jüm-jüm
Dieter Kuhlbrodt,
Filmkritik, May, 1968
In “jüm-jüm” by Dore 0. and Werner Nekes, a girl swings for 10 minutes in front of a movie screen, on which is painted a phallus (slightly abstract and fairly large) The perspective is such that the girl appears to be swinging into and out of the phallus. If one is content to see through the specific event. the work exhausts itself in a trivial aspect, the literary. This is most comfortable for the critic: the literary content of a work is easiest to reproduce in a literary form of criticism.
But my description of the phallus and the jüm-jüm will only lead the reader astray: as the "literary" event becomes apparent, the qualities of the film are not exhausted, but heightened. Violent beauty is disclosed by the film's severe construction (the reduction to visual detail and one musical key), the ornamental repetition of the few settings focuses on ritual necessity. Perhaps these words are too large for jüm-jüm. But how, other than with emotional concern, should a critic discuss a work which engages him not only literarily, but completely emotionally? And how can he reduce to familiar concepts that which he finds unfamiliar? An innovation cannot be formulated, only described. And for the critic of films like jüm-jüm, his duty is to see the film as a work of fine art. The film by Dore 0. and Werner Nekes had an important political function at Oberhausen for this reason: to draw attention to the necessity in the fine arts sphere of seeing and criticizing not only with the literary method. For that reason it belonged in the program, as did the two ''gurtrug'' films by Nekes. As highly as I esteem jüm-jüm, however, it appears doubtful to me that the direct use of works of fine art in film (the painted screen) can do justice to the claim of the film to be taken seriously as a work of fine art. The two "gurtrug” films are to that extent, more convincing. Dore O.'s and Werner Nekes' jüm-jüm shows simultaneously the span and the large sphere around which the fine arts, or the film, can be enlarged
Dieter Kuhlbrodt,
Filmkritik, May, 1968
 |
