Wunderkammer Reborn – Part II

(Second and last part – you can find the first one here.)

In the Nineteenth Century, wunderkammern disappeared.
The collections ended up disassembled, sold to private citizens or integrated in the newly born modern museums. Scientists, whose discipline was already defined, lost interest for the ancient kind of baroque wonder, perhaps deemed child-like in respect to the more serious postitivism.
This type of collecting continued in sporadic and marginal ways during the first decades of the Twetieth Century. Some rare antique dealer, especially in Belgium, the Netherlands or Paris, still sold some occasional mirabilia, but the golden age of the trade was long gone.
Of the few collectors of this first half of the century the most famous is André Breton, whose cabinet of curiosities is now on permanent exhibit at the Centre Pompidou.

The interest of wunderkammern began to reawaken during the Eighties from two distinct fronts: academics and artists.
On one hand, museology scholars began to recognize the role of wunderkammern as precursors of today’s museal collections; on the other, some artists fell in love with the concept of the chamber of wonders and started using it in their work as a metaphor of Man’s relationship with objects.
But the real upswing came with the internet. The neo-wunderkammer “movement” developed via the web, which opened new possibilities not only for sharing the knowledge but also to revitalize the commerce of curiosities.

Let’s take a look, as we did for the classical collections, to some conceptual elements of neo-wunderkammern.

A Democratic Wunderkammer

The first macroscopic difference with the past is that collecting curiosities is no more an exclusive of wealthy billionaires. Sure, a very-high-profile market exists, one that the majority of enthusiasts will never access; but the good news is that today, anybody who can afford an internet conection already has the means to begin a little collection. Thanks to the web, even a teenager can create his/her own shelf of wonders. All that’s needed is good will and a little patience to comb through the many natural history collectibles websites or online auctions for some real bargain.

There are now children’s books, school activities and specific courses encouraging kids to start this form of exploration of natural wonders.

The result of all this is a more democratic wunderkammer, within the reach of almost any wallet.

Reinventing Exotica

We talked about the classic category of exotica, those objects that arrived from distant colonies and from mysterious cultures.
But today, what is really exotic – etymologically, “coming from the outside, from far away”? After all we live in a world where distances don’t matter any more, and we can travel without even moving: in a bunch of seconds and a few clicks, we can virtually explore any place, from a mule track on the Andes to the jungles of Borneo.

This is a fundamental issue for the collectors, because globalization runs the risk of annihilating an important part of the very concept of wonder. Their strategies, conscious or not, are numerous.
Some collectors have turned their eyes towards the only real “external space” that is left — the cosmos; they started looking for memorabilia from the heroic times of the Space Race. Spacesuits, gear and instruments from various space missions, and even fragments of the Moon.

Others push in the opposite direction, towards the most distant past; consequently the demand for dinosaur fossils is in constant growth.

But there are other kinds of new exotica that are closer to us – indeed, they pertain directly to our own society.
Internal exoticism: not really an oxymoron, if we consider that anthropologists have long turned the instruments of ethnology towards the modern Western worold (take for instance Marc Augé). To seek what is exotic within our own cultre is to investigate liminal zones, fringe realities of our time or of the recent past.

Thus we find a recent fascination for some “taboo” areas, related for example to crime (murder weapons, investigative items, serial killer memorabilia) or death (funerary objecs and Victorian mourning apparel); the medicalia sub-category of quack remedies, as for example electric shock terapies or radioactive pharamecutical products.

Jessika M. collection – photo Brian Powell, from Morbid Curiosities (courtesy P. Gambino)

Funerary collectibles.

Violet wand kit; its low-voltage electric shock was marketed as the cure for everything.

Even curiosa, vintage or ancient erotic objects, are an example of exotica coming from a recent past which is now transfigured.

A Dialogue Between The Objects

Building a wunderkammer today is an eminently artistic endeavour. The scientific or anthropological interest, no matter how relevant, cannot help but be strictly connected to aesthetics.
There is a greater general attention to the interplay between the objects than in the past. A painting can interact with an object placed in front of it; a tribal mask can be made to “dialogue” with an other similar item from a completely different tradition. There is undoubtedly a certain dose of postmodern irreverence in this approach; for when pop culture collectibles are allowed entrance to the wunderkammer, ending up exhibited along with precious and refined antiques, the self-righteous art critic is bound to shudder (see for instance Victor Wynd‘s peculiar iconoclasm).

An example I find paradigmatic of this search for a deeper interaction are the “adventurous” juxtapositions experimented by friend Luca Cableri (the man who brought to Moon to Italy); you can read the interview he gave me if you wish to know more about him.

Wearing A Wunderkammer

Fashion is always aware of new trends, and it intercepted some aspects of the world of wunerkammern. Thanks mainly to the goth and dark subcultures, one can find jewelry and necklaces made from naturalistic specimens: on Etsy, eBay or Craigslist, countless shops specialize in hand-crafted brooches, hair clips or other fashion accessories sporting skulls, small wearable taxidermies and so on.

Conceptual Art and Rogue Taxidermists

As we said, the renewed interest also came from the art world, which found in wunderkammern an effective theoretical frame to reflect about modernity.
The first name that comes to mind is of course Damien Hirst, who took advantage of the concept both in his iconic fluid-preserved animals and in his kaleidoscopic compositions of lepidoptera and butterflies; but even his For The Love of God, the well-known skull covered in diamonds, is an excessively precious curiosity that would not have been out of place in a Sixteenth Century treasure chamber.

Hirst is not the only artist taking inspiration from the wunderkammer aesthetics. Mark Dion, for instance, creates proper cabinets of wonders for the modern era: in his work, it’s not natural specimens that are put under formaldeyde, but rather their plastic replicas or even everyday objects, from push brooms to rubber dildos. Dion builds a sort of museum of consumerism in which – yet again – Nature and Culture collide and even at times fuse together, giving us no hope of telling them apart.

In 2013 Rosamund Purcell’s installation recreated a 3D version of the Seventeenth Century Ole Worm Museum: reinvention/replica, postmodern doppelgänger and hyperreal simulachrum which allows the public to step into one of the most famous etchings in the history of wunderkammern.

Besides the “high” art world – auction houses and prestigious galleries – we are also witnessing a rejuvenation of more artisanal sectors.
This is the case with the art of taxidermy, which is enjoying a new youth: today taxidermy courses and workshops are multiplying.

Remember that in the first post I talked about taxidermy as a domestication of the scariest aspects of Nature? Well, according to the participants, these workshops offer a way to exorcise their fear of death on a comfortably small scale, through direct contact and a creative activity. (We shall return on this tactile element.)
A further push towards innovation has come from yet another digital movement, called Rogue Taxidermy.

Artistic, non-traditional taxidermy has always existed, from fake mirabilia and gaffs such as mummified sirens and Jenny Hanivers to Walter Potter‘s antropomorphic dioramas. But rogue taxidermists bring all this to a whole new level.

Initially born as a consortium of three artists – Sarina Brewer, Scott Bibus e Robert Marbury – who were interested in taxidermy in the broadest sense (Marbury does not even use real animals for his creations, but plush toys), rogue taxidermy quickly became an international movement thanks to the web.

The fantastic chimeras produced by these artists are actually meta-taxidermies: by exhibiting their medium in such a manifest way, they seem to question our own relationship with animals. A relationship that has undergone profound changes and is now moving towards a greater respect and care for the environment. One of the tenets of rogue taxidermy is in fact the use of ethically sourced materials, and the animals used in preparations all died of natural causes. (Here’s a great book tracing the evolution and work of major rogue taxidermy artists.)

Wunderkammer Reborn

So we are left with the fundamental question: why are wunderkammern enjoying such a huge success right now, after five centuries? Is it just a retro, nostalgic trend, a vintage frivolous fashion like we find in many subcultures (yes I’m looking at you, my dear hipster friends) or does its attractiveness lie in deeper urgencies?

It is perhaps too soon to put forward a hypothesis, but I shall go out on a limb anyway: it is my belief that the rebirth of wunderkammern is to be sought in a dual necessity. On one hand the need to rethink death, and on the other the need to rethink art and narratives.

Rethinking Death
(And While We’re At It, Why Not Domesticate It)

Swiss anthropologist Bernard Crettaz was among the first to voice the ever more widespread need to break the “tyrannical secrecy” regarding death, typical of the Twentieth Century: in 2004 he organized in Neuchâtel the first Café mortel, a free event in which participants could talk about grief, and discuss their fears but also their curiosities on the subject. Inspired by Crettaz’s works and ideas, Jon Underwood launched the first British Death Café in 2011. His model received an enthusiastic response, and today almost 5000 events have been held in 50 countries across the world.

Meanwhile, in the US, a real Death-Positive Movement was born.
Originated from the will to drastically change the American funeral industry, criticized by founder Caitlin Doughty, the movement aims at lifting the taboo regarding the subject of death, and promotes an open reflection on related topics and end-of-life issues. (You probably know my personal engagement in the project, to which I contributed now and then: you can read my interview to Caitlin and my report from the Death Salon in Philadelphia).

What has the taboo of death got to do with collecting wonders?
Over the years, I have had the opportunity of talking to many a collector. Almost all of them recall, “as if it were yesterday“, the emotion they felt while holding in their hands the first piece of their collection, that one piece that gave way to their obsession. And for the large majority of them it was a naturalistic specimen – an animal skeleton, a taxidermy, etc.: as a friend collector says, “you never forget your first skull“.

The tactile element is as essential today as it was in classical wunderkammern, where the public was invited to study, examine, touch the specimens firsthand.

Owning an animal skull (or even a human one) is a safe and harmless way to become familiar with the concreteness of death. This might be the reason why the macabre element of wunderkammern, which was marginal centuries ago, often becomes a prevalent aspect today.

Ryan Matthew Cohn collection – photo Dan Howell & Steve Prue, from Morbid Curiosities (courtesy P. Gambino)

Rethinking Art: The Aesthetics Of Wonder

After the decline of figurative arts, after the industrial reproducibility of pop art, after the advent of ready-made art, conceptual art reached its outer limit, giving a coup the grace to meaning. Many contemporary artists have de facto released art not just from manual skill, from artistry, but also from the old-fashioned idea that art should always deliver a message.
Pure form, pure signifier, the new conceptual artworks are problematic because they aspire to put a full stop to art history as we know it. They look impossible to understand, precisely because they are designed to escape any discourse.
It is therefore hard to imagine in what way artistic research will overcome this emptiness made of cold appearance, polished brilliance but mere surface nonetheless; hard to tell what new horizon might open up, beyond multi-million auctions, artistars and financial hikes planned beforehand by mega-dealers and mega-collectors.

To me, it seems that the passion for wunderkammern might be a way to go back to narratives, to meaning. An antidote to the overwhelming surface. Because an object is worth its place inside a chamber of marvels only by virtue of the story it tells, the awe it arises, the vertigo it entails.
I believe I recognize in this genre of collecting a profound desire to give back reality to its lost enchantment.
Lost? No, reality never ceased to be wonderous, it is our gaze that needs to be reeducated.

From Cabinets de Curiosités (2011) – photo C. Fleurant

Eventually, a wunderkammer is just a collection of objects, and we already live submerged in an ocean of objects.
But it is also an instrument (as it once was, as it has always been) – a magnifying glass to inspect the world and ourselves. In these bizarre and strange items, the collector seeks a magical-narrative dimension against the homologation and seriality of mass production. Whether he knows it or not, by being sensitive to the stories concealed within the objects, the emotions they convey, their unicity, the wunderkammer collector is carrying out an act of resistence: because placing value in the exception, in the exotic, is a way to seek new perspectives in spite of the Unanimous Vision.

Da Cabinets de Curiosités (2011) – foto C. Fleurant

Adam and Eve Raised Cain

Dec4

We all know how hard it is for talent to emerge in the art field. That is why from time to time, in my own small way, I have tried to give voice to young promising artists; some of them went on with their careers with excellent results, as did Fulvio Risuleo whose work I wrote about and who then won the first prize of the “Semaine de la Critique” at Cannes Film Festival.
I say this not to brag about my farsightedness, but in the secret hope that Bizzarro Bazar might turn out to be bringing good luck also in the future: today I would like to present you with a curious Italian stop-motion short film which in my view is a true little gem.

Entitled Adam and Eve Raised Cain, it was written, directed, animated and edited by Francesco Erba, born in 1986, from Bergamo.
Before discussing the short with his author, I advise you to take some 20 minutes off and let yourself drift into the fark, disturbing atmosphere of this little film.

The short film starts off with a declaration of love to Sci-Fi B-movies from the Fifties (Jack Arnold, Roger Corman, Bert I. Gordon and their giant radioactive monsters), and goes on to pay homage even to the father of fantasy in motion pictures, Georges Méliès.
But the true references here are to horror and science fiction film directors from the Eighties, Carpenter, Hooper or Cronenberg. These nods are perfectly inserted in their context (an all too rare occurrence these days): the main character’s passion for monster movies, for instance, becomes a pivotal dramatic element in a scene where the child’s toys are sold, a psychologically scarring moment for little Albert.
Any citationism, even when done with a purpose, entails the risk of breaking the spectator’s identification, projecting the public “outside” of the film, and lessening its emotional impact. It could be because of the visceral and painful nature of the themes addressed in this short, but Francesco Erba succeeds in the task of creating an even stronger connection with his character: it’s as if, when observed through the filter of the American movies the 80’s generation grew up with, Albert’s trauma became more recognizable, more humane – despite his rough stop-motion puppet appearance.

Since he was a child, Francesco has been living and breathing cinema. How could he tell a tale of fear and love, if not by going back to those films which frightened him or made him fall in love?
This, in my opinion, is the admirable subtlety of Adam and Eve Raised Cain, a sensitivity which many narratives of nostalgia lack.
Behind the animated film facade, behind the entertainment, Erba is depicting a world of solitude and mental cages. And whenever he relies on some vintage stylistic elements, he’s not throwing them to his audience like peanuts just to stimulate some cinephile pavlovian response: he is using them because, to him, they still represent the best (maybe the only) way to really tell us about the wounds and anguish tormenting his character, both a victim and a perpetrator.

I asked Francesco Erba a few questions about his work.

How was this project born, and how did you manage to make it happen?

The concept for Adam and Eve was one of many sitting in my “Ideas” folder, on my laptop. After spending much time working with and for others, I decided it was time to shoot something new for myself. Sifting through the folder (and discarding all million-budget ideas!), the one that was left was a live-action version of Adam and Eve.
I started working on it, inserting new elements and focusing on the structure until I realized what I was really trying to tell: my film was about imprisonment, in all its possible meanings.

Once the script was completed, it started to dawn on me that this film could – should – be realized in stop motion: enclosing some puppets in a 1.5x1m box would cartainly take this idea of “imprisonment” to the extreme.

I knew all too well that to shoot this film in stop motion, as I had it layed out and with the resources at hand, it would take at least 2 years of work. I had to prepare a complete storyboard, character studies and preliminary drawings, set and prop construction, sculpting and mold making, motion tests, all leading up to several weeks of shooting in a dark room. And then the digital effects, and compositing the live actors’ eyes on the latex puppets, a process that had to be done frame by frame…

I mustered up all my masochism, started filming, and in the end I discovered I was even too optimistic. It took nearly three and a half years to complete the short movie!

Was the choice of stop motion limiting or did it give you more freedom? Which challenges were the most tough in producing the film?

Stop motion, which I do not consider just an animation technique, but THE animation technique, has an unquestionable charm which transcends time and technological innovations. But it can also be a real bitch!
If on one hand it allows full artistic freedom even on a tight budget, on the other it is certainly demanding in shooting time, shooting process, scenic design (sometimes down to miniaturization). Every aspect needs to be considered in advance, carefully calculated and measured, and you very often have to use your ingenuity to bypass problems: if I cannot move my camera, then I need to build a slider rig, and so on.

All these limitations, I think, really disappear when looking at the final result, at what you can create with this incredible technique. Take for example the movies produced by Laika today: they teach us that stop motion, although very old and almost the same age of cinema itself, has no limits other than those dictated by budget or creativity.

Adam and Eve seems to tap into the current vein of nostalgia for the 80’s (Super 8, Stranger Things, the San Junipero episode from Black Mirror, etc.). Did any film in particular inspire you? Is there some director’s work you had in mind while writing the script?

The short was filmed back in 2011, before this new wave of nostalgia for the cinema of the 80’s and 90’s (at least I chose to put it online at the right time!). Inevitably, it ended up containing many elements from the films I grew up with, which are now part of my DNA; these are references I cannot leave out of consideration.

Actually when you think about it, even those cinematic references coming from my imprinting are enclosed, like the rest of the story, in a chinese box system. Besides the cinema from the 80’s and 90’s, I chose to include some references to the films those very directors took inspiration from and sometimes plagiarised, namely monster movies from the 50’s. Taking it to the extreme, as I did with every aspect of the short, I went even further, paying homage to Méliès himself.

Sometimes directors get asked to summarize in few words the style they’re aiming for. My answer, right from the start, was: “think Rob Zombie doing stop-motion animation”. A coarse, wicked, sharp and sometimes repulsive style, which had to be recognizable in each aspect of the film.
But ofcourse I’m semplifying. If I think back to all the directors who inspired me, it might look like a meaningless list, and yet in Adam and Eve‘s world of opposites and extremes they make perfect sense to me: Carpenter, Cronenberg, Jackson, Spielberg, Selick, Park Chan-wook, Harryhausen, Quay, Svankmajer, Peter Lord and Aardman, Laika… they all influenced in a creative way the approach I chose for this short film, and its genesis.

The film shows extremely adult themes: phobia, alienation, family violence, unwanted pregnancy, despair. Yet all this is filtered through obvious irony: the handcrafted animation and the homages to the imaginary of American cinema make the film a “second level” experience. I personally find this ambiguity to be one of the strenghts of the project. But in your intent, should Adam and Eve be seen as pure entertainment, or taken more seriously?

This is one aspect of the “research” which I very humbly try to carry on with my work. One of he constants that can be found in everything I’ve done until now, from short films to music videos, from a pilot for a children TV show to the feature film I’m working on, is a search for the limit and the balance between two opposite extremes.

Using stop motion (which is often regarded as a technique for “children movies”) to tell an adult story, making an adult film about imprisonment, alienation and phobias with latex puppets, this is already a strong combination. To “cage” a real actor’s eyes inside the puppet, thus closing him within these narrow limits, to me is a further exaggeration of this concept. If you then imagine myself, the animator, stuck in strange positions and “prisoner” of a small dark room, the narrative gets really dizzying!

And what about the entertainment? Well, I’m not one of those who think cinema has the power to save the world, but it certainly makes it a little better. To me, films should not try to give answers, just to ask questions and create emotions. It you’re looking for important answers, you’d better get a ticket for the museum, rather than for the movie theatre.
According to this philosphy, Adam and Eve is of course to be taken as a visual experience and not just as an artistic research: I think the scenes in which I “physically” enter the main character’s brain to show his past. make it clear that it’s also meant to be a product of pure entertainment.

This short film must have been quite a training ground. Will you continue with animation? What are your future projects?

I am finishing my first live action feature film: here my personal research has evolved even further, as my movie is narratively and stylistically composed of an investigative report, a mockumentary and a more “traditional” film.
In the last few months I have been working on a TV animated puppet series for 5/6-years-old children, a project I very much believe in, and which gave me the opportunity to experiment with a different kind of animation.

As for stop motion, its “call” is very strong, despite the huge sacrifices that Adam and Eve demanded. One day I would love to be able to film my peculiar horror version of Peter Pan, or another small short film on Tesla and Edison.
A director’s work is often based on human interaction and mediation… I confess I sometimes miss being alone in my little dark room, moving my puppet’s head frame after frame!

Here is Adam and Eve Raised Cain Facebook page.

Inferno fresco: Dante Alighieri e la cultura goth

Sep19

Sorry, this entry is only available in Italian.

Speciale: Krokodyle

Jun6

Da bambini, tutti sognano di fare l’astronauta. Ma qualcuno sognava di diventare un becchino.

Se c’è un regista italiano che, per temi, dimostra una vera e propria “affinità elettiva” con il nostro blog, è Stefano Bessoni. Fin dai primi corti, le sue immagini pullulano di esemplari tassidermici, wunderkammer, bambole e preparati anatomici, scienze anomale, fotografie post-mortem, e tutto quell’universo macabro e straniante che caratterizza in buona parte anche Bizzarro Bazar. Ma la lente attraverso cui Bessoni affronta questi argomenti è pesantemente influenzata dalle fiabe, Alice e Pinocchio sopra a tutte, filtrate dalla sua vena di visionario illustratore.

Dopo il suo esordio al lungometraggio con Imago Mortis nel 2009, segnato da mille traversie produttive (ma qualcuno ricorderà anche il precedente Frammenti di Scienze Inesatte, mai distribuito), Bessoni ritorna quest’anno a una dimensione indie che gli è forse più congeniale. Se infatti Imago Mortis, pur contando su un notevole dispiego di mezzi, aveva sofferto di alcuni compromessi, il suo nuovo Krokodyle si propone come visione “pura” e totalmente svincolata da pressioni commerciali.

Gli elementi più apprezzati del film precedente, vale a dire la cura per i dettagli fotografici e scenografici, le atmosfere gotiche e macabre, la riflessione metacinematografica, si ritrovano anche in Krokodyle, nonostante la decisione di operare in low-budget e assoluta indipendenza artistica. Bessoni costruisce qui una specie di scrigno di “appunti di lavoro” che testimonia della varietà e profondità dei temi a cui attinge la sua fantasia. Se in Imago Mortis trovavamo la fascinazione per lo sguardo, i teatri anatomici, le favole nere, in Krokodyle il protagonista Kaspar Toporski (alter ego del regista, interpretato da Lorenzo Pedrotti) si trova a “raccogliere” in una collezione virtuale tutte le sue più grandi passioni: l’amore per le stanze delle meraviglie, l’animazione in stop-motion, la fotografia (ancora), l’esoterismo più grottesco e fumettistico, le creature magiche medievali (mandragole e homunculi), la frenologia, l’archeologia industriale, la letteratura… e, infine, il cinema. Il cinema visto come necessità ed estasi, libertà assoluta di inquadrare “con il cuore e con la mente”, vero e proprio processo alchemico capace di infondere vita a un mondo immaginario.

In esclusiva per Bizzarro Bazar, ecco un’intervista a Stefano Bessoni.

Con Krokodyle ritorni a una dimensione più indipendente – meno soldi e più libertà espressiva. In quale dimensione ti senti più a tuo agio? Cosa trovi di positivo e negativo nelle due differenti esperienze produttive?

L’ideale sarebbe avere tanti soldi e la completa libertà espressiva, ma questa è un’ovvietà. Mi trovo sicuramente molto più a mio agio nella dimensione indipendente, anche se non è possibile farlo senza trovare un minimo di finanziamento e un rientro economico che permetta almeno di coprire i costi del film. Lavorare per il cinema commerciale è invece massacrante, per non dire avvilente, ti annullano le idee e tutta la creatività costringendoti a lavorare come se fossi comunque un indipendente, limitandoti brutalmente il budget destinato all’aspetto visivo ed espressivo, per poi gettarti in pasto al pubblico senza farsi troppi scrupoli. Certo mi auguro che non sia sempre così e che magari, trovando i produttori giusti, si possa anche lavorare in sintonia su un prodotto che possa sposare esigenze commerciali ed espressive. Comunque mi piacerebbe molto continuare a lavorare da indipendente, assieme ai miei amici fidati di Interzone Visions (produttori di Krokodyle), sognatori e visionari come me, cercando però di mettere in piedi budget soddisfacenti per produrre film particolari, di ricerca visiva, ma allo stesso tempo accattivanti per il grosso pubblico.

È inevitabile che qualsiasi cosa tu faccia venga rapportata al cinema italiano. All’uscita di Imago Mortis erano stati citati Bava, Margheriti, e (forse a sproposito) Argento. In Krokodyle “rispondi” dichiarando il tuo amore per Wenders e Greenaway. Dove sta la verità?

La verità è che io ho iniziato a fare cinema guardando autori come Greenaway, Wenders, Jarman, Russell, poi ho scoperto il cinema espressionista tedesco e quello surrealista, l’universo fantastico di Svankmajer e dei fratelli Quay, insieme al grottesco di Terry Gilliam e di Jean Pierre Jeunet, infine mi sono lasciato contaminare da una buona dose di cinema di genere, avvicinandomi in questi ultimi anni a figure come Guillermo del Toro. Gli autori ai quali mi accomunano non li conosco nemmeno bene, li ho visti di sfuggita quando ero bambino e non credo che mi abbiano mai influenzato più di tanto.

Krokodyle si presenta fin da subito come un oggetto particolare, un “contenitore di appunti”. In questo senso sembra un film estremamente personale, quasi pensato per riorganizzare e fissare alcune tue idee in modo permanente. Ma un film deve anche saper incuriosire ed emozionare il pubblico, non può essere ad esclusivo “uso e consumo” di chi lo fa. Come hai mediato questi due aspetti? Come si concilia l’onestà di una visione con i compromessi commerciali?

Krokodyle è indubbiamente un film molto personale. Un film per me necessario per permettermi di fare il punto della situazione sulle mie idee e sulla mia condizione di filmmaker diviso tra indipendenza e cinema commerciale. Penso comunque che anche qualcosa di estremamente personale, se raccontato con fantasia e vivacità, possa destare l’interesse del pubblico. In fondo si dice che si dovrebbe raccontare solamente quello che si conosce molto bene, ed io ho fatto esattamente questo.

Hai spesso parlato del cinema come wunderkammer. Al giorno d’oggi, cos’è che ti provoca meraviglia?

Tante cose mi meravigliano, cose che magari altri non degnerebbero neanche di attenzione. Un animaletto rinsecchito, un insetto, una macchia d’umidità su un muro, un ferro arrugginito, un tratto di matita che lascio su un foglio quasi casualmente. Mi meravigliano le immagini e tutti gli espedienti e le tecniche per catturarle o crearle. Mi meraviglia il cinema, che considero la mia personale camera delle meraviglie, e trovo peculiare che la macchina da presa venga spesso chiamata camera.

Il film è stato in parte realizzato a Torino. Come è stato girare al Nautilus?

Il Nautilus è un posto che adoro. Ogni volta che vado a Torino non posso fare a meno di andarci e di intrattenermi per ore con il mio amico Alessandro Molinengo, perdendomi tra le mille curiosità e stranezze di quella bottega meravigliosa. Lì dentro si respirano le ossessioni degli antichi costruttori di wunderkammer, si percepiscono le perversioni di strambi sperimentatori scientifici e riaffiorano nella mente le descrizioni delle Botteghe color cannella di Bruno Schulz. In parte l’idea iniziale di Krokodyle è partita proprio dentro a quella bottega tanto macabra quanto bizzarra. Girarci è stato come girare a casa… a parte il terrore di rompere qualche reperto dal valore inestimabile!

Krokodyle, come altri tuoi lavori, è mosso da passione enciclopedica, e stupisce per quantità e ricchezza di riferimenti “alti” – letterari, cinematografici, scientifici, magico-esoterici. Eppure il tutto è filtrato da una leggerezza e un sorriso quasi infantili. Quanto è importante l’umorismo per te?

L’umorismo per me è fondamentale, soprattutto se parliamo di un ironia tendente al grottesco e al mondo dell’infanzia. Sono pervaso da una forte dose di umorismo nero che inevitabilmente riverso in ogni lavoro che faccio, che sia un film, un’illustrazione o uno scritto. È un temperamento molto più nordico, anglosassone e lontano dal modo di fare tipicamente italiano. Infatti vengo normalmente visto come un folle o un degenerato, come uno che rema controcorrente, uno da biasimare e allontanare, che mai riuscirà a comprendere le gioie e le delizie della commedia italiana più mainstream, dove calcio, doppi sensi, peti, tette e culi sono ingredienti prelibati per “palati raffinati”.

Gli attori nel film sembrano ben integrati e assolutamente a proprio agio nel tuo mondo. Eppure, recitare in Krokodyle dev’essere stato un po’ come entrare nella tua testa, e far finta di esserci sempre stati. Ok, mi dirai, sono attori… come li hai introdotti in questa realtà macabra e straniante? Che domande ti hanno fatto? Quali difficoltà hanno incontrato?

Non è stato facile, ma sono tutti attori che mi conoscono molto bene e che avevano già lavorato su Imago Mortis. Hanno accettato con entusiasmo di lavorare su Krokodyle proprio per aiutarmi a raffigurare personaggi estremamente intimi. Abbiamo lavorato molto, affrontato lunghe discussioni, e ho pensato a loro fin dalla fase di scrittura, proprio per avere il totale controllo dell’operazione. Somigliano anche ai miei disegni e non fatico a riconoscerli come qualcosa di estremamente familiare, di “mio”. Sono molto soddisfatto del risultato ottenuto.

In Italia l’idea diffusa è che il cinema debba riflettere la realtà, la condizione sociale, parlare insomma di problemi concreti. In una delle immagini più poetiche di Krokodyle, il protagonista fa partire una macchina da presa tenendola vicino all’orecchio, finché il ronzìo del trascinamento della pellicola non copre e annulla il rumore del traffico e dei clacson fuori dalla finestra. Il cinema è per te una fuga dalla realtà? Ti senti in colpa per le tue fantasticherie o le rivendichi orgogliosamente? Insomma, l’esotismo è una vigliaccheria o un diritto?

In colpa? Assolutamente no! Ne sono consapevole ed orgoglioso. L’esotismo, come lo definisci tu, è un privilegio, un dono, un’illuminazione. Io mi sento un fortunato. E poi, sembra strano dirlo, ma per me Krokodyle è un film sulla realtà, sulla realtà che io vivo tutti i giorni. La realtà è fatta di mille sfaccettature e quella che un certo cinema si ostina a propinare è solamente una piccola parte, forse quella più evidente. Basta saper osservare, ascoltare, per scovare un infinità di livelli di realtà che non ci sognavamo minimamente che potessero esistere. Anche gli specchi in fondo non sempre riflettono la realtà, basta pensare a quello che è successo ad Alice. Per concludere vorrei citare una frase di Jean Cocteau proprio a proposito di questo: “gli specchi farebbero bene a riflettere prima di rimandarci la nostra immagine…”

[vimeo http://www.vimeo.com/22233126]

Ricordiamo che il film è in uscita nelle edicole in DVD a partire da metà giugno, in allegato con la rivista Dark Movie, contenente uno special di 16 pagine interamente dedicato al film.

Ecco il blog di Stefano Bessoni, e il sito ufficiale di Krokodyle.

Liz McGrath

Apr29

Pittrice, animatrice, stilista, punk rocker e scultrice: Liz McGrath è la bad girl della nuova scena artistica pop-surrealista californiana.

Essendo precocemente ribelle, i suoi genitori ultra-cattolici decisero di usare il pugno di ferro con la piccola Elizabeth; è proprio a quegli anni, fatti di imposizioni, minacce di inferno e altri terrori, che la McGrath attribuisce la sua fascinazione con il lato oscuro della propria fantasia. Eppure c’è sempre una delicatezza, un’eleganza rétro nelle sue creazioni. Liz McGrath non è mai cresciuta, e ci invita a conoscere i suoi amici immaginari.

Si tratta di sculture anomale, piccoli personaggi di un mondo infantile distorto. Animali freak antropomorfizzati, spesso inseriti in bacheche che ricordano le insegne dei sideshow degli anni ’40. Un bestiario contemporaneamente macabro e raffinato, che unisce bellezza e malattia, ironia ed elementi gotici.

Certo, c’è sempre quella ingenua e forse “facile” estetica un po’ dark che contraddistingue molti surrealisti pop, quello stile vagamente alla Tim Burton, per intenderci; eppure le sculture di Liz ci sembrano più gioiose, più scanzonate e irriverenti. Forse, come la loro autrice, sotto la patina leziosa e ricercata sono davvero delle sculture punk.

E poi ammettiamolo: quanti di noi, da bambini, non sarebbero impazziti per dei pupazzetti simili?

Ecco il sito ufficiale di Elizabeth McGrath.

Oddities

Dec15

Discovery Channel ha da poco lanciato un nuovo programma che sembra pensato apposta per gli appassionati di collezionismo macabro e scientifico: la serie è intitolata Oddities (“Stranezze”), e racconta la strana e particolare vita quotidiana dei proprietari del famoso negozio newyorkese Obscura Antiques and Oddities, la versione americana del nostrano Nautilus, di cui abbiamo già parlato.

I due simpatici proprietari di questa spettacolare wunderkammer ci mostrano in ogni episodio come vengono a scoprire di giorno in giorno oggetti curiosi, strabilianti o rari, regalandoci anche un’inaspettata galleria di personaggi che frequentano il negozio. Collezionisti seri e compunti che arrivano con la fida ventiquattrore dopo un importante meeting, gente semplice dai gusti particolari, giovani darkettoni appesantiti da centinaia di piercing, compositori musicali del calibro di Danny Elfman, bizzarri personaggi che collezionano articoli funerari e si emozionano per un tavolo da imbalsamazione, ragazzi normali che hanno scoperto nel solaio del nonno una testa di manzo siamese imbalsamata, o una bara ottocentesca, e cercano di ricavarci qualche soldo.

Mike Zohn ed Evan Michelson, i due proprietari di Obscura, passano il loro tempo fra mercati delle pulci e aste di antiquariato, cercando tutto ciò che è inusuale e bizzarro. Nella loro carriera di collezionisti hanno accumulato alcuni fra i pezzi più incredibili.

Purtroppo in Italia questa serie non è ancora arrivata, ed essendo un prodotto di nicchia è probabile che non la vedremo mai sui nostri teleschermi. Per consolarvi, ecco alcuni estratti da YouTube.

Mike ed Evan riescono ad annusare un’autentica mano di mummia egizia, che stando alla loro descrizione esala un “inebriante” odore di resina:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFepPtBkhpo]

“Oggigiorno è sempre più difficile trovare una testa mummificata”:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMTg0ZUFZ1I&NR=1]

Un’addetta delle pompe funebri (leggermente disturbata, a quanto sembra) ha una collezione invidiabile di strumenti di imbalsamazione e non sta più nella pelle quando Evan le propone l’acquisto di un tavolo utilizzato per presentare il cadavere nella camera ardente… dopotutto, si intona con gli strumenti antichi che lei ha già… come resistere?

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-EoRA25NDA]

Un avventore scopre che quello che ha in mano è l’osso del pene di un tricheco. La maggior parte dei mammiferi (uomo escluso) è dotato di un simile osso. Sarà disposto a sborsare 450 $ per questo articolo?

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2XBALa0ehQ]

Un ragazzo ha acquistato al mercato delle pulci una scatola piena di escrementi fossilizzati che gli hanno assicurato essere di dinosauro. Coproliti è il termine scientifico. Purtroppo, Mike gli spiega che quelli sono probabilmente escrementi di mammifero. Le deiezioni di uccelli e rettili sono molto più acquose. Pensate se doveste togliere una cosa del genere dal vostro parabrezza?

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbcvEOwxQYU]

Tari Nakagawa

Sep26

Le macabre e malinconiche necro-ninfe dell’artista giapponese Tari Nakagawa sono davvero il lato oscuro delle Barbie, tristi e scheletriche bambole anatomiche ormai perdute.

Fragili, eteree, malate e spesso in decomposizione: queste bambole create dallo scultore giapponese hanno qualcosa di indicibilmente triste e al tempo stesso poetico.

Nonostante i loro sguardi persi e drammatici, ormai irrimediabilmente segnati da una fine imminente, le bambole sembrano sospese in una dimensione di dolore e di nostalgia, come se si aggrappassero agli ultimi brandelli di vita che rimangono nei loro corpi sofferenti.

Le sensazioni e le emozioni che suscitano sono molteplici. Il loro stesso status di bambole rimanda all’infanzia, ai giochi spensierati e innocenti, eppure queste sculture conoscono il tempo, il disfacimento, la morte, e non ne fanno segreto. Sono bambole “adulte”, che sembrano avere davvero un’anima.