Kerstin thank you so much for this information. English text here: The Haitian Rushes <http://johannjacobs.com/en/formate/the-haitian-rushes-by-maya-deren/>. There may be a trip to Zurich in my future unless the Whitney can be cajoled into giving space to Maya’s voodoo voice.
> On Aug 26, 2020, at 3:18 AM, Kerstin Schroedinger <kr...@zeromail.org> wrote: > > as far as i know > there is a project to do with the Jacobs Museum / Foundation in Zurich > Switzerland > to preserve the ‘Haitian Rushes’ > there was an exhibition there in 2016 > https://johannjacobs.com/de/formate/maya-deren-die-haitian-rushes/ > <https://johannjacobs.com/de/formate/maya-deren-die-haitian-rushes/> > > best > > Kerstin Schroedinger > schroedinger.blackblogs.org <http://schroedinger.blackblogs.org/> > +49 179 473 2258 > > > > > > >> On 26. Aug 2020, at 2:27 AM, David Baker <dbak...@hvc.rr.com >> <mailto:dbak...@hvc.rr.com>> wrote: >> >> Chrissie, >> >> If you would allow the discussion to expand to Black Lives Matter >> a film comes to mind I have only seen in an excerpt at Anthology on Jan. 26, >> 2010 <https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/arts/dance/28lost.html> >> as part of a program presented by Danspace Project, >> Maya Deren’s Unedited Haiti Footage. >> >> When I saw this work I was overwhelmed by its consequence. >> I was very familiar with the Ito/Winett edit of this material, >> Divine Horsemen: The LIving Gods Of Haiti (1954). >> However the experience I had with the fragment of Unedited Haiti Footage was >> very different, >> an order of cinematic magnitude I have never forgotten and always wished >> to see in its entirety. >> >> Immediately after the program I brought my ardor >> to this forum. >> Pip lent important information, >> >>> We screened the totality of Maya Deren's Haiti Footage on April 4th, 2004 >>> at 4pm in the Auditorium du Louvre in Paris. The screening was organized in >>> parternship with Anthology in the hopes of raising money to preserve the >>> footage. Jonas Mekas dedicated the screening to Jean Rouch. >>> >>> What was actually screened was 240 minutes of silent 16mm footage, the >>> complete unique print, the first and only time it has been screened in >>> Europe. The auditorium was full, so over 400 people saw this footage that >>> day. Nobody came forward with funds to preserve it. >>> >>> The footage is beautiful. It should be preserved - a new internegative >>> could be struck for a few thousand dollars and a print could circulate. >>> Deren never touched the footage or edited it our of allegiance to the >>> voudoun gods. >> >> >> >> Vociferous discussion ensued. >> >> Jonas Mekas in a rare appearance by way of Andy Lampert sent this: >> >> "Andy, please let all well-meaning but little informed enthusiasts know that >> the work on preserving HAITI footage has been going for several years now >> with Martina Kudlacek and myself in charge of it. Martina has put a lot of >> work into it, and has prepared a detailed description of materials , a plan >> for how to go about the preservation work, and a budget for doing that work >> which in 2005 was c.70,000 but I figure now it will be over $100,000. >> Martina is returning back to New York to continue the work this March, so it >> will be at that time that we'll have an updated budget and updated plan how >> to go about it (changing technologies have opened other choices and >> possibilities). In 2005 all my efforts to find suport for sponsoring the >> project ended on dead ears. It looks like it took an earthquaque and >> destruction of half of Haiti, to open some ears and eyes. No guarantee that >> this will also open the checkbooks, but all of you, excited well meaning >> people should know that I have never given up on any of the projects that I >> worked on, you should know that much about me by now. Maya's HAITI film will >> be preserved and made available to all. And so will be our LIbrary wing >> built too. On the completion of Anthology, our Cinema Cathedral, I have been >> working for thirty years. On completion of Maya's HAITI I have been working >> only for five years. Both cathedrals will be completed, I promise you that. >> But I want you to know that talking, no matter how enthusiastic and >> well--meaning, has not built any cathedrals yet. I need your concrete, in >> this case your money, to complete the two cathedrals. >> Jonas" >> >> Ten years later I am wondering how this ineffable work on such an >> extraordinary subject by an auteur as consequential as Maya Deren is still >> invisible, endangered, unknown. >> >> Your esteemed thoughts would be most appreciated. >> >> David >> >> PS Hannah Frank’s Frame By Frame matters to me too. >> >> >>> On Aug 25, 2020, at 5:35 PM, Chrissie Iles, Curatorial >>> <chrissie_i...@whitney.org <mailto:chrissie_i...@whitney.org>> wrote: >>> >>> Most importantly, what are we all doing to support Black filmmakers and >>> thinkers, and expand the discussion beyond the Eurocentric model to take on >>> the larger, more inclusive post colonial thinking that is now so urgent. >>> We’re in the middle of the biggest uprising in American history, and that >>> changes everything and honestly blows all this out of the water in terms of >>> what we need to be thinking about now. >>> Chrissie >>> >>>> On Aug 25, 2020, at 1:48 PM, Michael Betancourt >>>> <hinterland.mov...@gmail.com <mailto:hinterland.mov...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Bernie, >>>> >>>> Thank you for reminding me why I don’t get involved in these discussions. >>>> Not in decades ... but animation and avant-garde film is a topic that is >>>> of personal interest. So, let me begin by saying that there is no emotion >>>> in this response I’m writing. I'm not angry, upset or anything except >>>> (perhaps) a bit disappointed. But I’d done with this discussion since I >>>> recognize a pattern of "gas lighting." You can claim I'm being over >>>> sensitive, that's fine. I'm not interested. This is not the start of a >>>> flame or me walking away in a "huff" because you're "right" (I don't think >>>> you are, and I'm not), but simply my giving up on the discussion entirely >>>> as I have more important and useful to me ways to spend what time I have; >>>> if this seems rude or confrontational, I'm sorry, but that is not the >>>> intention here. This is me making a polite exit, one where I do not accept >>>> the behavior I have observed directed at me. >>>> >>>> So my response is simply, “No. I’m done.” >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> For readers who haven’t been following, or who don’t understand what I >>>> mean, go through the other posts. "Gas lighting" someone in a discussion >>>> is an attempt to make the person you’re “conversing” with feel like they >>>> don’t know what they’re talking about, to make them doubt their expertise, >>>> knowledge, ideas. It is an attempt to make the challenge posed by their >>>> comments present go away. Recognizing it is simple. It works like this: >>>> >>>> First, claim to have been unclear and explain a point that was perfectly >>>> obvious. This creates the sense that your comments have been misunderstood >>>> and makes the person being gas lighted doubt their comprehension. >>>> >>>> Then, deny (some or all) of what the other person has been said, >>>> dismissing it as irrelevant or incoherent. Ignore the rest. >>>> >>>> Next, drop in a few ad hominem asides during your comments that are >>>> irrelevant, but put the other person in “their place.” (These can be used >>>> to attach what you think are their credentials.) >>>> >>>> Finally, introduce a non sequitur argument phrasing it so it can be seen >>>> as an attack. Whether it's coherent or relevant doesn't matter so long as >>>> it becomes the focus of discussion. Feel free to contradict your earlier >>>> comments since it doesn't matter what you're saying so long as the person >>>> you're addressing feels they don't know what they're talking about and >>>> defer to your "expertise." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So as I said, I’m done with this discussion. Feel free to have the last >>>> word. >>>> >>>> Michael Betancourt >>>> Savannah, GA USA >>>> >>>> >>>> michaelbetancourt.com <http://michaelbetancourt.com/> | >>>> vimeo.com/cinegraphic <http://vimeo.com/cinegraphic> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 11:47 AM Bernard Roddy <roddy...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:roddy...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> Greetings, Michael. >>>> >>>> There was ambiguity in my sentence regarding Pip. When I wrote that I >>>> think "he" sees himself as doing philosophy, I am referring to Deleuze. >>>> >>>> There is way too much to try to address in your post. But whenever you >>>> introduce audiences, I think you are off track. Or, you are not talking >>>> about philosophical questions, whatever people teaching film studies might >>>> happen to say. >>>> >>>> There is a priority on narrative in Delueze. This I see as distracting >>>> given my priorities. And all these questions about language derive from >>>> literary cases of narrative. Remember Pasolini and the "cinema of poetry," >>>> which was supposed to conceive of cinema as unlike the written story? >>>> >>>> Of your quotations, the one from pp. 26 - 27 bears on narration. Deleuze >>>> seems to be asking what explains the appearance of narration when it >>>> appears. And he seems to be less inclined to adopt the terms from >>>> linguistics that were so common in discussion of cinema during the heyday >>>> of Barthes and semiotics. >>>> >>>> Only at the end do you take up what I find a manageable question, and the >>>> one at stake for me here. I wouldn't say the question concerns Deleuze >>>> exegesis. It was, rather, in what way are we going to think about >>>> animation? >>>> >>>> And yet, given the right focus, I would like to enjoy Deleuze's work. I >>>> just opened to p. 56, where he mentions Bergson and Husserl, and where >>>> this term "movement-image" seems to receive a definition. Think of >>>> movement as non-mental and image as mental. The long history of discussion >>>> around how the mind and body could interact comes back to the surface, but >>>> where "mind" is now "image" and the "external world" is represented by >>>> "movement." >>>> >>>> That's a history making its way into what we would probably appreciate >>>> more if it presupposed a little less. These are extremely attenuated >>>> summaries of chunks from modern philosophy. And with them Deleuze spins >>>> his own equally abbreviated thinking. >>>> >>>> For me, it was about the appearance of movement in cinema and how it is to >>>> be explained. But the cinema has offered a model for explaining the same >>>> appearance in everyday perception. So, what we have is a history of >>>> philosophy that has thought in terms like film strips offer (and long >>>> before cinema, as it happens). >>>> >>>> My reference to Husserl presents the alternative. You may want to think >>>> about differences between past and future frames, but you'll end up with >>>> nonexistent parts of something that is supposed to be presently observed >>>> (what is past is gone). So in Husserl we have an incredibly developed >>>> alternative nobody bothers with. (And who is really going to know what >>>> Derrida's thinking about Husserl involved? I mean, seriously.) >>>> >>>> Option 1: You understand time as if it is made up of moments that can be >>>> divided. The model is space. Option 2: You realize that you only perceive >>>> what is present. And you also realize that doing geometry isn't the same >>>> as drawing conclusions from your little sketches. In geometry, Husserl >>>> says, you work with essences. There is a point of contact with your >>>> sketch, but your basis for thinking is not empirical. >>>> >>>> And so we have Ariadne and the construction of space without temporal >>>> parts. We have geometry done on a grand scale. And we have an alternative >>>> for the person who shoots frame by frame her drawings of figures - or the >>>> navigation of her architectural designs. >>>> >>>> Bernie >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> FrameWorks mailing list >>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com> >>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >>>> <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> FrameWorks mailing list >>>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com> >>>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >>>> <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FrameWorks mailing list >>> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com> >>> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >>> <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FrameWorks mailing list >> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com <mailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com> >> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
