Film, Risk, Contingency

This evening at the Film Studies Workshop, Mette Hjort from the Lingnan University of Hong Kong, will be speaking on "Film and Risk," based on a book of the same title she is editing. Just a cursory read of her introduction chapter drew me in considerably. Film-making involves many risks: economic, political, environmental and personal. The book project she and others are working on aims to understand how this risk is perceived and experienced by individuals involved in filmmaking and viewing, and how it is managed (or ill-managed) in the film industries and in the wider society. Their methodology is a combination of ethnography (of the film industry), oral history, textual analysis, and sociological study.

The choice of "risk" as the organizing concept is an interesting one. On the one hand, "risk" dialogues with the much older concept of "contingency" in film studies, yet treats "chance-happenings" with more human agency and responsibility than how "contingency" is traditionally treated. On the other hand, "risk" is a term used often in the context of politics and economics, therefore it allows us to speak about film experiences in relation to other social experiences. Further more, while risk involves personal rationality, calculation, and responsibility, it also involves the power structures that distribute the risk. (In Hollywood cinema, for example, stunt actors have to perform risky activities in place of real actors; In China, certain film projects damage environment, and the risk is shouldered by the residents who live there). Therefore, thinking about risk and cinema raises questions not only with regard to "ethical accounting" in filmmaking, but regarding all our cultural activities and how they interact with real-life politics and society.

For me, this is a particular attractive line of thinking about cinema. I think of cinema, theater and literature as laboratories for us to experiment with ideas about ourselves and about the world. The film studies I have read seems to deal much with trauma, suffering, memory, history, but not enough with other operative ideas such as risk. There is so much more to be done in this field--what a happy reminder from Mette Hjort's visit!

the stake of indie film exhibition

In the past week, I have been struggling with an article I have to write for a conference in mid-April. The conference is on Chinese cinema, and I was assigned the topic of "independent cinema circuits."

Compared to American indie films, Chinese indie cinema is doubly disadvantaged. In the U.S., indie cinema must establish itself as an alternative to the capital-intensive Hollywood. In China, besides having to compete with blockbuster productions, indie cinema has to deal with the fact that it cannot be shown in any official cinematic space, whether in cinemas, or on television. With little capital and no official cinematic space, it is a miracle that this cinema has survived and grown. My paper is to recount this story of survival and growth. What have been the strategies of survival? Who have been the crucial supporters? How has this particular history of survival affect the forms and concerns of this cinema? How has this cinema opened new spaces, and how has it adapted to suit the old ones? How does this survival story serve as a legacy for filmmakers and audiences?

Thinking about my own daily experiences, I must confess that on this campus, the place that brings me the most happiness has been the Harvard Film Archive. If HFA, Coolidge Corner Theater, Brattle Street Theater, and Kendall Square Cinema were to close down within the next years, this place would become for me infinitely impoverished. Of course, I could shun film altogether and read, but the loss would not be simply the loss of good cinema. The loss would be this: facing dominance, the society failed to produce alternative, failed to issue its counter-act. If in cinema, alternatives were gone; then very quickly, the same thing would happen in other fields as well. Each field is a battleground that the society can't afford to lose.

The Chinese indie cinema has been a success story so far. Yet the success may not continue if lessons were not learned from its history. From new indie films made in China, I can see how hard it is to master the cinematic art and to find one's own voice. It takes years to build that intuitive sensibility that can lead to best directorial decisions on the spot. If making a film is already so difficult, then making viable a cinema is just equally if not more difficult. One needs to learn to adapt, insist, follow and invent--and do all of these at the right time, with the right people. Learning about how to make this cinematic alternative viable in China is one way of learning how to make many good things viable in that country, in this world.

Film studies may not be the most practical field that contributes to livelihood. Yet it is one of the fields that try to make sure there are nice things in the world. If HFA, Brattle Street Theater, Coolidge Corner and Kendall Square are so indispensable for me, then I shall renew my faith in this discipline, and go back to my writing!