Das Leben der Anderen

     Spree Day being in the way, we did not have time to discuss last weeks movie. Even though I am guessing most of you have already seen it, lets refresh our memories with a brief summary. The story is set in East Berlin six years before the fall of the Wall. Captain Wiesler, a zealous and devoted Stazi officer is given the mission to spy on a prolific East German writer named Georg Dreyman. Dreyman is being suspected of collaborating with the West and of helping fellow artists that are opposed to the regime. Wiesler a lonely and dull man, spends his days listening to Dreyman and his girlfriend Christa-Maria (she is the real trigger for the investigation on Dreyman, in fact, the Culture Minister is infatuated with her and wants to get rid of Dreyman for that reason). He eventually gets attached to the couple and decides to not only ignore the numerous insinuations of treason but he also goes as far as protecting them. His efforts will not save Christa-Maria but the writer gets away free of charge. Eventually, Wiesler's actions are suspected by his superiors and he is retrograded to the lowest post possible. However, after the wall has collapsed and the surveillance files are open to the public, Dreyman discovers the truth and decides to write a novel about the man who saved his life. 

      This movie is remarkable for several reasons. The tension is palpable from end to finish and the viewer gets sincerely attached to the morbid Wiesler character. However, what makes it really stand out is its account on human nature. It shows that no matter what the greater cause is, personal gain and human greed are the motivation of many political actions. The minister is a perfect example of that. Dreyman would've been left alone if it was not for the minister interest in Christa-Maria. Also, the fact that the minister is able to comfortably reposition himself in the government makes the whole, East-West conflict almost a risible political issue, instead it becomes more a coq match between men of power whose only interest is to maintain this power. This of course can be tied to our discussion on Adorno and Horkheimer: the ruling minority uses the good of the people as an excuse for personal gain. Feel free to elaborate on that!

The Dialectic of Enlightment

Friends, I feel like it is that time of the year, we can not avoid it any longer... We have to talk about the Dialectic of Enlightenment, also referred to as the most depressing and pessimistic essay of all time.  Adorno and Horkheimer's text may make you wonder if any of the choices you ever made in your life are actually your own. It might also make you feel like any of the taste you may have are the consequence of the domination mainstream media has over all of society. It will finally make you feel like every illusion of freedom of thought you may have has actually been implemented by the dominant minority that rules the world and that makes sure that you (as the proletarian majority) remains in servitude. Finally, if you are a Jazz fan there simply is no way out for you.
Despite the slight will to hang yourself you might feel after reading it, the essay makes great observations about society and the way it works. This is why I will try to go over some of the main points that are being conveyed by citing some of their most relevant comments.

"Movies and radio need no longer pretend to be art. The truth that they are just business is made into an ideology in order to justify the rubbish they deliberately produce. They call themselves industries; and when their directors’ incomes are published, any doubt about the social utility of the finished products is removed."
"...the basis on which technology acquires power over society is the power of those whose economic hold over society is greatest."
"...any trace of spontaneity from the public in official broadcasting is controlled and absorbed by talent scouts, studio competitions and official programs of every kind selected by professionals. Talented performers belong to the industry long before it displays them."
(talking about entertainment such as film, radio and television) "The man with leisure has to accept what the culture manufacturers offer him. Kant’s formalism still expected a contribution from the individual, who was thought to relate the varied experiences of the senses to fundamental concepts; but industry robs the individual of his function. Its prime service to the customer is to do his schematising for him."
This is a very interesting part of the essay that directly relates to us because it treats of film: "The details are interchangeable. ... the hero’s momentary fall from grace (which he accepts as good sport), the rough treatment which the beloved gets from the male star,..., are, like all the other details, ready-made clichés to be slotted in anywhere; they never do anything more than fulfil the purpose allotted them in the overall plan. Their whole raison d’être is to confirm it by being its constituent parts. As soon as the film begins, it is quite clear how it will end, and who will be rewarded, punished, or forgotten(...) Though concerned exclusively with effects, it crushes their insubordination and makes them subserve the formula, which replaces the work."
"In the culture industry this imitation finally becomes absolute. Having ceased to be anything but style, it reveals the latter’s secret: obedience to the social hierarchy". 


You get the general picture: repetition in film, popular music or television shows contribute to giving a false impression of reality and therefore make the masses easier to manipulate. By making the 99 percent believe in a reality that matches fiction, the dominant class can keep its hegemony. In fact, it feeds the masses, through media, with images of what it wants them to believe what constitutes happiness. The system works and soon the masses become blind to their servile state and their lack of freedom. Overall, this is how the two author justify the reason why Marxism failed and probably will always fail: people have been convinced to think that materialistic good and the comfort it brings are sufficient and more important than class equality and social justice.


If you are interested in reading the whole article, it is called Cultural Industry: Enlightment as Mass Deception. 
Here's the link: http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/adorno/1944/culture-industry.htm

Die Weisse Band (2009)

More film recommendations...

I was reminded by Daphne's post of this film I saw a few years ago in a German course. If you've ever seen any of Michael Haneke's films, you won't be surprised to know that this one is especially bizarre and creepy... and quite a commentary on the pre-war German life.

Die Weisse Band, Eine deutsche Kindergeschichte (The White Ribbon, A German Children's Story) follows the lives of the citizens of a suppressed Protestant north German village, Eichwald, in a period just before World War I (July 1913-August 1914). Strange murders, gorey deaths, and suicides accompany intense sexual and physical abuse of the children in the town.

In Oberösterreichische Nachrichten, Julia Evers called the film "an oppressive and impressive moral painting, in which neither the audience nor the people in the village find an escape and a valve from the web of authority, hierarchy and violence. [...] Everything in The White Ribbon is true. And that is why it is so difficult to bear."

I often try to avoid the Kracauer-ian analysis, but it is easy to suppose that Haneke created with this film a prequel to the story of Nazi Germany. It is fairly easy to predict that the dark, abused, oppressed 14 year-old boy growing up under violent authoritarianism (his father was an abusive pastor) in 1913 could have made an excellent violent, authoritarian Nazi in his 30's. Haneke comments on the allusion of the film to Nazism.

A must-see, I think.

Napola

Those in the Intermediate German class will have watched this recently during an evening film screening. "Napola," or "Before the Fall" as its English title goes by, is a film about an elite school for boys in Nazi Germany and the boy Friedrich Weimer's struggle to find acceptance and success in its harsh environment. I saw it for the first time several years ago and it remains a favourite of mine and something you all should see. Dennis Gansel directs, though his best known film is "The Wave" based on a adolescent novel.

Perhaps the most touching part of the film is the close, semi-homoerotic relationship that Friedrich (Max Riemelt) forms with Albrecht (Tom Schilling), another boy at the elite school. Their friendship exists despite immense differences in their personalities and forces within the school that threaten to tear them apart. Ultimately, this friendship leads Friedrich to discover that Napola is not all he had thought it to be and that he in fact rejects many of the school's teachings. Here's the trailer for those that are interested, as well as one of the more touching scenes with Friedrich and Albrecht.

The Piano Teacher

Tis the season for film recommendations. After reading Arianna's post, I have a few more films I think you all might enjoy. We'll just choose one to start with. As Arianna mentioned in the comments, "The Piano Teacher" or "La Pianiste" is another superb piece directed by Michael Haneke that captures obsession, sexual repression, and the human condition of loneliness and suffering. I don't know what it is about the insane artist completely consumed with their work, but this seems to a theme popping up in many on the films I've viewed recently. Proving herself to be one of the best actresses of our time, Isabelle Huppert is marvelous in the role of the masochistic piano teacher and really brings the character to life. Haneke is quoted saying "[Huppert] has such professionalism, the way she is able to represent suffering. At one end you have the extreme of her suffering and then you have her icy intellectualism. No other actor can combine the two."

Take a look at the trailer here. Music plays an important role in the film, the music being that composed by Schubert and Schumann with some of the songs even containing German lyrics (see, there's still the German connection and this post, therefore, does not deviate completely from the purpose of this blog!). I'll warn you however, this film is seriously disturbing. Know that before casually loading it on Netflix some evening.

Funny Games

This post was inevitable, right?

I picked up a copy of the American version years ago, watched it sometime last semester. (It should be noted you need to kind of be in the right mood for this film. Like, totally down for a disturbing night. So it took me quite a while to get around to it.) Now with a bit of German under my belt I decided to watch it auf Deutsch.
For those who don't know, this is a film by Michael Haneke first made in Germany in '97 then remade shot-by-shot with American actors - Tim Roth, Naomi Watts, Brady Corbet & Michael Pitt.

I'm currently watching the last 15 minutes and it is making just as little sense as the American version. I literally have no idea what you are thinking, Haneke! But it's perfect. I don't think there's enough written about this by real film scholars. There are some so-so reviews. This one is good but I am utterly unfamiliar with this "Brechtian" influence.
It all makes a lot more sense with some thought and this interview, but at surface value the style of this film just kills me. And the perfection of the shot-by-shot remake is incredible.

My mom watched this because she loves really sick horror films - but she didn't really like it that much or appreciate it. I was only ever interested in it for two reasons - the fact it was a shot by shot remake, and the fact that Michael Pitt is in it. I called her up after I watched it the first time and went on and on about the self-reflexivity and how confused I was about the whole ending. She didn't get it. But anyone who has ever taken a film class should be intrigued by this film.

Also, I really, really love the opening sequence.

PS
The most curious thing ever - I watched this streaming on Netflix and you know how when you scroll backwards it goes frame by frame? Well, it was suddenly Michael Pitt and Naomi Watts even though I'm watching the German version. WHAT?!

interview with Rosa Van Praunheim on Rent Boys

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,747267,00.html