The Kickstarter Blog

Meet the Team: Tomasz and Nicole

  1. Interview: The Intersection of Punk and Philosophy

    The punk explosion of the 1970s and '80s stretched beyond the music: it was a cultural moment that influenced art, fashion, design, and how and why people made things. In order to compile their book The Truth of Revolution, Brother, Charlie Waterhouse, Lisa Sofianos, and Robin Ryde spoke with people all across the genre, from its pioneers to current torchbearers, in the US, UK, and beyond. 

    We talked with the three creators about the origins of the project, and what exactly punk, philosophy, and design have in common. The interview was conducted via email, and in the spirit of the collective, all of the editors contributed to the answers.

    You three have a variety of backgrounds ranging far beyond music and pop culture writing. Where did the idea for this book come from?

    We were all into punk when we were young. Robin can wax lyrical about going to see Stiff Little Fingers and the UK Subs at the tender age of 13 in Nottingham. Charlie’s first gig was Siouxsie & The Banshees (and he has seen The Fall 32 times).

    Since then of course we've all gone on to do different things. These days Charlie is a graphic designer, Lisa writes books that challenge the way that organisations should work and Robin also writes books that he then lectures on to whoever will listen. But, for all of us punk has remained, and influenced much of the way we think – and our attitudes to life.

    So the project was a logical extension of our love for punk, for writing, design and for ideas. It came out of a long car journey. We were talking about the fact that it’s been over 30 years since the punk explosion, and for many people we know punk changed their life.

    How did you choose your interviewees?

    We wondered how might the intervening decades had shaped the views of the architects of punk. We chose the interviewees not be saying to ourselves “who are the most well known punks?” but “which punks have got the most value to add to a discussion of punk philosophy?” So people like Penny Rimbaud of Crass and Einar Örn Benediktsson of the Sugarcubes & Ghostigital were first up on the list. But to be honest, we are absolutely delighted with all the people that have agreed to be interviewed – we’ve got to almost all of the people we wanted – and they really are the most influential punks out there.

    How and where do punk and philosophy intersect?

    For many people punk was an emergent mix of ideas, fashion and creativity that were about the right to self-determine and be heard in society. In many ways punk was a continuation of some of the ideas of pacifism, localism, anti-capitalism and anarchism that were to be found in the hippie movement. But there were also punks who examined the ideas of existentialism through their work and experimented with the disruptive power of surrealism and situationism.

    The art that comes from the punk scene is typically confrontational and disturbing and shakes people free from habitual thought and falling back into unquestioning ideology. That’s not to forget the strong feminist message within the movement. We are in no doubt that there are deeply philosophical ideas that sit beneath punk, and it’s our view that this is why punk has had such massive influence.

    Design is clearly important with this project. Where is the meeting of design and punk?

    Design has always been an integral part of punk, communicating the principles of Do It Yourself and disruption. For many it was the art that brought people to punk in the first place. Jón Gnarr, the Mayor of Reykjavík, tells a stunning and moving story about his own upbringing which – through some rather clumsy diagnoses – had him spending some of his youth in various institutions. These were understandably dark days for him, and a way out of the isolation and confusion that he experienced was through Gee Vaucher's art and the writing of Crass. Jón couldn’t speak or read English at that time, but it was the power and clarity of Gee's images on the album covers that he connected with at first. This quite literally saved his life, and now of course he’s become a hugely influential figure and politician.

    What's your team like? Who does what? Are there other people involved in the project?

    We are old friends (in our mid 40s) and have known each other since we were in our late teens, always sharing our common love of music. We are parents and all work, and have come to a similar point in our lives where we want to examine where we are and where we want to go in the future.

    We think that there are others who wish to do the same, and that this book can provide ideas and provocations that can help them. Lisa and Robin are the writing team and Charlie is in charge of design, although in practice we all get involved in everything. We founded the project on a genuine and open exploration of the subject matter, trust between the team members and a deep desire to deliver something of real value and beauty. This is not a commercial exercise for us, but art. As far as we know there is no one else out there doing the same work.

    There's a wide definition of punk for the purposes of this book. Would you talk about that a bit?

    Punk for us was always an expansive idea. It was about the politics, self-education and challenging of authority; the alternative lifestyles and disruption; the questioning of taken-for-granted notions such as capitalism, patriarchy and democracy. So our definition is necessarily wide. And of course the music itself quickly diversified. The first wave turned into myriad post-punk manifestations. People like Mark Stewart and Steve Albini are just as punk to us as Crass or The Adverts, and even people like Jeffrey Lewis, who wouldn’t classify themselves as punk, are torchbearers for a punk way of doing things.

    And the beauty of having such a wide definition is we’re getting amazing perspectives on the subject. People that have engaged with the system, those that haven’t; each end of the (mainstream) political spectrum, anarchists and pragmatists. Punk encompasses an incredibly wide range of approaches, while staying true to its basic tenets of personal empowerment.

    Who’s the punkest non-musician you can think of?

    What a question! Well, some in the book certainly that fit the bill. Jón Gnarr, the artist Gee Vaucher, Gavin McInnes (US founder of Vice magazine), Domo Arigateu (graphic designer and activist) and others.

    But to be honest, there are scores of people out there that we would argue are non-musician punks. Jackson Pollock, Sarah Silverman, the philosopher Slavoj Žižek, Russell Brand and maybe even Benedict Cumberbatch!

    Then there’s Banksy. Perhaps he’s today’s most punk non-musician. He divides opinion, is widely misunderstood – surrounded by hype too, and gives The Finger to The Man. We’d love to have him in the book. Maybe we will, who knows.

    Any other favorite anecdotes to share from any of the interviews?

    There are loads! But one that springs to mind is when we arrived to interview Steve Ignorant, lead singer and co-founder of Crass.

    We’d driven for five hours nonstop to get to his house. The moment we arrive we see him running out of his front door towards us like a man possessed. Steve pulls open the driver's door with an urgent look on his face. He jumps into the car and directs us to turn around and drive as fast as we can. Without a word, we do as we’re told. Turns out he’s a volunteer lifeboat crew member, and he’d just received an emergency call! It also turns out Steve doesn't drive. We had the living daylights frightened out of us, but it was all in a good cause. See, punk saves lives!

    There’s another absolute cracker involving a loud-hailer, a scoutmaster and The Clash. But you’ll have to wait for the book for that one.

    Leave a comment
  2. Interview: Sean Durkin and Antonio Campos on Producing James White

    Director Josh Mond's James White is the latest project from Borderline Films. Made up of Mond, Sean Durkin and Antonio Campos, the trio uses a filmmaking method they picked up in film school at NYU, in which each person directs a film while the other two act as producers, securing funding and making sure the vision remains intact. Most recently, Campos directed the darkly romantic Simon Killer, and Durkin directed Martha Marcy May Marlene, which explored the emotional fallout (and subsequent paranoia) that comes from being part of a cult. Though each film is unique, there is something they share: a curiosity about the human condition. How do we cope when things get really bad? What are the repercussions? How do we change?

    We spoke to Durkin and Campos, who acted as producers on James White—which stars Christopher Abbott, Scott Mescudi, and Cynthia Nixon—about the film.

    Can you explain the way you guys work? How you contribute to each film? 

    Sean Durkin: I guess it started because of the way that NYU structures its film class, Sight and Sound, which is what we were all taking when we met each other. There are four people in a group, one directs, one’s a cinematographer, one does sound, someone’s a camera assistant and you rotate. When we met each other that’s what we were doing in class. When I started i never thought I’d produce something. It was a necessity to do whatever it took to make each other’s films. It required us doing a lot of roles for each other. It was sort of basic and not really thought out.

    Antonio Campos: I think the other thing is that we really didn’t know—once we came to the conclusion that we’d produce for each other, we didn’t really know what a producer did. it was kind of a blanket term. It was like, well you do everything else the director doesn’t do. We were all figuring it out at the same time. Basically the producer, for us, was someone that was like, "well we’ll just help you make the film and get you the things you need in order to make the film you want to make," and that’s still sort of the way we look at it. But the more you make movies, the more specific it gets, the more roles and people you have on crew. When we started out, coming out of NYU, where it was all hands on with everything, producing was almost like being on the crew.

    Do you find that you’re able to do all these production tasks properly?

    SD: I think it changes from film to film and our roles change on each film. Initially when we made After School, me and Josh were producing, and then on Martha, Antonio and Josh were producing, and then Josh and Tony went to Paris to shoot Simon Killer and I was editing Martha, and Melody [Roscher] came on board and produced with Josh, and then it was me and Antonio and Melody so every time there’s a film you obviously learn more and your role changes, but also the dynamic of our producing relationship changes based on whatever it needs to be for that film.

    There’s a lot of trust that has to go into working this way. If one of you needs more budget, one of you will go do a commercial to fund that. It seems very collaborative.

    SD: Yeah, for us it seems strange to produce for someone or direct a film and have people that are producing for you that you don’t trust. It makes it unpleasant. The whole idea is that you have to accept the vision of the person that is directing as the way to go, and you can disagree. We certainly do say when we disagree with the director, but we respect that if they stand strong on that path then that's the way it’s gotta go. That’s what the director is, the guy that takes responsibility for this vision, whether everybody else thinks they’re right or wrong. 

    I think the trust goes all the way through, too. Everything about making a film is about setting up trust. For us a lot of it is that you go into it with trust and you trust everyone you hire, you trust your actors and you trust your crew. That’s why you hire them — because you believe in them. You trust them to do the best work. 

    AC: It’s [that] phenomenon where certain actors are always better when they work with certain directors. When actors have that trust that the person they’re working with is not going to make them look bad or is going to make this film the right way, then they sort of free up and they are the best version of themselves. that same actor could be horrible in another movie and the trust is really what an actor needs from his director, everybody needs to be doing the best work they can do.

    Once James White is done, do you guys start the process circle around and start at the beginning again?

    SD: It happens very naturally. Antonio and I are both working on several scripts at the moment. We’re writing or other people are writing or are going to direct. There’s a lot of stuff going on, so there was never really an order. it sort of naturally happened that Antonio was going to go first, then we produced a film for somebody else, then Martha was ready, then Antonio was writing another film. It’s really about what projects are ready when. The only difference is now we’ve all directed a film, it feels like a new chapter in a way. We set out 10 years go to be directors and now we’ve done it and supported each other in doing it. That was the first step, and finishing James White will provide that. There’s no real plan other than focusing on the work ahead of us, focus on the projects we’re passionate about. You just know when one is ready to go, and we’ll just move forward with that project.

    Let’s talk a bit about James White. can you outline what your roles were?

    AC: We were producers, but in terms of James we were developing the script with Josh for a year and a half or so. We’re always involved in each other’s process—as much or as little as the person needs. it was no different on this in the sense that we’d be there throughout the whole production and pre-production and now post. We’re not in the edit room but we’ll be there when he needs us there.

    So what is James White about?

    AC: The "what’s it about" is always a tricky one.

    SD: It’s especially tricky in editing because we’re really protective of it. You write a script that’s about something and it ends up being about that, but it can always change. When we’re in the edit we’re really protective of saying it is or isn’t about one thing. Part of the edit is finding what it’s truly about.

    AC: It’s really amazing how it can shift. The script has a through line, and I don’t know how much or how little this will shift or become more important in the film, in its finished complete form. The edit is where the film is defined, and to try and define it before anyone sees it is what scares us. The funny thing about Kickstarter is, Kickstarter has made us be more open about our process, or the part of the process where we’re not so open. So little by little we’re becoming more comfortable with letting people into that. We’re inherently more private and protective in that way, we really nurture the thing before it goes out into the world and people have a sense of what it is. I can say it’s in line with everything we’ve done: it’s a character study, an unlikely kind of hero character study. I think that this film more than any other film we’ve made is incredibly human and has a warmth that our other films haven’t had. that’s what makes James its own thing.

    In your previous films you guys were very good at creating relatable moments from pretty unrelatable scenarios.

    SD: Yeah, I think that is essential for us. That’s what we’re most interested in. The way people interact and deal with themselves and others. We never set out to say what we’re interested in, what we’re not interested in, I think it happens very naturally looking at all the work.

    Leave a comment
Loading small 9cd608b53c63844322bca1d7d2cfa9d9cf2b2d91b09deb1c37b02bb990161eab
Please wait