‘ToBBNo avs eee ye my expla To Beparxod apepayniag H peandorevoy ‘107 elds mrmparoyp6y (1956-2008), no opyei and To ‘4 @eoupah Karpatoypgoy Secoaiowtns (17-26 Naeyeto 2008) ‘Ths pubeaton was compile onthe occasion of he mira in Greek Cinema 1856-2006) ‘insta was cganae by he 47h Thess itraton| Fim Festal (17-26 Noverbe 2000, Thsetpos Seon /Fesval resent Fadpya Xapayd/ Geass Corie ‘vectra ean Festal Drocor:Agonona Max /Despia Mazak Ente anzpdisas Tit selactn:Odvos AveoTénokag Thanos Anastopauas uvronoyésapipswaros | TbuteCo-rénaten: Xap anabmpic / HraPapadition Fapovorioo ry agtepazorc/ Fim presets: Xépng Kapa /Hary Karas nyse exdoane Et: v6 Kopahou Alena Karu, Agpodin Nxoksday/ Rost Nkolou ‘os Avaoenoulog Taras Anastopolos “urronaptsexbicewy @corgh/ esa publeabonsco-ordntor Any Kopidhu Aten Katou Meragpdoeig Tansttions Mating EAsv8piu/ Michael Bktnro, Maa Teresa von HierandXyiun, Hanae / Zi Sparta ‘op8boe/ Poot Reading: Mivey Mio Mant Bosios, EN erp ly Petites 1 guoypana rou ekuqtu ev: an rete ou Ake Aaa My roma ‘over Ales Damiano’ Uni te Sip Sais ‘Eekionoion Layout Avene Pats / Areas Remouts ‘Copyight © 2006, cana Kearoypagav Becoakovig/Thessalonk Itratonal Fm Festa xii yen /EgokeosPubleatons Soon; eaonGeh Kimoypiqau Deosaowins ‘Thessloemtinal Fi Fsiral Publcators exgpogAleEovbps 9, 11473 Aya /@Alxandras Ave, 11473 hens, Greece 7, +30 210 6706000, +30 210 8848763 MigrieAsoxekau 10, $4623 Geoochovi/ 10 Assos Square, 54623 Tessar, Greece T, +30 2310376400, F. +30 2810285750 wv fies inocoiiestval gr "YHOYPTO TONTEMOY / HELLENG WINTRY OF CULTURE(SEZTIBAA KINHMATOTPAGOY OEIEAAONIKHE ‘THESSALONIKI INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL Exgopirodge ya Ty evyypop tev xemevar roc / Special thanks tothe folowing for wring the texts ncued inthis pubicaion ‘iowa Geigepov / Ela-Anra Oaveraud Dan Gearakas, Knot Bepysrano.N /Chisios Dernereopados, Apa ayaudro / Andreas Payouts, Andrew Hoa, Zo Kyu / Sel Kymin, Ela Sean Eva Sea, ound Zamnponodhou! Chysanhi Soeopovlou, Maple Napabeiny Mara Paras, lwawa AahaTaU/ tana Lalu, Maveyir My Panayea Mn, Fg Manobenbau / Yannis Pasteotoou, laswo ABovooou anna ‘anasto, pn Nia Hera Nk, Ban Bax Vassis Vaal, Kipn Kapysha/ Hay Karnes Exyopiroine Beppi/ Special Thanks og oxotere/ oe rectors: Néorape Meron Mestre Mass, AA iavakOc My Yamaki. Alf Te Rex Gras, Bago Ayyhoouho Then Angelopals, ha Manaoean Laks Papas, fwpy0 Kapur Yo (1s Kenypis Acuégn SmvBnowko Lets Yantbopouos, No Monaro / Neo Papas, Eup Tkap an Sos Gortsas,Fwoye Zag /Yorgos Zi, Feo Kapoa Yargas Karas, Xoo Boinoupa / Clos Vospurs ucwravtvo aves /Contatne Ganmars, Xpjoo Au / Criss Das, Baaiy aie /Vasis Lae, Traine leévou/Savosloanou, ednna Tot Foes Tstns, Exopa Avi / xorasLjghans, Kata Mayle / Costas acters, Moun Bo Baran, pve Hr / Wa Bok, Kua Katou / Kyikas Katara, ove Boityan Paris Vag, Mage Frac / Marzo Gane, Navas Sap | Penayots Faas. No Fovayasonouts/ Nkos Panayetgoues 11g / and alse Tasooryn ms ENNGEog na aitepe oH Dodupe ASQASTOUD, Ale MaBE va To ABayorouko Tafa is Eades and especialy Thocoros Adamopouss, Emilia Mattie anc Tassos. Acamoaovls” EAhneKd KEYt90 Konpavoypd9os nau satepa voc: Xin Nerpie, Kaoa GruquAéa x Mav Kai Geek Fim ere ad xp aly Kosa Dimou, Ey Peis, Marinas Kos vipa Aa aga Ms, Lola Nal ov mkeor a0 rp tar aiepa tov soto Ap Ko\obfun/ he TY ston Strand espocialy Dink Kalodmoe my expe Tago MonawSpgos xa itep ou; Too Manav xa xp Auyepovadou Teese Paganini Co and es- ‘esi Tasos Papandeou ac ms Avgeropadau my EET / «CHET my Eragein Eta Erwan Grek Decors Gull’ ror Gov6on Kaposia ThanassisKaataos’ Sana Manayeupvow wa havo Vain Papagecgu and Lida Galaou, «Pate» 7 Jo9aSraypauibu Sta Stamntou, Oéeom" raha Xoo ‘or tov Fv Baad You Crista ad Yares Sanaa, »Proopkiv tv Beioaapo Kacovsae/ Vesa assy, em Sia Pav Oicoaxocn Fantasia Opthoskoustke ov xp ave oud Par ‘wis Tomazos' ty Cinetec BolognaNEPIEXOMENA / CONTENTS ‘Aéonwe Moo{ae,H yeroveoron ator ex xamparaypo: Eva; ara KN Despina Mouzeh miro n Greek cinema n open cycle eS tro: pravdorey roy eA stntoypdpo, 1956-2006 Ina orgy an: migration n Gree enema, 1956-2006, Ao-avva Aedgepou, Ta pa Tu perovdom, lead Devo The mia’ fs ‘an Gergkas, Wend tou petvdonn atv eqs eyoptaenmpToRBGpO ‘Dan Georgas. rian mane in popular Greek chema onoroe Aepuertenautos, 0 werowsarn omy Tawa Tou En Anaad ‘gga root: prtjuo rao eaves AN) xaatoypeow ‘ists Dermenzopauns, he negra inxs Darins’ fl Unt de Shp Sai the cus between fhe od and new Geb cir ‘Arp Nayouro, H yeausoreum ov edAqHE vtoypGg To vmwaNTED ‘aces Paguuaos, Inia in Grecia the cemetary nsren Hr, eon owopa ner nepdooyse ys ve otéoouye oT HDD: (toes tov Ssiapou Ayyehdnouhou ata Béyat TG peteverEuayS xa Ty RohveoTIONG ‘nse Horo, "How many borders do we ave o eos o ave home? te fis st a 2 of Theo Angora ad te thane of amigation an run rehog Kypng, Meraroraeg mg eicsmta: vo roca ym twetevdoreuon am Sexrca ru 1970, ‘StlosKyons, Sts the meaning of “Grevknass:docuertaris on ‘nvnigatn inte Sevens Ego rine ot anes {va Stefani, neigrabon camo save an Xouatven Zurpporadion, duc at erenpapés rapa Tou YOu Kl ty vipa evox Cysant Sarogau, Fgh an etus on he bodes of myth and human endurance ae lagMoga apoio, H env rou Gévou oto pov ERAS KeMCOYPNS a Parad, Th frelgne s ortayed in coremgrary Grek cea wave ou, Zevon, eravanrec. reooqvEs © xamparoypanoS ‘ic ueravdorevg we nokriowet pat Toema Lalo, Frege, female mmigrars,reuges: he crm of migration ss cual pas vaya Mm, Cnooc tou Kuworart Geom: og xl pia ya 0 cua Tv pravdom Panala Min, Constr Gann’ Hostage ear and puisher re body af he negra Faw ManaGentuipo, To erie amp: 0 dpcuoc none m Ady x AyeoIaOg YarelsPapatheodoru, The the intra": Te Way to the West ant Arerbanas “Woo Nika, Nooganué nope at euaoyptne: Movoaia, wow den Hora Nika, Ora stones in cea: Maso. a Geek rie tava Aovodro, Fron sravdowsuan nepkmtuon me ratas Fa Ap Hog Ioana Ahanasaou, ere emigration the case of A apt Shing Son Bootie Baysanés, HaBxaiam peravoorevn| rutéra ‘assis Varvatas, The usted errant identity tone Kapeaves, Nap pos ong ciyzpoveseXdnaxes rae yam peravarcuon Hany Aaranalos, Spata mots contemporary Greet fs abot niratonLe Gévo én N petavdotevan otov EAAnviKé Kivnpatoypdgo, 1956-2006 10 Kavnparoypagnes apiépapa xopiCouv tov eAANVIKG xivPaTOypspO OF NAGS, 60 xax o¥yxpovo. Me vay mpdopatn Napayavr| va ouvoRIhE! téco pe EHV nepfoBo Ug cpnopusrig axwrjc tou eAAnvixos xivnuaveypéyou, doo Kal ye TY MpoowMIKt Ek ‘epaon tov petayevéotepa SexarTidy, patverat Sui wpindoupe og KoIvs xa ENB oupyof, os KpiviKos, GewpntiKo Kat iotopiKof tov cAAnViKOS xavnNavoyedgOU, Ya va anoBex#oune noA¥ neproodtepo ané va BiaxopiouRG Kat vakivopned dpia, un Bia Spont péoa ané vavies xax npdowne nou oxnpatigouy wehrxd cy ouvelaesy enKdva ou ehAnvinoss xivqpacoypégou. Autrl tay datoym, uns ja Evvo.a, «whonoief» vo Bepauixs apiépawpa pe vaivies HOU Saxpéxovy én my eAAnvuKy} napayoyy| ocA xpoviRr} mE efAIEN oF pla anénerpa enaveppavetag xai enavavéyvooné tou eAnviKos xivmpavoypdgou. Prati, n xivn- atoypagney 1ovopfa Bev efva avaysato ~ote enapxée- va ypdipreal ndvea pe ion, “us aro®inuineés emAoyés ai ta priynata, AvtiBeTa, efva avaykato va npooeyyicexes yvexse and thy apr pe ta x40e popé véa neDoBohoviKd epyadeia ins Oeaplag xa ing 19vopiag vou xAvnNATOYPA@OU KaL He TRY ~ tg onlofee KoWwawIRd Biaxerprédpaote. Enopéviog, Eva tétO10 agpigpopa quobofes va avaberEer th OUHETOXY TOU KIVRUALOYPAgOU OTRY Kava: oxeur me eIKGvag YoU peravéorn, Galax ~FoWs MO epavids- ExOUV KGvel ta yéoN La Gris eemnepcoone, “Exo, vo apiépona ova peravéotevon pag kahes va Boe Favs, poe ans to ovygexpinsvo enapéBeryna>, tr oxEon eAARViKON KiVKaLoypapOU Kat eAnvuarig npaypacixdu tag ‘Mia Getizepn andvenon ovo epdtnua ylatf to npdto Oepariks apiéponé yas va emmxevvocveran om nevavéorevon, oxeriZerm pe tm ovyKupia. H wwprvy xpavexr ray gatvotan oxs6ov KouBiKy. Zovue oF ya enoxr| Nov n NevavéorevoN or Mae ‘yntint xAfnaxa- mpoxadet BabStates omovouinés, KorvaviEss Kat noAreioTiRss ah- Aayés. Meta avrcv, evtomiverar Kav 0 noMAamacaopss tov eIkSvOY yia THY Bie, 1m peravdorevon, ahd xar pa yevinétepn xan ovyyery} éevo, vay etepéeqva. Os Buonohies kowovinrig évcatns tov peravaoty, o1 auxvd Eevopopixés avriBpdoers, tov toby ove xopes UMoboxtis Tous Kai n Kpion MOkrtioTURIg TAVLUTAR HOV pavoy tng Bupame nov vie tehevrates exarovtarcieg aveihayBdvoveal Tig KONG 8 H METANABTEYEH ETON EAAHNIKO KINHMATOFPAGO 1956-2006In a foreign land: immigration in Greek cinema, 1956-2006 Ti “immigration in Grek cinema (1956-20067 retrospective he et thematic et rospective in the history of the Thessaloniki Film Festival's Greek programme. And the timing could hardly have been better, seeing that the unifying thread running through the entire Greek programme at the 47th Thessaloniki Film Festival is its unitary view of Greek cinema; a view in which every strand in Greek cinema is distinct but integrated in toa cohesive whole ‘What this year's Festival is proposing is the transcending —though not necessarily the abolition —of the boundaries that traditionally divide Grock cinema into its Old, New and Contemporary manifestations. That recent productions have entered into dialogue with both the commercial heyday of the Greek cinema and the aueur films of later decades would indicate that Greek audiences, directors, film critics, theorists and historians are now mature enough to reject such divisions and labelling and form, instead, a progressive view of the Greek cinema as a whole through the films and the figures who made it what it is today. In a sense, the immigration retrospective puts this view into practice by including films from every stage in the last half century of Greek film in an attempt to reinterpret and reread the development of the Greek cinema; because cinematic history does not have to ‘be written in terms of aesthetic choices and discontinuities alone. Indeed, such a history ‘would be profoundly inadequate. What is necessary, however, is to approach cinema hi tory anew each time with whatever new methodological tools the cinema historians and theorists have developed, and with both oyes open to the possibility that socio-political de- vvelopments are mirrored in cinema history But why should the first thematic retrospective on Greek cinema be on immigration? ‘An initial answer relates to the framework posited ahove: that a retrospective on immi- gration -which is to say on a social and historical, rather than a cinematic, theme—rais-" ¢s questions about the link between cinematic reconstruction and the history/society that produces it. The link between immigration and Greek cinema is not reflexive. We do not have to draw conclusions on the actaal migration flows in and out of Greece as we watch the films, though they ean point to the inner discourses on immigration, and to the ways jn which the cinematic image can exert a functional and normative influence on reality ‘Because it is this image—along with other mechunisms—that produces the images of the Other and of tho Self we employ in society. Which means that a retrospective like this one ‘ims to highlight the fact that the cinema has played a role in constructing the image of the immigrant in the same way though not as obviously —as the Media, ‘The immigration retrospective thus invites us to take afresh look at the connection between Greek cinema and Greek reality in the light of the given ‘example’. ‘A second reply to the question why our first thematic retrospective should address imn- ‘migration would relate to the singularity of the present moment in time: we seem to have reached a turning point. We are living in an era in which immigration is bringing about profound economic, social and cultural changes on a globel scale; changes will include the proliferation of images of immigration itself and of a broader—though related ~ concept: Otherness. The problems immigrants face as they try to integrate into a new society, the frequently xenophobic reactions of the citizens of host nations, and the crisis of cultural Identity eurrently faced by the states of Europe which have in rocent centuries come to perceive their societies as monoethnic, have turned immigration into a Key political bat- tleground, with all that implies. © 17 In Greece, these changes have boon sweeping: a country that once exported immigrants to the world now imports them, And this in the wake of its inclusion into the main body of the European Union and its emergence afterwards as a stabilizing influence in the Balkans during the period of reformation that followed the collapse of the Eastern Bloc. Over the last fiteen years, the flow of immigrants into Greece has changed the country's IMMIGRATION IN GREEK CINEMA 1056-2008 °t0U5 1g HovorBvnKés, avayopesiouy ty petavdareuon oF pe‘Zov pétOME HOAITE xGy avuinapaBéoeay ne 6,t1 «ured cuvendyeran, Euqy EAAGta, 01 adAayés eivan capouxée: ans xsSpa anootodrg petavaotesy Neca “spdmyxe o¢ xspa unoboxrig tous, Ki aves, werd tay éraly| tng ato «Spa wns Eu ponding “Evoong xai peué tn —pecayevéoepn- eykaSiépvor| ms oF popka ovabe- pdentag ory eupsrepy nepioyr{ av uRé avainryRpdenon BaAxaviev. Ta celewraia Bexanévee xp6via, 1 CiOpoF pecavanvEsy GAAAEE to BqROYpAyIKS, tO OIKOVORIKS, aA- Ad xat vo aowiKd vonfo. HapaAAnda, dyias, GMAakay Kal ta avanapaccaciKd 1600 Kay npéeuma (yevixeupévn, xprion UTOLOyIOTGY xa KIVRTGY ULAEPOvEOY, Kappes ehéy- X00, rotimy} emedpaon), ye ta onofa emxorvavauipe tie a\hayés, AAA Kat «npood- Yaroligéyaete> xoviovind. AuLS onpatves 6c1 © KoWV@vERss YoSpos -STa Kal 9 ATE oe, av Géhoune va efuaoce npaynatistés- efvan AnyStepo eUKOAE xaptoypagpomos Kai to apiépopa om peravdoreuen, 1 onofa anaexodes ého kar mepicodtepo vy cOvixt pag tavqHaroypapia, giADBoget va mapdoxer too évav Xdpen avrg tng B- ‘Bang neproxrig, doo xa: pia nvSiba mAoriynans. Mia. tpftn andvenon, exer va Kéver pe to dun petavéorevan evan pa Oepacinsh nov «axokoutet vov ehinvik6 xivnnatoypéipo ofS xen TOANE XpGvia — yia NY aKp- Bera, nevrivea, Auty n biabpourj tng netavacwewans yon ovIg eAANVIREe vaivieg ara Sencviier pia GAAn Sidotaon, ebaiperind evBrapépousa: o: xvnparoypaprKés avant paotdveig rg peravéorevang dev upiocaveas ad hoe, Bev GUYKpOLOLY aits ves, cOUS G@ éxppaon 1 éva effog tov eAnvixod KIvquaLoypapou, GANG avtiBeca oUupadt four, xonomonoiosy H/xax Siayoppavouy cig fies tig ueraBodge raw eAANVIKON KI vrnatoypdgou we apos ta ex@paaTiKd kat exBohoyied vow éoa, Pia th pecavdovev. on pIAOWY vedotpduaca xa xaneSies vou AeySpevou naXaion cAAnVINOS xivnnaco- ypdou, raiviee SqiovpYsy nov onnaLodéenoay thy évapéa tow véou eNANVIKON Ki vanaroypdpou, vioxipavegp and ta péoa tne Bexartiag rou 1960 «ig va ven xHS Be xaetiag tov 1970, «peydee» wwdouhaowixés apnysicer¢ ung Bexaeciag tov 1980 xan, ‘mo mpdopava, xAao:xdtepo1 ex@paTTAKO! tpdrto! ~KapIKo! Kan (peho)SpapatiKot= Kal vées, ypagés Soy cuvundpxer n pvBortAaota Kau vo vtoKipaveép - @AAote pe jxpaon ‘uy npaen, dARore ovo Betivepa, To apicowpa anoneipdvar va npoogeper xa aves) tHY -ovvapr PEwara, at petovupia cous, pe ty petavdoreuon- Sev neprapfavoveas oto agiépwpa. Oa undp E21 yeipos, au xpdvos, yaa avtés ne GAN euKaipra AY, Ope, bey eivar egavtAntixd éva apigpapa v1 vonna éxer; Ma, axxpifiss oe aves vo onpeio Bpfoxevai to véqud tov. Aev nodkere yia TaGWOUIKG kaLdAoYO Kea efa- vuhntuaf, puoodiprnrf anorunoog, aAXé yia emiAoyrf nou Beixver BraBpouse wat wa vevbvorig, nov ouvevidyer Herat tous garvopeviKd Biagope UKE avarrapaatdceic, ov npoxepd en auciitnan Kat voy BidAoyo, xwpie va prAdbokel va ekaveArjaes vo O€- ia, a\AG aveiBera va vo eniavagépes oto npooKrivi0, auvexiGoveas Bpduous nou Exouy if Sravorxeet ané aAAouc, [laipvoune ty oxveaAn, yia Va THY napabaooune ocouE enduevous, To apiépapa axohouBer wa nopefa tg avanapéoraong tov petavdown Kar Lor apnyrigeoy nepi wh peravdiotevon nou ounBabide: pe tmy Hopefa wng avyKpsenons QUO} LOY Vp aN to eNete Kar o1 GAO, ané tov «eases» Kar tO EEO. Koieeco- ry aM NAPTEVEH ETON EAAHNIKO KINHMATOPPA@O 1966-2008demographic, economic and urban terrain, But those changes have occurred in parallel with changes in the representational media and models with which we communicate these changos and collectively orientate ourselves (the ubiquity of computers and mobile tele- phones, surveillance cameras, private television channels). ‘This moans that the social space—and the urban, too, if we want to be pragmatic about itis now less easily mapped And the retrospective on immigration, a subject ta which Greek cinema turns ever more frequently, aspires to provide a map of this inaccessible terrain and a compass for orien- tating ourselves in it. « AA third reason relates to the fact that the Greek cinema has been ‘monitoring? immi- ~ ‘gration for many years: fifty, in fac. The course charted by immigration through Grock films reveals another—and fascinating dimension: far from comprising a Greek cine- matic expression or gonro, Greek cinematic representations of immigration actually mi ror, employ, and/or mould changes in the Greek cinema and ils chosen expressive and ty ological means. Immigration is a subject addressed by the melodramas and comedies of, the so-called Old Greek Cinema, the films of the auteurs whose work marked the begin- ning of the Now Greek Cinema, the documentaries ofthe mid Sixtios to late Seventies, the “large-scale” fictional narratives from the Bighties and, in recent years, more classical com- Je and (melo)dramatic forms of expression, and new styles in which fiction and documen- tary coexist and the emphasis alternates between the two. ‘The retrospective attempts to present audiences with the ‘underground’ course charted by immigration through Greek cinema, too; indeed, this was one of the eritoria that in- formed our selection. This elearly precludes any attempt at an exhaustive documentation of every film in which immigration figures in one way or another, Nor is every aspect of immigration included as it appears in Greek cinema. With an extremely wide-ranging cor- pus of films to choose from, we steored a very spekific course—the time limitations im- ‘posed by the Festival gave us no choice—while the need to clarify the boundaries of our ‘approach necessitated that we do so methodically. We therefore decided not to include films whose narratives are constructed around the forcible uprooting of people from their hhomelands in the population exchanges that followed the Asia Minor eatastrophe; films dealing with internal and political immigration or the return of political refugees; and films dealing with exile and the Other ~subjects related, in their metonymy, to immigra- tion. Their time will come. ‘Bat what is the point ofa retrospective if itis not exhaustive? Well, that, in fact, is the ‘whole point of the enterprise: neither categorized list nor exhaustive record, the retro: spective isa corpus of films selected to underscore routes and directions linking the seem- ingly disparate representations; to stimulate debate and dialogue with a view to bringing immigration to the fore, to take trails blazed by others further rather than exhausting the subject. We take the haton to hand it on to those whose turn will soon be coming ‘The retrospective charts the changes in the representation af the immigrant and of im- migration narratives; changes that go hand in hand with the formation of identities + around ‘us’ and ‘them’; the Self and the Other. Looking back to the early films in the ret rospective, the immigrant is the Greek himself, At this stage, the Greek cinema deslt more with those that stayed behind than with those who left, which was perfectly logical, sec- ing as their audience was ~initially —made up of those that stayed in Greece, and respon: sible, 100, in the context of a Greece struggling to construct identity after the Civil War; & Greece that thought it was healing its wounds with the Marshall Plan, though the fever still burnt within, Ton Daifas' Dollaria ke onira (Dollars and Dreams) and Nestoras Matsas’ O Metanastis, (The Immigrant) speak of those left behind, as do the comedies ofthe ‘Old Greek Cinema’ In a model that was almost universal in the cinema of the period, those left behind looked forward to the spoils of immigration and condemned the new foreign mores in films that juxtaposed countryside and city, past and present, traditional morality and new ideas. Alexis Damianos’ handling of the subject in 1966 was different in both cinematic and ‘ideological terms: avoiding the categorizations favoured ahove, he records the journey of he that leaves, His narrative steers clear of the until then classic motifs, and proceeds with ‘a subtly differentiated view of immigration: he talks of what we can know, the progress of the potential immigrant up to the moment of departure; to the ship, IMMIGRATION TN GREEK CINEMA 19562006 arag niow, ours mpeg vaivies tou apiepsparos, apxiKd pevavdouns sivav o ii0g 0 “EMnvag, Ze aver] vn gion, o ehAnvTK6s xivnatoypepoS pAAOKioe MepiOOGEpO YE auvéy nou péver, apd aneveuvdcav ve autéy nou gedyer. AoyIR6, GOL vo ~apxIKS— KOS tou Hitav autof now napéuevay. Buvente, oto mafoio wie wee npoonddr1as 0 xoBdgnons vs vautduntas oe wa pevewpuAIaRH EAAGEa, nov -voprce Su eH10UAw- ve ug nAnyés tng ne vo oxsi0 Mépoah, 2v65 oxo comeepied tye exeaye and MUpETé. To dolAdpra Kat dveipa vou ‘lava Ntaigé xa 0 Metavéorne vow Néoropa Macon, AAG xar xopobies tou Aeyouevou naAiog EMaVIKOS KIVnHALOYpdgOU WIAOY yr aU ove oy éueivay 1foW: npooboxssv tag ta o@¥An une weravéateuas Kar KaLaKpIvO- vyeac va véa ¥0n] nov Epxovea and vo eEwcepiKd, o¢ Eva Mafor0 OAS yevimdtepns, 1oxGog orov xivnpaxoypdgo ts nepisbou, uly av unapafoly{ unaBpov-Gove0e, na pehGycog-napsv toc, nOvxrig udéewcpoveépviny iBeciv Arawpopeting, xrvqpcroypagiKd Kot iGeohoyimd, n Braxespion tov AEpacog an6 tov AlGEn Aquiavs vo 1966: Eegesyer and ug nupandveo Raxnyopionoijocig Kar Kava: ‘ypdipet thy mopefa autos nov gedyet. H axpriynor{ vou, mpoomepvesy cag ca pExpr vsve avayvopforpa «og eaoned potiBa, aupBabiger pe wiag SAAN xpoxdc ouverBneoNOsNON angvavts otq petavdorcuon. MiAd yia aves tov proporipe va ywopKoupe: vay 110 pefa vou Suvduer wecavéiren néxpr uy ovryntl cng antoxSpnamE, HEXp! vo Moi. Afya xpdvia apyotepa otny ira omeany] Str ceAIKG o1 tanvies pnopoty va pihowy yie ‘mn Blower euaeipia, yra auté now yvapiCoupe and tnY Korveia péoa guy onoia Gorime nar dxt via vn waxpLvt KapIKATOKpA, n Avarapdoxaon wou OéGopON Ayes ovlou arotehef évav ohoxAno@pévo Adyo ndvio otis oUYEneIES TOU HELavGTEVT ot arvouévou otny chAnviK erapxta, erodyovvag vausxpove vies ypapes VTOKI- av repiowinns Aoyistig otov Kopnd tng wuBonAaorae, To veoxmaveép ag xivnpatoypagner avanapdotaon nov 6iver thy (yeud)ato8yon movsvepng avanupayoytis x¢ npaypariKsuLac, Umsip&e to dxnua yia wy yevaKfyne n vaV aghytoeay yia vn RetavdoteuE and aUESY NOU Eves, oe avLsY How gedyeL “Ero1, and te péoa une dexaevfas tov 1960 péxor xai to téhog tou 1970 efvan 0 EAN ‘yas netavdouns nou méov xivnuctoypagettal -H neprypGgetas we dXAOUE epEnoUG- ov0V E6¥0 510, OtOY X90 enYAaFaE, BtOV xtbp0 BIaoKEBaINE, TOV xISpO Grou Kasi ar va (er, xopie va napenBaivouy o1 gavao‘es xai 0: npoofoxiee tov dARov. Ta vt0 mipavrép Ayalléas tng MadAuc Psavvaxdi, 750,000 vou Aden TpiBa, EUrevin Kor ima Xatdelfeyns xen O Ticipy0s an’ ra Vesrmprdvnxa vou Aeutépn EavOsnovdov, Televratog oratude: Kosirounepyx vos Tispyou Kapuni®n, To ypdyua arté ro Zaphe- pod cov Avecivn Atapénovkoy, Tpdunara ané ry Avepter vou Aékn Thanaetatn, amovehowy yvrfoia Befypava pag xaBaprg ypaupis mow Bev @oBacan tn OE yEpOUAN We tay npayaouxéemza. ‘Tn Sexacvia tou 1980 n pevavdoreuon enavépxecar ovy wuBoudao‘a — Ker wadroca ovo maior apnyriocay yia tn «pean» 1ovopia, Me ey ovyvpia ens avayvapions ‘ng eOvmnrfg avtfovaons, avabeueviiera: to dua ens emoxpogrig xax e¢ NaAIvvdorN, ang, oy ovvaiex we pra afoPnom BaPrdg anoyor|teuONe Kat tag, CUVBeEBEUEHE pe CO élog tov Heohoyidv. HpooBoKiee pacauonsvee, Sveipa xaxeBagpiopEva Yia Tg Tal vies tng nepisB00 ne noArtixs Baipos, Een Poroypagéa vou Nikov Tlanavéen, and inv €An, nia e€ foou pavaxayévn eEob0« and xn wNEpa-narpiba Kai emotpOgH oF aU fy Xpdvia nerd, to 2004, Kai maAt pa geotoypagia ovéAver pia GA «nKpri= 1ovopia cous Bpsous wns «peyEAng» agrivnans oTIG Nuipes vou Tlaveedsj BoeAyapn, Haotée1a evpeone ravesenzag nov Snyuoupyertas deav n EAAdBa wevapaAAeva: oe xcipa unodoxrig petavacvi, Bev éyer oe Kania nepSrreon aro: aBrdgopous oxn vob étes tov orfvepa, o1 onofor oe RdMoxes MepmTesoric enavag’pOUN AapAAANAG vo OF pa rou éAAnva pevavéotn xn onnepsvs{ tov exGoxr. Ta Sweet Home cou thinniow Toicow, Delivery vou Nikow TavayioténouAou, Ausprcdvos vow Xpriovou Axjua mat to Eoatepuré ontciod we yovatca nov raGopicerpifla (lenoxéperes) vou “Excopa Av- yikou evtdocouy tov §v0 -MAnva tf «adAoeOvy)-~ Kai tov «eaut60 oF pa nOAUHOA- HORM xorvevia, npayHanKT rf “pavtaniaKt», nou o1 oxtoeg vow avOpanov eovy vives peuotés xa enopévos n tauestata ef SiapKsie NpOs avactiemon, TE pevorsenca, che, Bev nepiopiGeval oxo nepiexspevo, alAd vivar eupaviig St1¢ conynnatinés texviKes mou xonorponoinvta Je valvieg ung LeAeUEaiag Bexaeciag 1“ H MBTANALTEYEH STON RAAHNIKO KINHMATOFPAGO 1986-2006,A fow yoars later, Theo Angolopoulos’ Anaparastasi (Reconstruction) gave us a consum mate diseourse on the consequences of immigration on the Greek countryside. Sharing Damnianos’ viewpoint that films can speak of lived experience, of what we know of the s0- eioty in which we live rather than distant caricature, the film introduced new stylistic el ‘ements borrowed from the documentary form into cinematic fiction. The documentary as a cinematie reconstruction that gives the (illusory) sense of a mare faithful reproduction of reality provided the vehicle for a shift in the narratives on immi- gration from ‘those that stay’ to ‘those that leave’, Between the mid Sixties and late Sov- ‘ties it is now the Greek immigrant who is filmed —or otherwise described —in the for «ign space, the work space, the leisure space of the land in which he has been invited to live, without the fantasies and ambitions of others intervening. Milly Giannakaki's Ackil- leas, Alexis Grivas’ 750,000, Lefteris Xanthopoulos’ Elliniki hinotita Haidelvergis (The Greck community in Heidelberg) and O Yorgos apa ta Sotirianiha (Yorgos from Sotiriani- ‘ka}, Giorgos Karypidis’ Teleutaios Stathmos Kreusberg (Last Stop: Kreuzberg), Antonis Liaropoulos’ To gramma apo to Charleroi (The Letter from Charleroi) and Lakis Papas: tathis’ Grammata apo tin Ameriki (Letters from Ameriea) all exemplify a clear style that does nol shy away from confrontations with reality, Immigration reappeared in Greek cinematic fiction in the Eighties in films narrating “big” history. Coineiding with recognition of the (mainly Communist-led) national resist lance in World War I, it focused on the issue of return; the profound disappointment and defeat which, linked to the end of ideologies, accompanies a return to one’s native land. ‘The political films of the period documented frustrated ambitions and shattered dreams. In Nioo Papatakis’ / Photografia (The Photograph), we are presented with an equally fi tile exit from—and return tothe motherland, Years later, in 2004, another photograph ‘was to send another ‘ittle’ history out onto the avenues of the ‘big’ narrative in Pantelis, Voulgaris' Nsfes (Brides) Greek directors have been anything but indifferent to the difficulties of defining an iden- tity for Greove as it changes from a provider to a recipient of immigrants. In parallel, some have returned to the modern version of the Greck immigrant: Filippos Tsitos’ Sweet Home, Nikos Panagiotopoulos’ Delivery, Christos Dimas’ Ameritanos and Ektoras Lyghi- 208! Esoteribo spitiow me yineke pou katharizi mila (leptomeries) Unterior with Woman, Peeling Apples {Details all place the Other—Greok or foreign —and the Self in a real or “imaginary” multicultural society in which interpersonal relations have become fluid and Identity has, asa consequenee, to be constantly sought. However, this fuidity is as evident in narrational techniques as itis in content in the documentary elements incorporated into fiction films, and vice-versa in films dealing with immigration in recont decades: Stavros loannou’s Kleistot dromoi (Roadblocks), for in- stance, Kyriakos Katzourakis’ dromas pros tin Dysi (The Way to the West) or Constan- tine Giannaris' Apo tin akri tis polis (From the Bdge of the City). I's eertainly pertinent that some of these films are by directors who have at some point in their lives experienced andjor chosen to move to a new land and new communities: Irina Boiko’s Yparhour lin- daria stin Ellada? (Are There Any Lions in Greece?), Marco Gastine’s Massalia, makrini ori (Marseilies, a Greek Profile) and Bujar Alimani’s To kato: (The Kennel) are just three ‘examples, ‘Taken as a whole, these films manifest the shift from the narratives of the Greek immi- «grant abroad to thove ofthe foreign immigrant in Greoee. In addition to the films already ‘mentioned, the retrospective includes Sotiris Goritsas’ Ap to hioni (From the Snow), Gior- gos Korras’ and Christos Voupouras’ Mirupafshim, Vasilis Loules' Bras lamberas ilios (A Bright Shining Sun), Panagiotis Fafoutis' Salingaria tis Loulous (Lulu’s Snails) and Yor- ‘go: Zafiris” Ishmael. Some films give the immigrant room to speak and act, to take charge of his life, his body, his desires; others show hin negated by the confines of immigration, in societies which either incorporate him, sucking his blood, or exclude him, vomiting hira out. Some transcending and others downgrading the concept of the Other in the immi- grant. Some clearly plead in his defence, others with an approach which betrays under- ‘currents of discomfort, ‘When, in 2002, Costas Macheras returned to Yorgos from Sotirianik, the Greek immi- grant Lefteris Xanthopoulos introduced us to in 1978, he spoke to us of George from Hei- IMMIGRATION IN GREEK CINEMA 1956-2006 6yia 1m petavdarevon: vaivies puBomaoiag BaverZovvai ovorxefa vroxinaveép Kan v0 avtiotopo. EvBerxuixd: Kleoxof épjuor cou Dravipou ledvvou, O dpdyoe ripos #7 Ac on vou Kupréxou KarCoupaxn, Ané znv dxpn rns néine tou Kovovaveivou Piavvapn, “Ox1 wxata xéno1es and autés evan oxnvodetsy nou Exouv Brcoestikax emaAcEer ocr Gor vous eH pecancivnon ce véo véuo Kai oe vées Rover Lee: Yedpyouy Miovedpra orqv EUd6a; tne Ipiva Mn6ixo, Manoaia, waxpivy xopn tou Mapx Pxautiy, To Kare tou Mnovyidp Admdvi Bro ovvols vous, Spa, o1 vaiviog aueés npayparonoioty ey NeLéaor, ans vig a—n yijotig yia tov AAAnva petavdorn oxo eforepiKs ovov kévo petavdoun otny EAGBA, Koved or aurés now 1f8n avagépane, ovo apiépapa nepihanpivovean: Ar’ ro x26 vou Barrjon Pkopitoa, Mipoundpoiy tov Képpa xa Bosnoupa, vac hapinepss fliog vou Bagikn AovA6, Dahyeipra me Aoulode vou Havayisen Sagosen, Louarth tou Top you Zageipn. Ades agrivovtag ovov pevavdory nepibspia yi A6yo Kan Spéon, ya Sraxelpion us Laois, tou aGnard, ing emBuplac. AMes Befvoveag tay aKNipaar{ ‘tov péoa otoV eyRAeIoNd tg HetavdotevOS, Je KoIvGOvies NOY Bite voUG EvtaoOOUY avOponopayned, efte tovg aoxdefouy av@panoructixd. Adkec unepBaivoveag xat Adee unoBadpiCovras tay éyvoua vou KEvou atov pevaveown. AALec He gavepe ne= nnof®qon npedomiong Kat GAKeg ue undyeia apnxavia npayparevons, “Otay 0 Kisarag Maxafpag to 2002 aoxahsOnxe ue tov Fspyo ait’ ta Bornpiévixa, ‘ov onofov pas efye ousuijoes o Aeutéons Sav@dnauhos to 1978, vas wihnoe mAgov ya pyn, Seixvoveas wov xiicho ths tawreseHtag tow petavé- W fevitid Kai BvOY véno Kavay@oyrie / emIocpopife cov. AvUAf 1 xivnHaLOypA. aMo: tov Bidoyo peragy omuaxssy, 1H ouvavEReN vow apnyrowor je Lov mo artes vpéno, Kars ay tiotonxo emxerpet woe vo agiépana doo Kai n aposioa éKBo0q TOY Xo ov vobedex: un ouvéxion tou Biahsyou ype axté w peLevGovevon ovov eAAnveRS KIA naroypdo, Zayués auvot tou Biadsyau: H napéAAnAn exérikoon tow 28ou eres Bad EXAnyinod Kivnparoypagou to 1987 pe Oéua tay anoBniia, n onofa cvvobeus- av ans ex6ie &xb00n (Baothng Kexaysae, Kevyyearoyigos nar andbauos eUlnvouce, Exédotig @eouyiA EAnvixow Kivntatoypdgou, @rosaAovinn, 1987). AcsBeKa xo0- via apystepa n Xpvarivin EZarmponosihou Kuxlowépnve to éeyo H Siaonape ary el Anvess exvquacoypdgo (Adriva: Orpédvo, 1995), pia ouvokuey Dexipnon ww avanape- ordoeov vow eAAnviKod xivqRaToypdipoU yia tov “EAAnva mow Ce, epydgetat, mapa Eves, eyehopidevar ¥ Siageriyer exx6s ovvdpaav. Tio npsoxpaca, to 2003, vo Krvnpa: Toypagixs Apxeio tou Yroupyeiou E&wtepixay ovo MAaioio voy KaDiepopever eur ouoy ouvaverioesiy tov opydvioce ne agoppt my HpoeBpia uns EAAGGag oun Eup nnaixs{ “Evoon tn ouvévenen we dua «Hi ueravéoreuon oxov xivnuaroyedoo» eny onofa axoouBqoe n €xB00n Lyou we oxetrKa dpa. [Axaccive| Topar}-Kiovovav: novhou (emp.), H petavdcreven arov xvnjacoypdge, ABriva, Tarazeions, 2004] Zrov Bishoyo aves npooxahgoape va ounLETdaXOUY us dpBpa tos axnY apovioa éx600n, Bewpneixos Kat 10vopIKO! LOU KIVNBGTOYPGpOU Kal EiBixof and ouyyeveiG om- arunnovuxotig kAdéoug nov ExoUY aoxoANBes pe to BE NA tng yevavaoreuans oLoy (eh- Anvnxé) xavqpavoypdign. H pevdBaon ing Oeparixrie rou SiaAdyou and thy -ano8n- far, orm Bexaccia tov 1980, on -Biconopd>, oxy Sexartia tov 1990, Kar an6 exe! amy “pevavéacevan>, os népes Yas, gavepdver ty orabiaKr evaromion vou Be«pn- “UKod Kar 1otopiKoU apabeyatos ne EvaV TPO NapGAANLO mpog aUESY UAE HeLd- Baong wv Srpatixey tov iow tov eAANVIKOG KIVNBGTOYPMPOU TAY avanapdota- on xg peravéorevons. EkniZoume doa Seite xai doa SioBéoeve, va anoteAtoouy aria yia KoIvovins ot0- xaond xan Spdon: agopuH yla Brdoyo Kat aveaAAayr KivRtpO yia véa apIEpORACA, Yéa Kespeva, véze vavieg. AOnvé Kaprétov, Agposin Nixolaiéov, @dvos Avaordnovhos 6 1H METANAZTEYEH ETON EAAHNIKO KINHMATOFPAGO 1966-2006delberg, thereby demonstrating the nature of immigrant identity in the cirele from depar- ture to foreign land to return, But this cinematic journey from Sotirianika to Heidelberg and back again illustrates something more, and in the most tangible way possible: the di- logue between viewpoints; the meeting of narratives. ‘And that, more or less, is what the retrospective—and this volume accompanying it~ seeks to achieve: to contribute to the dialogue on immigration in the Greek cinema, & di- ‘logue whose salient points include the Greeks abroad event held aa part of the 28th Greek Film Festival in 1987, which was also accompanied by a special publication (Vasilis Kecha- ias, Cinema and Greeks abroad, Greek Film Festival Publications, Thessaloniki, 1987); Chrysanthi Sotiropoulou’s The diaspora in Greek cinema (Athens: 'Themelio, 1995), a comprehensive survey of Greek cinematic representations of the Greek who lives, works, ‘remains, is trapped or escapes beyond the bordors of Grooce published twelve years later; and, more recently, the “Immigration in the cinema’ mini-conferenee the Hellenic For- eign Ministry Cinema Archive included in its 2003 programme during Greoce"s EU Prosi- dency, and its follow-up volume published the following year (Foteini Tomai-Konstan- ‘topoulau (ed, Immigration in the cinema, Athens, Papazisis, 2004), We have invited film theorists and historians, as well as specialists from related fields ‘who have studied immigration in the (Greek) cinema, to participate in this dialogue by contributing articles to this volume, The shift in focus from “Greeks abrond” in the Fight- ies to the “diaspora” in the Nineties and thence to “immigration” reveals a gradual change in the theoretical and historical paradigm which in turn parallels the shift in subject-mat- ter in Greek cinema's representations of immigration, ‘We hope that everything you see and read will prove a stimulus for social clarity and the adoption of a meaningful stance, a starting point for dialogue and thought, and a motiva- ‘tion for new retrospectives, new texts, new films, Athena Kartalou, Afroditi Nikolaidou, Thanos Anastopoulos IMMIGRATION IN GREEK CINEMA 1956-2006 ”