Applause for a Donkey: An Interview with Krzysztof Zanussi by Zdzislaw Pietrasik Author(s): Krzysztof Zanussi, Zdzislaw Pietrasik, Elzbieta

Matynia, Richard Adams Source: Performing Arts Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2/3 (1990), pp. 21-28 Published by: Performing Arts Journal, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3245550 Accessed: 27/11/2010 14:30
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=paj. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Performing Arts Journal, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Performing Arts Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

Applausefor a Donkey

An interview with Krzysztof Zanussi

by ZdzislawPietrasik

PIETRASIK: Many of our artists have recently been actively involved in have become Ministers, Senators, and Representatives.It Some politics. to seems me you don't have the temperament for this. ZANUSSI: On the contrary,I reallybelieve I do have the temperamentand see myself as performingcertainpublic functions. It seems to me that I've given clearevidencethat I can be useful not only in the role of film director. Not long ago there was talk of your being a candidate for Chairmanof Polish Radioand Television. Since Mr. Drawicz [the currentChairman]mentionedit publicly, I won't deny it, althoughthe PrimeMinister's [TadeuszMazowiecki]negotiations are in fact confidential.Yes, my candidacyfor this position was discussed and I want to emphasizevery clearlythat I didagreeto it. But I was not able within the short time allowedme by the PrimeMinisterto free myselffrom all foreign contracts.More time was needed for my agents to find ways to withdrawfrom the contractsthan he could afford.Still, I think maybe it workedout for the best, since I don't think that I would have been an ideal candidatefor this unusuallydifficultposition. Television today should give society a feeling of confidence.In orderto accomplishthat, people have to be replaced.I think that Mr. Drawicz,who sufferedmuch more than I did,

21

is in a betterpositionto be a strictjudge of those who should have access to the antenna. Does that mean that someone who didn't suffer isn't credible? Well, you know, a bit less so. The sufferingis an unquestionedtrumpcard. Todaymany boast that they suffered. But really many did suffer. Certainly,but is this sufficient reasonfor glory? This is the way people get on the lists of the decent. Since those who suffered are the more decent ones, everybodytries to producea certificateof decency. I never was imprisoned,and I feel terribleabout it. On televisionthis statementwould come through more effectivelybecause viewerswouldalso be able to see the way in whichyou said it. But all right. Whatare decent people to do who never did time in prison? We must laboriouslycarryout our duties, conscious that for some time we are not going to be in the limelight. We are simply not much of an attraction today.It may just be a matterof one season, and certainlythis espritof the veteranswill pass. In fact it's weakerthan I had expectedanyway. That veteranspiritaffectedour cinema, stillfeeding on memoriesof the recent heroicpast, when it "knocked" the authoritiesand hadsociety behind it. I like to quote a certain remarkby Jaime Sin, the PhilippineCardinal,the leaderof the Church,who playeda big role in overthrowingMarcos. When Sin appearedin Rome, he was welcomed here as a representativeof the Churchtriumphant,and duringthe pressconference,he was askedhow he felt in this role. He answeredthat he felt like the donkey on which Christ enteredJerusalem.The donkey thought the applausewas for him. Nice metaphor,a lesson in Christianmodesty. Yes. But it includesanothermessageas well. I think it can be appliedto the situationof artistsin a society living underpressure.A lot of applausethat we receivedthrough the years was only seemingly deservedby us. Applausefor the donkey, then. Society was on our side because it was against the authorities.They applaudedus becausewe somehow managedto deceive the authoritiesand to say more than they allowedus to say. Through the flexibleand innovative

22

language[of cinema] we were ableto introducecertainideaswhich couldn't be expressedin anotherlanguage.The audienceknew this code and this is why we got that applausefor the donkey. The censorshippretendedthat it didn't know the code. is a problemwhich concernsme very much, especiallyfrom the Censorship moral standpoint.Of course we can entertaineach other with stories about what they cut out-which wordsand which detailsworriedthe censor. This traditiongoes back to czarist times. They talked about censorship in the same way, and it doesn't lead to anything essential.But the horrorof censorship and the whole responsibilitylies in this that it is an instrument of social injusticeand a poor functioningof the state. It acts as an anaesthetic for the authorities, or it eliminates the symptoms of the illness without eliminatingits causes. And what about state secrets and our alliances? When one knows the cuts of the censor, when one knows the books of censored materials,then one knows that the censorship served another purpose. You are using the past tense. The problem of censorship,one of the fundamentalproblems of the artist in Poland, is disappearing. Already today everything-well, almost everything-can be said. But somehow we aren't seeing any masterpieces. Since everythingcan be said, we have to get busy with real art. New times will requirenew tasks. We will need a differentcinema now. One has been hearing this said for a couple of seasons, that a different cinema is needed. But we still don't know what kind. It seems to me that this cinema will have to fulfill the most generalconditions of any art in any time-it has to be true and sincere. It has to connect with what people's lives are abouttoday. No doubtwe're at a turningpoint regardingmany valueswe've been accustomedto that were consideredfundamentaluntil now. People must reorient themselves to a new world in which the categoryof social justice will have a new and differentmeaning, in which the chimeraof the caretakerstate and socialist charitywill disapfrom scratch. The question pear. Many values will have to be rediscovered of nationalidentitywill also arise,which we [Poles] feel very sure aboutbut which we cannot take for granted.As we see beforeour eyes, in variousnaor weakens. For me these tions this sense of identitysometimes disappears are realms of very interestingmoral re-evaluationand I think that people

23

will experiencethem in a similarway. In the meantimethefilmmakersare talkingmore oftenabout theirfinancial troublesthan about art. Things are tough. I was saying last year in the Gdynia Forum-maybe you remember-that we have to be aware,as artists,that we will have a naturaltendencytoward behavior,becausewe will never be in such a good situation as reactionary the Stalinist era. during For today that's a very originalopinion! Suchprivilegesas the artisthad then will be grantedby no one again. In the times of Ford and Jakubowska[prominent Polish directors of the '50s] there was a joke that the governmentof the Polish People's Republicis a of Polish cinema. Because such were the laws, and to a great exsubsidiary tent the engineersof the human soul had free rein. Yes, they sufferedcensorship, but on the other hand the authoritiesspoiled and elevated them. They were reallyinterestedin them. Bierut could listen to their poetryfor hours, and partyactivistswatchedall the new films. I don't think that Mr. Mazowieckiwould have time for it or that it would be appropriate anyway. This is why some artistscannot shakethe nostalgicfeelingthat things were betteronce. Todayit's simply difficult to make a livingfrom directing or acting. In such a poor country as ours this should surpriseno one. If I hear today the voice of a directorfrom the IrzykowskiStudio [young filmmakers'production unit], the author of a beautifuldebut, complainingthat he feels alien in this country becausenobody wants him, then, franklyspeaking,I want to laugh. BecauseI don't know any countryin which young artists,or even old, don't feel alien in some sense. Such is the natureof our profession, that nobodywants us, and we must in some way be pushy, and that's not easy. Our artistsgot accustomedto the moderatecomfort of socialistcharity,as you call it, and now they tell him to get down to businessand raisefunds on his own for makingfilms. I too would prefer that artists be able to focus on art and not trouble themselves with business, but what can we do? Art is partiallya business too, and one must know how to defendit. Now the filmmakers are trying to create a system of artists' selfgovernment.

24

The experience of all civilized countries shows that art cannot be selfgoverning but has to be submitted to public judgment. If cinema is subsidized-and it's only in the few biggest countries that it need not be subsidized-then it has to subjectitself to social control. It cannot be that they will give us money and say "Govern yourself." It seems that this is what happenedin our case. I think the model is an unfortunate one. And this is why I supportsubsidies for specificprojects,the way it's done in most countriesI know. The money can be awardedby a commissionconsisting of competent,credible,and frequently rotatingmembers.The same commissionwould laterevaluatehow those funds were used. Artists don't like controllers. I understand that perfectly. I have also dreamt about having complete freedom,but I know that this wouldn't be healthy.But it would also be immoralto take and have no responsibilities. Only an ideal patron-and only with regardto an artist he loves-gives money and says, "Do what you want." I wish that would happento me ... Meanwhile in your last film, Personal Assets [Stan posiadania],you're returningto your favorite moralproblems. One of the majorcharactersis a former censor who is now paying the price for her thoughtlessness.Evil from thoughtlessness:this is a new theme in your work. I always got excited about metaphysicalevil, but the kind of evil which results from a lack of consciousnessis for me a startlingdiscovery.I often find it even more terrifyingthan the other kind. Evil has probably become dwarfed as well. The devil gets smaller and smaller. Good and evil have been getting mixed up. Perhapsnot completely.But everythingthat's happeningtoday makes the distinctionbetweengood andevil more complex.Societydid not divideitself at all accordingto membership in the partyor in certainmilieus. It can still turn out that those forces whose ascent to power we greeted with enthusiasmwill disappointus because of opportunisticand mediocrepeople, and that among those who provoked so much hatred and anger will be foundpeople who are also honorableand deservingof recognition.Such is the fate of all fundamental changes: a good remainsgood but in its realization there is always a mixed bag of virtues. In your films virtue is usuallya serious suspect.

25

Of course, because skepticismis the defenseof my beliefs. It allows me to defendvalues. It doesn't let me accept them too easily, since it alwayssees in a man his differentsides. Walesa said recentlyin a TVprogram,that if he had beenan educatedman, in August 1980, he wouldprobablyhave been on the other side of the barricades. This is sad, but probable, if he'd been an engineer, or of the "halfintelligentsia." ... The realintelligentsia,using their intellectsperfectly,were often disappointing as well. I am constantlyexpressingoppositionto anddisappointment with the power of pure intellect. On the one hand, I was taught to revereit and cultivateit. On the other hand, I see its limitationsand its poverty. This irresolutioncharacterizes many of your films. I was talking once with a Russian Orthodox monk about our Pope's difficultieswith theologians,andat some pointmy partnerin conversationsaid something that shook me. "You didn't throw your theologiansdown the wells. And that's why you're having troublewith them today." Shocked by this crude attitudetowardthe successorsof St. Thomas, I askedwhy we should have treatedthem so horribly."Because to do what theologiansdo one should live differently."You cannot sit at the university,have an armchair, and reflect on the nature of divinity. You have to live in the desert and eat roots. And these professorsdon't arouse my interest. This is just pure intellect. It is a game of billiardsthat I, too, to some degreeknow how to play. On the other hand, the wisdom of the simple peasant woman sometimes amazes me. She can see through to some things that we don't even notice. A few years ago in the Jesuit PrzegladPowszechny,KrzysztofKlopotowski reproached you on the occasion of your film about the Pope [From a Far Country]for "treating the folk religiosityuncritically.'' For me that type of reproachis welcome becauseI enjoy polemicizingwith it. In folk religiosityI see profoundvalues. I appreciated those values only after years of traveling. Of course in the '60s, as a Christianlooking into French Catholicism,I had a natural reflexiveaversion to devotionalsa la Czestochowa.Today, afterwhat I have seen in Africaand CentralAmerica, I respect much more the intuition of a simple man which helps him open himself towardmetaphysicsthrough rituals and gestures. These activities

26

are more authentic than purely intellectual,speculativeones characteristic of reasoningas advancedby the Enlightenment. The contactwith mysticismin today's highly technicalworldis enormously difficult. This is why I respectall pathswhich leadto it, even if they are closed to me. I think some of your views may surprisethose readerswho think of you as an intellectual/rationalist. But let's go back from mysticismto the practical. Lastyear at thefilm festival in GdyniaFilipBajon [film director]was trying to argue that it wouldn't be possible to makean honest contemporary film in Poland until Solidaritywas officiallyregistered.Because the criticism of manyphenomena which deserveit is morallynot acceptable.Do you think that today we can, if necessary,tell society unpleasantthings? I'd still be afraidto. Things are still quite uncertain... But no doubtFilip Bajon was right. The Polish cinema will become healthy at the moment when it has the right to say badthings about both the Party and Solidarity, and when it won't be accusedof serving propaganda purposes.It would be ableto say everythingabouteverybody,if it says it justly, if it says it wisely. Falseapplausehas createdfalse barriers. It was unethical until yesterday-and maybe it still would be today-to point out how much wrong is being bornin the midstof renewal,how many mediocrepeoplestick to those noble slogans, and yet we alreadyknow that it's very difficultto defendthose slogans if we don't in a short while call those people by their real names. Since we have creativefreedom in the arts ... We will achieve creative freedomnot when censorshipdisappears,which will happen soon anyway, but when the conditions will no longer make sense underwhich every statementof the artistis seen as a politicalfact, as a vote for somebody or against somebody, for the repressed or for the When there won't be the repressedany more, one will be able to repressor. talk without fear of being accusedof supportingsome black forces.... The public is going to expect different things of the artist today-among others,I think, that they will strengthenhope, which is still in small supply. Whatwouldyou say, as an artistand intellectual,that we can hopefor in today's Poland? I see hope at least in this that a numberof people-in every age group-will rise to the occasion who for forty years have not been able to influence

27

publiclife andwhom we didn't even notice until now. I can see them myself already, and more of these splendid people are turning up on a national scale. They are there, and I believe in them. And among them are the heroes of your olderfilms. Honest, but not victorious types. They were never winning in any immediatesense, but one could have hope because they existed. As long as people like that exist there is hope, even though evil can be winning out in the short run. The good almost never wins out in the short run, even though we desireit very much. This is, after all, where the strength of the Western movie lies-and of every morality play-that in the end good deeds and virtues are always rewarded.We would very much like it to be that way, but I see some deceptionin it. I think that in fact we only then achieve the good when we know it won't be in any immediatesense at all. rewarded

This interview with Krzysztof Zanussi originallyappearedin the Polish newspaper Polityka, October 21, 1989. It was translated by Elzbieta Matynia and RichardAdams.

28