David: You Only Live Twice begins with a chance encounter between yourself
and Chase Joynt at the Orly Airport the day Chris Marker died. Is this really
how the two of you met? This chance encounter and later on the café robbery
near Marker’s apartment seems so fantastic and coincidental that it’s a little
hard to believe. I’m wondering if any of these stories were embellished?
Mike: Every
action relating to Chris Marker seems impossible. Even while he was still alive
he was a kind of living fiction, everything he touched turned into myth and
legend. As a notoriously shy man, he left a space where his real life,
attention-seeking avatar might have held forth, opining at international
festivals and granting interviews. Perhaps it was his absence that drew us to
him. He embodied what David Mamet names as the uninflected shot, an image that
fails to signify by itself, but only in relationship. His retiring persona left
a lot of room for his many admirers. What was more of a surprise than meeting
in Orly, where Chase and I were of course hardly alone, was the fact that we
were both from the same city (at least temporarily), and concerned with
questions of picture making. Marker has been a reliable touchstone in our
journeys, though we have pursued very different directions.
Aren’t all of
our most important meetings chance encounters? I’d want it to be otherwise, I’d
like to scribble “let’s fall in love today!” in the calendar or else “Get a new
best friend” but it usually doesn’t quite work out. Or?
David: I like how you talk about Chris
Marker’s La Jetée as a model for
second lives – that of experiencing life after a personal metamorphosis due to
a turbulent, life-changing experience. When did you first discover Marker’s
films and start having this interpretation of La Jetée? And on the topic of Marker, what exactly is the La Jetée film festival that you both
attended or the project to reveal his web-browsing history? I’ve never heard of
either of these…
Mike: Buddhists
sometimes speak of the three kinds of impression an experience can make. Some
experiences are written on water, some on sand, others in stone. When we first
saw La Jetée it felt like it was
written in stone. It is a science-fiction movie about a future that became my
future, as if it was conceived and photographed for me alone. As if I had
uncovered, strangely and unwittingly, the script for my new life.
The movie’s unlikely
romance is set in the aftermath of a terrible war where the question of second
chances is floated. If you could survive your own death, what story would be
compelling enough to keep your new hope alive? When “the cocktail” arrived in the
mid-90s, millions of us who were HIV-positive were delivered from a certain
death sentence, at least, those who were not already too close to the end, or
who were fortunate enough to live in a country that granted access. But we were
faced with a new and unsuspected challenge. We had lived with the promise of
closure that proved a rigorous mission, we had bent ourselves towards our
dying, and now that had been taken away. Marker provided a map for what might
happen next.
Marker’s website
has been lovingly maintained (chrismarker.org), his web browsings are part of a
Second Life cache, and the festival was part of a private arrangement made with
Parisian avant-gardist Yann Beauvais.
David: The book recalls Marker’s Sans Soleil with its structure of
corresponding letters (which you also discuss in the book). How did these
correspondences proceed and when did the two of you decide that this would take
the form of a book? What is the time span between all of the exchanges? Which one
of you also wrote the third person narrations at the beginning of each section?
Mike: In one of
our earliest convos, I mentioned to Chase that I became HIV-positive long
before drugs were available, I should have died, but brave new chemistries
granted me a second life. Chase began his life as a she, and now is a he. It’s
as if, we couldn’t help thinking: you only live twice!
We are both
creatures of distance. The only way we could be close, close enough to divulge
our forbidden secrets even, was to create a reliable structure. Instead of the
unwanted slippages of a live encounter, we could comb our words smooth before
releasing them. It helped that our letters always arrived as part of an
exchange, nodding yes or no, or simply exclaiming in surprise over the last
received missive. You did what? It was hard to keep up with Chase’s winning
retrieval of dating patterns or familial trysts, each missive was a nudge to
step further out on a limb of trust, newly undressed.
The earliest
form of the novel was a collection of letters, and it was necessary for us to
retrieve this old technology — the technology of the novel and its open-ended
hopes — in order to find a common language. There are so many different ways to
become a couple. Some couples like to look at things together. Ford Maddox Ford said that you marry to continue the conversation. We wrote our way towards one another.
The project took
about a year and a half to write, generating too many versions to count, and in
a gesture of trust that still seems unthinkable one of us would be visited by
an inspiring moment of reinvention and shuffle up the chapters. The responses
were rapid, or that’s how it felt at the time. It took shape organically, the way
a chitchat proceeds, with all of the important underground bits as exposed as
we could make them. We didn’t have a map at the beginning, only the compass of
our inclinations. The novelist Catherine Bush was instrumental in applying a
three-act structure: first life, transition, second life. Once that was in
place it was obvious that the stories of our live encounters would provide the
opening moments of each period.
David: The confessional aspects about the
personal effects of the AIDS epidemic in the book (and in your films in
general) present a complex portrait of the emotional and social toll that the
disease was imposing onto people and the society at the time. This is one of
the strengths of the book as it testifies to this pivotal moment in Canada’s
cultural memory. Can you talk more about the period in terms of how these
issues were being engaged with in Toronto by activist queer filmmakers and
artist such as yourself, John Greyson, Bruce LaBruce, Will Munro and General
Idea? What was the urgency to create art, films and media in this period?
Mike: I think
the work offers testimonies, a bearing witness, but it’s interesting the word
you use instead – confessional. It recalls Augustine’s book of the same name, Confessions, often cited as the first autobiography.
His confession is also the saga of conversion, and both hinge on a calling;
Augustine describes a voice reciting a Biblical passage, and at this moment he
is called to convert to Christianity. His would be the first of innumerable
callings and conversions, the template for being “born again” into a second
life.
After my
sero-conversion (becoming HIV positive) I was also called to make work about
the condition. Along with many others, as you note. Two of the three folks who
made up General Idea died of AIDS, and their work increasingly turned towards
an examination of the iconography and politics of AIDS, most famously turning
Robert Indiana’s LOVE poster into AIDS, or filling a room with oversize
capsules and calling it One Year of AZT. AA Bronson’s heartbreaking book about
the loss of his comrades (Negative
Thoughts) remains a touchstone.
The rapid spread
of the virus was also a problem of pictures. How do we make pictures that can
inform, that can create changes in government policy and pharmaceutical
practice, and in our sexual lives? Will Munro was a genius of making community
pictures that were big enough for unmet strangers to live in.
I think John
Greyson and Richard Fung are the two premier political poets in the fringe
media arts scene. Their activism finds new roots in their pictures, Richard’s
through a steadfast approach to family, while John’s hybrid creations arrive
from a political collage tradition. In his masterpiece Fig Trees, John creates an AIDS opera (!) starring Tim McCaskell
and Zackie Achmat, the South African activist whose drug strike brought Nelson
Mandela and finally the government onboard to change its deadly policy of
refusing AIDS pharmaceuticals. Richard meanwhile also made a movie with Tim,
who is not incidentally his partner, and tells the story of his becoming HIV,
and blends this illness narrative with his ailing sister, with essayistic
asides on colonialism and disease.
I think one of
the hopes of fringe media is to find new forms for new contents. To allow
different kinds of voices to speak, and to allow them to be heard in different
ways. How can we learn to love each other in a new way, and how can we learn to
make pictures with each other that might make these new dreams possible?
David: With your published interviews
with experimental filmmakers, the website Fringe Online (fringeonline.ca) and
the vast archive on your own website (mikehoolboom.com includes 28
free-to-download books, the Independent Eye Magazine, Funnel experimental film
collective) you provide an archeology of an underground and experimental film
history of Toronto that’s a little forgotten about today. What is it about this
late-80s to 90s period that you think is really important and should be better
remembered?
Mike: When I
started making and seeing fringe media it was part of a climate of anti-capital
resistance. It wasn’t simply the movies we made, it was the places we lived,
the clothes we wore (and didn’t wear), the things we didn’t own, the values we held
in common. It was the way we had sex, the conversations we risked, the openings
and closings of a face. You made movies with your whole body, as the dancer
Deborah Hay likes to say, the whole body at once is the teacher.
Today at least
some of the fringe is in danger of becoming a genre, sealed inside an academic
kiss, safeguarding its rules and conventions. Recalling earlier modes of
cultural resistance is not a nostalgia-fest, or some longing for the good old
days, they are warning signs and reminders from the shoulders of past roads.
The real estate moguls leveled the old avant scenes and undergrounds. How might
they be reimagined today, as the triumphal march of capital turns once radical
institutions into ruling class projections? Perhaps we can pick up a few old riffs
and hack our way into new pleasure zones, where the lack of a good job will not
effect our ability to hook up, where our new distraction machines will not
distract us from each other.
David: Your Vimeo account (vimeo.com/mikehoolboom)
is a great resource. Aside from Positiv and
Mark, which you discuss in the book,
what of your other work would you recommend people to watch to have a better
idea of your focus and aesthetic in your body of work? And what are the videos
that you have been making in recent years?
Mike: I’ve been
slowly reworking and re-editing my entire body of work and posting it on Vimeo,
there are more than thirty movies up, and the heap continues to grow. I made a
home movie about my nephew called Jack
(2000) that’s a dozen minutes long, featuring moments from his first five
years. Frank’s Cock (1993) received a
generous reception when it arrived, nearly two decades ago, winning awards at
Locarno, TIFF and many other ports of call. There were three features in the
early noughts that I’m partial to: Tom,
Imitations of Life and Public Lighting. New versions of Tom and Public Lighting are ready for their close-up, bits and pieces of Imitations are online and there’s more
to come.
Last year I
finished an hour-long Marxist love story on super 8 that premiered in Rotterdam
called We Make Couples. Could the
couple also be a form of resistance? It features guest appearances by Occupy,
Pussy Riot protesters, a runaway goat, two poodles, an army of street marchers,
Mos Def, Frankenstein and cinema’s first kiss.
I also made Incident Reports last year, a
feature-length movie made of one-minute shots that premiered at the Images
Festival. It’s a love letter to Toronto with a number of cameos by my pals,
film artists and writers mostly. I’m recutting Incident Reports, as usual, tweaking the sound, swapping out some
shots, bigging up the colour. Digital media means never having to say the word
stop. Last year’s flicks are not up for public viewing on Vimeo yet, but soon
they’ll join the others. This year I’m working on four new shorts and a pair of
new features. I just edited a book of Mike Cartmell’s brilliant writing called Disasterologies, and am nearly finished
an oral history book about the Funnel, both books will be published by the kind
and generous folks at the Canadian Film Institute.
No comments:
Post a Comment