Search results

This essay offers a succinct but comprehensive overview of Icelandic cinema from its early 20th-century emergence to the present day. Split into two parts, the first half focusses on filmmaking in Iceland prior to the founding of the Icelandic Film Fund in 1978, which was to establish a continuous local film production for the first time. Prior to that filmmaking in Iceland boiled down to the occasional efforts of local amateurs, albeit often quite skilled ones, and professional filmmakers visiting from abroad. Indeed, the few silent feature films made in the country all stemmed from foreign filmmakers adapting Icelandic literature and taking advantage of its photogenic landscapes. The first Icelandic feature was not made until 1948 and although immensely popular, like those that followed in its wake, the national audience was simply too small to sustain filmmaking without financial support. Although this changed fundamentally with the Icelandic Film Fund, which instigated contemporary Icelandic cinema and the subject of the essay's second half, the Fund's support proved insufficient as the novelty of Icelandic cinema began to wear off at the local box office in the late 1980s. The rescue came from outside sources, in the form of nordic and European film funds, whose support was to transnationalize Icelandic cinema in terms of not only financing and production but also themes and subject material. These changes are most apparent in Icelandic cinema of the 1990s which also began to garner interest at the international film festival circuit. In the first decade of the twenty first century, however, American genre cinema began to replace the European art film as the typical model for Icelandic filmmakers. Hollywood itself also began to show extensive interest in Icelandic landscapes for its runaway productions, as did many other foreign film crews. In this way Icelandic cinema is increasingly characterized by not only national and transnational elements but also international ones.

Kosningaréttur er grundvallarréttur þegna í lýðræðisríkjum og þátttaka í kosningum álitin ein af mikilvægustu athöfnum borgaranna. Þó að þessi réttindi skuli tryggð öllum þegnum sýna alþjóðlegar rannsóknir að fatlað fólk er víða útilokað frá þátttöku í kosningum. Fatlað fólk er síður líklegt til að kjósa en ófatlað fólk og mætir iðulega ýmsum hindrunum ef það reynir að taka þátt í kosningum. Þessi grein fjallar um kosningaþátttöku fatlaðs fólks með hliðsjón af niðurstöðum alþjóðlegra rannsókna. Í upphafi eru raktar helstu hindranir í vegi kosningaþátttöku fatlaðs fólks og leitast við að svara hvaða áhrif þessar hindranir hafi, ekki aðeins fyrir fatlaða borgara, heldur jafnframt hvað það þýði fyrir heilbrigði lýðræðis og lýðræðislegra stofnana þegar hluti þegnanna mætir alvarlegum hindrunum varðandi borgaraleg grundvallarréttindi. Íslenskar rannsóknir á þessu sviði eru ekki fyrir hendi og engin skipuleg tölfræðileg gögn eru til varðandi þátttöku fatlaðs fólks í kosningum eða stjórnmálum hér á landi. Byggt á gögnum sem aflað var hjá tveimur fjölmennustu heildarsamtökum fatlaðs fólks hér á landi er rýnt í reynslu, aðstæður og möguleika fatlaðs fólks til þátttöku í kosningum á Íslandi, lagasetningar þar að lútandi og skyldur ríkisins til að stuðla að og tryggja þátttöku fatlaðs fólks í stjórnmálum og opinberu lífi, ekki síst í ljósi þess að Samningur Sameinuðu þjóðanna (SÞ) um réttindi fatlaðs fólks (SRFF) hefur verið fullgiltur hér á landi ; The right to vote is a fundamental right of citizenship in democratic nations, and participation in elections in one of the most important acts undertaken by citizens. Although these rights are guaranteed to all citizens, international research shows that disabled people are widely excluded from participation in elections. Disabled people are less likely to vote than non-disabled people and often encounter various obstacles when they try to participate in elections. This article discusses the voting participation of disabled people in consideration of the international research. The main barriers that disabled people encounter in the voting process will first be outlined. This will be followed by questions concerning the effects these obstacles produce, not only for disabled citizens, but what this means overall for the health of democracy and democratic institutions when a portion of the citizenry encounter serious obstacles concerning their basic civil rights. Icelandic research in this field is extremely limited and no systematic statistical data exists on the participation of disabled people in elections, or politics in general, in this country. Based on data drawn from sources from two of the largest disabled people's organization in the country, the focus here is on the experiences, circumstances and opportunities for disabled people to participate in elections in the country. The findings draw attention to the obligations of the state to promote and ensure the participation of disabled people in politics and public life in light of the recent ratification in Iceland of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) ; Peer Reviewed

This article discusses the phenomenon of self-harming or "non-Suicidal Self-In-jury" (nSSI). The International Society for the Study of Self-Injury defines non-sui cidal self-injury as the deliberate, self-inflicted damage of body tissue without suicidal intent and for purposes not socially or culturally sanctioned." The article discusses the cultural and social representations of self-injury, what is implied in it, who engages in it, and for what reasons. A lot can be deduced from interviews with self-harmers who use it to gain control over bad feelings and stress, by hurting their body and participating in risky behaviour. This dangerous activity often has more complicated sides with reference to rituals and spiritual associations to bloodletting, cleansing of all evil and healing, absolution and much wanted peace of mind. Finally, the changes in self-harming discourse and channels of communication are discussed. It has opened up during the last two decades with the arrival of social media. The self-harmers have built their own subcultures with special aesthetics and often preferring theatrical staging or performances instead of verbal expres-sion. These channels can have an uncanny power and influence over young and vulnerable people. The conclusion of the article is that all this requires an informed discussion as a special world, a special angst which is expressing itself in ways that might develop into suicidal behaviour if it is not taken seriously.

The so-called "land question" is a well known theme in South African political discourse. Much has been written on the subject in recent times, but also in the historical development of South African politics. This article articulates thoughts concerning the political meaning of land by way of framing the land question as a space of political contestation in South Africa, simultaneously discussing it against a wider international background, acknowledging that the land question is not unique to South Africa and that it also relates to many historical and contemporary political struggles. It is suggested that such an approach possibly may contribute to contextualise the matter and to shed some of the emotional baggage that often pertains to it. The article contextualises land as political contestation while suggesting an interpretation of what politics is. Attention is afforded to the understanding of politics as conflict, but also as reconciliation and compromise against an underlying context of power and its purposes. The latter determining in what kind of country political actors would want to live and relating to interests and values that political actors hold in common. The possibility exists that if reconciliation and compromise are not possible, politics will come to an end, which will not contribute to a sustainable democracy or a solution to the land question. The broader conflicting nature of positions and understandings of the land question in South Africa is further highlighted within the context of political contestation, after which attention is afforded to the positioning of political actors within this contestation.The position of the government and political parties is highlighted within this conflict based framework, noting the different understandings of the land question as well as the commonalities that parties share. Reference is briefly made to non party political actors (formal and informal) which represents the same conflictual positions, but which also alludes to other factors relevant to the land question whereafter these factors are highlighted. These include the broader social and economical issues (which are also understood as political), as well as an agricultural and rural bias in the land question, while it is also a matter of political and socio-economic rights within an urban context. The question is also asked whether solutions to the land question should not be found in a forward looking manner, rather than a romanticised understanding of land. The article concludes with a discussion in regard to the land question, when it is viewed from the perspective of political contestation, as defined in this article, as well as considering the possible outcome of the land question. A suggestion is made that consideration could be given to a re-negotiation of this space of political contestation, as land reform will remain unsuccessful if the politics thereof is not addressed; although this would also entail its own dangers for a democratic South Africa where democracy is not yet fully consolidated. OPSOMMING: Grond en die sogenaamde "grondvraagstuk" is 'n welbekende tema in die Suid-Afrikaanse politieke diskoers. Heelwat is reeds hieroor geskryf in die hedendaagse tydsgewrig, maar ook in die historiese verloop van die Suid-Afrikaanse politiek. Hierdie artikel artikuleer gedagtes rondom die betekenis van grond as politieke stryd (en ook binne die konteks van 'n bepaalde begrip van politiek) in Suid-Afrika, maar plaas dit ook teen 'n wyer internasionale doek. Moontlik kan so 'n benadering bydra om die saak te kontekstualiseer en te ontdaan van die emosionele bagasie wat dikwels daarmee gepaardgaan. Die benadering van die artikel is dat grond as politieke stryd hanteer word, waarna aandag geskenk word aan hoe politieke akteurs hulself posisioneer binne hierdie stryd. Daar word ook kortliks verwys na ander faktore wat 'n rol speel in hierdie politieke stryd. Die artikel sluit af met 'n gevolgtrekking ten opsigte van die grondvraagstuk, wanneer dit vanuit die perspektief van politieke stryd, soos in hierdie artikel omskryf, beskou word en die moontlike uitkoms van die grondvraagstuk oorweeg word. ; http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_issues&pid=0041-4751&lng=en&nrm=iso