E It seems to be one of the facts of this world that Tilda Swinton, as a political activist, acts far less subtly than in her films. She and the other involved filmmakers would have been able, in their open letter, which they ostensibly sent to the Berlinale, but in fact probably into the arenas of public opinion, to at least perceive how aware this year’s Gaza conflict festival is and how it also takes Palestinian perspectives into account.
The journalist Thomas Hummitzsch, whom one certainly cannot accuse of lacking sensitivity toward the Palestinians, has counted the films that address Gaza more or less directly. They are, as he writes on the blog “Intellectures,” about as numerous as the efforts to depict the cinematic processing of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine at the Berlinale 2023.
Moreover: In greetings and thanks, solidarity with the Palestinians was stated unambiguously. Film directors had beforehand been assured that they could express their protest in words and symbols. They could, on the podiums one saw Palestinian scarves and melon stickers. Censorship looks different. (The impression that, if anything, the Israeli side was missing is noted here only in parentheses.)
BDS-Aligned Perspective
All of this the signatories of the open letter could have seen. But no. They use their prominence to advocate slogans that, it seems, have long since become autonomous from the news cycle. They speak of “involvement in censoring artists” and an “ongoing genocide.”
That is a language of one-sided thinking. Their letter is not driven by concern that the Palestinian perspective is underrepresented, but by insisting that only their own, BDS-aligned view be accepted. And that view can be resisted for very good reasons. The role of Hamas and states like Iran is omitted in this view, while they are instrumental in fueling the conflict.
Shortly, in Gaza, one of the most complex conflicts ever, both in terms of history and political realities, escalated, and the open letter demands submission to exactly one viewpoint on it. Who is narrowing the spectrum of opinion here?
In their reply to the open letter, festival director Tricia Tuttle writes: “We know that presenting people as ‘pro-Palestinian’ or ‘pro-Israeli’ narrows the complex range of perspectives and does not do justice to the discussions we must have about one of the most difficult and polarizing issues of our time.”
It would be naive to believe that the signatories of the open letter would be impressed by such a sentence. But it is not as understated as it is portrayed. One should not be persuaded that such a nuanced view is wishy-washy or means disassociation from victims of violence. How else can a festival claim to be a place of complex perception?
