Nostalgic from the Hip: Apichatpong Weerasethakul’s Lomokino Short
Nenad Jovanovic
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10509208.2021.1966289
2021-09-01
Quarterly Review of Film and Video
Abstract:No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).1 It was only in 2002 when the Thai LGBT rights activist group Anjaree Foundation suceeded in making the Ministry of Health publicly declare that homosexuality is not a mental illness ("Thailand" 2007).2 The operations of the Thai Censorship Board continue to be controlled by a 1930 legislation entitled the Thai Film Act, whose latest version inexplicitly formulates the criteria for prohibiting exhibition or ordering deletions in terms of undermining or disrupting social order or moral decency, and threatening state security or bringing Thailand into disrepute (Ingawanij 2008 Ingawanij, May Adadol. 2008. "Disreputable Behaviour: The Hidden Politics of the Thai Film Act." Vertigo 3.8 n.pag. Accessed July 14, 2021. https://www.closeupfilmcentre.com/vertigo_magazine/volume-3-issue-8-winter-2008/disreputable-behaviour-the-hidden-politics-of-the-thai-film-act/ [Google Scholar]). For a detailed commentary on the act, the changes it underwent following the 2006 Weerasethakul, Apichatpong. dir. Sang sattawat/Syndromes and a Century. Strand Releasing, 2006. [Google Scholar] military coup, and a discussion of the film censorship in Thailand in relation to Apichatpong's Sang sattawat/Syndromes and a Century (2009) see Ingawanij 2008 Ingawanij, May Adadol. 2008. "Disreputable Behaviour: The Hidden Politics of the Thai Film Act." Vertigo 3.8 n.pag. Accessed July 14, 2021. https://www.closeupfilmcentre.com/vertigo_magazine/volume-3-issue-8-winter-2008/disreputable-behaviour-the-hidden-politics-of-the-thai-film-act/ [Google Scholar]. For an engaging discussion of the law regarding the case of the filmmaker's Sud pralad/Tropical Malady (2005 Weerasethakul, Apichatpong. dir. Sud pralad/Tropical Malady. Strand Releasing, 2005. [Google Scholar]), see the final section of Anderson (2009: 172–177).3 Drawing on contributions by Jihoon Kim and James Quandt, Nicholas Mercer describes Apichatpong's cinema through the following contrasting notions: "global/local, urban/rural, postmodern/imeval, science/superstition, present/past, death/life, real/surreal, documentary/fiction, memory/fantasy" (2009, 196).4 As one reads Barthes' examples of how certain details on the human figures depicted on old photographs tend to provide one with the uncanny impression that the long-deceased people these images represent are alive, one is reminded of Walter Benjamin's much earlier description of the phenomenon: With photography, however, we encounter something new and strange: in Hill's Newshaven fishwife, her eyes cast down in such indolent, seductive modesty, there remains something that goes beyond testimony to the photographer's art, something that cannot be silenced, that fills you with an unruly desire to know what her name was, the woman who was alive there, who even now is still real and will never consent to be wholly absorbed in art. (2010 Benjamin, Walter. 2010. "A Small History of Photography." In Philosophers on Art from Kant to the Postmodernists, edited by Christopher Kul-Want, 102–117. New York: Columbia University Press. [Google Scholar], 108)5 Despite the emphasis on movement in Eisenstein's discussion of the shots of lion statues, these images draw their estranging power equally -Abstract Truncated-