Journal of Film Preservation - FIAF

dans le contexte du débat très actuel :
rétrospective complète vs rétrospective
sélective. Les expériences récentes de
Vienne, Toronto et Copenhague sont
notamment mises à profit pour éclairer
le débat.
La production nationale et sa
place dans le programme des
cinémathèques (Londres, Toronto,
Copenhague) est aussi débattue,
comme l’est la question souvent
controversée des séries thématiques
et des séries dite « géographiques »,
c’est-à-dire consacrées à un pays en
particulier et qui, pour le meilleur et
pour le pire, sont fréquemment bâties
en collaboration avec les ambassades
et les services culturels des pays
sélectionnés.
Sont également abordées les questions
plus générales de planification :
de l’équilibre des programmes à
l’identification des publics cibles,
en passant par la périodicité du
programme imprimé, à la répétition
des séances (voire même la mise à
l’affiche prolongée d’un film : une
semaine, deux semaines), comme
parfois pratiqué à Londres, Toronto et à
l’American Cinematheque, au prix des
billets et l’existence d’un abonnement.
L’expérience de distribution (au sens
strict du terme) du Filmmuseum
d’Amsterdam, vu son caractère unique
dans le paysage des cinémathèques,
fait l’objet d’un chapitre particulier.
Enfin l’auteur examine les pratiques
actuelles vis-à-vis les festivals, les
musées et les salles commerciales;
soulève la question du vieillissement
du public de nos projections; du
caractère de la programmation
(populaire ou élitiste?) et fait état
d’expériences récentes et innovatrices.
sits at a TV station, a cinematheque, or a festival and puts together a film
programme. The curator, on the other hand, navigates all areas of a film
museum.
The archivist does not need to know how to interpret what he keeps in
the archives and the programmer does not need to have knowledge of
a film’s origin. The curator, on the other hand, interprets the collection to
the audience and staff of the institution. To curate at film museums is to
translate and interpret, says Horwath.
The view that a curator should both monitor a film collection and have a
paternal, Olympian overview of all aspects of a film museum’s activities
is met with surprise at Cinematheque Ontario, as they don’t have a film
collection. There, the head of programming, James Quandt, organizes a
large director-retrospective every second or third year, which tours 15-20
North American cities and which is also shown at European cinematheques.
Subjects have included directors such as Robert Bresson, Kon Ichikawa, Kenji
Mizoguchi, Shohei Imamura, and Mikio Naruse. For these retrospectives,
Quandt has developed detailed monographs. The touring retrospectives are
viewed as the strength of the cinematheque – especially in relation to FIAF.
Quandt sees himself as a curator: “It is possible to be a curator of ideas and
various film series without being connected to a collection,” Quandt and his
team claim.
The Austrian Film Museum programmes many films from their own archives,
and 80% of the films screened at the Cinémathèque Royale in Brussels come
from the large film archive in the Belgian capital. The Museum of Modern
Art in New York also draws largely from its extensive film collection when
programming. In Copenhagen only about 45% of the film prints screened
are from our own archive. It is at even a lower percentage at other venues.
Finally, as mentioned before, there are cinematheques not connected to
any archive.
For many of the film archives and museums in Western Europe and the
United States, cinematheques do not function as a window to a film archive.
The majority of the programmed films come from other print sources rather
than their own archive. In many archives, programming is a separate post,
which as such brings our work as programmers closer to that of a curator
at an art museum. There are so many different institution models when
we refer to cinematheques and film museums that the definition of film
curatorship offered by the book Film Curatorship will only be relevant to very
few people in a very limited number of film museums and archives.
The job of programmer or curator at a cinematheque is different from
the function of the curator at an art museum in that film programming
is a continuous activity that takes place in a specific cultural institution.
It is largely controlled by the need for versatility, comprehensiveness,
and balance – certain historical periods, directors, and genres must be
represented in the programme selection.
A curator at an art museum implements more idea-driven, subjective
projects. On top of that, several curators within the field of visual art work as
freelancers and as such are not tied to specific cultural institutions. Our most
important function within the film world, whether we call ourselves curators
or programmers, is to create a contextual experience for the audience – to
place films in their right context.
7 Journal of Film Preservation / 81 / 2009