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.