|
By Judd
Ne'eman
From 3rd
Edition--
Consumed with the
war against the Palestinians, the impact of the Holocaust and the death
ethos, the political cinema of the 1980s in Israel presented a radical
critique of Zionism and set the stage for an apocalyptic/dystopian cinema
in the 1990s. Popular cinema in modern society functions in a similar
way to mythology in prehistoric societies. It exposes conceptual contradictions,
on the one hand, and explicates unresolved social dilemmas, on the other.
In this respect, the 1980s Israeli cinema foreshadowed the emergence
of a new historiography and sociology of the 1990s.
Loss of power to the nationalist right-wing parties in 1977 prompted
a new moral and political stance among the left-wing cultural elite
which was totally opposed to the nationalist Likud government’s promotion
of Jewish colonization. At the same time the left was disillusioned
with the lethargic Labor party and its acquiescence vis-à-vis the colonization
and the eviction of the Palestinians from their land. The new platform
of the left consisted of two main components: 1) resisting the occupation
by means of every political and legal instrument, including objecting
to military service in the occupied territories; 2) adopting the “two
states for two peoples” solution and promoting direct negotiation with
the PLO. The Israeli cinema expressed the political mobilization of
the cultural elite when, concurrent with the upheaval of the 1977 elections,
a new school of films emerged. The political cinema was born protesting
“the political reality in Israel and more importantly, foregrounding
the question of Israeli identity.” (Gertz: 176) This new cinema articulated
a radical critique of Zionism that in its rigor and dissidence exceeded
a discourse of protest of the political left.
In the late 1970s, three films foreshadowed the forthcoming political
cinema of the 1980s. HIRBETH HIZ’AH (Ram Levy, 1978), dealing with the
1948 roots of the Israeli Palestinian conflict, forecast the production
of several “conflict films.” PARATROOPERS (Judd Ne’eman, 1977), the
first anti-heroic army film, set the stage for a dozen anti-war films
which, based on their social philosophy, I have called the “nihilistic
cinema.” WOODEN GUN (Ilan Moshenson, 1978), for the first time in Israeli
cinema, revealed a shadow cast by the Holocaust on Israeli society and
previewed a number of related films which I have entitled the “Shadow
Cinema.” A radical critique is articulated through the films’ subtexts:
(a) in the Conflict Films, rudiments of both Near-Eastern myths and
medieval romance deconstruct the Zionist master narrative; (b) in the
Nihilistic Cinema, a deeply embedded nihilist philosophy lays open and
explicates the national death ethos; and (c) in the Shadow Cinema, Holocaust
guilt-laden film characters represent a post-traumatic syndrome leading
to psychic numbness and an obsession with death.
CONFLICT
FILMS
The 1980s Conflict Films reformulate Arab-Jew relationships and challenge
the Zionist master-narrative which dominated 1930s -1950s cinema in
films such as ODED THE WANDERER (Chaim Halachmi, 1932), SABRA (Alexander
Ford, 1933), ON THE RUINS (Nathan Axelrod, 1936), MY FATHER’S HOUSE
(Herbert Kline, 1947) OUT OF EVIL (Joseph Krumgold, 1952) and THEY WERE
TEN (Baruch Dienar, 1959). The rewriting of Zionist master-narrative
by means of the Israeli cinema began in 1978 with HIRBET HIZ’AH, Ram
Levy’s television drama, and continued to develop in films such as HAMSIN
(Daniel Wachsman, 1982), BEYOND THE WALLS (Uri Barabash, 1984), SMILE
OF THE LAMB (Shimon Dotan, 1986), AVANTI POPOLO (Rafi Bukai, 1986) and
GREENFIELDS (Yitzhak Yeshurun, 1989). Not only do these films present
the Arab-Israeli conflict as an uncompromising struggle between two
national movements but they in some instances judge the whole Zionist
quest as misplaced.
Ironically, both 1930s-1950s Zionist cinema and 1980s Conflict Films
exhibit, in both their iconography and narrative, rudiments of ancient
Near Eastern myth, and resemble two phases of the medieval Holy Grail
romances. The iconographic motifs of chalice and blade appearing frequently
in Grail romances are directly related to ancient near-Eastern fertility
rituals. In Israeli cinema the same icons, chalice and blade, originate
from the cultural wells of the ancient Near-East, both from local Arab
tradition and from ancient Judaism. Another common cultural basis of
cinematic representations which link the Zionist cinema to the Grail
romances is utopianism - the ambition to redeem a people and restore
a land. The first cycle of Grail romances features a two-fold mission
for the quester (the Grail hero):
(a) “restore the health and vigor to a king suffering from infirmity
caused by wounds, sickness or old age” and
(b) “restore the waters to their channels and render the land once more
fertile.” (Weston: 20)
 Key
films of the early Zionist cinema such as SABRA, LAND OF PROMISE (Yehuda
Lehman, 1935), or OUT OF EVIL, feature in their opening sequences a
wasteland followed by scenes in which the Arabs are seen using very
old agricultural technologies that cannot keep the land fertile. In
the Grail romance the King’s infirmity has a disastrous effect on his
kingdom, depriving it of vegetation or exposing it to the ravages of
war. The Grail hero revitalizes the wasteland by freeing the waters
and restoring the rivers to their channels. Similarly, in early Zionist
cinema the pioneer-hero frees natural waters by digging (SABRA), or
drilling a well (AVODAH), or by forcing Arab peasants to give away water
rights (THEY WERE TEN). The Arab jar, a traditional water container,
appears in these films along with a plough blade, both symbolizing the
process by which the wasteland is revitalized. The sword dance, rooted
in the fertility cults of Tammuz, Isis, and Osiris, corresponds to the
hora circle dance of the pioneers. These early films present an Arab
patriarch - a sheik or a muchtar - as the antagonist of the Zionist
pioneers. Characteristically weak, wicked or backward, Muchtar is defeated
by young, virile and progressive Zionist pioneers. These scenes are
related to both the Near Eastern mystery cult, where the death of the
demigod symbolizes the end of the agrarian year, and the Grail romance,
where the rejuvenation of the sterile or old king by the quester eventually
frees the waters and restores the wasteland.
NEXT
PAGE
Israeli Cinema of the 1980's & 1990's:
A Radical Critique of Zionism
|
Article:
Introduction
Producing Your Own Film Festival
Independent Jewish Film in America
Sephardic Cinema
Israeli Cinema
Film & The Holocaust
The SFJFF In Moscow
|
