From: Ken Bawcom (email suppressed)
Date: Sun Jun 25 2006 - 12:21:20 PDT
I've followed this discussion with great interest, and thought about
replying. But now Shelly has said almost everything I would have liked
to say, save one thing. At the Ann Arbor Film Festival, and I suspect
at many film festivals, the Awards Jury has the ability to view any
work submitted. If they feel there is any sort of imbalance, for
whatever reason, they can address that by looking at work that hasn't
been programmed. Indeed, since program time is finite, many worthy
works go unprogrammed, no matter how balanced the program. In my
opinion, this makes it incumbent upon the Judges to view as much more
work as they can. This may well have been done by the Onion City Awards
Jury, I have no way of knowing. But, it was clear to me that Jennifer
was not blaming the imbalance on Onion City.
Quoting shelly silver <email suppressed>:
>> Judges' Statement:
>> "We want to call attention to the underrepresentation of women in
>> this year's
>> festival. While it is not uncommon in both mainstream and alternative
>> media festivals for the makers to be mainly men, we are aware of the
>> multitudes of exceptional female experimental filmmakers, both here and
>> abroad. Hence their relative absence at Onion City, and in our own awards
>> roster, took
>> us by surprise. Here's hoping for more equal representation in
>> future years."
>> we all agreed on the wording of this statement. and i know we all also
>> agreed that in past years there has been more equal representation, and
>> that we thought your programming was excellent. so i hope you don't take
>> this statement too much to heart. it was just something we felt it was
>> important to point out.
>> thanks again for including me in one of the best festival experiences i've
> hey all:
> as far as i'm concerned, the above is not an accusation or an
> indictment of the onion city festival, far from it (it's actually a
> 'hope'). the statement makes an observation about the paucity of
> women filmmakers showing at a particular festival in a particular
> year, and raises a simple question 'why weren't there more?' this is
> a perfectly valid question for members of a jury to raise and
> statements like this are quite common in jury's remarks. i'd think
> it would be up to the organizers of the festival, if they found it
> useful, to fill in any pertinent details - to explain more of the
> outreach process, the submissions received as well as the selection
> i also think that putting it out on a list like this where hundreds
> of curators, organizers and filmmakers will read and discuss it is
> perfectly appropriate and for me, very interesting, as it makes us
> all reflect on possible problems - problems that may not exist (as
> several people on the list seem to feel) or may not necessarily be
> directly connected to this particular festival. jury's remarks are,
> in my experience, always made public - they are typically read during
> the awards ceremony, quoted in the press and published in catalogues.
> the statements (as is the one above) are understood to be from the
> point of view of the members of the jury. one can agree or disagree
> with this statement - why it has been taken as an inappropriate
> frameworks statement completely escapes me.
> ps: i personally feel that gender bias in our society is alive and well.
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
"Those who would give up essential liberty
to purchase a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty, nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin 1775
"I know that the hypnotized never lie... Do ya?"
Pete Townshend 1971
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.