10 Years a Master

ALUMNI’S TAKE ON THE NOTIONS THAT SHAPED THE ‘ARTISTIC RESEARCH IN AND THROUGH CINEMA’ COURSE

The international MA ‘Artistic Research in and through Cinema’ was created in 2009 as a space for filmmakers and artists interested in exploring research questions emerging from their artistic practices. It was founded upon a strong conviction that filmmakers have developed and are still developing tools that offer a unique understanding of the world around us. In the course of the last ten years, the Master’s programme became a testing ground for close to a hundred film professionals from all across the globe who strived to understand what methodologies, questions and motivations have been driving their work.

The goal was not to transplant theoretical frameworks from other disciplines and cast the practice against it but to condense and critically assess the expertise of film practitioners, making cinema itself a tool of research.

Researching your subject through practice, you allow your experiments to frame the meaning of the concepts you operate on. As we’re celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Master of Film, we decided to brush the key notions, that the course was founded upon, against the grain of our alumni’s practices. In order to do that, we asked our colleagues who graduated from the course between 2011 and 2018 to speak about their relationship with Cinema, understanding of Artistic Research, Methodologies they uncovered while reflecting on their own practices and their Subjectivity as makers and researchers. In doing so, we wanted to see if there is any common denominator between the former students - a lasting vocabulary of the course. Simultaneously, we welcomed it as a research opportunity to learn from our own trajectory and redefine those pillar notions through the praxes of the researchers that carried them outside the school and developed through experimentation.

MASTER OF FILM 2019

10 Years a Master

Question

What is your take on the notion of artistic research?

Eliane: Freedom and excitement - that’s what I think when I hear the word “research”. There’s a continuous line in my practice where discoveries provoke questions, which initiate the process of making a new film. The research I’m involved in is constituted by that whole process, with its results and intermediary steps. It’s as much artistic as “practice-based”, founded on reflection on the practice itself and a dialogue with my collaborators and the world. It goes beyond the boundaries of my field, seemingly unconnected or useless things gain relevance when seen in the scope of research.

I see my works as living entities with a voice and will of their own while they are still “in progress”. This is one of the pleasures of doing research - it’s adventurous and brings

unexpected outcomes because you have to deal with these unruly entities.

Agnese: I’d call what I’m doing research through artistic means but I wouldn’t equate it with scientific study. In science, you tackle a very specific subject under particular conditions and use a set of parameters to render your research relevant.

Taking those little steps you look for universalities, results that will progress the body of knowledge within your field. What I’m interested in is not universal but particular. I collect impulses - ever-changing phenomena that stay in constant flux. Similar to Eliane, I see the images and materials that I work with as living organisms - their meaning, impact, and relevance are fluid and change over time. Depending on when you access them, you will notice different things, so it’s hard to establish parameters that would stick.

Bogomir: I think the whole point of Artistic Research is precisely not to impose the same parameters as other disciplines like Anthropology or Social Sciences. If you start with this rigid set of parameters you will only see what they

10 YEARS A MASTER

Researcher’s Profiles Momchil Alexiev

Bulgarian artist and a filmmaker. After working within film, performance, and installations, he moved on to producing 360-degree films and VR experiences. His focus is on expanding the notions of cinematic space and immersive film. Founder of the VR Lab BG in Sofia - a platform for VR, AR, and MR professionals - and a Sundance Institute fellow.

Emilio Reyes-Bassail

Filmmaker and sound artist based in Mexico City. His work revolves around questions of memory and time. Constantly experimenting with different mediums and forms, his body of work comprises radio pieces, video art, film, experimental literature, sound installations, illustration, and music. Currently, he develops the artistic research course at the Universidad Iberoamericana in Mexico City.

Áron Birtalan

Hungarian artist with a background in music, experimental arts, and role-playing, who creates games and rituals in everyday environments. Working together with players and their imagination as an artistic medium, he explores the nature of human interaction by creating collaborative experiences, called Transformation Games. Through his work, he encourages people to tap into a playful territory, where art, games, and magic mingle. Áron is also active as a musician and co-runs a children’s fantasy camp in rural Hungary.

Eliane Esther Bots

Dutch filmmaker / visual artist and art educator. In her work, she explores the notion of intimacy, treating it as a condition for the encounter between people. She is currently working on her long-term filmic research on the influence of conflict and migration on narratives of people involved in them. The Channel, her latest documentary, focuses on (former) interpreters of the Yugoslavia Tribunal in The Hague and their role as ‘intermediary’ between speakers and listeners, witnesses and accused, court and attendees.

Julia: I see myself as an interdisciplinary artist and a researcher. At the same time, I also think that artistic research is essentially different from its academic counterpart. It requires investigation and stretching of your own cognitive boundaries but in addition, it embraces the beauty of the image, a satisfaction deriving from creating something unique.

As a maker, I create my own visions of reality, within my own spectrum of knowledge, using filmmaking and image-making tools such as speculation, provocation, observation and composition.

Momchil: I actively embrace the frame of Artistic Research and the way of working I established in the Master. It’s a bit

more difficult process to sustain once you leave the institution, however. In VR you’re in this paradoxical position that even if you wanted to be the artist only, you inevitably need to engage in research since there is no established way of doing things. For me research is a process of procrastination - instead of proceeding with work, you need to put your poetic drive on hold and reflect, go back, write about the things you’ve done. You do something and reflect, take another step and reflect again. Meanwhile, you need to be careful not to bury the emotion and poetry under the intellectual layer. There’s a certain conflict within me between the artist and the researcher, the poetic-emotional register and the intellectual side. I need to synthesize the researcher and the artist in me into the creator all the time to resolve that tension. Artistic research needs to go beyond dry scientific methodology and engage with the soft tissue of the phenomena around you - not only with the science of them, but also feelings, our inner selves, and simply being here and now. I like to see artistic research as a process of combining and merging qualities of the two, not excluding elements of either field.

Agnese Cornelio

Italian artist with a background in communication sciences and theatre direction. Her theatrical practice intertwines fiction and documentary work. She makes performances based on contemporary plays as well as documentary theatre projects. Her ongoing research project Free to Work is a multifaceted attempt at understanding changes in the practices and perception of “work”. It combines filmmaking, appropriation of archival materials and performative arts.

Bogomir Doringer

Born in Belgrade, he studied sociology before coming first to the Rietveld Academy and then to the Film Academy. He is currently doing an Artistic Research PhD at the University of Applied Arts Vienna with the ongoing research project I Dance Alone where he observes clubs’ dancefloors from a bird-eye-view as reflections of social and political change. He frames the collective and individual dynamics of these dancefloors under the working concept of the Dance of Urgency. His observations are presented in the form of lectures, publications, workshops, installations, and films.

Maria Molina Peiró

An audio-visual artist and filmmaker from Spain. Her body of work includes films, video art, and new media Installations. Her films and installations often use metafiction, post-production and geo-tools to unfold layered realities that connect humans, technology and nature. Her current research focuses on humanity’s struggle with its temporal and spatial limitations, and the resulting changes in our relationship with technology, nature, time, and the understanding of life itself.

Julia Sokolnicka

A Polish experimental and documentary filmmaker, writer and researcher, with a background in philosophy, based in Amsterdam. She’s an author of music, dance videos and visual concepts for theatre and commercials. As a researcher, she moves between social philosophy, video, and performance. She continuously collaborates with other artists on projects in the field of theatre, dance, performance art, and video art while developing her research projects Digital Nomads and Social Choreographies.

MASTER OF FILM 2019

are calibrated to capture. In my practice, I tend to observe my subject first to see what is particular about it and set my own parameters from that experience. Only after you’ve framed something you can decide what you want to keep in the picture and what to leave. Otherwise, art would only serve as a mode of presentation. In my case, I research my subjects through making cinema and curating exhibitions.

Áron: In this manner, I don’t really separate my research and my practice, nor do I differentiate them in terms of results, i.e. one being a text and the other an event. I work through a practice of facilitating playful experiences for people, so they can reimagine the world around them. The experience can be delivered as a game, workshop, ritual, text or an audio guide but it’s always framed as a practice operating on artistic, social and political levels. I don’t use the “artistic” component to legitimize my practice or put it on a pedestal.

It’s a mindset. With its consideration of aesthetics, compositional techniques, perspective, framing, editing and performativity, art provides you with a great vantage point It allows you to understand experiences within a given situation differently, express it, and establish a common ground for communication.

Question

10 YEARS A MASTER

What is the role of the audience in your artistic research practice? Áron: New inputs are constantly being provided through a constant influx of players and changes within the internal structure of the games I run. I see my practice as research because it facilitates responsibility - the ability to respond to the world around us. It can help us understand our place, potential and the agency within a given situation.

At the expense of authorship, I’m interested in sustaining a conversation with players who are in an equally informed position. It’s about facilitating research discoveries and creating opportunities for everyone involved, so we can develop an ear to listen, to find responses to the challenges ahead.

Julia: Academic and artistic research translate differently and have a very different degree of consideration for the audience. Both fields are driven by the same sense of urgency - trying to capture a sign of time - but the art that I’m

interested in has much more room for dialogue. It is a practice of noticing things at the intersection of disciplines that might not be visible or accessible to others.

I’m usually using myself as a tool to mediate between individuals who have expertise on a given topic with others who might be interested in it. I constantly work on the designs of platforms of communication between those two groups. In my case, the insistence on dialogue comes from the tradition of solidarity, grass-roots work, and activism.

Bogomir: In artistic research, you always need to be aware of your audience. By adjusting elements of your work, i.e. using music or not, you frame the conditions of their reception.

Lately, I played my dancefloor footage filmed from a bird eye view to spectators without sound and noticed how much more analytical they become when they’re not overwhelmed by the audio. In moments like this, you notice how much we are trained as spectators to analyze and categorize. Without realizing it we scan the picture, assess it and decide which elements or characters to follow, who is important for the narrative and who isn’t. If you use those artistic/cinematic codes, you can have the audience analyze your work and research intuitively. Humans are actually perfect surveillance devices, technology simply replicates what is in our nature.

Question: The Master facilitates the research in and through cinema but the projects are executed in various media. How is cinema present in your practice? Does it help you set up that rapport with the audience you mentioned?

Julia: I come from a generation that grew up in Eastern Europe being conditioned as spectators primarily by cinema.

I am also trained as a filmmaker and it makes me think a bit different than art school graduates do. I’m always going to be influenced by cinema, the same way as when a sculptor decides to use a video, you clearly see that she treated the screen as a sculpting material. However, as much as I like seeing my films on a big screen and I enjoy the element of projection, I don’t think that cinema happens in cinema anymore. When you say “cinema” it evokes all the connotations to film industry, festival circuit and worn out narrative templates. What cinema means to me is a particular set of expectations and spectatorial practices that I can play with. The spectators shaped by cinema expect

There’s a tension within me between the artist and the researcher, the poetic emotional register and the intellectual side.

I synthesize the researcher and the artist in me into the creator in the process of making.

— Momchil Alexiev

The point of art is to transform material in such a way that it creates meaningful connections with the universe.

quality - beautiful image and crisp sound - but in turn, they reward you with a special degree of attention. It doesn’t mean that I always go for the pretty picture. I often choose raw aesthetics but also challenge myself to bind spectators to the screen and evoke that heightened focus through the work itself, without immobilizing them in the dark room. My audience of choice would be set in more intimate conditions - in the gallery, in front of the TV or the computer. It’s time for cinema to allow reactions and interaction on its own terms, not like it’s done in gaming and VR. To work towards that, though, I first need my audience and myself to understand the language of cinema.

Bogomir: I’m from the same generation and when I was a kid, cinema was the most dominant and easy-accessible art form. I see it as the most powerful medium that has the capacity to move you in an unmatched way. Even when I work on transmedia projects in space, I use cinema both as a reference and a conceptual framework adapting such notions as editing and framing to different circumstances.

For me, cinematic reference also sets the bar high in terms of quality and intelligibility - the images I make need to look good and they need to resonate by themselves - without additional aid from the accompanying text.

I collect impulses, ever-changing phenomena that stay in constant flux. They are like living organisms. Their meaning, impact, and relevance are fluid and change over time.

— Agnese Cornelio

Eliane: As my practice developed, I realized that cinema is a relational medium to me. Through cinema, I get to relate to a very diverse range of people and question my surroundings.

It gives me space and necessary focus to observe life carefully, in order to isolate its parts into a film or other object. The frame of cinema makes me establish relationships with my characters that are barely possible in life - the time we spend together is characterized by heightened focus and attention, where everything they say is of the essence and of interest to me. Coming from visual arts I know that this complex relationship could possibly be facilitated by another medium but once I tried animating my drawings and saw them coming to life, I didn’t feel I could continue in any other way. Cinema translates even to my seemingly unrelated activities. When I work on text, I compare it to editing and when I’m in conversation with my students, I feel like we are trying to create a joint narrative.

Agnese: I was working with concepts deriving from documentary cinema before the Master because I come from the tradition of documentary theater that chooses to work with non-actors who bring their expertise on everyday life to the play. When I compose images I always start with performers and subject the camera to what they are doing.

MASTER OF FILM 2019

— Emilio Reyes-Bassail

10 YEARS A MASTER

That’s why I’m vitally interested in the vast cinematic tradition relating to rehearsals. On the other hand, I refer to film archives as repositories of images that inform life. While looking at those images, I primarily think about the way they are constructed from the position of the maker, questioning the social and ideological circumstances of their production. What am I looking at? Why was it shot like this? It applies to images in films but also to images I encounter in the real world. Áron: I’m definitely more interested in how cinematic practices could inform the experience I facilitate for players than how the experience could influence cinema. If you work with participation, there are so many notions built around interactive cinema or participatory theater that they can suffocate what you’re about to discover. In the cinematic experience, there is an inherent asymmetry between the maker, the audience and the material. The camera can easily turn players into performers and it creates a rupture in the experience - a differentiation between the inside and the outside. It’s such a strong paradigm that I needed to cut off any references to it in order to explore the specificity of my own practice of working.

The decision not to allow any external eye into the space of a game (be that a camera, or an audience) also has to do with me taking a direct stand against treating the experience as a commodity. Not everything is ‘up for capturing’, and I like the idea that the only way to get into the game is to play it.

Nevertheless, I’m now at the point where I recognize what I’m doing for what it is, and it allows me to revisit notions coming from the cinema. I sometimes try to assume the position of an editor to tackle the configuration of the experience or think about the ways of channeling the attention in terms of framing. These concepts are really enriching as long as they don’t serve as an external theology of the work but are put into practice immediately. I can also see a potential now, of bringing the camera into the experience, but only as a diegetic tool - one that is acknowledged, becomes a part of the game and facilitates communication within it.

Maria: Cinema is my main frame of reference, it’s in my spine. I always think in terms of narrative, how it could fit the concept. I also think from the basic terms of cinematography like light and shadow, tempo and rhythm. So, even if I don’t work in cinema, creating different kinds of outcomes, I always work through it.

Emilio: From the very beginning, I saw cinema mostly as a way of conducting research that would allow me to combine my interests in fine arts and music. Applying to the Master I wanted to learn how to make films and to understand how memory works. I managed to combine the two into a single thing. You could do projects about memory in other media and if I was a sculptor I’d probably find some aspects of the subject reflected in sculptures but cinematic elements are deeply embedded in the way we recollect. For example, trying to recall your first kiss, you might remember it in slow motion.

Speaking about the editing process I often equate it with memory - you select certain elements and organize them to create a narrative. The more you work within a particular medium, the more parallels like this you find. In the end, it is the point of art - transforming the material in such a way that it creates meaningful connections with the universe.

Question

Are there any constant elements in your practice?

Specific methods that you’re consistently using?

If not, how do you develop a method suitable for a particular project?

Emilio: In my case, the process of refining methodology was all about finding ways of working that would give me a better understanding of the subject of memory that I’m trying to research. I started rationally by looking for the best ways of materializing how the memory works. However, the further I got, the more I was relying on instinct. It doesn’t mean that there was no reason for proceeding in this manner, but the rationale of those choices would only become apparent in the subsequent reflection on the results. What constitutes research is precisely that process of reflection on what

My role as an artistic researcher is to address the inexplicable tensions that I spot and create circumstances for the audience to notice them.

— Julia Sokolnicka

Cinema is a relational medium to me, I get to relate to a very diverse range of people and question my surroundings through it.

— Eliane Esther Bots

you’ve done. It’s hard to do when you rush into production, delivering one project after the other but if you take one step at a time and reflect on it afterwards, it will eventually inform the next step. That’s what I call a method. Áron: The Master of Film provided me with the space to build a practice that is sustainable. I let it grow organically by framing experiments that inform each other and keep progressing. Throughout the course of my research, I developed methods to create playable games. I can do it fairly easily now, so there’s definitely an element of advancing craftsmanship both in game design and my guiding of the experience. I developed a recurring structure of the experiences, structural points that I want to hit. If I broke down the timeline of each game, the playtime itself usually takes only between 20-25% of time. The rest consists of the workshop, debriefing, warm-ups, and breaks. All these elements are known to the players and crucial for the experiences to work. The aim of that is to create a space that gives the player as much agency, transparency, and the opportunity for articulation over the course of the game.

After all, time and attention are the two most precious resources we work with, so making room for them is paramount.

Agnese: In terms of methods I’m indebted to Stanislavski and his approach to physical action. His is mostly known for his take on the psychology of the character but what I found especially interesting is his idea of given circumstances. It’s a set of conditions that influence the actions that the character undertakes. It helps you trigger memories by recreating circumstances in which a given event or action occurred. The physical reenactment triggers the tactile, bodily memory that is not entirely conscious and hard to tap into otherwise. I come from the theater and it constitutes the core of my methodology but the camera plays an equally important role in the process. Those practices and gestures that emerge within given circumstances need to be captured exactly as they emerge when there’s only a glimpse of opportunity. There are some similarities with cinema verité - the truth or authenticity captured in an instance on film.

However, the truth I’m interested in is often a total construction, a synthesis of the remembered and culturally imposed fantasy.

Julia: There’s a certain methodological commonality in my

work. I bring my expertise as a documentary filmmaker, an interviewer and an observer to the table - analyzing the situation through my lens. I position myself as an onlooker who needs to be open to what can be seen, instead of seeing reality as a symptom of the methodology. Whenever I deal with a subject I like to read and get the basic understanding of the field but I need to keep myself at bay not to become a specialist, keep my point of view and mojo going. In this sense, I also build a different rapport with the audience - showing phenomena instead of explaining. My role is to address the inexplicable tensions that I spot and create circumstances for the audience to notice them.

Question

Research practice is often associated with the use of concepts.

Does conceptualization happen at any stage of your work? If not, how do you reflect on your practice?

Julia: When I coin the concept to work with, I do a brief reconnaissance to flag the field but I don’t try to get the full summary of its history and branches. I treat concepts in a speculative way. They set up the horizon that I later explore with my tools. In this way, I’m trespassing, playing with technology and desecrating scientific methods of speculation. Áron: The material you’re working with, will always inform you and your method. It doesn’t make a difference if you’re working with clay or experienced-based forms, you always

Humans are perfect surveillance devices. If you use artistic/cinematic codes, you can have them analyze your work and research intuitively.

10 YEARS A MASTER

— Bogomir Doringer

need to recognize what your material is. This is where the concepts may help, they can aid the process of developing an understanding of the material. I like to build a “cosmology” of my practice. I give things names in order to push it forward, to create new openings and facilitate communication. For example, I refrain from calling people who engage in my experiences participants but address them as players. This differentiation has a serious impact since it frames their engagement - they’re not only participating by choosing from a given set of options but actively co-directing the outcome and overall course of game. Be that as it may, conceptualization always comes after the experience itself as an act of articulation. I name things that are already there. If you get entangled in too many concepts, you become their hostage. Concepts are not the only way in which knowledge and experience are articulated. The things that are said, seen, felt, and expressed in the games, leave a footprint, and inherently inform future games. Hence, the same way as the concepts are being refined over time, here the knowledge is being accumulated within the experience itself.

I want to provide the audience with some sort of metaphysical synthesis bringing things that lie below and above us into the temporal and spatial scale of humans.

— Maria Molina Peiró

Eliane: The awareness of what I’m working on and the possibility to verbalize it is essential to me. It gives me the opportunity to share not only the work itself with the public but also all the findings and discoveries that were made in the process. That knowledge of the methods, challenges, and structures of my research feeds back into my work as an educator.

Bogomir: At some point, when I came up with and started using the term Dance of Urgency, someone asked me where I took it from. I looked around and realized it was coined within my practice. In that notion, I managed to capture something about dance and its relation to the state of political urgency, art, expression and club culture that wasn’t given a name before. The dance of urgency is a dance that arises from the emotions that occur in times of personal and collective crises. Such a dance empowers individuals and collectives, uniting them and enabling to perform as political bodies when necessary. Taking the interdisciplinary approach, I was able to extract expertise from dance culture and it suddenly started to look not only like an original

Question

It is a widespread conviction that researchers are after objective truths and artists follow subjective impressions. How do you retain and express your subjectivity in the artistic research practice?

Maria: I’m currently working on a documentary film that falls at the intersection of many fields. It deals with Rio Tinto - a mining area in Spain with some of the oldest mines on earth dating back to 3000 BC that is also considered by NASA to be the most similar in its chemical composition to the planet of Mars. They are currently testing remote robots and other space equipment there. With that area being close to where I was born, it becomes a story that combines my personal memory, a memory of the earth reflected in geology and the seeds of our possible future as space colonizers. Moreover, the story has multiple symbolic layers because Rio Tinto was also a departure point for Columbus’ journey to America, a site of the first ecological protest in history and the birthplace of one of the oldest branches of flamenco - Fandango - that originated among the workers lamenting their living conditions. Working through cinema and narrative I can synthesize all these

I see my practice as research because it facilitates responsibility - the ability to respond to the world around us.

— Áron Birtalan

different elements that don’t belong in the same field. It won’t be a sociological, political study alone but instead, it’s aimed at providing the audience with some sort of a metaphysical synthesis - bringing things that lie below and above us into the temporal and spatial scale of humans.

Agnese: I want my working process to be transparent. It’s a more fair position towards the audience to reveal where you stand as a maker. Transparency is the biggest affirmation of subjectivity, it flashes out the particular. I always try to find a way to show how I approached the subject, and how far I am from it. It’s not strictly about saying where you’re coming from but highlighting those elements of your background that influence the way you deal with your topic. I try to make my personal entanglements visible.

Emilio: There’s this sentence by Kierkegaard where he says something along the lines of subjectivity being the subjective truth, but one that cannot be mediated through reason.

Subjective truth needs to come from a leap of faith. Without being certain of your method or an idea, you invest it with belief, trust your guts and see what it brings. Of course, if you analyze the notion of subjectivity it has a lot to do with where you come from and how you relate to your environment as well. I don’t believe in this romantic idea about all people being essentially different from each other and art coming exclusively from the inside. At the same time, I think that you need to affirm being a fool to a certain degree. Trying to do something no one else has done, or plenty have done but not in the same way, without any certainty, is a part of subjectivity. That is what I’d like to teach in my course. It’s about finding ways to discover your own mode of working. All film professionals should have their own personal relationship with notions related to filmmaking.

Framing should mean something different to you than it does to me because as a filmmaker I offer you my way of looking at the world by framing it for you.

Julia: I’ve been thinking about subjectivity a lot because I’m very active in the art world. I considered how practices of the industry influence our work and condition its meaning and how the works feed back into the industry. Among the

MASTER OF FILM 2019

contribution to the field of knowledge production but one that is backed by 15 years of practice and subsequent reflection on that practice. That gave me the confidence to dare to create new definitions.

10 YEARS A MASTER

scariest, least useful and degrading notions in this context is one of the “individualist star artist”. It should perish. Intuitively when you hear “subjectivity” in the art context you associate it with this idea of a genius who is about to show you the reality, since he/she has a special way of looking at things. This approach creates an unhealthy competition where artists speaking about the same subject are pitched against each other so that one can win. I hate it since it goes against everything that we’re doing as people, artists, and thinkers.

My idea of subjectivity is very much connected to the notion of community. There’s a reason why I stand where I am - at the intersection of different disciplines, interpretations, and bodies of knowledge. I’m practicing now in the Netherlands which is the country of consensus, influenced by very particular design ideas, and distinct social and moral politics.

We’re also in the middle of the refugee crisis and a very weird moment for information and propaganda when the media landscape and the concept of the image itself are shifting.

Given all that, I can’t pretend to be doing my own little thing without knowing it and being influenced by it. You need to be aware that by creating images in these conditions you get involved in the network of communication. You need to know where you’re speaking from, what channels and media you’re working through and who you’re talking to. What I work on and how I work comes from certain traditions, circumstances, and decisions that altogether create the subjectivity. I’m gonna use the example of my group at the Master. Although we were very different from each other, I think we all come from the same subjectivity. Subjectivity in this sense is something that we create together as a group, that is being born out of shared experience and communication. It’s different from intersubjectivity that I perceive to be a function of the process.

Subjectivity is embedded in the outcome, in the work.

Interviews were conducted and compiled

by Stanisław Liguziński.

Researchers 2011 Bart Juttmann, Bogomir Doringer, Kasper Verkaik, Kay Schuttel, Lisette Olsthoorn, Reinier Noordzij, Taatske Pieterson Researchers 2012 Alice Spitz da Rocha, Janneke van Heesch, Joep Kuijper, John Treffer, Julia Kaiser, Sam Yazdanpanah Ardekani Researchers 2013 Channa Boon, Claire van der Poel, Edwin, Ginta Tinte Vasermane, Jovana Tokic, Pedro Collantes de Teran, Reinilde Jonkhout, Ruben van Leer, Yael Assaf, Yassine el Idrissi Researchers 2014 Agnese Cornelio, Anca Oproiu, Jack Faber, Jelena Rosic, Luiza Fagá Ribeiro do Valle, Margot Schaap, Maria Ångerman, Noël Loozen, Sonja Wyss Researchers 2015 Bálint Túri, Bram Loogman, Ellenoor Bakker, Momchil Alexiev, Namfon Udomlertlak, Nina Jan, Olivier Delebecque, Pablo Núñez Palma, Rosanne Pel, Signe Tørå Karsrud, Vladimir Simić

Researchers 2016 Anastasija Pirozenko, Dawood Hilmandi, Dorian de Rijk, Eliane Esther Bots, Fedor Limperg, Gwendolyn Nieuwenhuize, Julia Sokolnicka, Mariia Ponomarova, Matteo Canetta, Mikko Keskiivari, Stanisław Liguziński Researchers 2017 Alex Perry, Daniel de Oliveira Donato, Emilio Reyes-Bassail, Gustavo Lorgia, Jad Youssef, Kristina Daurova, Lisa-Marie Vlietstra, Louis Liu, Maria Molina Peiró, Sophie Dixon, Wietske de Klerk Researchers 2018 Ana Bravo-Pérez, Áron Birtalan, David Wasch, Deniz Ozman, Diego Arias Asch, Francesco Ragazzi, Sabina Mikelić, Sam Ashby, Stephen Graves Researchers 2019 Albert Kuhn, Bora Lee-Kil, Giorgia Piffaretti, Peter Hammer, Robin Coops, Stefan Pavlović, Jan-Timo Geschwill, Yafit Taranto Researchers 2020 Alberto Delgado de Ita, Federico Sande Novo, Juan Palacios, Magdalena Szymków, Marleine van der Werf, Mira Adoumier, Misho Antadze, Omar Breeveld, Sarah Fernandez, Sophie Wright, Victorine van Alphen

MASTER OF FILM 2019

The Master of Film would like to acknowledge all the alumni as well as current and former students who contributed and still contribute to the development of our programme and the field through their continuous engagement in the artistic research as makers, researchers, teachers, and propagators: