Ten Years: Bibliography and Filmography

Bibliography:

Ten Years Hong Kong:

Blundy, Rachel. “Hong Kong’s dystopian film Ten Years screened to huge crowds across the city following overwhelming public demand.” South China Morning Post, April 2, 2016. https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/education-community/article/1932954/hong-kongs-dystopian-film-ten-years-screened-huge.

Carrico, Kevin. “Ten Years: An exercise in negative identity in Hong Kong.” Asian Cinema 28, no.1 (April 2017): 3-22.

Fang, Karen. “Ten Years: What happened to the filmmakers behind the dystopian Hong Kong indy film?” Hong Kong Free Press, July 10, 2017. https://www.hongkongfp.com/2017/07/10/ten-years-happened-filmmakers-behind-dystopian-hong-kong-indy-film/.

Lee, Edmund. “Controversial Hong Kong film Ten Years to be shown in cinemas in Japan, and team behind it are thrilled.” South China Morning Post, March 10, 2017. https://www.scmp.com/culture/film-tv/article/2077764/controversial-hong-kong-film-ten-years-be-shown-cinemas-japan-and.

Lee, Edmund. “Controversial Hong Kong film Ten Years to spawn international versions in Thailand, Taiwan and Japan.” South China Morning Post, August 16, 2017. https://www.scmp.com/culture/film-tv/article/2107012/controversial-hong-kong-film-ten-years-spawn-international-versions.

Shi, Wei. “Ten Years and the politics of fear in post-Umbrella Hong Kong.” Continuum33, no.1 (2019): 105-118. DOI: 10.1080/10304312.2018.1541164

Wu, Helena. “The Travelling of Ten Years: Imagined Spectatorships and Readerships of Hong Kong’s Local.” Interventions20, no. 8 (2018): 1121-1136. DOI: 10.1080/1369801X.2018.1460220.

Yau, Elaine. “Ten Years: Hong Kong film that beat Star Wars at the box office, and the directors behind it.” South China Morning Post, December 29, 2015. https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/film-tv/article/1895992/ten-years-hong-kong-film-beat-star-wars-box-office-and-directors.

Ten Years Thailand:

Buchanan, James. “Film Review: Ten Years Thailand.” New Mandala, December 20, 2018. https://www.newmandala.org/film-review-ten-years-thailand/.

Camia, Giovanni Marchini. “Ten Years Thailand Cannes 2018 Review.” The Film Stage, May 11, 2018. https://thefilmstage.com/reviews/cannes-review-apichatpong-weerasethakul-ten-years-thailand-offers-a-largely-bleak-vision-of-the-countrys-future/.

Ide, Wendy. “ ’10 Years Thailand’: Cannes Review.” Screen Daily, May 11, 2018. https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/10-years-thailand-cannes-review/5129197.article.

Lee, Maggie. “Film Review: ‘Ten Years Thailand’.” Variety, May 17, 2018. https://variety.com/2018/film/asia/ten-years-thailand-review-1202807160/.

Marsh, James. “Ten Years Thailand film review: four filmmakers consider their country’s future.” South China Morning Post, December 4, 2018.https://www.scmp.com/culture/film-tv/article/2176187/ten-years-thailand-film-review-four-filmmakers-consider-their.

Rithdee, Kong. “New Thai films set to premiere at Cannes.” Bangkok Post, April 12, 2018. https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1445278/new-thai-films-set-to-premiere-at-cannes.

Tsui, Clarence. “Ten Years: Thai adaptation of hit Hong Kong film to premiere at Cannes.” South China Morning Post, April 26, 2018.https://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/arts-music/article/2143262/hong-kong-hit-film-ten-years-adapted-japan-taiwan.

Tsui, Clarence. “How Ten Years Thailand, inspired by controversial Hong Kong film, reflects on history and politics.” South China Morning Post, May 14, 2018.https://www.scmp.com/culture/film-tv/article/2146040/how-ten-years-thailand-inspired-controversial-hong-kong-film.

Tsui, Clarence. “’Ten Years Thailand’: Film Review | Cannes 2018.” The Hollywood Reporter, May 11, 2018. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/ten-years-thailand-film-cannes-2018-1110751.

Yu, Richard. “‘Ten Years Thailand’ Is an Abstract Take On Societal Pressures in Modern Thailand.” Cinema Escapist, January 7, 2019. https://www.cinemaescapist.com/2019/01/review-ten-years-thailand-movie/.

Ten Years Japan:

Hsiang, Emily. “Review: “Ten Years Japan” Pictures Dystopia With Hopeful Undertones.” Cinema Escapist, January 9, 2019. https://www.cinemaescapist.com/2019/01/review-ten-years-japan-movie-dystopia/.

Ide, Wendy. “’Ten Years Japan’: Busan Review.” Screen Daily, October 8, 2018. https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/ten-years-japan-busan-review/5132936.article.

Kerr, Elizabeth. “’Ten Years Japan’: Film Review | Busan 2018.” The Hollywood Reporter, October 8, 2018. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/ten-years-japan-film-review-busan-2018-1150181.

Marsh, James. “Ten Years Japan film review: anthology about how country will be in 10 years.” South China Morning Post, November 19, 2018. https://www.scmp.com/culture/film-tv/article/2173902/ten-years-japan-film-review-hirokazu-koreeda-produced-anthology

Schilling, Mark. “ ‘Ten Years Japan’: Chilling and sharp, these five shorts are a must-see for fans of ‘Black Mirror’.” The Japan Times, October 24, 2018. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/culture/2018/10/24/films/film-reviews/ten-years-japan-chilling-sharp-five-shorts-must-see-fans-black-mirror/#.XNPgWRQzbcs

Van Haecke, Pieter-Jan. “Film Review: Ten Years Japan (2018).” Asian Movie Impulse, April 29, 2019. https://asianmoviepulse.com/2019/04/film-review-ten-years-japan-2018-by-chie-hayakawa-yusuke-kinoshita-megumi-tsuno-akiyo-fujimura-kei-ishikawa-2/.

Ten Years Taiwan:

Aspinwall, Nick. “INTERVIEW: ’10 Years Taiwan’ Directors Dish on Taiwan’s Future and Its Present.” The News Lens, January 26, 2019. https://international.thenewslens.com/article/112767.

Drillsma, Ryan. “‘10 Years Taiwan’ anthology to be screened around Taiwan this month.” Taiwan News, January 3, 2019. https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3609479.

Green, David. “FILM REVIEW: ‘10 Years Taiwan’ Peers Pessimistically Into an Unsettling Future.” The News Lens, December 26, 2018. https://international.thenewslens.com/article/110911.

Kao, Anthony. “Review: “Ten Years Taiwan” Reminds Us How Taiwan Has Problems Besides China.” Cinema Escapist, January 20, 2019. https://www.cinemaescapist.com/2019/01/review-ten-years-taiwan-movie/.

Marsh, James. “Ten Years Taiwan film review: speculative anthology paints bleak future for self-ruled Chinese island.” South China Morning Post, January 14, 2019. https://www.scmp.com/culture/film-tv/article/2181995/ten-years-taiwan-film-review-speculative-anthology-paints-bleak

Rosati, Adriana. “Film Review: Ten Years Taiwan (2018) by Lekal Sumi, Rina B. Tsou, Po-shun, Hsieh Pei-ju, Lau Kek Huat.” Asian Movie Pulse, April 28, 2019. https://asianmoviepulse.com/2019/04/film-review-ten-years-taiwan-2018/

Tsui, Clarence. “ ‘Ten Years Taiwan’: Film Review.” The Hollywood Reporter, July 13, 2018.https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/ten-years-taiwan-film-review-1126844.

New Political Cinema, Asia, and Beyond: TEN YEARS

In the aftermath of World War II, Japan embraced dystopian fiction and brought what Susan Sontag termed the “imagination of disaster” (1965) to world screens with classics such as Godzilla (1954), Rodan (1956), and Mothra (1961), among others. While the Ten Years franchise seems far from these monster fantasies, blending political allegory and social satire in speculative fiction set in the near future or a parallel present has literary as well as cinematic antecedents in Asia. Lao She’s Cat Country (1932), for instance, set in a society of cat-people living on Mars standing in for Republican-era China, predates George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) by over a decade. In Ten Years Thailand, Wist’s Catopia brings the force of the feline allegory to its critique of that country’s struggle with the constraints of the military and the controlling powers of the police. In fact, the Ten Years filmmakers, throughout the series, claim the right to be paranoid about a particularly bleak future they see in embryonic form in today’s Asia.

Hong Kong’s Ten Years sets the tone and also, arguably, pushes it to its extreme. Chow Kwun-wai’s Self-Immolator, for example, engages with hot-button Hong Kong taboos, including the erosion of “One Country, Two Systems” agreed upon by Britain and China in the lead up to the Handover of the colony in 1997, fears of anti-sedition national security legislation, anxieties surrounding Beijing’s influence on the territory through its Liaison Office, and the possibility of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) using the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) stationed in the HKSAR to quash dissent. Hunger strikes, police violence, and political kidnappings sadly have clear recent antecedents, and the image of the burning umbrella brings the film unmistakably into conversation with Hong Kong’s 2014 protests. In fact, all five segments allude directly to issues making headlines in mainland China that ignite Hong Kong fears including political assassinations, the treatment of non-Han minorities, the wanton destruction of heritage sites by real estate developers, contaminated food, laws suppressing Chinese dialects such as Cantonese, and extreme cases of the extraterritorial kidnapping and detention of booksellers. Indeed, the film serves as a superb introduction to the protests against proposed extradition legislation now debated in 2019. Casting a South Asian as the scapegoated “terrorist” in Extras also resonates with the plight of the Muslims in Xinjiang currently incarcerated using the same racist logic.

While critics do not see the same urgency in Ten Years Thailand, Japan, or Taiwan that catapulted the first omnibus Ten Years to box-office success in 2015, the films collectively voice the angst experienced in a region plagued by economic precariousness, political upheavals, geopolitical realignments, and seismic cultural shifts. While the places featured in the series suffer from their own local tensions as Chaiworaporn (Thailand), Coates (Japan), Chen (Taiwan), and Cheung (Hong Kong) point out in the essays collected here, the vignettes anthologized in each Ten Years collection also speak across borders to issues of common concern throughout Asia and beyond.

Stylistically, too, the films cover the gamut of cinematic expression found in the arthouse as well as popular cinemas of Asia from the “slow cinemas” of Taiwan and Thailand to the triad auctioneers of Hong Kong and the domestic melodramas of classic Japanese cinema so beloved throughout the region. Traces of Yasujiro Ozu, Hirokazu Kore-eda, Wong Kar-Wai, Tsai Ming-liang, and Hou Hsiao-hsien can be found across the Ten Years franchise, and, of course, Apichatpong Weerasethakul makes his own contribution to the Thailand omnibus. Several of these filmmakers, in fact, delved into speculative fiction. Notably, Kore-eda’s After Life (1998) imagines a limbo between the living and the dead; Wong Kar-Wai’s 2046 (2004) offers its own rather opaque image of Hong Kong’s future; Tsai’s The Hole (1998) envisions Taipei plagued by constant rain and a mysterious disease; Hou’s Millennium Mambo (2001) projects part of its story ten years into the future; and, Apichatpong’s contribution to Ten Years, Song of the City, captures the same feeling of temporal disconnection and mystically parallel existences found in his feature films including the recent Cemetery of Splendour (2015).

Speculative fiction often turns to youth as bellwethers for future dystopias or as flag-bearers of guarded optimism. The two extremes are seen in Local Egg (Hong Kong) in the viciousness of the organized vandals as well as the resistance expressed by a young bookworm committed to reading censored comics. Authoritarian control of uniformed youth finds satiric expression in Chulayarnnon’s Planetarium (Thailand) in which discipline operates like a computer game. Children in Kinoshita’s Mischievous Alliance (Japan) defy authority to liberate a horse while enduring the pain inflicted on them by a remotely-operated cyber-disciplinary system.

As the children in Mischievous Alliance find some relief in the woods beyond the reach of the punishing signal, the link between the fragility of both youth and nature becomes clear. At a moment of extreme crisis for the entire planet, it comes as no surprise that environmental themes play a major role throughout the Ten Years collection. Taiwanese aboriginal filmmaker Lekal Sumi sets his film The Can of Anido on Taiwan’s remote Lanyu (Orchid) Island to underscore the relationship of indigenous rights to the contamination of agricultural land, nuclear policies, and the excesses of capitalism. Lu’s Way Home also deals with rural Taiwan, the destruction of village life, and the degradation of the natural environment. In Tsou’s 942 (also Taiwan) breathable air is at a premium as it is in Fujimura’s The Air We Can’t See (Japan). Local Egg (Hong Kong) offers a rare glimpse of Hong Kong’s agricultural countryside besieged by intrusive government policies, and Wong’s Season of the End (Hong Kong) eerily alludes to rapacious urban development that exists on both sides of the Hong Kong-mainland Chinese border.

Season of the End’s response to this horrific destruction involves breaking down the quotidian environment into specimens for preservation. The human body serves as the ultimate object for the collection and as the final material resistance to the presumed end of the world. Eschatology and dystopian fantasy go hand in hand, and this theme intersects with grotesque visions of the disruption of the seasonal cycles of nature and human biology—generation and regeneration interrupted, distorted, or destroyed. The fragility of human life parallels the vulnerability of the entire natural world.

Hayakawa’s Plan 75 alludes to the Japanese film versions of The Ballad of Narayama (1958 and 1983), based on the 1953 novel, depicting the practice of “ubasute” in which the elderly are abandoned in a remote location, usually a mountainside, to die. Plan 75gives senicide a commercial twist by offering financial incentives to the seniors who opt into the “plan.” Given Japan feels the demographic shift in its population more acutely than the rest of Asia, anxieties surrounding the treatment of the elderly dominate Ten Years Japan. Although Tsuno’s Data ostensibly dramatizes the tension between personal privacy and difficulty of erasing digital footprints, it also uncovers the enormous communication divide that separates the generations in Japan when a daughter feels she has the right to invade her deceased mother’s privacy in order to get to the bottom of whether or not she had an adulterous affair.

Ishikawa’s Our Beautiful Country takes an initially humorous look at an elderly female designer addicted to virtual reality war games. However, as she bonds with the propagandist who rejected her poster design for the reinstatement of the military draft in Japan, the genuine prospect of the remilitarization of Japan becomes horrifically clear. The title of the film provides an ironic commentary on historical amnesia involving World War II and the deadly prospects of the resurgence of nationalism in the region. Ironically, the search for peace —imagined as a restful sleep— through technology also has a dark dimension as seen in entries such as Lau’s The Sleep (Taiwan) and Apichatpong’s Song of the City (Thailand). These filmmakers imagine a future best experienced while unconscious.

While generational divisions play an important role across the Ten Years films, race, ethnicity, class, and gender also make important contributions to the visions of the future presented by the filmmakers. Feminist scholars use the concept of “intersectionality,” developed by African-American legal theorist Kimberlé Crenshaw, to analyze the ways in which gender and other aspects of identity add up to more than the sum of their respect parts in hierarchal societies dominated by bourgeois, Western, white, heterosexual, cisgender men. While class, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and other markers of difference do not signify in the same way across Asia, the concept of “intersectionality” still may be useful in probing the dystopian futures found in Ten Years. Several contributions to Ten Years Taiwan, in particular, highlight the ways in which intersectional identities complicate regional visions of the future. Indeed, the Taiwan portmanteau boasts the most diverse collection of directors in the series, including two women, Rina Tsou and Pei-Ju Hsieh, an aboriginal filmmaker, Lekal Sumi, and a Malaysian immigrant Kek Huat Lau.

In Rina Tsou’s 942, a tear in the fabric of time and place enables a Taiwanese victim of sexual harassment working as a nurse in Indonesia to see her Indonesian counterpart abused by the man who employs her as a domestic helper. The film also includes a brief, but moving scene featuring a lesbian relationship between the young nurse and a fellow hospital employee with whom she shares a dormitory berth. The film manages to comment on heteronormativity, patriarchal privilege, environmental degradation, the feminization and exploitation of migrant labor, class and ethnic hierarchies in Asia as well as on the ongoing struggle of women working in environments in which sexual harassment and gender-based violence are endemic.

Pei-Ju Hsieh’s A Making Of takes a seemingly lighter look at the extended Chinese family.  As a self-reflexive view of the media industry, it offers a backstage perspective on the making of a commercial hawking frozen dumplings for the Lunar New Year holiday. Looking ten years into the future and assuming same-sex marriages have been recognized (confirmed in May 2019), a gay couple forms part of the family group. However, the commercial shoot cannot be completed because the crew has difficulty finding an infant to complete the multi-generational tableau. Although the film achieves a happy ending by locating a baby, the allusion to Taiwan’s declining birthrate and anxieties surrounding reproduction give the cheery patina of the consumer paradise and nostalgic familial portrait a darker side. With a small push, A Making Of could slip over the edge into the dystopian world of Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, in which a dramatic drop in fertility caused by pollution allows a demonically male-dominated culture of absolute patriarchal control of female bodies to thrive.

A Making Of also spotlights the importance of self-reflexivity across the Ten Years collections. Several of the films foreground the process of manufacturing propaganda for government and/or commercial ends (e.g., posters for the military draft in For Our Beautiful Country, assisted suicide in Plan 75, sleep remedies in The Sleep and Song of the City). Song of the City, in fact, contrasts the sleep salesman’s love of folk music with his job pushing sleep remedies. As Anchalee points out, Apichatpong cast a former political detainee in this role to comment on consumerism, culture, and censorship in Thai society. Other films reflect even more directly on the restriction of dissent through censorship including Aditya’s Sunset (Thailand) in which the military arrives to shut down a suspect art exhibition and Ng’s Local Egg (Hong Kong) which ends with a scene in an underground library filled with contraband books.

Brechtian alienation effects foreground performance as a metaphor for the roles forced upon the oppressed characters in authoritarian societies of the future. The would-be assassins set up to be killed as terrorists in Extras (Hong Kong), for example, cut particularly pitiful figures since they have no idea about the deadly nature of the roles they have been cast to play as “terrorists” to justify the implementation of National Security measures in the territory. The cat-woman in Catopia acts the part of the victim to unmask the human hidden among the felines. On set in A Making Of all play their parts to create an image of a harmonious family to mask the disintegration of the environment that may condemn them to be among the last humans on a doomed planet. Under the authoritarian regimes depicted in many of the films, in fact, characters play the parts assigned to them by the machinery of the state—wittingly or unwittingly.

While some critics expressed disappointment at the less direct political critique of Ten Years Taiwan, Thailand, and Japan, they may miss the fact that these films address very different audiences. The appearance of a statue of Marshal Sarit Thanarit and the casting of Patiwat Saraiyaem in Song may resonate with Thai viewers; however, it may not have as visceral an impact on its audience as the killing of the hapless gangsters (Extras), the self-sacrifice of protestors (Self-Immolator), or even the inability of a taxi driver to communicate with his son in his native language (Dialect) in the Hong Kong film. However, the entire project speaks beyond the specifics of a particular political moment, and even the local egg takes on global significance for audiences threatened by draconian government policies, authoritarian regimes, environmental catastrophe, mindless nationalism and the silencing of any whisper of dissent.

Indeed, there is one more dimension of an intersectional type that we may add on to this exploration of the transnational project that Ten Years has become: the festivals that bridge this project to the rest of the world. In the interviews repeatedly the role of the festival in Osaka and that man who rose up in the audience pops up as a moment for inspiration. Is it more or less that the concerns are now within specific countries and due to the reporting of media few are able to follow the logic of local concerns? To what extent can an external viewer understand what is the anxiety about in Hong Kong and why is it that some HK filmmakers compare it to Tibet? To what extent can an external viewer understand the anxiety about Japanese army 75 years after the war? Festivals travel and even though they provide ghettoized exposure to films they still give platform and reach out. Festivals like the one in Udine or at Lincoln Centre bring the concern to the wider world. We will see the developments next. FESTIVALS TEN YEARS’ distribution pattern, extensively discussed in the video material, also has this unique wabi-sabi quality. Those based in Hong Kong marvel at the audience mobilisation that the project generated, both at the theatrical box office, at open air grassroots screenings at spots across the New Territories, as well as online (see the videos with Clarence Tsui, Vivian Lee, and Felix Tsang collected in this issue): Netflix, Google, YouTube.

Is this Asian series, which may still evolve and include further segments, supplying a fresh functional model for political cinema? We would love to see this innovative take used for the production of films like Ten Years Britain– wouldn’t it be fantastic to see young filmmakers project their vision of the post-Brexit that lies ahead? Or perhaps Ten Years France, which could give projections of racial conflict in the banlieues or other inequalities that are kept in the limelight by the jillets jeunes? Or how about all those other countries where populist nationalism mixes with neo-liberalism endorsed by clerics? Ten Years Poland? Ten Years Hungary? Ten Years Turkey? Last but not least, how about Ten Years USA?

One would think that the West holds the keys to the anti-utopian tradition, as old here as Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927) and William Cameron Menzies’ Things to Come (1936, based on H.G. Welles) and that is linked to anti-utopian classics like 1984 (Michael Radford, 1984, based on George Orwell’s eponymous novel) and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (repeatedly adapted for film and television). Like their Asian counterparts, European and American filmmakers have repeatedly offered takes on dystopian visions of the future. We can only benefit if we bring these visions together, for a comprehensive inventory that would keep the record together rather than compartmentalized by regions that seem to not interact. We would like to see anti-utopican classics like Chris Marker’s La Jettee (1962) talked about alongside the work of philosophical political documentarians like Chilean Paricio Guzman, Japanese Kazuo Hara or Indian Anand Pathwardan, but also alongside the work of British visionaries of political gloom such as Adam Curtis (Pandora’s Box, 1992; The Power of Nightmares, 2004), Joshua Oppenheimer (The Globalization Tapes, 2003) or Charlie Brooker (Black Mirror, 2011-2018).

Widely-seen films made in the West that seem closest to the mood and intention of the Ten Years series, albeit all with a different timeframe, include the French City of Lost Children (1995, Jean-Pierre Jeunet and Marc Caro), the British Code 46 (2003, Michael Winterbottom) and The Age of Stupid (2009, Franny Armstrong), as well as American Idiocracy (2006, Mike Judge), Children of Men (2006, Alfonso Cuarón) and the most recent masterpiece of intersectionality, Sorry to Bother You (2018, Boots Riley). However, Ten Years also resonates with earlier classics that are set in a loosely designed familiar yet alienated milieu, such as Stanley Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange (1971), or Terry Gilliam’s Brazil (1985) and 12 Monkeys (1995). There is resonance here with films such as The Truman Show (Peter Weir, 1998) and Spike Jonze’s Her (2013), but also with Greek Yorgos Lanthimos’ The Lobster (2015), with the fantasy world of Michel Gondry, the cosmopolitan surrealist Frenchman, as well as with the recent transnational anti-corporate dystopias of Bong Joon-ho, such as Snowpiercer (2013) and Okja (2017). Like in Ten Years, in all these films we see ordinary present-day protagonists navigating a world of adversely changing circumstances imposed by authoritarian nationalist, corporate, or militaristic forces. The framework is the same; the framework is globally valid.

The very project of presenting Ten Years to what we hope would be a wider international audience is itself an example of an international collaboration, between the Centre for the Study of Globalization and Cultures at the University of Hong Kong and the Institute for Global Cinema and Creative Cultures at the University of St Andrews in Scotland. Besides commissioning essays from writers with insider knowledge and understanding of the respective countries and cinematic traditions (Ruby Cheung on Hong Kong, Timmy Chen on Taiwan, Anchalee Chaiworaporn on Thailand, and Jenny Coates on Japan), we put the framework of our transcontinental academic collaboration in service of those who speak through the medium of film. We specifically worked with producers and distributors (Andrew Choi, Lorraine Ma, Jevons Au, Felix Tsang), who took part in an in-depth interview conducted by Leiya Lee for the purpose of this dossier. We convened a symposium at the University of Hong Kong in January 2019 that brought producers and academics (Elena Pollacchi) together, and present here video-recorded excerpts of this wide-ranging conversation, featuring specifically the interventions of leading producer Andrew Choi of the Ten Years Studios, distributor Felix Tsang of Golden Scene, as well as of cultural analyst Prof. Laikwan Pang (Chinese University of Hong Kong), Hong Kong cinema specialist Dr Vivian Lee (City University of Hong Kong), creative writing Prof KC Lo (Hong Kong Baptist University), and seasoned film critic (formerly of South China Morning Post) and festival curator Clarence Tsui. They were all asked to highlight those parts of the Ten Years films that particularly touched them.

In putting this dossier together we took an activist stance. We hope that the Ten Years project will receive the exposure and appreciation we believe it asks for in a world that is globalized yet fragmented through the narrow-minded national and regional political anxieties that dominate the media and obscure the bigger picture of what the immediate future holds for us.

Bibliography

Atwood, Margaret. The Handmaid’s Tale. London: Vintage Publishing, 2001.

Crenshaw,Kimberlé.“Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43, no.6 (spring 1991): 1241-1299.

Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World. London: Vintage Publishing, 2019.

Lao, She. Cat Country. London: Penguin Books, 2015.

Lim, Song Hwee. Tsai Ming-Laing and a Cinema of Slowness. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2014.

Orwell, George. 1984. London: Penguin Books, 2008.

Orwell, George. Animal Farm. London: Penguin Books, 1999.

Sontag, Susan. “The Imagination of Disaster.” In Against Interpretation and Other Essays. New York: Dell, 1979, 209–25.

Wells, H.G. The Shape of Things to Come. New York: Penguin, 2006.

Filmography

12 Monkeys. 1995. Directed by Terry Gilliam.

1984. 1984. Directed by Michael Radford.

2046. 2004. Directed by Kar-Wai, Wong.

A Clockwork Orange. 1971. Directed by Stanley Kubrick.

After life. 1998. Directed by Hirokazu Kore-eda.

Black Mirror. 2011 – 2018. Created by Charlie Brooker.

Brazil. 1985. Directed by Terry Gilliam.

Cemetery of Splendour. 2015. Directed by Apichatpong Weerasethakul.

Children of Men. 2006. Directed by Alfonso Cuarón.

Code 46. 2003. Directed by Michael Winterbottom.

Godzilla. 1954. Directed by Ishiro Honda.

Her. 2013. Directed by Spike Jonze.

Idiocracy. 2006. Directed by Mike Judge.

La Jetée. 1962. Directed by Chris Marker.

Metropolis. 1927. Directed by Fritz Lang.

Millennium Mambo. 2001. Directed by Hsiao Hsien, Hou.

Mothra. 1961. Directed by Ishiro Honda.

Okja. 2017. Directed by Joon-ho, Bong.

Pandora’s Box. 1992. Directed by Adam Curtis.

Rodan. 1956. Directed by Ishiro Honda.

Snowpiercer. 2013. Directed by Joon-ho, Bong.

Sorry to Bother You. 2018. Directed by Boots Riley.

Ten Years Japan. 2018. Directed by Akiyo Fujimura, Chie Hayakawa, Kei Ishikawa, Yusuke Kinoshita, Megumi Tsuno.

Ten Years Taiwan. 2018. Directed by Rina Tsou, Kek Huat Lau, Po-shun Lu, Lekal Sumi, Pei-Ju Hsieh.

Ten Years Thailand. 2018. Directed by Aditya Assarat, Wisit Sasanatieng, Chulayarnnon Siriphol, Apichatpong Weerasethakul.

Ten Years. 2015. Directed by Zune Kwok, Fei-pang Wong, Jevons Au, Kwun-Wai Chow, Ka-leung Ng.

The Age of Stupid. 2009. Directed by Franny Armstrong.

The Ballad of Narayama. 1958. Directed by Keisuke Kinoshita.

The Ballad of Narayama. 1983. Directed by Shohei Imamura.

The City of Lost Children. 1995. Directed by Marc Caro, Jean-Pierre Jeunet.

The Globalization Tapes. 2003. Directed by Joshua Oppenheimer.

The Hole. 1998. Directed by Ming-liang, Tsai.

The Lobster. 2015. Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos.

The Power of Nightmares. 2004.Directed by Adam Curtis.

The Truman Show. 1998. Directed by Peter Weir.

Things to Come. 1936. Directed by William Cameron Menzies.

Notes on Contributors

Dina Iordanova is Professor of Global Cinema and Creative Cultures at the University of St Andrews and Visiting Research Professor at the University of Hong Kong. She has published extensively on Eastern European film, global film festivals, and transnational cinema. Interested in political cinema, she edited Film Festivals and Activism (2012), and subsequently helped filmmakers from various corners of the world to gain better exposure for their work. Dina has given masterclasses on different research subjects and has served on the juries of the main film festivals in Asia, most notably at Busan and Yamagata.

Gina Marchetti teaches courses in film, gender and sexuality, critical theory and cultural studies at the University of Hong Kong. She is the author of Romance and the “Yellow Peril”: Race, Sex and Discursive Strategies in Hollywood Fiction (University of California Press, 1993), From Tian’anmen to Times Square: Transnational China and the Chinese Diaspora on Global Screens (Temple University Press, 2006), and The Chinese Diaspora on American Screens: Race, Sex, and Cinema (Temple University Press, 2012), Andrew Lau and Alan Mak’s INFERNAL AFFAIRS—The Trilogy (Hong Kong University Press, 2007), and Citing China: Politics, Postmodernism, and World Cinema (University of Hawai’i Press, 2018). Visit the website https://hkwomenfilmmakers.wordpress.com/for more information about her current work on Hong Kong women filmmakers since 1997. To register for her Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on Hong Kong cinema, go to https://www.edx.org/course/hong-kong-cinema-through-global-lens-hkux-hku06-1x.

Quietly Critical: Ten Years Japan

Ten Years Japan (Jū nen, 2018) expands on the Ten Years anthology film franchise, which began in Hong Kong and has since spread to Taiwan and Thailand. Executive producer Koreeda Hirokazu introduced the project as “carrying on the spirit of the original Hong Kong film by trying to envision Japan ten years from now” (Variety 2017). Yet viewers familiar with Japan, and indeed Japanese film scholars, may have been forgiven for struggling a little to imagine what “carrying on the spirit” of the original might mean in the Japanese context. A significant number of Japanese scholars, filmmakers, and politicians have approached Japan as something of a separate entity within the region of East Asia, expressed in the common phrase “East Asia and Japan” (higashi ajia to nihon). Furthermore, the “spirit” of the Hong Kong original was one of defiant protest, resulting in aggressive censorship and a negative media campaign by the Chinese government (Fang 2017). The five short films in the Japanese anthology take a softer tone, focusing on imagery and themes familiar from earlier politically-oriented film narratives, such as the safeguarding of children and the necessity of hope (see Coates 2018). At the same time however, all take a critical stance towards the Japanese government’s role in planning for the nation’s future.

Plan75, directed by Hayakawa Chie, opens the anthology with a sensitive exploration of one of Japan’s best-known issues, the super-aging population. While most nations are aging, Japan’s population is aging faster than others, with almost one third aged over sixty-five (Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication 2019), and an increasing burden on working-age citizens to support pensioners. Hayakawa’s film imagines a future where impoverished and disabled citizens aged over seventy-five are recruited to a state-sponsored voluntary euthanasia program paying cooperative volunteers to die. Protagonist Itami, played by Kawaguchi Satoru, wrestles with the discomfort of his job persuading seniors to sign up to the program, while his pregnant wife considers whether to sign up her mother, suffering from Alzheimer’s disease. The short film neatly juxtaposes the sterile bureaucratic population-level initiative with the messy lived experience of one family caught between the challenges of aging and death, and bringing new life into the world. Hayakawa’s beautiful framing and measured pace colours the cerebral nature of the problem presented to us with human feeling: as an old man lies dying alone in the state euthanasia centre, a pair of hands reach out from an unseen body and clasp his own, suggesting that the warmth of human connection remains important, even in the face of impossible ethical choices.

As the title suggests, the mood lifts a little in the early scenes of the next short film, Kinoshita Yusuke’s Mischievous Alliance (Itazura dōmei). The opening sequence shows young schoolchildren scurrying to class in an elementary school. Slowly however, we identify the colour grading and image quality of the footage as that of a security camera. Each child’s face is located, identified and tagged by an artificial intelligence programme. A small sign in the bottom left corner of the screen identifies the camera as “PROMISE CAM” and the programme as PROMISE System v14.2.0.1. A zooming shot reveals that every child in every classroom wears an eye-level device connected internally, which transmits PROMISE’s instructions and prompts to the child. Discipline is applied via a frequency emitted directly into the child’s head.

All five short films build their worlds around problems and technologies already identifiable today. The disciplinary system of Mischievous Alliance recalls the debates around the use of devices that emit high-pitched noises disproportionately painful to younger people’s hearing, such as the “Mosquito” device, to drive youths away from areas like parks and building sites (Japan Today 2019). Visually, the opening scenes also recall Fukasaku Kinji’s Battle Royale (Battoru rowaiaru, 2000) in which non-compliant teenagers are punished by a remote-controlled explosive device around their necks. The horror of the children’s situation is therefore readily understood, yet Kinoshita’s short film focuses instead on a moment of innocent rebellion set in natural surroundings. The mischievous alliance of the title is formed by a group of children determined to set free a horse due to be killed by school authorities. As the old horse bolts from his opened stall and runs through the nearby forest, the children give chase, finding themselves surrounded by peaceful nature as the ringing in their heads subsides. Of course, PROMISE System v14.2.0.1 is soon updated to PROMISE System v14.2.0.2 and the children are returned to a state of enforced compliance. Like Hayakawa however, Kinoshita appears to identify a fragile hope in empathy expressed through human communication, as well as the interspecies bond which inspired the mischievous alliance to free the school horse.

Human connection is also a key theme of DATA, Tsuno Megumi’s quiet film placed third in the anthology. Here the boundaries of the human are pushed and expanded, as Maika (Sugisaki Hana) tries to get to know her dead mother by accessing the data cloud she has left behind. The careful intimacy of the father-daughter relationship is sensitively depicted by Tsuno’s slightly shaky camera, getting close up to her subjects for an almost ethnographic impression. By contrast, a torrent of blunt information characterises Maika’s attempt at intimacy with her digitised mother. Once again, the material objects which make up the film’s world are based on our contemporary identification systems. The mother’s “Digital Data Inheritance Card” is found amongst her belongings in an envelope marked like that used to deliver pension and tax information in today’s Japan. The design of the card recalls the controversial “My Number” combination identity card rolled out from 2015, and scheduled to become mandatory from 2021 (Osaki 2015). Critics of the scheme have focused on issues of privacy invasion and vulnerability to information leaks, concerns reflected in Maika’s repeated efforts to hack into her mother’s digitised file. When her search appears to suggest that her mother may have had an affair, Maika begins to reckon with questions that have become familiar since the “Right to Be Forgotten” was debated in Japan (Otake 2014). While Maika asserts that, “As her daughter, it’s my right to know about her”, her mother’s friend suggests, “Maybe nobody has that right”.

Human rights clash with governmental bureaucracy again in The Air We Can’t See, in which director Fujimura Akiyo creates an entire world underground, where Japanese citizens live in the aftermath of an explosion that has contaminated the entire nation with radiation. The opening radio broadcast evokes the triple disaster of March 2011, when a nuclear reactor meltdown caused mass evacuation in the Tohoku region of Northern Japan. Prime Minister Abe Shinzō’s response, unsatisfactory in the eyes of many citizens, evacuees, and anti-nuclear protestors, is here evoked in the draconian mandate forcing all citizens to live in sparse underground chambers. The young protagonist imagines a world of fantastical nature, provided by magical CGI, but her everyday environment is bleak. When a friend infatuated with the world above ground disappears, the protagonist imagines going above ground to search for her.

Like Tsuno, Fujiwara uses a handheld camera to create a sense of intimacy with her characters. One of three of the five films to rely mainly on child actors, Fujiwara’s contribution demonstrates an ability to achieve naturalistic and convincing performances from children, a marker of executive producer Koreeda’s own films and strongly in evidence throughout the anthology as a whole. While the other films in the anthology develop complex narratives that could be extended to feature length however, Fujiwara’s film privileges the visual, gesturing towards the inner life of her protagonist through CGI animated sequences that recall a music video or art installation. Its placement as the fourth of five short films creates a pleasing sense of respite from the more challenging concepts and plots of the other contributions, yet in many ways this self-contained piece gives a closed-off impression that the other films resist.

While the first four short films maintain a critical dialogue with policies set by an unseen governmental force, the final film takes aim squarely at the government and ideologies of Prime Minister Abe from the very beginning. Ishikawa Kei’s Our Beautiful Country (Utsukushii kuni) borrows its title directly from the book of the same name authored by Abe, which hinges the Prime Minister’s vision for the country’s future on the differentiation between politicians who will “fight” for what they believe, and politicians who will not (Abe 2006). The question of whether to fight has been taken out of the hands of the characters of Ishikawa’s film, as the military draft has been re-introduced after years of pacifism, or non-military aggression, protected by Article 9 of the 1947 Constitution of Japan.

The use of propaganda, another key thematic of the anthology as a whole, is addressed explicitly by Ishikawa’s contribution. While all five films deal with the gap between idealized technologically-enabled bureaucratic initiatives, and the material violence of their implementation, Ishikawa’s film takes propaganda as its direct subject matter. Watanabe (Taiga) is a young advertising executive sent to tell an elderly designer that her work on a poster for the draft has been rejected. As the two bond over virtual reality war games, Watanabe learns about the designer’s father’s experiences in Japan’s last war, and the distance between virtual reality and the lived experience of war becomes clearer to him. Though the protagonists overcome the distance between old and young, communicating and understanding one another freely by the end of the film, Ishikawa’s contribution closes the anthology on a less hopeful note. The designer speaks in the past tense of a Japan that “might have been beautiful”. “If young people have to die for a beautiful country, that country isn’t beautiful at all”, she reasons, but “Even so, it’s too late now”. While she insists on “passing the baton” to Watanabe at the end of the film, a close-up on her face shows it devoid of hope as he walks off into the night. Sure enough, in the next scene Watanabe supervises the pasting up of the replacement pro-draft poster. As he asks after the youngest member of the work team, now missing, we realise that the draft has already claimed this character. In a slowly zooming close-up on Watanabe’s face, overlaid by the sound of an aeroplane, we see the reality of the draft and the danger to his own generation dawn on him, too late.

None of the five young filmmakers’ visions for Japan ten years from now are explicitly hopeful. The lightest tone of the anthology is perhaps found in Fujimura’s The Air We Can’t See, where youthful innocence protects the protagonist from a full realisation of the horror of nuclear disaster. Tsuno’s DATA similarly suggests that the best outcome of an imagined future includes a degree of disengagement. While Maika suffers from the overload of information contained in her mother’s digital afterlife, the final scene in which Maika and her boyfriend spend time screen-free in a park suggests the need for time spent with others and in nature, which we also find in Kinoshita’s Mischievous Alliance.

Considering the Ten Years project itself however, it is debatable whether it could have been achieved, particularly at such speed and with limited resources, without our current degree of technologised interconnection. For example, the influence of streamed cinema content on the five Japanese contributions has been noted. Critics have observed their similarity to Charlie Brooker’s Black Mirror (Schilling 2018), available to stream around the world on Netflix, which also screened Ten Years Hong Kong. The popularity of the original anthology film has been tracked through its downloads from iTunes, as the film briefly became the most-downloaded item in Hong Kong (Fang 2017), and the franchising of the project may have benefited from these early results. Furthermore, each short film clearly advocates the building of connections across boundaries as a means to survive the unknowable future: between young and old, human and non-human, and between the artificial environment and the natural. Given the key role that technology plays in building connections, the answer to our future problems cannot be so simple as: log off. Perhaps it is this dilemma which gives the five short films of Ten Years Japan their complexity.

Bibliography

Abe, Shinzō. Towards a Beautiful Country (Utsukushi kuni e). Tokyo: Shinsho, 2006.

Coates, Jennifer. “Mediating memory: Shōjoand war memory in classical narrative Japanese cinema.” Cultural Studies 32, no. 1, 2018: 105-125.

Fang, Karen. “Ten Years: What happened to the filmmakers behind the dystopian Hong Kong indy film?” Hong Kong Free Press, July 10, 2017. Accessed February 12, 2019. https://www.hongkongfp.com/2017/07/10/ten-years-happened-filmmakers-behind-dystopian-hong-kong-indy-film/.

Frater, Patrick. “Hirokazu Kore-eda Boards Ten Years Spin Off Project.” Variety, October 15, 2017. Accessed February 12, 2019. https://variety.com/2017/film/asia/hirokazu-kore-eda-boards-ten-years-spin-off-project-1202589064/.

Kuchikomi. “Teen repellent in Adachi Park spurs flood of inquiries.” Japan Today, May 26, 2009. Accessed February 23, 2019. https://japantoday.com/category/features/kuchikomi/teen-repellent-in-adachi-park-spurs-flood-of-inquiries

Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, Statistics Bureau. “Japan Statistical Yearbook, Chapter 2: Population and Households.” Accessed January 31, 2019. http://www.stat.go.jp/data/jinsui/pdf/201903.pdf

Osaki, Tomohiro. “Ready or not the government will soon have your number.” Japan Times, September 20, 2015. Accessed January 31, 2019. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/09/20/national/ready-not-government-will-soon-number/#.XKSXRetKib8.

Otake, Tomoko. “Right to be Forgotten on the Internet Gains Traction in Japan.” Japan Times, December 9, 2014. Accessed February 12, 2019. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/12/09/national/crime-legal/right-to-be-forgotten- on-the-internet-gains-traction-in-japan/#.VkenSq6rRE5.

Schilling, Mark. “’Ten Years Japan’: Chilling and Sharp, These Five Shorts are a Must-See for Fans of Black Mirror.” Japan Times, October 24, 2018. Accessed February 21, 2019. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/culture/2018/10/24/films/film-reviews/ten-years-japan-chilling-sharp-five-shorts-must-see-fans-black-mirror/#.XKSqfutKib8.

Filmography

Brooker, Charlie. Black Mirror. London: Channel Four/ Netflix. 2011-present.

Fukasaku, Kinji. Battle Royale (Battoru rowaiaru). Tokyo: Toei Company, 2000.

Hayakawa Chie, Kinoshita Yusuke, Tsuno Megumi, Fujimura Akiyo, Ishikawa Kei. Ten Years Japan. Hong Kong: Ten Years Studio, 2018.

Kwok Zune, Wong Fei-pang, Jevons Au, Chow Kwun-Wai, Ng Ka-leung. Ten Years Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Ten Years Studio, 2016.

Notes on the Contributor

Jennifer Coates is Senior Lecturer in Japanese Arts, Culture, and Heritage at the Sainsbury Institute for the Study of Japanese Arts and Cultures, University of East Anglia. She is the author of Making Icons: Repetition and the Female Image in Japanese Cinema, 1945-1964 (Hong Kong University Press, 2016). Her current ethnographic research project focuses on early post-war film audiences in Japan. Jennifer has been a Kluge Fellow at the Library of Congress, Washington D.C. (2012), a Visiting Research Fellow at the Australian National University (2011), and a Hakubi researcher at Kyoto University (2014-2018).

Self-portrait of the Wrong-Eyed Jesus: The Mythical South Looking through the Mirror

Distinguishing history from myth is a hard task, and it has led scholars such as Roland Barthes or G. B. Tindall to conclude that all history contains a part of myth. As Tindall argues in Mythology: a New Frontier in Southern History, “we see myth and reality as complementary elements of the historical record”[I] because history is written by selecting and organising facts in a way which allows people to make sense of what happened. Similarly, myth is according to Barthes a language which uses characters and images to give meaning to the world.[ii] Both historical and mythical narratives follow an ideological pattern in which some events or characters are made more important, more significant than others for the understanding of a certain community and its genesis. Benedict Anderson famously defined the idea of “nation” as “an imagined political community”, but he insisted on its ambiguous nature as something that does not exist beyond the collective imagination – not a geographical or political reality – and something that has existed for a long time – the feeling of belonging to a “nation”, of a collective bond created overtime while facing the same ordeals. In other words, the idea of “nation” is itself a historical myth, which makes sense of history by turning traumatic events’ “fatality into continuity”.[iii]

The American South (the former confederate states minus Texas) can be understood as a mythical “region” that echoes, in many respects, Anderson’s view of “nation”. The issue of the boundary between history and myth is at the heart of the place’s identity. Tindall suggests that “there are few areas of the modern world that have bred a mythology so potent, so profuse and diverse, even so paradoxical, as the American South”.[iv]Contrary to the rest of the country which builds its collective identity on American values dating back to the Frontier myth and often reinvested in western films;[v] the mythical South, born from the collective imaginary of both southerners and outsiders, changes in values and colours depending on the period and the origin of the story being told, at times indistinguishable from its own history. The region has notably been depicted over the years by two main and opposing visions: on the one hand an ante-bellum tableau of gentility and beauty (such as Birth of a Nation, D. W. Griffith, 1915 or Gone With the Wind, O’Selznick, 1939 – celebrating the figure of the Southern Belle), and on the other, a darker, marginal southern wasteland harbouring a population of zealots and dangerous lunatics, which seem to have failed to recover from the stigmas of the Civil War and de-industrialization (Deliverance, Boorman, 1972; Cold Mountain, Minghella, 2003). These two sets of conflicting images – “Moonlight and Magnolias”[vi] versus the “Savage South”[vii]– could hardly be reconciled into a single production due to their antithetic nature, and yet they coexist in the collective imaginary of the place we call the South.

Searching for the Wrong Eyed Jesus (Douglas, 2003) is a musical documentary which sets out to look for this contemporary “South” which produced music, myths and cinematic images.If films often participate in the creation of a national feeling,[viii] the documentary form presents the same problematic relation to authenticity and myth as history does. The common belief that documentary should provide an authentic account of the real world is challenged by recent documentaries and, therefore, by documentary critics such as Jeffrey Geiger, who argues that “not all documentaries – or even all those considered ‘social’ or ‘political’ documentaries – have always worked to demystify the nation”.[ix] Some of them, by reusing the same mythical codes, even reinforce the national narrative by providing visual arguments.In the case of southern documentaries, the films necessarily tackle this question of mythical representation, either denouncing the pitfalls of a mythical vision or participating in the regional narrative (Louisiana Story, Flaherty, 1948). I would argue that Andrew Douglas, British director of Searching for theWrong-Eyed Jesus, takes the “Savage South” as contemplative object; not in order to denounce any kind of cliché, but to understand where the myth comes from and what southerners themselves think of the image it portrays of them. It is, in this sense, what Bill Nichols calls a performative documentary:[x] the film, its director and its musician narrator Jim White openly side with the myth, asking the audience to believe with them by calling on the strange, otherworldly poetry of the place. In this article, I argue that Searching for the Wrong-Eyed Jesus reflects on the Savage South as both part of a long-lasting mythological discourse meant to darken the region’s traits, and an ongoing process of myth-making and re-appropriation nourished by Southerners themselves – and by films such as this one.The first section questions the film’s representation of the mythical south as a negative image of America, before focusing on its appropriation and acceptation by southerners as exceptionalism, their degree of implication in the process of myth making. My analysis of the documentary’s specificity will then allow me to question the role of the film in discussing myth and its existence on screen.

“Savage South”, the myth of the margins

As explained by Geiger, the “reality claim” to which documentaries are said to obey should prevent them from conveying myths, since the latter is a narrative system which functions on stereotyped characters and pre-established values – it is simplified and constructed – while non-fiction films supposedly take on reality as their filmic object, shooting places and people which are unique especially because they exist in the world.Yet some documentaries inform social myths as vigorously as fictions do.The documentary Searching for the Wrong-Eyed Jesus (SWEJ),along with the productions of its featured guests, the songwriter Jim White and author Harry Crews, belong to this stream of cultural productions which have decided to rework and perpetuate the myth of the Savage South. Historian Fred Hobson[xi] defines the Savage South as the image of an impoverished and violent place born sometime around the 1920s when the South was undergoing one of its darkest periods – strikes, anti-Catholic and racist outbursts, KKK lynching – under the pen of journalists and social critics of the time.[xii] This idea, coupled to the more ancient one of the Benighted South, a myth through which the European colonists fantasized the region as a land of all dangers in the 18thcentury – gave birth a literary genre, the southern gothic, notably represented by such authors as William Faulkner and then Flannery O’Connor, whom Jim White refers to towards the end of film. This genre adds a touch of mystery to a savage and unruly region, an unsettling otherness and haunted figures representing the place’s troubling past whose ghosts keep re-surfacing.[xiii] In the 1930s, Faulkner painted the South as a land of “decaying gentry, idiocy, religious fanaticism, murder, rape, and suicide”. This harsh description of Southerners matches a particular setting, made of crumbling houses and wild landscapes, which metaphorically render the idea of defeat and abandonment. The cinema avoided gothic representations of the South until the Production Code started losing ground, notably in films like Night of the Hunter( Charles Laughton, 1952). In the last forty years, however, this negative, savage vision of the South has prevailed on both big and small screens, with a wide variety of productions including Deliverance, Oh Brother Where Art Thou? (Joel and Ethan Coen, (2000), the recent HBO shows True Blood (2008) and True Detective (2014) and The Beasts of the Southern Wild (Ben Zeitlin, 2012).

Still from Searching for the Wrong Eyed Jesus (15:38)

Still from Searching for the Wrong Eyed Jesus (15:38)

All follow the visual codes and moral values originally set by Faulkner’s approach to the southern gothic half of the time in SWEJ, the camera, embarked in Jim White’s newly purchased old car, films through the window an endless dirt track winding its way through a jungle of weeping willows, passing by abandoned buildings and vehicle carcasses overgrown by plants, precarious houses or sedentary trailers replacing homes and churches. The wilderness, a symbol of the domination of men over Nature in the days of pioneers,[xiv] seems to have gotten the upper hand once again in the Deep South. Fifteen minutes into the film the camera tracks around the carcass of a yellow school bus, recognizable symbol of American culture, abandoned in the middle of the woods, entangled in branches and trees which seem to swallow its familiar shape. This, along with swamp houses, rusted diner signs and the overall faded colours of the film roll which appears to be worn out, contribute to the depiction of a disenchanted rural South. Just like the “freaks” with which Flannery O’Connor[xv] or Harry Crews populate their short stories, people encountered in the film seem to diverge both physically and morally from Hollywood canons: overweighed tattooed sisters, amputees and toothless old women cross paths with petty criminals and exiled poets. Harry Crews, interviewed numerous times in the documentary, recalls that in his youth, the children used to compare themselves with the Sears Roebucks magazine’s pictures, and be amazed by the perfection of the people they saw in it as compared to their own flawed bodies: “Everybody in there [the magazine] had all the fingers that was coming to them, nobody had any open and running soars on their bodies. But everybody we knew had a finger missing, or one eye put out (…). In other words, in our world everybody was maimed and mutilated whereas everybody in the Sears Roebuck world was perfect.”The film’s social actors[xvi] also evince a troubled relation to morality, and seem particularly engaged in the battle between Good and Evil; as the camera enters in turn the county jail, the local bar, or a Pentecostal church in Louisiana the viewers encounter people who have either found God or rejected him. One of the convicts explains: “I had never gone to church, until when I was thirteen, [my family] thought I was big enough, that I was gonna find God, but I never did. I just couldn’t turn over that function”. There seems to be no in-between in the southern mind: you are either definitely good or definitely bad. Jim White, at one point, sums it up thus: “In a small town like this, it’s in your blood. You either choose Jesus or choose Hell”. Later in the documentary, Jim also links the essential pre-determination of Southerners to the gothic when he says “[these people] have what Flannery O’Connor called the Wise Blood”, implying that they do not, in effect, have a choice: their southern blood and lineage determine their lives, as well as their relation to Faith.

Carefully avoiding any racial discussion – there are no black people in this version of the South the film presents – the film chooses to shed light on poor white communities who, by their imperfections and their otherness, stand in sharp contrast with both the American ideal and the southern moral and physical canon. One can think, for example, about the southern Belle, who is expected to be pious, virtuous, but also white and beautiful, but who seems to belong to a brighter, more ideal South which has no relation to this one. Though these people are not black, they do not reflect the neat and tidy white middle-class either; they are the poor and excluded “white trash”. In Nancy Isenberg’s words, these “marginalized Americans were stigmatized for their inability to be productive, to own property, or to produce healthy and upward mobile children – the sense of uplift on which the American dream is predicated”.[xvii] The South displayed in SWEJ is a region marginalized by its defeat in the War, and mostly by its own failure to adapt to a changing world. If the Civil War did function as the original traumatic event, the successive social and economic crises have reinforced the idea that the South keeps tumbling down the bad road: the racist exactions of white supremacists, followed by the Jim Crow era, contributed to label the South as a land of unforgivable violence and ignorance, while the end of the industrial era has left the South’s lower classes unemployed and down spirited.[xviii] Everything that made America prosper is seen in ruins. For example, the appropriation of the land and its resources’ transformation in the primary sector, which in terms of national narrative mirrors the work of the pioneer and Jefferson’s agrarian ideal, is seen in the film as either struggling or dead. The miners in the last 10 minutes of the movie seem to come straight out of another day and age, and the only plants seen in the movie are unattended, they are left to grow freely and seem to be eating the small towns alive. There is no sign of a southern plantation anywhere. Yet this South is not the passive victim of this ideological characterization. It is not, in other terms, a myth crafted by Northerners only to contrast and compare the two parts of the nation and make the North shine brighter – as is the case in a film like Girl on a Chain Gang (Jerry Gross, 1966), which clearly show an exploitation of the image of the South by the Hollywood industry.[xix] On the contrary, one could argue that, if the cultural marginalization of the South has never been desired, it has, however, been appropriated by southern authors and people as a way to forge an image for the region’s common identity. This identity therefore stands somewhere between the myth created by literature and cinema and the Southerners’ perception of themselves. Making a documentary seems, for the director, to be a means to explore a kind of authenticity in this complex southern construct, at least because it offers the audience the testimony of “real” Southerners.

Southern exceptionalism: Going against the flow

Following the Civil War, and even though the country was supposed to be reunited, Southerners became identified as the ones who lost the war. In so many ways, the turn of history forced them to belong to a nation from which they had ideologically severed themselves. The trauma of both defeat and forced reunion has been deeply rooted in the representation of the region up until today; and it led right after the war to the birth of a myth: the Lost Cause.[xx] Romanticizing their loss against the North, idealizing the past and turning Confederate soldiers into martyrs, Southerners took back control over their own narrative, re-interpreting defeat. This is probably the first example of the South taking the matter of mythmaking into its own hands; the term “Lost Cause” was coined as early as 1867 by Edward A. Pollard, and it still appears in contemporary representations, even in the bleaker ones, in the form of a looming fatality. The idea that the ante-bellum world was a kind of southern Eden made only for God’s People, destroyed by the War, encourages the collective southern memory, which crafts the regional identity through oral and written stories, to select from the myth the ancient but positive values of community and spirituality. This desire to return to better days is evident in a number of southern movies and TV shows, from Gone with the Wind (O’Selznick, 1939) to Steel Magnolias (Ross, 1989) and Hart of Dixie (CW, 2011), but also in those reprising the imagery of the Savage South (True Detective, SWEJ).

There is no re-enactment of glory and gentility in SWEJ, no plantation mansions, but a tenuous sense of disconnection with the present and a nostalgic cry for days gone by. The number of ruins visible on the sideway in the documentary, as well as in season one of True Detective, hint at a bygone age, but it is the way people live, and the values they live by, which truly make this return to the old days a choice. Both productions display Southerners driving vintage cars, eating in 1950s diners and dressing accordingly. In the last few minutes of the film, the camera intrudes in a motel room and pans to the right, revealing an analog TV where a black and white music video of Elvis is airing. Jim White asserts at the beginning of the documentary that, “if you go a few miles away from the interstate, you can see the South as it was some fifty or maybe a hundred years ago. That’s not something you can find anywhere else.” As he speaks, the camera tracks in on the battered steering wheel, to which is tied an old wristwatch. Both sound and image conjure the idea of a remote time, towards which Jim is driving us. The documentary conveys the idea, as do many southern fictions (such as Steel Magnolias or Hart of Dixie), that being stuck in a constructed past is a conscious choice for Southerners; the choice to remain in a sweeter, fantasized world, preferred by far to the charmless, aseptic world offered to the poorest classes by today’s society. Listening to the social actors and storytellers portrayed in the film, including Jim White, the choice is clear indeed. This fantasized past encapsulates a set of codes and moral values which no longer match the reality of our world, only the idea that people – Southerners and outsiders – might have of the region. Without them, the contemporary South would be adrift. This was already in 1941 J. W. Cash’s contention in his pioneer work The Mind of the South. For him, the South is particularly apt to trigger the imagination because of its harshness, creating “a mood in which nothing any more seems improbable save the puny inadequateness of fact, nothing incredible save the bareness of truth”.[xxi] Even though Cash blames it on the land itself, and on a certain atmosphere, his statement remains valid. The South – or rather, its inhabitants – require positive myth. Thus, they have created a nostalgic world grounded in the very stereotypical backwardness the North has associated them with. From the margins they have been pushed to, they have built a community. And finally, in response to the allegation that they are either religious fanatics or depraved criminals, Southerners claim the vigour of their Faith, which has been lost everywhere else in the country.

The idea that the South is populated with marginals –dating back to southern gothic literature, finally becomes a cliché in the era of anti-heroes on screen. “Marginal”, in the South, is to be understood geographically as well as socially. The most destitute Southerners have traditionally been labelled “eccentrics” because they did not fit in the physical or social canons of a proper society. Jim White plays on this eccentric characterization on several occasions in the film, calling people “your regular southern insane lunatic”, or explaining in a typical southern small town, that fanatics, criminals and artists are crushed by social pressure and find themselves on the margins, literally “off the centre”of town. By being socially marginalised, they thus end up in the geographical margins. The whole region, after undergoing numerous social and economic crises, is seen by popular imagination as a margin; that is what the term Deep South means. Because it could not objectively remain the “same old South”, the myth has turned this marginal space into a unique place of struggle and endurance which began to make sense, as a story, in the regional consciousness. In the Wrong-Eyed Jesus, people seem to assert their ownership of the territory: people living in the mountains of Kentucky readily admit that the place in inhospitable, the cameras shoots them in shabby grey cabins and covered in black soot, but the old miner interviewed says it himself: “if I could go back into the mine I would.” By living together and between themselves on the land they have been forced to inhabit or do not have the means to leave, and by sharing the same vision of themselves, they create a mythical bond: that of a community. John Livingston argues that “a sense of community is most simply put as an awareness of simultaneously belonging to both a society and a place, and also an awareness of self-identity as that society or place”.[xxii] In the South displayed by SWEJ, there is indeed this strong, almost foreordained connection between the land and the people who live there: they make up and are the South. Yet the documentary often qualifies the idea that the people met were actually free to choose to live in those small towns. Some, indeed, would never think of leaving, while others, including Jim White, confess that it is all they have ever dreamt about. Paradoxically, the desire to escape is also something that links them together, that reinforces the feeling of belonging and participates in the myth. Thanks to all these shared values, however paradoxical they may be, the southern myth provides a “sense of place”[xxiii] to fill the need of its people to belong somewhere that looks like them, somewhere they can identify as their own.

In the same way, the representation of southern spirituality and morality shifts from an external criticism to a regional identity claim incorporated to the myth. In the Wrong Eyed Jesus, morals and faith still seem closely intertwined, more so at least than in the rest of the western civilization. Yet the image we get from the film is that of a rough, even uncivilized place, that is both a land of sinners and of fanatic bigots. If the movie shows an “old school” baptism in a river at night, where two men hold a semi-conscious woman underwater, and if this image is for a secular European audience as excessive and unsettling as a fifteen-year old girl dancing lasciviously in front of the camera a few minutes earlier in a bar, both of these images are nonetheless justified by the people’s visceral attachment to their faith, and more broadly to their constant search for their place on earth. A repented drug addict, now priest in a Pentecostal church, proclaims during his service: “They say you folks are crazy and you have lost your mind. We’re not lost, we have found our mind, we have found our purpose;” he later adds: “Yes I am radical, yes I am fanatic, yes I am extreme”. This exuberant faith –often represented in southern movies –seems to be something they are actually proud of, the sign that spirits have not definitely left this age. By opposing “we/I” and “them”, the priest also strengthens the claim of southern exceptionalism. A country musician explains in the back of a car: “if we have more demons in the South, we also have more angels, it is our spirituality being still alive”. This vision and practice of the religious rituals the spectator witnesses is certainly not based on Puritan restraint, but it allows elevation all the same. The resurgence of fundamentalist faith since the 1970s in America caused a profound misunderstanding between the religious and the secular for the general public as for scholars, who considered that such a shift was no longer possible in a modern, rational world.[xxiv] This feeling or misunderstanding and fear has only grown since, as those who already looked down on Evangelical or Pentacoastal currents tend to regard them as a threat towards American values of liberal rationality and progress. And yet the South, as part of the US, is not ready to tame its most enthusiastic believers, to let reason and rationality prevail. The audience, identified with this “they”, finds itself excluded from the ritual, as looking through a window. In the end, the imaginary South, recreated with pieces of the old and the new, with its monsters and angels, is certainly not perfect, nor is it rational, but it is meaningful. This patched-up, backwards world is precious, because it is, for Southerners, proof of southern exceptionalism chosen or not, and of the meaning of a wretched life. Even in a documentary film, which is meant to deal with authenticity, what matters is not so much to give a comprehensive, down-to-earth vision of the rural South, but to show which of its representations is meaningful enough to replace the South in the grand narrative of history. The representation people have of themselves, if it is distorted, is still very much real to them because it constructs their identity.

The most obvious clue to this last point is probably to be found in the documentary Seven Signs: Music, Myth and The American South, which is similar to SWEJ in the way both films take the shape of road trip down South led by southern musicians – here J. D. Wilkes – looking for peculiar places and people to illustrate their musical world. In this film, it becomes more evident than ever that the truth matters less than meaning, and that the South can easily distort reality in its search for its own mythology. Two minutes into the film, Wilkes finds himself in front of a Southern church on which a sign reads “THERE IS NO LIE IN WHAT WE BELEIVE” with the IE voluntarily inverted in “believe”. This extraordinary sign is the perfect metaphor for the South and its myth: it does not matter if it is false, so long as it matches one’s beliefs. Faith is stronger than reason. Should an analogy be made between Southern Pentecostal faith and Southern myth, this would imply that the myth, more than any other contemporary narrative, recognizes itself as artificial, acknowledging its own constructiveness. This is what I propose to discuss now. Can it be said that the Southerners themselves, being aware of the artificial nature of the myth they bathe in, participate in its creation? Or is this just another idea promoted by outsider cinema? How can a performative documentary like SWEJ, which clearly sides with the South even though it is made by a British director, really depict this mythical image without questioning its own relation to the truth?

Southern Poetics: Performativedocumentary onself-conscious people

Jonathan Daniels famously said: “We Southerners are a mythological people, created half out of dream and half out of slander, who live in a still legendary land”.[xxv] The implication of this is that the southern community is a made up one, which only exists through myth. However, the use of the pronoun “we” also hints at the fact that Southerners are conscious of the myth within which they live, and more than that, it hints at the active part they may play in mythmaking. It could be said that the South, instead of being a product of fiction, has also been creating itself, telling its own story in order to reclaim power over History. This hypothesis, as discussed above, finds evidence in oral storytelling traditions which are characteristic of southern culture. In Storytellers: Folktales & Legends from the South, John Burrison argues that “the region’s fondness for storytelling” might originate in the migration of Old World inhabitants, especially Irish and African populations, who would have brought this oral tradition with them. These folktales, or “memorates”, are defined as “a firsthand account of a personal experience coloured by traditional belief”[xxvi]. And indeed, the whole structure of Searching for the Wrong-Eyed Jesus depends on the stories and songs told and sung by Southerners. Moreover, its “southern atmosphere”, both magical and rustic, mythical and real, profits from the particular way these stories are told and the lesson they teach.

At one point, Harry Crews recalls a story told by his grandmother about killing “possums”. He explains that in the South, everyone knows a possum must be buried with its eyes looking downwards, otherwise it will come back and seek vengeance. If it is buried the right way, the possum will keep digging in the wrong direction and end up on the other side of the earth, unable to find its murderer. This tale qualifies as “southern” in every way: the possum holds a predominant place within southern culture, and its hunting is only the sport of a certain rural population. The moral of the story is about vengeance, and the return of the undead is a southern trope. Finally, the way the story is told sets it on the side of the southern dialect: the excessive use of g-dropping in “diggin’” and “lookin’”, the diminutive “possum”, the stresses and repetitions, etc. anchor the story in the Southern context. By recalling a childhood memory, the author also hints at the oral transmission of these stories, which is a defining part of the Southern character. He concludes: “Everything was stories and stories were everything. Everybody told stories. It was a way of saying who they were in the world, it was their understanding of themselves.” Thus, the audience understands that the legacy of such folk stories is what makes the South what it is now. Incidentally, one realizes that the aesthetic and narrative codes used by southern storytellers are similar to those used by literature or cinema to depict it. O’Connor’s Wise Blood, for instance, does mimic the southern dialect, and its cinematic adaptation in 1979 follows the same codes of diction, the same tone. More recently, in Beasts of the Southern Wild, a northern-made southern movie, the five-year-old Hushpuppy becomes the voice of the South and tells the tale of her people, starting with “there once was a Hushpuppy who lived in the Bathtub”. It is hard to know which of the northern-made myth or the Southerners first influenced the other, but it appears rather that one draws from the other to build what has finally become a common story.

The limit of such an analysis is that the audience can only access these southern voices through the film, which is in itself the result of a process of selection and editing as any other movie. However “real” a documentary might claim to be, it can never present a taintless reality. Geiger confirms that “though as a cinematic form documentary is aligned to nonfiction and factuality, it’s easy enough to see that documentaries are constructs containing elements of subjective interpretation, selection, fictional techniques narrative modes and so on”.[xxvii] Discussing this allegation, Bill Nichols, in Representing Reality, establishes a number of categories to distinguish fiction from documentary in terms of purposes, means, setting and characters, or the viewer’s expectations towards the film. To focus only on a few of these criteria, the purpose of the documentary is not a narrative, with a plot and resolution, but an argument to prove. The setting is not world but the world, in which we all live, and the characters are not played by trained actors but are social actors, people playing themselves.[xxviii] In Searching for theWrong-Eyed Jesus, the purpose evoked in the first intertitle is to look for the South as it is pictured in Jim White’s eponymous album;[xxix] thus, from the outset, we know that the setting of the documentary will not exactly be the world but a constructed one, with a certain atmosphere, a certain poetry added to it, which does not belong to reality. The same goes for the social actors: if some of them are, indeed, anonymous folks, half of the people interviewed are musicians or writers (The Handsome Family, Johnny Dowd, David Eugene Edwards, Harry Crews…) who have not necessarily spent their whole lives in the Southbut share and heartily maintain this poetic view of the place. The fact that they are not named in the film however, might be a way to blur the line between them and the social actors and offer a unified vision. The documentary’s purpose is therefore not the direct telling of a tale, but the exposition of a persisting romanticised narrative constantly fed by all kinds of storytellers. All of this indicates that this documentary pushes towards what Nichols defines as the “performative” mode of representation. Indeed, among the different kinds of documentaries categorized by the scholar in his later work Introduction to Documentary,[xxx]the performative is the mode where the filmmaker clearly picks sides, arguing that the only way to know the world is through a subjective approach. Nichols explains that, for filmmakers using this mode, “meaning is an affect-laden phenomenon”, that is to say that the understanding of the world is only possible through feeling and experience, hence this documentary’s power to convey a poetic – and therefore subjective – sense of the South and of its experience by Southerners.

Indeed, as we have seen, the first intertitle exposes the longing presence of two subjectivities in the vision the film displays: that of the musician Jim White, whose album is the reason the documentary was made and named, and the filmmaker Andrew Douglas who was so fascinated by the album he decided to see if he could find an illustration of it in southern reality. Both intend to share their fascinated vision of the South with the public, hence the numerous direct addresses, particularly in the beginning, where the off-screen voice of a child says: “Do you know what you’re looking for? Do you think this place is on a map? Will you know it when you see it?”.The same goes for Jim White’s conclusion: “I hope you found what you were looking for”. These words are not an invitation to discover the real world; they evoke a quest for a fantasized South, a place which does not appear on any map, but which can be recognized by the audience because it looks like the South displayed by so many southern fictions already mentioned. Apart from the setting and characters the film depicts, the gritty 16mm reel with which the film was shot seems to conjure up images from Boorman’s Deliverance(1972). The persistence of the myth, and the social character’s role in its construction are the real subjects of the film.

As in Flaherty’s documentary Louisiana Story, whose slow opening shot on a natural, romantic swamp might have inspired the Wrong Eyed Jesus, music and its relation to the visual seem to be one of the main markers of subjectivity in the film. Indeed, the songs played in the film sometimes surface between two conversations with words such as “welcome to my world”, “unbelievable things” or “there was a murder here today” and they are the ones – along with the landscape – creating the poetic and gothic atmosphere luring the spectator into the myth. These musical suggestions are often associated through editing to extreme close-ups of people’s faces or deep-fried food, at a moment where the social actors seem particularly oblivious of the camera. If most of the time, music starts like this, disembodied, the film then discloses where the music comes from by showing, a few seconds later, the band or singer playing on a semi-improvised stage. Such moments invite viewers to question the film’s authenticity, because these people are actually performers, and the stage which is otherwise a real-life setting appears this time as artificial. Yet paradoxically, these scenes are also the moments when the filmmaker fulfils his promise to find the original place of southern music. When the camera tracks through the swamp and closes in on Jim White playing on a porch, the film implicitly succeeds in finding the “Wrong-Eyed Jesus”. These moments are, then, both the most artificial and the most meaningful, because of the staging of the southern myth by the filmmaker and various characters, and it is up to the audience to keep believing or not. When social actors do reveal their awareness of the presence of the camera, they become performers as well, using their voices or attitudes to create the myth.

Still from Searching for the Wrong Eyed Jesus (1:14:21)

Still from Searching for the Wrong Eyed Jesus (1:14:21)

Still from Searching for the Wrong Eyed Jesus(1:14:33)

Still from Searching for the Wrong Eyed Jesus (1:14:33)

The last place Jim takes us to is an Outreach Church in Virginia, in an extremely poor area of the state. In this sequence an old woman is talking in a microphone about hell and salvation while the camera is slowly panning to the right and turning around her face. At first, we cannot see her audience, but the next still shot reveals the scene’s staging once the woman is gone: we realize that she was not addressing people in a church, she was addressing two cameras, in what was actually a radio studio. By disrupting the continuity of action – one second she is there, the next she is gone – and showing the cameras, the film draws attention to its own artificiality, thus inviting a discussion on the constructed nature of both the myth and the film. The audience, then, can reflect on the entire movie and find clues of its artificiality from the beginning. For instance, the direct addresses, in their content, are a way to invite the audience to share a particular vision, but by breaking he fourth wall, they imply that, if there is a spectator, then there is also a spectacle, something created and staged on demand. Moreover, Jim White introduces himself as an “imitation of a Southerner” because he left the South and was only able to appraise its poetry when he came back – he physically took some distance with the South to see it. This distance, according to both White and the mythologist Joseph Campbell, is necessary to make sense of a set of images and codes, and turn them into a meaningful narrative.[xxxi] The underlying reflexive aspect of this documentary, along with its nature and origin (the director is British), allow the viewer to step back and apprehend the constructiveness of the myth. Thus, the film is not exactly proving that the real South is the Savage South, but that this myth is a part of our collective understanding of the region, insiders and outsiders alike.

Conclusion

Depending on who tells the tale, the codes of the myth remain but the goals of each party are different: for the songwriter, the enterprise is a poetic one, trying to restore and protect the “sense of place” as a beautiful treasure by showing its colour, rhythm, and sometimes glorious absurdity. For the documentary filmmaker, the aim is performative and sometimes reflexive – sharing this poetic vision with the viewers while remind them that every film is the result of a subjective choice, even documentaries, and that they too, in their own way, have a story to tell. For Southerners, the heart of the matter is, first and foremost, identity: who are southerners if not creatures of the mind? What does it mean to be a Southerner in a global world? Whatever voice one decides to listen to, the South appears in the movie as a place both highly poeticized and yet powerfully truthful.

Although this form of contemporary documentary feels unstable, halfway between authenticity and myth, and torn between the various myth-makers, Searching for the Wrong-Eyed Jesus still manages to give voice to the South, or at least to a south. The myth selected by the filmmaker, with its defined set of visual codes that are borrowed from fictional representations of the South, is that of the Savage South – a rough and unhospitable place at first glance, which eventually becomes imbued with gothic poetry. This myth, however, does not spark from Northern or foreign invention, but is co-created by Southerners and official storytellers in order to give the South a common narrative. The performative nature of the documentary invites the audience to follow the filmmaker in his biased poetic quest for a myth and the people who tell it. Even though it is probably foolish to think that audiences might one day really accesses the truth concerning the Savage South, precisely because of this bias, the film manages to highlight its constructiveness as well as its importance for Southerners and the rest of the world alike. Presented is a simplified, negative image of the US, and more generally a foil to the values supported by a globalized western civilization, this South allows the public to reflect on the ideology their nations embody, on the values they believe in. A cinematic myth is not a lie but a model to follow to make sense of the world. It is a miniature, simplified but substantial world for us to decipher our own. Nichols adds that “performative documentary restores a sense of magnitude to the local, specific, and embodied. It animates the personal so that it may become our port of entry to the political”.[xxxii] This gives the myth, the people and the film a common goal: to understand the value of myth and its strong imprint on our common understanding of the contemporary world.

Notes

[i]G B Tindall, “Mythology: a New Frontier in Southern History”, in Patrick Gester and Nicholas Cords, Myth and Southern History, Vol 2: the New South, Second Edition.University of Illinois Press, 1989, p. 1.

[ii]Roland Barthes, Mythologies. Paris: Seuil, 1957, p. 222.

[iii]Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities:Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso, 2006, p6 & p11 nations become “a secular transformation of fatality into continuity, contingency into meaning.”

[iv]G B Tindall, “Mythology: a New Frontier in Southern History”, p. 2.

[v]The West was and still is seen – thanks to the western genre – as the land of the pioneers, of those who conquered the wild land and turned it into a community. By that, it embodies the values and ideal character of the American identity See André Bazin, “Le Western ou le cinéma par excellence”.

[vi]“Moonlight and magnolias”: expression alluding to walks in the moonlight and the scent of magnolias, a metaphor for the alleged antebellum romantic period in the South.

[vii]Fred Hobson coined the term in “The Savage South: An Inquiry into the Origins, Endurance, and Presumed Demise of an Image” (1985).

[viii]Jeffrey Geiger argues in American Documentary Film: Projecting the Nationthat “a film reflects and refracts national consciousness – it can help create a sense of national belonging through the national narratives and myths it (re)produces.” p. 3.

[ix]Jeffrey Geiger, American Documentary Film: Projecting the Nation, p. 5.

[x]Bill Nichols, in the Introduction to Documentary, introduces “six modes of representation: poetic, expository, participatory, observational, reflexive, performative.” The performative genre stresses the subjective and affective dimension of our understanding of the world, showcasing the filmmaker’s own emotional engagement in the object, p. 99.

[xi]Hobson wrote “The Savage South: An Inquiry into the Origins, Endurance, and Presumed Demise of an Image” exposing his main theory in 1985, and made a series of conferences entitled “The Savage South: Reflections on an Image”. He is currently working on a study on the same theme.

[xii]Fred Hobson in The New Encyclopedia of Southern Culture: Volume 4 – Myth, Manners and Memory by Charles Reagan Wilson, p. 27.

[xiii]Eric Savoy, in the 9th chapter of The Cambridge Companion to Gothic Literature, explains that the region “has produced a strain of literature that is haunted by an insistent, undead past and fascinated by the strange beauty of sorrow.”

[xiv]This myth of the pioneers conquering the wilderness as a way to settle civilization dates back from the American settlers themselves and the biblical conception of Nature they brought with them. Historian George Stankey explains that “the submission of wilderness was a genuine source of pride for it represented ready evidence of success in overcoming the environment in which evil resided” (“Beyond the Campfire’s Light”, p17).

[xv]Flannery O’Connor, in Good Country People, tells the story of an amputee girl trying to find love, who finally has her fake leg stolen by an ill-intentioned Bible seller.

[xvi]A term used by Bill Nichols in his various works to distinguish characters in a fiction film from ‘real people’ allowed to be themselves in front of the camera in a documentary film.

[xvii]Nancy Isenberg, White Trash: The 400 Years Untold History of Class in America, NY: Atlantic Books, 2017, p. 3.

[xviii]One could mention the Great Depression period during which the South was deemed “America’s economic problem number 1” by the Roosevelt in 1938 (see the article “The South as ‘the Nation’s No. 1 Economic Problem’; the NEC Report of 1938” by Steve Davis), and the Sun Belt which saw the migration of industries in the South also excluded the poorest parts of the population.

[xix]See Sharon Monteith’s chapter “Exploitation Movies and the Freedom Struggle of the 1960s” in Deborah Barker and Kathryn B McKee’s American Cinema and the Southern Imagery, Georgia University Press, 2011.

[xx]Alan Nolan explains in the first chapter of The Myth of the Lost Cause and the Civil War, that “during the decades following the surrender at Appomattox, [ex-Confederates] nurtured a public memory of the Confederacy that placed their wartime sacrifice and shattering defeat in the best possible light”. 2000, p. 1.

[xxi]W. J. Cash, The Mind of the South, New York: Knopf Eds, 1941, p. 48.

[xxii]John Livingston, “Other Selves” in Rooted in the Land, Wes Jackson and William Vitek, Eds. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1996.

[xxiii]Term of Human Geography, notably developed by Yi-Fu Tuan or Robert Hay in 1998, hinting at the conscious creation of a place by people living by a common thought process.

[xxiv]Martin Riesebrodt begins his article “Fundamentalism and the Resurgence of Religion” by saying “the dramatic resurgence of religious movements since the 1970s has caught most scholars of religion by surprise. (…) [it] was not considered possible since the fate of religion in the modern world was an irreversible trend toward secularization” in Numen, vol 47, n. 3.

[xxv]Jonathan Daniels in A Southerner Discovers the South, quoted by G. B. Tindall in the New Encyclopedia of Southern Culture, Vol. 4, p. 125.

[xxvi]John A. Burrison, Storytellers: Folktales & Legends from the South, p. 2-11.

[xxvii]Jeffrey Geiger, American Documentary Film: Projecting the Nation, p. 8.

[xxviii]Bill Nichols, Representing Reality: Issues and Concepts in Documentary. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1992, p. 108

[xxix]Jim White, The Mysterious Tale of How I Shouted “Wrong-Eyed Jesus”. Luaka Bop, 1997.

[xxx]Different modes of representation: the poetic, the expository, the participatory, the observational, the reflexive and the performative kind. Nichols, Introduction to Documentary.

[xxxi]Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth: “read other people’s myths, not those of your own religion, because you tend to interpret your own in terms of facts –but if you read the other ones, you begin to get the message” p. 6.

[xxxii]Bill Nichols, Introduction to Documentary, p. 137.

Bibliography

Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso, 2006.

Barker, Deborah E. and McKee, Kathryn (Eds.). American Cinema and the Southern Imaginary. University of Georgia Press, 2011.

Barthes, Roland. Mythologies. Paris: Seuil, 1957.

Burrison, John A. “Storytelling Traditions.” New Georgia Encyclopedia. 13 July 2018. Web. 06 April 2019.

Campbell, John and Bill Moyers. The Power of Myth. “Chap 1: Myth and the Modern World”. NY: Doubleday eds, 1988.

Cash, Wilbur J. The Mind of the South. Vintage Books, 1960.

Daniels, Jonathan. A Southerner Discovers the South, New York: Macmillan, 1938.

Davis, Steve. “The South as “the Nation’s No. 1 Economic Problem”: The NEC Report of 1938.” The Georgia Historical Quarterly, Vol. 62, n. 2 (1978): 119-32. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40580465.

Gallagher, Gary W. and Nolan, Alan. The Myth of the Lost Cause and Civil War History, Indiana University Press, 2000.

Geiger, Jeffrey. American Documentary Film: Projecting the Nation. Chap 7 “Relative Truths: documentary and postmodernity”. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011.

Gester, Patrick and Cords, Taïna. Myth and Southern History, Vol 2: the New South, Second Edition.University of Illinois Press, 1989.

Haddox, Thomas F. Fears and Fascinations: Representing Catholicism in the
American South
, Fordham University Press, 2005.

Isenberg, Nancy. White Trash: The 400 Years Untold History of Class in America, NY: Atlantic Books, 2017.

Lienard-Yeterian, Marie and Tuhkunen, Taïna. Le Sud au cinéma, de Birth of a Nationà Cold Mountain. Paris: Editions de l’Ecole Polytechnique, 2009.

Mcpherson, Tara. Reconstructing Dixie: Race, Gender and Nostalgia in the Imagined South. Duke University Press, 2003.

Nichols, Bill. Representing Reality: Issues and Concepts in Documentary. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1992.  

Philips, Jason. Storytelling, History and the Postmodern South, Baton Rouge: Louisiana University State Press, 2013.

Riesebrodt, Martin. “Fundamentalism and the Resurgence of Religion”, Numen, Vol. 47, n. 3 “Religions in the Disenchanted World”, 2000.

Stankey, George H. “Beyond the Campfire Light: Historical Roots of the Wilderness Concept” in Natural Resources Journal, vol. 29, Winter 1989.

Whitt, David and Perlich, John . Myth in the Modern World: Essays on Intersections with Ideology and Culture. Jefferson, NC: Mc Farland eds, 2014.

Wilson, Charles R. The New Encyclopedia of Southern Culture, Vol 4: Myth, Manners & Memory. NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2014.

Filmography:

Beasts of the Southern Wild, Benh ZEITLIN, 92min, ARP Selection, 2012.

O, Brother Where art Thou?,by Joel and Ethan COHEN. 107min, Touchstone Pictures, 2000.

Searching for the Wrong Eyed Jesus, by Andrew DOUGLAS. 82min, Lone Star Prod and BBC, Netherlands, 2003.

Seven Signs: Music, Myth and The American South, by JD WILKES. 54min, Milk Products Media, 2008

True Blood, season 1, TV Series by Alan Ball, with A. Paquin, S. Moyer, USA, HBO, 2008. (55min, 22 episodes)

True Detective, season 1, TV Series by Nick Pizzolatto, with M. McConaughey, W. Harrelson, USA, HBOn, 2014. ( 8 episodes, 55min)

Notes on Contributor

Marine Soubeille is a «professeur agrégée» of English at St Sernin Secondary School. She previously lead researches on the evolution of Southern myths in contemporary American cinema and TV shows, and is preparing a PhD proposal on the representation of Texas in American cinema at the University Jean Jaurès of Toulouse.