Starting from the economically opportunistic backing of the Zionist project, the director delivers a nuanced account of the complexities surrounding the ‘Palestinian issue’.
EN
“In terms of Flat Jungle's effect, Van der Keuken made a more political film than his commissioners had anticipated, and it raised a sharp political discussion of the issues. This throws a new light on patronage, as does The Palestinians (1975) which Van der Keuken says he had tried to avoid making for quite some time: "I was forced to take sides as a political filmmaker. It also involved my whole attitude to filming. I didn't want to reduce the film to only the content, the subject or the political theme."
The politics versus art dilemma kept van der Keuken away from the Palestinian project as long as his mind was more geared to individualistic, aesthetically oriented projects. Now it seemed a challenge he could no longer avoid. He produced a powerful, politically committed statement in support of the Palestinians' right to self-determination, which was what the Palestine Committee in Holland wanted. For van der Keuken, it meant working more at the level of experience, with exposition and self-expression playing a greater part than kaleidoscopic montage. The displaced Palestinians living in camps in Lebanon are caught between Zionism and the Lebanese ruling class. Imperialism cuts across the Jew/Arab divide, and the film places responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the European ruling classes who allowed anti-semitism and nazism to flourish. Palestinian camp life, makeshift hospitals, military training of children, and a funeral of villagers murdered by the Israelis punctuate this story. It is characterized by deep emotion and images of daily routine, shot with van der Keukens characteristic calm and perceptive eye. It is framed by an opening sequence showing documentary photographs with a neutral voice telling the history of Palestine since the end of the 19th century. The closing sequence shows a lively class in a camp where a teacher goes through these same points with his children — old facts renewed by a current reality where knowledge of them, personally and politically, becomes a matter of life and death.”
Cohn Chambers1
“The very crucial difference between The Palestinians and the films that I did before is that with a subject like The Palestinians your moving space is much smaller. In a more pretentious film there is an element of play – the game between the filmmaker and every spectator which is much more in the forefront than the documentary content itself. In The Palestinians the element of play is at a less powerful level than the element of direct speech by the people concerned – and that is a moral choice. It is important to talk of reality in terms of relationships and not just facts. Normally they would be formal relationships, but here the form has shifted in some senses to the content – so that they become relationships of content. So the film has to deliver a set of relationships to the audience which make sense and I think that at that level the film works. As a film it is not authoritarian. It is not saying to the audience, you have been misinformed, this is the way it is. But it brings out a set of more or less disconnected images in a certain structure/construction of relationships and an audience can make sense, or get a certain tone out of it. That's more important than what is being told exactly. Because I believe that lists of facts – and this is my experience when I see documentary films – are useless, hard to remember. But an overall image stays. To be able to communicate what is happening you have to downplay the facts somewhat to get people to realize that they are looking at a construct; the construct is there and if the spectator is interested or aware, he will see the constructs.”
Johan van der Keuken2
- 1Cohn Chambers, “Johan van der Keuken: Political and Experimental,” Jump Cut, no. 34, March 1989.
- 2“Johan van der Keuken: A Dossier,” in Ciné-Tracts: A Journal of Film, Communications, Culture, and Politics 1, nr. 4 (Spring-Summer 1978), 16.
FR
« Avec Les Palestiniens, qu’on classera néanmoins dans les films “engagés” de son auteur ; on sent que JVDK est allé en quelque sorte au bout d’une ligne de fuite – aller voir la “guerre du peuple” là-bas, parce que la “révolution” semble ici hors d’atteinte – en se posant d’emblée la bonne question : comment parler avec des images sans donner de mots d’ordre, sans se soumettre au pouvoir des langues jamais innocentes ?
D’autres s’y sont essayés, Godard le premier, dans son fameux Ici et Ailleurs, tourné cinq ans plus tôt, dont le montage s’est achevé en cette même année, démontrant avec le recul l’impossible simplicité des choses. Qu’on se souvienne seulement : “Pas une image juste, juste une image.” Mais ici, le propos est ailleurs, dans l’expérience concète de ceux qui sont les victimes, dans la dignité de ce peuple en état de lutte, qui accepte l’image qui est donnée de lui. On perçoit par là-même une certaine forme d’admiration de JVDK pour ceux qui refusent la défaite : il les filme de manière directe, cadrant au plus près, dans un souci d’universalité. Et ce n’est pas tant la misère dans son aspect le plus visible qui transparaît que le processus d’exploitation dont JVDK s’emploie à décrire les tenants et aboutissants dans une approche globalisante du contexte, en termes historique et économique – d’où le recours à des archives filmées, ce qui est plutôt rare chez lui – pour montrer que tout se tient. Peut-être est-ce là que réside au fond la démarche essentielle de JVDK : rendre à l’image sa provenance, son plein d’autres images. »
Jacques Kermabon1
- 1Jacques Kermabon, “Johan van der Keuken: le monde à portée de main,” Bref: le magazine du court-métrage 39 (hiver 1998): 25.
