INTERVIEW:Cat among the pigeons, Kong Rithdee BANGKOKPOST
Interview with Thunska
Bangkok Post: Real Time (Friday September 14, 2007) by Kong Rithdee
Cat among the pigeons Controversial filmmaker Thunska Pansittivorakul talks about his relationship with the establishment and how society can’t just be seen in black and white KONG RITHDEE
Surprise, bewilderment, and only the slightest murmur of approval greeted the decision to name independent filmmaker Thunska Pansittivorakul as one of this year’s Silapathorn artists. Unknown to most Thai viewers or the mainstream press, the 33-year-old maverick makes digital movies that breathe the hot fire of unadorned aesthetics and prurient provocation and which are often screened at small gatherings of like-minded cinephiles at low-profile local film events. That this obscure, radical figure was honoured with the award, initiated four years ago by the Office of Contemporary Art and Culture, the liberal wing of the Ministry of Culture, has brought both the recipient and the hosts into the heat of cultural discussion.
A graduate of Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Education, Thunska started making films in 2000 and quickly earned a reputation for trashy, quasi-Warholian style pictures that never shied away from showing explicit nudity, specifically the penis. His shocking shorts are raw and rough-edged - in Private Life a blurry image hints at an act of fellatio, and in Unseen Bangkok a man masturbates to the camera - whereas his feature-length documentaries, namely Voodoo Girls and Happy Berry, document with in-your-face realism the anxiety and disorientation of Bangkok youths. He doesn’t blink when he touches on sexuality - homosexuality, to be precise - and naturally that endears him to hardcore film-buffs and alienates him from the rest.
His anti-establishment stance makes him a surprise choice for a government-sponsored award given out by a cultural agency known for its prudence. Skeptics may wonder whether the committee, which is made up of highly respected artists, really ever saw any of his works in full. As though performing an awkward dance, Thunska himself seemed reluctant when his name was announced.
To learn more about this unlikely award-winner, this week we talk to Thunska about his award, movies, politics and thoughts on pornography.
Thunska Pansittivorakul: “One day, when society opens up, I’ll stop doing what I’m doing.”
What was your reaction when you heard that you had been picked to become a Silapathorn Artist this year?
Thunska: When I heard from the OCAC that I had been nominated for the award, I told them I probably wasn’t a suitable candidate and declined to give them the information about myself they required. I also recommended two other filmmakers who I believe to be more eligible. I implied to them that I preferred to have as little to do with the Ministry of Culture as possible.
But two months later, they called again and informed me that I was the awardee, and one thing led to another. I thought of turning down the award, but it was too late because they had already informed the press.
The award came from the government, and a number of respected artists have been recipients in the past, so why were you so reluctant to receive it? You showed up at the award ceremony, didn’t you?
I did. I spent 6,000 baht on a suit! And of course I thanked them for giving me the award and the prize money. But frankly, apart from a few top-ranking officials, I doubt if the Ministry people know anything about contemporary culture. There are forward-thinking people in the Ministry, but the conservative group is more dominant, and I’ve been very disappointed with them.
Even in the video presentation on the awards night, they said that movies were a medium that should be used to promote Thai culture and to advertise “Thainess” to the world. This means they only see movies as a kind of product. For me movies are universal - art is universal. And yes, the quality of being universal may be able to complement this Thainess, but it’s important that the agency steps away from this mantra of promoting traditional culture and sees the world with their eyes open.
On the same day as the press conference that announced you as an awardee, you showed a film, “Middle-Earth”, which could be seen as a very controversial piece for its explicit depiction of male nudity.
To be honest, I made Middle-Earth when I knew that I had been named a Silapathorn Artist, because this is the kind of movie that I knew wouldn’t please the conservatives.
People might question why I was making such a film since I had become a government-endorsed artist, but the fact is that I’ve been making this kind of movie for a long time.
I am not going to change my style after this. I have no wish to create the image of a well-behaved boy. I’m not going to change. Maybe I will be even more radical after Silapathorn.
You also wrote in the programme notes that this was your “political film”, even though there’s nothing overtly political in a film that simply shows two naked men sleeping.
Middle-Earth may not contain anything overtly political, and I’m aware that most people won’t get it, but I intend the movie as a statement. To show naked men is forbidden in Thailand, but the fact that we did show it on a big screen is a statement. [The film was shown as part of the Thai Short Film and Video Festival and by law wasn’t subject to censorship].
It says something. It’s my political expression. To just show it, without saying anything more, already means something. The authorities ban films for the stupidest reasons, so here it is.
In all your films you include at least one shot of a penis. Is that a statement too? Aren’t you afraid that it’s getting a little self-indulgent and deliberately controversial?
Well, not all of my films have a shot of a penis. I’m a sexist: I like men but I also do not want to glorify the male sex. What I always do in my films is objectify the male body and reduce it to become a tool for sexual desire. Sometimes I’ve been depressed with the qualities of maleness, especially of other men, and in a movie I can do whatever I want to them. This may sound really wicked, but movies are a tool for imagination and I intend to use them that way.
There’s also something else. Many years ago my movie was banned by the Thai embassy [from being screened at a film festival] in Hong Kong. That left a mark on me.
When the kind of films that I’m making become normal in Thailand, I’ll stop doing them. But to keep making movies like this is my fight, as long as the authority doesn’t accept reality - as long as they refuse to admit that there are prostitutes in this country and that not everything is as clean and beautiful as they’d like us to think. Life has many faces and people have the right to choose, but we’re being enslaved by people with power who tell us how to think and what to believe.
As a filmmaker, is that what drives you? That objectification of the male sex and anger against the conservatives - is that enough to compel you to keep making movies?
That’s part of it. They say this country has a high percentage of rapists who are inspired by pornographic movies. My take is that they rape because pornography is forbidden and the need has to be channelled into unreasonable actions. I don’t mean we have have to be like Japan, where you can buy porn openly. But the more we hide things, people will want to see more. I show pornographic images, but I believe it’s not the same as in porn films, because at least I have something to say by showing them.
One day, when we open up, I’ll stop doing it, because what I do will stop being a statement. But that won’t happen in this country any time soon. Maybe you and I will die first.
The Silapathorn Award is intended as encouragement for mid-career artists to keep up the good work. Will that work for you?
Everything will be the same for me. My inspiration and confidence don’t come from awards. When I finish a movie and I’m able to express what I’m feeling at that moment, that’s my award.
In literary and painting circles you also see artists who are controversial and anti-establishment. But they’re still respected, unlike radical moviemakers, who’re often vilified. Are the movies regarded as an inferior art?
Movies are not viewed as art at all, but as potentially pornographic material. Some books are more controversial than my movies. But maybe it’s the visual quality that easily incites anxiety. For me it’s the same old hypocrisy: we refuse to accept the state of our being, and we keep sanitising our reality. The world is said to be post modern, but we’re still in the modern age, perhaps the renaissance, or even the dark ages. Or, alternatively, we’re in an idealistic world where everything is beautiful and we’re all five year olds.
Why do you make movies?
To say what’s on my mind at a particular moment, to express what I feel at a moment in my life before it passes. Every movie I finish is an award for me. Sometimes I feel uncomfortable expressing my feelings, and maybe you don’t have to understand that lack of comfort, but at least in a movie you’ll be able to see it.
You’re now officially a government-honoured artist and you’ve made a “political film”. Do you think it’s possible for an artist to remain non-political?
I wasn’t very political until recently. That all changed during the time of Thaksin and later, the coup. We got rid of one corrupted power to be replaced by something not much better.
But in retrospect, I’ve been fighting for a political cause all along as I’ve made films and fought for the freedom to show them. Politics is part of us because we’re not living alone on this planet. I’m part of everything. I live with other people, and I have to accept what has been chosen for me by the government, and to say something about it, I believe, is an act of political struggle. People have to fight for the right to choose.
Today, when they say gays and junkies are bad and monks are good, you know it’s not true any more. The world has changed. Black and white aren’t always that distinguishable and that’s what I’ve always been trying to show in my films.
(Source: slantmagazine.com)
