I was up very ear­ly so I wal­ked in the sun along the Rhi­ne ins­tead of taking the U‑bahn to the cine­ma. As I got the­re Pro­fes­sor and the pro­jec­tion­ist were in the midd­le of a con­ver­sa­ti­on; Pro­fes­sor told me the pro­jec­tion­ist was clai­ming a lone Cana­di­an goo­se had dri­ven out the pre­vious inha­bi­tants of a shel­ter floa­ting in the Alter Hafen we over­loo­ked from the bal­c­o­ny out­side the cine­ma, only he wasn’t any­whe­re to be found that mor­ning. Appar­ent­ly an inva­si­ve spe­ci­es of Cana­di­an geese had been dis­pla­cing the local popu­la­ti­on in recent years. The pro­jec­tion­ist said that he had read in the news­pa­per ear­lier that week that most spe­ci­es of birds go through a year­ly pha­se cal­led ‘Schwin­ge­mau­ser’, which he didn’t know how to trans­la­te into Eng­lish, whe­r­ein they rege­ne­ra­te the majo­ri­ty of their wing-fea­thers used for fly­ing and gather tog­e­ther under bridges and over-pas­ses to make use this pha­se of vul­nerabi­li­ty and down-time by mating. Cana­di­an geese do not go through this pha­se but rege­ne­ra­te their wing-fea­thers all year long, the pro­jec­tion­ist told us, and so they’ll sett­le in nes­t­ing grounds they assu­me to have been aban­do­ned, or at least unoc­cu­p­ied, which is what pro­ba­b­ly hap­pen­ed with the shel­ter we were loo­king at. He see­med impres­sed with hims­elf for kno­wing so many details about this mat­ter, but also as if he wan­ted to play it down, to not show us how sur­pri­sed he was that this bit of know­ledge he’d picked up had pro­ven rele­vant, pre­fer­ring to think of hims­elf as the kind of per­son who just ‘knows things’ and could talk with the same aut­ho­ri­ty about any num­ber of issues, and in fact does so all the time, so he briskly hung his kimo­no on a hook near the rai­ling and went in to prepa­re the days scree­nings. As the other stu­dents began show­ing up the projectionist’s brot­her, who work­ed at the ticke­ting booth, came out to the bal­c­o­ny and when Pro­fes­sor asked him if he knew any­thing about this goo­se the brot­her laug­hed and said it was pro­ba­b­ly all made-up; whe­re was this sup­po­sed goo­se any­ways? This only fur­ther piqued Pro­fes­sors inte­rests in the mat­ter. Alt­hough it was time to move on and begin the day, Professor’s smirk gave the impres­si­on that this con­tro­ver­sy wasn’t neces­s­a­ri­ly sett­led for him, that if he’d con­ti­nue inves­ti­ga­ting it more incon­sis­ten­ci­es would come up and point towards fur­ther lines of inquiry, but that for now the­se ques­ti­ons would just have to ser­ve as a hap­py remin­der of the many dis­clo­sures life opens up when you poke around a bit. After the others arri­ved and we had shuf­fled into the scree­ning room, after pla­cing our pho­nes in a card­board box, Pro­fes­sor began the day with an obitua­ry he’d writ­ten a few years back; “The sta­ted func­tion of this archi­ve was dis­ar­mingly simp­le: the stu­dy, through com­pa­ri­son and con­trast, of the histo­ry or deve­lo­p­ment of the archi­tec­tu­re of indus­tri­al pro­duc­tion. Such a clear state­ment of pur­po­se. Such well-defi­ned use-value. But for whom? To whom is this archi­ve useful?”

The film began with fuz­zy audio and wit­hout an image eit­her, and we sat in the dark­ness for a good fif­teen minu­tes befo­re the tutor rea­li­zed some­thing was wrong and kno­cked on the door of the booth to noti­fy the pro­jec­tion­ist. The digi­ti­zed film began play­ing again, this time wit­hout com­pli­ca­ti­ons. The mal­func­tion we wit­nessed, howe­ver, would later seem to have been an inten­ded part of the pro­gram as we scree­ned two dif­fe­rent ver­si­ons of D.W. Griffith’s A Cor­ner in Wheat, both of which show­ed a sce­ne we all assu­med at first to be a sin­gle nega­ti­ve stuck in the shut­ter wit­hout bur­ning, of fro­zen share­crop­pers wai­ting in line to buy bread at the bak­ery. It was only in the second ver­si­on, the fide­li­ty of which both cla­ri­fied and com­pli­ca­ted this phe­no­me­non, that the seven-some­thing seconds which had pre­vious­ly appeared to be a sin­gle frame repea­ting did in fact show the move­ment of time, of bodies having been direc­ted to wait and stay incre­di­bly still as though posing to be pho­to­gra­phed by an insen­si­ti­ve pla­te-nega­ti­ve that neces­si­ta­ted a long expo­sure time. A sign near the cashier’s table read; “Owing to the advan­ce in the pri­ce of flour the usu­al 5ct loaf will be 10cts.” It seems quite lite­ral in hind­sight, that Grif­fith must have staged this tableaux to monu­men­ta­li­ze the immo­bi­li­ty felt by the resi­dents of wha­te­ver made up mid­wes­tern farm-town this sto­ry posits as the rural dis­trict in its micro­c­osm of the indus­tri­al, capi­ta­list eco­no­my, who could no lon­ger afford the pro­duct they them­sel­ves grew on account of its pri­ce being deter­mi­ned by its value on the glo­bal stock exch­an­ge via Chi­ca­go. Though I won­der now what it would have been like in 1909 to have seen this in thea­ters when many of Griffith’s more well-known tech­ni­ques hadn’t been adopted repea­ted­ly enough to beco­me the con­ven­ti­ons of cine­ma, when his and all forms of fil­mic sto­ry-tel­ling were still for­eign, what expe­ri­ence was then pos­si­ble and not fore­c­lo­sed upon by the accu­mu­la­ted expec­ta­ti­ons every fol­lo­wing gene­ra­ti­on had inhe­ri­ted and pas­sed down. Having been the one-hundred and twen­ty-fifth film Grif­fith made that year, working with an abso­lu­te fero­ci­ty to pio­neer all of the yet untes­ted poten­ti­al in the medi­um, he was bound to invent such oddi­ties. It was our ina­bi­li­ty to expe­ri­ence this one as any­thing other than a mecha­ni­cal mista­ke that see­med to me, in the times I later reflec­ted upon my expe­ri­en­ces that day, so bleak. This appar­ent­ly fro­zen frame, seven seconds of time as though yet unf­ur­led, never again to be re-used, must have once aimed like a for­king path towards the unrea­li­zed pos­si­bi­li­ties of a cine­ma com­po­sed of such tech­ni­ques not able to be instru­men­ta­li­zed among­st others equal­ly unpre­ce­den­ted, lying in wait, to repre­sent time not just as past but as poten­ti­al. On that mor­ning the stut­te­ring could only be tra­ced back­wards, down along that see­mingly ine­vi­ta­ble and neces­sa­ry chain of events that have con­dem­ned this medi­um to focus all its ener­gies on reinven­ting the same for­mu­laic dyna­mism cap­ti­vat­ing enough to resol­ve the con­tra­dic­tions and pla­ca­te the dis­con­tents yiel­ded by the very sys­tem of pro­duc­tion and exch­an­ge Grif­fith aimed to repre­sent in his film about the gro­wing and sel­ling of wheat when this was all then in its infan­cy and it was still pos­si­ble, I ima­gi­ne, to dream with films.

As Harun Farocki’s Indus­trie und Foto­gra­fie began play­ing through the once more plug­ged in cables, befo­re the cho­reo­gra­phed cae­su­ras in Griffith’s film echo­ed the days first mal­func­tions, the pos­si­ble signi­fi­can­ce I might have tried giving this moment of still­ness was swift­ly sur­ren­de­red to his tour de force of nar­ra­ti­on. How this aut­hor, under the com­mis­si­on of the Ger­man mining indus­try, could wea­ve tog­e­ther such a tight­ly-bound web of texts, images, tech­ni­cal know­ledge and his­to­ries see­med to me supra-human, as though his life had up to this point been desti­ned for such acti­vi­ty. The signi­fi­cant infor­ma­ti­on about the histo­ry of mining in the Rhi­ne­land, the evo­lu­ti­on of dif­fe­rent methods of extra­c­tion and pro­ces­sing coal and steel, the typo­lo­gi­cal stu­dy of fur­naces and coo­ling towers, the industry’s effect on the local popu­la­ti­on, and so on and so forth were all ren­de­red a poe­tic romance of cau­sa­li­ty and inge­nui­ty. Its cohe­rence and orga­niza­ti­on were like­wi­se so com­pel­ling that later, in try­ing to pro­cess this expe­ri­ence, I found mys­elf asking who his pre­ce­dents were, who­se films he could watch the way I wan­ted to watch his, brea­king down every detail, tran­scrib­ing the scripts, going through the source mate­ri­al, try­ing to find how each ele­ment func­tion­ed in rela­ti­on to one ano­ther, what logic was orga­ni­zing it all. So unpre­ce­den­ted, it see­med Faro­cki had reinven­ted the medi­um the way Grif­fith had, only not from an aes­the­tic dis­po­si­ti­on towards that which could still be inven­ted but with a retro­s­pec­ti­ve gaze back­wards, to redis­co­ver in it a method of ana­ly­sis. Despi­te his films essay­i­stic pro­gram, I expe­ri­en­ced in it an echo of what the French pain­ter Paul Cezan­ne had said about his land­scapes in the Aix Pro­vence, a quo­ta­ti­on Farocki’s pro­fes­sor Jean Marie Straub was so fond of; “The­re is fire in tho­se bould­ers, I want to release it.” Befo­re Griffith’s film show­ed us the labour of til­ling the top­soil, Faro­cki took us deep down into a sub­ter­ra­ne­an net­work of slow­ly chise­led out pas­sa­ge­ways, illu­mi­na­ted only by the workers sodium head­lamps and fro­zen in images by magne­si­um flas­hes, whe­re workers sought out veins of solar acti­vi­ty pre­ser­ved in veins of coal, brin­ging out into day­light the petri­fied sun­light of a mil­li­on years past. And so this is a way to say Farocki’s work is a mat­ter of prac­ti­cal indus­try inter­ac­ting with some­thing very super­hu­man like aes­the­tic con­tem­pla­ti­on. Deep down the came­ra was see­ing things for the first time, and so Faro­cki was see­ing it as though for the first time, and show­ing us how to see it as though for the first time. Yet the only thing that was new in this world was the set­ting, the atmo­sphe­re. Becau­se as in the world abo­ve deep down in the mines below the order of indus­tri­al pro­duc­tion and fac­to­ry labor had rein­sta­ted its­elf; the workers task was to over­see the machi­nes trans­for­ma­ti­on of natu­re. From this drud­gery unfold­ed the con­tra­dic­to­ry dialec­tic of modern indus­try; its unce­a­sing capa­ci­ty to out­mo­de its own pro­duc­ti­ve powers, a per­ma­nent revo­lu­ti­on in which we ven­ture to ever­mo­re remo­te loca­ti­ons, in this ins­tance deeper into the earth, making cont­act, as though for the first time as a spe­ci­es, with cos­mic time like Titans. But we are unable take cre­dit for or feel an accom­plish­ment from the­se achie­ve­ments. On the con­tra­ry, in the face of the­se explo­ra­ti­ons we feel only ever fur­ther estran­ged from our­sel­ves, as though in direct rela­ti­on to the colos­sal magni­tu­de of what indus­try has made pos­si­ble, and any­ways the metric of every achie­ve­ment comes with the near cer­tain­ty of its being out­do­ne in the not-so-distant future, a gain which will again be wit­nessed as though by con­flic­ted bystanders.

As capi­ta­lism imprin­ted its­elf in both seen and unseen places, Farocki’s self-assi­gned agen­da with this film was not only to explo­re the net­work of mines in moun­ta­ins but also the net­work of social rela­ti­ons that, like the con­ven­ti­ons of Griffith’s tech­ni­ques, had beco­me so omni­pre­sent as to be invi­si­ble and for­got­ten. Faro­cki had to mine the indus­try of cul­tu­re, to tra­vel through the time in space of tex­tu­al and pho­to­gra­phic docu­ments, to assem­ble them in such away as to allow their for­ma­ti­on to speak through his film. The pro­fun­di­ty of my expe­ri­ence of his film was that the indus­try of mining was spea­king to me, not Faro­cki. The Ger­man pho­to­graph­ers Bernd and Hil­la Becher (it was in tri­bu­te to Hilla’s pas­sing that Pro­fes­sor had writ­ten the obitua­ry he’d begun the day with) spent their lives pho­to­gra­phing the indus­tri­al archi­tec­tu­re Faro­cki was stu­dy­ing in this film, and like him they, too, were not inte­res­ted in the pos­si­ble artis­tic recep­ti­on of their work, nor in the pos­si­bi­li­ty of its archi­val func­tion, clai­ming the­se were both just bypro­ducts. Rather, they labo­red with the same urgen­cy as Faro­cki to pre­ser­ve the world and the eco­no­my dis­ap­pearing befo­re their eyes becau­se of some intui­ti­ve cer­tain­ty it was of gra­ve importance. So it is only fit­ting that Faro­cki dis­cus­ses them at some length in his film while describ­ing the dif­fe­rent mecha­nisms in blast fur­naces, using their pho­to­graphs as case stu­dies to demons­tra­te aes­the­tic and mecha­ni­cal varia­ti­ons in the dif­fe­rent struc­tures and pro­ces­sing plants. I think he felt a gre­at affi­ni­ty and soli­da­ri­ty with their work. The second sub­ject of his film had been, as its title tells us, pho­to­gra­phy, which always looks back as indus­try moves for­ward. Being an indus­tri­al, che­mi­cal method of pic­tu­re making, pho­to­gra­phy was moder­ni­ties ans­wer to the cri­sis of memo­ry, and ended up ser­ving to replace this dis­card­ed func­tion with its fide­li­ty and exacti­tu­de. What bound Bernd and Hil­la and Harun tog­e­ther was working in the shadow of this para­dox, having to look at the world being left behind and kno­wing that it wouldn’t be remem­be­red becau­se it couldn’t be, becau­se it is industry’s natu­re to move cea­se­l­ess­ly on wit­hout loo­king back. Faro­cki used the Köl­ner Dom as an exam­p­le of some­thing being pho­to­gra­phed so often that it beco­mes meanin­g­less; a supra-his­to­ric cypher tur­ned every day into an emp­ty sign. Con­ver­se­ly, the Becher’s aim had been to pho­to­graph as many simi­lar, prag­ma­ti­cal­ly-built objects as pos­si­ble, such that they could each appear to be varia­ti­ons of an ima­gi­ned ide­al, achie­ving a meaningful dif­fe­rence in subt­le varia­ti­ons. The pre­cis­i­on of their work fol­lo­wing a typo­gra­phi­cal orga­niza­ti­on seems to invo­ke photography’s anti­the­ti­cal dis­po­si­ti­on towards memo­ry, which is not divi­ded and stored and then appli­ed accor­ding to sci­en­ti­fic or taxo­no­mic­al orders but by some quint­essen­ti­al­ly human facul­ty the roman­ti­cs and then Proust tried so hard to under­stand, acti­va­ted not by a deter­mi­ned choice but evo­ked in the face of dan­ger, joy, and the gre­at and true emo­ti­ons, which were all sus­cep­ti­ble to chan­ging cour­se by this invol­un­t­a­ry relation.

Towards the end of the for­ty minu­te long film, again una­wa­re to the pro­jec­tion­ist, the laptop’s bat­tery war­ning light signal­ed and a few minu­tes later the film stop­ped run­ning. After it was char­ged back up the­re remain­ed less than a minu­te left in the film; a sin­gle shot made from a car wan­de­ring out of a pro­ces­sing plant cam­pus into the hills of the Ruhr­ge­biet, show­ing vis­tas of the once fer­ti­le land­scape now off limits to indus­try. A few weeks after this scree­ning I read, by chan­ce, ano­ther sto­ry about mining in the Rhi­ne­land, this one by Johann Peter Hebel cal­led Unver­hof­fe­tes Wie­der­se­hen, ori­gi­nal­ly published for a Ger­man Alma­nac to be read on the Thir­te­enth of Decem­ber in 1811 along­side valuable infor­ma­ti­on about the arri­val of new sea­sons, the waxing and waning of the moon, its effects on the tides, the likeli­hood of rain­fall, and other vital infor­ma­ti­on of serious con­se­quence to far­mers, who­se life-pre­ser­ving acti­vi­ty had to be kept in sync with our pla­nets move­ment through the cos­mos. A young man enga­ged to be mar­ried dies trap­ped in a mine, only to be unear­thed fif­ty years later loo­king as if he’d fal­len asleep just an hour ago, his body pre­ser­ved in the deoxy­gen­a­ted cham­ber by the natu­ral­ly abun­dant sul­pha­te salts and iron vitri­ol. To descri­be the pas­sa­ge of time in which the young mans body had died but not deca­yed Hebel wro­te, “Unter­des­sen wur­de die Stadt Lis­sa­bon in Por­tu­gal durch ein Erd­be­ben zer­stört, und der Sie­ben­jäh­ri­ge Krieg ging vor­über, und Kai­ser Franz der Ers­te starb, und der Jesui­ten­or­den wur­de auf­ge­ho­ben und Polen geteilt, und die Kai­se­rin Maria The­re­sia starb, und der Struen­see wur­de hin­ge­rich­tet, Ame­ri­ka wur­de frei, und die ver­ei­nig­te fran­zö­si­sche und spa­ni­sche Macht konn­te Gibral­tar nicht erobern. Die Tür­ken schlos­sen den Gene­ral Stein in der Vete­ra­ner Höh­le in Ungarn ein, und der Kai­ser Joseph starb auch. Der König Gus­tav von Schwe­den erober­te rus­sisch Finn­land, und die Fran­zö­si­sche Revo­lu­ti­on und der lan­ge Krieg fing an, und der Kai­ser Leo­pold der Zwei­te ging auch ins Grab. Napo­le­on erober­te Preu­ßen, und die Eng­län­der bom­bar­dier­ten Kopen­ha­gen, und die Acker­leu­te säe­ten und schnit­ten. Der Mül­ler mahl­te, und die Schmie­de häm­mer­ten, und die Berg­leu­te gru­ben nach den Metal­la­dern in ihrer unter­ir­di­schen Werk­statt.” After his exhu­ma­ti­on nobo­dy in the town but his for­mer bri­de could reco­gni­ze him; all his rela­ti­ves had died long ago. Upon see­ing him she was final­ly able to grie­ve her loss. This corp­se kept young, if in appearan­ces only, alo­ne sea­led deep beneath the earth while fif­ty years of world his­to­ri­cal events unfold­ed, only to be dug up and beheld as a cypher index­ing time having chan­ged becau­se it had not at all, see­med then like a per­fect ana­lo­gue to Faro­cki and the Becher’s pro­jects to che­mi­cal­ly pre­ser­ve fore­c­lo­sed indus­try in sil­ver-gela­tin, if only for the sake that our memo­ries wouldn’t hold them other­wi­se. The­se archi­ves then began to appear to me to have value in rela­ti­on to our society’s abili­ty make sen­se of its­elf through them, only nega­tively, by asking what is now not going to be held onto, what of the world we make will be out­mo­ded by the pro­gress of the coming gene­ra­ti­ons inge­nui­ty and will be for­got­ten by them too. A cer­tain despe­ra­ti­on ensues, a con­fu­si­on and deep uncer­tain­ty. The lack of an archi­val func­tion and the pre-deter­mi­ned aes­the­tic pro­gram to their works then beca­me not more than a back­drop for the lyri­cal excess spil­ling out of their images’ rigo­rous fix­a­ti­on on what can be seen in indus­try fore­go­ne; of leaf­less tree bran­ches, of rus­ting secu­ri­ty gates, the Rhineland’s soft­box sky, of con­cre­te sola­ri­zed by the acid rain their smo­ke stacks had once fed. Becau­se if one were to rewri­te Hebel’s sto­ry with the archi­ve of the Becher’s and Farocki’s works being the young mans body, an index pre­ser­ved through the pas­sing of 50 years, the series of events neces­sa­ry to descri­be the pas­sing of time wouldn’t be a dra­ma wort­hy of Hebel’s account, but could only befit the hol­lo­wed-out homo­gen­ei­ty their archi­ves drown in; the gra­du­al dis­sol­ving of all forms of inter­na­tio­nal workers soli­da­ri­ty move­ments, end­less pro­xy wars by geo-poli­ti­cal com­pe­ti­tors in poor count­ries, the reor­ga­niza­ti­on of indus­try to ever-fur­ther ends of the earth, incre­asing­ly auto­ma­ted methods of pro­duc­tion, the liqui­da­ti­on and invest­ment of all forms of capi­tal, the algo­rith­miza­ti­on of trade, the pla­net-wide exhaus­ti­on of natu­ral resour­ces (and more wars in more poor count­ries becau­se of this), the fur­ther exten­si­on of the poli­ce sta­te into every aspect of what was once con­side­red our pri­va­te lives… in short, ever-more inge­nious ways of con­cre­tiz­ing the cur­rent forms of social rela­ti­ons as the sum-total of all human acti­vi­ty cycles its­elf out into the ether. Unsur­pri­sin­gly this situa­ti­on has resul­ted in a socie­ty very poor in expe­ri­ence, unable to trans­mit its way of life to the next gene­ra­ti­on except in bad faith by reci­ting it all like paro­dy­ing a tech­ni­cal manual.

After the film ended we left this win­dow­less box and bro­ke for lunch. I wal­ked through the sun­ny foy­er down to the base­ment to the rest­room, which was lit with the­se blue-purp­lish tin­ted fluo­re­s­cent tubes I’d noti­ced being instal­led in public places. The light reflec­ting off all the glos­sy cera­mic tiled walls and flo­o­ring, mat­ted by resi­du­al streaks of clea­ning pro­duct index­ing clock­wi­se orders, crea­ted an ethe­re­al, shadow­less ambi­ent. One might think this other­world­ly lumi­ne­s­cence was instal­led to make some­thing unseen visi­ble for inspec­tion, like the ultra­vio­let lights tele­vi­si­on pro­grams show us detec­ti­ves using at crime sce­nes. But the pur­po­se of this light, I alre­a­dy knew, was the oppo­si­te. It floods the room with blue to pre­vent any­thing blue from being distin­gu­is­hed as such, spe­ci­fi­cal­ly veins. This tint ren­ders the who­le exte­ri­or sur­face of the human body a homo­ge­nous, glo­wing ala­bas­ter to dis­sol­ve the natu­ral­ly occur­ring con­trast bet­ween the fle­shy tone of our skin and the pur­ple veins cir­cu­la­ting blood just beneath it. Such a cold and anony­mous defer­ral, so gent­le and uns­po­ken it can pre­tend to hard­ly exist, this method of drug pre­ven­ti­on seems to have been inspi­red by night­ma­res whe­re no amount of strugg­le will free a drea­mer from his peril becau­se cer­tain fun­da­men­tal laws of natu­re like gra­vi­ty sud­den­ly stop func­tio­ning the way they used to. This new form of pas­si­ve-aggres­si­on, kno­wa­ble only by tho­se whom it addres­ses by way of dis­mis­sal, I ima­gi­ned to be a lite­ral blue­print for the fur­ther dimi­nu­tion of what remains of our sen­su­al coör­di­na­ti­on, set in place to con­trol a mino­ri­ty of the popu­la­ti­on we don’t even hard­ly ever think about. Not even prac­ti­cal, tho­se despe­ra­te and dope­sick enough will attempt to inject and cure them­sel­ves in the pri­va­cy of the­se rooms regard­less, only wit­hout coör­di­na­ti­on and so tearing them­sel­ves up in the pro­cess. Like the board­ed up adits in the hills of the Ruhr­ge­biet clo­sed off to the mil­ling of indus­try, ever­y­thing here seems to go on in spi­te of its­elf, as if cyni­cal­ly, just to show what isn’t pos­si­ble anymore.

for Chi­na and Mol­ly Maguire