Indiewire: Filmmakers respond to the threat of censorship
Following the horrific act of terrorism last week in Paris and the recent domestic threats regarding "The Interview," Indiewire reached out to a select group of filmmakers for their thoughts regarding artistic freedom. This was our response:
We expect that the filmmaking community will respond to the Charlie Hebdo murders in a characteristically fragmented way, and that the gutsy filmmakers will continue to hang themselves out there like they always do. The conditions we're facing are nothing new: it has always taken a measure of bravery to play with volatile ideas, and to poke at ridiculous power structures. Calling people out on their shit can be a dangerous vocation, whether you're a serious documentarian or goofball provocateur. Reprisals come—just ask Laura Poitras, or, better yet, ask Theo Van Gogh's corpse.
Evading people who are trying to shut you up is just part of filmmaking. In our experience, the biggest enemies of free expression have not been balaclava-clad maniacs waving guns around, but bureaucrats and executives acting on behalf of some imagined audience that must be shielded… you know, for their own good. We've had partner organizations drop out on us because they didn't like our choice of subject matter, and we've lost potential funding because we wouldn't bend our vision to the whim of the people holding the money bags. It's not always easy to take the hard road and stick with your vision, but doing so teaches you to be self sufficient. A two-person crew doesn't need much from anybody, which means a two-person crew can walk out on a funder and still find a way to make the story they want to make.
Since the Charlie Hebdo massacre, we've been thinking a lot about a young man named Yaakov Baruch. Yaakov is a law professor of Dutch-Indonesian heritage who lives on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi. Yaakov's Dutch ancestors were Jewish, and he carries on their religious traditions to this day, despite the fact that Judaism is illegal in Indonesia. Yaakov practices openly, and, in doing so, often makes himself a target for the country's prominent Islamic extremist fringe. The higher the threat level, the more defiant Yaakov becomes. He serves as the de facto rabbi of a tiny synagogue in mountains of Northern Sulawesi, and walks around town in a yarmulke.
Yaakov is a brave guy, and in 2011 we decided that his bravery—and contradictions—had to be documented in our project "Empire." Others disagreed. Right before we were scheduled to shoot, the Indonesian NGO that was helping us coordinate the project dropped out, citing concerns over "cultural sensitivity." The cultural arm of the Dutch embassy in Indonesia also refused to support the project despite initially expressing interest. We later found out that the diplomat in charge of the decision had a reputation for stifling cultural projects he saw as potentially controversial (he now works as human rights advisor to the UN).
In the end, we found another organization that was willing to help us out. We shot the piece about Yaakov, and then exhibited it a month later in the Javanese city of Yogyakarta. Our venue was the Jogja National Museum, a beautiful space founded and run by Prince Wironegoro, a well-loved Muslim monarch and patron of the arts. On the night of our opening, we feared protests by the local chapter of the Islamic Defenders Front, a group of extremists who make it their job to beat up religious minorities and protest cultural events. They never came. Perhaps they didn't see our posters.
Since then, we've decided that the way to stay brave as documentary filmmakers is to film people braver than yourself. Some of it rubs off.
-Kel O'Neill & Eline Jongsma, January 12, 2015
Photo: Yaakov Baruch in Manado, 2011
dailybridgerton
stormborns
turnnoffyourmind
kaledo-art
annaxmalina
areudirty
izzy806
snowghoul
romaincrisis