A surrealistic fourteen minutes

Video Quartet (2002)
by Christian Marclay (born 1955)


Four screen projections, thousands of different scenes from various movies, one piece of art.

For his work Video Quartet the New York based artist and experimental musician Christian Marclay collected thousands of film clips with musical instruments, singing, dancing and other forms of sound. He amazingly edited these clips together, resulting in a surrealistic 14 minutes.

Four different screens next to each other play four different scenes at the same time, quickly alternating, sometimes returning, but for the full 14 minutes it almost seems like these scenes were meant to be together. Scenes of famous and less famous movies from the whole century, instruments varying from the piano and guitar to the saw, genres from Jimi Hendrix to Maria Callas, combined with other sounds like humming, tap-dancing and screaming connect surprisingly well. Two or three instruments become an orchestra, with a singer they form a band, all sounds become one and even the images seem to relate to each other as if all movie makers, actors and musicians have been working together in this project.



Video Quartet is displayed in Tate Modern, London, in the wing “States of Flux.” This wing is devoted to early twentieth-century movements like Cubism and Futurism, which “broke with traditional ideas of picture making, seeking a more dynamic and fractured visual language to represent the complex reality of modern life and the machine age.” (http://www.tate.org.uk/) The work of Christian Marclay is an example of contemporary artists that have been influenced by these earlier movements. It shows the different layers of a movie, it mixes several cultural genres and it shows the relationship between sound and vision, between music and daily life.

The lesser of all evils

Centre-right? Centre-left? All left? Or ‘Christian-social’?

Last night the results of the Dutch elections came in. However, this does not mean that the new government can start today…

Most likely, the new government will be a coalition of losers. The biggest party, the Christian Democrats of the present Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, or Harry Potter, lost three seats. The second party, the Social Democrats, lost 10 seats and the former third party, the Liberals, lost 6 seats. Negotiations for the coalition will start tomorrow…

Harry Potter

Both the Christian Democrats and the Social Democrats have made a move to the centre the last years. It is therefore striking that their smaller and more radical versions came out of this election as winners.
The Christian Union is more conservative in ethical issues such as euthanasia, but is much more social than the CD. Balkenende, who has been trying to win the sympathy of George W. Bush, seems to have lost sight of Christian values of brother love in the 'war against terrorism'. The CU won the seats the CD lost.
Traditional voters of the SD have abandoned this party in favour of the Socialist Party of Jan Marijnissen, nicknamed ‘the wizard of Oss’ after his hometown. One group that did this by large is the Turkish community, that was not grateful when SD leader Wouter Bos fired a Turkish employer because he refused to acknowledge the Armenian genocide of 1915. The SP experienced a historical victory from 9 to 26 seats in Parliament.

Another winner is Geert Wilders, who rose from 1 to 9 seats. This means that over 600,000 people voted for “more courtesy, lower taxation and less Islam”.

Am I happy with these results? I guess I am, in a way.

Although I am not a Christian Democrat, I believe that between Bos and Balkenende the latter would make a better Prime Minister. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t mean a good Prime Minister. A man that kisses Bush’s ass, supports the war in Iraq and, as the only EU leader, called the process against Saddam fair and the death penalty ‘fitting’ would never have my sympathy. But at least he is consistent. Bos lost his credibility completely and I don’t think he deserved to win.

Although many people seem to think Wilders is a clever man and by voting for him spread more hate and division in the Netherlands, I was relieved to see that many, many more people have some common sense and see that a social policy would be in the best interest of everyone.

Although I would like to see the SP in government as a result, unfortunately the votes are not that easy to translate in a coalition. To listen to the votes would mean to include the winners in government, but this is easier said than done.

I was glad to hear that Marijnissen refuses to work together with the CD, even though this means the SP is doomed to serve another 4 years in opposition. In theory the biggest party does not have to be included in the coalition, but it would be a bit undemocratic not to do so. I was also glad to hear non of the parties want to work with Wilders and his ‘Party of Freedom’. Remains the CU, and a coalition between the CU, the CD and the SD is the best possibility at this moment. And this might not even be that bad. The CU is too small and the liberal laws of for example euthanasia, gay marriage and drugs to settled for the CU to make a difference in these issues, but the small party could put some social pressure on the two big centre parties.

So, although I would never vote for any of these parties and although this is not at all an ideal government, considering the possibilities, the present tensions in the Netherlands and the rise of extreme right, this is by far the lesser of all evils.

Tsunami

Since the rise of Pim Fortuyn 4 years ago many right winged power seeking populists in the Netherlands thought: I can do that too! Let’s start my own party, scare the people with terms like “tsunami of immigrants” and “terrorism” and they will vote for me!

Sadly enough, they were right. In the upcoming national elections of this Wednesday three such parties participate. One of them is the “Partij voor the Vrijheid” – Party for Freedom of mr. Geert Wilders. His haircut makes it very hard for me to take this guy serious, but unfortunately there are many more reasons to fear him.


Just a few of his party standpoints are: to make national history and national identity prominent in education, the right of preventive frisking, the discard of the Dutch Senate, an important part of our democracy, more roads and planning to the expense of green areas, no new EU members, no new Mosques and Moslim schools and the inclusion of Christian/Jewish/humanist culture in the constitution. Oh, and of course a stop on immigrants and lower taxations.


According to the latest polls this guy will win about 6 seats in parliament. After a quick calculation, this means that, based on 12 million voters and a minimum of 60% turn up, over 300.000 people are voting for the Party of Freedom. Who’s freedom? For the thousands of Muslims that have been living in our country for decennia? For the disabled people that now “have to work for their allowance”?

Do people know what they are voting for? Or do they just hear the word “immigrants” and is that enough? Either way, this seriously frightens me. Of course “tolerance” was a myth all along. But the hostility and selfishness of so many of my fellow Dutch people sickens me. It makes me glad to be away from it for a while.

Afraid to be scared

I always thought I wouldn't be scared. That I would go, right away. I mean, I am not a very scared person in general. I don't mind walking around in dodgy area's, at night, alone. Rumours about shootings and mafia don't stop me. Homeless junkies never made me run away. It might be naive, but better naive than locked up at home.

Of course there is a difference between a dodgy area in Rotterdam, London, or even Istanbul, and a warzone. I do realise that the chance of getting in to trouble in Afghanistan might be slightly bigger than in the banlieue of Paris. Still, I thought, and actually I still think that I would feel more excitement than fear. But what will I do if I end up in some actual fighting? How will I react on the sound of firearms around me? What if I get to see bloody situations? I don't think the army would be very pleased if they have to deal with not just their own job but with a fainted journalist as well.

A few lectures the past couple of weeks made me realise that such things will happen, for sure. I guess I knew this al along, but the personal stories of journalists made me truly realise. How do you prepare for that? You get a special training, of course, but how do you prepare mentally? I guess you can't. And maybe you shouldn't try.

Today we got a lecture on the International News Safety Institute. In the past 10 years, 1000 journalists were killed, and most of them were murdered. Most of them were local journalists, so not foreign correspondents. I guess that's comforting news for my worried parents... The worst part of this news is that journalists don't just die in war because it's war, they die because they are journalists and often not just seen as objective reporters. Even worse, some journalists appear to believe they are not... a Dutch cameraman in Afghanistan run out of battery and "with nothing better to do" he picked up a gun and started shooting.

Whatever state of panic I might find myself in, I am pretty sure at least that won't happen to me. But again: what would I do?

The thing that a female journalist in Iraq looks back at as her worst experience as an embedded journalist is not the fighting. It was that she could not shower for three months and because of the lack of a toilet she had to go 'in the desert with the entire British army watching you.' Those are the things you can't prepare for, and the things you'd rather not know beforehand...


I still think I won't be scared. By now, I am just afraid I will be once it's too late to return.

Review

Why is it that so many people decide to do research about their own country?

When I wrote my thesis on Northern Ireland last year, I discovered that most of the literature on the subject is written by Irish people. The same turns out to be true for South Africa. I find this very admirable. Im not even from a country that is in war and/or strongly divided, although slightly disturbed, but still I find it very difficult to give a balanced view on the Dutch situation. Of course I know that there might be more than one Muslim fanatic in the country, and I do know that Theo van Gogh was far from campaigning to throw all Muslims out. But when I read an article about "dark forces", that is not clear in what this is but suggests that it has to do with the Muslims, I don't even feel like trying to be balanced at all. Where do I come in this story?

Actually, the best books on Dutch history are not written by people from the Netherlands. And the best book on the current political situation is written by a Dutch journalist that has been living in the USA for the past 30 years. So it is a Dutch thing than? Are we not capable of distancing ourselves from the subject? Or are we just not interested at all?
How do you do research on a subject that includes yourself?

Dark Forces

"After a turbulent four years, including not just two political murders but a string of slightly different governments and the voters' rejection of the European Union constitution, the Dutch would like a period of calm. That may boost their Harry Potter - but only if there are no more scary confrontations with dark forces."
(Economist, November 11th-17th 2006, p. 48*)

What does the writer mean by "dark forces"? The murderers of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh? The first was murdered by a left winged environment and animal rights activist, the second by a Dutch Maroccan. The Economist writes that "Theo van Gogh, a film-maker who was rude about Islam" was murdered by a "Muslim fanatic". It is obvious who is the dark force in this sentence.
This murder was absolutely horrific, and like other Dutch people I was shocked to feel freedom of speach can be dangerous, but to call Theo van Gogh "rude about Islam" is an understatement. He regularly called muslims "goat fuckers". And many people agreed with him.

So what is the dark force in this case? One muslim fanatic or a country full of people that are campaigning to throw all "goat fuckers" out?


* The article is on the coming Dutch elections, in which the current Prime Minister, nicknamed Harry Potter, has a good chance.

A Blogger's World

I’ve been thinking about it for a while now. Subjects, theme, style, audience… I mean there is a lot to consider before you create a blog. And I did not even mention the most obvious consideration yet: why? Would anyone be interested in what I have to say online? Is this important at all? The reason blogging is so popular might have more to do with the writers than with the audience, since the existence of a blog does not depend on any commercial interest. Anyone can blog, so everyone blogs. People like to have their say and the internet is a perfect place to drop it. And if there are just a handful of people reading it, it’s enough.

So I surrendered… I am blogging. Not because I have anything particularly important to say. I am blogging for blogging’s sake.

It’s a blogger’s world. And who am I to deny that?