text:
Published on Sabzian (www.sabzian.be)
Conversation EN
Making the World Superfluous
An Interview with Harun Farocki
Thomas Elsaesser 1993
Thomas Elsaesser: You have been making films since 1966. I think your filmography numbers some fifty titles. Where have you been all these years? The New German Cinema has come and gone, Fassbinder, Wenders, Herzog – been and gone. How did you manage to survive? How have you been able to create such a body of work, unnoticed by the world?
Harun Farocki: Not entirely unnoticed. I'm probably the best known unknown filmmaker in Germany. Hartmut Bitomsky is another filmmaker in the same position, a well-known, unknown filmmaker in Germany. He and I started making films together, after leaving the Berlin Film Academy in 1969. During those years a lot of things were possible, or so it seemed to us. Kluge was successful in the cinema, and Hellmuth Costard's work was shown on prime-time television. There was a short boom for political films in West Germany, and for a brief summer we had the possibility of producing this kind of films, and before we knew it the fashion was over. I think we didn't take advantage of our opportunity all that wisely, and with the start of the 1970s, it was all over. Take Wim Wenders, he gave up his long takes, began to work with shot-countershots and made himself socially acceptable. But we didn't manage the crossover, and it seems that anyone who failed to adapt at that point, stayed out in the cold for a long time. I tried to get by, by getting my work into arts programmes or on children's television, but it was by no means always a done deal. And in any case, there is not much public attention to be gained from those kinds of assignments. Working for television, a documentarist like Peter Nestler attracted precious little attention, and today, not even the Straubs can provoke a reaction, always assuming that their films are being shown at all.
Was it a deliberate move on your part to more or less bypass the subsidy system as it existed in Germany during the 1970s? I noticed that Images of the World did actually get subsidised by the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia, a regional funding authority. Considering the way your projects are set up, it could not have been easy to submit scripts or otherwise comply with the regulations, which were required by this public machinery surrounding the subsidy system? Or maybe it was a political decision to not even try?
No policy decision on my part. Simply, in the case of Between Two Wars, I tried twenty-five times or so to get the finances together, but in the end, I had to produce it without public money, and instead used some 30,000 German Marks that I had earned with other film work.
I gather that Between Two Wars, when it was submitted for a Prädikat, that is, when it was submitted for evaluation to the Ratings Board was actually refused a certificate on the grounds that it was biased, unimaginative, a filmed lecture. Does this sort of discriminatory judgement hurt you when you hear someone referring to your films as didactic?
Yes, unfortunately, yes. If you look at the film that Henri-Georges Clouzot made about Picasso [The Mystery of Picasso, 1956] you can see that Picasso wanted to prove something, namely what a virtuoso painter he was. Apparently all that talk about his work being something "a five-year old boy could do" got to him. So it may be true that I, too, am trying to prove that my films are not unfilmic or uncinematic, that with my framing and editing I want to prove them wrong. There is already a burden of proof in Between Two Wars.
You have actually made feature films, fiction films, but I think on average you prefer either to make fictional documentaries or to document fictions. With your films, which sometimes go by the name of "essay films", you have actually contributed to film history a sort of genre, or at least you gave the idea some currency in Germany. One tends to think of Jean Luc Godard in this context, but your films do not strike me as Godardian, to use a term that has gone a little out of fashion. But I know that you have worked with Jean-Marie Straub and Danièle Huillet, for instance. Do you see yourself as a filmmaker belonging to the European cinema in either of these senses?
For me, Godard has been way out in front for the past thirty years, he always encouraged me to do things, and I always found out that I do what he did fifteen years earlier. Luckily for me, not quite in the same way. At the moment I am working with video, sometimes I think I see myself remaking Numéro deux, the same staging in my apartment, but there are also major differences. So many ideas are hidden in his work that although you are a different director, you can nonetheless always refer back to him.
You have written on Robert Bresson. How does this come together? A filmmaker like Bresson on the one hand, Godard on the other. Are these compatible ways of thinking about the cinema, and if so, what idea of cinema do you see them pursuing?
But Bertold Brecht and Thomas Mann were also antagonists, and nonetheless one can be an admirer of both, as happens to be the case with me. Bresson, to put it briefly, makes his images rhyme, of which I'm a great admirer, even though this is not at all my own project. Whether it is Bresson, Godard or the Straubs, watching their films or writing about them is like learning to read. In order to read a philosophical text, you have to have a certain amount of training; the text requires a different mode of reading than a newspaper or a novel. The same goes for these films. I study them in order to attune myself to their way of thinking and production.
One thinks of the kind of spare clarity that the mise-en-scène has in Bresson, the tremendous effort to keep a certain distance. With Godard, one rather gets the sense that he always comes in with his own voice or pencil or paintbrush, and that, graffiti-like, he crowds the frame with all kinds of – admittedly far from irrelevant – interferences and interjections. But I also remember something you said when we met nearly twenty years ago, and we got to talking about Filmkritik, the Munich-based film journal, of which you were at the time a contributor, and you said, jokingly: "Terrible magazine if you want to know what movies to see, but the best literary magazine in Germany." As a long-time subscriber to Filmkritik, I found this an illuminating comment, also about your own work. Not only because writing for you is obviously very important. Indeed, some of your films exist as a written text and as a film, without the one cancelling out the other, but also because it seems to me that your writing is already a form of filming, of spacing, editing, of transposing ideas into images and actions. On the other hand, there is also a sense in which for you the cinema is not a substitute for writing. On the contrary, writing has, since the advent of cinema, achieved a new definition, a new purity and outline that is paradoxically due to the existence of cinema. Where does this stance of cinema as writing come from – for it seems different from the French caméra stylo idea of Astruc. Or is it quite simply an economic relation: you have to make some of your money with journalism, getting your work published, in order to keep circulating as an author, for only as an author can you continue making films.
Yes, of course, by writing one produces oneself as author. In the mid-1970s I stopped working for radio, because those texts took too much time compared to what they paid. Since then I only write when I feel like I have something to say, regardless of what it pays. But of course, writing increases your cultural capital, as it does for US professors who get promoted in direct relation to the number of published works. Another thing is that a film accompanied by a text elicits much more commentary than one in which the author manifests himself only with images and sounds and their organisation. Images of the World attracted much more writing than, for instance, Leben – BRD. The same is true of Chris Marker's Sans Soleil, which has an extraordinary text – a text that emanates from a lifetime's preoccupation with cinema, as you just sketched it. This text can also be reproduced without the film, by which I do not at all imply that the images in the film are somehow worthless. Rather, the text has had such a strong effect that in some places nobody paid much attention to the images. To give a small example: there is a scene in Sans Soleil where the camera accompanies two people visiting a grave. It rushes ahead of them and waits for them at the graveside, just like a television crew would do it, if it had the time and a chance to stage things. Why does the camera rush ahead? – this sort of question has not generated any critical energy. I probably write, or rather: occupy myself with writing, in order to determine the difference between film and text. I want to make films that are not that far removed from texts, and that are nonetheless very distinct. I am very interested in etymology. In the case of Images of the World, we always called it "pictures of war", and that's what it was called in the subtitles. In 1988, the film went to San Francisco to the festival, then started circulating in the US for a while, and when it came back it had been renamed "images of the world..." – that is how it appeared in all the catalogues and programmes. The same thing happens with children, you give them a name, but the world does not accept it, and then they end up with another name. I had chosen "pictures", because I liked it when Sartre's book Les mots was translated into German by the critic Hans Maier, who called it not "Worte" but "Wörter". The latter is a less ambitious term, and that is also what I tried to do with my title. Etymology is a very strange discipline, I like surfing through dictionaries and learn about "Wörter", before they become "Worte". It gives you insights into all kinds of details that can never become a system, which strikes me as very innocent. Of course I know that words are not entirely determined by their origins, but where they come from for me retains a certain radiance. It makes the word "Holocaust" unacceptable to me, because it puts Auschwitz into a mitigating, historicising context. Maybe I want to exercise a similar form of tact with words in my films: investigate pictures, take them apart to reveal their elements.
I do get the sense that words for you are related to artefacts, that looking at them makes them strangely remote but also somehow haptic or tactile. When you say you're interested in etymology, you obviously have a writer's sensibility also as it relates to the shape of meaning, to the ambiguities and multiple meanings of a word. I am not thinking of the old problem of "film language" or "film grammar" that has preoccupied filmmakers since Griffith and Eisenstein, and film theorists from Bela Balasz to Christian Metz. What I have in mind has more to do with the nature of the objects, the artefacts that one can "make" with words, compared to the ones one makes with sounds and images. And the way in which an image can be a concept – here we do end up touching on Eisenstein – as well as a cliché saturated with cultural meaning, and therefore, act as a kind of "revolving door" between different associations, ideas, even histories. You seem to be alert to puns, for instance, and the way they can fuse two quite distinct levels, or domains. One very striking example of how a single word brings different things together occurs in Images of the World through the double and triple meanings of the German word "Aufklärung". How crucial is it to you that audiences realise that "Aufklärung" has this potential? For this is something that gets lost in the translation, where "enlightenment", "re-connaissance", "sex education" and "a cloudless sky" really belong to very different clusters of associations.
Yes, there are terrible casualties that occur in translation. To translate the word "heldisch" as "heroic" is to deprive it of what is special about it. I have been wondering whether I should not really find authors who take full responsibility for the English or French versions of my films, instead of myself getting involved in the translations and the recording of the voices.
But now that the word "Aufklärung" carries all this baggage, are you intrigued by the possibilities? Does it make you reflect on how words like this suggest connections in the real world, in your visual material, in the argumentative fabric of your film, so to speak, for which you have to take responsibility?
Yes, that is a very interesting field. For instance, Hans Jonas points out in his book, Phenomenon of Life, that nearly everything in philosophy has a metaphor related to the eyes, to vision and so forth, and that in religion, things always relate to the ear. In many languages, at least in many European languages, God is audible and philosophy is visible. That's very interesting because we always seem to believe that the word, simply the word is related to philosophy and the image to religion. So, in this sense, it's very essential that the German word "Aufklärung" is a bit different from the English word 'enlightenment', and such things are essential for a film, but they were not the starting point of the film. In fact, I wanted to make a film without a starting point, simply to tell something about images nowadays, that was the idea. Luckily, I succeeded in raising some money, quite similar to an author who says, here I have pencil and paper and now I'll take one and a half or two years to write something. This is how I started to work, and then I read this note by Günter Anders who is quoted in the film, who compares the early 1980s to these political attempts to prevent access to the Auschwitz installations. If there was a starting point for all the research, this was it. It was only later that I found this strange brochure about the two CIA men who came across those photos.
So, the centre of the film, these two images, these two collections of images came later: one of the aerial photographs taken by Allied bombers, by American bombers in 1944, and this album, this Auschwitz album by Rudolf Vrba and Alfred Wetzler which was found, I forget when, in the fifties or sixties...
... no, earlier, it was re-found, it's a long story...
... obviously, these two collections bring two very different perspectives to bear on something that in a sense is neither explicable, nor seizable in images or even words. It defies understanding in either direction, as it were. At least, this is how Auschwitz has entered our culture, as something that almost signifies the limits of understanding and representation, of our capacity of picturing something. You have in some sense tried to work with this blockage, to see in your film if something cannot be displaced, cannot somehow be opened up, maybe to "Aufklärung". Is your film an attempt to open up a space for the mind to grasp what was going on, or are you more concerned about pointing to the unbridgeable gap between the two sets of images, pictures, representations? Could such an awareness of the gap help us overcome it, help us to "work through" it in some sense? I may be over-interpreting, I don't know how you feel about this, but your analysis of the processes of "inscription" seems to make sure that the aerial photograph is opened up to a political history, which is the history of the Allied campaign against Nazi Germany. One begins to ask what were their goals, their objectives? On the other hand, there is the history of how it could come to Auschwitz, or rather how it could be that Auschwitz was "seen" but apparently not "known"? Or if they were indeed known, the existence of the camps was not part of any military "Aufklärung", it did not figure as a reality to be verified or acted upon. Thus, even if it was known only in this virtual state, in these photographs, they make it clear that among the Allied war aims, humanitarian considerations, like saving lives, were not as important as the economic war aims, which were to destroy Germany's military might and industrial installations. Yet by using this image of the woman, and the way you comment on it, you make something else very comprehensible to us, namely the "ordinariness" of the basic situation, and therefore the mindshattering extraordinariness of the circumstances. A man is looking at a woman, who is looking at a man and not looking at a man. It's almost a kind of founding moment of cinematic fascination, vision and attraction, a moment very important, as we know, for feminist theories about the cinema. Yet these two detours, in order to approach "Auschwitz" are very, very different. Are you prepared to bear the burden of making the connection between them? What is it that is so productive in this juxtaposition across the gaps and the detours?
We're talking about two different kinds of images. The aerial photograph is a technical image. Although an analogue recording, it already points, with its grid system (as Vilém Flusser noted), to the digital mode. The individual human beings fall through the grid, and only the ornament of their group-existence registers: for instance, when they line up in the yard for the selection or a roll call. The image of the woman, arriving at the camp, is taken by SS-men. Every bureaucracy is in the business of documenting itself, but not always with photographs. The Nazis did not circulate images of the concentration camps, so maybe these pictures were intended for a select public, or for an anticipated future. This particular picture, in any event, was the result of a reflex, an impulse of the kind you just described. The picture could even have been taken by a well-meaning non-Nazi. He takes a blond woman, so as not to pander to racial stereotypes, he shows an attractive woman, so as to arouse compassion. A woman one want to possess, and this is the desire that the Nazis accommodate... The main figure in the picture is basking in the light of our attention, while the people in the background are already swallowed in the twilight of our indifference. The two pictures belong to two different classes or categories, they embody the technical and the narrative mode of historical writing. 1944, with the discovery of the camps, was like an experiment. On the one hand, the new automated technology of recording was already around, was already in the air, capable of being used as a sensor and recording everything that was happening, including what was happening in Auschwitz. On the other hand, two prisoners, Vrba and Wetzler, who are escaping from the camp and have to testify to the reality of Auschwitz by being physical, bodily eyewitnesses. This is the crisis, this is somehow a turning point in human history. Both types of narrative, both types of images are inadequate, both are inappropriate. The old dualism of word and image – we cannot simply opt for one or the other, we have to try and establish a relation between the two. The same occurs here; maybe one image can elucidate the other, critique it, give it some experiential validity. If I may add something here, you are right in the way you've programmed this retrospective. The choice you've made in showing a series of films that look at cinema not as part of the history of storytelling, but as belonging more to the history of other techniques and technologies of surveillance, measuring, calculating, automation. I know of someone in Germany, Bernhard Siegert, who has written a book about the postal system. For him, the history of the novel is a sub-category in the history of postal communication [1993; transl. as Relays: Literature as an Epoch of the Postal System, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA. 1999].
Now, while working on this film I became aware that in all these strange experimental installations where I did my shoot, "optical sensoring" or "imaging" was only a sub-category of other kinds of measuring, that light is only a wave of a certain frequency. Most measuring has little use for images anymore, certainly not in order to harvest figures, as at the time of Meydenbauer. The figures are now the primary material. They calculate the statistics and the numbers, and occasionally they press a button, and there is an image you can see, just to make it a bit more vivid. In the film, I argue that appliances and instruments that have become historically obsolete undergo a brief deification, before they disappear. You can observe it in today's body culture: directly proportional to the decline of physical labour, everyone now dons these sport shoes and trainers, as if they were athletes. And I suddenly realised that the human eye, too, is no longer essential to the production process. Film and television images have a simple function: to keep our eyes alert and moving, similar to having to exercise horses, when they're not out working. If you compare this to the field of manual labour, it is the same: more and more automation, also in the field of vision. Suddenly I realised that this branch of working with images that I am in is about as modern as Muybridge's experiments with recording a galloping horse's movement.
If I understand you right, what you are hinting at is that images, which in some sense are fundamental to our culture – you mention religion, of course religion has a double edge because many religions have a big prohibition against images – are on their way out. For the last 200 to 300 years our culture has been dominated by images. We are shedding one of our key perceptual and conceptual supports, if what you are pointing to is really happening, namely the possibility that images today are, as it were, merely a concession to the human interface. Since machines don't need images, they can do their own "visualisations" and "conceptualisations" with mathematical calculations. Is this, then, the historical connection between fascism and, let's say, virtual reality? In some sense, for both, the human interface has dropped out of the equation as a cumbersome and costly irrelevance?
Yes, that's correct. A process of human self-abolition is underway. The extermination camps were directed against "the Jews" – I put it in scare quotes, because so many of the victims were not even aware that this was their identity, being a "Jew". Already in this case, the identity and image of the other was not clearly drawn. With euthanasia and eugenics the border is even less clear because every family can have a handicapped or terminally ill family member. In his table talk, Hitler was thinking out loud about the possibility of exterminating all those with hereditary lung or heart disease. Meanwhile, nuclear weapons are even more indiscriminate: they're directed against everyone. The German philosopher Ernst Tugendhat once wrote that if there was ever a nuclear war, the survivors of the first wave would most likely queue up outside the gas chambers, if they existed. It is a terrible thought. I had it in the script, but maybe I did not dare keep it in. When in 1989, the regimes in Eastern Europe began to collapse into nothingness, it would have been a good opportunity to also address the question of the threat of nuclear weapons. The existence of nuclear installations is to my mind no less a scandal than political dictatorship or the five-year plan. Incidentally, this aspect of my film has largely passed unnoticed. It's a little like the story with the title; to me, the film has come back from its journey with another name and a somewhat different identity. Of course, one has to be careful if one establishes relations between Auschwitz and other events, it can easily lead to purely dramatic or rhetorical effects. I hope my filmic method allows for certain reflections to enter into relations with each other, without suggesting equivalence.
Audience member: I found your film very graphic and I would like to know about your use of still photographs.
I saw a film recently, where Robert Frank was asked what the difference was between still photography and the moving image. And he said something like, "in a photograph you see a man standing somewhere, and in a film, he stands there for only a moment and then he walks out of the frame". Then he walked out of the frame, but unfortunately, the camera panned after him. There is just too much movement in the world. When I make a film, I have to compete with all this movement. So, I try to reduce the level of expectation a little, slow things down a bit. I use still images, in the hope that afterwards, the moving image will acquire a different value. When I show sequences where there is movement, ideally I'd like to produce the same kind of astonishment that occurred when the first Lumière films were shown.
Elsaesser: Perhaps you can just pick up on this last point, because what strikes me about photography in general is that it is not as if the still photograph was there first, and then it became a moving image. Historically, photography and cinema are not quite related in this sequential causality. With you, it's in fact the other way round, as you say, you are arresting time, you are slowing it down. Without, however, thereby annihilating the fact that a still image is the sum or the cusp of a movement, that there once was movement where there is now stilled movement. In that sense, as a photographer, you are always responsible for arresting time at that precise moment. And then the burden is for you to explain to us why you are arresting it, in other words, you raise a strong expectation of reading that image, of making that image say something, that it would not necessarily have said if it had just slipped past us. There is a kind of force that the image acquires. This seems very characteristic of your filmmaking, even in your other films.
It is probably comparable to what is meant when one speaks of an author's concept, rather than of his movement of thought around the concept. I think I am looking for images that represent, in their stilled state, several directions of movement at once. An image like a juncture, the way one speaks of a railway junction. I am looking for an image that is the concept for several sequences of movement. Images of the World is not a fully worked-out film so much as the design or blueprint of maybe several films.
Audience member: Could you comment some more on your use of sound?
A totally zero-sound space is considered to be a no-no in the cinema. That is why even silence is "represented" by low ambient sound. I did not want to take this kind of atmospheric sound out of the archive, that is why I made one with music. I had the idea to take Beethoven's Razumovsky quartet and Bach's English suites, and then I took the sound reel and put the scissors on it and then put the reel in the eraser drum. Everything was erased except the parts protected by the scissors. During the final sound mix I was also following an aleatory principle, because without calculating it in advance, I would sometimes turn the music on and then off again. Every language version therefore has a different soundtrack and because these frequencies are different in nearly every theatre, each performance is somehow different. The idea was to have something excessive and random, not calculated, because there was already so much calculation and premeditation in this film.
Audience member: My question relates to the previous question. You use images that speak very eloquently, but you give them a very insistent commentary, too. Unless I'm wrong, the commentary tended to overlap and double the images, sometimes to undermine them. At times this made me angry, it seemed quite didactic. I wonder whether it was meant to make me angry. Could you imagine making a film, perhaps even this film with these images but without the commentary, imagine that the images are on their own, without the insistent commentary?
Yes, you're right, in principle, I could. I think if I was really using up the images with my commentary, then I would have to agree with what you say. But I think that often I make such playful use of the commentary, I propose this meaning and then another meaning, and then exchange them, as one does when playing cards in a game. They are never the so-called representative illustrations for these ideas. They are never that. There is always a reading of the images, sometimes a provocative reading, where the audience will wonder, "surely, this can't be the right commentary to these images?" Between the images and the commentary there is a parallel, but it's a parallel that will meet in infinity.
Elsaesser: This may actually be a point that an English audience would be more struck by than a German audience, where commentary, when it is used in a documentary, often seems to be killing the images. In Alexander Kluge, for instance, one has that sense that he knows it all and whatever is in the images is in a sense just dangling from his words. In your film – partly because of the rather flat delivery by Cynthia Beatt – one is very conscious of her delivering the words in a kind of even monotone, against the melody of meaning and sense. Was this precisely in order to create that interplay that the last questioner was alluding to, that there is the possibility not only of reflecting on the sense, but of inserting oneself and disagreeing with the words, disagreeing with the commentary?
Yes, the dramaturgical line is not in the commentary, it is somewhere else. It's somewhere in your mind or in these connections and solutions. And the connection is made through all these combinations, the structure of these loops, and therefore the music and the commentary should also loop in this way.
I am thinking of "the solution that begets the solution" that Chris Marker found in Sans soleil where he actually has a female voice speak what is effectively a male text because these are letters written to her by a man. So there is double displacement or reversal, and at the same time, there is a gender question involved as well. Is the voice in the German version also a woman's voice? Is it important that the gender of the voice is female?
Yes, but not for political reasons. It was not a matter of choosing a female voice so that women can have their say – that would be bizarre, since it is after all, I who wrote the text. Simply, I wanted to make evident that here a not-I was speaking.
In the case of Kluge, the commentary was one of the major objections women filmmakers had about his films. That here was a male voice, which often was Kluge's own voice, telling everybody what to think about the images.
Yes, but Kluge has such a wonderful feminine Saxonian word-melody! I want to defend Kluge against some of the criticism you have alluded to. First of all, when Kluge speaks, it's not at all easy to understand what he says, there is still plenty of work for the spectator. Secondly, his films are full of passages that make so many different kinds of sense, if you think of all these tangles of slow-motion he puts in, and all these moons and clouds speeding past in his time-lapse fast-forward sequences. Kluge is at least conscious of the fact that a text can tie up one's thoughts, instead of setting them free. I would not agree that he is a know-it-all. Or at least, he doesn't want to be one. And that is already a lot.
Is this another case of a filmmaker who is very different from you, yet whose work you can admire, because you recognise and respect his project?
I hope so, I hope so. I definitely try to avoid being smarter than the film is. I try to let the film think. Literally, I write a line, then I go to the editing table and try to comment on it with images. Conversely, I try to find my words on the editing table. I have both my typewriter and my editing table in one room. It is connected to this question of writing and filmmaking, because it is also very evident you cannot make films the same way you can write a text. For the text you need to go to the library, but 80% or so of them are created in the room, or if not created, then at least the final version is made indoors at your desk. That is also the last stage of the filmmaking, the aspect where writing and filmmaking come together. People ask me, why don't you write anymore, and I realise it is because I have succeeded in making a form of writing out of my filmmaking.
I want perhaps to close with something you said earlier on. Quite casually you mentioned a phrase that really was quite extraordinary to me. You said that cameras are circling the world to make it superfluous, and that you are part of these cameras circling around the world...
It's not my idea, but yes, in a way I am part of it. I am also part of the business, even though I am not literally in the space industry. And it's those cameras that I was talking about. I think the analogy is that in a film, I can always tell who speaks the image, I can always hear the image, I always know how people are making use of an image, instrumentalising it. Once, when Ronald Reagan was in Germany and went to the Bergen Belsen concentration camp with Chancellor Helmut Kohl, he said something like, "I didn't know that Christians – not just Jews – were also victims of the Nazis". It's unbelievable how people make use of victims. After all, they are just quoting things, in this remote way. I suddenly realised that I am also making use of images as quotations, therefore, I had this sequence with the woman photographed in the camp, where somehow I have to confess my method so I can't continue to hide behind other quotations. Perhaps that's also the designated breaking point of my film. Sometimes, one has to say "I".
This interview was conducted after a screening of Images of the World and the Inscription of War [Bilder der Welt und Inschrift des Krieges] at the National Film Theatre-MOMI London, 6 February 1993.
With thanks to Antje Ehmann and Volker Pantenburg
© Harun Farocki GbR
Milestones: Bilder der Welt takes place on Thursday 22 April 2021 at 19:30 on Sabzian. You can find more information on the event here.
Thomas Elsaesser Harun Farocki Sabzian: Milestones Milestones: Bilder der Welt
Sabzian is een gratis online magazine dat afhankelijk is van het werk van een groep toegewijde vrijwilligers.
We kunnen uw steun goed gebruiken. Overweeg een donatie!
Sabzian is a free online magazine that relies on the work of a group of dedicated volunteers.
We could use your support. Please consider a donation!
Sabzian est un magazine en ligne gratuit qui dépend du travail d'un groupe de bénévoles dévoués.
Votre soutien nous aide beaucoup. Pensez à faire un don !
Source URL: https://sabzian.be/text/making-the-world-superfluous


If you only have a few days but want to explore Tuscia and relax in the outdoors, this package is designed just for you. There's a little bit of everything in this tour, in fact, the best that Tuscia has to offer. A weekend full of discoveries, surprises and activities will make you fall deeply in love with our land. You'll discover archaeological, medieval and renaissance Tuscia gems as you'll enjoy the natural surroundings and the relaxing atmospheres. You'll also enjoy sampling fine food and wine, with lunches featuring local delicacies and you'll love staying at a true antique residence situated in the Medieval heart of Viterbo surrounded by art and history!
* The choice is between the Terme dei Papi thermal spa, a 16th century monumental pool and the Thermal Park of Bagnaccio, a set of countryside natural pools surrounded by archaeological findings.
We recommend to enjoy the full Tuscia Weekend tour (4 days and 3 nights), but you are free to build your very own tailor made tour modifying the itinerary according to your availability and preferences.


Compliment your style with a European black silk suede choker necklace. The Swarovski crystal design statement piece will add a stunning look to your day or evening style. The sparkling choker necklace is designed with a custom cut multi-color Swarovski crystal fabric. The adjustable chocker features shiny silver plated hardware with a lobster clasp closure. This product is handmade in the beautiful San Francisco Bay area and comes wrapped in a small black cotton bag with a leather tie.
Leather: The suede leather comes from a European tannery featuring a beautiful, luxurious nap and the soft, supple feel of "real suede", imparting this leather with a stunning tracking effect. The leather has a specific tanning process, waterproofing the leather for better and easier maintainability.


text:
Bi-annually at Winona National Bank
The John Latsch Memorial Board consists of the five members who serve four year terms. The John Latsch Memorial Board is staffed by City Clerk Monica Hennessy Mohan - email Monica Hennessy Mohan.
Scott D. Sherman, Ex-Officio and Mayor
Term Expires: December 31, 2024
Dave Gilmer, Hospital
Tim Breza/Appointed by the District Judge
Term Expires: April 11, 2023
Randy Domeyer/District Judge
The Mayor is an Ex-Officio Member
One member by Winona General Hospital Association
One member by the Woodlawn Cemetery Association
Two members by the District Judge
Interest in recreation and conservation.
The John Latsch Memorial Board was established by Trust Deed from John A. Latsch in 1915. The deed conveyed to the John Latsch Memorial Board numerous properties. The board is responsible for receiving income from the properties conveyed and to expend the income in the manner specified by John Latsch.
Mr. Latsch was a great outdoorsman, and true to his nature, he specified that the income generated from the parcels be used to provide, enlarge, improve, and maintain public parks and animal, bird, fish, game and hunting preserves on those lands donated by him. He further specified that funds may be used to improve Island Number 72, which is now known as Latsch Island.
Trust Deed of John A. Latsch, 1915

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
'Brian Banks': Football Star Who Was Wrongfully Imprisoned Shares His Story For "People Who Are Currently Voiceless"
The story told in Brian Banks is unfortunately all too familiar. The eponymous biopic, directed by Tom Shadyac, chronicles the true story of the All-American football player who had committed to USC by his junior year, then had his life upended when he was falsely accused and convicted of rape, to being exonerated, and finally reaching his goal of playing in the NFL.
Throughout his 10-years in the prison system, a sentence he received despite the lack of evidence to support the accusation, Banks never wavered in maintaining his innocence. Ultimately, with the help of Justin Brooks and the California Innocence Project, Banks' conviction was overturned in 2012, his name was cleared, and he was finally free to pursue his NFL dreams.
'Queen & Slim' Scribe Lena Waithe On Making A Film "Where We Could Keep Breathing And The Oppressor Didn't"
Speaking at the 25th annual Essence Festival in New Orleans, Banks described the film as a "full circle" moment. "It's really surreal to have gone through such a traumatic experience… to come full circle and be here now with the opportunity this share this story. For Banks, the goal was to "not only to get our story out there but to share this story for other people who are currently voiceless, who are experiencing a similar situation."
He continued, "For every young person of color who has had an encounter with a police officer or has been miscategorized or judged, this is one of those films where we talk about a real-life story that so many people can connect to and relate to. We need more stories like these, real-life stories turned into art so that we can learn."
Playing Banks in the film is Leverage alum Aldis Hodge, who joined Banks as well as co-star Sherri Shepherd onstage.
"I knew the film had the potential to be so impactful," said Hodge. "I wanted the audience to be inspired by Brian the way I was inspired by his triumph."
Later expounding on that, Hodge added, "This brother went from 10 years in the prison system to coming out and achieving his goal of playing in the NFL, he lauded. "That was so profound because he never allowed himself to become broken. He never lost faith in who he was and the potential of his future… there is always a future if we choose it just like this man chose his."
Shepherd, known for her comedic chops as an actress, flexed her dramatic muscles in the role of Banks' mother Leomia, a role that the mother of a 14-year-old son found easy to connect with. "Her faith, her spirituality, how she advocated for her son, that is what struck me," she said, later adding, "If you have children, the part that you play in your child's life, it's not what you say, it is those actions, it's what you do."
Greg Kinnear, Melanie Liburd, Xosha Roquemore, and Tiffany Dupont also star in the film, which will hit theaters August 9 via Bleecker Street.


Mobile-Pack Owner Kay Washington knows the hospitality industry. Having spent 22 years in the industry, opening and operating numerous hotels, she saw the need for an alternative to hauling those heavy and bulky cleaning carts through hotel hallways. Her solution was the invention of the Mobile-Pack, a cartless method to simplify the cleaning process. What began as a $25 product sketch came to fruition and is now used internationally by hoteliers.
Seek legal counsel early. Document review is critical and impacts your business for the long run. Be smart about who you partner with and who you seek guidance from.
Cover all your manufacturing bases. When selecting an overseas manufacturer, Kay wanted to ensure she was getting genuine information despite language barriers. She hired a translator because she needed someone to interpret the dialogue with potential manufacturing partners. She was then able to determine which manufacturers offered the best rate.
Have a method in place for strategic planning. Kay works with an advisory board consisting of financial professionals and others associated with the hotel industry to discuss new product ideas.
Find resources when working overseas. Verify all the information you find on business ownership and factory protocol when selecting the manufacturing company to work with.
Stay ahead of the competition. With emerging competitors entering the market, make sure you're prepared to continue to serve your customers and maintain those relationships.
Mobile-Pack is represented by Schwabe.


Two summer 2017 field courses for graduate students and early career professionals are now being advertised. They promote a One Health approach to global health issues and problem solving, and planetary health is a theme within each of the courses. Please share the attached flyers or web link below with your networks if you think they would be interested in applying, as deadlines are coming up fast in January.
Interested in One Health problem-solving at the animal/human/environmental health interface?
Want to learn as a part of an interdisciplinary team working in the field? Do you want to gain skills related to leadership, communication, cultural competency, and field & laboratory assessments? If so, then this educational Rx (or prescription) is just right for you!
This three-week action-oriented field course is designed for a collegial, inquisitive, multi-disciplinary group of students in human health sciences, veterinary medicine, agriculture, nutrition, and social and environmental sciences.* University of California (UC) applicants can be enrolled at any of the 10 campuses.


This past week, the TCCOM advanced me to the rank of Fleet Admiral! Writing "FA" at the end of emails hasn't become my habit yet, it's usually "AD Plif" and then I have to delete it and start over. First world problems, for sure.
The MSE spreadsheeting I've been working on is in its final phase, with one squadron's sent out and the others nearing completion. Per the usual intent behind a paperwork process change, I think the leaders won't have to spend as much time putting their evaluations together with the new format.
The Trivia Grand Tour is in its eighth week, which wraps up later tonight. If you haven't played yet, head over to http://tc.emperorshammer.org/timetest.php?testid=899825. Congratulations to last week's winners, AD Miles Prower and CPT Lanil Jast!
With another staggering, superhuman month's worth of flight activity and communication under his belt, I hereby endorse General Elwood The Brave for the Silver Star of the Empire!
For excellent activity, communication and command being demonstrated in February 2019, I hereby award General Clark with the Bronze Star!
For his activity, especially in the SP flight area, LCM DarkSith_99 shall be rewarded an Imperial Security Medal in accordance with the February 2019 MSE.
For his activity, especially in the MP flight area, LCM Steve Dermody shall be rewarded an Imperial Security Medal in accordance with the February 2019 MSE.
For his activity, especially in the Unifrom art area, LC Kyle Kroan shall be rewarded an Imperial Security Medal in accordance with the February 2019 MSE.
For his activity, COL Gyssler shall be rewarded an Imperial Security Medal in accordance with the February 2019 MSE.
For AD Plif's flying efforts as well as keeping up with all the medals coming out of the SOO office, I hereby award him the Imperial Security Medal.


text:
PSN Back Up In Asia Tomorrow
TSA Staff 27/05/11 33 Comments
After countless wranglings, the PlayStation Network resumes service in Asia as of tomorrow, the 28th of May.
Gamers in Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand will see the service back up and running, with the first round of reboots including:
Sign-in and password change for PSN and Qriocity
Friend List, Chat, and Trophies
PS3 and PSP online play
PlayStation Home
Torne
Japanese players will also get their own "Welcome Back" package, being able to choose two games from The Last Guy, Loco Roco, Echochome, Wipeout and Hustler King. Similar offers are available for PSP gamers.
There'll also be 30 free days of PlayStation Plus and Platinum membership for the Weekly Toro Station.
Via AndriaSang.
Tags: PSN Hack: Latest
Sony Agrees To Pay £250,000 Over 2011's PSN Hack
The Two Year Anniversary Of The PSN Hack
Sony Fined £250,000 Over PSN Hack
Amy: PS3 Version Completed In April?
Erroneus	 27/05/11, 09:17
Good! This is properly also important for the comeback of the store worldwide.
John Malcolm	 27/05/11, 09:20
Welcome back, a (hopefully) much more secure PSN.
We've all missed you.
This is written before it's announced that the PSN return has been postoned again… – I really hope not!
"Postoned"? How about "postponed"! Sorry, it's not sitting square at the keyboard that does it…
TURRICAN-808	 27/05/11, 09:21
So the JP government must've ok'd the PSN security then. I read a week ago that the JP goverment were waiting for SONY to deliveer a secure PSN that mest certain standards or something…
Amphlett	 27/05/11, 09:31
That's a pretty poor 'welcome back' package. Low priced games from a few years ago. Wipeout is the stand-out of the bunch for quality but it's still a few years old.
minerwilly	 27/05/11, 09:54
I was thinking the same thing , and they had to wait an extra 2 weeks !
Charmed_Fanatic	 27/05/11, 12:22
thinking the same thing, ours is better
"Malasia" – is that, like, Bad Asia?
(I'll get my coat.)
TwoJay	 27/05/11, 13:40
And all the shitty games too. We really are getting punished for something…
kivi95	 27/05/11, 09:49
Is not Loco Roco a psp game?
KeRaSh	 27/05/11, 11:47
LocoRoco Cocoreccho is a PS3 offspring of the LocoRoco PSP series.
eye8have9you3	 27/05/11, 09:54
what's torne?
Awayze	 27/05/11, 09:56
sesameseed	 27/05/11, 10:20
Torne's like their version of Play TV I think.
A better version of Play TV.
Sympozium, cyclone tornado AGAIN!	 27/05/11, 11:41
It as trophies
OllyBobs	 27/05/11, 10:28
Fantastic news for them! All we now is the store…
Reality Check	 27/05/11, 10:29
Now the Japanese government can go back to lying about how safe their nuclear power stations are to the Japanese people then. And they stop SONY's PS3 for not being safe? ? ? LoL
Anyway cool its back tomorrow because i have a Japanese + Chinese account;) [but still got to wait for the store i suppose]
jayjay119	 27/05/11, 10:36
I must admit I have been thinking that the JP Government should have more pressing issues to worry about than the security of the PSN, such as how they're going to resolve the $XXX Billion worth of dammage that needs fixing. But, technology is a big part of their hold on the global market, so obviously it's in their best interest, even if it does seem more trivial than other stuff.
Watchful	 27/05/11, 17:25
Erm, the situation at Fukushima is that the radiation hasn't killed anyone*, is extremely unlikely to and is so far very unlikely to have any significant affects on anyone's health either long or short term.
*Two plant workers were killed at the site, but they were drowned by the tsunami.
The nuclear plant was hit by an earthquake almost 10 times stronger than it was designed to resist (magnitude 9.0 vs. design limit of 8.2) and a tsunami almost 3 times higher than the expected maximum (15m vs. 5.8m). It stood up extremely well to both and no one has been exposed to more than relatively trivial and harmless levels of radiation.
The exclusion zone has affected 140,000 people. The long term economic impact is unknown but at the moment they are set to receive around $600m in compensation.
Now I am not for one moment belittling their suffering or situation, but let's look at the numbers associated with the PSN hack.
100m accounts, of which a minority will be multiple accounts for the same individual, so let's say 66m individuals put at risk of identity fraud.
Sony's cost estimate so far is about $170m, the cost to developers and publishers in unknown. Capcom have said it could be cost them "millions of dollars" in lost revenue.
And ultimately it was not the Japanese government asking Sony to clarify things before restarting PSN there. The credit card companies had asked the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry to intervene on their behalf to press Sony for details of the security measures.
In Japan it is the credit card companies that will end up paying compensation as there is no ID fraud insurance on offer as there is in the US and EU. So the delay was down to the credit card companies covering their collective asses that has kept the PSN down in Asia.
Enough of a reality check for you?


text:
Q: Two definitions of Lebesgue integration Normally, Lebesgue integral, for positive measures, is defined in the following way. First, one defines the integral for indicator functions, and linearly extend to simple functions. Then, for a general non-negative function $f$ , it is defined as the supremum of the integral of all simple functions less than or equal $f$.
However, I find another definition in the book of Lieb and Loss, "Analysis". Let $f$ be the non-negative measurable function on a measure space $X$, let $\mu$ be the measure, and define for $t >0$,
$$S_f(t) = \{x \in X : f(x) >t\},$$
and
$$F_f(t) = \mu(S_f(t)) .$$
Note that $F_f(t)$ is now a Riemann integrable function. Now, the Lebesgue integral is defined as:
$$ \int_X f \, d\mu = \int_0^\infty F_f(t) \, dt,$$
where the integral on the right-hand side is the Riemann integral.
Here is the google books link to the definition.
The book gives a heuristic reason why this definition agrees with the usual definition described here in the first paragraph. Now I would like to have a rigorous proof of the equivalence.

A: Notations and Definitions
Let $(X, \mu)$ be a measure space.
Let $f\colon X \rightarrow [0, \infty]$ be a measurable function on $X$.
We define a function $F_f\colon [0, \infty) \rightarrow [0, \infty]$ by
$F_f(t) = \mu(\{x \in X; f(x) > t\})$
We use the definitions of this question.
Lemma 1
Let $(X, \mu)$ be a measure space.
Let $f\colon X \rightarrow [0, \infty]$ be a measurable function on $X$.
Suppose $f$ is integrable on $X$.
Then $F_f(t) < \infty$ for every $t > 0$.
Proof:
Let $X_t = \{x \in X; f(x) > t\}$.
Then
$t\mu(X_t) \le \int_{X_t} f \, d\mu \le \int_X f \, d\mu < \infty$.
Since $t > 0$, $F_f(t) = \mu(X_t) < \infty$.
QED
Lemma 2
Let $[a, b]$ be a finite interval of the real line.
Let $f\colon [a, b] \rightarrow (-\infty, \infty)$ be a monotone function on $[a, b]$.
Then $f$ is Riemann integrable.
Proof:
Without loss of generality, we can assume that $f$ is non-decreasing.
Let $P\colon a = t_0 < t_1 <\cdots < t_{k-1} < t_k = b$ be a partition of $[a, b]$.
Then
$s_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k f(t_{i-1}) (t_i - t_{i-1})$.
$S_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k f(t_i) (t_i - t_{i-1})$.
Hence
$S_P - s_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k (f(t_i) - f(t_{i-1})) (t_i - t_{i-1})$
Let $\delta = \max\{t_i - t_{i-1}; i = 1,\dots,k\}$.
Then
$S_P - s_P \le \delta\sum_{i= 1}^k (f(t_i) - f(t_{i-1})) = \delta (f(b) - f(a))$
Hence $S_P - s_P$ can be arbitrarily small.
Let $\Phi$ be the set of partitions of $[a, b]$.
Let $s = \sup\{s_P; P \in \Phi\}$.
Let $S = \inf\{S_P; P \in \Phi\}$.
It is easy to see that $s \le S$.
Since $s_P \le s \le S \le S_P$, $s = S$.
Hence $f$ is Riemann integrable.
QED
Lemma 3
Let $(X, \mu)$ be a measure space.
Suppose $\mu(X) < \infty$.
Let $f$ be a measurable function on $X$.
Suppose $0 \le f(x) \le M$ for every $x \in X$, where $0 < M < \infty$.
Let $P\colon 0 = t_0 < t_1 <\cdots < t_{k-1} < t_k = M$ be a partition of $[0, M]$
Let $m_i = \inf\{F_{f}(x); x \in [t_{i-1}, t_i]\}$.
Let $M_i = \sup\{F_{f}(x); x \in [t_{i-1}, t_i]\}$.
Let $s_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k m_i (t_i - t_{i-1})$.
Let $S_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k M_i (t_i - t_{i-1})$.
Let $A_i = \{x \in X; t_{i-1} < f(x) \le t_i\}$.
Then
$S_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k \mu(A_i)t_i$.
$s_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k \mu(A_i)t_{i-1}$.
Proof:
Note that $F_f(t)$ is a monotone non-increasing function and $F_f(M) = 0$.
Hence for $i = 1,2,\dots k$,
$M_i = F_f(t_{i-1})$
$m_i = F_f(t_i)$
Hence
$S_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k F_f(t_{i-1})(t_i - t_{i-1})$
$s_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k F_f(t_i)(t_i - t_{i-1})$
$S_P = F_f(t_0)t_0 + (F_f(t_0) - F_f(t_1))t_1 + \cdots + (F_f(t_{k-2}) - F_f(t_{k-1}))t_{k-1} + F_f(t_{k-1})t_k = (F_f(t_0) - F_f(t_1))t_1 + \cdots + (F_f(t_{k-2}) - F_f(t_{k-1}))t_{k-1} + (F_f(t_{k-1}) - F_f(t_k))t_k = \sum_{i= 1}^k (F_f(t_{i-1}) - F_f(t_i))t_i = \sum_{i= 1}^k \mu(A_i)t_i$
Similarly
$s_P = \sum_{i= 1}^k \mu(A_i)t_{i-1}$
QED
Lemma 4
Let $(X, \mu)$ be a measure space.
Suppose $\mu(X) < \infty$.
Let $f$ be a measurable function on $X$.
Suppose $0 \le f(x) \le M$ for every $x \in X$, where $0 < M < \infty$.
Then $F_f$ is Riemann integrable and $\mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, M]) = \int_X f \, d\mu$.
Proof:
This is clear from Lemma 3 and this result.
Lemma 5
Let $[a, \infty)$ be an infinite interval of the real line, where $-\infty < a < \infty$.
Let $f_n\colon [a, \infty) \rightarrow [0, \infty)$ be a real valued function for $n = 1, 2, \dots$.Suppose $f_n \le f_{n+1} (n = 1,2,\dots)$.
Suppose each $f_n$ is Riemann integrable on every finite interval $[x, y]$, where $a < x < y < \infty$.
Let $f = \lim_n f_n$.
Suppose $f$ is Riemann integrable on every finite interval $[x, y]$, where $a < x < y < \infty$.
Then $\lim_n \mathcal{R}(f_n, [a, \infty)) = \mathcal{R}(f, [a, \infty))$.
Proof:
By this question, each $f_n$ is Lebesgue measurable and $\mathcal{R}(f_n, [a, \infty)) = \int_{a}^{\infty} f_n dt$.
By Lebesgue monotone convergence theorem, $\lim_n \mathcal{R}(f_n, [a, \infty)) = \int_{a}^{\infty} f \, dt$.
By this question, $f$ is Lebesgue measurable and $\mathcal{R}(f, [a, \infty)) = \int_{a}^\infty f \, dt$.
This completes the proof.
QED
Lemma 5.5
Let $[a, \infty)$ be an infinite interval of the real line, where $-\infty < a < \infty$.
Let $f\colon [a, \infty) \rightarrow [0, \infty]$ be a non-increasing function.
Suppose $f$ is extended Riemann integrable(see Notations and Definitions).
Then $f(t)$ is finite for every $t > a$.
Proof:
Suppose $f(t_0) = \infty$ for some $t_0 > a$.
Since $f$ is non-increasing, $f(t) = \infty$ on $[a, t_0]$.
Hence $\mathcal{R}(f, [a, t_0]) = \infty$.
This is a contradiction.
QED
Lemma 6
Let $(X, \mu)$ be a measure space.
Let $f$ be a measurable function on $X$.
Suppose $0 \le f(x) \le M$ for every $x \in X$, where $0 < M < \infty$.
Then $F_f$ is extended Riemann integrable if and only if $f$ is integrable.
Moreover, if this is the case, $\mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, M]) = \int_X f \, d\mu$.
Proof:
For every integer $n \ge 1$, let $X_n = \{x \in X; f(x) > 1/n\}$.
Let $f_{n}$ be the function defined on $X$ which is equal to $f$ on $X_n$ and is equal to $0$ outside $X_n$.
Then $f_{n} \le f_{n+1}$ for $n = 1, 2, \dots$ and $f = \lim_n f_{n}$.
Suppose $F_f$ is extended Riemann integrable.
Since $F_f$ is non-increasing, by Lemma 5.5, $\mu(X_n) < \infty$ for $n = 1, 2, \dots$.
Since $F_{f_{n}}$ is non-increasing and bounded, $F_{f_{n}}$ is Riemann integrable on $X$ by Lemma 2. Hence
$\mathcal{R}(F_{f_{n}}, [0, M]) = \int_{X_n} f_n d\mu = \int_X f_n d\mu$ by Lemma 4.
Hence
$\lim_n \mathcal{R}(F_{f_{n}}, [0, M]) = \lim_n \int_X f_n d\mu$
We evaluate the both sides of this equation.
LHS = $\mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, \infty))$ by Lemma 5.
RHS = $\lim_n \int_X f \, d\mu$ by Lebesgue monotone convergence theorem.
Hence
$\mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, \infty)) = \int_X f \, d\mu$
Hence $f$ is integrable on $X$.
Conversely suppose $f$ is integrable on $X$.
By Lemma 1, $\mu(X_n) < \infty$ for $n = 1,2,\dots$.
Hence $F_{f_n}$ is Riemann integrable on $[0, M]$ and $\mathcal{R}(F_{f_n}, [0, M]) = \int_{X_n} f_n d\mu$ by Lemma 4.
By the similar argument as above, $\mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, M]) = \int_X f \, d\mu$.
Hence $F_f$ is extended Riemann integrable on $[0, M]$.
QED
Lemma 7
Let $(X, \mu)$ be a measure space.
Let $f_n\colon X \rightarrow [0, \infty]$ be a real valued measurable function for $n = 1, 2, \dots$
Suppose $f_n \le f_{n+1}$ for $n = 1, 2, \dots$
Let $f = \lim_n f_n$.
Then
$F_{f_n} \le F_{f_{n+1}}$ for $n = 1, 2, \dots$
and
$F_f = \lim_n F_{f_n}$ on $[0, \infty)$.
Proof:
Since $f_n \le f_{n+1}$, $\{x \in X : f_n(x) > t\} \subset \{x \in X : f_{n+1}(x) > t\}$.
Hence $F_{f_n} \le F_{f_{n+1}}$ for $n = 1, 2, \dots$
Since $\{x \in X : f(x) > t\} = \bigcup_n \{x \in X : f_n(x) > t\}$,
$F_f = \lim_n F_{f_n}$ on $[0, \infty)$.
QED
Proposition
Let $(X, \mu)$ be a measure space.
Let $f\colon X \rightarrow [0, \infty]$ be a measurable function on $X$.
Then $F_f$ is extended Riemann integrable on $[0, \infty)$ if and only if $f$ is integrable on $X$.
If this is the case, $\mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, \infty)) = \int_X f \, d\mu$.
Proof:
Suppose $F_f$ is extended Riemann integrable on $[0, \infty)$.
Let $f_n(x) = \min\{f(x), n\}(n = 1,2,\dots)$.
Then $f_n$ is bounded and $f_n \le f_{n+1} (n = 1,2,\dots)$ and $f = \lim_n f_n$.
Since $F_f$ is extended Riemann integrable, each $F_{f_n}$ is extended Riemann integrable.
By Lemma 6, $f_n$ is integrable and $\mathcal{R}(F_{f_n}, [0, n]) = \int_X f_n d\mu$.
Since $\mathcal{R}(F_{f_n}, [0, n]) = \mathcal{R}(F_{f_n}, [0, \infty))$,
$\lim_n \mathcal{R}(F_{f_n}, [0, \infty)) = \lim_n \int_X f_n d\mu$.
We evaluate the both sides of this equation.
By Lemma 7, $F_{f_n} \le F_{f_{n+1}}$ for $n = 1, 2, \dots$
and $F_f = \lim_n F_{f_n}$.
Hence, by Lemma 5, $\lim_n \mathcal{R}(F_{f_n}, [0, \infty)) = \mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, \infty))$.
On the other hand, by Lebesgue monotone convergence theorem,
$\lim_n \int_X f_n d\mu = \int_X f \, d\mu$
Hence $\mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, \infty)) = \int_X f \, d\mu$.
Conversely suppose $f$ is integrable on $X$.
Let $f_n(x) = \min\{f(x), n\}(n = 1,2,\dots)$.
Then $f_n$ is bounded and $f_n \le f_{n+1} (n = 1,2,\dots)$ and $f = \lim_n f_n$.
Since each $f_n$ is integrable, by Lemma 6,
$F_{f_n}$ is extended Riemann integrable and $\mathcal{R}(F_{f_n}, [0, n]) = \int_X f_n d\mu$.
By Lemma 7, $F_{f_n} \le F_{f_{n+1}}$ for $n = 1, 2, \dots$
and $F_f = \lim_n F_{f_n}$.
Hence, by Lemma 5, $\lim_n \mathcal{R}(F_{f_n}, [0, \infty)) = \mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, \infty))$.
On the other hand, by Lebesgue monotone convergence theorem,
$\lim_n \int_X f_n d\mu = \int_X f \, d\mu$
Hence $\mathcal{R}(F_f, [0, \infty)) = \int_X f \, d\mu$.
QED

A: I'll paraphrase the slicing argument given in Fremlin's Measure theory, Volume 2, 252O, page 220. Since I'm not going to base a theory of integration on this formula, I think it's legitimate to appeal to (very) basic Lebesgue theory (no Fubini, only monotone convergence) to prove the desired identity. I leave it to you to deal with the necessary but easy modifications if you allow extended real-valued functions or partially defined functions:

Let $(X,\Sigma,\mu)$ be a measure space and let $f\colon X \to [0,\infty)$ be a measurable function. Then for the usual Lebesgue integral $\int_X f\,d\mu$ of $f$ over $(X,\Sigma,\mu)$ we have the identity
  $$
\int_X f\,d\mu = \int_{0}^\infty \mu\{x\in X\,:\,f(x) \gt t\}\,dt
$$
  where the second integral is a Lebesgue integral of a non-increasing and non-negative function, hence the integrand is continuous up to a countable subset of $[0,\infty)$, and thus its Riemann integral exists in the extended sense and the Riemann and Lebesgue integrals coincide for it.

To prove this, set $E^{n}_k = \left\{x \in X\,:\,f(x) \gt \frac{k}{2^{n}}\right\}$ and put
$$
g_n = \frac{1}{2^n} \sum_{k=1}^{4^n} [E_{k}^n]
$$
where $[A]$ denotes the characteristic function of $A$. Note that we have $0 \leq f(x) - g_n(x) \lt 2^{-n}$ whenever $0 \leq f(x) \lt 2^n$, so that $g_n(x) \to f(x)$ for every $x \in X$. Also, $g_n(x) \leq g_{n+1}(x)$ for all $x$, so the sequence $(g_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ increases to $f$ pointwise everywhere. By the monotone convergence theorem we conclude that
$$\tag{1}
\int_X f\,d\mu = \lim\limits_{n\to\infty} \int_X g_n\,d\mu.
$$
Moreover, for every $t \in [0,\infty)$, we have
$$
\{x\in X\,:\,f(x) \gt t\} = \bigcup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \{x \in X\,:\,g_n(x) \gt t\},
$$
so, using the notation in the question, we have for all $t \in [0,\infty)$ that
$$
F_f(t) =
\mu\{x\in X\,:\,f(x) \gt t\} =
\lim\limits_{n\to\infty} \mu\{x \in X\,:\,g_n(x) \gt t\}
= \lim\limits_{n\to\infty} F_{g_n}(t)
$$
where the convergence is monotone in $n$. Again by the monotone convergence theorem we get
$$\tag{2}
\int_{0}^\infty \mu\{x\in X\,:\,f(x) \gt t\}\,dt = \lim\limits_{n\to\infty} \int_{0}^\infty \mu\{x \in X\,:\,g_n(x) \gt t\}\,dt.
$$
Recalling the definitions of $E_{k}^n$ and $g_n$ we see that
$$
\mu E_{k}^n =
\begin{cases}
  \mu\{x\in X\,:\,g_n(x) \gt t\}
    & \text{if }1 \leq k \leq 4^n
      \text{ and }
      \frac{k-1}{2^n} \leq t \lt \frac{k}{2^n}
    \\
  0,
    & \text{otherwise,}
\end{cases}
$$
so that
$$\tag{3}
\int_{0}^\infty \mu\{x\in X\,:\,g_n(x) \gt t\}\,dt =
\sum_{k=1}^{4^n} \frac{1}{2^n}\mu E_{k}^n =
\int_{X} g_n\,d\mu.
$$
Combining $(1)$ and $(2)$ using $(3)$ we get the desired formula
$$
\int_X f\,d\mu = \int_{0}^\infty \mu\{x\in X\,:\,f(x) \gt t\}\,dt.
$$

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Five years from now, Facebook will not be a household brand. Like GeoCities and TheGlobe.com before it, today's hot Web communities are tomorrow's graveyards, as a fickle Web audience will continue to move from one destination to the next, leaving behind ignored friend requests and a a river of bad HTML in their wake.
Even if you throw out the 1990s community sites mentioned above, it's easy to see how once exciting social networking destination sites give way to the next. From Friendster, to MySpace, to Facebook, hordes of teens, wannabe teens or those preying on teens have made the move, until, as Yogi Berra once said, "Nobody goes there any more because it's too crowded."
In 2006, it seemed nothing could beat MySpace. Now, as Facebook has opened up their doors to developers with custom APIs and let in the unwashed masses, instead of just for college or high school students, it seems that it's all anyone can talk about these days. But while that's fun and interesting, the truth is that it's still a closed, gated network, which runs contrary to the full purpose of the open Internet - one of transparency, exchange of ideas, communication and ease of access.
I don't have a Facebook login, don't have access, and don't want it. Why, when there is so much content and real-time collaboration and conversation going on outside of the walls of Facebook, would I take the extra effort to share in conversations and faux digital friendships to a more limited audience? It just doesn't make sense.
Today's Facebook is tomorrow's Friendster, or in five years, GeoCities. Teens are the most fickle of them all, and I'm not exactly sure they're going to be ecstatic that their moms and dads can now jump in and participate. That's just not cool. And once the 'rents start hanging out in your place, it's time to move on. I promise that's what will happen next. Slowly, but inevitably.
So, while John Battelle writes "Why Facebook, Why Now?" and Robert Scoble picks apart Facebook application issues, recognize that it's a lot of talk for today about something that has a very limited future.
anything is possible - especially considering friendster.
Totally agreed. I think the whole social network idea is going to go through some changes over the next few years. Right now, it's half baked and only somewhat useful. What it will become, I have no clue, but I think places like MySpace and Facebook won't be there when it matures.
I don't get facebook. MySpace is a mess. And there is entirely too much stalking opportunity for people to see personal conversations that should happen...well- In Person!
I miss real contact. I miss the phone and letters and lunches on the lawn with the people that I love. All these things are merely cheap substitutions for the companionship we now lack because the of all eCommunication we've allowed to take over our lives.
Facebook has an opportunity to be a lasting brand because it isn't just a social network: it's an application platform where outside developers can build things that have value (and already have). That alone makes it different than all the other examples you've given so far.
It should be interesting over time to see if Facebook can become an accepted business tool in the way I believe LinkedIn has. Can it shake its original label as a college meetup and meat market? I'll certainly be watching, but have yet to see a major reason to get me to jump in, any more than for Second Life.
Simpsons Movie: Woohoo! D'oh! Woohoo!
Did Trackbacks Die, and Who Killed Them?
Eight Things Previously Unknown. No Tagbacks.
FeedBurner: From Fee to Free: Should We Flee?
Can The Kings Pick Up Yi Jianlian?
Is There an Antidote to the Link Tags Virus?


bungalow.JPG, originally uploaded by jrambow.
Puri had many Raj-era bungalows that had either always been hotels or later turned into ones. This was one of my favorites. I wish I'd wandered in to have a little look around.


text:
Tara Lipinski Talks Executive Producing Peacock Docuseries 'Meddling,' Career
Tom Cruise's 'Mission: Impossible 7' And '8' Shift To Summer 2023, 2024
'The Batman' Shares One Trait With The Biggest Box Office Blockbusters Of All Time
Box Office: 'Scream' Passes 'Scream 4' In Just One Week
Comedian And Actor Louie Anderson Dies At 68
The 'Squid Game' Universe Expands With Season Two Confirmed By Netflix
Jason Katims And The Cast Of 'As We See It' Talk Autism And Authenticity
Disney Announces Executives For Its Disney Media And Entertainment Segment
Editors' Pick| Oct 14, 2019, 04:00pm EDT |
Box Office: Superhero Movies Rule Hollywood Because We Ignore Everything Else
Scott Mendelson
I cover the film industry.
'Avengers: Infinity War'
I didn't want to get into the "Marvel movies are taking over the multiplex" argument that Martin Scorsese has reignited while promoting The Irishman. He was right to take his 3.5-hour, $140 million mob drama to Netflix. There's no way that movie as it exists would have broken even in our conventional theatrical system. That's as true today as it was 30 years ago. Marvel/DC superhero movies are indeed dominating the box office, representing 25% of the current domestic marketplace. Audiences have always gravitated to the big-n-splashy event movies, like Star Wars in 1977, Stargate in 1994 or Thor in 2011. Superhero movies now represent, give or take Jurassic World or Mission: Impossible, the biggest of the blockbuster offerings.
Yes, Wonder Woman is better than King Arthur, Black Panther is better than Tomb Raider and Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse was better than Men in Black: International. What's changed, whether the filmmakers and artists realize it or not, is that the audience that once showed up for everything beyond the tentpoles, the romantic comedies, the crime dramas, the action thrillers and the melodramas, have comparatively abandoned the multiplexes in favor of at-home/VOD/streaming options. It's not that everyone wants to see Aladdin, but that the folks who once would have seen Booksmart instead of Aladdin or as well as Aladdin now either ignore Booksmart in favor of a Netflix show or wait to catch Booksmart on VOD or streaming.
'A Simple Favor'
It's frustrating to see a movie that we championed when it was in theaters, like (for example) Paul Feig's A Simple Favor, do okay business ($97 million worldwide) only to be "discovered" only when it's available for free on Hulu, Amazon and/or Netflix, with folks online wondering how loud why nobody told them how good it was. We did, you just didn't want to leave the house and pay the $10 ticket price to see it in theaters. Yes, Hollywood spent too much time and money on globally friendly, four-quadrant fantasy franchise blockbusters to the detriment of everything else. Contrary to popular belief, Hollywood still puts out original, adult-skewing and/or high-concept movies into wide release every week.
If you don't want to see Ad Astra, The Kitchen, Gemini Man or Brightburn in theaters, you don't get to argue that Hollywood doesn't make them anymore. You don't get to ignore Fox's entire 2018 slate (The Hate U Give, Bad Times At The El Royale, Love Simon, etc.) save for the superhero sequel (Deadpool 2) and the musical biopic (Bohemian Rhapsody) and then complain that Disney isn't letting Fox make Fox movies. Vote with your wallet. Yes, 20 years ago, you didn't have YouTube, Netflix and social media as a cheaper, more convenient entertainment option. Movie ticket prices have increased along with inflation in a way that real wages and other forms of entertainment have not.
'Dune' Tops Foreign Box Office With Promising $77M Cume
'Shang-Chi' Box Office: Marvel Movie Tops $360M Worldwide
4 Series Coming To Netflix In October That Are Worth The Binge
Brad Pitt stars in 'Ad Astra'
The video games that cost $60 in 1991 still costs $60 in 2019, while the average movie ticket (so says Box Office Mojo) went from $4.21 in 1991 to $9.01 in 2019. Gas is more expensive. Concessions are more expensive. Moreover, the given weekend's theatrical output is no longer the only game in town or the biggest-n-splashiest offering when it comes to high quality (and/or buzzy) filmed entertainment. Once the at-home video game consoles caught up to most arcade games in the early 1990s, the arcades as a regular institution died a swift and brutal death. When the Super NES version of Street Fighter II looks and plays as well as the arcade version, well, that's the endgame.
While Scorsese and those like him compare the modern MCU to theme park rides, the better comparison is the video game arcade. When TV, be it streaming or cable, can provide original filmed content that approximates the vast majority of what the major studios and indie boutiques offer in theaters, in 1080p video, surround sound from the comfort of home, that's less of a reason to go to theaters. Audiences still go to theaters in about the same numbers they always have. But they are spending a much percentage of their money on a smaller pool of films, specifically the big-scale blockbuster offerings (usually superhero/fantasy films) which offer that which they can't get at home.
'The Mandalorian'
Once the home consoles surpassed the conventional arcade content, consumers only went to arcades for nostalgia or immersive, can't get this at home experiences, like driving games, shooting games or, in a cruel irony, arcade-sized versions of smartphone games. I still see something similar happening to movie theaters in the next decade. Disney+ is promising Star Wars and MCU content on par with the theatrical features, and the streaming wars are going to create a rush of high-budget, star-driven originals that will continue to further approximate (if not surpass) what is available in theaters. The very things that are currently "missed' in theaters (the character-driven, adult-skewing, star-driven dramas and comedies) are the very things thriving on TV and streaming.
Couple that with a theatrical moviegoing audience no longer willing to follow movie star into the theater for an original and/or high concept, now craving familiar characters and familiar franchises above all else, and you have prestige filmmakers looking at the landscape and decrying all the superhero movies. The sub-genre, the comic book superhero movie, makes up maybe 7% of the annual wide release output while creating 85% of the media conversation. Theaters don't care as much because a popcorn costs the same for Avengers: Endgame as it does for Blinded By the Light. Comic book superhero movies have also, over the last decade, approximated almost every genre.
We've seen westerns (Logan), samurai melodramas (The Wolverine), crime thrillers (The Dark Knight), teen coming-of-age comedies (Spider-Man: Homecoming), spy movies (X-Men: First Class), political thrillers (Captain America: Civil War), hard sci-fi (Captain Marvel), outer-space swashbucklers (Guardians of the Galaxy), undersea adventures (Aquaman), kid-friendly horror movies (Shazam!), animated epics (Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse), body horror flicks (Venom), heist flicks (Ant-Man), sword-n-sandal actioners (Thor: Ragnarok) and self-satirical comedies (Deadpool).
'Joker'
And now, in the guise of Todd Phillips' Joker, the kind of straight-up character study that wouldn't have even been a hit in the 1970's, is breaking records for an R-rated movie. Nobody is forcing moviegoers to only see Disney movies or only see MCU flicks. Audiences are still going to theaters and seeing a wealth of genre movies with big stars, strong production values, richly developed characters and a dash of real-world topicality. It's just that they are getting most of their cinematic diet from the handful of major superhero flicks, along with a few animated features, high-concept horror films, live-action musicals and periodic breakouts like Hustlers. They are getting the rest from VOD, TV or streaming.
Hollywood still offers a couple wide release movies in most weeks, but audiences are voting with their wallet. This isn't about Parasite or Pain & Glory not playing anywhere near you, as that's not a new problem. It's not Disney forcing audiences not to see the movies offered by Sony, Paramount or Lionsgate. It's not Marvel brainwashing folks into only seeing superhero movies, nor is it movie theatrical flooded with a dozen MCU or DC Films flicks with no room for anything else. It's all the result of a handful of concurrent events and factors which occurred over the last decade or so, much of it during a recession, which combined to create this grim "new normal."
THE LION KING - Featuring the voices of James Earl Jones as Mufasa, and JD McCrary as Young Simba, ... [+] Disney's "The Lion King" is directed by Jon Favreau. In theaters July 29, 2019...© 2019 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
© 2019 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Hollywood spent a decade chasing the global successes of The Mummy, Lord of the Rings and Pirates of the Caribbean. They spent five years after The Avengers trying to create cinematic universes. They tried to wean their consumers off physical media. Audiences went from being willing to see a movie in theaters and then buy the DVD for $15 to just waiting until they could rent that movie for $5 or wait until it was free via a subscription service. Concurrently, Netflix and cable flooded consumers with high-quality dramas and comedies with feature-film-worthy production values, adult appeal and the kind of onscreen and offscreen diversity that a "needs to appeal to the entire world" theatrical marketplace can't touch.
HDTVs and surround systems became affordable and reliable, creating the ability to stream a theatrical release 90 after opening day in a high quality format with none of the risks of theatrical moviegoing. The real-world horrors of the last several years have rendered moviegoers unwilling to spend movie theater time/money for anything, save for horror flicks, that isn't fantastical escapism. The current situation facing Hollywood is not the fault of Disney or Marvel. Disney releases fewer movies than any other major studio. The combined output for the Marvel and DC accounts for 5% of a given year's wide releases. The problem remains not what Hollywood offers to moviegoers in multiplexes but rather what moviegoers choose to see in theaters.


Back in late 2004, we received a unique opportunity. The American Institute of Architecture (AIA) Seattle branch was looking for structural engineers to help architects review for their licensing exams. The set-up sounded straight-forward. A course full of useful notes would be provided to us, and all we had to do was run through those notes over a series of evenings for a small collection of aspiring young architects. After the classes, the architects would then be full of knowledge and confidence to take the structural engineering portion of their licensing exams. This would be a big step for them in their professional development and mastery of architecture. We accepted the invitation, happy to serve our community.
Of course, life is never quite what you expect it to be. The notes were aging and were more suited for a world of old-style clear sheets on overhead projectors than for LCD projectors. The code references were out-of-date. The architects were a collection of young, eager practitioners and seasoned veterans. Nearly all of them wanted a deeper understanding than could be summed up in four three-hour sessions. Everyone, including our engineers, was tired from long days at work. The class members' level of enthusiasm for being out until 9 p.m., before another long day of work, varied widely.
The best way to learn is to teach. It's a cliché, but it's true. Until you have stood in front of a group of people and put your knowledge on the line, you are missing something. Teaching helps you focus, helps you remember, and gives you a new appreciation for the knowledge that you have. It gives you humility, because sometimes you don't have the answer. Surprisingly, to the novice presenter, that isn't always bad. One architect told me that seeing the engineers sweat to figure out a complex practice problem made her feel better: She knew then that she wasn't bad at the material, the material was simply very difficult. This was the most valuable thing that architect took from the class, and that was fine. In fact, it was great. Most people are kind in this environment, and it is a great place for both sides of the podium to learn.
Public speaking skills are learned, not inherited. You might think that, without practice, you are a natural ace or a hopeless wreck. Either way, you are wrong. Expertise comes with practice. Before trying this, I will admit: I was very, very nervous. After nine years, I am sometimes asked to speak on short notice. Do you need me to do a quick talk for the school board? Sure. Sometimes I am still nervous, but I have the experience to make it work. I also have simple strategies to succeed: know your material, prepare your key points (they will be your roadmap if you lose your place or get an unexpected question), and be sure to have something to eat and drink ahead of time. Hunger and thirst are not allies of good presentations. They aren't allies of good audiences, either. I once read a study of judges who review parole requests. The approval rates are highest after a meal and fall nearly to zero just before the next meal. If it is appropriate, and you can bring a snack for your audience, do it.
Explaining things is a learned skill, too. In project coordination meetings, I am often called upon to explain my design strategy. This is part of the process. As with public speaking, it is mostly built by experience. I can explain much of what I do and think about as a structural engineer because I have done that several times a year in the AIA class for nearly a decade. You would be surprised how often the difference between a quick resolution and a protracted discussion is the ability of the speaker to provide a clear and concise explanation of their decision. Sometimes this has to be done for difficult people. That makes it harder, but practice helps that, too. Not everyone who takes the AIA class expects that the instructor will be a mere mortal. Some expected better. Dealing with that is a great opportunity to practice in a fun environment.
Pass it along. After nine years, I still have a lot to learn, but others do, too. At Reid Middleton, we give them a chance. It's easy to get wrapped up in the idea of doing something personally and, of course, doing it "perfectly" based on all of that personal experience. It is often better to give a less experienced presenter a chance. It helps humility, too, when they find a better way of explaining something than I ever have. I don't know if they always believe me when I talk about what a good opportunity they are receiving. Sometimes they think that I just don't want to be out late. Can't both of those be true?
After all this, I am glad we took the unexpected opportunity of the teaching for AIA Seattle. Our team of instructors has learned so much and helped so many people. Once in a while, a student even contacts us after they pass to say "Thank you." That's a great feeling. After all, that is what it is all about.
Paul is a LEED accredited structural engineer with expertise in design through all phases of a project, from initial building investigations and concept designs to final construction. Paul's project experience includes new buildings, seismic upgrades, investigations, and building improvements. Many of Paul's projects involve high-security or essential facility aspects including fire stations, military installations, and law enforcement facilities.
© 2019 Reid Middleton, Inc.