-
15 The Construction of Reality: Aspects of Austrian Cinema between Fiction and Documentary
- Wilfrid Laurier University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
15 The Construction of Reality: Aspects of Austrian Cinema between Fiction and Documentary Barbara Pichler Abstract Austrian cinema is known for its affinity to realist filmmaking. But is that attitude shared by Austria’s youngest generation of filmmakers? Four case studies provide an opportunity to explore notions of authenticity and veracity in contemporary Austrian film. While some of these films owe a debt to more established filmmakers such as Michael Haneke and Ulrich Seidl, the diversity of aesthetic and narrative structures in these films indicates that Austrian filmmaking’s most likely shared trait is a desire to challenge the expectations and mindsets of its viewers. R ealism, veracity, authenticity. What Austrian cinema, especially the feature film, is known for worldwide is a certain form of realist cinema, marked by an almost obsessive observation and at the same time forceful stylization of reality. It is often said that artists represent the conscience of a nation. In Austria that conscience tends to be expressed with a certain amount of contempt. […] True to form, the salient quality of Austrian film’s new wave is its willingness to confront the abject and emphasize the negative. In recent years this tiny country has become something like the world capital of feel-bad cinema. (Lim, “Austrian Filmmakers”) Even if slightly polemical, that statement summarizes the dominant stereotype about Austrian cinema. This perception was determined by the two big names in Austrian filmmaking, Michael Haneke and Ulrich Seidl—two auteurs 267 enjoying great authority among cinephiles worldwide. Ulrich Seidl often describes his way of making films as an attempt “to find the authentic in the world” (qtd. in Rebhandl), a world that is at the same time specific and general. In regards to Haneke, it is stressed that he is on the lookout for the “real,” for the “incorruptible gaze” (Rebhandl). These two directors, and the responses of a group of younger filmmakers to their predecessors’ oeuvres, have generated whatmaybeperceivedasadominantformofnarrationandstyleinAustriancinema . Critic Stefan Grissemann describes this as a specific, maybe slightly academic , and sometimes arrogant form of auteurism. Critic Bert Rebhandl offers an even sharper diagnosis, when he says that all these filmmakers share “an uneasiness with modernity. […] They tend to be determinist. They start with a preconceived assumption which they want to prove cinematically” (6). Theseclichés,asalways,containakerneloftruth,whileatthesametimethey overlook the far greater underlying complexities. In actual fact Austrian film production is much more diverse. Not only is there a dynamic and thriving experimentalscenethatisinformedbythecriticaldiscussionandsometimesalso continuation of the country’s quite exceptional avant-garde tradition, but there is also an abundance of short and medium-length works, especially in the documentary sector. If one uses the word cinema to describe the audiovisual output not specifically produced for TV, the landscape of Austrian cinema is quite diverse, especially for a small country like Austria. One has to concede that this argument might not look as convincing from abroad, however, both because the films produced never make it to cinemas beyond Austria’s borders or from the start only reach small, specifically interested audiences. What remains are the films that make it to international festivals, and it is these films that seem to be marked by a strange homogeneity or a typical style defined by a precise framing of the image, a deliberate pace, sparse use of dialogue, a specific stylization —a dominant form of realism, an authoritative mode of narration, or put simply: a pervading sense of pessimism. This idea of realism is the focus of this essay. I would like to think about tendencies and perspectives of Austrian cinema and provide a more differentiatedview .Myargumentisbasedonfourexamples—casestudies,ifyouwill.Produced between 2003 and 2007, the films under discussion are works of young filmmakers who enjoyed international critical success. I am interested in how they construct reality, but also in the reception of the films in Austria and Germany , their home market so to speak. There is no doubt that Michael Haneke and Ulrich Seidl have influenced a number of young filmmakers. The first two examples explore the impact of these two auteurs. AN INSIDER’S VIEW 268 [107.23.157.16] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 03:28 GMT) Case Study 1: Struggle (Ruth Mader, 2003) and the Haneke Approach The inspiration for this film, which Ruth Mader wrote in collaboration with Barbara Albert, herself one of the main protagonists of the young and successful Austrian cinema, and Martin Leidenfrost, were the lives of illegal harvesters from Eastern Europe. The story revolves around two main protagonists: Ewa from Poland...