Cannes: Ukrainian director Sergei Loznitsa on unlearned history lessons

If anyone wanted to summarize the work of Ukrainian director Sergei Loznitsa, it would be worse than quoting William Faulkner: “The past never dies. It’s not the past.”

In more than a dozen films, dramatic and documentary, Loznica explores the impact of state violence during World War II (Drama 2012 in the fog And a 2021 documentary Baby Yar. Context) On the conflict in Ukraine (2014 documentary). maidantheater 2018 donbas) Had and has in Eastern Europe.

The unresolved tragedy of World War II is at the heart of Loznica’s new documentary. The natural history of destruction., which debuted this year in a special screening at Cannes. Loznitsa was inspired by the late German writer WG Sebald’s book, in this case a series of essays focused on both Axis and Allied war bombing campaigns.

Consisting entirely of archival footage with no sound commentary, the film was released before Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, but current events give the film new relevance and tragic relevance.

Loznica itself was also at the center of the war debate. On February 28, he left the European Film Academy (EFA) in protest at what he felt was the organization’s very timid response to the Russian invasion. But the director also opposed the Ukrainian Film Academy’s boycott of Russian filmmakers, a ban supported by the EFA. As a result, the Ukrainian Film Academy expelled him.

Talking the hollywood reporter Facing the skin, Loznitsa explained why we go back to the unknown lessons of the past.

This is his second documentary, after 2016 austerlitz, which is “inspired” by WG Sebald’s book. what was her On the natural history of extinction What inspired you to make the film?

essay [in the book] We touch on a very important question: is it a morally acceptable target for civilians during a war? This question of how to approach it is what connects the book to my film. I was inspired after reading the book because this very important question remains unanswered to this day. If we look at what is happening now, we will see that the armies of different states and the military leaders of different armies consider it possible, even wisely, to attack civilians and destroy cities, targeting civilian infrastructure as a means. War.

You started this movie before the current war in Ukraine. How do you think they’re going to do it now, in the context of the Russian invasion going on there?

The idea of ​​making this film came about in 2018, after I graduated. donbas. It took mostly three years to finance this movie because everything is based on stock footage – we have two hours of stock footage in the film and we all know that stock footage is worth it. It is pure coincidence that I am finishing the film at the moment when this terrible war between Russia and Ukraine is taking place. But I knew this would happen a long time ago. I’ve talked about this many times. so i did donbas. You can go back and watch my interviews at that time. I said then: it is not a localized conflict, it is the beginning of a great war. It seemed very obvious to me.

The idea of ​​this war is a confrontation between two mentalities, between two ways of seeing the world – the Russian imperialist and the Ukrainian democratic – which are incompatible and cannot coexist.

If you look at my current film, you’ll see a principle that has become acceptable, almost standard, since World War II. Hitting civilians is now practically a war strategy. Today this principle is displayed in Ukraine, before it was the same in Syria and the world seemed to watch with disinterest. I think that this idea of ​​mass extermination, this principle, should be analyzed and reflected not only by politicians, but also by philosophers, anthropologists, sociologists, all those who study human society.

But when we were funding this film and applying to various funding bodies, for example, some representatives of German TV channels and foundations said: “Nothing to say, this matter has already been discussed. We [the Germans] Punished for our actions. ᲡThe case is closed.” It is Sebald who points out in his essay that morality [of targeting civilians] never considered.

Why do you think so much time has passed since WWII?

This is exactly the question I asked in my movie. Why, if everything is known, everything has been researched and studied, why these ethical blind spots? And here we get into concepts like collective guilt and collective responsibility. The notion of collective crime, collective responsibility was introduced by m [German-Swiss philosopher] Carl Jasper in his 1946 essay The German Crime Question. Casper speaks of this crime as a metaphysical phenomenon and how the question of collective crime must be raised by the culprits. The feeling of guilt must come from within the culprit and not as an external accusation.

But today this concept of collective crime has been inverted. Currently, there is an attempt to attribute a collective crime to anyone with a Russian passport or to the entire Russian culture. All of them must be held collectively responsible for the atrocities committed by Russian troops in Ukraine. Now I feel that every citizen of the country, the Russians, must also take responsibility for the actions of their governments. But if we are talking about collective crime, the Russians themselves should raise this question. I am not referring to the criminal acts committed by Russian troops. Of course, they must be tried at the International Criminal Court.

When he recently made a similar distinction, criticizing the call for a universal boycott of Russian films and Russian culture, he was expelled from the Ukrainian Film Academy.

Yes. I was very surprised and very disappointed by the decision of the Ukrainian Film Academy. But I absolutely oppose the outright boycott proposed by Russian cultural figures and Russian filmmakers, who actually opposed the Putin regime, which condemned the war. Because if we call them, like everyone else, a boycott, we are somehow betraying them.

A good friend of mine, the Russian filmmaker Ascold Kurov, made a documentary called ᲡCourtAt the trial of Ole Sentsov, a Ukrainian filmmaker detained by Russia. He risks Moscow’s disobedience, risking his freedom and possibly even his own life. The film was shown widely in Ukraine and around the world. He drew attention to Sentov’s plight and helped to free him. [from prison]. Now, if we say that the boycott of the film should happen just because it was filmed by a Russian film director, I think that would be treason, it would just be lewd and immoral behavior.

it’s about The natural history of destruction.Although the footage is over 70 years old, many of the scenes may have been from yesterday’s news.

We see that there is still the idea that it is possible to destroy all infrastructure, destroy the civilian population. Syria has shown us that such destruction is possible without much resistance from the international community. The Russians have been bombing Syria for five years, which should have been enough time for the UN to wake up and start doing something. Again and again the question arises: why does this happen? Why are people so callous when it comes to other people’s suffering? I don’t remember a public protest by any Ukrainian diplomat, for example, during the bombing of Syria. And now the same bombers, the same pilots, are doing the same thing in Ukraine.

The expression I remember is “chronocide”, the term you used in your documentary. Baby Yar. ContextThe Nazi massacre of Kiev’s Jewish population in 1941.

Chronocide is primarily the absence of historical memory. And the state of society where the tragedies, the traumas that devastated society are forgotten or not talked about. Whatever happens, sooner or later these traumas reappear and return to a community that tries to forget them.

But of course, if we compare World War II to the war that is now taking place in Ukraine, the fundamental difference is that the war between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union was a war between two totalitarian regimes. Considering that we now have a war between a totalitarian regime and a free and democratic country fighting for its freedom and independence.

The film is composed entirely of archival material. Where did you find it and what surprised you?

We have about 15 source files for the movie. Mainly German, British and American war archives such as the Imperial War Museum, German military archives, but also Pathé and the Associated Press. What surprised me was the night footage of the bombings, which was mostly technical footage that they used to set targets, but it was very detailed. Then there was the surveillance footage: the Allies filmed all of West Germany from the air, in really beautiful color photos, all very carefully, very accurately. It was also interesting to see how both sides formed their own propaganda and how the German propaganda style differed from the British one.

How did they compare?

The Germans filmed in a very romantic, very classic style. The camera was always pointed up, showing these heroic images of workers and fighters, using contrasting lighting to create a more dramatic image. The British style was very different, more like news coverage, with more relaxed imagery and freer, less precise composition. You could say that the German style was very hierarchical. British footage feels more organic and, to some extent, much more democratic. So even in the images you can see this controversy between the two worldviews.

We see what is happening in Ukraine now, what lessons has the world learned from the bombing campaigns of WWII?

Unfortunately, we see that no lessons have been learned. That question was swept under the rug. This is really the saddest part of it all, because what we’re seeing is how these unlearned lessons from the past come back to us. Of course, there must be laws, legal frameworks or agreements that prohibit the use of these methods of mass extermination of civilians. And do not forget [in the Ukraine war] There is also this danger of using nuclear weapons that threatens all of humanity. My goal in making this movie is just to ask that question, to encourage people to think about this whole thing.

The interview is edited for length and clarity.