Marilyn,
I don’t disagree with anything you wrote. Five people agreeing are not
always right. My post was colored by the fact that I believed the
initial story, finding it frightening that an instructor would be
pressured out of a job for showing a film. I don’t know of any films I
have seen the showing of which should ever be judged as sexual
harassment. Sexual harassment is very serious and very bad, and the term
should not be demeaned by application with speech acts not directed at a
particular person.
I taught in the same school as Stan Brakhage for quite a few years.
Perhaps he could be a little difficult at times, but he is not even
remotely like the unnamed person I was referencing. I was pleased to
sometimes try to smooth out small conflict between Stan and the
administration. There are intense and dramatic personalities; then there
is the occasional abuser, and that is the person I was referring to,
someone who in the course of what should have been an objective
conversation routinely resorted to frequent personal insults – among
many other bullying tactics.
One year I got a grant that allowed us to bring in fifteen different
filmmakers from the US and abroad. As the list came together, I was
warned that this or that filmmaker would be very difficult. In every
case but one, they were not. Kenneth Anger was gentle, even sweet, and
did exactly what he had agreed to do. A few had special requests, but
they were not hard to meet.
One of the fifteen /was/ difficult. When he met with his student
projectionist in advance of his public show, the projectionist
suggested, from the projector deck, that they needed to agree on a
signal between them if the filmmaker felt a film was out of focus. The
filmmaker said something like, "Why don’t I just call out, 'Hey, you
fuck, focus it. '" The projectionist took exception to being referred to
as a "fuck," and almost walked out. To me, this is not a matter about
which reasonable people can disagree; it is bullying.
That is not to say that I have any idea what the five were referring to.
Maybe I would agree; maybe not.
Remember too that I was responding to someone who was taking sides,
apparently accepting the initial narrative, suggesting that the artist
in general is so abused that he should teach dishonestly. Maybe in a
totalitarian dictatorship? We are not there yet, thankfully.
I don’t know what I would think about the MassArt situation if I had
been there. It is just that I was embarrassed to be thinking ill of
MassArt from having heard and accepted one side of the story. Now I am
neutral. I always did admire Switzerland for not having been in a
foreign war since 1515.
Fred Camper
Chicago
On 4/16/2018 3:31 AM, MARILYN BRAKHAGE wrote:
I don't know all the details of this story (and it doesn't sound as if
anyone else in this thread does either), but I just wanted to make a
few observations about the conversation generally:
"Are the five signatories lying?" you ask. One might also ask, are the
five signatories engaging in a sort of 'group think'? And/or is it
possible that /both/ sides of the tale are telling "the truth" from
their own perspective and chosen emphasis? ... My (admittedly sketchy)
understanding is that Saul Levine received a student complaint about
the content of a film, a student feeling "unsafe" perhaps, or
"sexually harassed?" (as is increasingly the charge that is made, it
seems, when someone is presented with something of a sexual nature
that makes them uncomfortable.) Any such complaint would necessitate
that the administration investigate it. They would be obliged to do
that. This chain of events taking place within a backdrop of long
standing contention between Saul and other faculty members and/or
administrators may have led to an encounter that caused Saul to decide
that all things considered he'd rather just quit. Thus, they can say
that he was not forced to quit because of his film, that leaving was
his choice -- yet he still has a story to tell about what led to his
decision to leave. The administration says he was not forced to quit,
and paints him as an ongoing problematic personality who is now
"bullying" them. I don't know precisely what they mean by that, but he
has his story to tell, from his point of view, and has every right to
tell it. I don't think that telling your story of a contentious
relationship with others, and even naming the people you were in
argument with, should necessarily be considered "bullying." And in a
five versus one argument it is not necessarily true that the five must
be right and the one must be wrong. They have their experience and
views and he has his. ... As for the longstanding conflicts, no doubt
an ability to compromise and to 'get along' with people is helpful in
any walk of life -- but on the other hand, there are some things that
people of integrity will not compromise on. They may fight for awhile,
they may decide to move on, and they may also have an argument they'd
subsequently like to present to a larger audience. So be it. But the
idea that artists are likely to be particularly and uniquely
difficult, self-absorbed people who are impossible to get along with
is a cliché that I reject. There are, of course, a lot of horribly
difficult artists. And there are a lot of horribly difficult
non-artists. And academic institutions are also fairly notorious for
their petty, territorial squabbling, which has nothing to do with art
whatsoever.
As a raised example of an artist teaching, Stan Brakhage did, yes,
show his own films as a part of his teaching practice, but he never
taught film/making/. This is because he considered his method of
making films, which involved deep dives into the unconscious, not
"teachable" in the ordinary sense, and potentially dangerous, and
probably because he wanted to keep his filmmaking practice generally
separate from his teaching. ... I don't recall Stan "getting into
trouble" with the school over the nature of his completed films,
though I do recall some students complaining, after he showed Kenneth
Anger's Scorpio Rising, that he was showing them "pornography." And on
another occasion when a university colleague (not a filmmaker or
artist of any kind) filled in for Stan during an absence, she told
/his/ Film History class that Stan's idea of film history was only
about what mattered to him in his own filmmaking (which was totally
untrue; as many know he was a voracious consumer of films of all
sorts, and his film history classes were extremely varied and
fabulously illuminating). But academics often have very narrowly
focussed areas of interest also, and can be just as competitive and
controlling in their personalities as anyone else.
Without going into any further specifics, it is also generally true, I
think, that people with large, passionate, or dramatic personalities
or temperaments are very easy to target for blame when tempers flare
and disagreements become intense. People will find it easy to believe
that it must have been that person's fault. But there are times when
that is not the case. So who knows?
Fred, you also say that we should take care to make accusations about
the abridgment of academic freedom only when it has really occurred.
True, but it might also be worth noting that such abridgments can
creep in in insidious ways and we need to be vigilant about the
effects of any dominating agenda of any particular group of people,
and the increasingly narrowing notions about what is and is not
acceptable and open for discussion, let alone viewing, in our academic
institutions. I think these are real, not fanciful dangers.
Marilyn Brakhage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Fred Camper" <[email protected]>
*To: *"Experimental Film Discussion List" <[email protected]>
*Sent: *Saturday, April 14, 2018 1:43:51 PM
*Subject: *Re: [Frameworks] Forwarded from Massart Faculty
So it sounds like you are unquestionably accepting that Levine was
forced out due to the nature of his filmmaking?
Are the five signatories of that statement lying?
Of course it is true that it is in the nature of some kinds of art
making that the artist will believe that she or he has found /the
/truth, /the /path, the only correct way of making films or other art.
Jessica comments on a facet of this, though I think in some other
kinds of artists authoritarianism is not to be found, or will be
successfully hidden. But for some of the most original artists, this
belief is central to their practice. One only has to read the writings
of Dziga Vertov and Robert Bresson, both filmmakers who felt so
strongly that their mode of filmmaking was the only true way that they
used use words or phrases to refer /only /to their own films to the
exclusion of all others to emphasize the correctness of their choices,
for examples. One can only speculate as to the nature, if language
differences could be bridged, of a "faculty meeting" to discuss the
correct forms of cinema education with a faculty consisting of
Eisenstein, Vertov, Epstein, Bresson, Kubelka, Brakhage, Rainer, and,
oh, say, Roberto Rossellini, Nicholas Ray and John Ford.
But at the same time, Stan Brakhage, Peter Kubelka, Robert Breer,
Hollis Frampton, George Landow/Owen Land, Ernie Gehr, Larry Jordan,
Ken Jacobs, Larry Gottheim, and of course others, all taught
filmmaking for many decades. I name these in particular as filmmaker
whose work I like, in most cases hugely. All showed their own films as
part of their teaching practice. Does anyone know of cases in which
these filmmakers got into trouble with their schools over the nature
of their completed films, or for their expression of their ideas about
their art? Some have troubles, but more due to the nature of their
personalities, is that not right?
With so many nations sliding into dictatorship, we who are privileged
to live in relatively free nations should appreciate, and try to
preserve, what we have, taking care to make accusation about the
abridgement of academic freedom only when it has really occurred.
What you are advocating implies an inner split that is probably
impossible for most of us to put in practice in the long term, but is
also fundamentally dishonest. Hired to teach one's beliefs, and not
directed to conceal them, the filmmaker is then to spend a career
lying about them? Is that even fair to the students, or to the school?
Would such a course not make the world a fundamentally worse, rather
than better, place? Haven't we seen enough lying, especially when it
is not absolutely necessary?
Avoiding academia entirely might be a good idea, if one can manage it.
I think Markopoulos's films only got greater, after he left teaching
and the U.S. I certainly felt freer in many ways when I could survive
as a freelance writer, working mostly for a for-profit newspaper, than
when I turned to teaching at allegedly high-minded not for profit
institutions. At the same time, I have been relatively free to work my
own beliefs about cinema and about art even in predesigned courses in
which I have to teach certain elements I did not decide on (though
also do not oppose). And I feel sure that for many,
alternative-to-teaching jobs might be far worse than teaching.
Fred Camper
Chicago
On 4/14/2018 12:40 PM, Francisco Torres wrote:
I suggest one course of action to avoid such problems- Total
boycott of academia. Find other sources of employment if possible.
If academia is the only alternative in terms of earning an income
then withhold your true work from the academic audience. Create
safe, vanilla works for the administration and the student body
and another body of work for yourself and your true audience
(outside academia). Also withhold your true wisdom from your
academic work, keep it secret. Moreover, feed an official artistic
line to your students and co-workers. Play it safe. After all, it
worked for the alchemists for hundred of years.
2018-04-14 1:34 GMT-04:00 lady snowblood
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>:
I’ve been observing this situation and reflecting on the need
for competing skills inside one person:
- adherence to personal vision in the studio
- the flexibility of ego to collaborate well with colleagues
and students in the educational environment.
I’ve seen behavior like this in art teachers the past,
although not to this degree. And I assigned it as lots of
skill in one area (authorship) fewer skills in another ...
It’s hard. I’m reminded that “you can’t say authoritarian
without author”. I also re-invest in the notion that I have to
keep a good buffer between my formal creative practice
(viciously adhering to the vision) and the social skills for
creating resilient learning environment (relax, communicate,
provoke, nourish, discover together etc).
Jessica
* * * * *
Jessica Fenlon
artist : poet : experimental : http://sixth-station.com
flickr <https://www.flickr.com/photos/drawclose> : vimeo
<http://vimeo.com/jessicafenlon> : instagram
<https://www.instagram.com/port.manteaux>
On Apr 13, 2018, at 8:13 AM, John Muse <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Another turn of the screw:
https://www.artforum.com/news/massart-embroiled-in-controversy-over-resignation-of-filmmaker-saul-levine-74966
j
On Apr 12, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Jon Behrens
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thank you Ed
For sharing this
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 11, 2018, at 8:22 PM, Deana LeBlanc
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Emotion vs. reason? His live video got us PUMPED
and struck a cord- we who were watching were
cheering, (crying a bit admittedly). Even had
musicians riding along to its It speaks to
something bigger and is effectively cathartic- the
performance, the storytelling, while also being a
testimony of information. Two things going on at
once, important to distinguish. But this also
makes sense- the statement from Mass Art Faculty-
glad to hear from them.
On Wednesday, April 11, 2018, Ed Halter
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hey Frameworks
Felt I should share this announcement that was
forwarded to me from the Massart faculty.
------------
TO THE MASSART COMMUNITY:
The faculty and staff of the Film/Video department
demand that Professor Saul Levine stop his
lies about recent events at Mass Art and his
cyber-bullying against his colleagues.
It is because of Professor Levine’s very public
attacks and misrepresentations that we feel
obliged to correct his version of the complaints
against him.
He has bullied his colleagues and created an
abusive working environment over many years.
He has derailed and destroyed important
discussions about urgent departmental and curricular
issues.
This is NOT an issue of academic freedom. No one
at Mass Art made any effort to censor or
punish Professor Levine for screening his film or
any other film he has shown over the years.
No one forced him to retire.The decision to retire
is entirely Professor Levine’s.
We recognize Professor Levine as a brilliant
artist and programmer and are thankful for his
contributions to the department and to Massart.It
is extremely painful to see his toxic rant
against the department, besmearing the College and
insulting us by name while claiming
himself as the victim.
As artists, teachers and mentors, it is our
responsibility to stand up when we are bullied and to
treat each other with respect. It is also our duty
to foster an open, respectful, and collegial
environment for our students.
Soon-Mi Yoo, Chair
Ericka Beckman, Professor
Gretchen Skogerson, Professor
Joe Briganti, Studio Manager, Video Area
Kim Keown, Studio Manager, Film Area
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
j/PrM
*************************************************
john muse
visual media scholar
haverford college
he/him/his
http://www.finleymuse.com
http://www.haverford.edu/faculty/jmuse
http://haverford.academia.edu/JohnMuse
*************************************************
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
_______________________________________________
FrameWorks mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
