Digital & Print Membership
Yearly + Receive 8 free printed back issues
$420 Annually
Monthly + Receive 3 free printed back issues
$40 Monthly
A Tale of Two Filmmakers
Omar Gabriel x Ruchi Mital

RUCHI MITAL: You once said something like art is my only refuge. Has that always been the case for you? Did your journey with the camera start when you were young? How did it come about?
OMAR GABRIEL: I realized at a later stage in my life that art has always been my refuge. I think it’s a cliche to say, art heals me, or art allows me to be myself. I don’t think it’s that. You watched my films, and you got to discover a deeper layer of myself. And this deeper layer was not easily accepted, embraced or celebrated, because it’s vulnerable, because it’s not based on: ‘I have achieved this. I have this amount of money. I am a strong man.’ It doesn’t fit into these standards. It’s more like, I’m feeling all these feelings, and that has been, in the course of my life, not celebrated, especially in the younger years when I didn’t have community or like-minded people holding space for each other. I would say it has been my cathartic tool, my way to be curious, to go outside of myself and into myself, and at the same time, it has been my peaceful way to show my rage and to say, ‘This cannot continue.’ Things need to be addressed properly, with depth, with humanity and with soul. I want to dig, dig, dig deep to a place that I don’t even know what it is. I want to enter something somewhere. It’s always never enough for me. I think it’s a problem for me that it’s always never enough. But at the same time, this is how I feel when I’m on an artistic quest.

RUCHI MITAL: Do you ever have the feeling that you touched it, the thing you were digging for?
OMAR GABRIEL: I think I’ve touched glimpses of it, and the rest is not touched. This is what keeps me digging. I’m afraid this is a big greedy part, or a part of me that’s always a bit unfulfilled. Not like, ‘I’m not satisfied,’ but more like, ‘Wow, we’re so complex and our stories are so multi-layered, so it will never be enough.’ When I finish any piece, I always feel like I missed a lot of things, and maybe it’s not enough, and I need to search more and dig more, but then it resonates with a lot of people, and they find it so deep and profound, and then I’m like, ‘Ah, okay, I asked for more, but maybe it’s already enough.’
RUCHI MITAL: There can be two parts to it’s not enough. One is, it’s not enough for me, the other is feeling a responsibility toward other people, like I’m taking on telling this story. I have a responsibility. Do you feel that? Do you have a responsibility to someone, some community, some country you carry when you’re making work?
OMAR GABRIEL: So much. I think this is why I also feel it’s not enough. Because I ask myself, ‘How can I, in a short film or feature film, tell the story of one person?’ I must understand what they have been through to be able to communicate it, verbalize it or address it properly. I feel this responsibility that they are giving me a door into their life, into their psyche, into their hearts. I feel so responsible, especially when someone knows what it means to open up, when they are vulnerable and want to be want to feel safe, want to feel appreciated, want to feel celebrated. I always want to push more to make them feel they are being represented in a way they feel good about while sharing things they thought might be too shameful or vulnerable. I want them to see that it resonated with a lot of other people, so they become the heroes of their story, and not the other way around. I think this feeling of it’s not enough comes from I want to touch the core of depth, realness, and authenticity, and I don’t have a reference.
RUCHI MITAL: Let’s talk specifically about your series, A Letter to Myself. I think it brings together so many of the things that you were just talking about. And I wonder if you can tell me a little bit about how this series come about, what drove you to do this series, a little bit about how you connected with the people you featured in the series, and the intention behind the approach that you took. It has the feeling of a home movie, and yet there’s also a kind of timeless quality to it. It could be almost any time period since cameras have been invented. It’s very intimate, but it’s also very universal. It’s experimental in that it’s not just a narrative, with a beginning, middle and end. It’s a really rich series you created. If you can, tell me a little bit about how you came to it and what your idea was.
OMAR GABRIEL: It all started after the Beirut blast, when I was very close to death. I was blessed to stay alive and stay in shape and healthy, and I asked myself, ‘What is my responsibility, since I’m here and what can I do without fear?’ I had been inhabited by the fear of expressing something too real and too authentic. I’ve done this in the past, but not to that extent, and I felt like since I have been so close to that, there’s nothing to be afraid of anymore. I wouldn’t say it’s only about queerness; it’s also about acceptance, and it’s about embracing the inner child and addressing something to oneself, and taking the time to reflect about oneself in a world where we’re always doing things for others.
I am writing a letter to myself, taking the time to write words intuitively with all my heart, not to another person, but to myself. It’s meeting the self that sometimes we don’t have the time for or are afraid to meet. I started with the others, and they inspired me to end it with a letter to myself, because I felt like, ‘Those people are so courageous.’ They are strong enough to write letters to themselves and to accept being filmed and to know that these films are going to go viral on Instagram. So why am I still hiding behind my camera? What I wanted to ask others is what I’m searching for in myself. So, this time, I would not hide behind the camera. The turning point was when I realized that what we’re looking for in others is also what we look for in ourselves.

RUCHI MITAL: There’s always this tension in a documentary, this power thing about, I’m looking at you, I’m telling your story. And as much as you are giving someone the opportunity to tell their story, you’re looking at them and making yourself one of the subjects of the series. To me, this seems like a political act, in the framework of Everything is Political. It seems to be related to this thing that happens when you’re a person from a particular community… you’re from Lebanon, you’re a queer person… It’s like you’re now going to speak for this group. If you’re from this country, you can only talk about wars, because that’s what this experience is about, and the multi-layers of complexity somehow are not allowed for. And I don’t know if that’s something you experience, but it feels that in this space of allowing one person to write to themselves and not have to speak to the audience or the world, and putting yourself in it, you’re kind of reclaiming this complexity.
OMAR GABRIEL: I totally agree that it’s a political act to place myself in this. In the beginning, I never thought about it as political. I just felt that intuitively, I felt the need to be in this series. But in terms of hierarchy, somehow it puts us all at the same level, when we are all expressing in the same way. As a filmmaker, I express differently through the camera, through the stories I want to tell, because also others are reflections of me. I don’t choose the people I work with randomly. Maybe it’s an intuitive choice, but deep down, we have things in common, or we have values that are shared in common, or wounds that are shared in common. It’s like a spider’s web; we’re all connected in some way or another.
I have to step back and look at it with consciousness to be able to understand it. We are all part of each other’s stories because we’re all having this human experience, and we go through things that are similar and different, but the things we share are part of this human experience of loss and grief and celebration and identity crisis. I think what is political about it is that we are an inspiration for each other, and by connecting and by opening up and by sharing, we realized that we as human beings have so much in common.
One of the insanely incredible things about this art form is that this specific individual story or life or experience has this power to burst into something universal. One of my favorite parts about making documentaries is the level of surprise you’re always dealing with. You know what it is, and it becomes something else, or it moves in a different direction, and you have to go with it. I think some art forms are inside out, like I have a feeling, or I have an idea, and then I express it. But this one is very much like you’re eating it, and then it’s digested and transformed. I would call it a humbling process. You realize that if you trust life and you trust the people, it can give you a lot more than you know. I would say it removes the control. It removes it’s my idea, it’s my vision.
My short film, Lebanon After the War: Is Healing Possible?, was filmed in the Shatila, Palestinian camps. I was shooting at the same time the genocide was happening and while the war in southern Beirut was going on. I wanted to go to Shatila to see if I could find some joy in this very complex and difficult territory, where Palestinians and other migrants, Syrians and Lebanese were staying. In this intense place, I wanted to search for joy, because the violence is inflicted on us and our bodies and I wanted to understand how it is possible to liberate ourselves while the system is still present and while the oppression is still happening and the war is still ongoing.
I met a dancer named Omar a couple of years ago, and he is from Shatila. I said to him, ‘Let’s do a movie while we try to liberate our bodies.’ And he was like, ‘Yes, great. Where?’ And I said, ‘In Shatila.’ He said, ‘No way. I wouldn’t dare dance in the streets of Shatila.’ I said, ‘I’m with you. Let’s take on this challenge. I don’t think it will be a problem.’ We started to test it out, and then we started celebrating our bodies, and we ended up dancing with this whole community we found in Shatila. I realized that people are here to celebrate joy, to dance, to move, and not to judge, even while they endure political oppression and violence.
As a man from Lebanon dancing with another man in this environment, it wasn’t the most comforting or safe in the beginning. But this was part of the challenge, to feel fear and move with it and see where it took us. Of course, we had some backups for our personal safety, but you can never control everything. We decided to move with fear and see where it guided us. Are you being chased, or is this an expression? And the answer is, it’s both. It really captures both those feelings. It’s all these feelings of wanting to escape what scares you, but also wanting to protect yourself, but also wanting to move to a place where you don’t know where you’re going, you’re just escaping something that has been imposed on you.
Palestinians, Lebanese people, and Syrian people have been living and experiencing for decades violence imposed on us. There’s always something we need to run away from. We need to run away from our home. We need to run away from our belongings, from our family, from our body. We always feel like there’s something that is threatening us. We carry with us all of these traumas.
I don’t have an answer as to how to liberate ourselves from fear, violence, and trauma. It’s still an ongoing journey as a Lebanese person, as a queer person, as a sensitive artist who also feels things in a global way. I don’t only feel my own story, I also connect to the global narrative. I try in my films to explore the possibilities of how we can do that, but I don’t have an answer for it. I just have suggestions, humble, simple, small suggestions.

RUCHI MITAL: Perhaps the most political thing you can do in this kind of work is not to close the loop, not to say the end, not to answer the question, because then the danger is it becomes a one-dimensional image, and that image then can easily be used against you. You did a really good job of showing that resilience has a cost, and that it’s not an end to anything. A new story is always beginning.
OMAR GABRIEL: Resilience is sometimes not a choice, but if you haven’t chosen to take your own life, you resist by default. This is what most of us have been experiencing. As you can see in this film, some resist by partying, some resist by putting on makeup and dressing up, and some resist by grieving in their own room and allowing those feelings to rise. There isn’t one proper way of healing to be able to continue, and we don’t have the formula yet. We don’t always have the space and time and luxury to explore and discover, because the day you start healing, there is another trauma that’s inflicted on you and your body and your nervous system. I started figuring out how to process this.
The Western methods of healing don’t apply to us, which is mostly everything is inside you, and you find it inside you, and you heal it inside.
I’m not only wounded, and I’m not only traumatized because of things that are inside me. There are things that are inside me that are coming from outer sources. So, once they stop, things can maybe start getting better, but as long as they are still there, we are figuring out our own healing. We don’t want to turn it into violence, and we don’t want to become the oppressor; we still want to be kind and loving. This is our own way of figuring it out, and, and it’s complex and it’s hard and it’s sad, but we are still going and finding ways, as long as we still can.
RUCHI MITAL: I think that all your films have a space for sadness, but they don’t stay there. They have a space for rage, but they don’t stay there. Maybe especially for men, but for a lot of us, sadness isn’t really allowed, because on one hand, you should be grateful for what you have, you’re here, you’re doing these things… I think a space for sadness is revolutionary in and of itself.
OMAR GABRIEL: Thinking that way, that if you are grateful, you should not be sad is imposing a binary way of thinking. You can grieve and still feel sad and still feel joy and still want to feel joy and still mourn and be depressed and get anxious. This is why I refuse to stick to one facet of life, or to one facet of our psyche. I want it to be complex because it is complex. You know, grieving is not linear, and it’s not rigid. It includes so many layers. I am curious about how people can still find their life force amidst all of what’s going on. And I think people like us—Arabs, Lebanese, Palestinians, Syrian—should become the reference for how to find a life force and continue. We should have our own healing systems that we teach others, or we should show others how we can continue, because it’s honestly extremely impressive. And even me, as a Lebanese, I’m still impressed, even if I’m not impressed by myself, I’m impressed by a lot of people in Lebanon and Syria and Palestine. When I see Gaza and people are carrying a life force to continue, I’m curious to know how. I want to learn from those people. I want to learn from my community. I want to learn from the human beings around me.
I want people around me, my neighbors, to tell me how they survived civil war and so many wars, and the explosion and their own personal journey. I’m impressed by the people around me. And I think this is why, with my camera, I don’t search far. I don’t want to travel to find this amazing story. All the people around me and around us have amazing stories.

RUCHI MITAL: Are you working on a film right now?
OMAR GABRIEL: I’m finishing my feature film, my personal feature film called Album, which is going to be, hopefully, distributed this year in festivals. It’s about the life of three queer people in Lebanon and their relationships with their mothers, told through archival images that they find in photo albums. It’s a reflection of their childhood but it’s also about questioning the present time and hoping for something in the future.
{
"article":
{
"title" : "A Tale of Two Filmmakers: Omar Gabriel x Ruchi Mital",
"author" : "Omar Gabriel, Ruchi Mital",
"category" : "interviews",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/omar-gabriel-ruchi-mital-tale-of-two-filmmakers",
"date" : "2025-06-19 14:26:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/omar-gabriel-1.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Emmy-winning producer Ruchi Mital sits down with award-winning director Omar Gabriel to investigate the inspiration and process of creating great film works.",
"content" : "RUCHI MITAL: You once said something like art is my only refuge. Has that always been the case for you? Did your journey with the camera start when you were young? How did it come about?OMAR GABRIEL: I realized at a later stage in my life that art has always been my refuge. I think it’s a cliche to say, art heals me, or art allows me to be myself. I don’t think it’s that. You watched my films, and you got to discover a deeper layer of myself. And this deeper layer was not easily accepted, embraced or celebrated, because it’s vulnerable, because it’s not based on: ‘I have achieved this. I have this amount of money. I am a strong man.’ It doesn’t fit into these standards. It’s more like, I’m feeling all these feelings, and that has been, in the course of my life, not celebrated, especially in the younger years when I didn’t have community or like-minded people holding space for each other. I would say it has been my cathartic tool, my way to be curious, to go outside of myself and into myself, and at the same time, it has been my peaceful way to show my rage and to say, ‘This cannot continue.’ Things need to be addressed properly, with depth, with humanity and with soul. I want to dig, dig, dig deep to a place that I don’t even know what it is. I want to enter something somewhere. It’s always never enough for me. I think it’s a problem for me that it’s always never enough. But at the same time, this is how I feel when I’m on an artistic quest.RUCHI MITAL: Do you ever have the feeling that you touched it, the thing you were digging for?OMAR GABRIEL: I think I’ve touched glimpses of it, and the rest is not touched. This is what keeps me digging. I’m afraid this is a big greedy part, or a part of me that’s always a bit unfulfilled. Not like, ‘I’m not satisfied,’ but more like, ‘Wow, we’re so complex and our stories are so multi-layered, so it will never be enough.’ When I finish any piece, I always feel like I missed a lot of things, and maybe it’s not enough, and I need to search more and dig more, but then it resonates with a lot of people, and they find it so deep and profound, and then I’m like, ‘Ah, okay, I asked for more, but maybe it’s already enough.’RUCHI MITAL: There can be two parts to it’s not enough. One is, it’s not enough for me, the other is feeling a responsibility toward other people, like I’m taking on telling this story. I have a responsibility. Do you feel that? Do you have a responsibility to someone, some community, some country you carry when you’re making work?OMAR GABRIEL: So much. I think this is why I also feel it’s not enough. Because I ask myself, ‘How can I, in a short film or feature film, tell the story of one person?’ I must understand what they have been through to be able to communicate it, verbalize it or address it properly. I feel this responsibility that they are giving me a door into their life, into their psyche, into their hearts. I feel so responsible, especially when someone knows what it means to open up, when they are vulnerable and want to be want to feel safe, want to feel appreciated, want to feel celebrated. I always want to push more to make them feel they are being represented in a way they feel good about while sharing things they thought might be too shameful or vulnerable. I want them to see that it resonated with a lot of other people, so they become the heroes of their story, and not the other way around. I think this feeling of it’s not enough comes from I want to touch the core of depth, realness, and authenticity, and I don’t have a reference.RUCHI MITAL: Let’s talk specifically about your series, A Letter to Myself. I think it brings together so many of the things that you were just talking about. And I wonder if you can tell me a little bit about how this series come about, what drove you to do this series, a little bit about how you connected with the people you featured in the series, and the intention behind the approach that you took. It has the feeling of a home movie, and yet there’s also a kind of timeless quality to it. It could be almost any time period since cameras have been invented. It’s very intimate, but it’s also very universal. It’s experimental in that it’s not just a narrative, with a beginning, middle and end. It’s a really rich series you created. If you can, tell me a little bit about how you came to it and what your idea was.OMAR GABRIEL: It all started after the Beirut blast, when I was very close to death. I was blessed to stay alive and stay in shape and healthy, and I asked myself, ‘What is my responsibility, since I’m here and what can I do without fear?’ I had been inhabited by the fear of expressing something too real and too authentic. I’ve done this in the past, but not to that extent, and I felt like since I have been so close to that, there’s nothing to be afraid of anymore. I wouldn’t say it’s only about queerness; it’s also about acceptance, and it’s about embracing the inner child and addressing something to oneself, and taking the time to reflect about oneself in a world where we’re always doing things for others.I am writing a letter to myself, taking the time to write words intuitively with all my heart, not to another person, but to myself. It’s meeting the self that sometimes we don’t have the time for or are afraid to meet. I started with the others, and they inspired me to end it with a letter to myself, because I felt like, ‘Those people are so courageous.’ They are strong enough to write letters to themselves and to accept being filmed and to know that these films are going to go viral on Instagram. So why am I still hiding behind my camera? What I wanted to ask others is what I’m searching for in myself. So, this time, I would not hide behind the camera. The turning point was when I realized that what we’re looking for in others is also what we look for in ourselves.RUCHI MITAL: There’s always this tension in a documentary, this power thing about, I’m looking at you, I’m telling your story. And as much as you are giving someone the opportunity to tell their story, you’re looking at them and making yourself one of the subjects of the series. To me, this seems like a political act, in the framework of Everything is Political. It seems to be related to this thing that happens when you’re a person from a particular community… you’re from Lebanon, you’re a queer person… It’s like you’re now going to speak for this group. If you’re from this country, you can only talk about wars, because that’s what this experience is about, and the multi-layers of complexity somehow are not allowed for. And I don’t know if that’s something you experience, but it feels that in this space of allowing one person to write to themselves and not have to speak to the audience or the world, and putting yourself in it, you’re kind of reclaiming this complexity.OMAR GABRIEL: I totally agree that it’s a political act to place myself in this. In the beginning, I never thought about it as political. I just felt that intuitively, I felt the need to be in this series. But in terms of hierarchy, somehow it puts us all at the same level, when we are all expressing in the same way. As a filmmaker, I express differently through the camera, through the stories I want to tell, because also others are reflections of me. I don’t choose the people I work with randomly. Maybe it’s an intuitive choice, but deep down, we have things in common, or we have values that are shared in common, or wounds that are shared in common. It’s like a spider’s web; we’re all connected in some way or another.I have to step back and look at it with consciousness to be able to understand it. We are all part of each other’s stories because we’re all having this human experience, and we go through things that are similar and different, but the things we share are part of this human experience of loss and grief and celebration and identity crisis. I think what is political about it is that we are an inspiration for each other, and by connecting and by opening up and by sharing, we realized that we as human beings have so much in common.One of the insanely incredible things about this art form is that this specific individual story or life or experience has this power to burst into something universal. One of my favorite parts about making documentaries is the level of surprise you’re always dealing with. You know what it is, and it becomes something else, or it moves in a different direction, and you have to go with it. I think some art forms are inside out, like I have a feeling, or I have an idea, and then I express it. But this one is very much like you’re eating it, and then it’s digested and transformed. I would call it a humbling process. You realize that if you trust life and you trust the people, it can give you a lot more than you know. I would say it removes the control. It removes it’s my idea, it’s my vision.My short film, Lebanon After the War: Is Healing Possible?, was filmed in the Shatila, Palestinian camps. I was shooting at the same time the genocide was happening and while the war in southern Beirut was going on. I wanted to go to Shatila to see if I could find some joy in this very complex and difficult territory, where Palestinians and other migrants, Syrians and Lebanese were staying. In this intense place, I wanted to search for joy, because the violence is inflicted on us and our bodies and I wanted to understand how it is possible to liberate ourselves while the system is still present and while the oppression is still happening and the war is still ongoing.I met a dancer named Omar a couple of years ago, and he is from Shatila. I said to him, ‘Let’s do a movie while we try to liberate our bodies.’ And he was like, ‘Yes, great. Where?’ And I said, ‘In Shatila.’ He said, ‘No way. I wouldn’t dare dance in the streets of Shatila.’ I said, ‘I’m with you. Let’s take on this challenge. I don’t think it will be a problem.’ We started to test it out, and then we started celebrating our bodies, and we ended up dancing with this whole community we found in Shatila. I realized that people are here to celebrate joy, to dance, to move, and not to judge, even while they endure political oppression and violence.As a man from Lebanon dancing with another man in this environment, it wasn’t the most comforting or safe in the beginning. But this was part of the challenge, to feel fear and move with it and see where it took us. Of course, we had some backups for our personal safety, but you can never control everything. We decided to move with fear and see where it guided us. Are you being chased, or is this an expression? And the answer is, it’s both. It really captures both those feelings. It’s all these feelings of wanting to escape what scares you, but also wanting to protect yourself, but also wanting to move to a place where you don’t know where you’re going, you’re just escaping something that has been imposed on you. Palestinians, Lebanese people, and Syrian people have been living and experiencing for decades violence imposed on us. There’s always something we need to run away from. We need to run away from our home. We need to run away from our belongings, from our family, from our body. We always feel like there’s something that is threatening us. We carry with us all of these traumas.I don’t have an answer as to how to liberate ourselves from fear, violence, and trauma. It’s still an ongoing journey as a Lebanese person, as a queer person, as a sensitive artist who also feels things in a global way. I don’t only feel my own story, I also connect to the global narrative. I try in my films to explore the possibilities of how we can do that, but I don’t have an answer for it. I just have suggestions, humble, simple, small suggestions.RUCHI MITAL: Perhaps the most political thing you can do in this kind of work is not to close the loop, not to say the end, not to answer the question, because then the danger is it becomes a one-dimensional image, and that image then can easily be used against you. You did a really good job of showing that resilience has a cost, and that it’s not an end to anything. A new story is always beginning.OMAR GABRIEL: Resilience is sometimes not a choice, but if you haven’t chosen to take your own life, you resist by default. This is what most of us have been experiencing. As you can see in this film, some resist by partying, some resist by putting on makeup and dressing up, and some resist by grieving in their own room and allowing those feelings to rise. There isn’t one proper way of healing to be able to continue, and we don’t have the formula yet. We don’t always have the space and time and luxury to explore and discover, because the day you start healing, there is another trauma that’s inflicted on you and your body and your nervous system. I started figuring out how to process this. The Western methods of healing don’t apply to us, which is mostly everything is inside you, and you find it inside you, and you heal it inside.I’m not only wounded, and I’m not only traumatized because of things that are inside me. There are things that are inside me that are coming from outer sources. So, once they stop, things can maybe start getting better, but as long as they are still there, we are figuring out our own healing. We don’t want to turn it into violence, and we don’t want to become the oppressor; we still want to be kind and loving. This is our own way of figuring it out, and, and it’s complex and it’s hard and it’s sad, but we are still going and finding ways, as long as we still can.RUCHI MITAL: I think that all your films have a space for sadness, but they don’t stay there. They have a space for rage, but they don’t stay there. Maybe especially for men, but for a lot of us, sadness isn’t really allowed, because on one hand, you should be grateful for what you have, you’re here, you’re doing these things… I think a space for sadness is revolutionary in and of itself.OMAR GABRIEL: Thinking that way, that if you are grateful, you should not be sad is imposing a binary way of thinking. You can grieve and still feel sad and still feel joy and still want to feel joy and still mourn and be depressed and get anxious. This is why I refuse to stick to one facet of life, or to one facet of our psyche. I want it to be complex because it is complex. You know, grieving is not linear, and it’s not rigid. It includes so many layers. I am curious about how people can still find their life force amidst all of what’s going on. And I think people like us—Arabs, Lebanese, Palestinians, Syrian—should become the reference for how to find a life force and continue. We should have our own healing systems that we teach others, or we should show others how we can continue, because it’s honestly extremely impressive. And even me, as a Lebanese, I’m still impressed, even if I’m not impressed by myself, I’m impressed by a lot of people in Lebanon and Syria and Palestine. When I see Gaza and people are carrying a life force to continue, I’m curious to know how. I want to learn from those people. I want to learn from my community. I want to learn from the human beings around me.I want people around me, my neighbors, to tell me how they survived civil war and so many wars, and the explosion and their own personal journey. I’m impressed by the people around me. And I think this is why, with my camera, I don’t search far. I don’t want to travel to find this amazing story. All the people around me and around us have amazing stories.RUCHI MITAL: Are you working on a film right now?OMAR GABRIEL: I’m finishing my feature film, my personal feature film called Album, which is going to be, hopefully, distributed this year in festivals. It’s about the life of three queer people in Lebanon and their relationships with their mothers, told through archival images that they find in photo albums. It’s a reflection of their childhood but it’s also about questioning the present time and hoping for something in the future."
}
,
"relatedposts": [
{
"title" : "A Call to Arms",
"author" : "Jeremiah Zaeske",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/a-call-to-arms",
"date" : "2026-02-03 11:17:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/1000013371.jpeg",
"excerpt" : "Birds perch on the gaps in barbed wire",
"content" : "Birds perch on the gaps in barbed wireBeckoning us to join themWater trickles through the obstruction in its path as if it were nonexistentWe have forgotten that we are waterVines weave a tapestry through metalIf trees cannot find a gap in the fence they will squeeze their way through,engulf it,absorb the border within themselvesThis is a call to armsLOVEI want my love to break through glassI want it to uproot the weeds that have grown in my heart as it picks through yoursI want it to burn through every piece of fabric stained with bloodLove was never a pacifistWhere there is evil there will also be two kinds of joyOne that revels in the misery,grinning faces posing with dead bodieswhile others look on in silence growing numbBut love is the joy of resilienceThe joy of knowing we will always need eachother enoughto tear down the walls and reach out our handsin spite of everything, even deathTo grab at the roots of ourselvesand plant flowers in place of the hate that’s been sown,though the stems may have thornsThis love will be the callouses born from fighting our waythrough rough brick and sharp glass edges,but they’ll just make it that much softer when palm meets palmThis love will be the fertilizer for a garden of scar tissue,never again to be buried under earth and thick skinThis love will be the seeds taking rootafter a long cold winter,sprouting from our chests and cracks in the pavementto greet a long-awaited springA NURTURING DEATHShot-gun weddingDrive-by baby showerClose-range baptismBurn down the forest,the church and the steepleThe baby’s gender is Destruction,Death, andPrimordial ChaosWe are unlocking the worlds they shut away,beyond the talons of textbook definitions,worlds they swore could never existworlds they swore to destroyWe’re pulling out fragmentsthrough the cracked open doorto fill the potholes and cracked cementof our bodymindsouls,to make salve for the woundsThe ones they claimed were pre-existingand unfillableand unfixableand “who’s going to pay for that?”We are toppling immovable fortresseslimb by limb,peeling off skin and tearing through tendonto reveal the brittle forgeries of boneWe are de-manufacturing wildernessNot just free reign for the treesor even all the life they hold,but regrowth for the village of Ahwahnee,birds pecking out the eyes of campers at YosemiteWhat remains will be fed back into the ecosystem,into the bellies of bears and mountain lions,swallowed by insects and earthuntil it’s decayed enough to fertilize the soiland grow foodmedicinelifeA rebirthA nurturing death"
}
,
{
"title" : "This is America: Land of the Occupied, Home of the Capitalists",
"author" : "Mattea Mun",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/this-is-america",
"date" : "2026-02-03 11:11:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/ice-protest-2-gty-gmh-260130_1769810312461_hpMain.jpg",
"excerpt" : "They tell us we live in the land of the free. They declare, “we the people,” and we assume they mean us when we were only ever defined – designed – to be the fodder to build their “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.”",
"content" : "They tell us we live in the land of the free. They declare, “we the people,” and we assume they mean us when we were only ever defined – designed – to be the fodder to build their “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.”On a Thursday, a 2-year-old girl returned home from the store with her father, Elvis Tipan-Echeverria, when unknown, masked agents trespassed onto their driveway and smashed the window in. In the name of defending the pursuit of happiness, she, with her father, was shoved into a car with no car seat and placed on a plane to Texas. This little girl was eventually returned to her mother in Minnesota; her father – still imprisoned in the land of the free.In the name of liberty, 5-year-old Liam Ramos, with his father, was seized and flown away from his mother and his home to sit in a detention facility in Texas, where his education will halt, his freedom is non-existent, and his pursuit of happiness – denied.In the name of life, Chaofeng Ge was “found” hanging, dead, in a shower stall in detention, his death declared a suicide though his hands and feet were bound behind his back, a fact evidently not deemed worthy of being initially disclosed. Geraldo Lunas Campos was handcuffed, tackled and choked – murdered – in detention, in an effort to “save” him. Victor Manuel Diaz, too, was “found” dead, a “presumed suicide,” the autopsy – classified.American voters like to declare that our present reality isn’t “what they voted for,” despite the fact that one of Donald Trump’s campaign promises in the 2024 election was to “carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in American history,” inevitably according to xenophobic and white supremacist lines. What many of us fail to remember is that this is not the first time we have voted for this. Indeed, I am not confident there is any point in American history that we have not collectively voted for this, regardless of so-called “party lines.”We Have Been Here BeforeWhile the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was founded in 2003, slavery and genocide predated the very Constitution of the United States, the bodies of African Americans and Indigenous Americans brutalized and broken in the service of laying the foundations of (white) American wealth. Though slavery was “abolished” in 1865 by the 13th amendment, this did not end the policing of racialized bodies.During the Reconstruction era, convict leasing and black codes preserved the conditions and social hierarchy that existed under slavery. Moreover, any legal rights afforded Black Americans were and still are persistently undermined by their inferior social caste, whereby their deaths and suffering at the hands of law enforcement, the healthcare system and other Americans often goes unprosecuted and/or unpunished.Within WWII-era Japanese internment camps, inmates were stripped of their freedom to move, subjected to harsh living conditions and coerced to partake in underpaid, unprotected labor.The Lucrative Business of Slavery and its Bipartisan ProfiteersTo this day, the prison system remains a potent vestige of slavery, again for the sake of profit, as inmates’ human rights are systematically liquidated. As early as the 1980s, the federal government has contracted for-profit prison corporations to operate federal detention facilities. Today, over 90% of ICE detention facilities are operated by for-profit prison corporations as of 2023, a figure which increased from 79% within Biden’s presidency alone.These trends, in conjunction with the ongoing mass detainments of America’s people of color, are not surprising when we consider the immense profits our politicians and some Americans stand to gain, made possible by the continuous enslavement of racialized bodies.Our bodies are their profit.Under the Voluntary Work Program, forced carceral labor is codified, whereby detainees are to receive “monetary compensation of not less than $1.00 per day of work completed,” their “voluntary” labor absolving them of legal employee protections, such as minimum wage. And although ICE affirms that “all detention facilities shall comply with all applicable health and safety regulations and standards,” there is confusion as to how these standards are checked, especially when we consider the Trump administration closed the DHS’s Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties in March 2025.Nevertheless, several lawsuits and detainee testimonies attest to the fact that the work program is rarely voluntary, the survival of themselves and the facilities imprisoning them hinging upon their labor and minimal income. Indeed, many detainees are expected to purchase their own basic products, such as toilet paper and soap. Other detainees recall being threatened with solitary confinement, poorer living conditions and material punishment if they refused to work. Martha Gonzalez was denied access to sanitary pads when she requested a day off work, demonstrative of a larger pattern of ICE’s refusal to provide hygiene products and spaces to maintain one’s hygiene in a dignified manner.In 2023, GEO Group, one of the largest for-profit prison corporations, made over $2.4 billion in revenue, of which ICE, as their largest customer, accounted for 43%, or $1.04 million. ICE also accounted for 30% of CoreCivic’s – another large for-profit prison corporation – revenue. Thus, our bodies enable these companies to amass hundreds of millions in profit.Incidentally, CoreCivic and GEO Group are among the private prison companies that contribute the most to political campaigns, parties and candidates. In the 2024 election cycle, GEO Group gave $3.7 million in contributions, including $1 million to Make America Great Again Inc, while CoreCivic provided roughly $785,000 in contributions. While Republican candidates and committees have been the recipient of the large majority of these funds in recent years, Democrats and the Democratic Party are also guilty of accepting funding from these corporations, among others. In the 2024 cycle, CoreCivic contributed $50,000 to the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association and Kamala Harris received $9,500 from GEO Group.The opportunities for profit extend even further beyond the U.S.’s borders as more and more nations are gradually entering deals to imprison noncitizen deportees coming from the U.S. In November, $7.5 million was paid out to Equatorial Guinea for this purpose. Alongside other Latin American countries like Costa Rica and El Salvador, Argentina is also rumored to strike their own deal with the U.S.Our bodies are their profit.The ongoing ICE campaign stands as a bipartisan issue, mirroring the ways our country’s deepest social inequalities have been repeatedly upheld on all sides of the political aisle throughout our history.The Occupied Mind and BodyMoreover, the policing of racialized bodies does not merely pertain to the body alone as a site to be moved and removed. Rather, this violence is also waged in our social spaces, in our fears and inside of our bodies.In the classroom, our curriculums hardly, if at all, represent a version of events where we existed and meanwhile the current administration actively tries to erase any part of history we are given a claim to. Such initiatives, too, have been supported for generations, reflected in the 150-year period Indigenous American and Hawaiian children were forcibly taken from their homes and sent to boarding schools designed to facilitate their assimilation and more seamless theft of their native lands.In our social spaces and lives – if not yet brutally taken – liberty and the pursuit of happiness is not ours for the taking. We are perpetually told under what conditions our movement is permissible. Decades of redlining have, in many ways, preserved segregation and pooled the best resources for the white and the wealthy to the detriment of communities of color.But even this is not enough.They police us from the inside, too. In exchange for gifts like food and photographs of her daughter, a Nicaraguan woman was subjected to have sex with a now former ICE officer whilst in detention. A “romantic relationship,” according to federal prosecutors. Our suffering is still romanticized even when guilt has been assigned. What they still do not realize is that there is no place for romance to reside so long as we remain shackled, our bodies – looted.From the inside, they forcibly remove our reproductive organs, then and now. Many of us were among the 70,000 forcibly sterilized in the 20th-century, deemed “unfit” to reproduce. As we speak, 32% of surgeries performed in ICE detention facilities are performed without proper authorization, and there are reports of mass hysterectomies being exacted behind closed doors.They dictate our movements, lock us up, take our insides out, inject their fantasies onto and into our bodies, deprive us of our right to learn and to work and to live. And even if they have not yet come bounding at our doorstep, we lie anxiously in wait for the moment our past may catch up with us and seep, once again, back into our present.And yet, they have the audacity to say that it is by our hands that we are dying; that if only we had lived and loved differently, things wouldn’t be this way. In the name of safety and peace, they force our bodies into hiding or otherwise out onto the streets, despite the fact that only 5% of us have been implicated in a violent crime. In the name of safety, they drag a half-naked ChongLy Thao into snow-covered streets for existing, in their eyes, incorrectly; that is, non-whitely. In the name of safety, a one-year-old and her father are pepper-sprayed in the eyes whilst sitting in their car at the wrong time.Dismantling the Oppressor to Dismantle OppressionFor all the state’s claims that a “war on crime” is being waged, it has always been and remains a war against our bodies, the means with which they wish to realize ICE’s utopic “Amazon Prime for human beings.” Similarly, the War on Drugs only ever served to terrorize our communities, to lock up and exploit our bodies. Meanwhile, this matter of “crime” never dissipated. For centuries, they tell us that it is our fault – our heinous “crimes” – that we are stripped of our families and our dignity. Meanwhile, politicians of all parties and colors have sat idle even while claiming to bear our interests to heart. We forget that they hold their money closer.And, not so unlike the slave catchers recruited and paid out to return runaway slaves to their owners, so, too, it is we who are being recruited and paid out to bind and beat one another, to tease out the “other.” That is, unless we bring ourselves to see ourselves not only in the “other,” but in the ones dragging our tired feet across the pavement, forcing our bodies into further submission, pulling the trigger – all whilst looking us dead in the eye.It was James Baldwin who said, “Everyone you’re looking at is also you. You could be that person. You could be that monster, you could be that cop. And you have to decide, in yourself, not to be.”Whilst the money and military might of the state and the oppressive systems that prop it up are, no doubt, daunting, their power is nevertheless maintained by individual choices made in the service of oppression and possession, as opposed to liberation. However, it is also important to remember that other individual choices are the reason we remain today, more free than before even if that freedom may be incomplete. Thus, just as individual choices have the power to oppress, so, too, individual choices have the power to resist oppression; to hold our people in check; to liberate.Only through our decision to not become the monster we fear do we have any hope of collective liberation."
}
,
{
"title" : "Couture in Paris, Cuts at the 'Post'",
"author" : "Louis Pisano",
"category" : "essay",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/bezos-sanchez-paris-couture-week-wapo-layoffs",
"date" : "2026-02-02 10:49:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Bezos_Sanchez_Pisano.jpg",
"excerpt" : "The Cruel Irony of the Bezos-Sánchez Empire",
"content" : "The Cruel Irony of the Bezos-Sánchez EmpireLate on January 25, as snow dusted Washington, about 60 foreign correspondents at The Washington Post hit send on an email that felt like a last stand. They had dodged gunfire in Ukraine, documented Iran’s water crises and protester crackdowns, risked sources’ lives in gang territories. Now they faced their own existential threat: rumors of up to 300 company-wide layoffs, with foreign desks, sports, metro, and arts likely gutted. Their collective letter to owner Jeff Bezos was direct, almost pleading.“Robust, powerful foreign coverage is essential to The Washington Post’s brand and its future success in whatever form the paper takes moving forward,” they wrote. “We urge you to consider how the proposed layoffs will certainly lead us first to irrelevance, not the shared success that remains attainable.” They offered flexibility on costs but drew a line: slashing overseas reporting in Trump’s second term, amid global flashpoints, would hollow out the institution they had built.Whether Bezos opened that email remains unclear. As of this writing, he has not publicly responded to it. In fact, Bezos was 4,000 miles away, strolling hand-in-hand with Lauren Sánchez Bezos into Schiaparelli’s Haute Couture show in Paris. Flashbulbs popped as they arrived, Sánchez in a blood red skirt suit from the house and a white crocodile bag. Hours on, she switched to a steel-blue-gray vintage Dior pencil-skirt suit, its enormous fur collar evoking a mob wife, for Jonathan Anderson’s couture debut with the house.The two didn’t just sit front row, either. Backstage at Dior, Bezos and Sánchez posed with Anderson and LVMH CEO Delphine Arnault. Sánchez lunched with Anna Wintour at The Ritz and was allegedly dressed by Law Roach, the “image architect” behind Zendaya’s accession to fashion darling, who once declared fashion’s power to challenge norms and amplify the marginalized. Roach reshared Sánchez’s Instagram stories, crediting the vintage Dior; later, they toured Schiaparelli’s atelier together. The partnership felt sudden and loaded.Back in D.C., the newsroom simmered. Staffers posted on X under #SaveThePost, Yeganeh Torbati recounting government violence against protesters, Loveday Morris describing blasts rattling windows and the mortal risks to sources, tagging Bezos directly in urgent appeals. In a guild-prompted twist meant to amplify the message, the Washington-Baltimore News Guild encouraged tagging even Lauren Sánchez, though not every reporter followed through. The betrayal stung deeper after years of buyouts, a libertarian-tilted Opinions section, a rebranded mission (“Riveting Storytelling for All of America”) that rang corporate. Losses topped $100 million in 2024 and now the axe is hovering over desks that produced the scoops Bezos once praised when he bought the paper for $250 million in 2013. Now, Bezos parties on in Paris, his wife climbing fashion’s ranks.While the billionaires party, a profound unease is permeating the American media landscape, exacerbated by political shifts and technological disruptions that empower owners like Bezos to sideline core missions in favor of personal ventures. The press, once a vigilant watchdog against authority, now frequently finds itself complicit with power structures, buckling under misinformation, partisan censorship, and budgetary constraints that stifle investigative depth. This dynamic deprives the public of the unflinching journalism that is capable of exposing foreign policy overreaches or everyday human struggle, amplified by economic slowdowns and subscription fatigue in an increasingly fragmented ecosystem. With eroding confidence driving audiences to social platforms, now eclipsing traditional TV and websites as the primary news source in the U.S., the fallout further deepens this public distrust.To be clear, fashion isn’t innocent in this. It loves to posture as progressive, touting body positivity, diversity, resistance as it’s relevant, but rolling out the red carpet for the ultra-rich when the checks clear, especially when the checks come from people whose fortunes are built on real harm. Once upon a time, you couldn’t simply buy your way into the Met Gala; invitations were curated by Wintour based on cultural relevance, creative influence, and a carefully guarded sense of who truly belonged in the room. That’s all over now. The Bezoses have turned every norm in fashion on its head, sponsoring the 2026 Met Gala (funding the event and reportedly influencing invites), making their debut as a couple in 2024, and now leveraging those ties to claim space in couture’s inner circles. Bezos and Sánchez’s couture jaunt is just the latest proof that fashion’s gates, once guarded by creativity and taste, now swing widest for raw wealth and access.Wintour lunches and their prominent sponsorship role in the Met Gala don’t help quell the whispers that Bezos is eyeing Condé Nast (Vogue, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker) as a “wedding gift” to Sánchez. Rumors denied yet persistent, revived by every Paris sighting.Not everyone in fashion is staying silent. Some insiders are pushing back hard against the normalization. Gabriella Karefa-Johnson, a longtime voice in the industry, posted bluntly on X: “The hyper normalization is doing my head in… keep your mouth shut about ICE if you’re mingling with them, seating them, dressing them. Accepting their cash.” She called out Amazon’s cloud systems as the backbone of DHS deportation operations and billions in government contracts that sustain what she called “Trump’s terror machine,” concluding that Bezos and Sánchez are at couture simply because they are rich—and their wealth comes from profoundly harming millions daily. “I feel crazy,” she wrote. While couture has always been a bastian of the uber-rich, Karefa-Johnson’s frustration underscores how even fashion’s own are starting to question the cost of that welcome.If that Conde-Nast deal ever materializes, the consequences would compound because control over fashion’s most influential titles would allow Bezos the opportunity to shape narratives around billionaires, soften coverage of labor abuses, environmental costs, or surveillance contracts. The same hand that funds AWS’s CIA contracts, DoD cloud deals, ICE enforcement tools, fossil-fuel operations, warehouse injuries, anti-union tactics, and small-business-crushing monopoly would quietly steer the stories about wealth and style. Already deferential to its biggest advertisers and attendees, fashion journalism would fold into the same closed loop, fusing tech dominance with cultural gatekeeping into one unassailable private empire—all of it ultimately bankrolling the yachts, the space joyrides with Katy Perry, the private-jet hops to couture shows and fashion influence, to polish an image that the Post’s own reporters once might have skewered.[x] It’s almost elegant the way one empire’s dirt gets laundered through another.It’s cruelly ironic how wide the gap between the risks assumed by WaPo correspondents tasked with holding power to account and the comfort with which their owner moves among the powerful in Paris actually is. Fashion has political power, as Roach once said. It can challenge and provoke. It can also resist. But when it courts figures like Bezos, whose empire thrives on the very inequalities it sometimes pretends to critique, it becomes another asset in his already enormous portfolio.But there is no challenge, no provocation. There is no major resistance. Instead, there’s champagne and constant disassociation. Somewhere between the clink of glasses and the photos, Bezos and his wife get a glow up while The Washington Post newsroom waits, knowing the cuts are coming but not yet here. No one is confused about what happened; this is simply how the trade now unfortunately works.Wealth drifts through media, fashion, culture, picking up prestige and shedding people along the way. Whether Bezos ever read the letter is beside the point. The stranger thing is how little anyone expects him, or anyone like him, to answer anymore."
}
]
}