Cinema, lootings and restitutions
Cinéma, spoliations et restitutions
Published on Thursday, October 02, 2025
Abstract
L’université Paris Nanterre organise à Paris du 5 au 7 février 2026 un colloque international « Cinéma, spoliations et restitutions ». Il s'agit d’investiguer un champ beaucoup moins connu des recherches de provenances, celui des spoliations du cinéma, ainsi que la représentation des spoliations et des restitutions au cinéma (fiction et documentaire), tant dans la période 1933-1945, que dans les contextes coloniaux et post-coloniaux.
Announcement
Paris, February 5-6-7th 2026 Université Paris Nanterre | Institut national d’Histoire de l’art.
Argument
Following a precedent symposium dedicated to Museums in Cinema in 2014 (published in 2018 by B. Le Maître, J. Jibokji, N. Pernac, J. Verraes (ed.), Presses universitaires de Nanterre) and in line with the scientific exchanges of the University Diploma “Provenance Research : Circulation, Spoliation, Illicit Trafficking, and Restitution” proposed by the same university, the need arose to investigate a much less known field of provenance research, that of looting of cinema (1), but also the representation of looting and restitution, in cinema (2 and 3), both in the period 1933-1945 and in colonial and post-colonial contexts. While the subjects of study are artistic, the study is fundamentally multidisciplinary and requires the combined expertise of researchers in History, Film History, Art History, Anthropology, Political Science, Law, and Media History, working in various cultural areas (Europe, Africa, Russia, Asia, etc.), as well as filmmakers and documentary makers.
1. The phenomenon of the looting of cinema, and more specifically that of films as cultural property (1933-1945), is little known and still being explored. Although researches have been conducted on certain aspects, notably the spoliation of French cinema by the Nazis (Leroy, 1999), the capture of films from military cinematographic services (Launay, 2018), and the fate of films seized by the Soviets during World War II (Pozner, 2012), this history is often described as “a work in progress” (Cœuré, 2018). It involves exploring a phenomenon that is difficult to quantify, while highlighting the theoretical and methodological difficulties inherent in the fundamentally reproducible nature of film. While the organization of looting structures in France—Propaganda Abteilung versus ERR Rosenberg, in close connection with the Vichy administration (CGQJ, COIC)—is now better documented (Podsiadlo, 2024), there is still no study of this systematic spoliation on a European scale, inquiry complicated by successive transfers to Berlin during the war and then to Moscow at the end of the conflict.
The spoliation of films, whether they were censored, banned, or reused, has only been partially studied, despite its obvious importance in the ideological propaganda and in cultural policies of the Nazi and then Soviet regimes. The exact objectives of these seizures remain unclear. Was the aim to destroy or “purge” this Heritage, to exploit it for propaganda purposes, or to control visual memory? Which methods can be developed to identify the films and directors that were plundered? How can these seizures be traced on a European scale and beyond? Did this phenomenon occur in other historical contexts and how? Can films sometimes be used as proof by visual evidence? This first subject for reflexion raises methodological challenges concerning the plundering of cinema in terms of traceability, provenance, misappropriation, and “restituability”.
2. The symposium aims to examine the representation of the looting and plundering of cultural goods in cinema, both in the context of major conflicts ((World War II, etc.) as well as in colonial and post-colonial settings. This field has not been the subject of dedicated study, despite the interest highlighted by Bénédicte Savoy (Savoy, 2018 and 2023). The proliferation of fictional scenarii dedicated to forced heritage translocations seems to form a new specific film typology in recent years, a sort of inverse variation on the proliferation of what have been the paintings of picture galleries made by the Francken dynasty in Antwerp in the years 1600s-1620s. How have filmmakers portrayed the capture of Cultural Heritage, a dark part of the history of wars? What narrative devices have they used: individual investigation or collective undertaking? Scientific approach or intimate quest? In what film genres (historical films, science fiction, detective films, etc.)? Based on what sources and according to what narrative forms? How are staged in cinema the gaps and ellipses in the objects' journeys? On a more directly aesthetic level, how do the films represent the objects associated with forced translocations? Are the works damaged or even destroyed? Or are they hidden from view (and how)? More broadly, how are works transformed by spoliation? Who are the actors involved in these film projects, what resources and objectives do they have, and who is their target audience?
In fact, film production has been (and still is) used as a tool not only for historical reconstruction and recontextualization, but also for demonstration, propaganda, for political exposure and discussion, through the dual mediums of fiction and documentary.
In the fictional realm, from Frankenheimer's The Train (1964) to the recent trend for films devoted to famous figures (Rose Valland and the Monuments Men, 2014) and to movements demanding historical justice (Les statues meurent aussi, 1953 ; Black Panther, 2018), cinema has been able to portray numerous of more or less imaginary cases of spoliation and restitution using its own means; in parallel with public debates, it has illustrated them as much as it has nourished them and guided them, using its appeal, efficiency, and power of persuasion. In doing so, it offers a particularly stimulating framework for rethinking the writing of history, the shaping of narratives, the cross-analysis of visions, and the construction of imaginaries. It encourages us to reflect on the collective and collaborative dimension of the recomposition of these object trajectories, being himself essentially a team production, an art that also nourishes contemporary creation (see, for example, the cinematographic installation Once Again... Statues Never Die or Vagabondia by Isaac Julian).
3. In the field of documentary filmmaking on lootings, the educational and/or scientific approaches employed raise questions about the role of funders and the weight of ideologies, about the value of testimony, the modalities of the inquiry, and the objectives of collecting traces. A cornerstone, Resnais and Marker's “film essay”, Les statues meurent aussi (1953), commission placed to two young filmmakers and which became an anti-colonialist manifesto, raised the question of the identity of art and the specificity of African Art (in 1966, at the inauguration of the dynamic museum in Dakar, Senghor spoke of the “solemn visit of our ancestors and our gods”) : it questioned the place of this African Art in museums, the phenomena of museumization, ethnologization, and artification, as well as the effects of merchandization (which turned authentic creations into serial tourist products).
The study of these films, whose current vitality is evident (Murphy 2023), can help to initiate a new history and epistemology of provenance research, while shedding light on the weight of memory and remembrance, as well as the cathartic, restorative process that the collection of archives and evidence can initiate. A cross-analysis will provide a better understanding of the construction of discourses and, at the same time, the role or place of institutions in or in relation to these statements, but will also provide a better understanding of the political, committed dimensions of these productions, their various scales (individual, community, national, or transnational ones), and the geopolitical tensions to which they are subject or linked. It will be all the richer as the corpus is broad (in addition to the question of artists' films that address the issue of spoliation): European, Soviet, Greek, Bollywood, Nollywood (Nigeria), Hollywood cinemas, etc.
These documentaries, whose ideological motivation is claimed, sometimes to the point of constituting a media tool for an outspoken activism (see the docu-fiction Promakhos, released in 2014 on the anniversary of the death of Melina Mercouri, the most active advocate for the return of the Parthenon marbles), often incorporate a historical perspective that they increasingly combine with an evocation of the expectations and effects of restitution: in this regard, Mati Diop's Dahomey film (2023), which focuses on reception, marks a turning point. Which role is cinema called upon to play consequently? In this respect, cinema is now one of the key players in the debate on the translocation and repatriation of cultural property, at the same time assimilating and delivering suitable material for creation and thoughts on the nature of heritage in relation to the most pressing social and international issues of our time: “Who owns beauty? Who owns a work of art?” asks Bénédicte Savoy, echoing the discussion in Frankenheimer's The Train. Cinema is at the burning heart of the presence of the past in the present and of the projection of the spirit of peoples into the future.
4. The symposium also raises a series of issues relating to Law. The legal complexity of film ownership, with its material, moral, and intellectual dimensions, and the multiplicity of actors involved (producer, director, exhibitor) impact the nature and modalities of cinema spoliation, which can affect directors, works, studios, equipment, or movie theaters. It is necessary to shed light on the changing legal status of translocated films and the restitution of films, as well as the issue of sharing between collections (film archives shared between museums or film libraries) or that of film collections belonging to archaeological excavation archives.
Areas for reflection (non-exhaustive list)
- Reuse and appropriation of film archives by the Nazis for propaganda purposes
- (Re)definition or theoretical exploration of spoliation based on the specific characteristics of film works
- Fictions on spoliation and/or restitution
- Translocation and heritage imaginaries
- Metamorphoses of spoliated works
Submission guidelines
The international interdisciplinary conference will be held in Paris (Institut national d’Histoire de l’art, Université Paris Nanterre) on February 5-6-7th, 2026. It will be accompanied by a related film program, with screenings and roundtable discussions attended by international filmmakers.
Proposals for papers (including a summary of the presentation in 300 words maximum and a biographical presentation of the speaker in 5-10 lines maximum) should be sent to cine.spoliation@gmail.com until the 20th of October 2025. The scientific committee will send potential speakers a response regarding their participation in early November 2025. The organization will cover part of the participation costs (transportation or accommodation) for speakers whose institutional affiliation does not provide financial support.
Organisation Committee
- Théo Esparon, docteur en études cinématographiques, université Paris Nanterre, HAR,
- Ghislaine Glasson-Deschaumes, directrice de la MSH Mondes, Nanterre
- Barbara Le Maître, professeure en études cinématographiques, université Paris Nanterre, HAR
- Maureen Murphy, professeure en histoire de l’art contemporain, université Paris Nanterre, HAR
- Natacha Pernac, maîtresse de conférences en histoire de l’art moderne, université Paris Nanterre, HAR
- Klaudia Podsiadlo, chercheuse de provenances, chargée du secteur géo-linguistique polonais, La Contemporaine
- Margaux Dumas, historienne, spécialiste des questions de spoliations et restitutions, EHESS/MSH Mondes
Scientific Committee
Théo Esparon, Barbara Le Maître, Maureen Murphy, Natacha Pernac, Klaudia Podsiadlo, Margaux Dumas
- Aurore Chaigneau, professeure de droit et sciences politiques, université Paris Nanterre
- Christophe Gauthier, professeur en histoire du cinéma, école des Chartes
- Monica Heintz, anthropologue, projet CINEMAF Images animées, mémoires controversées, LESC Nanterre
- Bénédicte Savoy, Professeur d’histoire de l’art, Technische Universität, Berlin
- Didier Schulmann, conservateur général du patrimoine honoraire, centre Georges Pompidou, ancien chef de service de la bibliothèque Kandinsky, Paris.
Subjects
Places
- INHA 2 rue Vivienne
Paris, France (75002) - Université Paris Nanterre, 200 Av. de la République
Nanterre, France (92)
Date(s)
- Monday, October 20, 2025
Attached files
Keywords
- cinéma, spoliation, restitution, archive, propagande, appropriation, translocation, butin, documentaire, fiction, film, mémoire
Contact(s)
- Natacha Pernac
courriel : natachapernac [at] yahoo [dot] fr
Reference Urls
Information source
- Natacha Pernac
courriel : natachapernac [at] yahoo [dot] fr
License
This announcement is licensed under the terms of Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal.
To cite this announcement
« Cinema, lootings and restitutions », Call for papers, Calenda, Published on Thursday, October 02, 2025, https://doi.org/10.58079/14udi
