When the 1980 documentary “House” about a West Jerusalem home that embodies the Israeli-Palestinian conflict last screened at Stanford, it was more than a year before the massive displacement of peoples and destruction of homes began on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas invaded Israel.
Now people have the chance to see Israeli director Amos Gitai’s film again, with new eyes.
“The film screenings hold exceptional relevance to current events in the Middle East today,” said Stanford librarian Michael A. Keller. “Gitai perceives his films as contemporaneous memories, both personal and societal, of the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”
Stanford Libraries, which hosts some of Gitai’s archives, will screen “House” on Jan. 22 and “Rabin, the Last Day” on Jan. 27, each followed by a panel discussion with the filmmaker and others. The archives include materials related to the making of eight of Gitai’s films. There is also currently a Gitai exhibit in Stanford’s Cecil H. Green Library.
“House” is a slow-paced, unvarnished black-and-white film that uses interviews to make points about the tragedy of internecine conflict and about what “home” means to displaced peoples. It was intended for Israeli TV when it was first made but was not shown because it included Palestinians talking openly about their own displacement.
The 2015 film “Rabin, the Last Day” uses reenactments blended with documentary footage to weave an artistic indictment of the right wing in Israel. The U.K.’s Guardian called the film a “gut punch.”
The discussion following the Jan. 22 screening of “House” will include Jennifer Wolch, a UC Berkeley professor of city planning; Richard Peña, a former Columbia University professor and former director of the New York Film Festival; and Vered Shemtov, a lecturer at Stanford. On Jan. 27 after “Rabin, the Last Day,” Gitai will be joined by Robert Alter, a professor emeritus of Hebrew and comparative literature professor at UC Berkeley.
When “House” screened at Stanford in 2022, Gitai told J. that he was glad the film was still valuable but also disappointed it was relevant.
“As a work on the Middle East … on one hand, we’re very happy that the film is still saying valuable things. At the same time, we’re sad that it’s saying valuable things because the reality didn’t change,” Gitai said at the time. “As a filmmaker, I’m delighted. As a citizen, I’m worried.”