Migrants get rock-hard Europe lesson in staggering 'Stranger in Paradise'

In a classroom in Sicily, migrants who have recently braved the Mediterranean are told what Europe thinks of them. It is no ordinary lesson, as the teacher is played by Belgian actor Valentijn Dhaenens. He shows here in the Dutch documentary Stranger in Paradise see three very different faces of Europe. That can sometimes be hard to take. Stranger in Paradise is a film essay following an unusual concept. US trade magazine Variety has already compared it to the work of Danish provocateur Lars von Trier. Reason enough to call its maker, Guido Hendrikx, who graduated from the Film Academy only two years ago.

While researching for Stranger in Paradise, what specifically struck you?

'That you get the feeling that we in Europe have created a kind of mould into which the refugee or asylum seeker has to fit. It's a kind of funnel, and if you fall outside that, it's pretty much over."

"Above all, I wanted to understand the power relationship between Europe and migrants empathetic make. We read a lot about it in the news, but I wanted to make it feel real, also through the form chosen, the seclusion of the classroom and the relationship between the teacher and the migrants. Highlighting that power relationship, that was the most important thing."

Mechanisms

"And also looking at it with a certain distance. After all, the film is a bit my personal view of what we in Europe have come to call the refugee crisis. I wanted you to be able to look at it with a certain distance. So how we, the lucky ones in Europe, deal with the happiness of others. These are the mechanisms we came up with for that."

Stranger in Paradise is divided into three acts. In the first, the teacher tells the migrants straight to their faces: 'You are not welcome here, go back!' In the second act, he is the opposite, the guilt-ridden European who welcomes the migrants with open arms. In the third act, he follows the rules of Dutch asylum policy, a rational waste race in which only a lucky few remain.'

Why did you choose this striking format? It is very different from a traditional documentary, almost a theatrical performance.

'I found out that this power relationship has different manifestations. For example, public opinion has become highly polarised, and both extremes float on a kind of complacency. There is also government policy. So I thought, if I want to show these different manifestations, I need a different tool than in an ordinary documentary."

Punishment Park

"Normally documentaries are character-driven. You empathise with the main characters. I found it more interesting to use an instrument that expresses the theme. So for me, the actor is not necessarily a character but more the embodiment of a certain view. It is a way of storytelling that Peter Watkins, for example, also uses in Punishment Park (A pseudo-documentary around hippies' confrontation with a group of soldiers. LB)'

How did you approach the migrants participating in the film. For example, did you inform them about the set-up of the film, did they know that the teacher was an actor?

''We were very controlled. Two of our staff went into that refugee camp, together with Hamdan, a migrant who has been living there for five years and gets a one-year residence permit every year. They spent whole days there talking and playing football with those people. Asked a lot, you just got here, what do you know. It was usually very little."

Sterile white suits

"We told them we were going to make a film showing the different sounds in Europe, and that we wanted to do it with them."

"They were very keen to cooperate, because the fact that they got attention was already special to them. The moment you arrive in Sicily, a delegation of men in sterile white suits is waiting for you, you are searched by the police, checked for diseases and you go on a bus to the first reception camp. During the whole process, you get very little information about what is happening. So even if the information they got from us was negative, like in the first act of the film, what better than being ignored anyway."

"On the filming day itself, I explained to the migrants in the classroom: soon a teacher will come, this is an actor, and he represents a certain sound that is going around in Europe. Today that is the sound against migration. He can be very harsh, he thinks you are not welcome. Try to listen to that and try to refute it, comment on it.'

Aftercare

I imagine those recording sessions, especially for the first and third acts, were quite confrontational. Was there any aftercare?

''After each lesson, we evaluated and talked after, but I didn't get the impression that they were very upset. Of course, it made a difference that they knew the teacher was an actor. They were also aware of the construction and of the fact that we were filming. That made a difference. After the third act, we organised an information evening where they could ask questions about the asylum procedure, and what it means, for example, to be an economic refugee. Basic information that they could at least do something with and that could perhaps prepare some for the actual procedure.''

In the epilogue, Valentijn Dhaenens, the actor, chats some more on the street with a few passing migrants. Among other things, the film's budget comes up for discussion. I found that quite striking.

'"We wanted to be very open. I think if you make a politically engaged documentary with a critical eye as we did, then you also have to look at yourself. Then you also have to ask the question: what is my role as maker, what economic structure does the film depend on, what about the power relationship between filmmaker and subject. I see that openness and transparency too little in these kinds of documentaries.''

Simplism

As far as you are concerned, who should see the film in particular?

'"Well, (hesitates for a moment) I wonder if it's political sentiments that are at play in the first act, or if it's also about how the media portrays reality. I find that increasingly simplistic, more sensationalist. The problem with the media and journalism, I think, is that they pretend to be objective, but of course that is an illusion. The media should at least see this film and rethink its pretensions of objectivity. We should get rid of that, media should be much more open about that."

"Secondly, I think of people who adhere very strongly to one particular opinion, are stuck in their dogmas and thus simplify the whole issue. This creates a lot of misunderstandings, which I think is dangerous.''