— ikas,who Willimanyothers and wecanaddheretheheavily fthologized home-movie maker, whom it goes withoutsaying — isalmostexclusivelythe fatherofthehouse createdheartfelt cuments ofthe families, friends and Sail FrailCiSCO ntsbig Cinematheque andsmallthatmadeuptheir cs. By hiding behind a hand-held, handcrafted sensibility lich privileged the humble aspirations ofthe amateur(both in me and style), these diarists Program NoteS were le tocornerthe market on both truth and subjectivity. Casual- 99 ss signified not only that the subjects of these 1 1 films San Francisco Cinematheque 1991 Program Notes Productionand Layout: Laura Poitras Michelle Sabol Written and Researched by: Jerome Carolfi Kurt Easterwood Susanne Fairfax Albert Kilchesty Crosby McCloy Jenny Perlin Lynne Sachs Eric S. Theise © Copyright 1991 by the San Francisco Cinematheque, a project of the Foundation for Art in Cinema. No © material may be reproduced without written permission from the publisher. All individual essays to the individual authors. San Francisco Cinematheque, 1991-92: Staff: Steve Anker,ArtisticDirector David Gerstein, ExecutiveDirector Albert Kilchesty, AdministrativeAssistant Laura Poitras, Michelle Sabol, Program Coordinator Board ofDirectors: Eric S. Theise, President Allen Sally Lynn Hershman Lynne Sachs Scott Taylor Susan Vigil Contents Introduction v 1991 Program Notes 1 Film and Video Maker Index 97 Title Index 99 Introduction TESTAMENT TOAN ORPHANED ART Film criticism is blessed with its share ofquaint dogmatic conventions, two ofwhich are "Ten Best Lists" and "Decade In Review" analyses summing up those years' achievements. With true underground elan, American experimental film has perverted these tried-and-true methods ofappreciation. Since roughly 1972 (the last two decades) the refrain echoing from all corners of the art-culture establishment has been that 'avant-garde' or 'experimental' filmisdead, a thingofthepast, oratbestsurvivesweaklyin theaftermathofits previous"Golden Age." Critics who wrote seriously about experimental film in earlier years as well as those who came of age studyingworkby majorfigures ofthe '50s and '60s helped perpetrate this myth by dismissingall buta few new films and artists, chosen as tokens because their aesthetic was easily recognizable or because they had obvious cachet. socio-political Infact,nothinghasbeenfartherfromthetruth. Thepast20yearshaveseenanexplosionofremarkablefilmswhich expanded therange, deepened thesubtlety ofexpression, andoften surpassedtheartisticexpressionoftheearlier generations' "masterworks." Ironically, it isjust those sanctified butstill crea—tive filmmakers from the so-called "Golden Years" who have most painfully experienced this blanket disregard their newest (and in many cases most mature) works have likewise been summarily dismissed. As Stan Brakhage recently said "There is no questionthatthefilmsmadeduringthelast 10yearshavesurpassedeventheworkproducedduringthe '60s." But no one here has noticed. Why thisneglect? Thesexy noveltyofavant-gardeor"underground"films hadwornoffby theearly 1970s; early breakthroughsinsubjectandtechnique(usesoffound-footage,hand-manipulatingfilmmaterial,optical-printing, using one's private life as a creative springboard, exploiting controversial taboo subjects, exploring formal propertiesforaestheticexperience,etc.)becamefamiliarandabsorbedintothe largermediaculture; arigidcanon of'great' directors hadbeen establishedbyJonasMekasandhiscohortsin NewYorkCity andhadbeenaccepted around the world; films were becoming more difficult to make and exhibit, and remained useless as collectable commodities;Americahadbegunaconservativebacklash(asevidencedbytheNixonyears)thatmetnoresistance from theexhaustedandconfused 'counter-culture'; and theveryexistenceandvalueofan avant-garde itselfwas under attack. Because of these reasons, there were no emerging filmmaking 'stars' or even members of the established filmmakingelitewho feltempowered toshoot theirmouthsoffandtakecenterstagewith thecolorful flamboyance reminiscent of such luminaries as Markopolous, Brakhage, Anger, J. Smith, H. Smith, Jacobs, Sharits, Conner or Mekas himselfduring the Golden '60s. Therehavebeensomeambitiouscuratorialendeavors,especiallyduringrecentyears, thatrejectedthisperception ofbarrenness by embracing new avant-garde films with enthusiasm. David Schwartz ofthe American Museum oftheMovingImagemountedanextraordinary54programseriesin 1988titledIndependentAmerica, 1978-1988. Nelly Voorhuis curated a strong package of 33 films and film performances, A Passage Illuminated: The American Avant-garde Film, 1980-1990 , which toured the Netherlands in 1990. Most recently, Austrian filmmakers Martin Arnold and Peter Tscherkassky curated Unknown Territories:American IndependentFilm fora festival held in Vienna duringJune 1992, an insightfulseries of9 programs containing40 films thatoffered an overview ofsome of the best American experimental films produced in these years. As Artistic Director of the San Francisco Cinematheque. I was invited to curate three programs for the festival and advise them in their otherselections. Although this briefseriescouldn't represent thecreative breadth ofeven the few filmmakerswho were included, let alone the many others who were left out because of pragmatic constraints or aesthetic preference, it did illuminate many striking developments in American avant - garde cinema: — & • super-8 other 'home' formats as serious art The humble, fragile, and cheap home-movie gauge attracted numerous filmmakers (despite and to some measure because ofits crude technology) to embrace and articulate its special aesthetic qualities. Majornew voices were drawn to this professionally dismissed medium, making it the major outlet for their creative expression. Other renowned artists and filmmakers were drawn to super-8'simmediacyandintimacy,creatingnumeroussubstantialworks. Allofthemworkedinthefaceofcritical and curatorial disdain, but they succeeded in producing a body ofvibrant films which pulsated with the hand of the individual inways unseensince thedaysofMarie Menken and Brakhage's early work. Super-8mm's demise now seems imminent (thanks to Kodak), but new films will continue to be made until stock is completely 8mm unavailable, and there has been a spirited rise in the creative use of video and video Pixelvision. — •riseofwomenfilmmakers AsidefromtwoearlyAmericanpioneers(MayaDerenandMarieMenken), the few women making experimental films prior to the 1970s tended to be undervalued relative to their male counterparts. Carolee Schneemann, Barbara Rubin, Storm De Hirsch, Gunvor Nelsonand ChickStrandall made invaluable but generally ignored contributions during the 1960s. Women filmmakers have now emerged as a dominant force over the past two decades. Although their concerns have varied to extend well beyond gender issues, many are overtly concerned with their position as women and have addressed their experiences in their work. Womenhaveemergedaggressively toassertthemselvesasartistsand radical filmmakersand havegrasped an equal role in today's film culture. — •confrontingtraditionalgenresandconventions UnlikeourEuropeancounterparts, Americanavant- garde filmmakers have historically denied and stood in opposition to conventional genres and forms. This defiance led to a clarity of purpose and urgency which produced the astonishing body of 'pure cinema' masterworks of the '60s. Many newer filmmakers have boldly engaged mainstream forms and values, and in typical American fashion, haverudely taken thefamiliarfarbeyond propriety. Othersdrew inspiration from past masters but developed their own idioms in new and compelling fashion. — • intensified creativity by established figures New breakthrough work by filmmakers whose earlier achievements were lauded have mostly gone unnoticed. Stan Brakhage, whose Mothlight, DogStarMan, and Window WaterBaby Moving are in museums throughout the world has produced a body of films over the past ten years that staggers credulity for its volume, thematic and stylistic range, and unprecedented mastery. Many others have remained creatively vital,expandingandenriching theirart, includingartists like ErnieGehr, Gunvor Nelson, Yvonne Rainer, and KenJacobs, among the many others who havecontinued tocreate new marvels that give the lie to the beliefthat theirs is a moribund generation. For the first time in my nearly 25 years as filmmaker, curatorand teacher, the American experimental or avant- garde filmmightin factproveto beincrisis. Costsareskyrocketing, labservicesaredeteriorating, andmany have begun workingwith alternative (oradditional) mediums such as video. One thing however, is clear. Artistswill continue to be excitedby the moving image, andby the film medium in particular, until raw stockand projectors no longer exist. Steve Anker/San Francisco, April 7, 1992 Originally written for Blimp magazine, #20, Summer 1992, to accompany Unknown Territories: American IndependentFilm VI 1991 Program Notes