema. I will then explore this category of art cinema in relation to Walter Benjamin’s iDeas on weak messianism. Ultimately I will strive to show how ambiguity can function as a political category, a topic I further explore in the coming chapters. I unDertake this stuDy in the hopes of examining the value as well as the failings of the turn to ambiguity in the context of political turmoil, anD I Do so by Discussing four wilDly Different films that employ tactics similar to GoDarD anD Gorin’s.