Tricia Tuttle continues, but the Berlinale’s reputation is damaged

After the “Bild” newspaper reported last week that Weimer wanted to get rid of Tuttle, the Minister of State for Culture explicitly praised the work of “Tricia,” as he confidentially called her in an interview with the “Rheinische Post.” She “always tried to balance the political tensions and make the Berlinale strong.”

At the same time, there was still a threat: “The tone of the activists – no matter where they come from – must not become the tone of the Berlinale. We must better protect juries, employees and artists from activist attacks.”

Earlier this week, in a DPA interview, Tuttle expressed her desire to remain festival director, but also spoke about her personal doubts about continuing her work, “in an environment in which my leadership role and the integrity of the Berlinale were seriously publicly questioned.” Until then, only Weimer had commented on the Berlinale boss’s intentions.

A “code of conduct” for federal cultural events

In general, communication from the BKM office since the “Bild” headline from an unknown source gave the impression of a forward defense. After a wave of solidarity from the cultural landscape and politics, it must have been clear to Weimer that the premature end of Tuttle’s term of office would have massively damaged the image of the festival as well as his reputation as the country’s top cultural politician.

However, the solution that was found this Thursday in a two-hour meeting of the Supervisory Board of the Federal Cultural Events in Berlin GmbH (KBB), which is responsible for the Berlinale, is anything but Solomonic. It has merely postponed the problem, the core of the problem is obscured in nebulous words.

It was agreed on the establishment of an “advisory committee” which, among other things, would be involved in the development of a “code of conduct” for federal cultural events and institutions. This step is intended to ensure that “art and artists are once again at the center of the Berlinale in the future”. Weimer: “With the recommendations adopted today, we have laid the foundation for strengthening social acceptance of the festival.”

You have to read this sentence in particular twice to believe it – after all, the Minister of State for Culture has made a significant contribution to the loss of this acceptance with his communication strategy in recent weeks. Wolfram Weimer is now attempting an impossible balancing act: he is presenting himself as the top anti-Semitism fighter in the cultural scene and Berlinale savior in one person.

An undertaking that is unlikely to be manageable given its broad definition of anti-Semitism, which already includes criticism of the Israeli government. The question of how political “recommendations” for juries and the independence of the Berlinale can be reconciled also remains unanswered for the time being.

How can a repeat of the incident surrounding the Syrian-Palestinian director Abdallah Alkhatib, who was named best young director almost two weeks ago, be prevented without compromising the integrity of the festival? In his acceptance speech, holding the Palestine flag in his hand, Alkhatib did not express gratitude, but rather accused the federal government of complicity in a genocide in Gaza and threatened that those who did not stand on the side of the Palestinians would be remembered.

These statements can be criticized – they are not punishable. The Berlinale is also not an “institution of the German state,” as we recently read in “Welt.” The German state only supports the cultural event. This does not give rise to a right to influence.

What could that look like? Should acceptance speeches be initially authorized by the Berlinale in the future? Should the presenter snatch the microphone out of the award winner’s hand when he hears the word “genocide”? Or should the BKM have used “recommendations” to suggest to the jury not to give Alkhatib a prize because it could be assumed that he is not a supporter of German reasons of state – although neither Israel nor Gaza are specifically named in his debut “Chronicles from the Siege”? If the Berlinale no longer offers room for unwelcome criticism in the future, it will be deprived of an important social role.

Weimer’s activism has taken a 180-degree turn since the beginning of the Berlinale. While he had to defend Tricia Tuttle at the beginning of the festival because she was accused of “censoring” solidarity with Palestine and criticism of Israel, she is now under political scrutiny because she is said to have not taken consistent enough action against “hatred” and anti-Semitism. According to the supervisory board’s communiqué, she is always under observation. Tuttle explains: “The committee has made a number of recommendations that we will consider carefully.” But there is silence about what exactly these look like.

Abroad, the discussions surrounding the Berlinale have been closely followed in recent weeks, from the Hollywood industry services to the “New York Times” to the “Guardian”. The handling of these debates – the jury’s egg dance around the complicated Gaza issue that triggered the protests, the anticipatory outrage on all sides, the government’s wary eyes – has had a lasting impact on the image of the Berlinale.

You have to be happy that Tricia Tuttle, after careful consideration, wants to do it all again. Maybe that’s exactly why she’s the right person for the job. You can’t envy them because of that.