by Dov Kornits
“All Static & Noise —杂音和噪音 (záyīn hé zàoyīn) — found its inspiration from an article by Anthropologist Darren Byler, who was reporting on a speech by Communist Party officials at Xinjiang University in 2017. Party officials gathered thousands of students and faculty in the university gymnasium to ‘explain’ their version of the ‘Global War on Terror.’ They painted Uyghur and other ethnic minorities in the Uyghur Region as ‘terrorists’ guilty of ‘separatism.’ During the speeches, the Xinjiang University Party Secretary and others, referring to Uyghur and other ethnic minorities, declared that ‘all static (杂音, záyīn) and noise (噪音, zàoyīn) would need to be eliminated.’”
That’s documentarian David Novack, explaining the meaning of his latest feature length film’s title. “The film’s intention is to reappropriate this language, to make louder the voices of resistance and inspire the masses to challenge the hate that sits behind this inflamed speech. Note that in English, the term ‘static’ can have two meanings. The film’s title refers to the crackling sounds you might hear on a radio or television caused by electricity in the air, not stagnancy.”
All Static & Noise is Novack’s third feature documentary as writer/director/producer, following Burning the Future: Coal in America (2008) and Finding Babel (2015).
How did this story of Uyghurs come into your orbit?
“We were researching a different film about Chinese rule of law, drawing an arc from Tiananmen Square 1989 to Hong Kong (eventually, as it erupted during our filming), and highlight the 709 Lawyers crackdown from 2015. One of these lawyers had represented Ilham Tohti, so through that research and talking with China rights defenders in Europe, I learned more about the Uyghur Crisis. This was in 2018 and the “re-education” camps were really exploding, so a lot of news was starting to come out. I began more research, planning to include it in the original film. However, as the details and scale of the oppression unfolded over several months, it became clear it had to be its own film, one where Uyghur and Kazakh voices could be given the time and context to tell their story personally and directly.
“For me personally, I could not divorce these crimes from my own Jewish family’s experience in 1930s and ‘40s Europe – first stripped freedoms and endless terror, then forced labour, and ultimately concentration camps and road-side ditches where half my family were killed. The strongest tool at my disposal to take a stand against human rights atrocity is filmmaking, and so I embarked on a journey that I will never forget, and never regret.”
Did you have to consult with any Uyghurs regarding their representation in the film?
“Yes of course. It was critical that representation of those in the film was met with not only approval but with space for input. Moreover, before putting the final film in public, we screened it for our subjects to make sure that they did not have problems with their final representation on screen and that they still felt comfortable being public. I remember at our world premiere in New Zealand last year, one Uyghur woman in particular, noting that “finally, we feel heard” and also commenting on how powerful it was just to hear their stories on screen in their own language.”
Did you attempt to present the Chinese perspective at all, or is that a different film?
“There was a point at which we edited in sections of the Chinese “perspective” as you note. It really felt wrong. First of all, what perspective can possibly justify the mass abuses? Would it give audiences an excuse to disengage if it sounded reasonable to them simply by shedding doubt on what is true? Moreover, I don’t believe it is a “perspective” at all. It is a “strategy replete with a propagandized “perspective” that allows the Chinese government and countless citizens to treat ethnic minorities as outsiders who need to be cured. We decided to give no space for such propaganda. The Chinese government has their ministry of foreign affairs daily press briefings, CCTV and CGTN (their international network) and their domestic media machine for that. They don’t need us. We also chose to eliminate almost all information that listener-viewers could easily find online, except for the bare minimum context. Our priority became delivering brave testimony and following the brave activism of our collaborators.”
How does a film like this get financed?
“Financing has been very challenging for this film. Not because it is a human rights documentary, but because the looming villain in the background is the government of China. Typically, we get grants and private donations. In this case, many organisations and potential donors found that because of other initiatives and overlaps that involve China, through business or the arts or academics, they had to shy away from supporting the film for fear of unforeseen consequences. Some did support anonymously, as one can see in the credits. We also ran a GoFundMe campaign that was quite successful. Many donors there asked that their names not be included in the credits. Additionally, myself and Janice Englehart, our producer, put countless hours into the project and still do, on our own time. Some crew members also took lower payments and/or deferrals. This way, we can say that the film is partially financed by our own free labour and desire to have a positive impact on the future.”
Have you had any problems/threats since embarking on this film? Have you had to be precautionary, for both your welfare and some of your subjects?
“The threat of Chinese retaliation has been a dark shadow over this entire project. During production in Turkey and Kazakhstan, where the local authorities are friendly with China, we were fearful for the safety of our subjects and crew. You see that in the film when a car is following Aina and the crew. During post-production, the security of our footage was another concern. We stored our content on external drives and used encrypted platforms. I still at times will carry the project hard drives in my backpack because I’m afraid someone will break into my home or car and confiscate them. This kind of paranoia is hard to shake. It is the kind of fear that the Chinese government seeks to instil in people to keep them in line. It is the panopticon in action.
“On the distribution side, we have found (and confronted) “minders” at screenings and reported them to the police. The film has been banned in China, officially (see third inset in this China Digital Times story), even long before it was completed! We were invited to a screening at a festival in Almaty Kazakhstan and just as I was about to board a plane to go, I got word that the theater owner was threatened and cancelled the festival. (We did it online instead).
“Badiacao, who is a Chinese artist based in Melbourne and designer of our poster, has been posting about the Melbourne Documentary Film Festival, where he will join our panels and q&a. His posts are received many threats, most likely from bots, which is a harassment he is unfortunately very used to dealing with. Some of the people in the film have also received threats, if not consequences. I cannot disclose all of them, and for some it is hard to say that it is because of the film, as they are outspoken activists far beyond our project. But suffice to say, there are at least 102 “Chinese Overseas Police Service Centers” in 53 countries. Those in the film living outside of China are tracked and contacted both by local Chinese police where they live and by police back in East Turkestan/Xinjiang. They are at times threatened, their families are threatened, they are told they have to return for some reason, etc. It is a great source of stress for our friends and their families. You can see the video on the bottom right side of this page where Abduwli discloses at an award ceremony for the film, in NZ, that of 80 Uyghurs in Auckland, only 8 felt safe to come to the screening.”
With a film like this in Australia, there’s usually an ‘impact strategy’ associated with the project. What do you hope the impact of the film is, and has any impact been made since its completion?
“We are neither lobbyists nor policy-makers. What we can do with All Static & Noise is provide a working tool that brings the voices of the Uyghurs and others to the world, contributing to a tapestry of voices that might bring this horror to an end and restore Uyghur culture and language to their homeland, and other cultures as well, with safety, security, and joy. To that end, impact means as much visibility as possible. For instance, our Australia screenings beyond the MDFF are in Sydney and Adelaide. We are paying for the theatre rentals. However, the screenings are presented by the Australian Uyghur Tangritagh Women’s Association, the Uyghur Association of Victoria and the Australian Uyghur Association. All proceeds go to their work. They have agency to do with the funds whatever supports their community best. This is one aspect of our impact campaign lying at the tail end of representation…. from project inception to distribution.
“We will also be partnering with NGOs in other parts of the world (see website’s partners page) for outreach and impact. For instance, we are developing a tour with Amnesty and also planning some special impact screenings before decision makers in many parts of the world. For the USA, we hope to raise funds to put the film on tour as well, to eight target cities. Also of note, the film has been shown on Taiwan public television.”
You work with your wife, Nancy? How’s the conversation around the dinner table?
“Conversation with my wife Nancy at the table is mostly about how delicious whatever we made is. I joke. Nancy is an Emmy-winning, extraordinary and very busy documentary film editor. We were lucky that her availability lined up and it is the first time we have worked together. In the past, with young kids, we decided that raising them was enough of a shared project! But they are now grown, and we decided to give it a go. It worked out very well. We are still married and still cooking together.”
What’s next?
“We are swamped with the distribution phase of this film due to the barriers of traditional distribution. So that is taking up quite a bit of time. But, we do have a few things in development that are exciting.”
All Static & Noise is screening on 27 & 30 July 2024 at Cinema Nova as part of the Melbourne Documentary Film Festival, tix here. The screenings will be followed by a Q&A with David Novack, collaborator Abduweli Ayup, and Melbourne-based political cartoonist and Chinese rights defender Badiucao.
All Static & Noise is also screening at the following:
SYDNEY Screening + Q & A with filmmakers and Amnesty International
Sunday July 21 15:00 – 18:00
Event Cinema 505/525 George Street
Tickets: Eventbrite
ADELAIDE Screening + Q & A with filmmakers and Australian Uyghur Tangritagh Women’s Association
Tuesday July 23 18:30 – 21:00
Palace Nova Cinemas
Level 2, 98a Prospect Road, PROSPECT
Tickets: Eventbrite
