觀影線索~關於【環境】viewing trends: on environment

關於【環境】

「環境」一詞讓人有很多聯想:綠色、大自然動植物、污染破壞、城鄉發展……除卻自然的物理空間,「人」作為群居的集體,在環境當中有著怎樣的位置?

本屆有關環境議題的影片,從土地規劃到能源使用,表面上是專職官員和專業人士才能參與的問題。一旦落實到你我的生活當中,有權策劃和決定環境事宜的人,與切實受這些安排影響的人,他們各自對「環境」的理解有沒有落差?誰又在種種與環境有關的安排之下,得到/失去了什麼?大家旁觀別人遭遇時又有否想過,自身是否真的與這些事情無關?別人在我們之前率先受難的時候,大家又可以如何回應?

on environment

the word ‘environment’ lets us think of: green, animals and plants of nature, contamination and destruction, urban and rural development…apart from the natural physical space, what is the position of ‘human’ living in groups, in the environment?

the environmental issues highlighted in films this year, from land use planning to energy use, seem to be the concern of respective officials and professionals only. when it comes to real life practice, what is the difference in the understanding of the ‘environment’ between those who have the power to plan and make decisions, and those who are directly affected by related policies? who then gain/lose something under the arrangements related to the environment? when we witness someone else’s situation, do we really have nothing to do with this? how can we respond to the situation that others are suffering already?

Advertisements

觀影線索~關於【媒體】viewing trends: on media

關於【媒體】

2012年第十屆社運電影節受到匯豐驅趕(註),主流媒體口徑一致地歪曲報導成響應「佔領華爾街」的「佔領中環人士」重返匯豐。三人成虎,媒體告知大眾一個個「被事實化的事實」。通過微妙的媒體框架,主流媒體有意無意地悲情化社會弱勢,或妖魔化主流社會不歡迎的人群;通過畫面、聲音、拍攝角度的截取甚至是記者衣著裝扮的設計,以偏概全甚至歪曲事理,觀眾對事實的理解也只能如瞎子摸象。大眾媒體似乎力量無窮,可以影響民意甚至左右政局。但,作為運動者或普通市民,我們是否只能如此無力地接受?本屆電影節的數部影片均有探討媒體之於社會議題的討論和社會運動發展當中的角色。
註:詳見《匯豐皇國(2012.10.6-7) 社運電影節十年最黑暗的兩天」》,http://smff2012.wordpress.com/2012/10/12/smffvshsbc/

on media

in 2012, the 10th hong kong social movement film festival is forcefully evicted by the hsbc security guards*, the mass media distorted the news as “occupy central” activists tried to re-occupy the hsbc ground-floor space (“occupy central” as echoing the “occupy wall street” movement in north america). mass media attempt to tell the public the “facts” they produced. with delicately-made news frame, mass media somewhat traumatize the weaks or demonize the marginalized communities which are not welcomed by the mainstream society. the selected images, sound, filming angles or even the outfit of the reporters shown on the television, could only tell the public part of the truth (even no truth) as the mass media wish. it seems that, mass media is so powerful that the public could not avoid but only to accept this cruelty. but, is it the whole story? as ordinary citizens or as activists, you may seek possible answers from the films.

* : see <hsbc kingdom 2012.10.6-7, the darkest two days for the ten-year social movement film festival> http://smff2012.wordpress.com/2012/10/12/smffvshsbc/

 

觀影線索~關於【勞工】viewing trends: on labour

關於【勞工】
新自由主義政經框架下,資本看似自由的流動。資本,除了包含金錢,還有人。人的流動,是追求更好的生活,但通過何種方式去追求,到何處去追求,是否真的有自由的選擇?這個選擇的權利是否人人平等?通過本屆幾部關於本地和外籍勞動者的影像也許給觀眾多一點思考。各行各業,從家頭細務,到修理飛機大砲,勞動者,除卻物理上的「勞動」,其實,都是有血有肉的「人」。
on labour

it is claimed that global capital could flow freely under the neo-liberalistic system. what is capital? besides the money, human beings, as we usually call man power or human resource, are also included. mobilizing from rural place to big cities, from country to country, people hope for a better life – we call them the “migrant labors”. but, do they really have their own choice where to go and what to do? are the opportunities really equal to every body, as the neo-liberalists tell us? after viewing the movies about labors home and abroad, maybe you would have a second thought. furthermore, what we could imagine about labor? besides the physical labor work as they do, they are human, just like each of you. human think, talk, express their emotion and embrace their lives.

觀影線索~關於【性/別】viewing trends: on gender

關於【性/別】

談論性別,我們不是在談生理上的男性和女性,而是在談社會分配給兩種性別的氣質定型。同時,這些氣質定型(如剛強/柔弱;理性/非理性等),又早已被賦予了不同的社會價值。這些,在效果上,造成了「男性」和「女性」應該有的樣子和可以做的事情。這些定型的要求,分別會對兩性或其他性別認同的人帶來沉重的壓力。同時,這些定型的要求,結合其他社會分配機制(如族群/階級)之後,又分別對微小的個體產生不同的壓力效果。其實,對於各種性別身份,我們又是否有選擇的權利?透過性/別這條線索,你可以在這些影片中看到什麼?

on gender

talking about gender, we are not talking about biological male and female, but the temperament socially assigned to biological male and female, and finally, the social value given to these temperament. these distribution of cultural resources creates standard stereotypes and asks for conformity. those fall out of the standard/mainstream would be subjected to heavy social pressure. in fact, do we have choices in gender identity? what can you see, through this viewing thread.

觀影線索~關於【另類出路】viewing trends: on alternatives

關於【另類出路】

面對眼前惡劣處境,難道舊酒新瓶,就會不那麼苦澀?就算新瓶是你所選,又如何?
畢竟,選舉以外,才是根本所在。讓我們一同看看,各處蘊釀當中的群體自主的嘗試。固然問「人與人如何結連去抗壓迫?」,更問「人與人如何結連而不製造壓迫?」。
on alternatives
while facing obnoxious circumstances, how can new bottles make the old wine taste less bitter? albeit the new bottle is of your choosing?
after all, it is beyond all the votings and representation, where lies the fundamentals for change. so let us study the attempts for collective autonomy undergoing in different places. inquiring “how to organize against oppression?” moreover, “how to organize while not creating oppression?”

觀影線索~關於【商討】on deliberation

關於【商討】

當我們認知到投票的局限性之時,有提議「商討」作為一個補充投票不足之處的方法,讓持份者有更多機會發言。但話說出了口,卻不一定被聆聽。如何摒棄因為人微所以言輕的陋習?如何令弱勢意見能夠左右群體決策?這些才是「商討」這個方法需要處理的問題。串連線索的幾齣影片,呈現了一些抗爭中的群體討論決策過程,這些聆聽溝通的嘗試,遇到、又克服了什麼困難?並有延伸活動,試經由工作坊實驗,指認出我們在平日溝通常不自覺犯的錯誤。

on deliberation

when we’ve acknowledged the limitations of voting, some suggest “deliberation” as an supplement, by providing more chance for stakeholders to express and converse. yet what is spoken, might not be heard. how to avoid the habit of discarding one’s opinion base on their social status/ personal image? how to ensure minority’s opinion do matter to the collective decision? those are the problems that “deliberation” mode has to deal with. the several films on this thread show the decision-making process in the movement, by means of collective discussion. what obstacles have these trials of listening and converse faced and overcame? also there will be a workshop, in which we are going to pin-point the common, unconscious mistakes that hampers discussion.

觀影線索~關於【全球化】

關於【全球化】

全球化全球化,這三個字你或許有時會說它是投資賺錢的好機遇;或是買平靚正貨的好原因;有時會說它是必然過程,甚至說是對發展中國家的,請憐憫同情消災解難。這樣說全球化,這三個字便是真象?便是全球化帶來的事實嗎?

資本累積資本,資本追逐資本,資本經過政客和資本家,他們撈兩把,然後,再來!讓資本翻八翻,資本又累積資本,資本又追逐資本,政客和資本家都想辦法撈多十六把,立一些對他們有利的法則、訂一些他們的規矩,聯合一切他們能聯合的資本家和政客,花光所有腦汁,目的讓資本翻三十二翻,再把他們訂的法則、立的規矩裝飾得更漂亮,撈多六十四把。資本可以想留就留想走就走,再累積資本,再追蹤資本。資本經過的地域,執行辦法中的地方,同時衍生出不同形狀不同形式的壓迫,那些壓迫影響的是一-個-個-活-生-生-的人。

在「全球化」這條觀影線索當中,每條選片皆流著全球化的禍根,亦看到人民在這一環環流動之中,發出真實的聲音。在這逃不開,留不下的全球政治經濟網絡當中,人民都在流動,隨著資本走,隨著資本被迫走,資本累積同義詞是認錢不認人,走呀走,走呀走~~不過,除此以外, 同時也發生了無權勢者跨裔跨藉跨地發展出來的連結和抵抗。

你會看到非裔新移民、越藉菲藉移工在某時某地某抗爭中的生活面貌,和反世貿時,跨裔跨藉跨地發展出另一種友誼的可貴。

即使是留和守,人民仍須要面對全球資本對人民賴以為生的土地的覬覦,要面對保護家園的種種鬥爭;又或即使留守不走,全球資本對你生活週遭環境的破壞,最後可能也迫令你不得不走。如果走與留,都要面對嚴峻處境的話,無權勢者是否只能接受這種被設定為賺錢工具的命運呢?

 

on globalization

capital flows, it shapes and differentiate various forms of oppression which is affecting each individuals. The selection of “globalization” are all about bane, but also about people realistic voice inside a flow linked with another flow.

among economic-politically global network, who could escape from? who wanna stay without autonomous life? people run and capital flows, capital means accumulation but do not refers to humanity. people keep running and being forced to flow. however, solidarity and resistance have been being taken place linked by powerless people.

or you stay and defend, the people still have to face the struggles to protect their homes and land, where global capital flows; due to damaged life circumstance,  you are finally compelled to give up even you make choices to stay and defend , where capital flows. whatever run or flow, stay or defend, people have to face the grim situation, the question have to been asked, is it the only way of powerless people to accept the fate that is set up as tools of making money?