战斗伦理:丹尼尔·施密德根据法斯宾德的《垃圾、城市与死亡》改编的电影

Q1 Social Sciences Cultural Politics Pub Date : 2020-11-01 DOI:10.1215/17432197-8593494
A. Koutsourakis
{"title":"战斗伦理:丹尼尔·施密德根据法斯宾德的《垃圾、城市与死亡》改编的电影","authors":"A. Koutsourakis","doi":"10.1215/17432197-8593494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The publication of Rainer Werner Fassbinder's play Der Müll, die Stadt und der Tod (Garbage, the City, and Death; 1976) constitutes one of the major scandals in German cultural history. The play was accused of being anti-Semitic, because one of its key characters, a real estate speculator, was merely called the Rich Jew. Furthermore, some (negative) dramatis personae in the play openly express anti-Semitic views. When asked to respond, Fassbinder retorted that philo-Semites (in the West Germany of the time) are in fact anti-Semites, because they refuse to see how the victims of oppression can at times assume the roles and positions assigned to them by pernicious social structures. Fassbinder's vilification on the part of the right-wing press prevented the play's staging; subsequently, in 1984 and 1985–86 two Frankfurt productions were banned due to the reaction on the part of the local Jewish community. A similar controversy sparked off by the film adaptation of the play Shadow of Angels by Daniel Schmid. During the film's screening at the Cannes Film Festival the Israeli delegation walked out, while there was also rumor of censorship in France. Gilles Deleuze wrote an article for Le Monde titled \"The Rich Jew\" defending the film and the director. Deleuze's article triggered a furious reaction from Shoah (1985) director, Claude Lanzmann, who responded in Le Monde and attacked the cultural snobbery and \"endemic terrorism\" of the left-wing cinephile community. Lanzmann saw the film as wholly anti-Semitic and suggested that it identifies the Jew—all Jews—with money. While the author acknowledges the complexity of the subject, he revisits the debate and the film to unpack its ethical/aesthetic intricacy and propose a pathway that can potentially enable us to think of ways that political incorrectness can function as a means of exposing the persistence of historical and ethical questions that are ostentatiously resolved. He does this by drawing on Alain Badiou's idea of militant ethics and Jacques Rancière's redefinition of critical art as one that produces dissensus.","PeriodicalId":35197,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Militant Ethics: Daniel Schmid's Film Adaptation of Fassbinder's Garbage, the City, and Death\",\"authors\":\"A. Koutsourakis\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/17432197-8593494\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:The publication of Rainer Werner Fassbinder's play Der Müll, die Stadt und der Tod (Garbage, the City, and Death; 1976) constitutes one of the major scandals in German cultural history. The play was accused of being anti-Semitic, because one of its key characters, a real estate speculator, was merely called the Rich Jew. Furthermore, some (negative) dramatis personae in the play openly express anti-Semitic views. When asked to respond, Fassbinder retorted that philo-Semites (in the West Germany of the time) are in fact anti-Semites, because they refuse to see how the victims of oppression can at times assume the roles and positions assigned to them by pernicious social structures. Fassbinder's vilification on the part of the right-wing press prevented the play's staging; subsequently, in 1984 and 1985–86 two Frankfurt productions were banned due to the reaction on the part of the local Jewish community. A similar controversy sparked off by the film adaptation of the play Shadow of Angels by Daniel Schmid. During the film's screening at the Cannes Film Festival the Israeli delegation walked out, while there was also rumor of censorship in France. Gilles Deleuze wrote an article for Le Monde titled \\\"The Rich Jew\\\" defending the film and the director. Deleuze's article triggered a furious reaction from Shoah (1985) director, Claude Lanzmann, who responded in Le Monde and attacked the cultural snobbery and \\\"endemic terrorism\\\" of the left-wing cinephile community. Lanzmann saw the film as wholly anti-Semitic and suggested that it identifies the Jew—all Jews—with money. While the author acknowledges the complexity of the subject, he revisits the debate and the film to unpack its ethical/aesthetic intricacy and propose a pathway that can potentially enable us to think of ways that political incorrectness can function as a means of exposing the persistence of historical and ethical questions that are ostentatiously resolved. He does this by drawing on Alain Badiou's idea of militant ethics and Jacques Rancière's redefinition of critical art as one that produces dissensus.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cultural Politics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cultural Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/17432197-8593494\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cultural Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/17432197-8593494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:莱纳·沃纳·法斯宾德的戏剧《垃圾、城市与死亡》的出版;1976年)构成了德国文化史上的重大丑闻之一。这部戏被指责为反犹太主义,因为它的一个主要角色,一个房地产投机商,仅仅被称为富有的犹太人。此外,剧中的一些(负面的)戏剧人物公开表达了反犹太主义的观点。当被要求作出回应时,法斯宾德反驳说,(当时在西德的)亲犹太主义者实际上是反犹太主义者,因为他们拒绝看到被压迫的受害者有时是如何承担起邪恶社会结构赋予他们的角色和地位的。右翼媒体对法斯宾德的诋毁阻止了这出戏的上演;随后,在1984年和1985-86年,由于当地犹太社区的反应,法兰克福的两部作品被禁止。丹尼尔·施密德的戏剧《天使的影子》改编的电影也引发了类似的争议。影片在戛纳电影节放映期间,以色列代表团退场,同时也有传言说法国要进行审查。吉尔·德勒兹(Gilles Deleuze)为《世界报》(Le Monde)写了一篇题为《富有的犹太人》(The Rich Jew)的文章,为这部电影和导演辩护。德勒兹的文章引起了《大屠杀》(1985)导演克劳德·兰兹曼的强烈反应,他在《世界报》上做出了回应,抨击左翼影迷群体的文化势利和“地方恐怖主义”。兰兹曼认为这部电影完全是反犹主义,并暗示它把犹太人——所有犹太人——与金钱等同起来。虽然作者承认这个主题的复杂性,但他重新审视了这场辩论和这部电影,以解开其伦理/美学的复杂性,并提出了一条途径,这条途径可能使我们能够思考,政治不正确可以作为一种手段,暴露那些被炫耀地解决的历史和伦理问题的持久性。他借鉴了阿兰·巴迪欧关于战斗伦理的思想,以及雅克·朗西特将批判艺术重新定义为一种产生分歧的艺术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Militant Ethics: Daniel Schmid's Film Adaptation of Fassbinder's Garbage, the City, and Death
Abstract:The publication of Rainer Werner Fassbinder's play Der Müll, die Stadt und der Tod (Garbage, the City, and Death; 1976) constitutes one of the major scandals in German cultural history. The play was accused of being anti-Semitic, because one of its key characters, a real estate speculator, was merely called the Rich Jew. Furthermore, some (negative) dramatis personae in the play openly express anti-Semitic views. When asked to respond, Fassbinder retorted that philo-Semites (in the West Germany of the time) are in fact anti-Semites, because they refuse to see how the victims of oppression can at times assume the roles and positions assigned to them by pernicious social structures. Fassbinder's vilification on the part of the right-wing press prevented the play's staging; subsequently, in 1984 and 1985–86 two Frankfurt productions were banned due to the reaction on the part of the local Jewish community. A similar controversy sparked off by the film adaptation of the play Shadow of Angels by Daniel Schmid. During the film's screening at the Cannes Film Festival the Israeli delegation walked out, while there was also rumor of censorship in France. Gilles Deleuze wrote an article for Le Monde titled "The Rich Jew" defending the film and the director. Deleuze's article triggered a furious reaction from Shoah (1985) director, Claude Lanzmann, who responded in Le Monde and attacked the cultural snobbery and "endemic terrorism" of the left-wing cinephile community. Lanzmann saw the film as wholly anti-Semitic and suggested that it identifies the Jew—all Jews—with money. While the author acknowledges the complexity of the subject, he revisits the debate and the film to unpack its ethical/aesthetic intricacy and propose a pathway that can potentially enable us to think of ways that political incorrectness can function as a means of exposing the persistence of historical and ethical questions that are ostentatiously resolved. He does this by drawing on Alain Badiou's idea of militant ethics and Jacques Rancière's redefinition of critical art as one that produces dissensus.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cultural Politics
Cultural Politics Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Cultural Politics is an international, refereed journal that explores the global character and effects of contemporary culture and politics. Cultural Politics explores precisely what is cultural about politics and what is political about culture. Publishing across the arts, humanities, and social sciences, the journal welcomes articles from different political positions, cultural approaches, and geographical locations. Cultural Politics publishes work that analyzes how cultural identities, agencies and actors, political issues and conflicts, and global media are linked, characterized, examined, and resolved. In so doing, the journal supports the innovative study of established, embryonic, marginalized, or unexplored regions of cultural politics. Cultural Politics, while embodying the interdisciplinary coverage and discursive critical spirit of contemporary cultural studies, emphasizes how cultural theories and practices intersect with and elucidate analyses of political power. The journal invites articles on representation and visual culture; modernism and postmodernism; media, film, and communications; popular and elite art forms; the politics of production and consumption; language; ethics and religion; desire and psychoanalysis; art and aesthetics; the culture industry; technologies; academics and the academy; cities, architecture, and the spatial; global capitalism; Marxism; value and ideology; the military, weaponry, and war; power, authority, and institutions; global governance and democracy; political parties and social movements; human rights; community and cosmopolitanism; transnational activism and change; the global public sphere; the body; identity and performance; heterosexual, transsexual, lesbian, and gay sexualities; race, blackness, whiteness, and ethnicity; the social inequalities of the global and the local; patriarchy, feminism, and gender studies; postcolonialism; and political activism.
期刊最新文献
Meditations on Writing Hell Transitional Justice beyond the Human Evocations of Multispecies Justice Tree Stories Ocean Justice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1