+ Genghis Blues review by Cynthia Fuchs
Vision and curiosity
The story of San Francisco-based blues singer Paul Pena's journey
to Tuva, a teeny republic in the heart of Asia, is certainly
strange and wondrous. Still, given the obscurity of almost every
element involved, the story probably wouldn't strike most people
as the ideal material for a first film, since first films
generally require financial backing on the front end and some
hope of distribution when all's said and done. Not to mention the
many logistical difficulties in making the thing: arranging for a
crew willing to work for next to nothing, traveling to and around
Tuva (currently part of the Russian federation) by plane, train,
bus, and sometimes horses, hauling equipment up and down mountain
footpaths, dealing with lack of electricity and of language,
confronting bad karma, etc., etc.
But the difficulties didn't intimidate Adrian Belic and his
brother Roko. On learning of Pena's dream, they were so thrilled
by it that they decided to follow and even to coax and expedite
it into a reality. While learning the ancient Tuvan art of
khoomei (translated as "throatsinging," and entailing the
production of multiple tones simultaneously; it's been likened to
the sound of "a bullfrog swallowing a whistle"), Pena befriended
Kongar-ol Ondar, winner of Tuva's 1992 throatsinging competition,
who invited him to come and compete in the 1995 contest. Genghis Blues documents the experience.
When I meet with Adrian Belic, he's wearing a Mongolian jacket
and eating eggs and potatoes at a hotel restaurant in Washington
DC, and though he's in his own journey mode at the moment,
flying from film festival to film festival to get the word out
about his Oscar-nominated documentary he's pleased to retell
most every detail concerning the Tuvan adventure. And yet, he
finds, in traveling with the film, that Tuva and its environs are
not so remote as you would think, based on popular Western
media's veritable erasure of the area and its complex politics,
arts, and histories. At the most recent screenings of the film,
Belic says, he has met students from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan,
Mongolia, and even Tuva; they thank him for bringing them a
little piece of home into their current lives.
Cynthia Fuchs: How did you and your brother decide to take on
such an unlikely project?
Adrian Belic: My brother and I saw a documentary in high school,
sitting on my mother's bed, watching a black and white tv with
the proverbial coat-hanger sticking out of it. It was about this
crazy brilliant American physicist, Richard Feynman. It was
called The Last Journey of a Genius, a BBC production, shown on
Nova, and it described this far off place that Feynman always
wanted to go but never did, somewhere north of Mongolia in
Southern Siberia, over the Siam Mountains. It described these
people and yurts and yaks and shamans and multi-harmonic singing.
We were fascinated, and committed ourselves to get there,
someday, somehow. So we finished high school, went to college,
and with that degree, we were finally free, with the societal
stamp of approval on our foreheads. My brother called up the
producer Ralph Leighton, the only guy we'd ever heard of who knew
anything about it. And he tells us the story of Paul Pena, a
blind blues singer, who learns Tuvan one letter at a time,
translating from Tuvan to Russian and Russian to English
dictionary, and who befriends this Tuvan throatsinger, who
invites Paul to Tuva for the second ever Symposium and
Championship in 1995. At first, there was a hurdle, because the
BBC was contracted to do the documentary, but they pulled out,
and Leighton called us and said it was ours. We were stunned.
CF: How did you put the logistics and the money together?
AB: At first, we talked to adults about it and they said, oh, you
guys are so lucky. You've got African American issues, disabled
people, traditional American blues, cross cultural issues,
traditional Tuvan music, you guys are young, people will be
throwing money at you guys. So we started writing grants, and
sent them off, and didn't receive a nickel. But how can we be
pissed? I wouldn't have believed it unless I saw it first. Two,
my brother and I had done student films since we were kids, but
what the hell does that have to do with it? And three, okay,
who's going to want to see this? No one knows Paul, no one
believes Tuva exists, and we're two yahoos who decided not to go
to grad school. We were never very upset, maybe a little
depressed. But we got the proverbial credit cards, got our
Aeroflot tickets, went to Tuva and shot for five weeks, stayed
with Kongar-ol and his friends, came back, found an incredible
guy in San Francisco who allowed us to come in on weekends and
edit for free. And we settled into this delusion that it would
take us five months, maybe eight months to finish, and that
turned into a year, then two years, then three years. And finally
we sent out some rough cuts, and got into nine film festivals,
Hawaii and Vancouver and the Margaret Mead Documentary Festival
here in DC, which was very prestigious.
Then we applied to Sundance, and were accepted. That's when the
real trouble began, because we had to come up with fifty grand to
transfer [from video to 35 mm]. But we did it, in one month, from
basically five individuals. At the festival, we were lucky, we
found a PR company that wanted to work with us, as the "renegade,
passion project," and they slipped us into photo sessions for
higher profile projects. And we were also very diligent, at
Sundance and Rotterdam and Telluride, and again at the Oscars,
the postcards in everyone's mailboxes, trying to do as much
preliminary work as possible.
CF: How do you feel about this packaging process, for the
"renegade, passion project"?
AB: It's not a question of like or dislike, it's necessary. It's
part of the filmmaking business. It's shame that filmmakers
or artists in general don't realize that. My brother and I
have always had businesses, a bicycle business in junior high
school, a house painting business in college. And we didn't call
it Belic Brothers House painting, we called it DaVinci Brothers,
it just rang better. At the festivals, in our bio it said we
grew up in Chicago, so we were known as the Genghis Blues
Brothers. So we let it ride, we didn't care. It's not so much
for my brother and I, because we're fortunate. But I'm really
happy for Paul and Kongar-ol, because their story is so
compelling. In some ways, my brother and I are just carrying on
the tradition of independent filmmaking and documentary, Hoop Dreams, When We Were Kings, Crumb, all the great films that
took chances and raised the bar higher. And we've gotten a very
lucky break with Genghis Blues, so we don't mind talking about
it from dusk till dawn. I love when we can screen the film for
young people, we let them keep the print, do an extra screening
for any school, because we didn't have that kind of mentoring
when we grew up.
CF: It sounds like you've given a lot of thought to how
documentaries do cultural work. How were you thinking about
that, a kind of meta-representation of documentary strategies, in
addition to telling this very personal story?
AB: This is our only documentary. My brother and I have always
done fiction films, though we were raised on documentaries. And
traveling's always been in our blood: our parents are from
Eastern Europe, our mother's Czech and our father's Yugoslav, so
I went to Europe for the first time when I was about eight days
old: the reality of [traveling] was very much a part of us. But
our experience in film what we made and what we watched was
fiction. And what frustrated us about documentaries is that they
told extraordinary stories, but presented them so dryly, and not
only that, but also in a dictatorial way. You have some
omnipotent narrator who's not on location, and reads over the
images as if what he says is the rule of law: this is what the
Masai do, or this is what happens at the elephant races in
Southern India. And also, it's usually a one-camera shoot,
single-focused. We were always wondering, who's behind the
camera? How'd they get here? Why'd they do this?
So we approached Genghis Blues with an appreciation for the
magic of documentary, which is that it's real. Paul is alive,
someone actually has those thoughts and lives a life like that,
and yet, how compellingly told. We tried to tell Genghis Blues
like a fictional narrative. It's not an anthropological study of
throatsinging, or a history of Tuva. It's the story of two
incredible human beings, a friendship and a journey, a struggle
and a dream. And ultimately, suffering and triumph, both external
and internal. I think that good storytelling is twofold: one,
it's good fortune at times; and two, it's having the vision and
openness and curiosity to look at it in a general way.
CF: How did you imagine what you were getting into?
AB: I mean, it was hilarious, when we were writing our grant
proposals. People told us to do it, but once we got down to it,
what were we writing about? There's no information on Tuva.
There's no text, no images, no research. So we made up a story
and sent it in and didn't get any money. So we went there to live
it. We shot a lot of tape. We didn't want our perceptions or
misperceptions or ignorance to cloud it or shape it. We didn't
know, but we knew that we didn't know. So we just let her roll,
and we came back with ninety hours we shot in Tuva and another
fifty in the States of interviews and Paul around town. And we
began honing it into a story for those who don't know anything
about it, so they can enjoy it and learn something.
CF: It struck me as I watching, that you could have been
tourists, or traditional anthropologists, going in and excavating
for "truth" to report. And you avoid that by focusing so
intently on Paul and Kongar-ol, but also by including yourselves
and the crew, as part of the process, of making and of
interpreting what you're seeing.
AB: That's part of the adventure. When you bring cameras in, or
any foreign element into a situation, it changes it, and to
assume that it doesn't is silly. We didn't want an
anthropologist to tell us about Tuva, or a narrator to intone
over the image; we wanted the people who experienced it to speak.
And sometimes that's contradictory: the way Ralph saw Tuva and
the way Lemon saw it were kind of different. Lemon saw Tuva as
this free place, with no fences, but the people of Tuva see it
otherwise, with the problems with Russia and Mongolia. But I
like that, because it allows the audience to pick what they wish
out of it. It's not a lesson in Tuva, it's a lesson in life, and
life is choices, your own perceptions.
CF: How did you structure the story, to balance personal and
political issues?
AB: Well, for one thing, we knew that the high point of the film
is not necessarily Paul winning [the contest], because the focus
of the story that we told, was Paul's journey. So the high
point was the end of the journey, how Paul experiences it, and
what he thinks of it. So we knew we didn't want the end of the
film to be the win, and people cheer and the credits roll, over a
slow motion Paul waving. One, it's been done before; two, it's
boring; and three, it's not the way we experienced it. That
wasn't our high point, what the group experienced it as a high
point: Paul winning was only one thing that happened along the
way. And we also had to make it dramatic, not necessarily true to
the chronology, not literal, but organic.
CF: I'm wondering what might have prepared you for being so open
to a culture that is so different from what you'd known.
AB: Well, part of it is that, once you meet Paul, you know that
magic just happens around him. Even on screen, he moves people.
Do you know his situation? Paul's dying of pancreatic cancer, he
was diagnosed right after Sundance last year, and given two
months to live. He's lived to turn 50, but he's really sick: he
couldn't even come to the Oscars. And people are so moved by him
that we've actually raised more money for Paul, through a
nonprofit fund, than for the film. [Further details are available
at www.genghisblues.com.]
CF: His experience also exemplifies the situation of a whole set
of generations of blues musicians in the States, who were or are
not rewarded for their art, financially or socially. This
contrasts so abruptly with the way the Tuvan people at least
those we see here revere their traditional artists.
AB: And on a more human level, the reverence they had for Paul,
which in America he doesn't get. One of the most poignant images
in the film for me is when Kongar-ol takes Paul to the river and
washes his face. Even with all the attention that Paul has
received, in the few times that Paul has come out with the film
here, no one touches him like that in America.
We're so lucky to have been along for this part of his life. At
screenings, people are surprised sometimes to see that we're not
Tuvan. But I think we've done the film with sensitivity and
passion, and real awe about what happened, not with an analytical
eye, but we're amazed, and we invite you to come join us on this
journey. And it's not that Roko and I are so great, but for all
people who are successful in life, somewhere along the line
there's been a mentor. And definitely my mother's that person
for us, and she's also told us how fortunate we are to live in
America. Whenever we come back from somewhere, she tells us,
"You kiss that ground." I mean, it's not perfect and you work
your ass off, and don't be a shmuck in that country, but be happy
you're here, for the opportunities that you have.
CF: That must have come to you, working with Paul so closely,
observing his more "difficult" position in the United States.
One image that struck me, probably because you repeated it, was
the cane, hovering over the sidewalk, as the camera tracks it or
appears to walk behind it. How were you trying to represent Paul,
or your feelings about him?
AB: Metaphorically, very simply, the cane represents Paul's daily
journey. His journey is that arduous, down the block. And then
the way the cane is off the ground, during the trip to Tuva, he
had no easy referents for where he was, we just hopped him from
one Aeroflot to the next. And, blind people are invisible to
most sighted people, and the shot from behind the cane, that's
what the cane sees, or senses, like tentacles or a snake's
tongue.
CF: And it's also an image Paul will never see, so it's doubly
complicated.
AB: Exactly. And then, we also thought that Paul would just come
home, to the same life he had left. It's not like he was offered
a contract and became a huge recording star in Tuva. He came
home, so we wanted to bracket that journey and return with that
image [of the cane]. You never know when you're going to be
fortunate, because when we got home, he gave us that great
interview, where we asked, what's up for you next? And he said,
"Well, I don't know, I just don't predict the future." As soon as
he said that, we thought, well, you just ended the film for us.
And now we have to sit down and carve it out somewhere in
between. And he says it in such a way, that it's not necessarily
a downer, but with a glimmer of hope. You don't predict the
future but look what happens when you just engage with it. And
for Paul, even though he physically came back to the same place,
as a person, he didn't. He grew and expanded, as it turned out
for all of us, too.